Sunday, October 31, 2010

Pollling on some of the Initiatives.

Latest from Survey USA: (Bold faced response percentages represent my recommendations)

I-1053 Restoring the 2/3rds Legislative or popular vote to jack up our taxes.

55% -Yes

36% - No

Support with both genders and all ages, Republicans voting 67% yes, Independents voting 63% yes, democrats voting 36% yes; Conservatives have a 69% yes vote... moderates 51% and libs 38%; lowest income (<$40K ) 60%, $40K 52%, $80K> 55%; and 53 to 57% yes in all regions.

I-1082 - Private Industrial Insurance:

33% - Yes

40% - No

Male support/op about equal at 40%, Female opposition 40% to support at 28%. No age group is over 50%. No party affiliation is over 50% in either support or opposition. Only liberal opposition exceeds 55%, no other group for or against exceeds 50 %. No income group supports or opposes over 50% and no region supports or opposes.

High undecided at this point will historically break for the "no" side.

I-1098 The Bill Gates Sr. Income Tax.

34% - Yes

56% - No

Opposition: both genders and all ages, GOP'ers voting 78% no, Indies 60% no, liberals 30% no. Conservative no rate 70%; Moderate 51%, libs 30%; Lowest income opposes at 51%, $40K at 54% and $80K at 59%; and voting know is across all regions from 54% in Seattle to 59% in Eastern WA.

I-1100 Get the state out of the liquor biz altogether.

48% -Yes

40% - No.

Only males at 58% yes are +50, Support at all age groups is around 50%, only Independents supporting are +50 at 57%; Conservatives are at +52%, no other ideology is at +50; and only those at >$80K are +50 at 55%. Metro Seattle is the only area at +50; 52%.

I-1105 Keep the state in the liquor business but change how it does

36% - Yes

51% - No

Only women opposition at 54% break the +50. Older women have strong opposition at 50% plus (>50 y.o.) Democrats at 60% no, all other groups are -50. (That is, below 50% in support or opposition) Moderates (54% and libs(60%) are the strongest no. Opposition is around 50% at all income levels. Strongest opposition is in Western Washington (By far the most government employees.)

Referendum 52 - The union full employment act

38% - Yes

46% - No.

Strongest opposition are men at 55% no. Ages 50+ are 51% "no". 66% of GOP is no, 62% of dems are "yes. Indies break "no" 49 to 33. Conservatives no is at 66%; lib yes at 58%, by income, strongest opposition is at <$40K. By region, strongest opposition is Western Washington at 53% no.

The rejection of most fringe left positions doesn't bode well for the left in this election.

The Corruption of the democrat: Barb Boxer scams $8 million federal dollars for her own kid.

So, what good is power if you don't use it?

Our own corrupt county commissioner, Steve "Easy Money" Stuart knows the value of money. $100,000 from megacasino developer David Barnett got him elected in the first place; once elected, he made a deal with failed congressional candidate State Senator Craig Pridemore (D-USSVancouver) that allowed him to keep $60,000 or so in campaign contributions that he would have had to return had Pridemore not amended his own bill to apply legislative limits to county races in county's our size.

God only knows that's going on to get Easy Money to be a rabid dog over jamming us all with billions in debt, a horrific burden to the families of the 65000 who commute every day to Portland so they can feed their families while Stuart advocates they get to pay $1300 a year or more for the privilege. But clearly, money motivates Stuart. Why wouldn't it here?

But this obvious corruption is chump changed compared to Barb Boxer... thought the source of a lot of it... a tribal casino issue, is much the same. Thanks to Doug Ross @ Journal for getting the word out.

How to use your power as a senator to send $8 million in cold cash to your son, by Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Also: The Hill scrubs story from website

Can we call this burgeoning scandal Boxer-gate yet? After all, when a Democrat finds a way to secretively transfer $8 million in cold cash to her son using unabashed power in the Senate -- which is what The Hill alleges that Barbara Boxer did -- then it seems an apt title indeed.

Step 1: Find a defunct American Indian tribe that officially ceased to exist decades ago.

Step 2: Jam legislation through that reinstate the tribe and discretely tack on an amendment that gives the tribe the right to open a casino near San Francisco.

Step 3: Have the tribe turn over all real estate and policy details to two advisory firms, both of which were co-owned by the Senator's son.

Step 4: Profit! Boxer's son reportedly cleared a cool $8 million for his, uhm, help.

To avoid immediate citizen concern about a casino popping up in their posh neighborhood, Doug Boxer’s Kenwood Investments 2 kindly fronted for the casino interests in purchasing a tract of land in Rohnert Park, as well as helpfully taking options on adjoining parcels of land for themselves to sweeten the pot... Then Platinum Advisers sprang into action to try to gain community support for the casino...

What makes the story timely is that the federal government just a couple of weeks ago was compelled to declare the land that Boxer’s son had purchased on behalf of the Indian casino a reservation, effectively killing the local zoning and lawsuits that had tied the project up in knots for most of the past decade.

As an aside, The Hill's Rick Manning -- who first reported this in the national press -- must be in very deep doo-doo indeed.


I dug around a little bit and here's the entire article:

Barb Boxer's Indian tribe Take.

By Rick Manning - 10/30/10 08:55 AM ET

For the past 10 years Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) has been playing a game that would make Jack Abramoff blush, a game that can best be described using the language of “Get Smart’s” Maxwell Smart as “the ole family-profiting-off-of-the_Indian-tribe-that-you-created trick.”

Here’s the story.

In 1998, Lynn Woolsey introduced legislation reinstating an Indian tribe in the wine country of Northern California that had been declared defunct by the Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1958. None of the Indians of the tribe objected at that time; they received a payment and went about their lives.

