Friday, January 31, 2014

Latest portrait of Chris Christie

The political fallout of the GOP betrayal concerning illegal aliens. The McKenna paradox as lesson.

A  political party is defined as, among other things:
“a type of political organization. It typically seeks to influence, direct, or entirely perform government policy; usually by nominating their own candidates and trying to seat them in political office.[1] Parties participate in electoral campaigns, awareness outreach, or protest actions. Parties often espouse an ideology or vision, expressed in a party program, bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.”
In short, they act in such a way to separate themselves from competing ideologies in a marketing and organizational sense.  When, as in this case, one party allows themselves to be co-opted by the other, it effectively eliminates reasons to vote for the party in question.

The practical result of the GOP’s political expediency is the false conclusion that out-democrating the democrats will somehow result in getting better numbers at the polls.

Essentially, it’s an acknowledgement in this instance that the illegal alien presence is real and that illegal aliens vote.  It’s an effort to get illegal aliens to realign to the GOP.  It is the first in many steps the GOP will take as they begin to sink into the political abyss.

Back in the poli-sci days, we were taught that essentially, in most voting scenarios the candidates can count a roughly 40% democrat vote from the left, a 40% Republican vote from the right and the middle 20%... which is where elections are usually won or lost.

Those numbers all fluctuate depending on the politics of the day.  By every and all indications present, the number on the right is increasing while the number on the left is decreasing.

And that makes this all the more mystifying.  The GOP is winning.  The democrats are getting hammered from the top down.  It’s clearly not broken… so why are they working so hard to “fix” it?

Back in February 2012, Rob McKenna had at least a 9% lead in most polls over Inslee.  At that point, for whatever the reason, he began to tack left politically, assuming more and more democrat political positions.

The more he engaged in that strategy, which included referring to GOP Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker as a “terrorist” and assuming democrat positions on the CRC and the Cowlitz Casino here locally... even going so far as to condemn the Boy Scouts for continuing their policies regarding homosexuals… (That was any of his business, why, again?) the more that advantage shrunk. The more he counted on increased support from the middle 20%, the more support he lost from his base 40%.

His self-portrayal as a metro-sexual, politically androgynous candidate ultimately cost him what should have been an easy victory.  He, truly, is a classic version of a candidate who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Precisely like the GOP at the state and federal levels.

National GOPer’s panicked at Romney’s defeat in 2012.  On paper, defeating arguably the worst president this nation has ever known SHOULD have been child’s play.  Instead of an introspective self-examination and recognition that they were out-hustled and lost in large part to superior technological edges, they immediately freaked out, wrongly blaming the loss on ideological differences that could only be fixed by moving left at warp speed.

Never mind that moving left leaves much of the base behind… a base clearly taken for granted by the geniuses running the show for the GOP… and a base that is finding itself increasingly in revolt as the RINO element holds sway.

The practical political consideration at the federal level is this: fewer people will vote for GOP candidates… not more.  I will reiterate my stance that the GOP will NOT regain the senate, in large part because of this political betrayal.

And a year from now, the national GOP will once again be running around like a chicken with its head cut off, looking for yet another part of the GOP ideology to jettison in the name of political expediency over political integrity.

People have various motivations for voting for candidates or parties.  The spectrum runs from one end, die-hard belief in a party’s tenets (“Democrat born, democrat raised,” etc). To the other: die hard opposition to a candidate. (See local leftist hatred of the GOP county commissioners)

At various stops along the way, the motivations include philosophical, financial, ideological and loyalty.  There are other reasons within these… but I believe that the primary reason a person votes is their belief in the candidate… and the tenets of the candidate’s party affiliation.

Those at the grass roots level fight for their party under the assumption that a candidate of that party’s affiliation will reflect the tenets of the party.

So, what are those grassroots to do when their party betrays them?

Many of them will just stop.

And for many of them, this is the last straw.  The list of betrayals grow as the GOP acts like an Offensive Coordeinator that can’t find the right play to win the game.

Most recently, for example, our erstwhile congressman and complete empty suit voted to cut HIS pension.

Obama's use of a Wounded Warrior as a political prop.  No mention of restoring the GOP cuts to his disability pension.

An act that the entire GOP should be ashamed of… and for.

This reiterates to me that my decision to never again vote GOP at the federal level is the right decision.  If the GOP is going to get into this unbroken loop, this historical pattern of caving on principal in the name of expediency that the left now counts on strategically… if the GOP is merely going to aid and abet the democrats shifting this nation over to the neo-communist vision the left has for this… once the greatest nation the world had ever known... then why should I vote for them?

Thursday, January 30, 2014

Here's how I called Stuart's decision not to run for re-election the week after the 2012 cycle.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Steve Stuart: depression poster boy?

Now that the people have finally been heard, what does that mean for odd man out, Steve Stuart?

Well, if I'm Stuart, and I saw such a dramatic role-reversal, I'd start looking for a new rope, because here's the options... and none of them are pretty.

If Stuart thought the people were angry at Boldt, he ain't seen nothing yet.

First of all, the fact is that now, with his ascension into the actual minority (as opposed to the faux minority he was in with a fake Republican) will Stuart become that which the fishwrapper claimed was Mielke's biggest problem?
Tanner is challenging lackluster incumbent Tom Mielke, perhaps best known for the great glee with which he repeatedly announces "No!" on critical issues and creative solutions facing the county.
In clear contrast, Mielke and Madore are entrenched in party doctrine, inflexible and unreceptive to suggestions from outside their partisan camps. When the prospect of a local professional baseball team surfaced (the proposal later failed), Mielke opposed even discussing the issue.
The endorsement of the CRC lackies included the usual sheer, unadulterated idiocy the rag is known for:
For the record, Boldt is a Republican and Tanner is a Democrat, but that really doesn't seem to matter, especially in Boldt's case. He remains ensconced in the local GOP doghouse, banished there by party kingpins (to their own detriment) who believe he's not conservative enough. Meanwhile, Boldt has increased his appeal to voters who understand that smart decisions about growth, the environment and the budget are not the province of either political party.
For the record, Boldt had been acting politically in every imaginable way like a democrat; he spoke like one, exaggerated like one, lied like one and ignored the people like one.

The partisan bias that blinded Brancaccio when he wrote this garbage was clearly that: the vote totals show that literally thousands of democrats refused to vote for Boldt because of that very party affiliation this moron claimed "doesn't seem to matter."

In fact, this is the worst... and perhaps the ONLY defeat of an incumbent commissioner I can find since that idiot Bussy Nutley was tossed because of the stupidity of her Growth Management hijinks.

That said, there are two things I CAN guarantee:  Steve Stuart will no doubt, say "no" just as often, if not more often, than Tom Mielke, and there is no way in hell the rag would diss him like they did Mielke for doing absolutely and precisely the same thing AS Mielke for the next two years.

You will note that the moronic description of Boldt's actions, that he "understand(s) that smart decisions about growth, the environment and the budget are not the province of either political party," is applied to someone who ONLY adopted democrat positions, inferring that all tenets of Republicanism that Boldt were SUPPOSED to follow are, in fact, just the opposite of "smart," yet another symptom of the bias of this rag.

So, Stuart has a decision to make.  He's actually caught between something of a rock and hard place here, a location no one in their right mind would ever knowingly assume.

He can move to the right and present a unified front against the incursion of the unwanted, unneeded and unaffordable CRC scam that he has been stupidly advocating for years.... or he can become the next Marc Boldt, ending his political career and any chance he may believe he has to either continue on as a commissioner or to run for, say, Congress.

Anger is the critical element in getting rid of an incumbent.  Stuart's insistence on supporting the continued waste and extortion of the CRC will certainly achieve that.  The problem is that if he reverse "Leave-it's" this thing, if he flips, the same outcome will happen to him from the D-side as what happened to Boldt from the R side.

A well-financed Republican running in Stuart's commissioner district could make it to the general.  And if one did under these circumstances, then it would likely be all over for Stuart county-wide.

Just watching Jim "My middle name is Hussein" Moeller's head explode would be enough by itself to make it worth it.

If he sticks to his guns and just votes "no" all the time (Remember, the rag only admires right to left compromise... and abhors left to right compromise) while continuing his support of the biggest scam, outside that moron in the White House, that this region has ever seen... well, come November 2014, the electorate will tee off on him the same way they tee'd off on Boldt.... and that's not an enviable position to be in.

What's a commissioner to do?

it is reasonable to expect an immediate charter vote, for example.  It's reasonable to expect a county-wide advisory vote so weasels like Leave-it can stop acting like he believes his lies about the outcomes of this past election.

And it's reasonable to expect further lay offs and, perhaps, other pay roll reductions and retirement/benefit reductions for county employees... like, for example, every PAO.

And it's reasonable to expect that Steve Stuart will require medication very soon.
Wasn't too far off.

And speaking of betrayal, MCC Republicans betray us by agreeing to state Dream Act scam.

So, the next time one of your kids is denied entrance to the UW or WSU, you can put the blame squarely where it belongs:

The Senators in the Washington State Senate.

They announced they caved today on the local version of the Dream Act where, once again, the taxpayers of this state are going to have to pick up the tab for the decisions made by illegal alien parents as the GOP again caves on yet another step in legitimizing illegals as the GOP gears up to make the democrats a gift of millions more voters.

Earlier, I asked the rhetorical question of what the hell good it is to vote GOP in Congress.

Now, I can ask the same for our legislature.

I will never vote GOP again.... period.  At any level.

The end.  I'm done with them.

Politics Northwest

The Seattle Times political team explores national, state and local politics.
January 30, 2014 at 1:43 PM

State Senate leaders reverse course, agree to version of ‘Dream Act’

OLYMPIA — State Senate Republican leaders have agreed to authorize college financial aid for students illegally brought to the United States as children, a surprising shift that is expected to pave the way for passage of the major Democratic priority.
The Senate GOP will announce the decision at a 3:30

The price for GOP perfidy on caving to illegal aliens.

I don't know... maybe it's something in the water.

The GOP generally and the House GOP particularly has sold it's soul for the political expedience of out-democrating the democrats.

And I will never vote Republican at the federal level again.

It's not like I couldn't see this coming.  With the ascension of worthless do-nothing cowards like Jaime Herrera, and the leadership of clueless morons like Cathy McMorris, John Boehner, Eric Cantor and their ilk, unable to find a testicle between them, this kind of stupidity was only a matter of time.

With this decision to out-democrat the democrats and cave to the illegal alien lobby, the GOP has locked itself into an increasing decline.

Ultimately, the hispanic vote will continue to go democrat in ever-increasing numbers primarily because the left will give them more "stuff."

Millions more will rush the borders, our own children will be shut out of our colleges and universities; our own unemployed will find it increasingly difficult to find jobs and the economic damage alone will be incalculable.

This will be a slap to the faces of those millions obeying our laws in their quests to become Americans as they are tied up and forced to watch the rape of their dignity as they are insulted and cursed by those breaking our laws with impunity... and while the GOP acts as accomplices in the rape of our Nation and our dignity.

This will be the last time these scum sell me out, and I will never vote GOP at the federal level again.


And if the more local version tries to emulate their fellows at the national level, then I won't vote GOP again, ever, at any level.

Despicable.  Disgusting.  Unacceptable.  An unforgettable betrayal of everything this nation stands for... and the death knell of the Grand Old Party.

GOP House still stuck on stupid: Herrera to cave.

Stuck on stupid: the democratian's CRC fetish resurfaces.

For the past several years now, our local newspaper has been stuck on stupid over the Columbia River Crossing issue.

So this morning, we see another idiotic demand that the Washington State Legislature ignore the people of Southwest Washington and facilitate the construction of their light rail project.  The title of their editorial:
In Our View: Washington, Revive CRC
State Legislature must help fund new I-5 Bridge without light rail -- for now
First and foremost, anything that these clowns demand concerning the CRC Scam, has, at the end of their tunnel, light rail.  This entire project has been about nothing but light rail.  There are numerous and multiple frontal attacks, exaggerations, outright lies, threats, the endless lists of fallacious reasoning as to why we shouldn’t that this entire County from the next 45 years of ever-increasing tolls, starting with the hundred million dollars a year being sucked out of our local economy having failed…  They now shift target slightly, and suggests that a bridge should be built that’s light rail capable.

There is no difference between building the CRC with light rail, and building a CRC that can be retrofitted for light rail.  Or, in the parlance, “loot rail ready.”  In reality, there’s no difference at all.

When the entire purpose to build the bridges to run light rail into Vancouver/Clark County…  How long do you think it would take to suddenly apply light rail to a light rail ready bridge to make that happen?

The reason…  The only reason…  To replace this bridge, as illustrated by the Oregon State Supreme Court decision that addresses the issue, was entirely to ram light rail down the throats of the people of Clark County.  It doesn’t matter how much lipstick they put on this pig, it’s still a pig.

Nothing that they’ve written in this editorial changes anything.  The state of Oregon has made it clear, repeatedly, that with no light rail there will be no bridge.  And that’s fine, as the people of Clark County, who drive over into Oregon by the tens of thousands on that same bridge, know that the arguments that they used a backfill their justification, are just that.

Here’s the excerpt from the Oregon state Supreme Court decision that lays it all out:
Now, it seems, no less than the Supreme Court of Oregon agrees... with me.
The Oregon Supreme Court has succeeded in doing what scores of public meetings, thousands of pages of reports, and endless public relations spin could not: Give us the original rationale behind the proposed $3.5 billion Columbia River Crossing.
The answer, according to the court: The massive Interstate 5 bridge and freeway project is a “political necessity” to persuade Clark County residents to accept something they previously didn’t want—a MAX light-rail line from Portland to Vancouver.  (To read the Feb. 16, 2012 Oregon Supreme Court decision regarding the Columbia River Crossing Project, click here (PDF, 18 pages))
Project opponents filed a legal challenge to the way Metro, the regional planning agency, granted sweeping land-use approval to the project.  The Oregon Supreme Court sided mostly with Metro.
But Chief Justice Paul De Muniz, writing for the majority, highlighted an inconvenient set of facts for CRC backers.
He wrote in the Feb. 16 opinion that most of the project—namely the 10-lane freeway bridge and new interchanges—was put forward to get Clark County to agree to the light-rail line.
De Muniz cited statements that Metro made in the land-use process and Metro’s lawyer repeated before his court.
“It was politically impossible for the light rail project to proceed without also building new interstate bridges across the Columbia River,” De Muniz wrote.
“Or as Metro later summarized it: ‘There is no light rail without the freeway bridge[s] being replaced.’”
Backers have cited traffic and safety issues as the top reasons to build the CRC.  But the court ruling means those and other justifications were created after officials decided to give a sop to Clark County, now worth $2.5 billion.
The democratian’s idiotic editorial this morning changes nothing in that regard.  Furthermore, it puts to light the hypocrisy of our local newspaper, which has repeatedly claimed that the Washington legislature’s input is not needed in this “Oregon go it alone” program.

This blogger has repeatedly stated that such an effort would be illegal from the outset, and such was obviously true, their efforts to bluff people believing that the legislature; specifically the Washington State Senate, could be ignored in this matter and that somehow the Governor of Washington can simply work around them.  Obviously false on its face, here’s the RCW that addresses that issue:
RCW 39.34.080
Contracts to perform governmental activities which each contracting agency is authorized to perform.   
Any one or more public agencies may contract with any one or more other public agencies to perform any governmental service, activity, or undertaking which each public agency entering into the contract is authorized by law to perform: PROVIDED, that such contract shall be authorized by the governing body of each party to the contract.  Such contract shall set forth fully the purposes, powers, rights, objectives, and responsibilities of the contracting parties.
And who is one to believe the governing body of each party in such a contract actually is?

While I can’t speak for Oregon, the governing body in Washington State is known as the legislature.

So once again, the Democratian dredges up the same old timeworn rejected arguments in favor of their pet project, that flies in the face of the demands of the people of Clark County.  There’s nothing new in this rant from the Democrat in, nothing new at all.  It’s not even repackaged.  This entire project as illustrated above has been about light rail, and in the minds of the Democrat in continues to be about light rail.  The people of Clark County have made it clear at the polls, and in many other locations, the light rail is not an option that we want to discuss.

It seems incredibly strange at this point for this fringe left rag to suddenly concern itself with the waste of the hundred $80 million that’s vaporized in the pockets of the various consultants and engineers with their fallacious plans, (and we still don’t even have a plan $180 million later!)  And that we should just continue to shovel more money down that rat hole is a mentally masturbate over how they can continue to screw us.

One of the problems the newspaper has (and boy do they have a lot of problems) is that they have lied so much about so many things concerning the CRC Scam; they have attacked, extorted, exaggerated, belittled, and generally ignored the wishes of the people of this County for so long, that when they suddenly make a lurch to the right in an effort to try and convince us that they are just concerned about how bad off were going to be if this thing is not built…  Well, it’s difficult to get past all the years where they didn’t give a rat’s ass about the people or what we wanted.

And here’s the thing: at base, this is an about what the Democrat in wants, it this is an about what the downtown Mafia wants, this is an about what the chamber of horrors wants, this is an about what identity Vancouver wants.

This is entirely about what the people of Clark County want.  If the ramifications of this bridge being replaced are so far reaching, and so important, then let the federal government pay for it all.  But I have yet to read the study from the same newspaper that lays out what the removal of $100 million a year plus from our local economy to pay tolls, is going to do to our local small business community…  A small business community that depends on its very existence on a disposable income that will be vacuumed into the coffers of the CRC should this thing ever be built.

I’ll begin to believe that the Democrat in his actually concerned about the people of Clark County, the moment they publish the findings from a study from nonpartisan sources that have no dog in this fight, that are not paid for by the special interests of the CRC, that lay out what the impacts will be on the people of this County.

It’s not difficult to illustrate the negative impacts of $100 million being sucked out of the pockets of people with marginal or low incomes.  It is certainly not hard to figure out what the ripple effects will be on small businesses like pizza parlors and ice cream shops in movie theaters and other independent stores that require access to the disposable incomes of the people of this County.

I have been closely following this entire situation for the past several years…  From its inception…  And I have yet to read anything about what those impacts would be to the families, and the businesses depending on disposable income for their very survival.

And at this point, if we don’t know?  It’s because we don’t want to know.

I will be continuing to urge my Southwest Washington legislators (minus of course those from the Vancouver Soviet) to do all they can to kill this hydra.  Recycling the same idiotic babble, as if it suddenly becomes more credible after years of discrediting their arguments only to find ourselves continuing to be faced by the already shown to be untrue positions of the newspaper does nothing to move their ball forward.

When confronted with the evidence made clear by the Oregon Supreme Court that safety and age of the bridge has not and is not a consideration in this equation, one finds oneself not moved by arguments the claims that this is a matter of safety, and that somehow the economic freedom of the Western World depends on replacing a bridge that’s already paid for and certainly functional.  Reusing the safety/economy argument is simply vacuous because at the end of the day we all know that if the bridge in fact was unsafe, if it felt below any nominal safety level of operation and use, they'd close it.

The safety issue went out the window when the governor of Oregon, while on one of his numerous “trips” at taxpayer expense informed us that the issue was “no light rail, no bridge.”  As honest as that declaration was, it destroys any of the Democratian arguments on this issue as it lays bare at its essence the entirety of the reasoning behind replacing our current functioning and paid for by I-5 bridge. 

And none of the reasons cited by the democratian in this editorial changes any of that.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Right on the money: GOP Suicide watch.

Looks like Briggs has filed against Vick.

Now.... where's my popcorn?

So, got a mailer from Representative Brandon Vick.

“2013 Legislative Review” it says.

It's an 8.5 x 11, what's known in the business as a "trifold" mailer.

I looked it over very carefully, because I wanted to know exactly what Brandon Vick has done since he was elected to office and went up to Olympia.

And you know what?  I couldn't find anything.

Oh, there was no shortage in the mailer about what the caucus has accomplished…  Just a horrific shortage of detail concerning what Representative Brandon Vick has accomplished

1/6th of the mailer was devoted to stuff that the Republican caucus did…  But not one word talked about what Brandon Vick did.

The language is kind of parsed.  It says: "Successes! In 2013 my fellow House Republicans and I:"

Solved every problem in the Western world.

As I read this, I looked down at it and asked myself the following question: if some other Republican besides Brandon Vick had been elected…  Would we be reading anything different?

In short, for me the question is: what difference did Brandon Vick make?

You see, Brandon Vick did not introduce a single piece of legislation for the entire year.

Let me repeat that:

Brandon Vick did not introduce a single piece of legislation for the entire year.

Oh, it’s not that he couldn’t introduce legislation…  Liz Pike, who was elected at the same time as Vick, introduced legislation, and some of it I believe has been signed into law.

No, Vick didn’t introduce any legislation because legislation takes time.  You have to go to committee meetings.  You have to testify.  You have to arrange for somebody in the Senate to carry the water on your bill.

In short…  You have to work it, to get a bill passed.

And it does not appear to me that at any point in this process was Brandon Vick interested in working.  And nothing in this mailer indicates that he will introduce any legislation.

That is not to say that he hasn't…  Or that he won't…  But if he had or has…  This mailer doesn't say anything about it.

You see, that's the problem I have with Brandon.  I asked him to do two simple things when he was party chair; neither one of them happened, (restart the newsletter, and do something about that god-awful website.)  Although he had many excuses as to why they didn't happen.

So, he gets elected to the legislature, and he decides because he so busy outside the legislature, that he's not going to be bothered to introduce any legislation because in his mind there's obviously nothing that needs to be legislated.

That, of course, is absurd on its face. And that's why he needs to go. He has done, and likely will do, absolutely nothing deserving of reelection to the state legislature.

Because if he had, we be reading all about it in his mailer.

When GOP Congressmen get stupid: NY Rep. threatens to throw reporter off balcony.

While this is typically the territory of the left; occasionally, Republican members of congress can be rather moronic as well.

This particular specimen should be thrown out of Congress.  He's a disgrace to the Body. He needs to go... and now.

N.Y. Rep. Grimm Threatens Reporter on Camera

By Adam O'Neal - January 29, 2014
Rep. Michael Grimm of New York, under investigation for alleged campaign finance improprieties, threatened to throw a reporter off a balcony during an interview following President Obama’s State of the Union speech Tuesday night.
After being asked by NY1 reporter Michael Scotto about the investigation, Grimm replied, "That’s off-topic. This is only about president’s speech,” and walked off camera.
Scotto briefly concluded his report, and Grimm -- assuming the broadcast was over -- returned to admonish the reporter. The camera remained on, however. “Let me be clear to you: You ever do that to me again, I’ll throw you off this f------ balcony,” Grimm threatened.
After a brief back-and-forth about the validity of the question, Grimm concluded, “No, no, you’re not man enough, you’re not man enough. I’ll break you in half. Like a boy.”
Both NY1 and Grimm’s office released statements following the incident.
“I was extremely annoyed because I was doing NY1 a favor by rushing to do their interview first in lieu of several other requests,” New York City’s lone Republican congressman said in a statement. “The reporter knew that I was in a hurry and was only there to comment on the State of the Union, but insisted on taking a disrespectful and cheap shot at the end of the interview, because I did not have time to speak off-topic.”
Grimm continued, “I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last.”
In his own statement, NY1 Political Director Bob Hardt called for Grimm to apologize, describing the congressman’s comments as “extremely disturbing.”
“The NY1 family is certainly alarmed and disappointed by the behavior of Representative Grimm and demands a full apology from him. This behavior is unacceptable,” Hardt asserted.
Two of Grimm’s donors, including a former girlfriend, have been arrested in connection with the investigation. Grimm has not been charged, and he has denied any misconduct. 

So why did I blow off the SOTU?

A bunch of people on Facebook yesterday were asking if others out there going to be watching the State of the Union speech or, as one particularly interesting individual put it, the “State of the Coup” speech.

My response was, “no, I’ll be watching a live streaming video feed of the polar ice cap expanding.  That'd be a great deal more exciting, and much more truthful.”

It’s reasonable to presume that I’m something of an uber-political junkie.  Given that once a year the president stands there in front of everybody, and selectively ruminates about what he claims he has done and what he claims he will do, why would I pass that up?

I could take this opportunity to rail against the current cardboard cutout of what a genuine president is supposed to be…  But to what end?

The president’s approval ratings speak far more eloquently than my meager effort here.  There’s really no point in going into specifics as to why this president is the pent ultimate liar in American politics at the national level…  Sort of a nationwide version of our own local mayor of the Vancouver Soviet.

But that he is such a liar effectively made the State of the Union address a complete and utter waste of time.  I have no respect for this president.  Merely uttering that statement on the part of many on the left would condemn me as a racist, or at least some other form of blasphemer, because their god is infallible.  The mere fact that he uses the Constitution as his latest form of toilet paper, is unremarkable and not worthy to be discussed in their view.  Had anybody with an "R" after their name abused the Constitution in this manner… They be rioting in the streets of course, but situational ethics is the meme of the left.

And that’s a shame.  This is one of those times in a nation’s history when we have to believe in the president, believe in his vision, and even believe in his competence.  Unfortunately for us all and our unborn generations, there’s nothing to believe in here except a sure and certain knowledge that future generations are going to have to deal with the damage that this moron has cost our country.

So I did not bother to watch the SOTU last night.  I’m sure that I was joined by tens of millions of others equally disillusioned by a man who could have been great, but who instead acted on his baser political instincts to the detriment of us all.

It’s particularly difficult when you look at the options, and you see that neither party is worthy of our support as both parties have betrayed this country, all in the name of keeping their jobs in the Congress of the United States.

I want to believe.  I’m educated to believe.  I’ve worn this nation’s uniform as a sign of my belief.  But when I see these kids being tossed into a political meat grinder for no apparent military reason and I see them suffering as a result of the social engineering that’s gone on in our Armed Forces in the middle of a war, all to make points on the cocktail circuit, I become disheartened and depressed at their sacrifice.

It’s why today, I’ve been successful in keeping my son from enlisting in the military.  How can I advocate that he do something that even after my 14 odd years of service I can no longer believe in?

There does not appear to be a single area of government that has not suffered under the “leadership” of this sorry individual.  All areas of policy are proven to be a disaster: domestic, foreign, military.  Our nation’s economy is buried in debt; trees are mowed down by the millions to print money that has absolutely nothing to back it up.

Both parties appear desirous to go off the cliff into the abyss of bankruptcy and pain.  The Democrats want us to sprint full speed off that cliff, while Republicans want us to saunter off of it at a somewhat more sedate pace.  But neither side appears to give a damn that we are heading towards a cliff.…  And the closer we get to that cliff, the more difficult it will be to change course.

So yeah, I admit it, I blew off the State of the Union.  I also blew off Cathy McMorris’s response.  Longtime readers know how “highly” I think of Congresswoman McMorris, who is single-handedly responsible for throwing the spare parts together she had laying around her office that has resulted in that worthless, totally vacuous waste of skin representing this district in the House of Representatives, Jaime Herrera.

Someone much smarter than I once pointed out that because Congress is the organization responsible for budgeting for this country, the reason we have such a horrific debt ($17 trillion and counting) is because Congress wants that.  The allegedly Republican-controlled US House of Representatives is fully capable of just putting their foot down and saying “no.”  And instead, they’ve chosen to keep their feet up and say “yes.”

In the best of all worlds, Republican tenets would actually mean something.  But as they gear up to cave on the illegal alien issues confronting us by granting them amnesty, as they’ve already been rolled on the issues of raising the budget ceiling, Obama care, failing to have the balls to back up their efforts to filibuster the last abortion of a budget, once again I have to ask the question: what the hell difference does it make what side's in charge?  They’re both equally inept and incompetent.  They can’t see the forest for the trees.  And because of them, every day we sink additional billions into debt… Billions that untold generations will be held responsible for.

I didn’t watch the State of the Union speech last night because I knew it was going to be both disgusting and disheartening.  And right now?

We’ve had enough of that.

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Greg Gutfeld's State of the Coup speech game. (2 min video)

Where is old Mussolini Mikey in this pic?

Earlier, Mussolini Mikey asked this idiotic question:

Well, that begs the question: where is old Mussolini Mikey in this pic?

Decisions, decisions: Mussolini Mikey… Or do-nothing Vick.

As I suspected, Mussolini Mikey has been deterred from his favorite target, State Representative Liz Pike (R-18) with the arrival of her likely next victim Maureen Winningham.  The only other target he had left was our local do-nothing state representative, Brandon Vick.

Since both of these guys set the bar at such an incredibly low level; Mikey for his incredible arrogance and stupidity, Vick for the fact that all he's done is warm the seat since he managed to get it, I've concluded that they deserve each other and that I really don't care which one of them wins.  It is hoped and I continue to hear, that other Republicans of means are looking at this race and that I will truly have a candidate to support in the upcoming election.

But as it is now I support neither one of them, and I'll sit back with my popcorn and whatever soft drink happens to be handy, watching them hack each other silly.

That is not to say that Mussolini Mikey has any chance of winning, because he doesn't.  The more people come to know that moron the less likely they are to vote for him.  But when you have two choices of such low caliber and the best I can do is loath one of them and detest the other for political office... since Brandon is following in the footsteps of the utterly worthless Congresswoman we are unfortunate enough to have representing us in Washington DC... I'll be sitting this one out.

It is to be hoped that the other parties who have expressed an interest in running against Vick, announce soon so they can get to work and get the job done.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to hammer Mussolini Mikey like a drum while simultaneously expressing my opinions concerning Brandon Vick.  With so little to choose between them, it may become rather boring and mundane, so I'll do my best to try and spice it up a little bit.

Monday, January 27, 2014

Of the many things I care less about, Gabby Giffords testifying on I-594 tops the list.

I freely admit that what happened to former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) was a tragedy.

What I fail to see is where her testimony on a Washington State law, a place that she does not live in or have any say over, will make any difference.

This effort it gun grabbing, which is designed entirely to punish law-abiding citizens for the actions of those who ignore the law, will accomplish none of it seems, none of its goals, nor will it arrive at what these people are looking for: a reduction in gun crime, a reduction in suicides, a reduction in reductions.

Is this where I point out that many other municipalities with the strongest gun control laws have the highest rate of gun crimes? Why is that?

It's likely because those who have a mind to commit crimes using a gun, don't care about laws like this.

As I pointed out in the past, any gun control issue before the people must be viewed in terms of what it would accomplish when implemented.  The questions are simple: would I-594, fully implemented have stopped any mass shooting of any kind?

Would I-594 fully implemented have stopped Sandy Hook?

What I 594 stop any crime of any kind from taking place?

The answers are clear and stark: no.

The basic flaw in the judgment of those who advocate laws such as these, is that the people who break the law, the people who carry weapons illegally, the people who kill people, are not going to pay attention to this kind of restriction.

I've had a concealed weapons permit since about 1997, when I began to receive death threats working for then representative Marc Boldt. I have not had occasion to shoot anybody and hopefully I never will.  But putting restrictions like this on to a law-abiding citizens is not designed to reduce access to weapons for people with psychological or criminal issues.  It is instead designed to reduce availability of weapons to people like me.

The absurdity of this law is best illustrated by the fact that many of the upper echelon pushing laws like this, including our own governor, really don't go anywhere without an armed guard.

As a result I don't give a damn what Gabby Giffords has to say about this.  The fact is, that she's not go to have to live with the results of whatever it is that we do up here in Washington over weapons.

All this kind of thing does, I believe, is to build resentment towards those who insist on socially engineering our lives, to fit their template.

In the end, it's going to take a great deal of will on the part of the public, to address these issues.  In the past I have advocated for a model more closely aligned to that in use in Singapore, where gun crime is effectively unknown.

They took the tough stance.  They made the hard call.  And now if you use a gun in any crime whatsoever whether you pull the trigger or not, you're executed.  If you even carry a gun when committing a crime you're subject to a life sentence, regardless of what that crime is.  The result?

Well, you're hard-pressed to find gun crime happening in Singapore.

As it is, I don't even go out and check the mail without carrying a weapon.  That old saw about "when seconds count, the police are only minutes away" is the harsh reality we face particularly out here in the rural area of the county. 

I will oppose any law that further restricts my constitutional rights.  And these laws, do, precisely that.

Here's my message to RINO Rep. Mike Hope who shilled for this garbage early last year:
Let me say on the outset that I’m not a constituent.  I did, however, spend 6 years on staff as Marc Boldt’s LA in the House so I have at least a vague clue as to how things work up there.  Thus, an “SNR” (Sincere Non-Response) is not necessary.
I am also an Army Veteran (Enlisted/commissioned – Infantry/Armor/Administration – 14 years) and was involved in the American Legion up to my eyeballs (Including 5th District Commander of Washington) a while back so I also have some vague knowledge of weaponry.  Further, I hold a CWP since I received death threats working for then Rep. Boldt, some 17 years or so ago.  I am rarely unarmed in public.

I cannot adequately express my disappointment in your actions regarding this bill, but one of the joys of the First Amendment and the other Rights I prepaid through my service to this country is the ability to both speak my mind AND to speak it to you.

During my time up there, I was privileged to see both the best and the worst of this body of people.
Your actions here are among the worst, because this effort will accomplish absolutely nothing of what you want it to.

This bill is a classic case of confusing “motion” with “action.”  As both a legislator and a police officer, you feel compelled to do SOMETHING in the face of Sandy Hook, presumably.  You obviously believe in this effort, unintended consequences notwithstanding, or you wouldn’t be doing it.  Unfortunately, except for punishing those of us who obey the law f you are likely to describe it will in and or the actions of those who do not, this bill accomplishes absolutely nothing positive.
Sandy Hook is yet another name that will live in infamy.  The question I have is this: what in this bill would have stopped it?

That this bill, had it been fully implemented, would have made no difference in Sandy Hook is the thing.

That this bill would do nothing to improve the security of soft targets like schools is the thing.

That this bill punishes those of us who follow the law for the actions of those who break the law is the thing.

That this bill will make no impact on street sales, where guns are sold to those who are not supposed to have them (Felons, for example) is the thing.

That this bill will do nothing to stop anyone from, say, buying a gun in Oregon or Idaho without undergoing this nonsense is the thing.

In fact, I offer you one word that sums up the ultimate aim of the democrats you are joining with: Chicago.

This bill accomplishes absolutely nothing except to increase the bureaucracy (always a democrat goal) and provide revenue to the state (always a democrat goal) while making it more difficult for those who obey the law to purchase weapons.

It's difficult to see where THAT isn't the real goal of this idiocy: and why would government want it to be more difficult for the law-abiding to buy weapons?

We have a Constitution.  It sets limits on government.  This bill appears to cavalierly violate those limits.

Those who obey the law will suffer.  Those who break the law won't even notice... or care.  And it seems to me that government's priorities are just the tiniest bit screwed up here.

I don’t doubt your sincerity.  But I would wish that in this instance, like all others where legislation is proposed or supported, those doing the proposing or supporting would stand back and see what the outcome would be BEFORE this (or any other bill) is passed into law.

This bill will not do what it appears that you want it to do.  But it will harm those of us who obey the law.  And I find it hard to believe you seem unaware of that… so I thought I’d take this opportunity to write to a legislator not in my district (18th) to let them know what *I* see.

A few amendments won’t help this fundamentally flawed bill.  There are many other options available that would not be offensive to my rights… such as mandatory life sentences for anyone using a weapon during the course of committing a crime.

After all, if you want to stop the use of a weapon for an illegal purpose, what better way to do that then actually holding the perpetrator accountable instead of further restricting those of us who follow the law because of the actions of others?

What a novel concept.

Your web site is replete with all the pats on the back from the left.  There doesn’t seem to be much discussion there of the opposing point of view.  I would suggest that perhaps you give that opposing view a little more thought.

Thank you for your time.
That is the crux of the matter.  And no amount of testimony from Gabrielle Giffords will change it.

Another lie by Taxhaber on the CRC Scam.

One of the biggest problems the CRC proponents of had has been their propensity to lie.

How many times of we heard the artificial cutoffs that they've used as a reason to strengthen their efforts to extort money from the taxpayers to get this project built?

The first the first of many times was last September when Washington state had the belly up to the bar with $450 million…  Or else the project was dead.  Clearly they were lying then and they are lying now.

Well it sure doesn't seem dead to me.  At least in the eyes of our cousins to the south, where they've been attempting to resurrect this thing like it was part of the zombie drama.

They simply do not understand that without the concurrence of the Washington State Senate they will never build this project.  They've done nothing to negotiate, it's always been their way or the highway, and they've lied repeatedly towards that end.

They've lied about the cost, they lied about the effects, they lied about the safety of the bridge, they lied about congestion relief, they lied about freight mobility; in fact, the list of things they haven't lied about is much shorter than the list of things they have.

What we all know here in Clark County is that the people have spoken.  We do not want this project built.

It makes no sense to replace a bridge that works.  Claims that it's unsafe are false, merely by the fact that they don't shut it down.  And they don't shut it down because it's safe.  It's a vicious circle for them.  And at the end of the day the Oregon Supreme Court made it clear that the entirety of this project has been to justify bringing light rail into Clark County.… and not the result of any safety issues on the bridge.

So when the governor of Oregon tells us that "CRC will die without action by March," I'm not above questioning his veracity or his integrity.

Tens of millions of dollars already wasted…  With little to nothing to show for it. Multiple votes by the people of Clark County who made it clear we do not want this project built.  CRC proponents who don't give a damn about sucking $100 million a year for the next 45 years out of our local economy to finance this extortion.  The no end to the lies, falsehoods, exaggerations, and attacks for those of us wise enough to oppose this project.  And this fantasy?
Kitzhaber reiterated that the revised CRC is financially and legally possible based on recent reviews. But the project still needs key intergovernmental agreements — which don’t require legislative approval — between the two states to work. Kitzhaber said he wants “appropriate action” from Washington by March 15.
Why they keep repeating the lie that this won't "require legislative approval?"

No agency "agreeing" to this extortion will survive the budget cuts that follow... or the lawsuits that happen as a result.  Maybe it's time for the Senate budget to include that requirement in every budget in government?

It is unlikely…  But not impossible…  That the Oregon legislature will actually try and do something.  But it won't make any difference if they do.  The Washington State Senate is locked up.  And they will not agree to this extortion.

Day 50 and still no response from Bob

The anointed Democrat candidate for congress, Bob Dingethal, is supposed to offer something of an alternative.

So far, the only alternative he's offered is as party affiliation.

Some 50 days ago, I posted on his campaign Facebook wall a couple of very basic questions concerning his political positions on Obama care and the CRC. I pointed out that if he did not have a plan to overturn and/or replace Obama care or if he did not have a plan to do all he could to stop the CRC, then he was wasting both our time and his running for any office.

I wanted to know what his positions were on those issues. Here we are, some 50 days later, and no response.

Fortunately, we can gauge an individual’s effectiveness for political office in part because of his or her campaign. What's problematic here is that I've asked questions that tens of thousands of people in the 3rd congressional district would like to have answered… and for whatever the reason, Bob has not felt compelled to respond.

Clearly then this is the kind of response that we can expect from Bob, even in the unlikely event he were to get elected.

And that is a shame. I would vote for him if he was right on the positions important to me. I'd vote for him if he was opposed and actually would work for the elimination of the CRC. I'd vote for him if he was opposed to and actually would work for the elimination of Obama care.

Last year, I cheerfully voted for Jon Haugen. Haugen is been militantly opposed to the CRC scam, apparently from the get-go.our current disgrace of a Congresswoman just wants people to think she's opposed to the CRC scam, while actually doing nothing to derail it.

As it is now, I'm just not going to vote. As we’ve come to find out, it really doesn't matter which party runs the House or the Senate.  while the Democrats want us to sprint off the cliff into bankruptcy and national destruction, the GOP just appears to be willing to do the same thing at a somewhat slower pace. They both betrayed us, and the GOP certainly has betrayed anything approaching Republican tenets of political policy.

So I'm beholding to neither one of them.

Here's your opportunity Bob. Start talking about issues, instead of hoping that we’re going to vote for you because you're just another pretty face.

The democratian blows through the obvious: Herrera and illegal aliens.

Make no mistake, "immigration reform" is code-speak for "Amnesty."

Obvious Number One:  Herrera is an intellectual coward, afraid of meeting with her constituents... and meeting with "12" does not a town hall make.

Obvious Number Two: she will do precisely and exactly what her keeper, Cathy McMorris, tells her to do... since she's Cathy's sock-puppet.

Obvious Number Three: the GOP in the House wants to cripple the Republican Party before the mid-terms.
"If we start with the most volatile issue from the start, it may tank the whole process," Herrera Beutler said. With an estimated 11 million immigrants in the United States illegally, the country can't afford for the process to be tanked again.
When the alternative is horrific, of course it can.  This is one of those rare instances when, in fact, it IS better to do nothing than sell out in yet another attempt to out-democrat the democrats.

Sounds counter-intuitive, doesn't it?  But there is precisely zero other outcome available if the GOP betrays us again.

Then, this idiocy:
Immigration will be a major topic for Congress this year, and it will be important to the Northwest — especially in the agriculture-dominated eastern portions of Washington and Oregon. Many industries rely upon undocumented workers, even as the country is ramping up efforts to keep such workers out. As the (Spokane) Spokesman-Review wrote last year: "Our nation needs to resolve the contradictory 'Help Wanted' and 'Keep Out' messages we send across our borders."
Odd, isn't it?  We have millions more illegals here than ever before, and farmers can't get workers.

Wonder why?

Seems to me they must be here taking other jobs... non-agricultural jobs... illegally.

As far as it goes, though, I agree.  We DO "need to resolve the contradictory 'Help Wanted' and 'Keep Out' messages we send across our borders."

And we need to resolve it in favor of "Keep Out."

Herrera, being a coward at every level, will do what she's told, whatever that is.

Meanwhile, the rest of us will suffer because of it.

Next up: watch her toss us under the bus (again) as she votes for yet ANOTHER debt ceiling increase, giving the moron-in-chief a blank check to bankrupt us.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Betty Sue has been rabidly defending Stuart.

Here's my response:
I'm mystified by the responses here.

The left screams about money and Madore having "bought" this seat... but they remain remarkably silent when a democrat spends millions of her own money to get elected to the Senate (Cantwell in 2000) or Congress (DelBene in 2012).

The rank hypocrisy of it is the problem I have.

Madore's money makes HIM bad, but the rock-solid support of these two democrats... democrats who make Madore's spending look like a drop in the bucket?

Situational ethics doesn't become anyone, left or right.

Further, Joe Tanner outspent Tom Mielke 8 to 1, including spending almost $50,000 of HIS own money... and that's just swell. Tanner was crushed, by the way. And that's another thing the left never mentions around here.

There is one reason and one reason only that Stuart won't run: he knows he would lose.

Tom Mielke faced the same "negativity" for FOUR YEARS and still ran for reelection, even though he was the only Republican on the council.

Stuart saw all this. He watched as Boldt got hammered. He knew that he was likely to go the same way, and then he saw the precinct maps that showed a deep-seated hatred of his pet project... and he knows down to the cellular level that he... cannot... win.

Better to leave on your own terms than to get thrown out like Marc.

And finally, in Stuart's OWN WORDS during a council meeting just a few short weeks ago:

"And I've said it before: I don't speak for the people... I will NEVER speak for "the people," I speak for Steve and some of you are going to agree with me and some of you aren't."

Betty Sue, as a democrat, you might like, admire and respect this kind of arrogance.

But I didn't bolt on the Army uniform for 14 years to support that kind of attitude.

The people of this county have spoken. Your hatred of their decision does not become you. But that you don't like it is rather meaningless.

Steve Stuart is a disgrace. He sold us out to TriMet, he admits he never listened... and you are oh, so enamored with that kind of thing.

Stuart is going to be gone. He's likely got his next high dollar gig lined up and it's likely to be quite the payoff for his vote raping the people of this county.

You all need to get over it and move on.