Oregon blows it: Blount should not only be suspended... he should go to prison.

.
Can somebody... anybody... explain to me why it is that this thug wasn't arrested on the spot?

The game was over. This moron sucker-punched a Boise State player who had removed his helmet while this scumbag courageously had his own still on.

There shouldn't be some sort of magic force-field surrounding football players that allows them to commit felony assault on nation-wide television without immediate arrest, subsequent trial and subsequent imprisonment.

If I were to have just walked up to this moron and popped HIM in the mouth, wouldn't *I* be subject to arrest and etc, etc, etc?

Of course I would. And this clown is no different.

Oregon didn't go nearly far enough. Like any other criminal, his thoughtless act injured another, cast a pall over an entire organization and state, and reminds us all of the Jailblazers.

For that, this scumbag SHOULD have not only been kicked off the team, he SHOULD have been expelled from the school and tried for assault. His scholarship COULD have gone to someone much more deserving... someone much more understanding of the honor being done in exchange for playing a game... someone who could appreciate the sacrifice made by the taxpayers to pay for this man's education.

Instead, we get this garbage:

The response came Friday afternoon, as the Ducks suspended Blount for the season, but allowed him to remain with the team. He will retain his scholarship; he will be allowed to practice; he will have access to support staff such as trainers and tutors.

Why anyone would want to have a lowlife like this one infesting their organization is simply beyond me. And the concern for BLOUNT, of all things, shows that many have a screw loose in their respective thinking processes.

Clearly, Blount has no business being in college football. His actions were an affront to the sport, a fact that is ironic when you consider that Blount and other players from both teams took part in a new NCAA-mandated handshake prior to kickoff. All in the name of sportsmanship, or something like that.

But you have to wonder what would have become of Blount had he been completely removed from the team. You have to wonder whether he would have stayed in school, whether he would have graduated, how he would have reacted to having his entire life ripped away because of one incident.

Actually, you have to wonder those things now. But at least he has an opportunity.

What? I "have to wonder?" First, the idea that his "entire life has been ripped away" as if HE wasn't the one doing the tearing... as if he was now going to DIE or something, is utter, blithering, nonsense.

He, presumably, will have his health. He has 3 years of education already completed and paid. I know of hundreds... if not millions... who would gladly, cheerfully and instantly trade places with this idiot in a New York second.

How could ANYONE believe that this minor suspension, as opposed to the multiple penalties he SHOULD have suffered, equates to his "entire life being ripped away" has a screw loose.

The ONLY thing I HAVE to wonder is why or how is it that a thug like this could possibly be going to what is, allegedly, a major institution of higher learning on the taxpayer's dime.

The LAST thing that's going to happen is that I will worry about what would happen to this idiot after he was expelled and after he completed his well-deserved sentence in prison.

In short, I don't CARE what would happen to him. With a mentality that could possibly result in this sort of behavior, does ANYONE have ANY doubt what's going to happen to him... either now... or later?

And this garbage about "these poor, little old 18-22 year old kids?"

When I was 17 and 5 months old, I was fully deployed as a member of the Recon Platoon for an Infantry Battalion in the 3rd Infantry Division in Germany.

Who had the greater responsibility? Who had the most pressure... the most adverse living and working conditions? Blount.... or me?

Yet, I managed not to behave like a psychotic. So the "age" argument has absolutely nothing to back it.

Yes, I do agree... this IS a "teachable moment." And in this case, what he's being taught is that there are few consequences for engaging in felony assault if you're a major college football player.

Where he SHOULD be getting his "teachable moments" are in a prison cell with Bubba.

Meanwhile, this clown keeps the benefits of being a member of a major college football team, keeps his multi-thousand dollar per month scholarship, and continues to get a FREE education while being required to do even LESS to earn it.

Yeah. THAT'LL teach him.

I had little respect for the Ducks BEFORE this happened. Now, I have none at all.

They COULD have sent a message that would have reverberated across this country when it comes to accountability and college athletics, a message that when you act like an animal, you can feel free to do it some place else.

Unfortunately, the message they sent will have the opposite effect... sending the opposite message.

And some are proud of that. Although only God knows why.

You heard it here first: Blount will be back in uniform before the season is over, because, well, he's "suffered enough."

Why else would they want this clown to keep practicing with the team... keep hanging around them?
.

The continuing delusion of Lou Brancaccio: Looking for reasons for the Columbian's bankruptcy? They start here.

.
It's not surprising that a local newspaper that's empathy begins and ends with the Downtown Mafia of Vancouver and who reflects their community about as much as the despicable bridge replacement/loot rail project reflects Clark County's citizenry would actually conclude that the paper he works for, a paper that, for example, endorsed ONLY democrats in EVERY open seat in the last election isn't a leftist rag.

Since it is a leftist rag with a leftist editorial staff and editor, it's also not surprising (and dead wrong) when this leftist democrat writes "But I would not conclude -- as you have -- that he 'doesn't appear to be voting the preferences of his constituency.'"

This constituency did not support Baird's voting for ANY bill he hasn't read. Even a delusional leftist like Brancaccio should know that.

This constituency did not support his votes on the Porkulous or Cap and Trade.

That Baird has scammed the people of this district for so long does not mean that his re-election amounts to a reflection of this district. After all, look at the empty-suited moron running this country... I'm sure, in the midst of his delusion, Brancaccio actually believes THAT idiot is reflecting the "preferences of his constituency."

Whatever it is you "try" to do, you're failing. In short, you DON'T do it. Every day that goes by where you don't demand a vote of the people on this unbelievable waste of billions, this paper fails.

Every time Laird pukes out another column hammering everyone to his political right... which means almost everyone alive... this paper fails.

When it comes to Baird, you've printed these stories because you have absolutely no choice. Had you not done so, others would have picked it up, and you'd have looked even more foolish then you typically do.

Even now, Lou is doing his best to make excuses for Baird. While there is no doubt that the Obamatons approve of Baird's failures as a congressman (cowardman) most people to the right of Lenin are incensed and offended by his cavalier, all-too-typical leftist tactic of referring to those wise enough to oppose them as Nazi's and Brown Shirts.

This represents another reason why this paper is circling the drain. Rank, situational ethics when it comes to their leftist pets that carry their water.

by Lou Brancaccio : 8/8/09 4:13pm - Report AbuseDick,

As you know I have disagreed with the congressman on his approach to town hall meetings. But I would not conclude -- as you have -- that he "doesn't appear to be voting the preferences of his constituency."

I would respectfully suggest that if that were the case he would not have been re-elected so many times.

What I try to do -- and what I feel The Columbian tries to do -- is respect the decisions that are made by elected officials -- regardless if they are a R or a D, if we believe they are good decisions. And disagree with decisions that we fell are not good.

But my sense is too many people look at an individual decision or a few decisons[sic] and then try to draw wide ranging conclusions from them.

Most newspaper find themselves in this situation as well. Some conservatives are a little confused by our stance against Baird on this issue. Many won't say "hey I agree with you on this one Columbian" because they only want to continue pushing the idea that we are a liberal newspaper. And this doesn't fit the box we have been painted in.

But I just go back to my earlier point. None of us should expect any elected official to always agree with us. And we should be able to see that some residents out there must approve of what he is doing. He keeps getting re-elected. So not everyone will agree with me -- or you -- on lots of things. That's OK. Let's just respect each other even if we happen to disagree.

Another day, another clueless Columbian editorial.

.
Today's nonsense from the tax-dodgers themselves involves their opportunity to do some more PR work for Gov. Gregoire and the dems running our state's legislature.

As anyone watching for more than ten minutes knows, Oregon is a slow-motion fiscal train wreck. Think of, say, a westernized version of Pakistan and you can get the drift.

While we have a high, business crippling sales and B&O tax, Oregon makes do with a high income tax. Lacking a sales tax kind of acts as a statewide commercial campaign to draw consumers from the surrounding states of Washington, Idaho and Kali-fornia into their state.

Now the primary motivation for our legislature was fear. The 1994 cycle is all too close a nightmare for our state's leftists, and while 2010 is shaping up as a greater or lesser version of the same, that's primarily a consequence of the stupidity, lack of depth, cluelessness and vision at the top of the ticket.

The local rag, of course, benefited from some of your basic quid-pro-quo. They stole money from the other small businesses of this state by arranging for their leftist masters to give them a massive B&O business tax CUT, a CUT that the rest of us didn't get in the midst of this $10 billion deficit... and a cut that, you guessed it, WE will have to make up.

Is it any wonder they lie and exaggerate in their support for the biggest waste of money the northwestern United States has ever seen, given that THEY won't have to pay for it?