The Woolsey bill would reinstate the tribe but specifically prohibited them from starting a casino. The legislation ran into trouble when the Bureau of Indian Affairs opposed the legislation because it had not seen any evidence that the tribe was significantly tied to the terminated tribe.

In 2000, Boxer helpfully picked up the Woolsey bill, but changed the prohibition against gaming, and designated any land that the group owned to be considered as a reservation.

In the same year, Boxer got her language into the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act of 2000, and with the changes unbeknownst to either fellow Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) or House sponsor Woolsey (D), the bill was signed into law by then-President Clinton.

That’s when the game got interesting.

Shortly after passage, the newly minted Indian tribe declared that after much soul-searching, the only thing it could do was open a casino on the outskirts of San Francisco in the town of Rohnert Park.

The tribe turned its fortunes over to two firms to make its dreams of wealth come true — Platinum Advisers, a political consulting/lobbying firm, and Kenwood Investments 2. Amazingly, and I’m certain quite coincidentally, Barbara Boxer's son, Doug, was a partner in each firm.

To avoid immediate citizen concern about a casino popping up in their poshc neighborhood, Doug Boxer's Kenwood Investments 2 kindly fronted for the casino interests in purchasing a tract of land in Rohnert Park, as well as helpfully taking options on adjoining parcels of land for themselves to sweeten the pot. (Can I say pot and Sonoma County, Calif., in the same breath?)

Then Platinum Advisers sprang into action to try to gain community support for the casino. They apparently didn’t do a very good job, because the casino still is not built 10 years later.

According to, Doug Boxer's take from the project was a very Abramoff-like $8 million.

What makes the story timely is that the federal government just a couple of weeks ago was compelled to declare the land that Boxer's son had purchased on behalf of the Indian casino a reservation, effectively killing the local zoning and lawsuits that had tied the project up in knots for most of the past decade.

The Santa Rosa Press Democrat rightly pinned the federal decision right on the Senate Ethics Committee chairwoman’s doorstep by pointing out that since she used the word shall, rather than may, in the legislation that birthed this tribe, the federal government had no choice but to declare the property that the tribe subsequently purchased to be tribal lands.

Of course, my favorite part of this story is the poor bedraggled, downtrodden Indian chief, Greg Sarris. You see, poor Greg Sarris is a Ph.D. who has served as a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles.

Dr. Chief Sarris, according to his own biographical story, was adopted out when he was born, never meeting his natural parents. At some point in his life, like many who have been adopted, he wanted to know about his birth parents, and began to research. He discovered that his mother was deceased, and his father’s name was unlisted on the birth certificate. His mother was not a Native American.

Just so this tale is believable, I am now directly quoting Sarris’s bio from According to Sarris in Mabel McKay (a book he wrote), Bunny (his mother) claimed that the father of her baby was a Mexican stablehand who worked where she kept her horse, but her brother disputed this (based on Sarris’s looks) and suggested that the father was more likely to have been a boy called Emilio. Sarris describes looking through yearbooks from his mother’s school to locate him:

“Then I saw it. The name, Emilio Hilario. I looked at the picture and saw my face. Darker, yes. But my face all the same. I ended up interviewing over twenty people, and yes, they confirmed that Emilio was my father. Other girls had gotten pregnant from him also. ‘Oh, your mother loved him so, even as wild as he was,’ her best friend told me.” — Mabel McKay. p. 142.

To make a long story somewhat shorter, Sarris located the Filipino father of Emilio, who said that Emilio’s mother’s father had some Indian ancestry, and so Sarris adopted his “father’s mother’s” heritage and proceeded to regenerate an Indian tribe.

And that, boys and girls, is the abridged story of how you create an Indian tribe and profit off of it in six easy steps. Isn’t it nice to have a Senate Ethics Committee chairwoman who is so skillful at playing the game?

Manning is a native Californian and a Fairfax, Va.-based political communications professional

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, that is corruption. Corruption of the rankest variety that SHOULD see that bitch locked up for the rest of her life, let alone get her re-elected.

It's the kind of corruption surrounding our own tribal effort here... with the same outcomes: We get screwed.

Was it that long ago the fringe left was going nuts over alleged illegality on the part of the right? Man, the cricket chirps are deafening on this one.

This morning's Democratian democrat puff-piece.

Hopefully, the leftists mentioned by the paper today will make sure to include a large, in-kind contribution on their PDC's as a result of the irresponsible crap and half-truths spewed out this morning by the local cancer on our society.

I've been in this business a long time, but rarely have I seen such utter, total and complete garbage from anything remotely calling itself a "newspaper."

In fact, the most recent version was interpreted editions of the Völkischer Beobachter, the Nazi party rag I studied as part of my PoliSci curriculum.

The rag deliberately overlooked critical elements of the campaigns they oppose. For example, Steve "Easy Money" Stuart certainly "understands the complexities of the job," since he's been on it for the last 5 corrupt years. But they haven't mentioned his connection to Megacasino shill and developer David Barnett, the $100,000 in dirty money that won him the job in the first place; his involvement in Tim "The Liar" Leavitt's flip campaign; his desire to shackle us all with a $100,000,000 a year in debt that will blow a hole in our local economy and hurt thousands of families.

No, all they mention is that he's "heavily endorsed," because, well, they want him to win, honesty be damned. So, they're certainly not going to concern themselves, or the voters, with the facts that everyone marking a ballot should know before they vote.

Unfortunately, the organization who could have acted by going around this stain on the science of journalism lacked the competence or vision to cull Easy Money out of the herd and make an example out of him.

Hopefully, this group will be back, older and wiser, and go to work to take out Alleged Republican Commissioner Marc Boldt, who has both endorsed and protected Easy Money while acting as his Wing Man to keep him safe from the right.

Boldt, who used to be a conservative Republican, a title long since gone, is as guilty as Stuart on the Bridge/loot rail project, because although he has been positioned to kill this project for years, he's sat idly by and done nothing while tens of millions of dollars have vaporized with literally billions left to go.

I guess it's become a political issue now, eh, Marc? Expect to see it a lot over the next two years.

Nevertheless, the Columbian's reminder that Stuart is oh-so-important pails in comparison over their failure to point out that when "someone understands the complexities of the job," their guilt in screwing the hundreds of thousands of people of Clark County is even more despicable.

It's one thing to screw up because you don't know. It's quite another to screw the people because you DO know, and you're using the system and manipulating people by lies of omission and keeping things "quiet" that might be a problem for Stuart... like his taking credit for a light rail vote that he HAD NO CHOICE OVER.

You know... like that?

No mention of union thug Hollywood Tony Golik's likely prosecutorial misconduct. After all, even though the rag frequently prints unfounded allegations against those they want to harm (Right, Lou?) when it comes to allegations that may negatively impact a campaign for someone they support.... forget about it.

No mention of Seekins' failure to vote for the entirety of her 53 year life... Just Seekins' platform that her opponent "doesn't understand mass appraisal techniques..." and, of course, no mention that Van Nortwick is a certified appraiser, which could go to show that Seekins "doesn't understand appraisals..." but no mention of that.

No mention of Parker's deliberate violation of campaign laws... why, no mention of that campaign at all. Nothing good can be said for Parker, given that she's a union hack like Golik, so why even mention the County Clerk's race?

And in the end, the 4 directly responsible for putting this tripe together... Kathie Durbin, Andrea Damewood, Laura McVicker and Stephanie Rice?

Would no longer be working for me if I ran the paper.

Selective fact presentation is inexcusable. Casting those your rag has endorsed in the best light by deliberately leaving out important facts and issues while amplifying the campaigns of those you support at the expense of those you oppose is despicable.

But then, we are talking about the Democratian here, and not a real newspaper.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Congrats to Chief Bridger/Loot Railers Steve "Easy Money" Stuart and Tim "The Liar" Leavitt for vaporizing $108 million on their unwanted project.

Yeah, keeping "Easy Money" in office has done so much to screw us already. And The Liar's deliberately misleading campaign against tolls... well, look what that's brought us: $108 million have vaporized to date... with hundreds of millions to go.

Besides his obvious corruption, this massive waste of money stands as the main testament as to why Easy Money is unfit to be the commissioner. And The Liar? Well, it's pretty clear he'll do or say anything to get elected... and then forget all about the suckers who voted for him. But what else can you expect from a fake Republican who's endorsed Obama and Fatty Patty?

Good job, gang. I'm sure you'll be screwing us a great deal more before it's over.

But we'll remember.

Oh yes... we'll remember.

Cross posted at Tim Leavitt Watch.

Another reason to detest the Obama Administration.

There are a wide variety of reasons to conclude that the Obama Administration hates the military.

From Obama's moronic and idiotic trial balloon to force our Warriors to purchase their own health care insurance to take care of their wounds to this:


Press Release

No Justice for Military Voters
in Illinois

October 25,

WASHINGTON, D.C.-The Department of Justice has once again failed our military voters-this time in Illinois.

Last Friday, the Justice Department and the Illinois State Board of Elections filed a consent decree to remedy widespread violations of our service members' right to vote in Illinois. Not only does the proposed agreement fail to address violations in numerous counties, it provides no meaningful relief for thousands of military members in the State of Illinois.

The widespread nature of Illinois's failure to protect military voters is beyond dispute. According to State Board officials, at least 35 counties in the state failed to mail absentee ballots at least 45 days before the November election, as required by the Military and Overseas Vote Empowerment Act (MOVE Act). At least 6 of these
counties mailed absentee ballots more than two weeks after the September 18, 2010 deadline.

Unfortunately, the consent decree does little or nothing to remedy these clear violations of law. In a vast majority of the counties, the decree does nothing more than extend the deadline for postmarking absentee ballots from November 1, 2010 to November 2, 2010. In the 6 counties with the worst violations, the consent decree also extends the deadline for receiving absentee ballots by 1 to 3 days.

"We have no idea how the Department thinks that this decree enforces the law or protects military voters," said Eric Eversole, the Executive Director of the Military Voter Protection Project. "In 65 counties that complied with the law, military voters
in Illinois had nearly 60 days to receive and return their absentee ballots. However, if you are a service member that lived in a county that clearly violated the law, you received something far less. It doesn't make any sense."

While the consent decree was signed by the federal district court judge on Friday in Chicago, the Illinois Republican Party has indicated that it may ask the judge to re-open the case and ask for equal treatment of military voters throughout the state.

The Military Voter Protection Project is a project of the Vets for Freedom Educational Institute in partnership with Families United, both non-profit 501(c)(3) organizations. For more information about the organization and its mission, please visit

Now, if Obama or the fringe left nutters he's surrounjded himself with gave a damn about the troops, he would have demanded that any state failing to meet the requirements of the MOVE Act extend their cutoff 20 days, to make sure EVERY vote from EVERY Service Member is counted.

Yes... the list of reasons to detest our President is growing longer by the day.


McKenna nails alleged democrat conspirator MacLean.

A mentioned here, Lisa MacLean works for a fringe left campaign group. And because of her alleged incompetent, underhanded and now, apparently quite illegal shenanigans concerning the handling of what should have been a relatively simple exercise, she's looking at a destroyed professional career tyhat may even take down her boss's company.

Well, Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna has filed suit against Ms. MacLean, according to the local Democratian (Who seems to have found it impossible to mention that MacLean is a democrat and the company she works for works for democrats... but, after all, they ARE the Democratian).

How many others have been impacted by this kind of thing?

