Monday, January 31, 2011

Beginning of the end for the Cowlitz/Paskenta/Mohegan/Barnett megacasino.

The legally indefensible decision of the BIA to nail down tribal donations for Obama's abortive re-election campaign took it right in the chops today when Clark County, the City of Vancouver and a variety of others filed suit today in Washington, DC to overturn Obama's tribal pandering effort that ignored a Supreme Court decision outright.

The local addicts, who would sell out their own mothers to stuff this blight down this community's throat so they could get a cheap buffet, are naturally upset. As it is now, they've got to drive 90 minutes for their fix.

Kudos to all involved in this... and additional advanced kudos to the Grande Rhonde who will no doubt be joining the fray.

Leavitt's first year? Who cares?

Tim "The Liar" Leavitt started off his campaign as an out and out liar; he then did what I knew he was going to have to do to pay off his backers and Steve Stuart; he flipped on his bogus tolling position; he lost control of the council and failed to react strongly enough to Harris's psychotic flip out; he failed to keep control of the situation when he and his fellow morons thought that failing to set the example of leadership on health care premiums was just dandy... in short, he's been a joke... a disaster... a heterosexual version of Sam Adams, Portland's mayor, best known for lying to get elected.

Unfortunately, we are saddled with all too many "Liars" like Leavitt. Now, anytime his lips move, the kneejerk reaction has to be that, once again, he's lying. And his failure to defend the people who stupidly voted for him BELIEVING his lies on his tolling position... well, there's only one word for that.


I get why the rag didn't put this article on the web. The last thing they want is for me to Ginsu them on their efforts to rehab this scumbag's image... like they are going to spend the next 3 years doing, since he's "right" on their positions.

Cross posted at Tim Leavitt Watch.

About That School Obama Highlighted in the State of the Union…

I've got nothing to add here, so I'll just let Doug Powers do the talking.

About That School Obama Highlighted in the State of the Union…

By Doug Powers • January 30, 2011 04:00 PM

**Written by Doug Powers

In spite of the woeful state of education in many areas of the country, there are still reasons to be encouraged. President Obama outlined one such example in his State of the Union speech last week:

When President Barack Obama spotlighted a successful school in his State of the Union speech, he picked Bruce Randolph School in Denver.

“Take a school like Bruce Randolph in Denver,” the president said. “Three years ago, it was rated one of the worst schools in Colorado. Last May, 97 percent of seniors received their diploma.”

Wow, that’s an impressive turnaround. How did they go from bad to great? Well, that part of the story ended up on the cutting room floor during the SOTU editing process, for obvious reasons:

Bruce Randolph was a middle school when it opened in 2002. In 2007, Denver Public Schools gave Bruce Randolph School permission to operate autonomously. It was the first school in the state to be granted autonomy from district and union rules.

Each teacher then had to reapply for his or her job. A published report said only six teachers remained.

When the devil is in the details, simply ignore the details.

(h/t Chicks on the Right)

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Wow. What an idea. I wonder what they did to make that happen?

McKenna was right, of course: so... are the fringe leftists going to apologize? (Obamacare UNCONSTITUTIONAL)

There was a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth by the fringe leftists infesting our state when McKenna joined the lawsuit to toss the obvious-to-even-a-lay-man-like-me lawsuit to toss out the myriad of unconstitutional elements of the unread-before-voting-on Obamacare socialist medicine bill.

Here's some quotes to remind us... ironic in that some of them are from lawyers like our former Attorney General/Now governor who SHOULD have known better.

Gregoire Blasts McKenna’s Health Care Reform Lawsuit

By Camden Swita, Monday, March 22, 2010 at 3:11 PM
34 Comments and 9 Reactions

Gov. Gregoire released an official statement later in the day:

“I’m disappointed that the Attorney General would participate in a lawsuit to repeal a law that would help 1.5 million Washingtonians get access to affordable, quality health care.

“I completely disagree with the Attorney General’s decision and he does not represent me.

“He doesn’t represent the people of Washington who would get assistance so they could afford quality health insurance. He doesn’t represent the thousands of small businesses that would benefit from tax credits to provide coverage for their employees. He doesn’t represent the thousands who will no longer be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. He doesn’t represent the half million young people in our state who would be covered under their parents plan until they are 26. He doesn’t represent our state’s Medicare recipients. He doesn’t represent the taxpayers of Washington.

So, even though Obamacare was obviously unconstitutional, "he doesn't represent" you?

Well, he damned sure represents me... and everyone else who doesn't view the Constitution as a roll of paper you use in the powder room.

Have you thought about turning in your license to practice law since it seems you don't know what the hell you're talking about?

Joel Connelly, The Seattle PI's fringe left nutter blabbed:

Stewart Jay, the University of Washington law professor and constitutional expert, has this to say about Attorney General Rob McKenna's lawsuit over the new federal health care law: "If it's not frivolous, it's close to frivolous."

"Unless the U.S. Supreme Court is willing to fundamentally change the way constitutional law has been interpreted for the last seven decades, the lawsuit has no merit. By that I mean that this kind of program - which is essentially a taxing and spending program - this kind of program has been consistently upheld since 1937," Jay said in an interview Monday.

Time for that clown to resign and his students should get a refund.

And then we can add one of the dimmer bulbs in leftist government, Jay Inslee.

Inslee Blasts McKenna Health Care Lawsuit

Liz Jones
03/23/2010 ShareThis

Congressman Jay Inslee has joined the chorus of Washington State Democrats who are blasting the Attorney General's health care lawsuit. KUOW's Liz Jones reports.


Washington's Attorney General, Republican Rob McKenna, is one of 13 state attorneys general who sued the federal government today. They claim the landmark
health care overhaul is unconstitutional.

Inslee says the lawsuit is not a surprise.

Inslee: "This is exactly what went on when we passed Medicare. They argued that it was unconstitutional. They argued that it was going to destroy the basic fabric of the country. And they lost."

Inlee says he's talked with several constitutional lawyers and is confident the lawsuit will fail.

McKenna says the goal isn't to overturn the full legislation, just the parts he considers unconstitutional. Mainly, the part that requires people to buy health insurance.

Well, Inslee's either a liar or he consulted legal "experts" bagging his clothing purchases at WalMart.

And now we can get a glimpse at why Bush fired John McKay: He doesn't know any more about the law than he does tuning fuel injection.

KIRO Radio

Former U.S. Attorney John McKay says Attorney General Rob McKenna's lawsuit challenging the health care reform bill has no legal standing.

During a formal debate on the issue at the University of Washington Tuesday night, McKay said the suit is entirely political.

"These are policy questions and they're political debate. Perhaps the filing of these cases is not such a pure exercise and the fact that it's not going to go so quickly might not concern some of those who filed it." McKay said.

Will those and other slimeballs like them now hurry to the media to explain how wrong they were and to apologize?

Fat chance. Because to scum like this, if it's a policy they like?

Then they don't give a rats ass if it's Constitutional or not.

And it's not. And the left knew it.

And they didn't care.

And my guess is these and the rest of the political swine will now be silent. Because the issue of standing and merit has been decided, no matter how this turns out.

But when even someone of my limited training knows this law is unconstitutional, what's the excuse of leftists above to whine that it isn't?

I-728 chickens are coming home to roost... and the teacher lobby are screaming like cut cats!

I have no sympathy for teachers on this issue: none.

First, I-728 and I-732 were both scams run by the Washington Education Association. Their campaign for this extortion was a campaign of lies that conveniently for the union... and perhaps fatally for 728 and 732, left out any kind of revenue stream to fund this nonsense in the face of the WEA's lies that neither 728 (Student classroom size) or 732 (GUARANTEED teacher pay raises, like what they do deserves such a thing) would require tax increases... not unlike adding 40 million people or so to Obama's socialized medicine program will make health care magically cheaper.

Teachers whining about their pay for their part time job is a mystery to me. In fact, I question if any teacher whining about pay is fit to teach.

I question that because, well, gee: they SHOULD have known about teacher pay BEFORE THEY TOOK THE JOB.

Here's a memo to whining teachers: you don't like the pay?

Then quit.

Because when you do quit... 20 or more teachers will cheerfully take your job for much less money.

But your monumental whining and extortion has grown tiring. And I say this to ALL public employees:

You don't like what you're getting paid? You don't thank God every damned day that you HAVE a job?

Then here's your solution:


You won't be missed. Seriously.

And now, because our economy is in such horrific shape, the 728/732 chickens are coming home to roost.

Because surely, teachers across the state will voluntarily take major pay cuts to help save their colleague's jobs, won't they?

Fat chance.

Wrong as usual: politicians must kill the unneeded, unwanted and horrifically expensive bridge/loot rail boondoggle.

We're cursed locally with a rag that seems to be genetically pre-disposed to lie.

We're also cursed with one of those elitist, Nazi-type publications that follow Rep. Cohen's Goebbelian diagram of telling a lie loud enough, long enough and often enough, it becomes the truth.

In this morning's papshmear, the whack job that wrote this "Build, Baby, Build" pap embodies all of that and more.

"We don’t think


he was talking about throwing down skids over Burnt Bridge Creek. More likely, he was talking about structures such as the obsolete,

Obsolete, functional and paid for has it's own charm... particularly in the midst of this horrific recession.

increasingly dangerous

The scumbag who wrote this garbage simply seems incapable of telling the truth... which is this:

The I-5 Bridge is perfectly serviceable and safe, according to Don Wagner, former Region 6 WADOT administrator.

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.

It's bad enough that these slime believe their vision to be superior to that of the people. But to flat out lie?

How can we view anything our local stain on journalism spews when they engage in such horrific, self-suiting, obvious lies?

and economy-choking Interstate 5 Bridge,

Another lie. Replacing this bridge, while enriching the special interests and politicos who won't have to pay for it, will do absolutely nothing to address freight mobility or congestion:

Congestion on new I-5 bridge back to today's level by 2030, study finds

Planners and elected officials who back the project are aware of the shortcomings, but say it's better than doing nothing


Monday, July 07, 2008 DYLAN RIVERA
The Oregonian Staff

So what the rag continues to babble about is a "better-than-nothing" approach, instead of an expenditure of monies that will actually make a difference to anyone besides the insipid morons pushing this nonsense.

its roundly cursed bridge lift

Whatever rare cursing going on because of the frequent-as-Halley's Comet-bridge lifts will pale in comparison to the cursing of the 65,000 members of the commuting public, their families and the businesses here locally that depend on their now, cut by as much as $1300 per year, disposable income.

But the scum like the assclown that wrote this editorial DON'T CARE... since THEY won't have to pay for it.

and the frightening, too-short entry and exit ramps for miles along the freeway.

"Frightening" to who? I've lived here 23 years, and those ramps have never phased me.

Look, at the end of the day, these fringe-left nutters want their loot rail. They want it no matter how many billions are wasted to get it. They want it bad enough to engage in gerrymandering to cut out 10's of thousands of us voters from voting, but not paying the tax.

They are afraid of us, or else they would have put this to a vote. Some in government have gone so far as to lie about that.

And now the rag engages in hysterical rants to frighten people into supporting an 8 to 10 billion dollar boondoggle... one that they won't have to pay for.

No.... the Nazi's got nothing on this rag.


Orcutt takes up the challenge: Make I-1053 an Amendment to the Constitution.

Kudos to my state representative, Ed Orcutt (R-Kalama) for stepping up. Well done!