Now, this sets the table for today's moronic idiocy. When it comes to matters of development, the morons pumping out editorials view this area as their own, personal, post card. This paper views the Gorge as their own personal fiefdom, advocating restrictions on the residents living there that they, themselves, would never CONSIDER living under.

And how many times has Koenninger regaled us with one of his "the way things were" columns while attacking anyone opposing his Utopian view and his efforts to force others to live under a standard that he, himself, does NOT have to live under.

That, of course, brings us to today's drivel.

Regardless, it seems likely many entrepreneurs and wealthy people will vote with their feet and take a look at moving to Clark County. The county has long been a desirable place for wealthy Oregon retirees, who can enjoy Clark County and the Portland area without paying personal income taxes on pensions...

...So, for their actions on behalf of Clark County, we thank the Oregon Legislature and say, "Welcome, newcomers."

When I left the Army and moved here in 88 or so, Clark County had a population of just over 200,000.

Today, it has a population far in excess of 400,000.

Since that time, our commissioners have done a great deal under the auspices of the growth management plan. But whatever they've done, this paper has been whining, moaning and complaining about the growth management boundary; how often it's been changed (Massive, explosive growth notwithstanding) and the Californication of the region.

Now today's idiocy appears to be throwing out the welcome mat for Oregonian Refugees to move here to a county already burdened by major shortcomings in all manner of infrastructure.

Of course, the preferred member of the O.R. class is that limited to the "wealthy" class... but the problem with that is ALL taxpayers are oppressed by massive tax and fee increases... and the implementation of thousands of dollars in tolls without a vote.

The result? The human tidal wave the idiot who wrote this editorial is referring to will not be limited to those with fat retirements and checkbooks. And if this rag's vision comes to fruition, well, guess what? The commissioners will have to revisit the growth management plan AGAIN, because all of these wonderful people will require somewhere to live, and the kids will require somewhere to go to school, and somewhere to buy groceries, and somewhere to buy furniture and so on and so on.

I would be the first to admit that like the city boundaries of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Vancouver, I wouldn't be caught dead living in Oregon.

That, however, does not explain this bizarre position where, on one hand, the morons running the paper want the "wealthy" to move here because of our oh, so, superior tax structure (soon to be obliterated by the fringe leftists this rag supports as they do everything they can to allow us to become a train wreck just like Oregon when they impose OUR version of an income tax) while, on the other, they bitch like cut cats over growth and it's consequences.

Yeah... you can REALLY trust this waste of wood pulp's vision for our future.

Idiots.

I'm stunned. Are you stunned 2? Downtown Mafia incest continues as Columbian endorses Harris.

.
It's not terribly surprising that in endorsing fringe-leftist Jeannie Harris for her re-election bid, the Columbian engages in their institutional double-standard wherein they treat those they hate (anyone wise enough to oppose their world view and quest for local domination) completely different from those they support.

Take, for example, their tender telling and retelling of Tom Mielke's two prior failed efforts to become a Clark County Commissioner. During the course of his last two efforts, (Mielke tried 3 times for the job, succeeding only on his last attempt) we were told, over and over, that he had lost twice before.

Yet, when these clowns endorse Jeanne Harris (Columbian Lackey, Vancouver) they fail to mention HER multiple failures to ditch this burg for a different office in their endorsement... clearly ONLY using her position on city council as a stepping stone to higher office.

Now... why is that? The West Point Honor Code at least used to be short and to the point: “I will neither lie, nor cheat, nor steal, nor allow a misleading silence to continue... nor tolerate anyone who does.”

The Columbian's deliberate failure to mention Harris's abysmal showings (Harris was smacked twice by Marc Boldt for county commissioner, and, if memory serves, did an abysmal job running for state representative) in their endorsement while going out of their way to remind us of Mielke's defeats is just indicative of the lack of integrity this paper has and the despicable institutional double-standard that has turned them in to a leftist swindle sheet... and the misleading facts they deliberately left out.

If prior rejections by the public are important for ANY candidate... then they are important for ALL candidates... even those you avoid any pretense of journalistic fairness in supporting.

Again, Harris supports the I-5 Bridge replacement, the largest waste of money the northwestern United States has ever known. Like all the members of Vancouver City Government and the rag endorsing her, she has done absolutely nothing to force this question to a vote of the people and, as a result is a rabid supporter of the massive tolls the completion of this unneeded and unwanted project WILL require, her tolling “concerns” notwithstanding.

Let's remember, boys and girls: there's no amount of lipstick you can put on this pig that will change the fact that it's a pig. And ANY candidate that wants this bridge and loot rail DOES want tolls... since there's absolutely no way to get this thing built without tolls... spin by the rag notwithstanding.

Harris, who has really accomplished nothing of note during her tenure, save attempting to ram a movie theater-ticket surcharge down our throats after I-695 was voted in as she claimed that she wouldn't let that vote “color her thinking,” has done nothing to be proud of except vote to jack up taxes and sue the voters... twice... to silence their dissent over downtown redevelopment.

So, yeah.... I'm stunned. Stunned that the paper would endorse yet another clueless idiot who lacks the vision that God gave a board fence, who has no desire to seek the will of the people on this, the most harmful project since Obama was elected; and who, you guessed it, carries the rag's water like Gunga Din.
.

Censorship of ideas on the Columbian web site.

.
The Columbian newspaper practices a rank hypocrisy rarely seen anywhere else in the area, and it's time for it to end.

In today's editorial, Laird (or whoever it is) whines about the possible waste of $46,000 if everything in a report's conclusions about the Vancouver Police Department morale issues were not addressed.

But if the report is not respected for its objectivity and expertise, then the whole thing will become an imprudent use of $46,440 the city spent on it; a waste of four months Matrix Consulting Group of Palo Alto, Calif., spent compiling the valuable data; and a troubling disregard for 139 pages of observations and advice.

They snivel about that when the CRC "study," with it's pre-ordained outcome, has wasted 10's of millions... the same study that has wasted, literally, tens of millions of dollars in an ongoing to ram and unneeded, unwanted, wasteful economic black hole that will vaporize increasingly scarce transportation dollars at an unimaginable rate.

It's ironic that the Columbian website censors the word "waste" and it's variations. (Try it. And mention of the word "wasted," for example, shows up as "******.") It's completely bizarre, but given all of the monumental waste this disgrace to journalism supports now and has supported in the past, it's not surprising that they want to avoid the embarrassment of the constant reminders of their perfidy by the public paying attention.

This newspaper supports the waste of billions of dollars... yet they express concern over, relatively speaking, a few thousand.

Is it any wonder they face fiscal disaster? Is it any wonder that so few people actually are willing to fork over money to be insulted both personally and intellectually by a group wholly owned by the downtown mafia and city hall.

Who in their right mind would support such a rag... or those who advertise in it?

What a blight and disgrace on our community. Respond with a position that oppose their agenda... and see how long that idea reminds visible.

This despicable pile of pulp fears ideas that oppose their agenda. And as a result... they will silence them.

That didn't work for Das Reich or Pravda Izvestia, either.

When the leftist bent of the Columbian interferes with facts and journalism. (Lies about aliens)

So I get a call from a friend of mine yesterday about a bizarre article in the Columbian that wrongly claims that "County can't deny services to immigrants."

First of all, the issue isn't ABOUT denying services to IMMIGRANTS.

The issue is about denying services to ILLEGAL ALIENS.

IMMIGRANTS are those who came here legally from another country. I've yet to read anything about denying services to anyone here legally.

Providing services to those here in violation of the laws of this country here illegally... that is, ILLEGAL ALIENS, is another thing entirely.

So, why didn't the newspaper make that distinction? Because they've allowed their bias to dictate their stories.

THIS paper doesn't want illegal aliens to be held accountable. THIS newspaper doesn't care that we have to reduce services due to expenditures to illegals. THIS paper doesn't care that we've had to lay off county employees because of budget cuts.

Nope... spending tens of millions of our increasingly scarce tax dollars on people violating the law of this land as an incentive for them to stay here is just peachy for the Columbian.

And I get that.

The problem is when their biases interfere with the increasingly tattered remnants of what passes for journalism at this paper, then the public is misinformed.

Now, I haven't decided if that's a result of poor reporting, incompetence, or bias... or a happy (for the paper) confluence of all three.

But the fact of that matter is this:

This county CAN deny "services" to our illegal alien population. The paper is either wrong... or lying.

CA Counties Cut Illegal Aliens Healthcare

From a deeply outraged Los Angeles Times:

California counties cut healthcare to illegal immigrants

With budget problems afflicting counties across the state, some have begun eliminating healthcare to illegal immigrants. Critics say this will only shift the burden to hospital emergency rooms.

