Monday, July 23, 2012

Pike stakes out her social issues positions. CCP endorses.

I've been hammering away at Liz Pike because of a variety of things... including a misunderstanding on the part of the paper vis the issue of Pike's positions on gay marriage and the Life issue.

Liz has made her poisitions clear on that, and I offer them up here for you:
Faith Based Issues

“Growing up in a conservative and very religious Catholic family as one of 13 children was a real blessing for me. Because of my faith, I believe marriage is a sacrament and reserved as a holy union between one man and one woman. I have also been pro life at all times in my adult life. When I was 13 years old, my mother took me out of school for the day to march on the steps of the capitol in Olympia to protest Roe vs. Wade. That event had a profound effect on my political life.”
My concerns were primarilly that the Columbian had reported that Liz had "declined" to state her positions on these issues.
And now, we get to the question of gay marriage.

On the subject of gay marriage, Shehorn agrees with recent legislation allowing same-sex couples to marry. Pike declined to disclose her personal view on the subject.
"Pike declined to disclose her personal views on the subject."
Obviously, she's clarified that situation and here they are.

This is the last piece of the puzzle for me and under the broad heading of FWIW, I now endorse Liz Pike for State Representative.

Predictions for the primary.

Bold face likely General election winners.

Senate: Cantwell and Baumgartner

Congress: Herrera and Haugen

Governor:  Two democrats: The Bobbsey Twins... unfortunately Hadian won't have the cash.

AG: Two democrats, Dunn and Ferguson.

Lt. Governor:  Two unfortunates: Owen and Finkbiener

Treasurer: McIntyre and whoever the write-in is.

Auditor: Miloscia and Watkins

OSPI: Dorn and no clue.

Public Lands: Goldsmith

Insurance Commissioner:  Kreidler and Reilly.

Secretary of State:  Wyman and the democrat.

17th all the GOP.

18th all the GOP

49th all the democrats.

Commissioners:  Mielke and Tanner  (Too close to call)

Battan and Madore.  (If Madore makes it into the general, he wins.  If Boldt, then Boldt wins.)

Judges Wulle and Woolard.

Could have been better... and even with a remarkably weak local GOP candidate slate, save for the incumbents, it still appears that at the end, Clark County will be represented by 12 Republicans and 3 democrats in the legislature.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

The WSRP fights back against the Paulbot insurgency.

Regular readers are well aware that the local GOP is under assault by Paulistinian insurgents.

The cult of Paulbots are well known for their psychotic politics.  Their enablers, who claim not to be Paulistinians in many instances are, nevertheless, being fooled into doing the Paulbot's bidding through messaging and the use of patriotic words.

Paul's positions are not what the GOP stands for or wants; Paul has never won a primary in either his independent runs or his fake GOP efforts.

While he does have a few decent ideas, those are overshadowed by his suicidal pro-Iranian nukes foreign policy and his penchant for drug legalization... not to mention his support of gender-based abortion.

The cultists slavishly following him, of course, don't care.  Few can, for example, tell you the difference between the Straights of Hormuz and the Straights of Juan de Fuca.

Those enabling the Paulbots are unaware of this suicidal view of the world or his gender-based abortion support.  They, instead, ascribe to his followers flowery phrases concerning "liberty" while they lie, directly, about getting "conservatives" in charge of the party again.

The result is a concerted, organized and planned effort to take over the GOP... run by Paulbots.

Of course, those involved disavow any knowledge of the fact that the Paulbots are behind this; they don't mention him and go so far as to try and convince the casual observer that this effort was "spontaneous," here locally in part because of the debacle of Brandon Vick's abysmal convention performance.

Except... we would have seen this exact same thing if the convention had gone off like clockwork and the Paulbots had gotten everything they wanted... much like, come to think of it, they DID get everything they wanted here locally.

Yeah.  It's "spontaneous."  It's sheer coincidence that it's happening here... AND Spokane... AND Seattle.

Finally recognizing the threat to sanity, the WSRP is doing something about it; something the Paulbots desperately tried to stop... and failed to stop.

They're fighting back.

Washington GOP creates controvery[sic] over mailer endorsement
Candidate for Precinct Committee Officer Joel Bowen, from the 45th district of Washington State, was surprised to learn that the Washington Republican Party was sending out mailers asking voters to choose his opponent Ed Brown, for the position.
"I have been doing this for over 20 years and I have never seen something so blatant before! From what I understand the state or county GOP never should be endorsing anyone during the primary," said Bowen.
Bowen believes the Washington Republican party is doing all they can to exclude him because he is a Ron Paul supporter. This would not be the first time the Washington Republican Party attempted to exclude Ron Paul supporters from engaging in the democratic process. Video of King County Republican Party Chairwoman Lori Sotelo, attempting to end the 37th districts caucus because of an overwhelming Ron Paul delegate majority, went viral on Youtube and was even picked up by Fox 19 News in Cincinnati.
According to some, this is not an isolated incident but a growing trend to push away the growing liberty movement within the Republican Party.
"I went door knocking the other day for a PCO in the precinct next to me. A guy said that the King County Republican Party had distributed flyer's for a candidate there too. Somebody who was opposing the liberty option," said Emilie Rensink, a political activist out of Seattle.
Many feel that the GOP's endorsement is unethical as well as a conflict of interest. At this time the GOP has yet to make a response over the controversy but Bowen intends to keep on moving forward with gaining support until the elections. Bowen chose to leave his thoughts over the incident on the Washington State Republican Party's Facebook page. 
More:

Many others don't feel that way, so, tough noogies.

I'm not delusional enough to anticipate any kind of endorsement from the WSRP; I've been beating them and the rest of the establishment up longer than many of the Paulbots have been eligible to vote.

But it's good to see that somebody is awake at the switch.

And Paulistinian heads are exploding all over the state today....

Saturday, July 21, 2012

So, if you think the Paulbot's local PCO insurgency is "spontaneous," take a look at this:

There's nothing spontaneous about it.  The thing that pisses me off the most about it is they keep lying about their motivation and the causes.  Just check out this scam going on in Spokane County.
Story  Comments 07
July 21, 2012 in City
Squabble splits local GOP


Fight over precinct officers could impact commissioner race

By Mike Prager The Spokesman-Review

An internal battle between mainstream Republicans and a conservative insurgency has divided the Spokane County Republican Party and may influence the primary election race for District 2 county commissioner.

The sides are battling for control of the local party through elections of precinct committee officers, a scenario mirroring those playing out across the country, some with tea party overtones.

The primary race for commissioner involving two Republicans – Shelly O’Quinn and Rob Chase – and Democrat Daryl Romeyn may be in the balance.

Only two of those candidates can advance to a general election showdown in Washington’s “top-two” primary system, in which the top vote-getters advance regardless of party affiliation.

O’Quinn expects that a core Democrat vote of about 39 percent will allow Romeyn to earn a spot on the November ballot.

If that prediction holds true, O’Quinn and Chase would be vying for the second ballot spot. A strong turnout by Republicans looking to back precinct committee officer candidates could be the deciding factor.

One longtime Republican Party official, however, said neighborhood precinct committee candidates working to get their supporters to cast votes could lead to O’Quinn and Chase advancing to a general election showdown.

“It will energize people to vote,” said Diana Wilhite, a supporter of O’Quinn.

Said Chase, “If it’s a close race, it could make a difference.”

Contested precinct committee officer races are on the ballot during the primary. There are 44 contested GOP precinct races in commissioner District 2 out of 101 contested GOP races countywide.

District 2 includes southeast Spokane and Spokane Valley, where libertarian and tea party forces are more concentrated.

Competition for control of the local Republican Party dates to 2008 when libertarian Texas congressman Ron Paul ran for president as a Republican and brought new faces to the party organization, said Chase, who is in his second year as county treasurer and is among Paul’s supporters.
More:

Look familiar?

Nope... nothing "spontaneous."  Yup, Ron Paulian planned, driven and executed.

But then, I may have been saying that all along.

So, Brandon Vick, where are you on the CRC?

Brandon's finally got a web site up that says more than "donate."  But while the "issues" section contains a lot of words, it really doesn't say anything.

Its got a lot of verbiage with no specifics that both sides use.  But what's missing?

Not one word about the CRC scam or transportation.  Not one word about the Cowlitz Megacasino scam (You know, the one his buddy Rob McKenna supports?  That one?)

Why?

Nothing about the bridge rip off.  Nothing about tolls.  Nothing about loot rail.

Now.... why is that?

Readers know what I think of candidates who run away from the big issues.  And from the perspective of local representation, there is no bigger issue confronting the people of this district then the biggest scam in the history of the United States (Well, with the exception of Obama getting elected) and our Republican candidate doesn't have a position staked out on it?  Doesn't even MENTION it?

The number one character trait of my representation must be courage.

The courage of your convictions.

That's followed by competence: you've got to at least have common sense.

So, the question goes back to this:  Why doesn't Brandon Vick talk about his position on the CRC scam?

Is it because he's afraid to?

Or is it because he forgot to?

Either way...

Right or wrong, up or down, anyone running for office in this area owes his or her constituents a snap shot of their positions on ALL of the issues confronting us... and not just the ones he or she is comfortable with.

Just sayin'.

Friday, July 20, 2012

A troubling connection: Brandon Vick and RINO Rob McKenna.

Even casual readers of this blog have noticed by now that Rob McKenna has moved to the left of Lenin as he sells out the GOP and avoids even a minor pretext of conservatism in his all-out pursuit of office.