An email that went out today from soon to be State Representative Brian Peck addresses the issue:

Sordid Campaigning Tactics Exposed

Recent revelations have come to light from the state Public Disclosure Commission concerning misbehavior by Democrat consulting firm Moxie Media. Using a maze of 40 Political Action Committees, Moxie Media has been attacking Republican candidates while concealing and misleading voters about who is paying for the advertising. The Brian Peck for State Representative campaign has been one of those targeted by Moxie Media, and has been smeared by numerous sleazy mailers.

"This problem goes beyond shadowy groups financing shady personal attacks, one that cannot be fixed with a statement by my opponent disavowing Moxie Media." Brian Peck stated. "In my 17th legislative District race, I have had $24,000 of disreputable mailers targeted against me. It's disingenuous of Tim Probst to only speak up now after the PDC asked Attorney General McKenna to prosecute the liberal strategist. He said nothing as negative mailers against me were hitting the district the past few weeks."

Peck has worked consistently to focus his campaign solely on the issues facing the state. "We cannot allow the political discussion of our state's future to be sidetracked by baseless personal attacks." Peck continued. "Washington is in the midst of a fiscal crisis, and we cannot continue the business-as-usual budgeting of endlessly increasing spending and taxes. My opponent, Tim Probst, has voted for many pieces of reckless legislation created by his Democratic Party leadership, such as the 2009 budget, which spent at record-breaking levels and created the current deficit. Despite boasting that "I've fought against debt and spending for years", he is unable to provide any evidence that he has ever succeeded against his Democratic leadership in that fight. This is the true central issue in this race, one that shows the clear policy difference between me and my opponent, a difference that I will continue
to work to bring before the voters of the 17th District."

Actually, I think bastardizing the political process is a bad idea for democrats in this particular election.

But then, it's hard to decipher what they were thinking.

Stunner: Real Clear Politics moves WA03 to "toss up" from "leans Republican!"

In yet another hopeful sign that Ridgefield Barbie will be completely unemployed come next Wednesday. Real Clear Politics has moved the race in the 3rd District from "Leans Republican" to "toss up."

As the days go by and more people find out that Babs is a "mile wide and an inch deep," they've clearly come to understand what I've known since she parachuted back in here after a 10 year absence: Herrera is unfit to be a member of Congress.

My remarking on our local empty suit's efforts to snatch defeat from the jaws of what should be an overwhelming victory does not mean that I believe she's going to lose.

No... as much as I despise her and her handlers, I think she's actually going to pull this off, having made a race that SHOULD have been hers in a walk into a real nail bitter, due to her tin ear and over all political incompetence.

What an amazingly awful campaign she's run. What a complete dolt and coward she's been by failing to debate as often as possible. But then, we all know why that is.

It's amazing what you hear in this corner of the information highway.

Since we're not going to need Herrera to take back the House, I think to myself how much better off we'd be with her gone.

As in, going back to work for McMorris.

But sadly, we're likely stuck with 2 years of her inanity before that happens.

Check it out here, check it outters.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

Friday, October 29, 2010

Trouble in democrat city: Moxie Media mogul looking at prosecution.

As I brought to you here, a leftist consultant working for Moxie Media, one Lisa MacLean, allegedly conspired with union thugs to take out a sitting DEMOCRAT state senator, one Senator Jean Berkey, who wasn't fringe-left enough for the thugs who gamed the system to take her out.

Part of that involved doing what amounted to anonymous independent expenditures that supported the REPUBLICAN candidate in the 38th District around Everett. Ultimately, that was successful, as Berkey came in 3rd, out of the running for the general.

But there's a price to pay and possible the overturning of the primary might be a part of that.

Wash. AG asked to prosecute political strategist

The state Public Disclosure Commission is asking Attorney General Rob McKenna to prosecute a liberal political strategist accused of failing to disclose who paid for mailers that attacked a Democratic state senator in the primary.

The Associated Press

OLYMPIA, Wash. —

The state Public Disclosure Commission is asking Attorney General Rob McKenna to prosecute a liberal political strategist accused of failing to disclose who paid for mailers that attacked a Democratic state senator in the primary.

On a 3-0 vote Thursday, the commission rejected a deal with Lisa MacLean of Moxie Media that would have involved her paying $30,000 in fines and agreeing she violated campaign contribution laws. The agency is instead asking McKenna to bring a civil claim against MacLean.

PDC spokeswoman Lori Anderson said that Commissioner Jane Noland specifically asked that McKenna "explore all remedies" including those available under a state statute that sets out when a court can overturn an election.

MacLean did not respond Thursday to phone or e-mail messages seeking comment.

An initial report issued by PDC staff last week said MacLean schemed to conceal donors for the mailers that urged voters to support a conservative candidate over Sen. Jean Berkey in August's primary.

The report also found that actions by MacLean and others involved with two political action committees she created may have violated several provisions of state election law.

While not surprising that they do this sort of thing, it is surprising how incompetent they were in pulling it off. With unlimited amounts of money, you'd think they'd be a little more circumspect.
You know... like the Senate GOP trying to dump Pam Roach by helping to try and elect a sex offender? Like that?

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Wolf at BLACKFIVE: A Horror never forgotten.

I follow B5 here... they're on my multiple-times daily must read list.

And this story is just one of the reasons why.

A Horror Never Forgotten

Posted By Mr Wolf • [October 28, 2010]

I dread going over to certain websites that contain 'news'. Daily, I scan and scour various sites around the 'net, looking for information and updates. Some sites have become so politicized that I can't stand to go to them very often. CNN has become such a site; but today, they brought this one out that MUST NOT be missed:

The diary arrived in a Red Cross package, along with a Sheaffer fountain pen. Acevedo mixed snow with the ink to help it go further; other times, he'd urinate in the ink container to make it last.