By Anna Gorman
April 27, 2009

Forced to slash their budgets, some California counties are eliminating nonemergency health services for illegal immigrants — a move that officials acknowledge could backfire by shifting the financial burden to emergency rooms.

Sacramento County voted in February to bar illegal immigrants from county clinics at an estimated savings of $2.4 million. Contra Costa County followed last month by cutting off undocumented adults, to save approximately $6 million. And Yolo County is voting on a similar change next month, which would reduce costs by $1.2 million.

"This is a way for us to get through what I think is a horrible year for healthcare in California," said William Walker, director of Contra Costa Health Services.

More:

Odd, isn't it? California counties that seem to have to work under the same rules as Clark County now seem to be doing the very thing that OUR paper reports WE cannot do.

Maybe they'll do another article, where first, they'll mention that counties around this country actually ARE doing that which they wrongly allege we cannot; and second, how it is that they could write something... anything, without due diligence and fact checking.

I mean, after all, it took me all of about 10 seconds to discover that, once again, the paper has been dead wrong... as they've been dead wrong on so many other issues.

A glimpse of the confirmed leftist bent of the Columbian.

The local paper is a completely-in-the-tank organization for the democrats in this state. The democrats obliged that support by slipping in a massive B&O tax cut for this, and other rags, in the midst of a $10 BILLION budget deficit.

Even though the people of this area spoke overwhelmingly in opposition to affirmative action, our paper is as unconcerned about that community value expressed at the polls as they are about seeking our permission to saddle us with a $4 BILLION unneeded and unwanted bridge replacement/loot rail project.

Todays installment has peeked out in the middle of a blh, blah, blah editorial about buying locally. Here's the offending paragraph:

Not unlike the way we should view hiring practices — when all other factors are equal, we should give consideration to a minority candidate — we should view buying practices: When all other factors are equal, we should buy locally.

NO ONE SHOULD EVER BE HIRED BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE (as hiring Obama because he's half black has proven) AND NO ONE SHOULD BE DENIED EMPLOYMENT BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE.

In this idiotic excuse for a paper, the Columbian cannot help but spew this liberal pap as an affirmation of what they are.

Such racism is not welcome here, and is not wanted here. That our local paper advocates a racist policy is yet another reason it should be closed... sooner, rather than later.

The scum of censorship at The Columbian

.
Our local newspaper is VERY big on freedom.

Freedom of the press... freedom of THEIR opinions... (even to the point of lies) and, of course, freedom to censor those they disagree with.

As mentioned below, Brancaccio's request for people to "start talkin!" because he's"listening." is limited only to those he wants to hear from. Those he doesn't want to hear? Well, he squelches their voice to silence.

I've noticed an intrepid poster over there, one of many daring to stand up to the fringe-left propaganda of our local fish wrapper. And that person's posts were almost completely obliterated this morning, regardless of content.

It's kind of like a local version of BDS. Hatred for dissenting viewpoints can be a terrible thing.

This paper expresses that hatred in a variety of ways. Fringe leftist nut job John Laird, editorial page editor and a propagandist in ways that would make Minister Goebbels blush is a case in point.

And now, Brancaccio has again joined the cast of those who would silence opposition to his paper's positions and agenda.

Gee. I bet he's proud of himself this morning. His actions and those of the Iranian secret police have a lot in common.
.

The utter absurdity of Brancaccio's latest because of his censorship: Press Talk: What our RAC does for us

.
It's fairly clear that Lou Brancaccio, the editor of the Columbian, wants us to THINK the paper is flexible and responsive.

He babbled on about their Reader's Advisory Council, a collection of bobble-headed, Amen Choir types that, to hear him tell it, seem to think, among other lies, that "Members felt our bridge coverage continues to be good. "

That any group could possibly believe that substituting opinion for news; lies for genuine polls, and failing to demand a vote for the entirety of this debacle simply confirms how utterly worthless this group is.

They are, in fact, a reflection of a student government, in, say, middle school. They have no real power; they go through the motions but rarely make any real change, and ultimately, they pretty much wind up becoming a reflection of the school administration.

Whoever these people are, their apparent discussions about paint jobs on this Titanic while they continue to support the nonsensical and indefensible positions of this paper... positions that have shoved them towards bankruptcy, serve to confirm how much they serve the role of window dressing... and how little impact or effect they could have, even if they wanted to have any impact, because it's clear that as change agents, they fail.

If this group has not roundly condemned John Laird's divisive and damaging columns; if this group has not repeatedly demanded fairness and accuracy in the Columbian's coverage of the I-5 Bridge/Loot Rail propaganda or that this paper demand a vote on the entirety of that debacle, then they are worthless; not representative of this community and serve no real purpose.

When the Columbian ran those fake polls suggesting that everything is hunky dory about loot rail, did they protest, or did they just sit there and nod like idiots?

The failure of this paper to implement any substantive changes... to go out and scam a B&O tax break when the rest of small business in this state is suffering FAR worse than they are... the failure to actually LISTEN and CHANGE shows that, essentially, you've put together a group that amounts to just another Amen Chorus... or that the paper ignores their positions, much like they ignore most of the positions stated under Brancaccio's columns.

You see, where this idea makes any money is where it's resulted in any changes. And as carefully as I read Brancaccio's column, I failed to note a single instance where this group or any other source of criticism has EVER made any real impact or difference to this paper. Brancaccio says they "WILL" see changes, but that infers that this group, which has been here for years, HASN'T YET MADE ANY DIFFERENCE.

Having the group? Swell. Ignoring them or any other opposition to what you're doing, particularly while you're in the midst of Chapter 11?

Moronic idiocy.

Kinda reminds me of the Supreme Soviet or the former Iraqi Congress under Saddam.

A lot of voting. But not a lot of opposing.

And then, as it turns out, if Lou doesn't "like" you, he censors your ability to comment on his columns.

The irony of his latest scam is the end of his latest bogosity:

If someone wants to comment, let them have their say. I try to keep my pie hole shut as much as I can.

I learn more when I'm listening than when I'm talking.

So start talkin'! I'm listening.

The absurdity of this is that as I write this, a grand total of FOUR posters have been allowed to comment.

FOUR. (There are 5 posters, but Lou is two.) Lou will probably point to the few comments as some sort of sign that everyone believes this paper is hunky dorry, and all's well. Other columns Lou have written have resulted in 50, 60 or even more posters telling him how idiotic his positions are.

This column, magically... mysteriously.... not one.

Now, for several months (since the website was redone) many posters have commented on the incompetence of the system because posting there is a hit or miss business.

There have been a number of complaints; posters post, but the post doesn't show up; posters post and the post disappears without comment (censored) and the like.

Brancaccio is fully aware of the idiocy of this system, but merely says his webmaster, Jeff Bunch, should be emailed about this stuff.

That's odd, but yet another sign of Brancaccio's incompetence: Bunch should be called in. He should be told to fix the problem, a problem that has gone on for 9 months now; and if HE can't fix it, Brancaccio should get someone who can.

The incompetent aspect of this is very telling: If this moron won't even fix an obvious SYSTEM problem with his web page, then how is it that anyone could possibly expect him to make any of the many, massive, substantive changes needed to make this paper even remotely competitive and fiscally viable?

Or, we have the second, likely, possibility: censorship.

When Brancaccio says "So start talkin'! I'm listening," what he REALLY means is "If you AGREE with me, I want to hear it. If you DON'T agree with me, then don't bother."

Either way, the RAC is a joke, a farce, and another in the series of offenses to this community.

Local News

Press Talk: What our RAC does for us

Friday, June 19 11:38 p.m.

BY LOU BRANCACCIO,
COLUMBIAN EDITOR

Lou Brancaccio

Summer's here!

And if you're lucky enough to have the summer off, have fun.

We typically give the summer off to our Readers Advisory Council. Of course, they have lives other than just hanging out on our council. But we do hope they have fun, as well.

Our council helps to guide us. In essence, they are another set of eyes on what we do. So throughout the year, we meet every other month to have them tell us how they think we're doing.

We don't turn down positive feedback from them, but we let them know that's not what we're looking for. We're looking for what we can do better so we can get better.

The group is made up of community members, and it's a pretty diverse group. They come from many walks of life.

The only requirement is that they read The Columbian and/or regularly look at our Web site.

We often take their advice, and they'll see changes in The Columbian. Still, a few members feel their views aren't executed. And that's because we can't execute every idea given to us. But certainly, we listen.

We listen to others as well, including those who comment on our Web site. I get quite the group, for example, that comments on this column online.

More, if you can stomach it.

