Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Strike one on the ballpark fiasco: commissioners table exclusivity agreement.

Apparently hearing it when your re-election comes up does make a difference.

With so many questions and disclosures left to be revealed, a great deal of the smoke-filled room nonsense that has led the efforts to stuff this waste of money down our throats seems to be increasingly up in the air.
There are so many unanswered questions... like, where's the feasibility study (there isn't one) it's community college property (So, how does the city or the county run that again... and how much are these people paying for this property?) and how much will groups pay to use this thing and who gets the money? (The owners. All of it) And didn't Clark College just get a new ballpark built? And why did it only have 150 seats?

And what about the neighborhood?

The most problematic aspect here is that most people who buy tickets will pay less of a tax for this facility then those who go see a movie in the evening... many of them, half as much as the movie goer.

And this is OK for the baseball junkies?
Stuart, an ex jock and a democrat, has no problem wasting millions of our dollars without asking us. That's the problem when so many people have suspended their common sense and voted to re-elect a tax and spender.

But Boldt has other concerns.

He's SUPPOSED to be a Republican, but has increasing difficulty in voting like one.

Earlier, I indicated that Boldt would sell us out. The next democrat vote he takes, which may be this one, will cause a horrific backlash in what will be his contested primary as educating the people on his voting record may well prove that to Marc, "Republican ain't nothing but a label."

In any event, the rip off has been dealt a blow. How telling a blow is hard to say. But clearly, Boldt is hearing it, and he needs to hear it some more.

What is it that veterans and active duty troops know that the civilian population can't seem to grasp?

That we have the worst president ever.

Obama's job approval among the military is even worse than among civilians

Obama greets US troops in Afghanistan

Some ominous political news for President Obama the day after he chose Memorial Day to name a new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

With just 15 months until the 2012 presidential election, Obama's overall job approval among Americans has sunk back down into the 40s.

But now a new poll of nearly a quarter-million Americans finds the commander-in-chief's job approval is even worse among members of the military, present and past.

A new Gallup poll finds that slightly more than a third of those military members (37%) approve of their commander's overall job from January of last year through April  2011.

This compares to Obama's 48% approval among nonmilitary Americans during the same period, Gallup reported.general martin Dempsey 5-11

The disapproval gap crosses all age groups. Men, especially veterans over 40, tend to disapprove of Obama more than women.
This would seem to indicate failure of this president's major public relations effort to be seen supporting veterans' affairs. On the Monday holiday the president did some business.

Obama announced he'd changed his mind about having Gen. Martin Dempsey (photo, right) as Army chief of staff. The veteran of two command cycles in Iraq had taken the top Army job less than two months ago.

Obama named him the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to replace Admiral Mike Mullen, who retires this fall. The president also visited Arlington National Cemetery for the traditional holiday wreath-laying and then got in some more golf.


Order of the day, troops: (Picture)



Monday, May 30, 2011

It's Memorial Day.


Try to take time out from the barbecue to remember what this day is all about. I'm on my way to Willamette National Cemetery to see some people.

God Bless those who have, are, and will serve in the Armed Forces of the United States.

Besides this, there will be no posts today.

Sunday, May 29, 2011

The Columbian/democratian spending disease.

It's a shame that we're stuck with a paper so bent on the same irresponsibility they've shown with their own money that they need to waste millions of dollars of ours.

It seems in the democratian world, both the democrat people... AND their newspaper, the only way to address any issue is to throw money at it, typically, OUR money... and never THEIRS.

I'm not sure why that is, exactly. It's a proven philosophy of disaster.

At the federal level, it's resulted in a Mt. Everest of debt they've hurled onto the shoulders of future generations with trillions more if they get their way, while they turn the value of the dollar into confetti by printing them as fast as they can mow down the tress.

Locally, it's resulted in an almost lock-step effort on the part of the democratian to throw OUR money at EVERY local problem while they DEFINITELY work to avoid paying anything themselves.

Local efforts include billions in debt they won't have top pay for a bridge replacement we don't need or want, along with loot rail we don't need or want; a ballpark we don't need or want and a federal courthouse, you guessed it... we don't need or want.

And they advocate all of these things without letting us vote... or demanding of those in power that they allow us to vote.

That, of course, is the democrat party meme.

When even a remote likelihood exists that the people will overturn the agenda of the leftist income-redistributionists, they tell us that allowing us the vote, or allowing the will to prevail is somehow a negative.

The democrat party's own rag tells us:
They hope to give rural interests dominance over urban values. They suppose they can make it harder for county government to raise and spend money on social problems and infrastructure capital.
What does that mean?

It means that they believe first, that "urban values" dominate and that's they way they want it and second, that they fear any effort to reduce their power and ability to rip us off, even when accomplished through that bothersome concept they disgrace that's a part of their name:


The democratian, which is, after all, the local mouthpiece for the fringe leftists that infest us, supports their positions.

The trouble with that is obvious.  Their obviously mishandling of their own bankrupt affairs tends to disqualify them from serious consideration over their comments over ours.

They can't even run their own life, I'll be damned if they'll run mine.

We do not need a bridge replacement.

We do not need loot rail.

We do not need a ballpark.

We do not need a federal courthouse. (There's one across the river in Portland)

And what do all these multi-million dollar projects have in common?

Democrat and democratian support.

Neither give a damn where the money comes from.  They just want to extort it from us knowing that the vast majority of them will never have to pay for any of it, because as the rag as shown before, they're amiong the more ignorant who believe that milk actually comes from grocery stores instead of cows.

They don't get it.  And they don't WANT to get it.