There were two journals in the pack. He gave the other to Pfc. Stephen James Schweitzer, POW #25802, on March 20, 1945. Schweitzer would also survive the war.

Acevedo wanted to make sure history was recorded. It was ingrained in him, as a medic and as a soldier who kept the war ethos: I will always place the mission first; I will never quit; I will never accept defeat, and I will never leave a fallen comrade.

This is the story of medic Tony Acevedo, 86, who survived the Berga slave labor camp with a diary of what he and his comrades had endured. CNN covers his visit to the Holocaust museum in DC, and his donation of the journal he kept to their archives. His is the first of an American citizen to the museum, and the only Mexican-American among the survivors listed there.

Most of those captured with him were from the Battle of the Bulge. To survive that period only to die in a hell-camp just adds insult to injury. Worse, in my mind, is how the Army treated them after they were liberated:

He was liberated on April 23, 1945. Before returning home, Acevedo signed a document that still haunts him today. "You must give no account of your experience in books, newspapers, periodicals, or in broadcasts or in lectures," it said.

It ends with: "I understand that disclosure to anyone else will make me liable to disciplinary action."

The military tried to shove this under a rug- in order to appease Germany at the start of the Cold War, and to try to prevent further condemnation, the survivors were never recognized until 2009 when they were finally recognized for who they were- survivors of a death camp. Even the commanders of Berga were spared; the military would not let Acevedo and others testify to the conditions that they endured at the camp- the death marches, the inhumane treatment.

Blackfive, like other mil-blogs and pro-vet sites on the internet, stand to prevent just this sort of cover-up from occurring. None of us here would even consider hiding or covering up such an occurrance- no matter the circumstance. To do such an injustice to our brothers-in-arms is beyond our collective comprehension. In fact, to those that understand why B5 began this blog, bringing out the truth and the REAL stories of our bretheren is what we are all about.

To think that someone would try to hush something like this, and/or not work to bring it to light is reprehensible. To me, the actions of leaders in the US are nearly as deplorable as the actions of the Nazis in this case.

Go read the article- watch the video. It's a keeper.


The Democratian continues to cover for Golik.

Golik's a democrat union thug, so the rag has no problem with the union infecting every level of the prosecutor's shop.

Credible accusations surface against Golik and the rag buries them. If they don't happen to like you, garbage by scum such as Keath Huff result in barrels of ink get poured on you by the resident bully, Brancaccio.

But if the rag "likes" you, then they're willing to engage in propaganda and lies, both of commission and omission that would make their hero, Goebbels, blush with envy.

Lew Waters has the low down on the rags effort's to protect someone likely indirectly responsible for the rape of a woman in Portland when he made that guy a deal and kicked him lose for a case he was trying.

Check it out, check it outters.

What is it with the League of Women Vipers?

Is there something wrong with that group?

Do they have some reason to oppose the Pledge of Alligence?

it should ALWAYS take place. And these witches look like left wing slime for opposing it.

Another Debate Audience Recites Pledge When Another Moderator Says ‘No
by Jeff Dunetz

What is it with the League of Woman’s Voters and the Pledge of Allegiance?

For the second time in less than a week a congressional debate began with a request for the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, and for the second time in a week the League of Woman’s Voters moderator said no, and for the second time in a week the audience got up and said it anyway. One would think that with all of the bad publicity after last week’s incident, the League would have “gotten it.” But Tuesday night the League of Woman Voters proved that they aren’t too “quick on the uptake.”

The Pennsylvania 18th Congressional district debate between Republican incumbent Tim Murphy and his Democratic party challenger Dan Connolly was about to begin when Murphy asked the moderator for the pledge. As the moderator Susan Reuther began to make excuses, the crowd stood up and took action on their own.

After the Pledge of Allegiance was recited, moderator Susan Reuther dealt with her obvious consternation over the spontaneous show of patriotism by scolding Candidate Murphy who Asked for the pledge.

“Next time if you have a request like that, we would appreciate it if you would give it to us when the rules are discussed,” she said.

“It didn’t need to be requested. I assumed you would do it,” Mr. Murphy replied.

Former Peters High School principal Tom Hajzus was sitting in the front row with a 22-yearold Marine veteran wounded by a bomb in Afghanistan.

“The insensitivity, to me, was inexcusable and outrageous,” said the registered Democrat and Murphy supporter. The crowd’s reaction “was an American moment, that’s what that was,” he said.

Once again the League of Woman’s Voters blamed it on politics.

“There have been some groups who want to create a ruckus, call attention to something and using the pledge to the flag and making it seem the league is unpatriotic if we don’t,” says Greater Pittsburgh League President Arlene Levy.

Levy says she thinks some of this is political but the League has no problem with the pledge if requested in advance by the candidates.

While neither Connolly nor Murphy made that request before the debate, both of the candidates said there was nothing political about the pledge.

“I see it as something completely a-political. It’s something that unites all of Americans,” says Connolly.

“If the flag is political, then we have some problems here. The flag is what brings us together,” says Murphy.

Ms Levy says her chapter will be discussing this issue at its next board meeting, perhaps to incorporate the pledge in every candidate debate (YA THINK!?!?)


It takes a monumental amount of arrogance to presume to avoid doing the pledge. And it's idiots determined to lessen the value of the LWV who are moronic enough to deliberately leave it out.

Well done by the crowds in attendence and the candidates in these debates.

HT to Big Government.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

KING 5 News: Heck closing on Ridgefield Barbie.

Unfortunately, those of us in the 3rd CD are forced to chose between Twiddle Dem and Twiddle Dumber.

According to the most recent Survey USA poll results released today, Barbie has dropped 2 to 50 and Heck has gained enough to climb to 46.

