This story reminds me that I used to have a post every election cycle listing my “Dirty Dozen”—a list of 12 candidates for re-election or office that I deemed ethically unacceptable. The list would include, in addition to automatic honorees like Rep. Maxine Waters, such oddities as Rich Iott, whose candidacy foundered when it was discovered that he had an obsession with dressing up as an SS officer. Usually I made an effort to include an equal number f Democrats and Republicans—it wasn’t hard.
It wouldn’t be hard this time, either. What would be hard, indeed, I decided, impossible, would be to keep the list to just a dozen. To begin with, “The Squad” would take care of all of the Democratic slots right off the bat. Every one of them (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri) is an embarrassment: incompetent, blindly ideological, and anti-American to the core. There wouldn’t even be room for Waters, or Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Majority Whip (and hypocrite “election denier”) James Clyburn, or the ridiculous Stacey Abrams. Then we have Nancy Pelosi, who has crossed more ethics lines with each passing year, and the truly horrible Adam Schiff (D-Cal). I couldn’t fit John Fetterman onto the list, or any of the awful Democratic governors running for re-election—and if I tried, then there would be no room for the Republicans who should never hold political office, like Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), or (you knew this was coming) Herschel Walker, the creepy Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Rep. Andrew Clyde of Georgia, who compared the Capitol riot to a “normal tourist visit,” and Rep. Tom Massie (R-Ky) who thought this was an appropriate Christmas card…
Well, I could go on, but this is depressing me. The point is that there are far, far too many ridiculous, incompetent, unethical people making our laws for anyone to be able to trust the government….and I haven’t even drilled down to the state level, where it’s worse.
So meet the entertaining Shavers. Clyde Shavers, the Democratic candidate for Washington state’s 10th legislative district, claimed to be an officer serving on a nuclear submarine in the Navy for eight years. He wasn’t one. He also has claimed to be a lawyer. He isn’t a lawyer either; in fact, he doesn’t know what a lawyer is. On his website, Shavers writes,
To those who point to my F-1 form that states my profession as “Attorney – Lawyer”, there were only three drop-down menu items to select. While a “lawyer” is considered someone who graduated from law school and an “attorney” is considered someone who passed the bar exam, I was unable to select one-or-the-other on my F-1 form. I fully intend to take the bar exam next year and serve as an attorney.
Wrong. Graduating from law school means you have a law degree, but that doesn’t make you a lawyer, because you aren’t licensed to practice law. Nor is he correct regarding “attorney”—that’s the correct definition of “lawyer.” An attorney is someone who is engaged in the practice of law, something Shavers can’t do, because he isn’t a lawyer.
But I digress: back to the submarine issue. Shavers false claims about serving on a nuclear submarine came to light last week when his father, Good Old Dad, wrote to his son’s Republican opponent to reveal “Clyde was never a submarine officer, not even for a day, ” while detailing how his son’s “use of his family’s history and values as a foundation for his credibility and values” have “gone farther than I can accept.” You can read the letter here.
What a rotten thing to do to your son right before an election. Checking Shavers’ claims about his background is the job of the news media (but he’s a Democrat, so you can’t expect that) and his opponent. A family member isn’t obligated to lie for a candidate, but for son (as in Herschel Walker’s case) or father in this case to set out to undermine a candidate qualifies as particularly heinous disloyalty and betrayal. It is hateful, which doesn’t mean Shavers pere’s accusation isn’t true. Shavers fils so far hasn’t agreed to answer questions about his father’s letter, and his careful, vague, explanation on his website leads me to think his father’s accusations are accurate.
Worse than Shavers’ hemming and hawing, perhaps, is his attempt at deflection by focusing on how darn hurt he is, and blaming his father’s attack on “politics.” Why, Dad was one of those evil MAGA types who went to D.C. on January 6th to exercise his Constitutional right to protest what looked to him like stolen election!
Yeah, Clyde Shavers has no business making laws, as it appears clear that he is a phony and a weasel. Still, he’s less of an exception than he should be in a healthy republic.