Orcutt seeks a tax clamp with constitutional force

Amendment would not be suspendable

State Rep. Ed Orcutt dropped a political bombshell in Olympia 10 days ago in introducing a bill that would enshrine a formidable barrier to state tax increases in the Washington Constitution.


State Rep. Ed Orcutt, R-Kalama

The Kalama Republican, bolstered by November’s overwhelming vote for an initiative requiring a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber to raise taxes, said it’s time to make the high bar permanent.

“The whole purpose of putting it into the Constitution is to make it impossible for the Legislature to use a simple majority vote to eliminate a two-thirds vote requirement,” he said.

That happened in 2010, when the Legislature, controlled by Democrats, suspended the two-thirds vote requirement in Initiative 960, sponsored by anti-tax activist Tim Eyman and approved by voters in 2007.Under the constitution, the Legislature has the power to suspend or amend voter-approved measures after they have been in place for two years.

It’s not the first time the Legislature has reversed a voter-approved bill requiring a supermajority to raise taxes, Orcutt noted.

In 2002, Democrats, who held a slim majority in each chamber, suspended I-601, a 1993 initiative sponsored by former House Republican Rep. Linda Smith, who, like Orcutt, represented Southwest Washington’s 18th District. Eyman responded in 2007 with I-960, part of which was suspended by the Legislature in 2010.

In all, Washington voters have either enacted or affirmed a two-thirds vote requirement for tax increases four times: in 1993, 1998, 2007 and 2010. With a simple majority vote, the Legislature has suspended the requirement three times — in 2002, 2005 and 2010.

In November, voters approved Eyman’s latest supermajority initiative, I-1053, by nearly a 64 percent majority.


The Will of the People. It's more than just a bumper sticker.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

The Bellevue Mafia/McMorris Wars against Kirby Wilbur continue unabated.

Filed under the "More things change, the more they stay the same."

McMorris and her winged monkey, Ridgefield Barbie, along with the rest of the Bellevue Mafia continue in their efforts to get rid of Kirby Wilbur and install their own guy, the wishes of the state committee be damned.

You know, I frequently used to wonder why Washington State was so deeply and darkly blue, until I got up there and served in the position of State Republican Executive Director. Then, over a short time, it became clear.

To the lay man, the purpose of the state Republican organization is to get Republicans elected.

After all, isn't that the reason for almost any political organization? To get those they ostensibly represent elected to office?

I've got to tell you... if the GOP in this state worked half as hard... hell, a quarter as hard at getting people elected as they do sticking a shiv in the back of those they disagree with, we'd be as red as Idaho when it comes to a state political party.

The full court press is on from McMorris, Babs and their staffs, along with those who work to control the GOP behind the scenes.

They are as corrupting an influence, using tactics and efforts not unlike their namesake, the REAL Mafia, as any organized crime group known to man.

Wilbur must prevail here, or the entire purpose of the State Committee becomes worthless and a sham.

It is to our everlasting shame that we've elected what amounts to be scum like McMorris and Herrera. They have no purpose, save their own power, and they represent the absolute worst this country has to offer at a time when we need the best to lead us out of the pit of vituperation we've been led into.

McMorris's corruptive influence was felt here when she parachuted that empty suit in here to run for Congress. And we now have McMorris's sock puppet representing us... and McMorris... in Congress... as sickening a political thought as any I've entertained.

But for now, the battle rages behind the scenes, has it has done before, with people of small minds and self indulgence, any thought of sacrifice or dirty hands a long, distant memory... if ever thought of at all... much like many here in the local party, come to think of it.

But this seems to be how business is done.

Hopefully, Wilbur will ignore the efforts of the slime and mud, go directly to the state committee, and get the support he needs in a way that the spineless EBoard can't ignore.

Because if he doesn't... then his tenure will be even more of a living hell then mine. And once again, in 2012... our golden opportunity will be pissed away because of the worthlessness of the state and local county organization.

The leadership of the party will continue to keep this state in the deep, dark, blue column as long as they insist on serving only themselves instead of serving the party they are SUPPOSED to be there to serve. Again... like many at the local level, come to think of it.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Zarelli nails it: slash services to illegal aliens.

If I haven't made my position clear enough in the past, let me restate it: If you are here illegally, then you deserve nothing in the way of state services except arrest and transport into federal custody.

The most deserving illegal alien is not as deserving as the least deserving citizen. Any program providing any service to any illegal must be eliminated at every level. Why any level of state or local government PROVIDES any service to illegals, save assisting in their deportation, is simply beyond my comprehension.

Well, it appears that we've finally reached the point where these truths are becoming increasingly clear. It's unfortunate that those conclusions are not innate; a major part of the reason illegal aliens still come here is that we represent something of a resort destination for those breaking our laws. Frequently, we subvert our own laws with moronic "sanctuary cities" and garbage like that... we even provide in-state tuition for illegals under many circumstances, a moronic bill by a faux Republican from the 49th, Don Carlson, who carried the WEA's water like Gunga Din for years, only to get tossed under the bus at their earliest convenience... but not before he moronically saddled the taxpayers and education system with a privilege that American citizens don't even get if they don't live in Washington State... the right to in-state tuition; a bill that Carlson blathered would only cosy $50,000 per year that has, in fact, cost us millions.

Let me make one thing perfectly clear: illegal aliens should not be allowed in our schools at any level. But they certainly shouldn't be allowed to take up the slot of a legal resident/citizen at the Washington citizen/in-state tuition rate.

That much was obvious when Carlson idiotically ran that bill, costing kids here legally the ability to attend our schools and university because their slots are taken up by illegals.

It does not appear that this program is on the chopping block... but it assuredly needs to be.

Meanwhile, Zarelli is asking many of the tough questions that need to be asked. And while the headline of this article says: "Immigrants may be affected by state budget cuts," it should say "Programs providing services to illegal aliens are ended."

Immigrants may be affected by state budget cuts

The state's grim financial shape is pushing lawmakers further into the immigration debate, forcing a state historically friendly to immigrants to consider cuts that will impact large segments of legal and illegal immigrants.

Associated Press

OLYMPIA, Wash. —

The state's grim financial shape is pushing lawmakers further into the immigration debate, forcing a state historically friendly to immigrants to consider cuts that will impact large segments of legal and illegal immigrants.

The proposed cuts are on top of introduced bills that call for stricter enforcement of immigration law, specifically bills that would force the state to ask for proof of legal residency when obtaining a driver's license.

"My whole point is that we ignore, ignore, ignore - now we have to make real decisions: Does the public think it's a priority to provide benefits for people who are undocumented?" said Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield, the Senate GOP's budget chief. "I believe it's time for prioritizing what we can afford to do. We gotta have that debate."


Friday, January 28, 2011

Night of the Long Knives 2: McMorris and her puppet, Herrera, are coming after Wilbur

As I indicated when McMorris built Herrera, Ridgefield Barbie would do only and precisely what McMorris told her to do... and as a result, this district has precisely zero congressional representation that McMorris won't allow... if Babs wants to have an opinion, CMR will give her one.

I've also mentioned in the past that McMorris wants to be president some day, in the worst way.
And if she ever pulls that off, rest assured... it WILL be in the worst way.

In the interim, McMorris is doing all she can to fill the political vacuum here in Washington, left by the first departure, and then death of Jennifer Dunn. With the help of the Bellevue Mafia, she is doing everything she can to become Dunn's political clone.

Sources I know and trust are telling me that the Bobbsey Twins, McMorris and her puppet Barbie, are doing all they can to effectively neuter Kirby Wilbur, to include stopping Wilbur's choice for Executive Director.

I've heard, but do not yet have permission to release, details of the efforts of the Executive Board to go after Wilbur in such a way that he would only have an almost ceremonial role in running the state party... and that the steps they're taking would never have been considered had Luke Esser managed to hang on for another term.

On the evening he was elected, I urged Wibur to get his political kevlar on. Kirby needs to bypass the EBoard and go directly to the state committee if he is to have any hope of surviving all of this.

So, there you have it. Wilbur's back looks like a knife target as the Bellevue Mafia seeks to eliminate him in favor of their, and McMorris's, agenda and choice.

No one pays any attention to Herrera because they see her as what she is: a joke. She's McMorris's sock puppet however, although a not particularly intelligent one: that's why her all of two town hall meetings are going to be so short: The less she can talk, the less she can come across like she did during the campaign... an idiot.

That said, there's much more happening behind the scenes. And when I hear it, you're gonna hear it as well.

Cross posted to Jaime Herrera Watch.

Murray to chair Veterans Affairs? Bad idea.

First and foremost, like having a president who never served in the military during a war, having a non-veteran chair the Veteran's Affairs Committee makes as much sense as having a man explain the experience of giving birth.

Murray has fooled a great many Veterans. I have tried to get her office to explain to me why, as a matter of course, I pay half as much to get my prescriptions at WalMart, Fred Meyers, Costco or Walgreens than I do at the VA... and her people won't even make the effort to find out.

That's right, ladies and gentlemen... non-serving civilians get better "benefits" at "Freddies" then honorably serving veterans at the VA when it comes to prescriptions.

Murray is very big on veterans when she's running for re-election.

The rest of the time?

Not so much.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Ridgefield Barbie's latest set of blinders.

My guess is that Babs has written me out of her will. But that's just a guess.

Just today, an entry on the WSRP Facebook page popped up. It was Herrera's usual babble.

"I did this, I picked blueberries... I scammed an appointment (nothing, of course, about her 11 year absence before the appointment or the conspiracy between Cathy McMorris and Marc Boldt that got her the gig...) but maybe it's progress that she left out her "Senior Legislative Assistant" lie.

But what's REALLY catchy is that she wasted fully 1/4 of her self-serving pap posting this:

Let me translate:

If you don't kiss my ring in any comment you might write about me... if you disagree with me about anything... if you believe that I'm unqualified... or that I'm an embarrassment to both Congress and this country... well, don't you dare write that here on my Facebook entry because I'm a little girl and I can't take it.

I bet COL West doesn't have any moronic notice like that. But then, he's already served something much bigger than himself... unlike Barbie.

God help us that we've got such a total wuss allegedly representing us.

Cross-posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

Pigs Fly II: MLB Pitcher, Gil Meche (KC Royals) walks away from guaranteed $12 Mil contract; "I don't deserve it."

In his own way, joining the ranks of the those with an almost unbearable integrity like Pat Tillman, who walked away from an NFL contract that would have paid him millions to become an Army Ranger... Gil Meche of the Kansas City Royals has walked away from a guaranteed $12 million contract... because he feels he doesn't deserve it.

This article is amazing on so many levels, and well worth the read. We, unfortunately, are not possessed of nearly enough men and women like Gil.Baseball Player Quits, Says "I Don't Deserve $12M"

Royals starter Gil Meche walks away from a guaranteed contract

Updated 10:19 AM EST, Thu, Jan 27, 2011

Getty Images
Okay, Gil Meche hasn't been great since signing a big contract with the Kansas City Royals. But not many players would feel so badly about their performance that they would walk away from a guaranteed $12 million.

Meche announced last week he will retire, giving up the payday due on the last year of his deal. Meche has always been known for his integrity, according to The New York Times, but this move left the baseball world stunned. Meche said he just didn't like the idea of not earning his keep.

“When I signed my contract, my main goal was to earn it,” Meche told the paper from his temporary home in Lafayette, La. “Once I started to realize I wasn’t earning my money, I felt bad. I was making a crazy amount of money for not even pitching. Honestly, I didn’t feel like I deserved it. I didn’t want to have those feelings again.”

Meche made more than $50 million playing baseball, with most coming in the five-year, $55 million deal he signed with the Royals when he left Seattle in 2007.


Simply... amazing.

HT to Drudge and NBC Washington.

Author: Doesn't know what she's talking about when it comes to illegal aliens.

First, this woman is as entitled to her opinion as anyone, although I'm mystified as to why the rag is so impressed with her that they have to provide her a platform for it.

The woman in question, somebody named Sonia Nazario, has received a Pulitzer Prize for writing a series of articles... in 2003... something the local rag won't have to worry about picking up any time soon.

Unfortunately, like the local democratian, she's a woman with an agenda. And she's presented an opinion. And that's all it is.

A fence on the border is anything BUT "misguided." Those who shout that the loudest about such an effort aren't worried about a lack of effectiveness from such measures... in fact, they're concerned about just the opposite... that those efforts will achieve their aim.

"Pulling the plug on the fence" was a political decision, designed to pander to the Sonia Nazarios of the world... because, we're told, the relatively few hispanics that are allowed to legally vote will only do so for those who make it the easiest on illegal aliens.


What she fails to understand is that without the completion of the fence, there is absolutely no way the illegal alien amnesty they so badly want will move beyond the pipe dream phase.

No fence?

No amnesty.

What Nazario is, effectively, advocating is elimination of the border and American responsibility for fixing Mexico's economic problems.

And it's not that I ain't buying that again... it's more like I ain't ever buying that to start with.

We can't even solve our own economic problems, and she just expects us to whip our our check book and voila! No more problem with illegals.


The following steps will substantially reduce to eliminate the illegal alien problem:

1. Severe punishments, including confiscation and imprisonment of those who hire illegals.

2. Require proof of legal status to receive any government service, including education and medical care, with a requirement that those attempting those services without proof of citizenship be reported to ICE immediately.

3. Require proof of legal status to receive or buy housing, motor vehicles open bank accounts or to get a driver's license.

4. End the "destination resort" aspect of the illegal alien trade, such as Washington State's moronic illegal alien in-state tuition law.

5. Complete the fence and all other border security requirements... which will favorably impact not only the illegal alien trade, but the drug trade as well.

6. End automatic citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.

These steps will slow the illegal alien trade to a trickle from the relative flood, and cause those already here to start to leave... not unlike the flood of illegals that left Arizona, post HB1070.

Like our economy and deficit, if we're going to address the problem, then we need to quit screwing around and address it. And that means doing painful things now when we can, instead of doing agonizing things latter, when we have to.

But to infer that this Nation has no other choice when it comes to illegals is political claptrap. And unfortunately, that's all Nazario had to offer.

Pigs Fly: State DEMOCRATS proposing illegal alien driver's license law.

Imagine my surprise when I read that the DEMOCRAT chair of senate transportation had FINALLY, after a 6 year battle, decided to do something FOR the people of this state concerning illegal aliens, instead of TO the people of this state.

The bill that Haugen, Senate Transportation Committee Chair is going to allow is, naturally, her own. But at first blush, it looks fairly straightforward.
Washington State has done everything it can to avoid following federal law concerning driver's licenses, and the illegal alien population of this country knows it.
Why the sudden change of heart? Hard to say, given the democrat's efforts to secure the illegal alien vote, a natural outgrowth of their support for voter registration without requiring proof of citizenship for the privilege.
But this is truly a case of better late then never.

More despicable bridge crap from the democratian.

The rag, having long since abandoned even a remote pretense of even-handedness, spews out another in their years-long series of manure loads trying to BS the people into actually believing that the unneeded, unwanted and unnecessary I-5 bridge replacement/loot rail scam is, in fact, something we need.

Of course, there's nothing in the article by those who oppose this colossal, unjustifiable waste of our money that few, if any, of the cheerleaders behind this crap pile won't have to pay for.

While getting an opposing view to this kind of propaganda is naturally required of the science of journalism... what would the democratian know about that?

Earthquakes are no excuse to replace the bridge... and in this instance, since there is no reason to get rid of the paid-for bridge we have, the rag and the mafia will start to make them up, and force-feed them to the more ignorant in an effort to get them to agree.

What we need, of course, are additional bridges... not a replacement in the same location that will accomplish absolutely nothing in the realm of freight mobility or congestion.

And betting $8 billion or so that a once-in-a-millennium earth quake MAY come along... and that an earthquake that bad wouldn't knock down whatever they replace this bridge with is a bet... with OUR money... that most of us don't want to take.

Let's say, just for yucks, that we do replace the bridge... and the new one gets knocked down as a result of this earthquack.

What are the clowns shilling this going to do or say?

"Oooops... Sorry about that?"

Murray tells us the bridge is unsafe.

Of course, Murray is a damned liar. But like the rest of the lies the democratian shills, that's not going to stop them.

They will say, or do, anything to get this steaming pile built.

And the rag will be lying to us, like they did today, every step of the way.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Herrera shows her cluelessness: "Praises parts of Obama's speech."

I suppose we shouldn't have expected any less from our own, local version of the Empty Suit in the White House. After all, any alleged Republican who could spew this:
“Not once have you heard me criticize Brian Baird’s performance in Southwest Washington,” she told the editorial board. “Linda Smith and Baird both have an independent streak.”
Is certainly idiotic enough to find reasons to praise her role model.

Barbie needs to remember that her first job is to represent us... not to position herself for a statewide run for the Senate. And in this instance, anyone paying attention knows that there was MUCH more to criticize then to "praise."

But not Ridgefield Barbie. And why am I not surprised?

Cross posted on Jaime Herrera Watch.

Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson (Communist-Seattle) wants to legalize her dope-smoking.

I frequently wondered during my time on leg staff what kind of drugs Dickerson was on, and now we get a clue.

She's one of those pie in the sky types who voted to jack up taxes on cigarettes... a brilliant ploy that has only resulted in $10 million LESS per month going to the state.

And now she wants to follow up THAT bit of genius by legalizing, taxing and selling pot thru liquor stores.

The leftist battle cry of "legalize and tax" is bizarre to say the least... with the same foreseeable result as jacking up the cigarette tax, a plan that has certainly enriched the state coffers of Oregon and Idaho.

Taxing pot, which is, after all, a weed (thus the name) will only result in an explosion of home grown operations which, when taken in their entirety, are likely to be much cheaper to the user then the proposal Dickerson and her buds (heh) want to foist on us now.

So the issue won't be the matter of local enforcement of drug laws, since this law will be thrown out by the Feds as soon as it's signed, presuming Queen Chrissy WOULD sign it.

No, instead it will result in major issues concerning revenue enforcement. And also, certainly, you can't legalize pot without full legalization of the head shops, right? We can see the headlines now: "Major Bust by State Revenue Agents shuts down untaxed pot grow."

With the fiscal suicide confronting this state and nation, you'd expect state representatives to be engaged in the more important, mundane issues of the day... like where and how much to cut the budget while leaving a functioning government in place.

Hit the bong too much, however, and you get silly bills like Dickerson's... who, as I recall, was a real yuckfest when I was there.

Obama's Health Care lie: It will NOT hold down costs, and you WON'T be able to keep your current health insurance.

Richard Foster, Chief Medicare Actuary tells Congress those costs will NOT be slowed or reduced.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Two of the central promises of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law are unlikely to be fulfilled, Medicare's independent economic expert told Congress on Wednesday.

The landmark legislation probably won't hold costs down, and it won't let everybody keep their current health insurance if they like it, Chief Actuary Richard Foster told the House Budget Committee. His office is responsible for independent long-range cost estimates.

Foster's assessment came a day after Obama in his State of the Union message told lawmakers that he's open to improvements in the law, but unwilling to rehash the health care debate of the past two years. Republicans want to repeal the landmark legislation that provides coverage to more than 30 million people now uninsured, but lack the votes.

Foster was asked by Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., for a simple true or false response on two of the main assertions made by supporters of the law: that it will bring down unsustainable medical costs and will let people keep their current health insurance if they like it.

On the costs issue, "I would say false, more so than true," Foster responded.

As for people getting to keep their coverage, "not true in all cases."


So, we've got a choice: Obama either knew this, and he was lying last night and since he became president; or he didn't know this and he's an incompetent idiot.

Either way, it doesn't look good, and WE are the ones who're gonna get screwed, because, frankly, I seriously doubt that the Obama family will ever want for health care.

You wanted him, you got him: Obama's Economy

As our Nation teeters on the fiscal brink, we have but ONE person to thank: Barack Hussein Obama, the President of the United States.

Yes, the person responsible for this is the great President of the United States, a man elected based entirely on his packaging, his sound bytes, his ability to lie.

Our debt will soon match the entirety of our economy's outcome of $14.5 trillion. And yes, I say that Obama is the single point of responsibility for this mess.

I say that because had he turned this ship around, he would be seeking all of the credit for that reversal.

Even his moronic "spending freeze," which he only wants to put into place after an 84% spending INCREASE, is smoke and mirrors, and we have accomplished fiscal disaster.

Will those who lead us have the courage to do what must be done? Will they have the guts to cut entitlements? Will they have the guts to cut the civilian workforce, and reduce the pay, benefits and retirement of the remainder?

Hell no, they won't. And the president damned sure won't act because he's put his re-election FAR ahead of the needs of the people he would govern.

But that's not a new construct, nor is it aimed just a democrats, because the GOP'ers in Congress lack the guts to do what must be done as well.

We are looking at the collapse of our economy and, per force, our country. We're long since past the time we should have done what needed to be done with the luxury of timely, well thought out responses to this problem. Now, our responses will be ultimately of the knee jerk variety, catch as catch can... the ubiquitous shotgun approach.

Obama has become the president I was sure he would be. And now, we all suffer for it.

And as our economy comes to match the "strength" of those economic powerhouses like Greece... the questions for me are these: when do OUR riots start... and who's going to bail us out... and at what cost?

EVERYTHING needs to be cut. Either now, while we still have a sliver of time... or soon, when we're out of time.

And Mr. President, if the direction we're moving is your version of "forward," then give me "backword" every day and twice on Sunday... because I believe we've achieved the "not at all" portion of your plan.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

I'll be skipping the State of the Union tonite.

First of all, I already know what it is... as do the majority of Americans.

It's a mess. And nothing the Empty Suit will say tonight will change that.

Secondly, the man is a consummate liar. (How's that trillion dollars worth of payoff's to his buddies going to translate to an 8% unemployment ceiling, again?)

So nothing he says will make any real difference.

Competency at any level has not been this guy's watchword. As for me, I'll get more good out of going to the gym and sweating a little more of this lard off.

Meanwhile, I'll check in on the talking heads later tonite.

It's just sad that I've concluded the SOFU is a waste of time. As a political junkie, you'd think I'd conclude just the opposite.

He'll want to spend money we don't have, on projects we don't need. He'll continue to be unphased by the $14 trillion in debt he's buried me, my children, my children's children's children's children's children's children under. He won't take the needed action to fix our foreign policies... so we can regain our place as the pre-eminent superpower.

A blood bill is coming. Who is going to pay it?

He'll take responsibility for nothing, even though if he had managed to keep this ship from sinking, he'd take the credit for everything.

We have the government we deserve. And until he is lawfully replaced... we'll just have to hunker down and survive and then spend the next several generations repairing the damage he caused.

So why listen to him... spin that?

So much for the bogus civility dodge: Date night at the SOTU.

Now being refered to as "Date Night at the State of the Union," who better to illustrate our new-found civility then having the Belle of Botox sit with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor?

FOX News: Cantor Has Invited Pelosi To Sit With Him

FOX News' Jim Angle reports that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) has
invited Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to sit with him at tonight's State
of the Union.

And then, to show how bogus even making the effort is, that same Belle of Botox?

  • I thank @GOPLeader for his #SOTU offer, but I invited my friend Rep. Bartlett from MD yesterday & am pleased he accepted

Another reason to hold funding at current levels for higher ed, and don't allow colleges to set their own tuition levels.

Public colleges and universities have been complaining about money for a long time. Like teachers, hey frequently forget who they work for, and no matter how much money they get, it's never enough.

In Washington State, the legislature allowed these schools to increase their own tuition up to 13% for each of the past two years... or roughly 27 or so percent overall.

Like medicine, costs are frequently driven by policy... and not the other way around.

Would the glasses I bought in November of '08 cost $700 if half that figure wasn't covered by insurance?

Well, here's a little number I stumbled across from the increasingly read and well thought of Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion blog that takes a snapshot of funding from the federal level for these schools.

Do we get our money's worth? Are tuition increases driven by funding availability?

You think?

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Bubbles in the Quad

Peter Thiel has been making a splash lately by calling higher education “the next bubble.” In a fairly recent Wall Street Journal article, he went as far as to say “Liberals [...] blame our education system, but liberals are the last ones to fix it, just wanting to throw money [at education] “University administrators are the equivalent of subprime mortgage brokers,” he says, “selling you a story that you should go into debt massively, that it’s not a consumption decision, it’s an investment decision. Actually, no, it’s a bad consumption decision. Most colleges are four-year parties.”

A recent study from professors at NYU and UVA may have corroborated this theory, “New research finds that 45 percent of undergraduate college students show no significant improvement in the areas of critical thinking and complex reasoning by the end of their sophomore year. … [Students] were tested using the Collegiate Learning Assessment, a standardized essay-based test that measures analytic and problem solving skills, reports the New York Times…. Inside Higher Ed explains some of the study’s results: 45 percent of students “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning” during the first two years of college. 36 percent of students “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning” over four years of college. Those students who do show improvements tend to show only modest improvements.”

In my neuroscience course, a similar study was cited that suggested the attitudes of college students have changed dramatically too. In the 1970s, students had an overwhelming focus on “finding one’s place” in college. Now, we’re all apparently out to get jobs. The presidents of universities, though, have consistently wanted to promote critical thinking. It seems like everyone is losing out!

And it also seems like this cycle is continuing until further notice. Even the most vigorous autodidact would have trouble signaling their intelligence to a prospective employer over some kid who got a couple of good scores on some tests in a conventional, name-brand college. (Heck, I couldn’t get my first job a salon sweeping up hair since I wasn’t enrolled in beauty school!) Thiel has been trying to save a few nerdy souls from the fate of debt and hangovers, starting an initiative to give thousands of dollars to any budding entrepreneur under the age of twenty who dare drop out of their respective school.

While this might be helping a few elite entrepreneurs, I wonder when we’ll see the people who really don’t need to go to an expensive school (that goes for you, photography majors at NYU!) start to drop out and have their departments disintegrate. Cornell is on the vanguard, disposing of their education department at the end of the year. Expensive resources make a great university, but it can also render it totally ill-fitting if one’s career prospects would lead them to become a teacher at a high school. It just doesn’t make financial sense.

Yet in the past few decades, America has seen many attempts to legislate college “affordability” through various measures like increasing federal funding for student loans, or even preventing “bad choices” in the case of New York. This is a popular political stunt since it holds noble aspirations, though the strategies themselves are rarely effective. For instance, a crux of the Obama administration’s goals, as stated on the website of the Vice President’s Middle Class Taskforce, is “increasing loans and grants, [to ensure that] families will always be able to count on the help they expect.” Yet Econ 101 suggests, and empirical evidence corroborates, an increase in federal loans, Pell grants, and other assistance programs results in higher tuition over time. According to a study by Bridget Long of Harvard University, private four year colleges increased tuition prices by more than two dollars for every dollar increase in Pell Grants, and public colleges increased theirs by .97 for every dollar increase. From 1979 to the present day, college tuition has increased in price by roughly 160%, while the average median family income has increased by 10%. So, maybe our over-valuation of college has hurt us twofold.

It is my contention that the focus is too high on signaling that one can get into a school, rather than critically evaluating the content of the work produced. In the NYU/UVA study, “the results also showed that many students are not engaging in a challenging curriculum. Half of the students did not take a course requiring 20 pages of writing over a typical semester and 32 percent did not take a course that required at least 40 pages of reading per week.” What puzzles me more, though, are the people who know they will incur tremendous debt to go into low-paying industries for this sake. There is no shame in not going to college, especially if it is obvious that one does not want to pursue a conventional career that requires a certain degree. Heck, if it wasn’t so critical to signaling my intelligence when applying for jobs in journalism or finance, I doubt I would be enrolled. Alas, there are few ways to short this bubble and I certainly do not want to be the first one to try.

This article was originally posted on The Politicizer, a web magazine started by Kathleen McCaffrey and Conor Rogers.

As the legislature reviews the self-serving pap of giving the money-junkies of our university system the ability to charge whatever and whenever they like... while we lack any list of massive cuts in pay and personnel... (Did we really need to pay the guy running the UDub a $905,004 -$620,004 salary, $250,000 of deferred compensation, $23,000 of retirement pay and $12,000 of car and housing allowance. (He only received the deferred compensation if he completed his contract) in compensation a year?) in the midst of this horrific recession, we need to keep all of these things in mind.

Our University system is a good one. Giving them the power to make tuition unaffordable to the people supporting this system will not make it better... but it will drive an ever larger wedge between the higher ed system and those it is, allegedly, here to serve.

Monday, January 24, 2011

The democratian thought-process explained.

I wondered how such an obviously biased, left wing rag could even remotely pawn themselves off as an unbiased, non-partisan news organ.

Now I know. Here's the explanation, with thanks to Professor Jacobsen for his able assistance.


The democratian blows it again: Big Plans at UW

As someone who served, all-too-briefly, as a tackling dummy walk-on in 1977 at Husky Stadium (My abortive effort as a walk-on in Spring Practice cut off by a weapons instructor reassignment to Saudi Arabia... my return to complete the AROTC program in '81 precluding further involvement... that and a desire to avoid getting flattened like a steam roller was building a road. ) I have an affinity for Husky Stadium: some small amount of my blood left on a vastly different rug in the shadow of the Lake Washington end and bodily fluids left on the hundred and hundreds of stadium steps from running those bad boys... so, I understand, probably better then the kool-aid drinker who wrote this editorial, what's going on there.

In part, I have a level of agreement with what was written... but it begins and ends here:

To its credit, after a misguided-but-brief effort to entice the Legislature to pay for the renovation, Washington is funding the project through private donations and expected increased stadium revenue.

DISagreement starts here:

That need for increased revenue is what necessitates the relocation of the students.

Utter nonsense, of course.

The UW is perfectly capable of not doing this, yet another in a series of renovations, at all. In that regard, this amounts to a colossal waste of money.

What we're talking about here is dumping an unnecessary quarter of a billion dollars into a facility that will be used for football around 6 times per year.

Spending $250 million dollars on anything that will be used for 6 days a year is, well, moronic.

Particularly in the face of this little tidbit:

During the renovation, UW will play its 2012 home football season, and the November 26, 2011, Apple Cup game against Washington State at Qwest Field.
So, the obvious question becomes this:

If the Dawgs can play a season and a third at Qwest... then why can't they play EVERY home game there, permanently?


Qwest Field, paid for, for the most part, by public dollars (let's never forget that Qwest is a PUBLIC facility) that have already been spent.

The Seahawks use it 10 or so times a year. So why is it that it's so damned important that we have a third unnecessary stadium (The Kingdome could STILL be serving us for a lot less money then the billion taxpayers spent on Qwest and Safeco) to blow dollars in?

The renovation is not something Huskyville NEEDS to have... it is, instead, something Huskyville WANTS to have.

And we're not, I believe, in a WANTS to have economy.

Yeah, it's a shame that we don't have the Nike equivalent up here... although I am reminded of a day during the stadium fight in Olympia when Paul Allen made enough money... on one day... to build 3 Qwest Fields and put an NFL team in each.

But why we don't is irrelevant. THAT we don't is the thing, and we never will.

Oregon isn't doing as well as they are because of facilities. After all, facilities don't make up for all the disadvantages Oregon has to overcome.

First, Oregon is in, well, Oregon. And who wants to play football for, or live in a train wreck like that? No matter what kind of castle Phil builds them, it's still in, well, Oregon. (Folks... there's a reason why NBA championships, for example, don't live there... and facilities ain't it. When a LeBron James hits the free agent market... Blazer-land ain't on the list))

Second, they've had a football team that has needed a probation officer more then a head coach. Is that what we want?

Do we want to hearken back to the Neuheisel Era (which took place, I might add, in a day when Husky facilities still lagged behind Nike's Palace.) and get players without regard to academics, character and integrity? (Thugs like Blount and Masoli come to mind)

There are only so many Don James types to go around. And when we get one... he wins. When we don't, we don't. And right now, it's fairly clear that while we may have one in the Sark, Oregon definitely has one now.

So get past the idea that we need to renovate Husky stadium. We don't.

Because in all of this, we can never lose sight of why we have college football in the first place.

It is first for the students; second for the student athletes, third for the community and fourth for the jock sniffers, aka the big shot Alum. And that duty to the students comes long before the "cold, hard business" nonsense the rag babbles about.

Football finances the rest of the athletic program there. I get that.

But what the rag is advocating is a move from a college athletic program to a huge, semi-pro level program, where the actual justification of college football... the students and the student athletes... are completely forgotten in a cloud of cash.

As it is now, Student season tickets average around $125... which seems like a reasonable cost. When this pig has completed it's non-student-focused lipsticking transplant, that cost goes up to as much as $900.

Is this where I point out that season ticket prices for the National Champion Eastern Washington University Eagles range from $25 per season... PER SEASON... for kids, to $90... PER SEASON.

SectionBench (A/F)Bench (B/E)Premium (C/D)Visitors (Q/M/P/N)Visitors (02/01)Endzone (HIJK)
Season Seats$70$80$90$70$70$60
Alumni Season$60$70
Family Pack
(2 Adults, 3 Children)
Kids Season$25

And these guys are the National Champions.

So, oddly, what we have here is yet another effort by the democratian to shill for an agenda that is unsupportable, unjustifiable and which will hurt those it's alleged to serve the most.

You know... like the steaming pile that is the I-5 Bridge replacement and loot rail?

And there is no excuse... or need... for that.

Jacking the students, which is what's going to happen here, is never justified.

Student ticket prices are going to hit the stratosphere, pricing many of them out of games altogether.

And while that has no impact on the morons writing these editorials, well... they've proven themselves unconcerned when others are the ones required to spend money.