RINO Rob has sold us out on Gov. Scott Walker, referring to what Walker did in his take-down of the democrats and the public employee unions as "terrorism," sold us out on the Cowlitz/Paskenta/Mohegan/Barnett mega-casino; sold us out on Obama care; called collective bargaining for state employees a "right," he opposed the initiative that would have saved us hundreds of millions and our local economy by restricting tolls...

And most recently, RINO Rob went all fringe-left democrat on us and came out swinging against the Boy Scouts. over their homosexual policy... when it's none of his fricking business.

So, why is Brandon Vick doing this?  After all, Vick was an Eagle Scout... so why does he support someone who just got done attacking the Boy Scouts for political points on an issue that's none of his concern?


No way should this be happening.

Eagle Scout indeed.

Thoughts on Aurora, Colorado.

"An armed society is a polite society.  Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. "  - Robert A Heinlein Beyond This Horizon (1942)
I was working in my office at about 1:30 this morning when news came about the massacre in Aurora, Colorado.

My first thought was "... is this a terrorist, ala that Hasan slimeball and Ft. Hood?"

And then I became riveted to the coverage as facts began leaking out.... there were two shooters; no.... one.  There were 10 dead, then 14, then 13, then now, apparently, 12.  There were 20 wounded, then 30 then 50.

I began to wonder: what would I have done in that theater?

Well, if he hadn't got me first, I'd have shot him.  And I'd have shot him because I don't go anywhere without my .45.

That used to be a problem in my family.  After all, when I was going to church, or to the store... or to the movies... who needs to be armed in those places?

Clearly, the answer is now "we all do."

I'd been carrying since Koenninger's moronic, yet somehow prescient piece demanding the resignation of now Democrat County Commissioner Marc Boldt  resulted in some death threats back when Marc had been a legislator and I'd been his Legislative Assistant.  I was my own security in the district office.

But this post isn't to proffer an argument on the 2nd Amendment or gun control or any of that.  It's not even to point out that Commissioner Boldt voted for an ordinance that would have enabled the county to confiscate our weapons if they were so inclined.

No, this post is to point out the obvious: had at least one armed individual been in that movie crowd, there is an increased chance that the likelihood of this vast amount of death and destruction would not have been as great.

I'm not going to get on the Tea Party-style high horse and make the absurd claim that NO one would have been killed. 

But now, we're going to be faced with absurd demands to make ever-more restrictive gun laws... as if any of those would have stopped this from happening.

What I am suggesting here is the same thing I suggested as a result of the Virginia Tech massacre given the response to those, like me, who suggest that no place should be off limits to firearms merely because it's a school:
 "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.
Within the past year, my wife has started shooting.  Got a nice little Walther PPK that gets it done.  Now, however, is the time for her to get her permit and begin to carry it, like I do, everywhere.

Because if we had been in that theater, maybe we'd have made it.  If SHE had been in that theater unarmed?

Likely not.

Unfortunately, this is likely to become a political football, where both sides quickly lose sight of the issue: government cannot keep us safe; we have to do that ourselves.  And in this day and age, those most strident in their demands that we be disarmed should really stop and ask themselves this question first:

"What if I had been in that theater?"

Because your efforts to disarm us will only embolden those who are not really likely to follow the law in the first place.

Then what?

It's a sad commentary that our society has reached this point.  But it has.  So, what to do?

Get a weapon and stand a post in your own security.  If you know how to use a weapon, then you should be armed.  If you don't, then get trained and THEN get armed.

Unfortunately, there are two classes of people in 2012: the sheep.... and the wolves.

Which one are you?

The people in the theater? 

Which one were they?

Obama's take on business....

Final primary endorsements.

US Senate

Write in

Congress

NOT Herrera.

Governor:

Hadian

Lt. Governor

Anderson

Attorney General

NOT Dunn

Auditor

Watkins

Public Lands Commissioner

Write in.

Secretary of State

Kastama

SPI

Write in

Treasurer

Write in.

17th District Senate

Benton

17th District House 01

Homola

17th District House 02

Harris

18th District Senate

Rivers

18th District House 01

None

18th District House 02

Pike

County Commissioner 01

Mielke

County Commissioner 02

NOT Boldt

Clark PUD Commissioner

West

I am a Republican, but being a Republican isn't a death warrant.

I will never vote for anyone who I do not believe is a conservative... and their conservatism has to come before a party label that, for example, Marc Boldt has shown to be meaningless.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Another of the many reasons to dispise McKenna: he disagrees with Scout policy on gays.

As the campaign continues and RINO Rob moves to Inslee's left, yet another reason to despise him surfaces:  He wants gays in the Scouts.

Or, in other words, the morality and integrity of the Scouts is meaningless to him.

This is just another in the series of hard left positions McKenna revels in... and why I wouldn't vote for him to be dog catcher; because, right or wrong, that policy is none of his fricking business; no one cares what he thinks about the issue, and if he doesn't like it, that's tough.

Ultimately, this is the same kind of garbage spewing out of Obama's White House that let's them try and force the Catholic Church to violate the tenets of their religion and force birth control down people's throats.

God, I hate a pandering slimeball.

McKenna disagrees with Scout policy excluding gays


A spokesman for Republican gubernatorial candidate Rob McKenna said Thursday that the attorney general, who is also an Eagle Scout, disagrees with the Boy Scouts' recent reaffirmation of its national policy to exclude gays from its ranks.

McKenna, who currently serves on the Chief Seattle Council of the Boy Scouts of America, has had some initial conversations with other Boy Scout volunteers in the state on how "at least locally, the leaders out here could encourage the national organization to reconsider the national policy," said campaign spokesman Charles McCray.

"It's something that is on his radar," he said.

McKenna's Democratic opponent, former U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee, also said he was disappointed with the Scouts' decision, which was announced Tuesday.

"Our state and our country has moved ahead rapidly with eliminating discrimination," Inslee said Wednesday during a meeting with the Olympia political press corps. "We've done it in the military, we've done it in education, and we ought to be able to do that in the Scouts, as well. So I'm hopeful this will be revisited as soon as possible."

An 11-member special committee, formed by top Scout leaders two years ago, came to the conclusion that the exclusion policy _ which applies to both adult leaders and Scouts _ "is absolutely the best policy" for the 102-year-old organization.

s a result of Tuesday's decision, the Scouts' national executive board will take no further action on a resolution submitted at its recent national conference asking for reconsideration of the membership policy
.More:

The principles of government that I admire do not involve this kind of left-wing government garbage.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

How many Paulbots does it take....

Tim Probst: when figures don't lie, but liars figure.

So, today's campaign piece for leftist democrat Tim Pobst was in the democratian:
"Our very ambitious fundraising goal for the month of June was a whopping $40,000, and we beat it," Probst said in an email announcement to supporters. "That is simply a tremendous outcome for a legislative race at this time of year."
Really?  Let's see if he made this "whopping $40,000" or if, as I suspect, he just told a whopper, period.

Probst claims he raised $40,000 in June.  That sounds a bit high for someone that even the democrats know is going to lose, so, I thought I'd run the numbers.

So, what Probst ACTUALLY REALLY raised for June was $27,640.... and NOT the "whopping $40,000" he claimed.

So, where did that bogus, scamming number come from?

The Senate democrats scammed him a completely bogus in-kind contribution of $13,778 so Benton, who raised $46,000 actual dollars or so in the same time period, wouldn't embarrass him.

In-Kind: $13,778.
ReportSENATE DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE  6/22/2012  $12,600.00  P  SEATTLE  WA  981450042

ReportSENATE DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE  6/28/2012  $1,178.40    P  SEATTLE  WA  981450042
In short, Probst lied.   And quite unnecessarily.

Why?  Who knows... funding envy?

But there's a huge reason why the bucks are just dribbling into Probst: the people writing the checks believe he's going to lose.

And, when a candidate lies like this... well, he deserves to lose.

The source for all of this is Probst's own PDC's.  Check them our here.

Just sayin'.

Filed a PDC Complaint against Gregerson today; Judge race, Superior Court Position 2.

FULL DISCLSOURE:  Judge Wulle likely doesn't know I exist.  He had nothing to do with this, period.

Rules and laws are what they're supposed to live by... supposed to deliberate by, interpret the law by, and rule by.

So how is it that Judge John Wulle's opponent, David Gregerson, has broken the law?

See, when you're a candidate, you designate campaign donations for whichever part of an election you intend to use them for.  Your choices, usually, are "primary," for use before the end of the primary, in this case, August 7, if I'm not mistaken; and "general," for use after August 7.

Gregerson's problem is that this brilliant legal mind apparently was/is unaware of the nuance:  he's listed his campaign donations using the "P" and the "G" symbol required by the Public Disclosure Commission rules.

And in Gregerson's case, he's limited the amount of money he can spend before August 7 to $1250.



Notice the right column.  That is every primary donation made to Gregerson; that is, that is every donation made to Gregerson that he could legally spend before the conclusion of the primary.

The total is $1250.00

The problem?

Gregerson's campaign has spent $14,491.91... or roughly $13,200 more then he's allowed... since only $1250 can be spent now.  (The "spent" figure is directly below the "Contact Information" button in this screen capture.)

So, he's overspent by $13G.  Broke the rules.  Screwed up.  Showed a basic lack of competence.

So, I filed a PDC complaint against him, because, ask Jon Russell:  I hate it when politicians break the rules.  But Judges?

They ESPECIALLY have to follow them.

Setting the example and all that rot, eh, wot?