Besides the idocy of the federal courthouse plan, the latest example is the continuing silence on the part of the rag, who has yet to express any concern or remorse over the waste of tens of millions of dollars on the unneeded, unwanted bridge replacement project, with tens of millions MORE to come to waste, just like they've never said a thing about the over $400 MILLION wasted on the floating bridge without one shovel of dirt turned. 

It's a disease.  Bankruptcy is the cure.  And it simply cannot come fast enough.

The cluelessness of Obama's foreign policy... if that's what you can call it.


Saturday, May 28, 2011

The democratian's "demonstrated need" scam.

In today's effort at self-flagellating moralizing, the democratian once again tells us how stupid it is to bring local government to heel.
Cheers: To county commissioners for putting an end to the home rule charter process this year.Inspecting methods of government is always a good idea, but there was no demonstrated need to elect a slate of freeholders to, in essence, draft a county charter that would replace the current system. A series of meetings produced no discernible public interest in the process outside of the same handful of activists who have promoted a county charter for years, only to lose at the polls. Better to save the staff time and the estimated $100,000 it would cost to sponsor an election.
Here, let me decode this:

"We at the local rag are absolutely terrified at the possibility that actual political power would be returned to the people of this county.

Why, the very idea that all the things we're ramming down their throats would have to be approved by by the people scares the crap out of us, and the democrats we answer to, because we already know that in fact, the people do not want another bridge when the one we have actually works; that they don't want loot rail, and they damned sure don't want that ballpark that they will have to pay for... but can never use."

The irony of these clowns wanting to bury us in billions of dollars of generational debt while expressing faux concern over the wildly exaggerated claim of $100,000 in expense goes to the heart of the matter.

They want NOTHING to stand in the way of their agenda, again proving their democrat roots, because bizarrely enough, democrats do everything they can to silence the people while everyone else does all they can to hear that voice.

When it comes to their bizarre excuse for this position, the "no demonstrated need" gag,
Well, there's "no demonstrated need" for light rail. There's "no demonstrated need for" for replacing a perfectly good, serviceable and paid for bridge. There's "no demonstrated need for" a ballpark.

There's "no demonstrated need" for so many things you want us to spend our money on, money that you won't have to spend.

Your use of the "demonstrated need" argument under those circumstances seems to speak to a continuing motive of many years duration to silence the people of this community.

Our local government at both the city and county level is completely out of touch with the people. This was the only way to hold them accountable before the did more terrible damage to our economy at our expense.

Once again, you are trumpeting the local democrat party line to a "t." Perhaps a name change is in order? I'm sure they wouldn't mind if you called yourselves the "Clark County Democrat?"
The democrat position on this issue, ably demonstrated by yet another fringe-leftist former democratian editorial page editor (Much like the current neo-communist that has the job) says this:

Proposed changes in county charter could be awful

Clark County’s government structure is somewhat antique and outdated. A system invented to manage road construction and not much else in the way of governance clanks along clumsily in a high-speed era of complex and varied civic action.

Streamlining and modernizing the machine appeals to the progressive psyche, but the folks who have convinced the Board of Clark County Commissioners to consider adopting a new county charter have other agenda priorities.

They hope to give rural interests dominance over urban values. They suppose they can make it harder for county government to raise and spend money on social problems and infrastructure capital.

They are far away from achieving their goals, but inattention from thoughtful citizens could ease their path.

Without much evident public support, the charter-change advocates have persuaded the county commissioners to start the ball rolling toward charter change for the third time in recent history. In January the board formally adopted a resolution to consider a move from the present form of government to something different.

Different how? That depends entirely on a panel of elected freeholders and how ably they can sell their program.

So far the county commissioners have ordained that, should the charter process go forward, each of the three commissioner districts will be represented by five freeholders who would be elected at the Nov. 8 general election. Any registered voter would be qualified to seek election to the board of freeholders. Upon their election the freeholders would establish a schedule of hearings and meetings for the consideration of what might be included in a new county charter. Upon a majority vote by the freeholders, the Board of Clark County Commissioners would be obliged by tradition if not certainly by law to lay the proposed charter before the electorate.
There you have it.

The democratian knows they can't use this word for word, but their motivation in working to kill this deal is the same as the democrat party's, which is the same as Stuart's and Boldt's.  Their fellow democrats don't want their agenda questioned, and they certainly don't want even the possibility of the people derailing their plans to bury us in debt questioned by an electorate that rightfully distrusts them and cannot afford them.

So jeers to the provably leftist rag that continues to claim they're fair and unbiased... which we all know to be an outright lie.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Q&A with the Vancouver Scammer's baseball rip off.

Actually, there's something of a Q&A over on the Oregonian website from the clown doing his very best to jam this nonsensical ballpark idea down our throats.

It was self-serving pap and total softball, like you might expect when the newspaper has an advertising dog in the fight; after all, we don't want to chase away any opportunity for revenue, do we?

But the tough questions... the right questions... weren't asked:

Questions such as:
How do you feel about requiring hundreds of thousands of people to pay for your ball park? (No problem with it)

What about allowing the people the right to vote? (No need.  If I can buy off the county commissioners and have THEM require the tax, I wind up smelling like a rose.)

Who did you first contact, and how long have you been talking about this?  (Good question.  Won't answer.)

Why did you do this in secrecy?  (Oh.  That question was asked, he just provided a bogus, crappy, untrue answer.)

Have you done any feasibility studies? (No.)

What about charging $10 per ticket to pay for your ballpark?  (What?  Why make it harder to get people thru then gates as it is when I can get the other 425,000 suckers who won't ever come here to pay for it?)

How much are you going to charge everyone else to use your ballpark? (Wouldn't you like to know?)