More hypocrisy from our local newspaper: The Columbian - In our view, May 21: Discrimination Fades

.
So, those who don't want to vote on this referendum don't have to. But to insult and silence those who might not agree? The frequent bigotry of gay marriage supporters cannot be denied.

"What is needed now is a truce — temporary, perhaps, but better if extended — between the two opposing factions that are at war over the word "marriage."

What a bizarre perspective.

One of the major problems (of the many) with editorialists on this paper is an inability to be forthright.

This paper wants a "truce" because gay-marriage proponents have gained 99 percent of what they want, and this paper does not want the Prop 8 scenario to play out here, since they rabidly support gay marriage as much as they rabidly support the I-5 bridge replacement/loot rail debacle.

For those who demand gay marriage, just like for those who oppose it, there can be no such thing as a "truce..." Advocating that those opposed to this development remains silent, particularly when this "truce" would represent a victory for the side this paper represents and a crushing defeat for the side this paper loathes, is an underhanded way to demand that the anti-side just accept it.

Gay marriage has NEVER been voted into place by the people. As a result, this sorry effort just serves as yet another in the series of Columbian hypocrisies, where in they're all ABOUT the "will of the people" when it suits them or they want it, but are violently opposed to that same will if there is a risk where, as is typically the case, the people ignore the collective "wisdom" of this newspaper and go in another direction.

Once again, they PICK the issues where they fear our will... and make every effort to tell us that what WE want doesn't matter... when they don't happen to like what that might be.

Instead of saying "truce," this paper should have just come out and said something to the effect of "OK, we've got most of what we want, now... so it's time for those opposing this to shut the hell up, and end any effort to find out if the PEOPLE want this."

This is the rank hypocrisy of this publication that keeps me from buying it. This is the double-standard that is editorial policy by social engineers who think we're too stupid to think for ourselves.

Yup. These morons are ALL about getting our "will" when and WHERE they want it. But when we MIGHT oppose them?

They don't want to hear it where it counts... at the ballot box.

No "truce" (which this despicable waste of pulp uses as a euphemism for demanding acceptance of what THEY want) is in the offing. And one can bet that had this bill died in the legislature, you can damned well bet that these morons wouldn't be asking for a "truce" THEN, would they?





In our view, May 21: Discrimination Fades
Governor signs bill that expands rights of domestic partnerships; it’s time for a truce
Thursday, May 21 1:00 a.m.

When discrimination dies, it doesn't always go quickly or quietly. Sometimes, prejudice passes incrementally. Although a judicial ruling might serve the same purpose of kicking down a door, the legislative process often unfolds in stages.

One of those seemingly small but profound steps occurred Monday when Gov. Chris Gregoire signed a bill that grants domestic partners all of the rights and privileges enjoyed by married couples. The measure often has been called the "everything but marriage" bill. We'll get to the semantics debate a little later.

First, though, we'll point out that the bill is significant because it accords long-overdue equal rights to more than 5,300 domestic partnerships that have been registered in two years. Domestic partnerships of gay or lesbian couples were recognized by the Legislature in 2007. The law also allows unmarried, senior heterosexual couples to register as domestic partners. That's more than 10,000 people, representing all 39 counties, who have gained virtually all of the rights of married spouses. As Gregoire said at the bill signing, those rights "will make for stronger families, and when we have stronger families, we have a stronger Washington state."

Among the latest rights granted to domestic partnerships are those related to sick leave to care for a domestic partner, unemployment and disability insurance benefits, business succession rights, adoption and child custody. In recent years, rights were accorded relative to hospital visitation rights, beneficiaries, the right to refuse to testify against each other in court and public assistance provisions.

What is needed now is a truce — temporary, perhaps, but better if extended — between the two opposing factions that are at war over the word "marriage." The day might come when that word applies to gays and lesbians. But it's not here yet, and for now, the best strategy is for everyone to calm down, recognize marriages and domestic partnerships as they are recognized by law, and save the semantics war for another day.

More, if you can stomach this rank hypocrisy.

Thanks to the Columbian and Lou Brancaccio for strengthening opposition to the massive waste of money known as the I-5 Bridge replacement.

.
I've got to admit I was stunned and amazed. The Columbian has provided, literally, millions of dollars worth of in-kind advertising in the form of fake polls and "articles" in support of ramming this despicable project down our collective throats.

Yet, yesterday's article (with the obvious title, answered "yes") "$4 billion: Too much for this?" provided any sane, unbiased individual with all of the facts needed to condemn the idea of replacing the I-5 Bridge for the purpose of getting light rail into Vancouver.

What the article proved to me is that we don't need to replace the bridge. Period. And for that, I do have to thank Brancaccio for providing all the reasons needed to trash this project, even though it means we will have already wasted in excess of $140,000,000 in taxpayer money for the nonsensical stack of paper that failed to address what really needs to happen here... the development of a new bridge elsewhere.

Wagner on the current bridge:

Wagner said he has no doubts the existing crossings are safe, so much so that he drives and cycles across the spans without hesitation.

"If we don't have an earthquake of any magnitude, those two bridges are going to stay there until something hits them," he said.

First and foremost: Wagner tells us that the current bridge is SAFE. Get that? SAFE. That is a lack of SAFETY has no place in the replacement discussion.

He expresses concern about earthquakes... but then says nothing about the easiest, simplest, fastest, cheapest solution: retrofit.

And, of course, the type of earthquake he envisions could well flatten a new bridge as well, since the new bridge provides no guarantees, meaning that all our $4 billion... or $5 billion or $6 billion (These projects ALWAYS cost MUCH more than they say, and the cost overruns are ALWAYS huge...) only gets us a CHANCE at a better earthquake response. I'm not willing to spend BILLIONS on a chance... especially when the real reason is to bring light rail into Vancouver.

Second: Wagner tells us, “The existing spans, opened in 1917 and 1958, are structurally sound.”

That is, the bridge isn't falling down any time real soon. Further, there was nothing here about retro-fitting the current bridge to make it more able to withstand the earthquakes light rail fans use to hide the real reason for this bridge.

Third: Wagner tells us that even when constructed,

“…during a 3 hour stretch of southbound morning commute, traffic would crawl along at 10mph or slower across the replacement bridge through Hayden Island and portions of north Portland.”

So... we're going to spend an unknown number of BILLIONS of dollars for this?

Fourth: "We have a bridge that's functioning, maybe not as good as we would like, but it's there, it's safe, it's open, the freeway's moving,"

These are ALL reasons NOT to build this horrific waste of money.

What they are, are reasons to build an ADDITIONAL bridge SOME WHERE ELSE.

I am not concerned with the excuses or legalities of finding ways and reasons not to ask us if we want this proven-to-be-unneeded bridge.

Morally and ethically, if not any other way, the reason to get our permission FIRST is clear: this thing will suck as much as $100,000,000 per year out of our local economy and away from many families that simply will not be able to afford this massively unneeded project.

I get why this interview didn't take place with, say, a Pollard. No politician shilling this thing wants to eat their own words in the next election... and they will.

NOTHING provided in this interview even BEGINS to justify this massive expense. When Wagner says: "The two sides of the river have to come together on what's going to happen," he's lying. What he SHOULD say is that the 35 or 40 self-appointed people who want to ram this thing down our throats without a vote are agreeing on the execution... kind of like saying "we'll go with a hanging, instead of a firing squad."

When Wagner says: "And on the Clark County side, while there is growing support for light rail," he's lying AGAIN.

With each of the many stabbings, shootings, robberies and massive expenses of Max, if anything, support for light rail is completely down the toilet. And he offers nothing to back this assertion.
Unfortunately, reading these obvious falsities shows that Mr. Wagner is delusional. He's spun this as positively as he could because he personally stands to benefit from this project.

What he thinks about voting on this is completely irrelevant. As a bureaucrat, Wagner can feel free to ignore us as he marches forward doing everything he can to make this happen. But interviewing THIS guy?

Besides shooting this project in the foot... what more did that accomplish?

So, I do appreciate Mr. Brancaccio's article, although I'm mystified as to why he would print something that confirms the position of many bridge opponents while weakening the position of the loot rail scammers, including himself, that have, while simultaneously providing literally millions in in-kind coverage, including using fake polls, to support this massive, colossal, utter waste of taxpayer resources.

$4 billion: Too much for this?

Bridge official says discussions now under way to pare massive project

Saturday, May 16 3:03 p.m.

BY JEFFREY MIZE
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

There may not be enough money to build a bridge, freeway and transit project costing $4 billion or more, the top state transportation official in Southwest Washington told The Columbian.

Planners and engineers already are looking to slash costs on the multibillion-dollar Columbia River Crossing project, even while the community continues to haggle over bridge design and other sticking points, said Don Wagner, the Washington State Department of Transportation's regional administrator.

Possible cuts include delaying one or more of the interchange projects and slicing off a bridge lane in each direction, he said.

"Just like most of us in the real world, we dream about the car we want," Wagner said in a wide-ranging interview last week. "And at some point, stark reality says, 'Huh. I dream about it, but I don't have quite enough money to get it all today. Maybe I need to take off a few of the options off of this car.' And we are starting those conversations right now."

Wagner said he doesn't believe it's politically possible to replace the Interstate 5 Bridge without extending light rail into Vancouver and predicted the crossing project
would be on "life support" if voters shoot down a light-rail measure.

Despite those looming obstacles, there are benefits to replacing the I-5 Bridge, namely a 70 percent to 90 percent easing of congestion at one of the region's most notorious bottlenecks, Wagner said.

Money remains a constant consideration. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski has suggested the region might be looking to build too much. Last month, Kulongoski used a similar car analogy, saying that "some of us like to go into the Maserati dealership" but "there is always the day of reckoning."

Wagner, however, declined to call the crossing project a Maserati or even a Cadillac.

"What we have out there is a good solid Chevy, with a few extra options on it right now," he said.

Removing a bridge lane — a significant revision given the heated battle that occurred earlier this year to get both sides of the river to back a bridge with six lanes in each direction — would save roughly $150 million, Wagner said.

Between $200 million to $300 million could be trimmed from the budget if overhauling the state Highway 500 interchange was delayed, and another $400 million to $500 million could be saved if the Marine Drive interchange in Oregon wasn't rebuilt, he said.

"There would be a lot of unhappy campers, people saying, 'But I thought I would get this?'" Wagner said. "But it would be a safe structure; it would be a functional approach. It would include proper tie-ins of all the interchanges. They just wouldn't have as many lanes on them. You might have to wait in line to get onto the freeway."

Saving another $750 million by killing light rail isn't going to happen, Wagner said.

"The two sides of the river have to come together on what's going to happen," he said. "And on the Clark County side, while there is growing support for light rail, I am going to stop way short of saying that everybody likes light rail because I've certainly had enough people tell me that they don't like light rail.

"But our side of the river seems to be one that says, 'Look, we have to have highway improvements out there or we don't have a project.' On the Oregon side of the river, it's really pretty close to just the opposite. If they don't have light rail, they have no reason to be at the table. And this project can't be built without money coming from both states."

Public vote

Although there is no requirement for a public vote on either building a replacement bridge or imposing tolls that could cost commuters more than $1,000 a year, a vote will be needed on one or more aspects of light rail.

More:

This article is now the Columbian's dirty little secret:

.
My entry below was written early this morning as it was one of the stories on the Columbian web page.

And while this article hasn't been deleted... as I write this, there is no reference to it on the Columbian's web site that doesn't require a search.

Why?

It's an article from today (13 May) at 1:15 a.m. Why is it gone so that most people will not know it was ever there?

If I hadn't just happened on it early this morning, there';s a good chance I never would have known about this tax break passing.

Is this newspaper ashamed of themselves?

I doubt it. They just don't want the hassle.
.

Surprise! While the REST of the business community suffers, the Columbian (among others) scam a tax cut for newspapers.

Last February, word leaked out that the newspapers around here were making an effort to scam special consideration from the legislature, because, well, they're newspapers.

I challenged that assertion; the people of this state should not be tasked with being forced to support an outmoded, obsolete business model when we're not being given any choice in the matter.

Since democrats control the government of this state, and since newspapers in this state endorse in elections like the democrat party was paying them, however, I should have known that the dumb asses in the legislature would sell us out to give their buddies a tax cut... while ignoring the rest of us in small business as our revenues plunge and we ALL suffer.

I guess it pays to know people... right?

"Blethen (Of the Seattle Times) said he understands that lawmakers may wonder why newspapers should get tax relief when other businesses are hurting.

"The answer is the unique role of newspapers," he said. "The unique role that they play in society and the unique role that they play in our self-government and the unique role they play in binding and creating community."

That's a crock, of course. In the age of the internet, no one cares except the unions that
print the papers and the leftists using them as democrat party organs.

Well, the d's delivered the pay offs in spades... so, assuming our own waste of wood pulp hasn't managed to go out of business by November, next year, we can expect yet another round of leg-humping for the left.

After all, the democrats bought them, fair and square.



Wash. gov OKs tax cut for newspapers

Tuesday, May 12 7:45 p.m.

Gov. Chris Gregoire has approved a tax break for the state's troubled newspaper industry.

The new law gives newspaper printers and publishers a 40 percent cut in the state's main business tax. The discounted rate mirrors breaks given in years past to the Boeing Co. and the timber industry.

Newspapers across the country have resorted to layoffs and other cost-cutting moves to deal with a wounded business model and a recession-fueled drop in advertising.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer printed its final edition earlier this year and was converted to an Internet-only publication with a much-reduced staff.

Gee.... the Columbian is going to blow a gasket over this one: US Senate Backs Allowing Guns In National Parks

.
Last December, the Columbian blew a gasket over allowing guns into parks... as if they were some sort of zone where criminals (The odd murderer/robber aside) simply don't tread, thus there is no conceivable need for non-criminals to be allowed their Second Amendment rights inside the borders of this federal property.

"... Jeers: To the Bush administration for overturning a 25-year-old rule and allowing people with concealed-weapon permits to carry loaded guns into national parks and wildlife refuges. The Columbian opposed this effort back in May, and, more compellingly, the change was opposed earlier by the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees. Yet this week the Interior Department announced that the new provision will take effect in January if the state in question allows concealed weapons.

"According to The Seattle Times, the change will have limited impact in Washington state. Even though the state has a concealed weapons program, the Times reported, “many visitors won’t be able to pack a gun because Washington only recognizes concealed-weapons permits from a handful of states with requirements as stringent. That’s just eight states, the closest of which is Utah.”

"So, in addition to loaded guns being taken into previously pastoral parks and crowded campgrounds, there now is this huge new bureaucratic and enforcement nightmare. We hope the next administration reverts to the old rule."

The idiocy of such a position is obvious to someone not blinded by a bizarre, leftist, anti-gun agenda. And the verbiage?

"So, in addition to loaded guns being taken into previously pastoral parks and crowded campgrounds"

As if the view is somehow diminished by my decision to carry a concealed .45 Colt Combat Commander?

As I stated before: Idiots.

As I had written:

"In situations like these, I tend to think of those writing these editorials in terms of "what would THEY want if their life was on the line?"

If these writers were at risk in a classroom. If there was a Columbine-style shooting going on in a school where they happened to be; would they pissed that I was carrying a .357 magnum? Would they be so outraged when I pulled my weapon and ended the threat?

It's not hard to imagine these sanctimonious hypocrites in a Virginia Tech classroom, whimpering on the floor in little liberal, whinny puddles, howling with outrage that some student or faculty member; or even worse, say, a college-student military-veteran had actually come to class with a firearm and was ready to use it to SAVE THEIR INCREASINGLY WORTHLESS LIVES had actually done so.

And so now what happens?

A completely-controlled-by-democrats Senate now BACKS allowing guns in Federal Parks AND Wildlife Refuges.

How much that must suck for the local fishwrapper.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sponsored the measure, which he said would protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The amendment allows firearms in parks and wildlife refuges, as long as they are allowed by federal, state and local law.

"If an American citizen has a right to carry a firearm in their state, it makes no sense to treat them like a criminal if they pass through a national park while in possession of a firearm," Coburn said.

Twenty-seven Democrats joined 39 Republicans and one independent in supporting the amendment, which was attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies. The amendment was approved 67-29.

This is OVERWHELMING support for a position this newspaper abhors. I guess someone is clueless... and I've got to wonder who.

Will this newspaper re-evaluate their position to something that actualy relates to common sense?

Nahhhh.

Senate Backs Allowing Guns In National Parks
Senate Backs Amendment To Allow Loaded Guns In National Parks
WASHINGTON, May. 12, 2009
E-Mail Story
Print Story
Sphere

(AP) The Senate on Tuesday backed an amendment that would allow people to carry loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sponsored the measure, which he said would protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The amendment allows firearms in parks and wildlife refuges, as long as they are allowed by federal, state and local law.

.

"If an American citizen has a right to carry a firearm in their state, it makes no sense to treat them like a criminal if they pass through a national park while in possession of a firearm," Coburn said.

.

Twenty-seven Democrats joined 39 Republicans and one independent in supporting the amendment, which was attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies. The amendment was approved 67-29.

.

Groups supporting gun control, park rangers and retirees opposed the amendment, which they said went further than a Bush administration policy that briefly allowed loaded handguns in national parks and refuges.

.

A federal judge blocked the policy in March, two months after it went into effect in the waning days of President George W. Bush's term. The Obama administration has said it will not appeal the court ruling.

.

More:

Strike Two: Columbian seeks Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection

.
It is extremely difficult not to feel a sense of satisfaction that the Columbian's Day of Reckoning is fast approaching.

I hate to revel in the agony the workers there must feel. We are all in a recession... but to each and every one of us facing unemployment or some other bleak prospect like the workers at this newspaper, the recession has become a depression.

This day has literally been coming for years. The newspaper has acted with an unspeakable arrogance. They believe their view is the only view, and they set out to personally damage those who oppose their Utopian vision for our community.

Their bias is legendary. Their ability to overlook the faults of those they support while exaggerating the faults of those they despise is the stuff making Germans longing for the days of Das Reich.

Just yesterday, they did a total hatchet job on Sen. Don Benton. That, of course, is the follow up to the hatchet job John Laird did on Benton just a few days ago.

A sober, balanced perspective is what we seek. This newspaper, for example, has shown itself to be, admirably enough, a staunch opponent of the organized crime effort known as the Cowlitz Casino.

Yet, when our federal officials lack the courage to take a straight position on that issue, does this rag take them to task for their cowardice? Has it, or even will it, cost any of these officials the lackey-leftist endorsement of this newspaper?

Why would I even ask? They're democrats. And this newspaper ALWAYS endorses democrat incumbents... and in the last election, ONLY endorsed democrats for ANY open seat; from the Presidency down to the state representatives.

Every, single, time.

If you're to the right of Lenin, you WILL come in for abuse by the editorial page editor, one John Laird, who CLAIMS to be an "independent..." but he's a liar.

This guy never misses an opportunity to tattoo anyone remotely conservative. And that, of course, is his privilege.

But to expect any of us receiving his abuse to then want to pay money for the privilege is the height of absurdity.

Further, this newspaper ignores those who disagree, and they all-too-typically get the tunnel vision shared by most who congregate in downtown Vancouver proper. An example of that is their rabid support of wasting $4 BILLION to bring light rail into Vancouver, an effort that will suck $100,000,00 each and every year out of our economy... dollars these staunch supporters will NOT have to pay on a daily basis, while they support the despicable gerrymandering and forcing tens of thousands of us to pay their fees without ever having the courtesy to ask us first.

It is nothing less than fiscal rape.

It's bad enough that we have a recession doing the same thing... but for us to do it to ourselves?

In spite of these common-sense concerns, the fact is that even a cursory review of these issues shows no in-depth reporting of the impacts on the working poor of this unneeded and unwanted monstrosity. Yet, this very paper has REPEATEDLY gone so far as to print bogus polls to support their position, a series of lies that amounts to the total abrogation of anything remotely related to journalistic ethics or integrity.

This is not new news. Over ten years ago, a Columbian reporter expressed concerns over the integrity of the profession:

NEWSPAPERS TRY TO REGAIN CREDIBILITY WITH READERS
From: The Columbian
Date: July 28, 1997 Author: MIKE FEINSILBER

WASHINGTON -- Would you believe this? A lot of editors worry that you wuldn't -- that people are less willing these days to believe what they read in the nespapers. They fear that, for a variety of reasons, newspapers are suffering a crisis in credibility, losing the irreplaceable asset of believability. The press has a lot to worry about these days: stagnant circulation, too few young readers, the Internet's ...Almost 12 years later, and the message has not been received by this organization, even though it originated with one of its own reporters.

Hundreds of comments, thousands of observations... no changes where it matters.

Bankruptcy is the inevitable result. And as optimistic as Scott Campbell appears to be, the outcome becomes increasingly inevitable as he sticks with the failures installed as editor and editorial page editor.

They will not change.

And neither will the outcomes resulting from their efforts.

Next stop, liquidation.

And they cannot say they have not been repeatedly warned.





Columbian seeks Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Friday, May 1 4:14 p.m.

BY JULIA ANDERSON
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

The Columbian Publishing Co. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Friday in a move to resolve credit issues with Bank of America, primary lender on its multimillion dollar downtown building project completed last year.

Scott Campbell, publisher of the independent daily newspaper serving Clark County and Southwest Washington, said operations will continue unaffected by the filing and that his company will emerge from the situation in a few months "with renewed vigor and excitement for the future."

The Vancouver-based three-generation family-owned publishing company with 259 employees operates The Columbian newspaper, established in 1890 and the Web site www.columbian.com.

"Our overall audience remains strong - and we are still an excellent way for advertisers to get their messages to Clark County buyers," Campbell said. "Our new downtown office building, which could have been paid off with our modest profits in a normal or even a conventional bad economy, contributed to our problem. But our debt peaked at the same time the economy stumbled, and the scope of the downturn exceeded my worst fears," he said.

Friday's filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Tacoma showed The Columbian owes approximately $17 million to the bank and to a host of unsecured creditors. Those creditors include Mason Nolan, a former Columbian executive and Washougal resident, $179,263; North Pacific Paper Corp., Longview, $95,000; GE Captial Solutions, Torrance, Calif., $84,331 and Page Coop, a production supplier, $30,000 and Inland Empire Paper Co., Spokane, $27,893.

The Columbian's difficulties began almost as soon as it moved into a new six-story $40 million office building at 415 W. Sixth St. in downtown Vancouver in January 2008. A sour economy and costs related to the building - where newspaper, advertising, circulation and newsroom operations occupied four floors - triggered three rounds of company-wide layoffs last year that cut more than 100 positions from operations. In December, the newspaper was forced to relocate to its former address at 701 W. Eighth St., where it had operated since the 1950s.

Al Kennedy, an attorney with Tonkon Torp LLC in Portland and The Columbian's bankruptcy representative, said he was confident the newspaper would be able to restructure its debt and emerge from bankruptcy in six months or sooner.

"Columbian creditors need to know that the company has gone through some significant changes in operations and restored itself to a cash-flow positive basis. The business is here to stay. It will reorganize and continue to serve the community."

Campbell pointed to several companies that recently transitioned through a Chapter 11 filing including Macy's, Delta Air Lines, Toys R Us and Shilo Inns, based in Portland. Currently in Chapter 11 are The Shane Co jewelers and Pioneer Place in downtown Portland as well as several media companies including those that own the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times.

"The Columbian has seen a 40 percent decline in advertising dollars over the past several years, most of this decline in the past year," Campbell said. "In response, we have reorganized, particularly over the past year, and we are positioned to come through this bad economy."

He credited Columbian employees for picking up additional responsibilities and bringing a "new level of teamwork, creativity and focus to the operation" that has been essential to its success.

Meanwhile, space in two top floors in the new Sixth Street building remains mostly leased, but ground-floor retail space has not been occupied. Tenants have not been found for the empty four floors once occupied by the newspaper, nor has a buyer been found for the building. Campbell is using NAI Norris, Beggs & Simpson commercial brokers to market the building.

The Columbian advised customers - readers and advertisers - in October that a Chapter 11 filing might occur because of a deteriorating business environment. Foreclosure action in early April by Bank of America appeared to set the stage.

The debt reorganization is complicated because the publishing company as well as a separate entity called Downtown Vitality Partners, owned by the Campbell family, are both debtors to Bank of America.

DVP owes money on the purchase of the new building site and construction costs related to the building's shell, while the publishing company owes the bank for four floors of office space build-out.

The publishing company is seeking Chapter 11 protection, not DVP, Campbell pointed out. DVP, separately, owes Bank of America $27 million.

Doug Ness, Columbian chief financial officer, said Bank of America officials have been working well with the publishing company and with the plan put in front of them. "We don't see significant disagreement between us and the bank," Ness said. "It now appears useful to the bank to complete the negotiations and final settlement through the Chapter 11 process."

The Seattle Post Intelligencer: RIP 1863-2009

.
The future of the Columbian as foretold by the Seattle Post Intelligencer?

There are many reasons for the death of this newspaper... reasons that I cannot help but think our local newspaper SHOULD have noticed... but have chosen to ignore.

Newspapers are essentially an outmoded method of news delivery. They cannot be updated; they waste resources (trees), they're a huge cause of pollutants, and a logistical, time consuming and expensive item to deliver.

That leaves the electronic medium. The obvious problem with that strategy is simple: newspapers are already competing with well-established electronic media... and the now omnipresent internet.

How do you charge for providing something that is provided, essentially, for free?

You don't.

The Seattle PI has been reduced, essentially, to a blog. One can see the effectiveness of a blog because, after all, you're reading this one.

Now, I don't have a staff of writers or researchers available. Nor do I have the brand name awareness of the Seattle PI which has, after all, been around 3 times more than I have.

And this brings me to what I believe is the most critical reason why the PI failed... why the Seattle Times SEEMS to be failing, and why the Columbian is failing... and these are reasons in addition to issues of technology and finances... because not every newspaper is teetering on the brink.

That reason?

Bias.

Newspapers have had a place in our communities and our societies. They've played a role in developing this country as tools of democracy. They've served as tools to hold our leaders accountable. They've sometimes been positive forces for change... but more recently, negative forces for change.

The critical element for newspapers has been under attack for years. Our local newspaper had a reporter that was prescient in expressing his concerns, a quote I reproduce here:

NEWSPAPERS TRY TO REGAIN CREDIBILITY WITH READERS
From: The Columbian Date: July 28, 1997 Author: MIKE FEINSILBER

The Columbian 07-28-1997

WASHINGTON -- Would you believe this? A lot of editors worry that you wouldn't - that people are less willing these days to believe what they read in the newspapers. They fear that, for a variety of reasons, newspapers are suffering a crisis in credibility, losing the irreplaceable asset of believability. The press has a lot to worry about these days: stagnant circulation, too few young readers, the Internet's ...

I stopped paying to read the Columbian over 13 years ago. They attacked people they disagreed with unmercifully, using exaggeration, lies, bias and gallons of ink to attack individuals wise enough to understand that while this newspaper is a PART of our community, it does not RUN our community.

In Seattle, in what appears to be an increasingly leftist area that I am FROM (And, in the interests of full disclosure, point out that I used to be an employee of the PI a LOOOOONG time ago) those who aligned themselves with the left wing a-men choir that the PI had unabashedly and unashamedly become have now accessed all of those technologies and other sources for free that the PI charged for.

Why read the PI if you can get the latest leftist pap from Kos, or Horse's Ass... for what amounts to free?

Loyalty is a fine thing... until it starts reaching into your wallet.

The PI attacks Congressman Dave Reichert because he was smart enough to vote against the Empty Suits "Generational Indebtedness Act," telling us it was a "partisan" move. They failed to mention the 11 democrats who also voted against it. Were they "partisan? The PI lost their collective minds over the Gas Tax... and kept silent when we were screwed by WADOT who then cut the project list by 30%; an obvious fraud... in supporting the idea of a death tax... and on, and on... and on.

This represents something of the Chinese water torture approach to anyone to the right of Lenin.

If a newspaper beats the hell out of a large segment of the public they depend on to support them financially... what's the incentive to give them money if you're a part of that segment?

Well, based on the PI going under, it would appear their isn't one.

Here, we have a completely leftist newspaper, one that only endorsed democrats for any open seat in the last election, with an editorial page editor apparently PAID to beat the hell out of anyone to the right of Stalin. He uses insults, slams, lies and libel towards those he doesn't agree with... and that typically means those wise enough to avoid the leftist Kool Aid drinking he's so enamored of.

Why on earth would anyone not a fringe-left whack job buy the Columbian when this clown writes most of his columns as if the very idea of conservatism is a personal affront, and he needs to use his soap box to kick the hell out of those he disagrees with?

Now... that is not to say that *I* don't do precisely the same thing: I do, and I admit it. Unlike the two newspapers under discussion, how ever, I don't hide anything from anyone in the realm of news. And part of the reason why I spend time doing this is to provide SOME counterpoint to the lie-driven, agenda driven morons that spew their lies as if they were God's own truth.

But the MAIN difference between us is.... YOU DON'T PAY ME TO READ ME. For the thousands who've stopped by my blog, there is absolutely no charge. I refuse to have the google ad set here for a variety of reasons, so I don't even make any money off of THAT.

And those issues, of course, just go to politics.

The other main issue is one of agendas.

For several years now, the Columbian uses itself as a club to literally BEAT on those opposed to their agenda.

In the alternative, they go out of their way to ignore those opposed to their Orwellian vision of what they want us to become.

They have a track history of this type of arrogance and community damaging garbage: The current issue is their utterly absurd and nonsensical lies and exaggeration in support of their demand that we get light rail into Vancouver... and oh yeah, let's waste $4 BIOLLION to make that happen... all the while, typically writing as if tens of thousands of us are not completely opposed to their moronic idea... going so far as to elect an anti-light rail, anti-bridge replacement county commissioner this past November.

Some at the Columbian have come right out and attacked those who oppose their massive black hole of precious and increasingly fewer transportation dollars as they do their damnedest to force US to pay hundreds of dollars a year in tolls THEY will not have to pay.

There have been other episodes of Columbian idiocy besides their rampant lies about the bridge replacement; there support of gerrymandered elections for tax increases, their support of the city of Vancouver actually suing the voters into silence for downtown redevelopment? their support of the overwhelmingly rejected Port tax increase, the biggest increase in our history.

Their relative silence on the destruction our prtesident is causing this country (of course, they endorsed him... and once they endorse you, you can do no wrong) their failure to hold our congressman accountable for his earmarks and for voting to bury us under an additional trillion in debt... because HIS earmarks are RIGHTEOUS. There attacks... repeated attacks... against a couple trying to build a house in the Gorge... their idiotic demands that a state representative, now a re-elected county commissioner, "resign before the people do it for him," right before he won his first of four re-elections to the House and his subsiquent re-election as a county commissioner.

This goes directly to the point brought out by Feinsilber, above.

If the people believe you've abbrogated your responsibility by putting your politics or your agenda ahead ofwhat's right for the people... well, guess what?

You become the Seattle Post Intelligencer.

When a newspaper lies, distorts, exaggerates, attacks and loses sight of their primary responsibility of telling the unvarnishede truth, they become an increasing stain on democracy; and people like me become increasingly less likely to want to pay to be abused by tonedeaf idiots like many of those writing for this newspaper today.

There are lessons to be learned in the demise of the PI. As of now, the Columbian maintains their blinders... and continue to circle the drain.

Seattle P-I to publish last edition Tuesday

By DAN RICHMAN AND ANDREA JAMES
P-I REPORTERS

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer will roll off the presses for the last time Tuesday.

· Seattlepi.com to continue as local news, opinion site
· Letter to readers
· More about the new seattlepi.com

The Hearst Corp. announced Monday that it would stop publishing the 146-year old newspaper, Seattle's oldest business, and cease delivery to more than 117,600 weekday readers.

The company, however, said it would maintain seattlepi.com, making it the nation's largest daily newspaper to shift to an entirely digital news product.

"Tonight we'll be putting the paper to bed for the last time," Editor and Publisher Roger Oglesby told a silent newsroom Monday morning. "But the bloodline will live on."

In a news release, Hearst CEO Frank Bennack Jr. said, "Our goal now is to turn seattlepi.com into the leading news and information portal in the region."

The new operation will be more than a newspaper online, Steven Swartz, president of Hearst Newspapers, said. The so-called "community platform" will feature breaking news, columns from prominent Seattle residents, community databases, photo galleries, 150 citizen bloggers and links to other journalistic outlets.

On Jan. 9, New York-based Hearst put the Seattle P-I up for sale and said that the paper would stop printing if a buyer were not found within 60 days.

Despite community concern, no buyer emerged. The P-I lost $14 million last year.

"The thing that should not be missed here is that the P-I is not going away. The P-I is going online," Oglesby said in an interview. "Nobody is happy about the newspaper going away. That's a sad thing. The editorial voice is still going to be here."

About 20 news gatherers and Web producers will stay on with seattlepi.com, plus another 20 newly hired advertising sales staff. The publisher will stick around through the transition period, but does not expect to be part of the ongoing online operation.

"Our goal is to just let the quality of the Web site speak for itself," Swartz said in an interview. "We're very excited that the people who are staying with us will continue to evolve and experiment and innovate. The newspaper industry needs more innovation, needs more experimentation, and I think the new seattlepi.com is an innovative experiment and I think that the eyes of the country and this industry are going to be on what we do in Seattle."

More:

Baird sells us out on another earmark: The Columbian is positively giddy.

.
So, Brian Baird and this fishwrapper are just all bubbly about how they screwed the taxpayers with millions in earmarks.

The article makes me want to blow chunks... and here's a few well chosen words in response to the headline:

Baird is proud of ‘righteous earmark’

It's at LEAST as "righteous" as the millions he wasted on the "Boat that nobody wanted" in return for the $14,277 in campaign contributions Baird got from Guardian Marine in return for shilling out $17.65 million in THOSE earmarks.