KING 5 poll: Herrera vs. Heck contest tightening in 3rd


Posted on October 27, 2010 at 9:48 AM

In the hotly-contested race for Congress in Washington's 3rd district, Democrat Denny Heck has closed the gap but Republican Jaime Herrera still has a narrow lead--just within the margin of error of our latest KING 5 poll.In the latest SurveyUSA poll, 50% say they would vote for Herrera, 46% for Heck with 4% undecided. The margin of error for the poll of 640 likely voters is +/- 4%.

From our pollster SurveyUSA and editor Jay Leve: "Democrats today are more likely than in 3 previous polls to identify themselves as certain traction among voters age 50 to 64, where he had trailed in August, September and early October, but now leads. Heck polls above 50% among women for the first time. And, Heck's advantage among Moderates has grown to 25 points. But, Herrera is still backed by 91% of those with a favorable impression of the Tea Party, 80% of pro-life voters, 56% of men and 55% of Independents."

With just a few days before election day, many voters have already mailed in their ballots. Watch here our profile of the race. You can also watch the candidates debate at our sister station, KGW in Portland.

It's a real shame that this time around, people are going to vote for as empty a suit as the one worn by the president.

Youda thought we knew better.

This late strength is, no doubt, a result of the growing realization among those paying attention that Barbie isn't fit to be elected dog catcher. Unfortunately, it's come too late and she's likely to win anyway.

Cross posted on Jaime Herrera Watch.

More of that Hope and Change thingy: our new, economy bruising tax rates!

From a CPA:

October 26, 2010

Change IS coming. There is change in the tax code on the very near horizon, January 1, 2011. The problem is that no one can say for sure WHAT the change will be. I wish I could layout what to expect. But right now all I can say is that 2011 WILL be different.


2011 Tax Changes At-a-Glance

A host of tax provisions enacted in 2001 and 2003--commonly referred to collectively as the "Bush tax cuts"--expire at the end of the year. While it's possible that new legislation could extend some or all of these expiring tax provisions, election-year politics make it difficult to predict what action, if any, Congress will take. With that in mind, here's what you need to know about the major changes that are scheduled for 2011.


Federal income tax brackets

Right now, there are six income tax brackets: 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33%, and 35%. For 2010, these brackets apply to married couples filing joint federal income tax returns in the following manner.


2010 Income Tax Brackets--Married Filing Jointly

Taxable Income

Marginal Tax Rate

Not over $16,750


Over $16,750 to $68,000


Over $68,000 to $137,300


Over $137,300 to $209,250


Over $209,250 to $373,650


Over $373,650


As it stands now, there will be no 10% bracket for 2011, and the remaining bracket rates will return to their original 2001 levels: 15%, 28%, 31%, 36%, and 39.6%.


Marginal Tax Rate

For 2010, if you sell shares of stock that you've held for more than a year, any gain is a long-term capital gain, generally taxed at a maximum rate of 15%. If you're in the 10% or 15% marginal income tax bracket, however, you'll pay no federal tax on the long-term gain (a 0% tax rate applies). That means if you're a married couple filing a joint federal income tax return, and your taxable income is $68,000 or less, you pay no federal tax on the gain.


However, these rates expire at the end of 2010. Beginning in 2011, a 20% rate will generally apply to long-term capital gains. Individuals in the 15% tax bracket (remember, there won't be a 10% bracket in 2011) will pay the tax at a rate of 10%. Special rules (and slightly lower rates) will apply for qualifying property held for five years or more. Finally, while qualifying dividends are taxed in 2010 using the same capital gains tax rates described above (i.e., 15% and 0%), in 2011 they'll be taxed as ordinary income subject to the increased 2011 tax brackets.


The Estate Tax

There is currently no estate tax for 2010, and special rules are in place that govern the way basis is calculated for property passing upon death. The estate tax reappears in 2011, however, with a $1 million exclusion amount (meaning that up to $1 million of assets will be exempt from estate tax) and a top tax rate of 55%. To put that in context, for 2009, the top estate tax rate was 45%, and estates received an exclusion of $3.5 million.






Estate tax exclusion

$3.5 million


$1 million

Top estate tax rate


No tax


Other Important Changes

Other changes for 2011 include:

  • Phaseout of itemized deductions and exemption amounts--Itemized deductions and personal exemption amounts will once again be phased out for higher-income individuals
  • The "marriage penalty" returns--Changes made to correct the federal income tax "marriage penalty" expire at the end of 2010, resulting in a reduced standard deduction amount and lower tax bracket thresholds (i.e., higher rates will apply at lower income levels) for married couples filing jointly in 2011
  • Tax credits get cut--The child tax credit will be reduced and both the Hope education tax credit and the earned income tax credit become less generous (the Making Work Pay tax credit also disappears)

The lies of November and Steve "Easy Money" Stuart.

. has missed an easy and golden opportunity.

Because their campaign has lacked a singular purpose, failing to focus on taking out one candidate to get all of the others to fall into line; their impact will be minimal to non-existent this cycle.

And that's a shame, because Steve "Unmarked Bills" Stuart would have been easy, and served as an example to the rest of area government.

Stuart's greatest claim to fame at this point is being the beneficiary of $100,000 in campaign funds while David Barnett, tribal casino developer, bought him like a used car.

Now, because he's going to win, the non-campaign of will have sent just the opposite message: Stuart will wrongly believe that his re-election is a mandate from the people of Clark County to go ahead and bend us over for his union buddies while he, Stuart, is primarily responsible for burying us in billions of dollars of debt along with his accomplice, alleged Republican Marc Boldt.

So, when "Easy Money" tells you, as he did in the Democratian, that he supports a vote... as long as it's only on loot rail... instead of the entire project... he means, first of all that he wants his bridge project; he wants to bury us in tolls, he wants to blow a $100,000,000 a year hole in the local economy and that, more specifically, he doesn't give a damn what we think, want or believe.

But when he says this garbage:

As a member of the C-Tran board, Stuart said, he worked to protect lower fares for disabled riders and fought a move to cut transit services to the disabled.

As for light rail, he said, “My focus is to provide you with a vote, and because of the work we did, there is going to be a vote next November.”

Without bothering to mention that Craig Pridemore's gerrymandering light rail bill REQUIRES a vote... and that he had NO CHOICE in the matter... well, that's just the tiniest bit over the top.

Pridemore's bill was designed to screw most of the county outside the urban growth boundaries of Vancouver, by giving us the privilege of paying the loot rail tax, but not having any say in adopting it by drawing the lines around every store in Clark County while simultaneously cutting tens of thousands of us out of being allowed to vote, precisely like they did for the last C-Trans election.

So, it would be one thing if Steve "Cash, Please, No Checks" Stuart was actually doing this because he wanted to.

It's another thing altogether for his rank hypocrisy and lies while he takes credit for something he had no choice over.

SB 5540, Pridemore's loot rail downtown mafia (I love this cute little phrase at section 2(1): "A governing body of a transit agency in a county that has a population of more than four hundred thousand and that adjoins a state boundary..." You get that? We're the ONLY COUNTY IN THE STATE THAT CAN GET SCREWED LIKE THIS!) taxation bill, one of the many reasons why his fringe-leftist congressional hopes were crushed, says this at Section 3:

The rate of the tax shall be approved by the voters.

The only question was "when". So, if that's what Easy Money was referring to when it came to the "work we did" without bothering to mention that a vote was REQUIRED... well, lies like that are just one of the many things to despise Stuart over.

And these are the kinds of things that should have drilled him for. They should have been omnipresent. They should have hounded him, politically, everywhere he went. They should have gone up on TV, radio, newspapers... to educate everyone as to what a lying slime ball Stuart is.

They should have hung that bridge around his neck and his alone, like an anchor.

But they didn't... because they didn't understand either the history of the candidates or the nature of this business. And as a result, we're stuck with a fringe left tax and spender... because they didn't want to get their skirts dirty.

What a waste.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

The slime backing I-1098, the state income tax, lie again.

Almost scummier then most democrat campaigns... almost... has been the despicable, underhanded campaign to jam us with a state income tax.

From the very first commercial when that low life Gates neglected to even use the words "income tax," they have no problem lying when it suits them.

Fortunately, they typically are too stupid to be clever, and then, they get caught... like here:

Originally published Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Comments (0) E-mail E-mail article Print Print view Share Share

I-1098 proponents falsely claim tax can't be touched without public vote

The Seattle Times editorial board says, once again, "No" to the income tax proposed by Initiative 1098. Proponents falsely claim the tax can't be expanded without a vote of the people.

"LIE" is a word used sparingly in these columns. To call a statement a lie is to say it is false and the person saying it knows it to be false. It is a fitting word for one of the current ads for Initiative 1098, the proposed state income tax.

The ad falsely starts with a green road sign saying, "TRUTH about Initiative 1098." A woman's voice — a calm, reasonable voice — says that "1098 can't be touched without a vote of the people."

That is a lie.

If the ad claimed, "Our initiative says it can't be touched without a vote of the people," that would be true. The initiative does say that, but the language is there just for looks. The Washington Constitution trumps all other state law, and the constitution says that two years after an initiative is passed it can be altered by a majority vote of the Legislature.

The people who wrote I-1098 know this. For them to say, "1098 can't be touched without a vote of the people," is a lie.

It can. It will.

The proponents of a state income tax argue that the Legislature would not ignore a vote of the people. But six months ago it did. On a simple majority vote it suspended Initiative 960, which set a two-thirds rule to raise taxes. I-960 was approved by the people November 2007. It was written as permanent legislation, just as I-1098 is. Last spring, the Legislature suspended it.

That is reality. The politicians know it. The I-1098 people know it, no matter what they put in their ads.

The deeper deception in their proposed income tax is its beatific public face. Recall the ad in which 84-year-old Bill Gates Sr. is dunked into a pool of water. Gates a rich guy, soaked. He smiles at the joke. He is loving it. Kids cheer.

But who will be paying this tax 20 years from now? Those kids. They will pay in economic opportunities lost, and they will pay in cash. They will pay and pay, and they will not recall the cuteness of it.

Please, vote no on Initiative 1098.

Whenever the slime have to lie to win, the vote should ALWAYS be "no."

Union thugs and democrat consultant conspired to take out a democrat state senator: succeed... but get caught.

Oh the tangled webs we weave...

A Seattle political consulting firm could face serious sanctions after a state watchdog determined it schemed to secretly take out a Democratic state senator from Everett in the August primary that unions had decided was too conservative.

On Friday, the PDC released a report saying that Moxie's Lisa MacLean coordinated with the Washington Federation of State Employees and labor affiliated political committees to pay for political advertising for a then-obscure conservative candidate in the 38th District Senate race. Labor was unhappy with the incumbent, Democratic Sen. Jean Berkey. Labor preferred another Democratic candidate, Nick Harper. A third candidate, conservative Rod Reiger, was not nearly as well known as the other two.

Under the state's Top Two system, the two candidates who get the most votes
in the primary advance to the general election, regardless of party. Apparently concerned that Berkey would make it through the primary, Moxie Media and labor interests reportedly decided to pump up Reiger's candidacy to try to make sure he was the candidate Harper would face in November.

"In written communications to her clients, Ms. MacLean clearly stated her intent to obscure the clients' sponsorship of postcards and robocalls that attacked Senator Berkey from the right, a strategy that all concerned understood to be controversial," the PDC report said. "Ms. MacLean promised her clients that they would not b connected to the project until after the August 17, 2010, primary." (Jerry Cornfield from The Everett Herald has more; so does Erik Smith from the Washington State Wire).

In the primary, Harper finished with 35 percent of the vote and Reiger got 32.75. Berkey finished third, just behind Reiger.

MacLean didn't respond to a request for comment.

The watchdog report says MacLean established two layers of political committees to sponsor anti-Berkey postcards and robocalls. The report says Moxie did the same in 2nd, 34th, 41s and 44th legislative districts, funneling campaign money through multiple PACs to be used on independent direct mail telephone, Internet and television advertising through Moxie.

The PDC says MacLean and Moxie violated state laws by not properly identifying funding sources or properly disclose MacLean and the consulting firm's role. The Public Disclosure Commission will consider the report Thursday. It could recommend fines or possible criminal prosecution.

Berkey was a member of the "Roadkill Caucus," a group of moderate Democratic state legislators who want the state to explore ideas like privatizing liquor sales and outsourcing other functions and who were concerned about imposing too many taxes to balance Washington's budget.

The Roadkillers were a big reason the the Washington State Labor Council launched the Don't Invest in More Excuses PAC in 2009. The committee took in more than $900,000. Labor leaders said they'd use that money to target Democrats who angered them - like Berkey - and support other candidates more in line with their views.

Democrats in action. Why are we not surprised?

Monday, October 25, 2010

DeFazio loses his mind, ActII: HR 4646 introduced, taxes ALL transactions at any financial institution, including deposits and transfers.

There could be a more idiotic bill then the DeFazio Debacle, HR 4646, a bill that will tax any financial transaction anywhere (Gee, why am I reminded of the Stamp Act under King George?) including deposits and fund transfers... but I can't recall it just off the top of my head.

Hey... can you think of a better way to keep people from puttting money into banks?

What a total, blithering, idiot. Those of you supporting this clown in the OR04 deserve this kind of inanity. Look up "stupid is as stupid does." you'll see the picture of Hanks has been shoved out of the way by DeFazio.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Laird loses it: "Our words should carry consequences"

John Laird has been the resident political bigot at the rag for years.

Spewing invective for all of those years against all those who don't happen to agree with the agenda he spouts along with the propaganda sheet he works for; lying about the non-existent bipartisanship of our local Democratian; excusing for friends and crucifying foes... that's what he does.

And now, he defends the indefensible, excusing the scum who fired Juan Williams for having the temerity to speak his mind on TV... while giving NPR a complete pass for doing nothing against those engaging in the PRECISE, SAME ACTIVITY... but who engage in that practice the same way Laird does.

That is, the ultra fringe-left perspective.

Words, of course, should have consequences.

Beginning with Laird, he should have been fired years ago. But his words don't seem to have any consequences, save an increasingly lower readership and his rag's bankruptcy.

What he's too dense to get is that the outrage (which has been expressed on both sides of the political spectrum, by the way) is not limited to just firing Juan for speaking his mind and then being lied to by the slimeball running NPR as to the why of it.

It's the situational ethics of the thing... the FACT that such NPR luminaries as Nina Totenberg do the EXACT SAME THING... but they do so presenting the same fringe-left elements that our Editorial Page Hypocrite Laird represents... and they DON'T get fired.

It's the all-too-typical double standard of the left that infuriates.

What people with common sense want is for everyone to be treated the same under the same circumstances.

Firing Williams under these circumstances was a questionable move at best, particularly since we all know the bitch who did it was lying about her reasoning.

But firing him while failing to fire any of the uniformly leftist automatons doing the same thing?

There's no excuse for that.

And it's just another sign of how cluelessly left John Laird actually is to defend NPR's actions while attacking William's defenders.

But then, I have yet to see anyone tell us that John Laird is possessed of the common sense exceeding that of a rock ape... and his babble today confirms it.

NPR was flat wrong. And hopefully, it will cost them huge, to send the message that ALL employees must be held to the SAME standard ALL of the time, a concept simply beyond Laird's ability to understand.

DeFazio loses his mind: getting smacked by independent expenditures, wants to impeach Chief Justice Roberts.


DeFazio talks about impeaching Chief Justice John Roberts

Published: Friday, October 22, 2010, 5:44 PM
Updated: Friday, October 22, 2010, 6:07 PM
defazio-new.jpgRep. Peter DeFazio
Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., is getting really mad at the independent advertising campaign that has been launched against his reelection. And now he says he is "investigating" launching an impeachment effort against Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court.

It was under Roberts' leadership that the court, by a 5-4 vote, passed the Citizens United decision that opened the door to expanded corporate participation in campaign advertising.

DeFazio has said the decision helped allow a New York hedge fund manager to pour $300,000 into the attack ads, without having to reveal his identity until a required Federal Election Commission filing last week.

At any rate, The Huffington Post reported that DeFazio is now raising the idea of impeachment.

"I mean, the Supreme Court has done a tremendous disservice to the United States of America," Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) told The Huffington Post on Tuesday. "They have done more to undermine our democracy with their Citizens United decision than all of the Republican operatives in the world in this campaign. They've opened the floodgates, and personally, I'm investigating articles of impeachment against Justice Roberts for perjuring during his Senate hearings, where he said he wouldn't be a judicial activist, and he wouldn't overturn precedents."
As the Huffington Post noted, efforts to impeach Supreme Court justices rarely go anywhere. The last justice to face impeachment hearings was Samuel Chase in 1803, and he was acquitted by the Senate.

Carla Axtman at Blue Oregon, which hasn't had much bad to say about Democrats during this fall campaign, says Citizens United is an "awful ruling. But I'm not sure how whacking at impeachment on Roberts does anything but tag DeFazio with a 'crazy' label."

HT Orbusmax.