How much are you going to make on concessions and parking?  (Enough for me to drop a multi-million dollar check on this deal)

How much are you paying for the property?  (Nothing)

Do you understand that you're doing your best to burden the population of an entire county to pay for your scam?  (As I said, I don't give a damn about the people of this county.  If I did, I'd demand the ticket buyers pay for this thing.)
Our so-called political leaders don't care about these issues.  If they did, the agreement would require an affirmative, county-wide vote.

But we are cursed with a political leadership that doesn't care about the people or our money.  They have an agenda, and what we think doesn't matter because they are SOOOO much smarter then we are.

And if the reporter who did this really wanted to drill down on this guy, these are the questions he would be asking.

He didn't.  And that speaks for itself.

The scam continues...

Democratian efforts at image rehabilitation for Leavitt and Stuart.

To our likely generational misfortune, we are stuck with two political liars highly placed in local government, politicians who lied to get elected.

Tim Leavitt lied repeatedly about his positions on tolling for the I-5 Bridge.  He skillfully used that lie to defeat the incumbent, Royce Pollard who quite wrongly but truthfully told anyone who would listen what his position was on the necessity of tolling as he saw it to get the I-5 bridge replaced and loot rail into Vancouver.

Steve Stuart, who was an integral part of Tim Leavitt's campaign, helped to develop the lie, since there was no way he would ever support a true-anti-toll candidate.

Like Pollard, Stuart has always supported tolls.  Like Pollard and Leavitt, Stuart knows that without tolls, this project would never be built.  That building it will enslave 65,000 plus commuters is of no consequence to either Leavitt or Stuart, since they likely will not have to commute to Portland to be mayor or county commissioner; meaning that, precisely like the baseball scam, the people of Clark County are going to get stuck with the costs of something these two want, and could easily kill, but will not have to pay for.

Stuart, realizing the success of the lie in Leavitt's campaign, utilized the same strategy in his own, promising a county wide vote  on loot rail this November; using that lie to barely get re-elected against a candidate who did very little and who had every disadvantage from a lack of name-familiarity to a lack of funding.

These lies are out there.  The blogging community keeps them alive, reminding everyone of the lack of integrity of our government leaders, leaders who lied to get elected.

The democratian is well aware of this.  So, once again, when the politician carried their water, even to the obvious detriment of our community, they do everything they can to rehabilitate their image, including crap like this from the democrat blog:

White Mayors Can't Jump

Blog: All politics is local

A May 12 celebrity basketball game raised $20,000 for Clark County Family YMCA, said executive director Eddie White.

The game featured players from the Vancouver Volcanoes and Dan Dickau and Derek Raivio, who were standouts at Prairie High School and Mountain View High School, respectively, before each starred for Gonzaga University and played pro ball.

Then there were people not known for being ballers, including Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt.


And Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart.

Who, with his double knee braces, reminded us of a certain former Portland Trail Blazer.

Stuart said Leavitt's team won, but only because Leavitt cheated. After a practice, Leavitt complained that Stuart's team had an unfair height advantage. But instead of asking for the 6-foot-5ish Stuart, Leavitt got Jake Carlisle, a 6'8" player for the Volcanoes.

One of the commenters on the blog wrote this: "Leavitt cheated? Imagine that."

Strangely appropriate.

Is rank hypocrisy in democrat DNA? Hah! DNC Chair Caught Bashing GOP for Not Supporting US Automakers… But Owns a Japanese Car (Video)

Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, May 26, 2011, 8:02 PM

What a shock… The new DNC Chair proves that she is as dishonest as she is cantankerous.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz told an audience today:
“If it were up to the candidates running for president on the Republican side, we would be driving foreign cars.”
She said this at a breakfast this morning sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor.

She forgot to mention that she owns a Japanese car.
Andrew Malcom at the LA Times reported:
Oh, how embarrassing.
Like roll-up-the-tinted-windows-and-slouch-down-in-your-seat embarrassing.a japanese nissan similar to Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s japanese 2010 Infiniti FX35
The new chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee was criticizing Republicans who opposed President Obama’s bailout of the American automakers union, oh, no, make that American automakers.
“If it were up to the candidates for president on the Republican side,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, “we would be driving foreign cars. They would have let the auto industry in America go down the tubes.”
So Michael O’Brien of The Hill newspaper went and checked what kind of automobile loyal-American-car-supporter Debbie Wasserman Schultz owns.
Yup, you guessed it — Japanese.
Drive as she says, not as she does.
This, of course, is not only rank hypocrisy, but political bigotry. And it's the foretaste of what's to come as the left is reduced to scare tactics, lies, distortions, exaggerations and character attacks.... much like local politics around here, only geometrically louder.

It's bad enough that government lies to US about loot rail... how about when they lie to other governments? Federal Way wants promised rail line.

We already know we're being lied to and ignored about both the bridge replacement and loot rail.

First, we have the Mayor of America's Vancouver, elected on a platform of lies over the issue of of tolls, to the ever-lasting shame of the political neophytes who were unfortunate enough to believe his lies.

Then we have the most senior of the county commissioners, who's last second lies about a vote for loot rail  this November were as conveniently forgotten by him as, well, yesterday's newspaper.

He closely followed by a second commissioner, my erstwhile brother-in-law, who lied to my face about holding a county wide advisory on this project vote LAST November.

So, there's little doubt that we're led by a government of liars.

But this has to take the cake: Federal Way got scammed into paying taxes to extend loot rail to their city, only to find out, well, sorry about that, you ain't GETTING loot rail, and, oh, yeah....

You can't have your tax money back.

It's bad enough when our government lies to us.

But when they lie to each other?

Federal Way wants promised rail line

Federal Way's mayor lamented to Sound Transit Thursday that his "working-class" suburb is being shortchanged in the struggle for transportation now that Link light rail won't make it there by 2023.
Seattle Times transportation reporter

Federal Way's mayor lamented to Sound Transit Thursday that his "working-class" suburb is being shortchanged in the struggle for transportation.

Sound Transit says it doesn't have enough revenue long term to reach South 272nd Street in Federal Way with Link light rail by 2023 — breaking a promise on the 2008 ballot. A plunge in sales-tax income is to blame, transit managers said.

Mayor Skip Priest went to Seattle's Union Station and urged the transit board to cut costs, even switch the alignment to Interstate 5 instead of down Highway 99 — whatever it takes to deliver the train service.

He said his city reflects the changing of American suburbs: Children receiving free or reduced lunches have increased from 20 to 53 percent in a decade; the nonwhite population is 48 percent; more than 100 languages are spoken; longtime residents are aging and becoming more dependent on transit.

Gentrification in trendy cities such as Seattle is pushing lower-income people outward, where it's harder to find reliable transit routes to work, a trend highlighted in a Brookings Institution report last week.

Sound Transit is now focusing on trying to reach Highline Community College alongside Highway 99, two miles north of the Federal Way city limits.

Under the rules of Sound Transit, the money collected in the Snohomish County, Seattle-Shoreline, Eastside, South King and Pierce County areas stays in each area.

South King has the biggest budget gap, of $1 billion through 2023, said CEO Joni Earl.

Instead of geographic equity, Priest on Thursday insisted on social equity.


Thursday, May 26, 2011

Marcus Griffith at VanVoice continues to hammer away on Clark County Sheriff Garry Lucas, who continues to stonewall.

You know, Garry Lucas has been our county sheriff for a long time.

Perhaps too long.

Although he's allegedly Republican, his failure to support either Republican policy changes and other Republican candidates, combined with his rabid support of the Megacasino because he wrongfully believes they'll pay for 17 or so FTE's if it's built (Way to sell us out, Garry) shows that it's time for him to go.

Now, added to that nonsense is Lucas's ongoing abuse of process and transparency with his continuing, ongoing efforts to stonewall a state-level FOIA request by fellow blogger Marcus Griffith of the VanVoice who is demanding to know why Lucas signed away the rights of the people of this county to get copies of the contract in question without the permission of the company in question, what appears to be a complete violation of state law.


Good job, Marcus. Stay on him until you get what's ours.

Sometimes, my Army and government leadership is despicable. This is one of those times.

There can be little doubt that the United States Army bears some level of responsibility for the actions of terrorist Maj. Nidal Hassan, MD, who slaughtered innocents and unarmed soldiers because he was a muslim jihadist.

I hold the army generally, and people like LTC Melanie Guerrero, MD, particularly liable because they were responsible for passing this piece of shit along because he wasn't white and they were terrified about being called "racist," or in Guerrero's case,
So, just for giggles, I checked one of the more egregious slimeballs, one Lieutenant Colonel Melanie Guerrero, to see if any action (Like a court martial and dishonorable discharge) had been taken against her.

Nope. She's still in, still at Walter Reed and still in a position to infest the military with her idiocy.
The next time the leadership of the US Military is looking around, scratching their collective asses, trying to figure out why so few, relatively speaking, seek mental health help for their trauma and PTSD, they might want to look hard at this quote:
One of Hasan's commanding officers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Lieutenant Colonel Melanie Guerrero, told investigators she had considered failing him as an intern but "decided to allow him to pass since he was going into psychiatry and would not be doing any real patient care."
If I could wave my magic wand, LTC Guerrero would immediately be reassigned to a Manila whorehouse, treating syphilitics where she so obviously belongs. But I would not let her within 5 miles of anyone serving in the military today.

This sorry bitch needs to be relieved IMMEDIATELY, and then she needs to both be kicked out, AND required to repay the Army (meaning us taxpayers) for all of the money we WASTED in training HER dumb ass and promoting HER idiotic efforts to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.

This issue is even separate from the stupidity of just passing someone, not because they deserved it, BUT BECAUSE THIS MORON DIDN'T THINK THEY'D BE PRACTICING REAL MEDICINE.
The least we can do is acknowledge the truth.  But my Army can't even do that.

The least we can do is acknowledge the truth.  But my Army won't even acknowledge that, for this moment in time, Ft. Hood was as much a combat zone as Baghdad.

The least we can do is acknowledge the truth.  But my Army and our government refuses to acknowledge the killed and wounded at Ft. Hood are combat loss, that the killed and wounded are deserving of combat benefits, that the killed and wounded are deserving of our nation's gratitude, our nations combat  casualty benefits, and our nation's Purple Heart Medal.

That my Army and my government fails to do this is an insult to those involved who spilled their blood as a result of a treasonous, cowardly terrorist attack.  They sacrificed themselves as my country sacrifices our honor in these tiny baby steps, with much larger strides away from what we are supposed to stand for to come.


Diana   West

The Senseless Cop-Out on Jihad

The Army honored a fallen hero of the Ft. Hood Jihad Massacre with a medal this week. Not, of course, that the Army describes the November 2009 attack in such meaningful terms. Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan may have shouted “Allahu Akbar”; (Arabic for “Allah is great”) as he killed 14 and wounded more than two dozen; may have been in contact with jihad cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and frequented jihadist websites; may have had business cards proclaiming himself a “SoA” (Soldier of Allah); and may have created and presented an Islamically correct PowerPoint brief outlining reasons for jihad by Muslims within the U.S. Armed Forces, but no matter. His actions remain a total mystery to the U.S. Army.

