Pam_Roach.jpg

State Sen. Pam Roach lashes out at GOP leadership

February 1, 2010 @ 10:52 am (Updated: 12:35 pm - 2/1/10 )

Related
MyNorthwest.com

After being banned from the Washington state Senate Republican Caucus Sen. Pam Roach (R-Auburn) is firing back at Senate Minority Leader Mike Hewitt (R-Walla Walla).

The Republican Caucus banned Roach over an incident last year in which Roach apparently demeaned a staff attorney saying he should be fired.

In a live interview on the Dave Ross Show, Roach characterized her relationship with the republican caucus having "inter- caucus divides." But she singled out Hewitt and her past as the main reason for her banishment.

"Senator Hewitt probably wouldn't have screamed at me and put his ass in my face if he liked me," Roach said. Roach was referring to an incident in 2008 between she and Sen. Hewitt. In an off-campus meeting Roach claimed that Hewitt screamed at her and stuck his clothed back-side in her face. At the time republican leaders were disciplining Roach for yet another, earlier incident. They said Roach made an issue of the backside incident to deflect attention from being disciplined.

In Monday's interview Roach voiced frustration with the republican leadership in Olympia saying that Tim Eyman and the Tea Party movement exist in part because of a lack of GOP leadership.

"It's pretty sad when you have Tim Eyman out having to do all of these initiatives to save people from taxes, where the heck is the party." Roach said, "Now I would say something like that Dave, and be criticized for it. But am I right? Probably I am."

At the end of the interview a clearly angered Sen. Roach asked Dave Ross to ask Sen. Hewitt why she hasn't gotten an apology for the aforementioned backside incident. "Ask him (Hewitt) why he's not man enough to apologize to a woman who he put his butt in her face. Ask that."

Hewitt has not responded directly, however Senator Dale Brandland (R-Bellingham) said her demand for an apology isn't the real issue, "The issue is that our employees are experiencing a hostile workplace," Brandland said.

Brandland said the caucus is not punishing Roach for her views, rather her treatment of personnel, "It was the way that she handled the issue. It was a very personal attack against the employee. He felt that it was extremely personal and it wasn't, in his mind, about the issue. It was about him and his job performance. That's what the point is here."

Related:
More Local News
Top Stories

  • Miracle
    Seattle native is only person ever cured of HIV and returns home to boost the cure

  • Back In Business
    A temporary bridge span across the Skagit River opens

  • High Altitude Upgrade
    The state's highest outhouse atop Mount Rainier is getting a badly needed upgrade
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (40)


  • Add A Comment

  • vashonmatt wrote...
    What a
    February 1, 2010 10:28 am
    B^tch
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    Roach has always had an anger problem
    February 1, 2010 10:39 am
    She used to scream at the state staffers working with her committees, call them names, mock them, totally inappropriate. The term "Roached" was well known back in the mid 90's.

    Between her and Linda Smith, the Republican caucus resembled a skit right out of Saturday Night Live! Roach snarling and screaming, Linda in frilly dresses (that were waaaaaaaaaaayyy too short for her figure) and 3 inch blood red nails bragging about how she knew how to "please her man".

    The couple of times I was there it was just hilarious, a total joke. Not funny to those poor staffers though.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    Oh, and one of her signature pieces of legislation
    February 1, 2010 10:49 am
    was banning having sex with horses (I'm not getting the logistics of that one, but whatever).
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gary e. wrote...
    Baby Pam
    February 1, 2010 10:56 am
    I now see why our government is so ineffective. What a childish brat!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • hnuh wrote...
    Been around that kind of thing...
    February 1, 2010 11:03 am
    It is typical, a person repeatedly criticized for angry behavior "lashes out" at her detractor(s). Chronic rage behavior is a way of controlling one's environment and if allowed to be effective just grows worse. This behavior is usually blamed on others by the rager. Ostracism and ridicule are non violent ways of dealing with the behavior. Submission of any kind just leads to more rage attacks.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleNative wrote...
    So the state GOP...
    February 1, 2010 11:13 am
    ...or at least Mike Hewitt...has decided her district has no standing in this state?

    Get your hubris in check, Sen. Hewitt. There's a REPUBLICAN district out there that you can't afford to lose.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Bcleve wrote...
    WHY......
    February 1, 2010 11:24 am
    is she still there, and why haven't her constitutents, who should know better, you'd hope, vote her out of there?? Is denial this widespread?? Could she (or does she) really intimidate all the oppostion in her district from opposing her every election and otherwise?? There's something awfully odd here, and somebody inher district should step up to fix it. Also, "denial" means it's everybody's fault but your own, and here you go....
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • How's that hope and change?? wrote...
    On the flip side of the coin
    February 1, 2010 11:28 am
    would we see this display out of the Liberals? No! It would not be covered by the MSM but only by Conservative news sources. I am sure the internal power struggles between Liberals and Progressives are intence and staggering.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • AJ McCarrell wrote...
    Lawny Yawny
    February 1, 2010 11:30 am
    The reason why she had the horse legislation is the well-known death from horse bestiality a few years back. It happened in her district, so you can't fault her for that.

    That aside, who let the "hostel" environment slide? So, Roach has her staff working in a European Barracks Hotel? The proofer needs a clue today.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RedRover wrote...
    RE: So the state GOP...
    February 1, 2010 11:35 am
    As a registered republican in Roach's district who has actually donated money to her campaign, I would say that the Republican party and this district does not need Pam Roach! She can't even get along with members of her own party let alone be able to get along or get any legislation of substance through the Dem Controlled congress. I would rather VOTE HER OUT and deal with a conservative democrat for a term and then elect a Republican to fill the seat in the next term. For the sake of the party she needs to step down and NOT RUN for another term. Note to the republican party if you run Pam Roach again I will vote for WHOEVER the Dem. opponent is! As much as I dislike the Dem's and what they stand for that is how much MORE I am disgusted with Pam Roach.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }