Has Cathy McMorris-Rogers got a screw loose?

.
Sound Politics reports:

Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers and the Constitution

Republican Congresswoman from Spokane, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, cosponsored a bill to make certain types of punishment and restraint illegal in schools.

She says in her piece on CNN.com, "It's difficult to believe, but there are no federal laws to prevent this from happening." I don't see how it is difficult to believe that there's no federal law regarding a purely state matter. While I have nothing against the aim of this legislation -- to restrict these particular practices -- it is nevertheless obvious that the law has no constitutional foundation, and further obvious that the citizens of each state -- being guaranteed a republican form of state government by the Constitution -- are fully capable of fixing the problem without federal legislation.

She never even attempts to say what justifies such an intrusion into the states. On her Facebook page -- I am on her friends list -- several people are congratulating her. They say the law is justified because "some states don't have these laws" and "states sometimes need a swift kick in the bumpus."

Last time I checked my Constitution, there was no clause that read, "the federal government can take over state functions if the states choose not to."

Even worse, many of these people are parrotting the Democratic deception that if you classify something as a "right," then that justifies federal intrusion. By that standard, almost any criminal statute can become a federal statute.

It's disheartening to see so many Republicans continuing -- in the face of the events of the last few years -- to jump on this bandwagon accelerating down the slippery slope toward tyranny.

I don't fault McMorris Rodgers' intentions, but it's obvious that good intentions are not good enough from a government. Following the Constitution and the important principles of limited government it is based on is the means by which our liberty is protected: it's what allows us to know we can speak freely, own property, purchase (or not purchase!) goods and services of our choice. McMorris Rodgers, through her misguided though well-intentioned sponsorship of this bill, is fighting against those liberty-protecting principles, and -- hopefully -- against the tide of change in her own party.

Cross-posted on .

Posted by pudge at December 10, 2009 07:02 AM | Email This

What seems even harder to believe is that she supports federal interference at ANY level over ANYTHING in our schools.

God save us from morons like this.
.

Last night, I expressd my disappointment in the ACORN-in-Chief's performance.

.
Last night's performance by the president, like all of his performances in every area since he took office, was abysmal.

There is no confidence within the military generally, and West Point particularly, in this empty suited clown's leadership or vision. They knew, like *I* knew, that the request for more troops SHOULD have been granted immediately. There was and is plenty of time to determine the missions needed, but now we have a 3 month delay of the inevitable, and more of us are going to die unnecessarily because of the clown calling the shots.

To illustrate the point, the fine folks over at Victoria Taft's blog have put together a few vids off of YouTube. These kind of focus on the cadet's reaction to one president... and their distinct NON-reaction to a clown who can't even PLAY president on TV.

Folks, there's a reason those kids were sitting there, looking like they were waiting to see a dentist who'd run out of anesthetic.

And by the way, BHo? Making those kids sit there for 4 hours to wait for YOUR dumb ass?

Bad idea.

Head on over and check it out.

Obama is a clueless idiot.

.
I just forced myself to watch the empty suited, Anti-American racist bigot's speech at West Point (what had the cadets done to be punished that way?) where he sounded and acted like a frightened, bumbling idiot selling out our military.

I was forced to blow chunks, but I'm not sure if that was result of the flu or his speech or a combination of both.

This idiot gets up there and tells the bad guys how long they need to be in hull-defilade until we leave and things can go back to what they were before we went over there in the first place.

He was a quivering mass of jello who has no more business being president then I do a brain surgeon.

Sickening.
.

In honor of the Moron-in-Chief's bowing prowess: Presidential Haiku.

.
President Obama
Cluelessness personified
Where is the sushi?

Puts the lie to his moronic excuses for bowing to the head guy in Saudi Arabia, though, doesn't it?
.

When your home town, leg-humping NBC affiliate says that Obama was an idiot about Ft. Hood...

.

When an NBC affiliate like the one in his own base of operations (Chicago) calls him a clueless idiot, then chances are, he's a clueless idiot.

We are unfortunately lead by a man dangerously out of touch with the country he leads. I am becoming increasingly frightened as to what other clues this moron is missing.

news politics
Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting
A bad week for Democrats compounded by an awful moment for Barack Obama.
By ROBERT A. GEORGE
Updated 2:56 PM CST, Fri, Nov 6, 2009

President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.

After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.

President Obama took way to long to get serious while speaking after the shootings at Army post at Fort Hood, Texas.

Source: Getty Images

But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?

Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur.

LOOK

Dramatic Photos: Fort Hood Shooting
LOOK
2009 in Memoriam

Indeed, an argument could be made that Obama should have canceled the Indian event, out of respect for people having been murdered at an Army post a few hours before. That would have prevented any sort of jarring emotional switch at the event.

Did the president's team not realize what sort of image they were presenting to the country at this moment? The disconnect between what Americans at home knew had been going on -- and the initial words coming out of their president's mouth was jolting, if not disturbing.

It must have been disappointing for many politically aware Democrats, still reeling from the election two days before. The New Jersey gubernatorial vote had already demonstrated that the president and his political team couldn't produce a winning outcome in a state very friendly to Democrats (and where the president won by 15 points one year ago). And now this? Congressional Democrats must wonder if a White House that has burdened them with a too-heavy policy agenda over the last year has a strong enough political operation to help push that agenda through.

If the president's communications apparatus can't inform -- and protect -- their boss during tense moments when the country needs to see a focused commander-in-chief and a compassionate head of state, it has disastrous consequences for that president's party and supporters.

All the president's men (and women) fell down on the job Thursday. And Democrats across the country have real reason to panic.

New York writer Robert A. George blogs at Ragged Thots. Follow him on Twitter.

Copyright NBC Local Media

First Published: Nov 6, 2009 5:16 AM CST

.

When a leftist outfit like Saturday Night Live slams the messiah, you know the wheels are coming off.

.
Unlike Victoria Taft, I actually thought this skit was pretty funny.

Victoria was more concerned about delivery than substance, while I was stunned that the Obama Leg Tingling Network would ever air anything dissing The One.

The TRUTH contained in this SNL skit speaks for itself. How long it remains available on YouTube before NBC yanks it is another question.

So take 4 minutes or so and join with me in concluding the the President is at the very top of my "People I'm Glad I Ain't" List.

The Barack Tea Party

Posted on September 23, 2009, 9:00 am, under Humor, Politics.

It’s an amusing thought but one without a real-life image, as you can be sure the carefully manipulated Drive-Bys would never be permitted the opportunity to snap what would be one of the most forwarded jpegs on teh Internets.

We are therefore left with the cartoon stylings of Ramirez, who seems to ask: what would happen if the Man-Child threw a tea party for madmen dictators and none of them showed up?
.
Manly's Republic get's the H/T
.

We have a president that is a blithering idiot: Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care

.
Sigh.

It is to our peril that the ACORN in Chief is such a complete moron.

This clown has screwed up our economy, lied about unemployment, sold out Eastern Europe, tried to get Veterans to pay for treatment of their wounds, and now, this scum bag wants to legalize the millions of illegal aliens in this country so a grateful public can waste billions on them by paying for their health care.

Man.... THAT'LL teach them. Why, if you enter this country illegally.... why.... why.... we'll FORCE you to pay in-state tuition in college AND we'll give you free health care... just like you would get if you were BORN here.

Hey, you know, if we legalize rape, then we won't have to lock up rapists! And what about burglary? Let's make THAT legal as well! AFter all, wheen we lock THOSE people up, we have to give them free health care, don't we?

My God, I am ashamed of my government.

They need to get ready to lock me up: I will NEVER buy mandatory health insurance, and I will NEVER pay ANY fine because I didn't.

.
I'm sitting here, basking in the afterglow of the empty-suited moron's lies about health care in this country, and his plans for that program.

Part of that program is FORCING people to get health care insurance. Those ignoring this edict risk a $3800 fine.

Bullshit.

I will go to prison before I pay a dime of such a fine. If, as a small businessman, I get health care insurance, that is MY decision... not his.

What.... unbelievable... scumery.

Van Jones: another racist bigot in the White House - update: This whacko is a Truther?

.
Talk about utter, political incompetence. The hiring of this scumwad to ANY position within our government gene3rally, and the White House in particular, just goes to confirm what an incompetent idiot we have elected as president.

That this scumbag has signed on to the truther swill, wherein Jones believes 9/11 to be an inside job begs the question: how did a communist nutjob like this idiot get hired for ANYTHING by ANYONE?

God Almighty, how can we POSSIBLY have such an incompetent running this country?
.

Journalism: a thing of the past in the Columbian.

.
Even though circling the drain for months now, the idiots running our local disgrace of a newspaper simply don't get it... and, for whatever the reason, continue to chose NOT to get it.

Take this morning's leftist screed by their resident leftist fringer, John Laird.

Laird, no more a journalist then I am a brain surgeon, puked his usual moveon.org/DNC-writing-like-the-White House-pays-him swill this morning, by lying/exaggerating/fantasizing about the moronic empty suit's efforts to socialize health care.

It's bad enough this rag is so in the pocket of the leftists that democrats are all they endorsed for any open seat where they made an endorsement (And a grateful group of leftists in the legislature responded by giving them a massive tax break in the midst of our $10 billion deficit) but when this assclown writes like he's working for that moron of a Press Secretary instead of a local newspaper, that's simply over the edge.

This waste of skin actually wrote the following:

Myth: We can't trust government to run the health care system.

Reality: We already do, with health care for veterans and senior citizens, who often receive better care than the rest of us receive from the private sector. Ronald Reagan's classic condemnation of government notwithstanding, government is not the problem. That's because government, actually, is us.

So much idiocy in one short blurb... it's hard to know where to start.

Part of the problem here is that we do NOT trust government, PERIOD. We don't trust it to run health care. We don't trust it to run our economy. We don't trust it to be fair, or equitable, or responsive, or timely, or any number of other things we don't trust government for.

So, when this moron writes "We already do," he's a liar. But to a leftist like Laird, facts are among those "Inconvenient Truths" that he refuses to allow to interfere with reality.

That Government PROVIDES a service, in this case, VA health care and Medicare, by no means shows that we "trust" them.

While my own personal VA care has been good, every time I go there I'm living the lie. NOT that I'm a Veteran (I am). But that I have to pay for that which was promised to me for free as long as I lived in return for serving this country so many years ago.

For many others, VA care has been reduced to a punch line. And this imbecile has done nothing to support his cause by pointing to a system many revile, rightly or wrongly, as some sort of justification for turning the entire system into a mirror image... and expecting THIS government to do it cheaper, faster, better, more efficiently and with greater bang for the trillions of bucks this blithering idiot ignores in costs to us that his Utopia will directly result in.

It's bad enough this idiot tells us the lie "That's because government, actually, is us," when he wants to ram a multi-billion dollar waste of money down our throats (without any say by the government he wrongly says we are) while spewing such bogus platitudes. But THIS heap of garbage?

I am averaging around a $1000 or so a year in medical expenses for that which I paid for with my service.... and that for which I have to provide at least some level of money now for drugs that cost more than twice what they charge at WalMart or Fred Meyers.

And I should TRUST a government that lied about that to get me to enlist?

That I should TRUST a government that lied about the unemployment ceiling to get the Porkulous passed?

That I should TRUST a government that has buried us under generations of debt for unimaginable corruption and pay offs?

Good God but this man is a waste of skin. An utterly clueless leftist shill who disgraces his profession and our community by his mere presence.

To shatter the illusion this moron is trying to scam us with on health care, I only have to ask one question:

If the empty suit is ever successful in socializing our health care... does that mean HE will have the SAME health care as the rest of us?

These follow up questions cut to the heart of the matter: Will he lose his own personal doctor? Will he not be entitled to any of the special treatment he and his family now receives?

You know damned well what the answer to that question is. Thus the rank, reeking hypocrisy of a scumbag leftist columnist and the major reason I won't spend a dime on this rag as long as I live.

Laird, you make me sick. You're a blight on our community with your leftist propaganda and lies. Please, PLEASE go back to wherever it is you came from, and do it soon.
.

Stimulus Fail: Just so you'd know where the Moron-in-Chief is wasting our money THIS week:

Just so you'd know where the Moron-in-Chief is wasting our money THIS week:


Yes... this is OUR government.

Yes... this is $1,192,200 for 2 pounds of sliced frozen ham.

Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Doesn't it do the same for you?

HT to Doug Ross et al

The scum of the left practicing the politics of destruction.

.
The empty suit living in the White House is attempting to pawn off a racist bigot with limited legal skills as our next United States Supreme Court Justice.

At the end of the day, I wouldn't let either the clueless idiot running the show OR his token hispanic run an elevator for me... but that is for another post. This post is to point out yet another in the series of leftist political character assassinations against someone they disagree with (Joe the Plumber immediately comes to mind) here, one of the lead plaintiffs that Sotomayer practiced her peculiar brand of bigotry against.

Her bigotry precludes her from holding any position of authority anywhere, let along a supreme court justice position; and in this case, this firefighter, a victim of institutional fear and racism who's case was tossed like last week's newspaper by this "latina women are wiser than white men" bigot will be testifying at Sotomayer's "go-thru-the-motions" confirmation.

The article speaks for itself, as does this, yet another in the long list of scummy efforts by the left to silence opposition speak for itself.

2010 can't get here soon enough for me.



Posted on Friday, July 10, 2009

Sotomayor backers urge reporters to probe New Haven firefighter

Register Log in logout member center
Follow us on TwitterFollow us on Facebook
More on this Story

Story Lawyers group gives Sotomayor its highest approval rating
Comments (235)
Recommend (70)

By Michael Doyle and David Lightman McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Supporters of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor are quietly targeting the Connecticut firefighter who's at the center of Sotomayor's most controversial ruling.
On the eve of Sotomayor's Senate confirmation hearing, her advocates have been urging journalists to scrutinize what one called the "troubled and litigious work history" of firefighter Frank Ricci.

This is opposition research: a constant shadow on Capitol Hill.

"The whole business of getting Supreme Court nominees through the process has become bloodsport," said Gary Rose, a government and politics professor at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Conn.

On Friday, citing in an e-mail "Frank Ricci's troubled and litigious work history," the liberal advocacy group People for the American Way drew reporters' attention to Ricci's past. Other advocates for Sotomayor have discreetly urged journalists to pursue similar story lines.

Specifically, the advocates have zeroed in on an earlier 1995 lawsuit Ricci filed claiming the city of New Haven discriminated against him because he's dyslexic. The advocates cite other Hartford Courant stories from the same era recounting how Ricci was fired by a fire department in Middletown, Conn., allegedly, Ricci said at the time, because of safety concerns he raised.
The Middletown-area fire department was subsequently fined for safety violations, but the Connecticut Department of Labor dismissed Ricci's retaliation complaint.

No People for the American Way officials could be reached Friday to speak on the record about the press campaign.

"To go after so sympathetic a plaintiff as Frank Ricci . . . is a new low in the politics of personal destruction," said Roger Pilon, the director of the libertarian Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies. "If they were smart, they'd keep a low profile."

Ricci, though, has his own advocates, including conservative commentators such as CNN's Lou Dobbs and Fox's Sean Hannity.

Nor is he the only Supreme Court confirmation witness to receive sharp elbows. In 1991, for instance, then-Senate Minority Leader Alan Simpson of Wyoming warned that witness Anita Hill would be "injured and destroyed and belittled and hounded and harassed" if she testified against nominee Clarence Thomas. Hill was preparing to testify that she'd been sexually harassed by Thomas.


More:

Leavitt has a priority problem: NO crime should be "tolerated."

.
Sometimes, you gotta love politicians and their political opportunism.

Tim Leavitt, who I've jotted some thoughts down about on this blog before, hasn't let this "me too" opportunity get by him, and now he's directly tying his legislative agenda to his campaign.

On his website, he tells us: Hate and Bias Crimes Must NOT Be Tolerated

But other crimes should be?

This leftist pap is just that. Further, Leavitt's "draft resolution" accomplishes ABSOLUTELY NOTHING except to provide this guy with an opportunity to politically grand stand.

"Hate" crimes are a sickening concept that somehow makes an assault based on skin color or gender or sexual proclivity or any of the many, many other segments we've been divided into, more worthy of greater punishment than just your average, run of the mill crime.

That is, if someone is shot because they are _____________ (fill in the blank) THAT crime is somehow more worthy of concern then someone getting shot, say, at random... or during a robbery.

And that, my friends, is pure, grade A, moronic bullshit. Fringe leftists love this kind of thing, but then, they are easily led tools anyway, or they wouldn't be fringe leftists.

There is no excuse for this kind of crap, and Leavitt ought to be at least as ashamed of himself over this as he is his rabid support for a replacement bridge that we don't need; loot rail that we neither need or want, and his continuing, ongoing failure to demand a vote for that entire project.
.

Obama fiddles while Iran... and her people... burn.

Thanks to the Hot Air Blog: Neda identified? Update: New details

posted at 7:18 pm on June 21, 2009 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend | Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Word on the street via one Iranian tweeter is that her name was Neda Agha Soltan. That’s also the name circulating on a few websites and now being attributed to her in a hastily arranged Wikipedia bio. The rumor — and it’s all rumor until some newspaper tracks down her family — is that she was 27 years old and a philosophy student. I hope to god this isn’t really her photo because the thought of her being so beautiful and dignified makes the murder somehow that much more obscene.

Two clips below. The second you’ve already seen; the first is a new one circulating today, shot sometime before the moment of truth. The blue shirt on the gray-haired man in the foreground should look familiar. That’s almost certainly her standing to his left, watching the protest, bothering no one. Read this Time piece on Neda by Iran expert Robin Wright afterwards, as it touches on the huge significance of martyrdom not only in Shiite theology but in Iran’s political tradition. If there’s any justice, there’ll be videos like this of Khamenei and Ahmadinejad someday soon.

Update: A Farsi speaker tells HuffPo that this blogger is claiming that Neda was at the protest with her professor and several other students and that the fatal shot was fired by a Basij driving by on a motorcycle. No rhyme or reason; I wonder if he even aimed. The burial, reportedly, was today — and her memorial service was ordered canceled by the regime.

H/T to Uncle Jimbo at BLACKFIVE

More despicable propaganda and censorship from the Columbian on the I-5 Bridge Waste/Loot rail project.

There are lies, liars and the Columbian.

Bridge supporters (Not to be confused with athletic supporters, although they serve the same function) use this carbuncle of a newspaper as an out and out propaganda sheet where no lie is too bald-faced, no exaggeration too far out of the realm of reality for the scum writing in this rag.

Yesterday's vomitous from John Laird, fringe leftest chiefly known for using his bully pulpit to attack anyone to the right of Lenin, was all about the unheard of straw man of comparing the I-5 Bridge Waste/Loot Rail project with the replaced bridge in Minneapolis.

When it comes to the I-5 Bridge Waste/Loot Rail project, the ONLY person I've ever heard bring that situation up has been John Laird. The Columbian brought it up when it happened in a moronic and now aborted attempt to get people to equate the I-5 Bridge with the collapsed Minneapolis bridge... garbage I anticipated in advance.

The main irony of Laird's Lies yesterday was his toilet's title:

John Laird, June 14: I-5 bridge myths cloud controversy

Unintentionally, to be sure. But the myths of the bridge supporters are almost too numerous to count, but among the myths furthered by Laird and his ilk include the idea that our community will benefit in ANY way. They insist on telling us that this massive waste of money will have either 12 lanes or 10, when in fact, it will only have 6 through lanes, precisely like the bridge we have now. They insist on a nonsensical figure for construction when we'll be lucky to get all of this done for twice that much. They have done practically nothing on the massive, decades-long financial impacts of sucking tens of millions of dollars out of our local economy to pay for this transportation sewer that will suck up transportation dollars badly needed elsewhere, particularly for a 3rd and 4th bridge.

Yesterday's despicable effort by Laird is all-too-typical of this newspaper's propagandists.

As for these protesters, I don't give a rip if they're Martians. If they oppose this massive, steaming pile of waste, then I support their efforts.

If this newspaper were remotely concerned about "myths," Laird and this paper would never report another word about this bridge, since most of what they write is grossly exaggerated or a downright lie. Of course, what "needs" to happen here is nothing.

Secondary to that, what "needs" to happen here is a vote of the people. I have never mentioned the Minneapolis bridge as a reason, a vision, or an excuse to oppose this unnecessary, massive and unconscionable waste of billions of dollars much better spent elsewhere. Nor has anyone else I've discussed this with. NOTHING needs to happen here.

When the chief bureaucratic bridge shill, Don Wagner, comes out and says: "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. “The existing spans, opened in 1917 and 1958, are structurally sound.” What he's REALLY saying is there is no need for this despicable waste of money... and that's the truth regardless of what happened in Minneapolis. But then, truth and John Laird rarely take up residence in the same space... at the same time.

It is this despicable brand of one sided, biased garbage journalism that is helping to cause this rag, which does a disservice to this community with each and every edition, that certainly provides cause for tens of thousands of us to avoid buying this crap like the plague.

Additionally, I'm told, that selective commenter's have been banned from refuting Laird's garbage in the comment section under his columns on line. That speaks to the cowardice of both his positions, and those of this rank imitation of a newspaper.

And that's a shame. But when your newspaper is built on lies, particularly in an economy like this one, who could possibly want to buy it?

Hitler weighs in on the Pelosi debacle.

.
We're stuck with such a titanic moron for Speaker, that even Adolf had to weigh in.



HT to This Ain't Hell

More stupidy from Leavitt: He just voted to waste ANOTHER $100,000 of our money on this massive waste of a bridge replacement.

.
It is unfortunate that rabid bridge/light rail supporters in government are truly such lying scum.

Yesterday's Leavitt lie?

"This project is going to move forward," said Vancouver City Councilman Tim Leavitt, who backed the new spending. "We have to represent as best we can the interest of transit riders in Clark County."

Here's a clue to the utterly clueless Leavitt:

What you have to "represent as best you can" is the "interest of" EVERYONE in Clark County... not just those that ride a bus, you idiot!

What about the 65,000 plus of us that have to pay the toll just to go to work EVERY DAY that YOU won't have to pay?

What about the interests of those of us getting screwed by YOUR plan to rip off hundreds of dollars from me and my family for a bridge that YOU won't have to pay to cross every day to go to work?

What about OUR interests, moron?

Or is it like Steve Stuart... where you don't give a damn about anything, including the voters?

When are you going to grow some balls and DEMAND that we get the right to vote on this monstrosity, you fricking COWARD?

"Mayor of America's Vancouver?" You shouldn't be class president of the 7th grade.




After bus-fare hike, C-Tran OKs up to $100,000 to help plan bridge

Thursday, March 19 | 11:32 a.m.

BY MICHAEL ANDERSEN
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

Two weeks after hiking bus fares in order to break even, C-Tran agreed to spend up to $100,000 this year to help plan the new Interstate 5 bridge.

The money will come out of a $136,000 windfall from the ads that C-Tran has on its buses.

Two county commissioners and a city councilwoman opposed the new spending, which passed the local bus agency's board Tuesday night, 4-3.

"We just raised the rates," said Clark County Commissioner Tom Mielke, who voted against the idea. "I thought we didn't have any extra money."

On March 1, basic bus fares rose 20 cents, about 15 percent. Monthly C-Van passes for disabled people doubled to $46, and discounted monthly passes for seniors, students and disabled people rose from $20 to $30.

The fare hikes will raise an estimated $422,000 annually.

The up to $100,000 in new spending approved Tuesday would let C-Tran review legal documents for the bridge and advocate for features of the project that Clark County citizens might want, such as walled-off light-rail stations, C-Tran spokesman Scott Patterson said.

"This project is going to move forward," said Vancouver City Councilman Tim Leavitt, who backed the new spending. "We have to represent as best we can the interest of transit riders in Clark County."

If C-Tran doesn't spend the money, Commissioner Steve Stuart said, Clark County residents would be shut out of key decisions.

"You're either at the table, or you're on the menu," Stuart said.

Rail: bad for C-Tran?
Of the seven C-Tran board members present Tuesday, Stuart, Leavitt, Battle Ground City Councilman Bill Ganley, and La Center Mayor Jim Irish voted to spend money on bridge planning.

Mielke, Clark County Commissioner Marc Boldt and Vancouver City Councilwoman Jeanne Stewart voted not to.

Stewart noted that in 2005, when voters approved a 2005 sales tax increase to support C-Tran, the issue's backers promised the money wouldn't be used to finance light rail.

Mielke added that though many C-Tran riders might support light rail, light rail would be bad for C-Tran itself.

"We're not there to represent the riders of C-Tran, we're there to represent C-Tran," Mielke said. "The only thing it'll do if we put light rail in there is that it'll take money away from C-Tran and riders away from C-Tran."

More:

The Pravda Columbian and John Laird: more lies to support an agenda.

.
For quite some time, now, we've been... well, "entertained" might be the word... if one finds train wrecks "entertaining"; by the hate speech spewed out in John Laird's columns on a regular basis.

It's bad enough that an unabashed ultra-leftist is given free-reign over a newspaper column without any effort made by that newspaper to provide balance. But when he spews lies in his efforts to superimpose his morality while simultaneously belittling those wise enough to disagree with his garbage, that does this community a disservice.

The Pravda Columbian is facing serious financial challenges... challenges that, hopefully, will bury it. And part of the reason for those challenges is the public idiocy of Mr. Laird.

In his most recent spew, Mr. Laird regailed us with the following lie:

"Meddling with adults — Those who are obsessed with controlling others' private lives are always on the prowl in the Legislature. This year they're pushing two bills that would outlaw sex between teachers and students under the age of 20 (according to House Bill 1385) or 21 (according to Senate Bill 5232). Sounds like a good idea, but this well-meaning effort is a waste of time for two reasons.

First, sex with a minor (under 18) already is against the law. Second, state and local school district policies strictly forbid improper relations between a teacher and any student of any age. It's a sure-fire way for a teacher to, well, get fired. These are all the laws, rules and protections that are needed."

Unfortunately for our community, Laird has once again failed to check his facts before trowing out his journalistic swill.

The fact of the matter is that the age of consent in THIS state is SIXTEEN... thus, he was flat-out wrong when he babbled "First, sex with a minor (under 18) already is against the law."

The LAW says this:

9A.44.076 <<>>9A.44.083

RCW 9A.44.079 Rape of a child in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape of a child in the third degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is at least fourteen years old but less than sixteen years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least forty-eight months older than the victim.

(2) Rape of a child in the third degree is a class C felony.

[1988 c 145 § 4.]

Notes:

Effective date -- Savings -- Application -- 1988 c 145: See notes following RCW 9A.44.010.

So, once again, this moron with a keyboard lies to support an agenda. But given the Pravda Columbian's lies in support of the bridge replacement, perhaps "lying" is just a an extension of the company policy.

Clearly, when it comes to "myths," no one knows more about them than Laird.


John Laird Feb. 15: E-mail, the Morality Police, and myths

Sunday, February 15 1:00 a.m.

BY JOHN LAIRD,
COLUMBIAN EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR

John Laird

Notes, quotes and anecdotes while wondering when we'll start seeing the "Honk if you were an Obama Cabinet nominee" bumper stickers:

Three toxic words — Inquiring minds want to know how many jobs and even marriages have been lost because of three little words: "Reply to all."

Maybe it's happened to you. A few years ago, several dozen editorial page editors around the country received an innocuous e-mail from one of our colleagues. A few minutes later, he received a reply from a friend, who also noted that a job applicant whom both were considering was not worth hiring. Mistakenly, the sender had hit "reply to all." The whole group of us — including the job applicant's boss at the time, who didn't know the guy was job hunting — looked on, horrified. Alas, a follow-up, "Please disregard the last e-mail, incorrectly sent to the wrong people" could not undo the damage.

More:

More "brilliance" from the Speaker of the House, Democrat Nancy Pelosi.

.
There's a reason that Congressional approval ratings frequently made President Bush wildly popular in comparison, and her name is Nancy Pelosi.