To wit: “Although we may never know why it happened, we do know that heroic actions took place that day,” Brig. Gen. Joseph DiSalvo said in presenting the Secretary of the Army Award for Valor to Joleen Cahill, widow of Michael Grant Cahill. Cahill is recognized as the first person to have tried to stop Hasan and the only civilian to have been killed by Hasan that day. “He will forever be a source of inspiration.”

Alas, I have my doubts about the deputy commanding general of Ft. Hood. Despite overwhelming evidence that Hasan committed an act of jihad, DiSalvo — like the Army, like the U.S. government — looks the other way. “We may never know why” the Hasan attack happened, DiSalvo said without, apparently, turning red or rolling his eyes.

It’s hard to overstate the impact of these words. In honoring the very last thing Cahill did on this Earth, the general pointedly chose to omit its significance. Like a potent spell, his words made all the context of the 62-year-old Cahill’s valorous act — charging Hasan with a chair as Hasan fired on the crowd — disappear. Of course, the general’s omission takes nothing away from Cahill’s courage. It does, however, wrongly release the rest of us from our debt to Cahill. In treating Hasan’s rampage as no more purposeful than a flood or a cougar attack, the general has also reduced Cahill’s ultimate sacrifice to its most personal level; exemplary, admirable, but of no consequence beyond the scene, outside the circle. This is morally wrong. It was the general’s duty to place Cahill’s death in perspective, to impress upon both his loved ones and his fellow citizens that he died not only to stop a bloodletting but also in defense of liberty, then and now under jihadist attack.

In other words, the general flinched. No surprise there. Ft. Hood may have been a war zone that day but, with few exceptions (Texas Republicans Rep. John Carter and Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn are pressing to see Purple Hearts awarded), neither our military nor our government has the courage to admit it.

Hows that false "recovery" thing working out for you?

Sale of seized homes at 28% of all sold...
UPDATE: GDP 1.8%...
Dow spooked...


Imagine.  One day, we just might get a real President and a government that actually gives a damn.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

When librarians and newspapers get stupid: King County Library System is removing its security cameras (Because it might help law enforcement)

I've seen morons in government in my time, but this clown takes the cake.

He is establishing a "right to privacy" that doesn't exist, and which will ultimately increase crime, property damage, assaults and hinder law enforcement in catching the bad guys.

Combined with that is the Seattle Times, a not-bad newspaper that our local rag could do well to emulate, who did epic fail in the headline for this article by writing only that "King County Library System is removing its security cameras" without adding the hook, "because it might aid law enforcement."

This kind of stupidity and bueraucratic arrogance is unquantifiable.  It's the kind of thing running rampant down here with an out of control making decisions not out of need or ability to afford, but because they "can".  And if this guy was working for me I'd fire him so face it would take a week for his ass to catch up with him.

King County Library System is removing its security cameras

The King County Library System is removing security cameras from its libraries, worried that supplying security video to law-enforcement agencies could compromise patron privacy.

Seattle Times staff reporter
The King County Library System is removing security cameras from its libraries, worried that supplying security video to law-enforcement agencies could compromise patron privacy.
"We decided the cameras were not serving a purpose and were a point of contention with law enforcement," said Bill Ptacek, who as director of the county library system has the final say. "We don't want to be in an adversarial relationship. We believe intellectual freedom is the important part, so we got out of the camera business."

The library system, which serves 1.3 million patrons, and records more than 1 million visitors each month, has about four dozen security cameras in 10 of its 46 libraries. The cameras were installed beginning in 2006, both inside and outside the buildings, because of requests by librarians faced with petty crimes, vandalism and graffiti.

The issue over police access to video from the cameras came up in March, when a 77-year-old man was assaulted in the Woodmont Library parking lot, on Pacific Highway South in Des Moines. A man approached the library patron and asked for money. When the patron pulled out his wallet, the man stole it and pushed the library patron down, causing minor injuries.

As part of a Des Moines Police investigation, officers asked to see the tape from the security camera, but library officials said they wouldn't release it without a court order.


Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Is Jon Russell taking a look at running against Joe Zarelli?

In response to a community corrections officer who fears his rice bowl is going to be taken away from him, Jon Russell, using one of his many fake nom de plumes, in this case, Citizen Judy, takes a swipe at 18th District Republican Senator Joe Zarelli for his vote on a senate bill, SB 5891.

The letter to the editor is typical of the half-truths of the desperate public employee, who views any effort to reduce costs as an effort directed at taking cash out of their wallet... even though that keeps more cash in our wallets.

That said, Jon Russell has been outed many times as hiding behind fake identities so he can comment at will on newspaper and blog sites; I busted him myself over making up the fake person "CitizenJudyBanks" during the course of his last, abysmal campaign.

What's of interest isn't his continuing lack of integrity.  That's par for his course.

What's of interest is that he keeps coming back.  And he keeps using fake names.  And he doesn't even bother to change them as if we won't notice.

It's really bad over at the Post Record, (Read the entire article, plus comments for just another example) where he seems to have taken simultaneous false identifications to comment on the same articles repeatedly.

But here in the democratian, we've got this to show for it:

Progressives? Are you kidding me???? Sen. Joe Zarelli is supporting 5891. Cutting supervision, letting criminals out early, rewarding offenders for violating supervision by counting jail time as supervision time. Zarelli supported 5288 last legislative session which let 10,000 felons off supervision in the community. So please ask your conservative Zarelli why he is supporting cuts in public safety. Criminals will thank him.
citizenjudy — May 23, 2011 at 11:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )
To me, the bill is secondary to this swipe at Zarelli by Russell.  You would think that after the last debacle, Russell would have learned his lesson.

Maybe, apparently, Not.

Cross posted at Jon Russell Watch.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Congrats to the democratian for 60 days of burying the Jim Jacks/House democrat story.

It's got to be tough on the lazy D.  When the democrats own you because they gave you a huge tax break while they jacked everybody else's taxes up, you know you're beholden to them because you also know that switch flips both ways.

In this case, the democratian is repaying the favor by continuing to bury the Jim Jacks misconduct story as they have failed to engage in even 7th grade school newspaper journalism to get the facts in the hopes that everyone will "forget."

Well, I won't forget.  And every so often, I'll remind the reader that the local paper failed in its duty to dig out the story, letting the supposedly "transparent" democrats completely off the hook and failing to report on then Rep. Jacks' rank misconduct, likely alcohol-fueled but never the less, misconduct of a sort they don't want the average reader to know about... because the pattern of misconduct isn't recent... it's long-term.

Our local paper has lowered the bar to unheard of levels.  The editor, who has had no trouble at all crusading against ME, seems incapable of speaking truth to power and crusading against THEM.

Rest assured, gentle reader, had it been Rep. Hinton, there is no stone the local rag would not have turned over; no colleague or staffer they wouldn't have interviewed, no rumor they wouldn't have run down to the DNA level.

Because that's how they roll.

It's not unlike someone writing a column about how great it's going to be for the vast majority of the people of Clark County paying for a ballpark they will never set foot in while the paper makes bank off advertising... and doesn't pay a thing.

Others have asked Brancaccio about the idea of the paper paying a tax with the money to go to the ballpark; while they stand to make money off this endeavor is very appealing (and not mentioned by Brancaccio in his pie in the sky column) his response to the idea that maybe the newspaper should chip in as much as they want the rest of us to is greeted with a rather hypocritical silence... which apparently means "no."

It's not like that isn't the long-term pattern of our local daily; they want us to go into debt by the billions to build their utopian idea of a bridge with loot rail... and they want to avoid paying a dime for that as well.

So, these two most recent episodes are not surprising, given the established pattern.

And frankly, that's just a damned shame.

There are so many other ways to pay for this ballpark that won't insult either our intelligence or our wallets.  But those would include making the fans responsible for paying for it; making the people of the city of Vancouver pay for it instead of ramming the responsibility down our throats county-wide without a vote (Imagine that... a bridge and loot rail that we had to vote on once before, but suddenly can't vote on now (to the silence of the newspaper) and a ballpark they don't want us to vote on, paid for by those of us who go to optional "entertainment" but not for those who buy an optional "newspaper."

The cover-up, the forced payments without a vote, the paper yelling the loudest for something they want and will make money off of but not have to pay one thin dime to profit from.

Why am I not surprised?

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Lew Waters asks the question: GOP Congresswoman: Clueless or Pandering?

While I answer in the affirmative to both, Lew does a much better job than I in wondering aloud:

Clueless... or Pandering?

GOP Congresswoman: Clueless or Pandering?

By lewwaters

It’s no secret that I did not support Jaime Herrera Beutler for the seat she sits in currently. The above video is a prime reason why, beyond the nonsense thrown at me by her staff and the Clark County Republican Party because I had the audacity to actually support a Conservative Republican in last year’s election.
At her May 16, 2011 Town Hall, Jaime faced a crowd of angry Democrats fearing she will vote like a Republican. The above comment was the normal run of the mill leftwing tripe on ending tax breaks and subsidies for corporations, the job creators. Hearing this particular part of her reply, I can only ask, “Jaime, are you clueless or pandering to Democrats again?”
She specifically mentions ExxonMobil and GE as corporations not paying taxes. Leftists, Moveon.org and several others have been making that claim, based in large part to admitted Socialist Democrat Bernie Sanders from Vermont releasing his list of Top Ten Tax Avoiders, where it is claimed the companies posted large profit increases, and pay no taxes in the U.S.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

Lou continues to fascinate with his failure to answer: you want this team so bad, how about taxing your paper to pay for it?

It never ceases to amaze me how willing Brancaccio is to spend everyone else's money.

For example, in all of this suggested tax scam, I see nothing from him concerning taxing his paper to help pay for the team he wants so badly.

Others seems to share that view.  Here's a recent example from comments under his babbling column wherein he tells us how great those of us who don 't want this tax will have it if we just go along with paying it... all so he can watch baseball without paying for the facility.

Asked directly if he would tax himself the way he wants to tax everyone else, Brancaccio shows what level of integrity and guts he has by refusing to answer.

And this clown judges ME?

Muddy and Lou - did it ever cross your mind that public support of private ventures is a contributing factor to the poor financial condition of the city and county, and maybe this is the time to stand up and put an end to it?
Private enterprise is much more efficient than any govt, and if this venture was financially viable it could stand on it's own w/o pubic dollars.
Once again - until the county releases full financials of the tri-mountian golf course and the amphitheature, and the city does the same for the hilton - maybe we should be very, very wary of these type of ventures. You have to ask yourself why they do not release these financials - perhaps becuase the actual financial picture is much more dire than what was originally promised?
Trapper — May 22, 2011 at 10:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
Lou, could you provide a list of any other business around here where any group of consumers, particularly those engaging in activities and buying products absolutely unrelated to the business at hand have to pay a surcharge for it?
And surely, you would support a tax on your product as much as you support a tax on the products of others to support your particular game? because I simply cannot understand why you would tax movie tickets without actively volunteering your own business and product for a tax to accomplish the same thing.
Or you could also advocate for a 10$ surcharge for each ticket. After all, You buy a ticket to the ballpark, you help pay for the ballpark. Unlike a sales tax that impacts everyone, this impacts only those who use the ballpark.
And if this team folds, I still haven't seen the plan as to how we pay for this, or how much others using this facility will be charged to do so.
Surely you'd agree to that, wouldn't you, as badly as you want this?
NotBuyinIt — May 22, 2011 at 10:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
As I said in my column notbuyinit, it needs to be vetted. And I'm strongly in favor of it being vetted. Couldn't agree more we should see what the deal looks like.
Did you miss that in my column?
Lou Brancaccio (Columbian Staff) — May 22, 2011 at 11:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Brancaccio proves his cowardice and hypocrisy: after telling us WE need to pay HIS tax... for HIM.

So, Brancaccio continues on with his pattern of demanding that everyone else in Clark County pay for what HE wants... and he lacks the testicles to tell us if he would have his paper be taxed.

I've known for years he's a cowardly bully, and added to that is his rank hypocrisy.

Here's the exchange under his moronic column telling us how great WE will have it as WE pay for the ballpark HE wants but that WE damned sure don't need.

Lou, you're not answering the question. You want this; your newspaper will make money off the advertising. Your sports reporter will cover it.
Are you willing to have your just-as-optional-as-entertainment newspaper taxed to help pay for it? Or is that only for those of us who won't ever go there?
NotBuyinIt — May 21, 2011 at 11:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
Lou, you have not answered my question either. Would you still be in favor of entertainment tax if this were for a soccer team? Or is this just because you like baseball?
luvithere — May 21, 2011 at 12:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
Lou, Would you support a tax on newspapers to fund the building of a stadium?
gto — May 21, 2011 at 12:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
Mike Briggs said: "It is not practical to have a public vote on every single item of interest for the public"
Yeah, I agree, Mike, ONLY TAX ISSUES!
MartinHash — May 21, 2011 at 1:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
I guess I shouldn't have a voice or an opinion unless I'm willing to be taxed gto? Silly.
Lou Brancaccio (Columbian Staff) — May 21, 2011 at 1:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal ) | Ignore User )
What a cowardly, gutless, weaselly response.

The answer, of course, is NO. He just wants US to pay for his little game palace, just like he wants US to pay for the horrifically expensive, absolutely unnecessary bridge and loot rail... all without asking us.

It's always been so easy for Brancaccio to demand that WE pay for what HE wants.. Now, when HE's asked.... what does he do? He runs away and hides.

Gutsy, Lou... really gutsy.

Brancaccio is guilty of a hell of a lot more then wanting to shove another tax down our throats for a ballpark.

So, Brancaccio pleads guilty to wanting to shove yet another tax or fee down our throats so 99% of US pay for something HE wants.

What he's NOT "guilty" of is volunteering his rag to be taxed to pay for this waste of money.
So what if you don’t like baseball or don’t plan to go? Could that still be a win for you?
Some would argue no. Fair enough. I respect that view. But I’d argue yes. There simply are certain things — like this ballpark and a professional baseball team — that show a certain coming-of-age aspect to the area. That would be good.
But what about this needed tax support to help build it? Aren’t we cutting back just about everywhere?
Yes we are. And that’s a valid point. But that’s the beauty of an entertainment tax. Essentially, only entertainment would be taxed.
You buy entertainment, you help pay for entertainment. Unlike a sales tax that impacts everyone, this impacts only those who use entertainment.
Gee.  What a surprise.... Moron.

Where have we seen that before?

How about this, instead:
You buy newspapers, you help pay for the newspaper.  Unlike a sales tax that impacts everyone, this impacts only those who buy a newspaper.
I sure don't see him volunteering HIS rag to help pay for this.  Why not?

While Brancaccio's babble is frequently bereft of sense, this kind of self-serving garbage is just that: self serving garbage.

What this REALLY means is that like every other downtown mafia type, he believes that this means their ability to steal our money for their uses has "come-of-age."

Of course, that also makes him guilty of being a hypocrite.

As a permanent member of the downtown mafia, Identity Vancouver types, Brancaccio is guilty of a wide variety of things.

He's guilty of a rank leftist bias.

He's guilty of doing the democrat's bidding like they were paying him by actively covering up Jim Jack's misconduct, pre-resignation, from the legislature.

He's guilty of using his position as editor and the column that position gives him to beat the hell out of those who are wise enough to oppose his utopian view.

He's guilty of running a paper that lies, exaggerates and avoids every tenet of journalism to push a position.

He's guilty of other rank hypocrisy: demanding that we pay yet another tax after his newspaper received a tax cut while the rest of our small business taxes were increased.

He's guilty of wanting to bury us under billions of debt for a bridge and loot rail that we do not want, do not need, and cannot afford.

He's guilty of slamming bloggers when THIS blogger has scooped his exulted rag on a few major stories, namely the fake Baird death threats, the Bittner arrest,and the Jon Russell, fake college degree scam.

He's guilty of demanding "civility" that he uses whenever HE feels like it, all the while unleashing his pit yorkie of an editorial page editor, my mentor, John Laird, who taught me everything I know about attacking opponents to an agenda.

He's guilty of a MASSIVE democrat bias in endorsements.

He's guilty of continuing to lie about the rag's lack of bias.

He's guilty of censoring and banning those from commenting on the paper's frequently pathetic efforts to slant the story... and an institutional failure to include the opposition to his positions in the paper.

He's guilty of shilling the lie that replacing the bridge will "ease chronic congestion."

He's guilty of failing to understand and seek out the opposition to his bizarre views on the massive waste of a bridge replacement until the level of hatred towards his view became so overwhelming he COULDN'T ignoring it any more.

He's guilty of running what amounts to fake polls and using their pre-ordained outcomes to support a false conclusion.

He's guilty of full-out public relations and damage control efforts on behalf of those he supports, such as rehabing Brian Baird's image after Baird's fake death threat, Nazi, Brown Shirt nonsense; a long term project that ultimately failed for him.... and that he continues in his efforts to rehab Leavitt over his months long, multiple lie-campaign on tolls.

He's guilty of shilling Baird's bogus 72 hour scam, never once holding him accountable for routinely violating his own rule.

He's guilty of failing to hold Baird accountable for voting on bills he hadn't read.

He's guilty of attacking the veracity of bloggers when his own is MORE than under question, like he did Koski over his paper's failure to report on Baird's bogus death threat nonsense.

He's guilty of failing to hold Tim Leavitt accountable for his fraudulent election and subsequent lies.

He's guilty of using double standards in endorsements: one moment, talking about a candidates experience or the lack thereof, the next moment, not even mentioning that experience, like they did in the Mielke-Brokaw race... as he endorsed the completely IN-experienced Pam Brokaw... twice.. over experienced candidates... who happened to be, you guessed it, Republican.

Coincidence, to be sure.

He's guilty of supporting a corrupt, gerrymandered C-Trans vote, both in the past and in the future, where tens of thousands of us will be cut out of the vote... but not paying the tax... all while his paper enjoys the largess of the democrats he supports so strogly and often through the B&O tax cut they're still working under.

He's guilty of failing to hold candidates who don't bother to vote, even thought THEY'VE been elected (Leavitt) or those who have NEVER voted (Janet Seekins, Van Nortwick's opponent) accountable in any meaningful way. 

He's guilty of using this blog as a source for stories, and then failing to credit the blog or me, or link to this blog as the source.

He's guilty of protecting Jim Moeller by refusing to remind people that Moeller (and his unbelievable arrogance) authored the moronic "some things are, some things aren't" candy tax, destroyed at the polls last November.

He's guilty of using the Storro story as a campaign piece for TV Tony Golick.

He's guilty of attempting to professionally destroy Brent Boger, Peter Van Nortwick, and, well, me.

Brancaccio is guilty of a long list of crimes to this community.  And to that list, sadly, we can add theft, as he works to steal our money to pay for his ballpark under nebulous crap like that published in his despicable propaganda sheet that would put the fricking Nazi's to shame.

Friday, May 20, 2011

The Sellwood message and C-Tran screwing the people.

Look. We know what the deal is.

Leavitt lied to get elected by defrauding the voters over the tolling issue, something I repeatedly warned people about.

Stuart lied by claiming we would have a county wide vote on loot rail this November.

But then reality set in. These people know we hate the idea, hate the tens of millions they have wasted and the hundreds of millions they want to waste.  And they made the decision to screw us all sideways. 

Leavitt promised to use his "block veto." Stuart, who suddenly claimed to have found the religion of listening to his constituents, failed to inform Leavitt that anything less then a county wide vote would be unacceptable... and that the county would exercise their veto on anything less.

Leavitt would have blinked, if for no other reason then his well-established lack of character.

So now, we're stuck with a C-Trans that believes us to be stupid, much like they apparently believe the voters who crushed the Sellwood Bridge fee to be stupid.
Should the C-Tran vote fail, Boyd said there are other options to come up with the $1 million a year it needs to operate a light rail line.

Still, she said the Clackamas vote was a sign “we need to do a much better job explaining what this means to people,” like jobs during and after construction and setting the stage for regional growth
"Boyd" refers to the latest in the string of arrogant, ignorant beaureaucrats who are here to help ram this thing down our throats.

The above is a sample of the arrogance in question.

First of all, we don't believe you.  Leavitt has already lied to us about issues related to CTrans... as has Stuart.

Second, this presupposes that the voters smart enough to crush that effort were not aware of the ramifications of their vote.

Third, this scam will do nothing to assist in some nebulous "regional growth."  And we don't care about adding a bunch of over-priced jobs that increase the costs beyond any reasonable level for a project we don't want, need or can afford... paid for with our money extorted out of our wallets.

We are smart enough.  And we're sick of it.

So, what they are going to do is stall long enough to gerrymander a district that will, once again, cut out tens of thousands of voters from having a say on this crap pile will simultaneously making sure that every major retailer in Clark County is included in their district so they can force us to pay for it.

That's what they've done in the past... and that's what they'll do in the future.  Because all the eyewash from Stuart notwithstanding, he won't do a damned thing to stop them, since that is what he wants.
C-Tran takes note as Oregon voters reject vehicle fee hike
Strategy of asking people countywide to support Sellwood project fails

By Andrea Damewood

Columbian Staff Reporter
Friday, May 20, 2011

The result of Tuesday’s vote in Clackamas County, Ore., wasn’t good news for proponents of replacing the aging Sellwood Bridge — and the outcome is also something that C-Tran and Columbia River Crossing officials are keeping in mind.

In a countywide vote, Clackamas voters rejected a $5 annual vehicle registration fee 63 percent to 37 percent, blowing a $22 million hole in the project’s $290 million budget.

While the Sellwood project doesn’t include transit, the vote could be fodder in discussions of C-Tran’s 2012 sales tax vote on light rail and bus rapid transit — such as whether to make the vote districtwide or part of a smaller subdistrict.

“(Tuesday’s vote) certainly appeared to be an issue where a lot of the people in Clackamas County looked at this as a project that benefitted not very many people, and primarily in Portland,” said Scott Patterson, public information officer and public affairs director for C-Tran. “When you go out for a countywide vote for what looks like more of a local arterial bridge, there’s not as much direct connection with it” for more rural voters.
More babble from CTrans as they get ready to ram it in and break it off.