$4.5 million | The earmark forced the Navy to buy a boat it didn't ask for and couldn't use. The company that built the boat, Guardian Marine International, got four earmarks totaling $17.65 million over several years.

It seems that Mr. Baird is simply incapable of grasping the enormity of his stupidity and the colossal waste of money he's so proud of.

"Bash" this earmark? I don't need Jindal or anyone else to "bash" this earmark when I can beat hell out of it all by myself.

Being in the pocket of the Downtown Vancouver Mafia is nothing to be proud of, Mr. Baird. Cementing your alliances with corruption isn't worthy of a press release, Mr. Baird. This slobbering coverage from this rag because they're all about jacking up their property values using taxpayer dollars isn't the thing that town hall meetings should focus on, Mr. Baird.

At the end of the day, you helped the empty suit to bury this economy in yet additional TRILLIONS of dollars of debt with your pork-laden garbage.

And that's nothing to be proud of, Mr. Baird.

See? It was easy. And Gov. Jindal didn't even need to break a sweat.

Your corruption and that of this newspaper are despicable, Mr. Baird.

Baird stands behind the earmarks. "We didn't just say, 'Oh, a company in our district wants an earmark — let's get it for them.' We looked at the mission, we looked at the history of the boat, and we looked at the alternatives out there," he said. "And I think that's pretty good work, frankly."

...And Rep. Baird still wants to get patrol boats like Guardian Marine's (That the Navy can't use and like the ones we ALREADY own that are tied up at a dock in Seattle's Portage Bay (except for yearly maintenance runs)) into Coast Guard hands. During a congressional hearing earlier this year, Baird asked an admiral if they could "chat" about "other alternatives that are available on the marketplace" to the Coast Guard's slower, 87-foot patrol boats.

"Might we do that?" Baird asked.

"Happy to do that, sir," the admiral replied.

$4.5 million for a boat that nobody wanted

The Navy decided it couldn't use this boat it was forced to buy. It was transferred to the University of Washington and later to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

THOMAS JAMES HURST / THE SEATTLE TIMES







Yeah. It's just coincidence that these people gave you $15,000 for your campaign... right, Brian?

No, dammit. I will condemn this earmark and the corruption it speaks to and the debt it assigns with all of my might.

Mr. Baird, you and this democrat lackey newspaper ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

Poster Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi does an amazing job of calling Baird's perfidy out. It's worthy of reproduction here, and I do it here in it's entirety:

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 3/14/09 9:45am - Report Abuse

It is called "triangulation". The apex of the triangle stands "above" the "left" or "right" ends of the base. Give a little to the "left" on their most important issues, they will hold their noses, vote for you, even after what you feed to the "right". Same thing on the "right": feed them a little on their pet issues, they will vote for you, often as the "lesser of evils" (when what we often have is the evil of lessers) while they hold their noses for what you give to the "left". All the while you appear not even "centrist", but at some imperial and ethereal level above it all. Of course what you "give" to the left, right and center is what is not really yours to "give" especially when there is nothing to give without robbing future generations of a chance your generation had: taxpayer dollars going where they are most needed and fiscal solvency. This concept was articulated by Dick Morris, a political operative, who worked mostly the Republican side but also worked for Dems like Clinton as well. But blaming these politicians can be like blaming a rabid dog for biting. These types, as Plato noted in his famous dictum "Those who seek power are invariably the least fit to hold and wield it", are typically narcissists, megalomaniacs, manipulators and many are outright psychopaths (see the book "Snakes in Suits When Psychopaths Go to Work" by Paul Babiak and Robert Hare) So it is up to us to stop trading away our liberty and tax dollars by supporting those who cynically pander to our baser instincts, selfishness, myopia and narrow single-issue or identity politics. We are also to blame. It is time to relentlessly out them, drag them out of the subterranean power cliques they operate through, and with hard-core and rigorous facts, the law, and contradictions in their own rhetoric expose them to the accountability they eschew. I have been up close with these types and they are nothing and cannot debate when pressed; that is why they hide and every two years come around counting on our short memories.

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 3/14/09 10:00am - Report Abuse

Here is an article in the Seattle Times called "The Favor Factory" with links to look up any Congressperson and see for any given year, how much in earmarks they got, to whom the earmarks went, and from whom they got campaign contributions. You will see an amazing correspondence between who gave and who got (sometimes literally within days of getting an earmark a campaign contribution given and vice versa). And every one of these types will look straight into the camera and say "But I assure you than in my mind there was no connection between the campaign contribution and the earmark--previous or subsequent--for the person who gave it." What else are they going to say? That does not settle it and it shows their own arrogance and contempt for the trust placed with them that that is all they have to say. Earmarks are about escaping transparency, scrutiny, accountability and the normal appropriations processes mandated by the U.S. Constitution. There is no way around it as President Obama himself noted. Now go check out Mr. Baird or whomever you wish. By the way, in the U.S. Constitution, only two crimes are explicitly mentioned as "High Crimes and Misdemeanors": Treason and Bribery.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008257178_favorfactory12.html

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 3/14/09 10:07am - Report Abuse

Mr. Baird's record on earmarks for 2008:
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/favorfactory/favorfactory_2008/lawmaker.php?id=H6WA03135

Baird, Brian N.

(House, D-WA) Totals
2008 Defense earmarks: $13,600,000
2003-08 Campaign contributions from earmark recipients: $68,800

Campaign contributions from earmark recipients
Recipient Amount
Gencorp, Inc. (HQ) $2,000
General Electric Co. (HQ) $11,000
Caterpillar, Inc. (HQ) $2,000
Battelle Memorial Institute, Inc. (HQ) $500
Oregon Iron Works, Inc. $17,500
Boeing Co. (HQ) $9,500
Accenture, Inc. (HQ) $500
Northrop Grumman Corp. (HQ) $1,000
Cassidy & Associates $500
SILVER EAGLE MANUFACTURING CO $2,000
Outdoor Research, Inc. $2,000
CASCADE DESIGNS, Inc. $4,000
Armor Systems International, Inc. $2,000
Honeywell International, Inc. (HQ) $5,000
Rice University $250
Nlight Photonics Corp. $6,550
Lockheed Martin Corp. (HQ) $2,000
Insitu, Inc. (HQ) $500

Has anyone ever heard of "conflict of interest" and recusing oneself from a vote in which one has even the appearance of one as a matter of honor?
____________________________________________________

Unlike our local waste of paper, the information provided above tells the REAL story about the despicable use of earmarks... earmarks the Empty Suit repeatedly campaigned AGAINST.

Email | Print |

Local News

Baird is proud of ‘righteous earmark’

Friday, March 13 | 11:23 p.m.

BY JEFFREY MIZE
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

Twist Architecture and Design Redevelopment of the former Boise Cascade site could include a series of high-rise buildings with hotels, condos, offices, hotels, shops and restaurants, along with parks and trails.

Congressman Brian Baird had finished the polite introductions and obligatory thanks.

Twist Architecture and Design Redevelopment of the former Boise Cascade site could include a series of high-rise buildings with hotels, condos, offices, hotels, shops and restaurants, along with parks and trails.

Then, the Vancouver Democrat moved closer to a clay model depicting the high-rise waterfront community that Gramor Development and its local investors want to build on the Columbia River waterfront.

"The infrastructure money leverages so much more," Baird told Gramor President Barry Cain late Friday morning as he examined the model. "They’re not building waterfront. They’re not building Columbia Rivers anywhere."

The waterfront project, proposed for a barren former industrial site west of the Interstate 5 Bridge, will benefit from two federal contributions: $2.5 million in stimulus money and another $3.09 million from the 2009 spending bill President Barack Obama signed this week.

"Everyone bashes us for earmarks," Baird said, standing where a cluster of office buildings, condominiums, apartments, stores and restaurants could pop up in the next 10 to 15 years. "This is a righteous earmark. You get a 30-to-1 return on our investment. Bash us for that earmark, Bobby Jindal."

Jindal, the Republican governor of Louisiana, delivered the GOP’s response to Obama’s Feb. 24 joint address before Congress and criticized federal officials for what he called an "eruption of spending in Washington, D.C."

As for the 30-to-1 figure, Baird used an estimate developed by the city of Vancouver of how much every public dollar — city, state and federal — spent on infrastructure will return in higher tax revenues.

Baird attended a Friday gathering with representatives of Gramor and its investors, along with city, Port of Vancouver and Clark County representatives, to show his support for the project and boost its community standing. A push pin in the clay model indicated where organizers had set a small tent, chairs and podium for the event.

More: