Head West, Turn Right

Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna's Must Read - July 2008

2008-07-23T12:28:00.000-07:00

I’m pleased to announce another major accomplishment in our ongoing efforts to fight high-tech crimes and protect children from online dangers. Building on the work of my Youth Internet Safety Task Force, the AGO’s High-Tech Unit and our Consumer Protection Division, we’ve added valuable new information to the Internet Safety section of our website.

In partnership with national Internet safety expert Linda Criddle, author of the Internet safety manual Look Both Ways, we’ve added fresh information for youth, adults, seniors and educators.

Our top tips for youth explain:

· How young people can put personal information at risk just by taking surveys, participating in chat, discussion boards and forums, online dating, creating personal e-mail aliases, sharing images and video, and gaming online.

· Most importantly, how to protect themselves online.

For adults, we offer:

· Ways to be smarter about spending and saving on-line, like creating strong passwords, identifying secure sites and safely participating in on-line auctions and classifieds;

· Tips for defensive computing, including things to keep in mind as you browse, download or share information via the Web; and

· Things to keep in mind while mobile computing, including using public computers and mobile phones.

Parents and educators will find information on:

· How to protect kids from on-line bullies;

· Unintentional consequences of sharing student information on-line, including photos, school sports schedules and other information that could expose students to predators.

· A checklist for family online safety, including a family Internet safety contract.

· A link to iKeepSafe Parent Resource Center, which offers additional resources and a free ParentCare download for MySpace parents.

The site also includes these tips for seniors:

· How to safely socialize on-line and avoid on-line dating scams;

· How to avoid scams that prey on emotions when you are posting information about weddings or deaths;

· Other specialized advice for those with limited experience on the Internet.

Please take a few moments to review these additions to our website. My hope is that you will join me in my efforts to educate Washington citizens, particularly our young people, about online dangers by forwarding these links to all of your family members, friends and neighbors who could benefit from this information. And, by asking each of them to do the same.

Having been at the forefront of this important issue in recent years, I cannot stress enough the importance of education when it comes to protecting ourselves and our loved ones from online crimes.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Rob McKenna

Attorney General

Conservative Majority Project (Oregon)

2008-07-02T09:19:00.000-07:00

Oregon Conservatives now have an outlet and a way to support conservative candidates via the net-roots.

It is the Conservative Majority Project and they were pretty successful in the primaries and are looking to try to make a dent in the liberal Democrat controlled legislature.

You can visit their website here and that has a link to their blog also here.

Their plan is to try to raise $200,000 via the netroots system and target some vulnerable Democrats while foregoing the traditional "consultant" class.

That means that more of the money will actually make it right down to the street and voter contact!

Rob Kremer has a pretty good track record of running those kinds of campaigns and if the conservative netroots can even be half as efffective at fundraising as the liberal nutroots then look for some sparks to fly come November.

I have already headed over there to make my small contribution and have forwarded the effort on to some of my friends. I hope you do the same!

Yip Yip

Quote of the Day

2008-04-14T19:57:00.000-07:00

"And what are the grounds for his supercilious disdain? If he were a war hero, if he had a career of remarkable civic achievement or public service — then he could perhaps be excused an unattractive but in a sense understandable hauteur. But what has Barack Obama accomplished that entitles him to look down on his fellow Americans? "

-- William Kristol

A Tip of the Toque to Rob at Say Anything Blog

Blogs for Mccain

2007-03-01T21:50:00.000-08:00

Check out the new site www.blogs4mccain.com.

Bush, the man, and his speech

2006-05-16T07:31:00.000-07:00

I've liked Bush enough to vote for him twice. But on this immigration issue he's shown himself to be incredibly out of touch with most of America, and out of touch with way more than most of right-of-center America. This guy gets it and states it flawlessly.

I'm not sorry that I voted for Bush, given the alternatives. But I grow weary defending him.

Lynching?

2006-04-29T17:24:00.000-07:00

I laughed out loud. I hope I didn't disturb anyone in the Starbucks in Sehome Village (here in Bellingham).

"Immigration rights" advocates have been commiserating, ranting, and consoling one another about the continued presence of the Minuteman project in Whatcom County. As reported in The Bellingham Herald yesterday, the Washington State Human Rights Commission, descended on Bellingham to hear all the teeth-gnashing. Predictably, Western professor Larry Estrada (see David Horowitz' The Professors) attended and "delivered perhaps the most heated denunciation of the Minuteman group" and, I assume, got the 200 strong ovation of "whoops and...applause."

“Latinos have been many times persecuted,” Estrada said. “We have been under the gun by vigilantes, and that’s not going to happen any more."

Even more inspiring was another quote the Herald highlighted in a related article about the Minuteman response:

"I ask the law enforcement: What is your plan when the lynching happens and what is your plan when the intimidation happens?"
-Bern Haggerty, 41, Bellingham attorney

Coming from an attorney? ...

That's where I laughed.

Bellingham/Western walkout

2006-04-06T11:12:00.000-07:00

The newest Herald story is up. It includes this cute photo.

I also woke up early enough to catch the early morning newscast from KVOS and they did cover it...with a short little snippet from our counter-stand in the square.

Still lacking more photos...hunting them down. Interesting note from the Herald story--apparently Tom Williams from the local Minutemen chapter was on hand downtown. Good to know there was someone on the other end of the march.

Background notes:

Don't know how much you've heard about MEChA, Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (Chicano student movement of Aztlán), the organization behind the walkout. It's a separatist group with the avowed intent to create:

A nation autonomous and free - culturally, socially, economically, and politically- will make its own decisions on the usage of our lands, the taxation of our goods, the utilization of our bodies for war, the determination of justice (reward and punishment) (emphasis mine), and the profit of our sweat.
-“Plan Espiritual de Aztlan” (spiritual plan of Aztlán)

BUT, according to Western professor Larry Estrada, who was recently featured in David Horowitz new book, The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in

America:

“MEChA has never stood for secession from the United States,” [Estrada] said. “It stands for involvement and inclusion.” (The Bellingham Herald - April 4)

Estrada also denies Horowitz' charge that he is a founder of MEChA, even though he admits he was present when they formed in 1969.

Crossposted at Meneltarma
(visit Western Unraveled for future updates)

Invasion

2006-03-27T16:06:00.000-08:00

(photo courtesy NYTimes.com: 500,000 demonstrators Saturday in Los Angeles)

And now the time for reckoning has come. Not only are they here illegally, but they are developing the inevitable audacity to change our laws. Rush had a lovely analogy today--this is like watching thieves unionize to lobby for fewer cops on the street! And congress will listen to them. They will ignore real American citizens, who by and large, are opposed to granting rights to those who violate our laws--who aren't even subject to our laws. (see recent poll results on the AP)

If some things make you sick, you are not alone.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Cleanup on Aisle 5

2006-03-21T09:50:00.001-08:00

Our apologies for the mess left in the comments. The garbage has been cleaned out, and word verification is now enabled.

- The Management

All Quiet on the Western Front?

2006-02-24T20:01:00.000-08:00

Cross Posted at: Respectfully Republican and Reagan's Children Blog

Commenting on the upcoming midterm elections, Seattle PI columnis Connelly, writes today that Washington State “will have a front-row seat in the battle for Congress.” True, campaigns are kicking off, but by and large, there is still relatively little “chatter” in the media about a forthcoming fight. So just where is this knockdown battle to rue all battles that Connelly envisions?

While Congressional Republicans want to increase and consolidate their hold on power, many strategists are predicting this could be a bad year for Republicans. In fact, it’s been popular to suggest that something like the 1994 sweep, but in reverse fashion, could occur. Democrats, who have long been salivating for a chance to regain influence in Congress, are gearing up, and you better believe they are willing to pull out all the stops. On a larger scale, other campaigns in the West, especially in California, seem especially ripe for a clash of interests.

Back in my home state, even with the state legislature in Olympia churning at full speed, on the surface at least, it’s politics as usual. In my best estimation, the incumbents and their respective challengers are quietly posturing and plotting for the upcoming campaign season, while quietly building up their war chests.

Actually there is some action to be seen: several Washington Republicans are opposing the UAE-based DPW deal brokered by the Bush Administration. The dissension is nothing new and it’s really just more posturing. Congressman Dave Reichert for example, has been on the opposite side of a number of issues championed by the Bush Whitehouse, from the Terry Schiavo case, to drilling in ANWR. He's also the only Republican Congressman east of the Cascades.

With all of the political calculations spinning, the issues are beginning to take shape: alternative energy, technology & innovation, and the continuing war on terror all seem to be ‘dinner table’ issues that Republicans hope to capitalize on.

Meanwhile, Democrats no doubt hope to keep the Abramoff scandal front and center. Whether that makes political sense when many Democrats had their hands caught in the cookie jar too, remains to be seen. But besides a ‘scandal plagued Administration’ where is the beef from Democrats? According to Connelly's column, Gregoire distanced herself from Dean in a recent visit; what, not a Deaniac?

If Connelly’s right, and I think he is, things will start heating up around here soon enough. Republican candidates like Senate hopeful Mike McGavick are still on the Lincoln Day speaking tour. By the time the last Lincoln Day speech is done, we should see more substance from both sides. And trust me, I’ll be there, as Connelly suggests, hopefully with a front row seat.

Operation Coverup Underway at UW

2006-02-22T10:54:00.000-08:00

If denigrating the memory of a great American hero wasn't enough, now the ASUW is trying to cover it all up. The Daily reports that the minutes of the Febuary 7th meeting (where the controversy started) have been amended, and certain statements adjusted. The title of the story is foreshadows what many have already speculated, now that the Leftists of been caught, they'll do or say anything to deny they've done anyting wrong: "National Attention Creates Confusion".

In an earlier post, I reported that the moonbats behind the comments were caught in a precarious "doublespeak". But how does one get away from comments like 'A Marine isn't the sort of person we want to be producing' or 'we don't need anymore monuments to rich white men'. The honest and frank answer is: you don't get away from them, you take responsibility and apologize.

But instead of taking responsibility for their actions, it's becoming clear the Leftists would rather just erase history and write in what makes them feel good. Operation Coverup is in full swing at UW.

Leftists At UW Caught In Doublespeak

2006-02-16T23:35:00.000-08:00

Cross Posted at Respectfully Republican.

Finally the Leftists at UW are having their feet held to the fire over the insensitive, race-baiting, and lunatic comments they made regarding a proposed memorial for WWII hero, and UW Alumnus, Gregoy "Pappy" Boyington.

Read the original and official minutes recorded at the ASUW meeting, where the controversy began.

In typical Leftist fashion, the irresponsible ingrates who made the comments are in full spin mode. 'Oh, we didn't mean that, our words were "taken out of context"... Yadda Yadda Yadda'.

And Seattle media's coverage, while helpful in raising the importance of the controversy, has been generally slanted to ease the pain of the offensive and rabid mouthpieces.

See e.g. "UW Students Face Barbs Of Free Speech" (Seattle PI) and "UW Student Senate To Vote Again On Memoriall" (KOMO 4).

As if a do-over is going to solve the underlying problem at UW, and what's this "barbs of free speech" crap all about? Damn skippy free speech has barbs, and responsibility for your words is one of them--but the PI article actually appears to try and remove any inroads to personal responsibility.

I don't doubt that some people have harassed and threatened those who spoke so ardently against honoring an American hero. While I would condemn threats of violence and profane harassment, these moronic Leftists need to be taught a lesson; one they won't soon forget. In fact, they should be held to account for their offensive comments, and made an example of to the larger community, as examples of what today's Academy produces in contrast to the 30's when UW churned out heroes like Pappy!

But it's also possible they aren't 100% at fault for their ignorance, after all, the Academy isn't exactly friendly towards the military these days, and with professors brainwashing students at every chance, this type of "doublespeak" should be understood, if not expected.

I mean, where's that security blanket of the classroom? Where's the sympathetic professor to defend you against the 'Zionist' neo-con enemy? Welcome to the real world kids!!!

Stay tuned to this controversy, as we'll see in the next few days whether the campus Leftists are successful in ducking out of responsibility. Their doublespeak, after all, is already being aided by the UW's student ("moobat-run") newspaper, The Daily.

Persecution? How about Pay It Forward?!?

Update 2/17: Michelle Malkin is on top of this story, as well. See: "The Fight Over Pappy Boyington"

Seattle Moonbats, At It Again?

2006-02-11T16:57:00.000-08:00

Cross Posted at Respectfully Republican.

Photo Credit: Money Mamchur

I am beginning to get used to the idea of the Seattle moonbats marching quite frequently. Free speech for them means snarling traffic while they rant and rave about Bush, recruiters in the schools, and basically whatever else they feel like opining about.

But today, I noticed something strangely different. In the procession dominated by blacks, one could see American, Canadian, Ethiopian and Somali flags, in addition to a few others from African nations. The procession was solemn, yet energized by a man on a sound system who clearly wasn't a native english speaker.

It turns out these weren't the Seattle moonabats I expected. Instead, they were a group of mainly Africans who were protesting the arrest of a local Somali imam for an immigration violation. My co-worker snapped the above photo, and immediately titled it "dirka dirka".

Photo Credit: Seattle Times

But the imam they are supporting, while not charged with a violent crime (terrorism-related or otherwise), was charactherized in this Seattle PI article as being "anti-American" with ties to a group the U.S. State Department has listed as a terrorist organization. In court, he was depicted as a dangerous man bv a felon who is currently in the witness protection program (not your most credible source). The PI and Seattle MSM in general, of course, are not to be commended for their uncritical reporting on Islamism (see Stefan Sharkansky's series of posts titled "Selective Willingness to Offend, I, II, and III).

Photo Credit: Seattle PI

I'm interested to see how the hearings progress, but I'm even more interested to see how the Seattle Muslim community responds to them, and what are sure to be more "insensitive" cases of editorializing Islam. Will Seattle's good-natured, peaceful Muslims riot, or will they continue to voice protest peacefully?

Update: Saturday's Seattle Times takes a somewhat different approach to the story: see FBI Says Imam Has Links To Terrorism.

A carefully orchestrated outrage

2006-02-09T00:03:00.000-08:00

The following analysis was sent to me recently by my cousin Chris Barnekov, an economist working within the beltway. I think it is insightful and I hope it gets out.

A Carefully Orchestrated Outrage
by Chris Barnekov

It is now very reliably reported that the eruptions across the Middle East were carefully nurtured by none other than the chief Imam for Denmark (Formanden for Islamisk Trossamfund -- President of the Islamic Society), one Ahmad Abu Laban, assisted by other Danish Muslim leaders.

Twelve drawings were actually published in Jyllands-Posten, but these imams added others -- none of which was published in Denmark (or elsewhere). I have seen some of these additional drawings, and three are incredibly offensive. So much so that I am not adding them to this post. One shows Mohammed with the face and ears of a pig; another shows him in the standard Muslim prayer position, but being sodomized by a male dog; the third depicts him as a pedophile. The Danish Muslim leaders showed these drawings around the Middle East.

These additional three cartoons are obviously made by amateurs, not the artists who made the 12 sketches actually published (which in my opinion are not particularly offensive). The three phony drawings are HIGHLY offensive and disgusting, even to me (and I am certainly no fan of the "prophet"). I can understand why Muslims would respond violently to these, but these were circulated by the Danish Imams who knew perfectly well that they were not published by Danes.

It took the Imams four months to orchestrate the planned uproar (and to make arrangements for such touches as having Danish flags available for burning -- isn't it odd that the street mobs all over the Middle East had Danish flags readily at hand? How many Arab markets regularly stock the Dannebrog?). Evidently this whole affair has been carefully orchestrated by the Muslim leaders of Denmark, no doubt with considerable assistance and funding from their radical Islamist sponsors across the Middle East.

In addition, Abu Laban is recorded as saying one thing to the Danish media, but the opposite the same day to Arabic media. If you can read Danish, here is one link to a recent documented example: http://ekstrabladet.dk/VisArtikel.iasp?PageID=333164 . Essentially, Abu Laban told Danish media on January 31 that he would urge Arabs to stop the assault on Denmark, but later the same day he told Al Jazeera (the Arab TV channel) that the Muslim citizens must "do their duty in defending the prophet" and that he rejoiced at the uproar. [Later he denied having said this, although Danish TV (DR) has the recording!] This is in the tradition of such 'Muslim leaders' as the late, unlamented Yasser Arafat, who was famous for saying one thing in English and the opposite in Arabic -- a trick he repeated many, many times (and usually got away with!).

Why are they doing this? It is a long term strategy, a frequently repeated tactic. Muslim leaders seize upon some (real or, as here, manufactured) affront to stir up violence and attract recruits. In this case, they thought they could pressure a small country with large export volumes to the Middle East. They hope to force Islamic law in place of Danish freedoms and to further radicalize Muslims in Denmark and abroad. It is a strategy employed over and over again to move toward the goal which has not changed in 1300 years – the subjugation of the entire world to Allah and Islamic law.

What is especially worth noting is that this campaign of violence and hatred has been orchestrated by the Muslim leaders in Denmark – the same leaders who meet with church leaders for dialogue and "understanding." It would be most interesting to follow the money that funded their travel around the Middle East for four months before the violence was ripe.

Whither reform

2006-02-01T09:24:00.000-08:00

Candidates for the House majority leader position are courting the right people: Rep. Mike Pence and his Republican Study Committee. For those who don't know (there are many) the RSC is the truly conservative bloc in the Republican party responsible for getting the first budget cuts we have seen in a long time after Katrina finally gave them an excuse to push some pork-busting measures.

Two of the majority leader candidates (minus Roy Blunt--not a big loss), have sat up to answer questions from the RSC. This if hopefully a strong sign the party, in general, is going to allow greater RSC influence in congressional affairs--they are the only group with the ability to save Republican credibility on spending issues.

Read Tim Chapman's article on Townhall.com for details of the RSC questioning--and a greater sense of what the future holds.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Cowering giants

2006-01-30T01:17:00.000-08:00

Google et al. isn't exactly reacting favorably to calls from the Capital to attend a congressional briefing on February 1 about it's cooperation with Chinese censorship:

Microsoft and Cisco Systems have refused to attend the event, while Google and Yahoo are non-committal, officials said.

The firms were asked to attend the February 1 briefing by the Congressional Human Rights Caucus following uproar caused by search giant Google's decision last week to censor websites and content banned by China's propaganda chiefs.

"We have heard from Microsoft that no representative from the company will attend the briefing. So, with Cisco Systems, this makes two companies that have confirmed they're opting out," [said] Lynne Weil, spokeswoman for caucus co-chairman Democratic Representative Tom Lantos.

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

Google: the big engine that couldn't?

2006-01-29T17:06:00.000-08:00

Here is a facinating piece from the UK Times--a long read but I was riveted. Frankly it is the best "problem of Google" coverage I have read.

Some excerpts from John Lanchester's analysis:

Until now, Chinese net users who were blocked from accessing a site knew that the information was there and was being kept from them by their own government. From now on it is Google which will be keeping data from them, in direct contradiction of its own declared mission “to organise the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”. ...

...It seemed that the company’s real motto was something more along the lines of “don’t be evil unless the Chinese government asks you to and there’s serious money in it”. ...

...Google is cool, but Google has the potential to destroy the publishing industry, the newspaper business, high street retailing and our privacy. Not that it will necessarily do any of these things, but for the first time, considered soberly, they are technologically possible. The company is rich and determined and is not going away any time soon. It knows what it is doing technologically; socially, though, it can’t possibly know and I don’t think anyone else can either.

Lanchester weaves in plenty of history and context so it is not entirly a Google bashfest.

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

Politicizing Sex Predator Legislation

2006-01-29T14:55:00.000-08:00

Cross-posted at Respectfully Republican.

This Sunday's editorial in the Seattle PI by Thomas Shapley is a poorly written political hit-piece. Lamenting his receipt of a "sex offender notification" mailer by the Speaker's Roundtable (a conservative PAC?) Shapley begins by calling this mailer "sleazy".

The target of one of the mailers was Rep. Pat Lantz. Shapley explains the "scam" this way:

On the opening day of the legislative session, House Republicans demanded the full House vote immediately on complex legislation to toughen punishment of sex offenders that hadn't even had a public hearing. It was a tawdry try by the minority caucus leadership to grab some limelight and gin up a "gotcha" issue to use against Democrats in this year's election campaign. The postcard hit piece is slam-dunk evidence of that.

Democrats are rallying against the postcards, but at the same time, are replying by saying things dangerously close to condoning certain types of sex abuse crimes (i.e. making a differentiation between known, versus, unknown to the victim). It's not hard to tell that this was an effective move by Republicans, and an ineffective response by Democrats. Knocked back on their heels by this "stunt", Democrats are not used to such brawny leadership by the minority Party.

That is part of the reason they have not been able to effectively mount a response. The second part really boils down to an idiotic attempt to use "moral indignation" at what the Republicans have done, when we're talking about one of the worst forms of crime that destroys the lives of innocent people.

Shapley acknowledges this, and states, "The paraded outrage and pro forma demands for apology are largely parliamentary stagecraft (by Democrats). So why should the rest of us care about such partisan potshots?"

Unfortunately, he then continues by failing to recognize the biggest reason why we should care: Republicans have proposed solid legislation, that would put sex-offenders behind bars for life. Democrats are so afraid of giving the Republicans an inch of the spotlight, that they shunned good legislation, and ended up looking like they were "soft" on crime, and albeit in a round-about way, more supportive of sex-offenders than their victims.

Wrapping up, Shapley asks a no-brainer question, likely trying to give the appearance of an open-minded and un-biased editorialist, you know, typical "media saves the day with a previously unheard of, and brilliant solution:

What the rest of us want to know is why a guy who committed such heinous crimes lives in any of our communities. What are lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans, going to do to keep this type of predator locked up?

Republicans already gave it a good shot. Democrats reacted poorly, and are now running their mouths rather than taking up the issue.

My suggestion: rather than apologizing, Republicans should capitalize on this rare opportunity that has been created for them. Take the lead on something momentous, and charge forward! Whether they will do that, is really what remains to be seen.

Fear of a backlash from voters is intuitive, but there is no calculus to measure that. From a strategy perspective, getting the legislation passed in both chambers and signed by "Chris" is the best move for Republicans. Then we can truly lay claim to being: "tough on crime", "protectors of the family", and "shrewd lawmakers".

Spanking Google

2006-01-26T19:10:00.000-08:00

From the Financial Times:

Google will be called to task in Washington next month following a controversial decision by the internet search engine to launch a China-based version of its website that will censor results to avoid angering the country’s Communist government.

The decision by Chris Smith, a Republican congressman from New Jersey who chairs a House subcommittee on Human Rights, to call for a February 16 hearing to examine the operating procedures of US internet companies in China, represents the first signs of what could become a serious backlash against Google and other internet companies in Washington that are perceived as capitulating to the Chinese government.

I was livid when I heard of Google's decision to placate China for a bigger buck. After canceling my Google ads account, and sending them a letter about it, I sat back and bemoaned my own continuing reliance on such a beautiful search engine.

For that matter, as this UK Sunday Times article points out, bloggers in general are guilty of hypocrisy, even without relying on the Google big block engine.

Many of the bloggers who are most critical of China's human rights policies make their voices heard using Chinese-made PCs. Probably wearing cheap Chinese-made trainers while they're at it.

(Cheap trainers? huh? I thought these were pajamas I was wearing!)

Point taken--I can still be mad can't I?

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

Souter v. grassroots

2006-01-22T17:53:00.000-08:00

The effort to oust Supreme Court Justice David Souter from his house and property has remained on the march. Although few honestly think it will work--it's certainly a worthy effort since no one is breaking any laws of course.

The effort is in response to the Kelo v. New London case, in which some home owners were evicted from their properties for the "greater good" of having a business established on their property and having higher tax productivity on the area: It's called "eminent domain" in law-speak; another way of stretching the beyond recognition. I thought I posted on this last year when it hit the news...but I haven't been able to turn it up in the archives.

Here's the Associated Press piece on the latest (admittedly retaliatory) efforts.

The group, led by a California man, wants Justice David Souter's home seized for the purpose of building an inn called "Lost Liberty Hotel."

They submitted enough petition signatures — only 25 were needed — to bring the matter before voters in March. This weekend, they're descending on Souter's hometown, the central New Hampshire town of Weare, population 8,500, to rally for support.

"This is in the tradition of the Boston Tea Party and the Pine Tree Riot," organizer Logan Darrow Clements said

Here's a few links for info on the Kelo decision.

A good abstract at Oyez.org

Justice John Paul Stevens, the majority held that the city's taking of private property to sell for private development qualified as a "public use" within the meaning of the takings clause. The city was not taking the land simply to benefit a certain group of private individuals, but was following an economic development plan. Such justifications for land takings, the majority argued, should be given deference. The takings here qualified as "public use" despite the fact that the land was not going to be used by the public.

Complete opinions (Steven's majority opinion and Kennedy's concurrence plus O'Connor's dissent and Thomas's concurring dissent)

Crossposted at Meneltarma

McGavick/Stevens Alliance?

2006-01-19T20:00:00.000-08:00

Cross Posted at Respectfully Republican.

That's the latest chatter in the blogosphere (at least from a return search of Technorati for “McGavick”).

Elliot Bundy, a former staffer of Senator Stevens, is reportedly coming to work on the McGavick campaign. That's according to the Washington State Democrats website. Horsesass.org “coincidently” picked up the same exact talking points. In what could be the first tit-for-tat-spat of the campaign, we will have to wait and see if the McGavick campaign takes the bait and fires back.

My feeling is that they won't. With a full slate of upcoming public speaking engagements, McGavick appears to be taking the high road, focusing instead on a positive Republican agenda for Washington State. Here's an interesting column by Joni Balter about the Stevens v. Cantwell dynamic.

Personally, I think it's hilarious that Goldy and the Washington Dems want to paint McGavick as too extreme for Washington State, because all I hear from conservative Republicans is that he's too much of a mainstream moderate. In effect, McGavick's real challenge so far has been reaching out to the grassroots, and placating the conservative elements in the Party. But to win this election, he'll need to bridge the gap between sub-urban moderates and rural conservatives.

I can't wait till Maria starts airing TV Commercials showing oil rigs in the Puget Sound, *enter the seedy voice "Mike McGavick wants to drill for oil - IN THE PUGET SOUND, vote NO on Mike McGavick, he's too extreme for Washington." Believe you me, Cantwell's going to be on the edge come late August, early September, and especially during the sprint to November.

This is one promising race ahead of us folks, I hope you're all tuning in.

Smoke in your eye

2006-01-18T12:00:00.000-08:00

Oh? Bellingham isn't so apathetic after all?

One local establishment is under siege for defying the smoking ban passed by voters in November. The Western Front has some good coverage here--take note of the feedback that has already been posted online. Dr. Chris Covert-Bowlds was the primary sponsor and spokesman for the ban campaign.

For what it's worth, I already wrote a piece on the ban last quarter--focusing kind of on the way everyone was falling for the utilitarian arguments of the left. A commenter on that string noted an interesting possible conflict of interest regarding Dr. Covert-Bowlds.

I'll be honest: I hope they keep up the protest (if I can do so without having to think about moral obligations to government)--at least it will keep the issue out in the open. Our constitution was not based on utilitarian "majority rule" ideals.

Do I sound libertarian yet?

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

A Possible Junction

2006-01-06T07:58:00.000-08:00

I truly don't want to be premature or presumptive, but it seems pretty apparant that the era of Ariel Sharon has closed. That seems to be the inevitable. The blogosphere is replete with concern --even trepidation-- about that fact. What does it mean for Israel? What does it mean for the Middle East? Iran? Israel has been blessed with great leaders throughout its history. One after the other, the right man (or right woman) has stepped forward at the right time. My guess is that it will happen again. The key is that whomever it is, it will have to be someone in whom the Israeli public has overwhelming faith and confidence. Personally, I like Benjamin Netanyahu, but I suspect that the majority of Israelis don't have that overwhelming faith and confidence in him.

And what to make of Pat Robertson? On his television show, "The 700 Club," Robertson said, "Sharon was personally a very likable person, and I am sad to see him in this condition, but I think we need to look at the Bible and the Book of Joel. The prophet Joel makes it very clear that God has enmity against those who 'divide my land.' "

One thing I won't do is jump onto the bandwagon and bash Robertson. It's not because I agree with or like what Robertson said. It's because I don't like the people --the usual suspects-- who routinely bash Robertson, and I choose not to be lumped in with them.

What I will do is point out the comments of another anathema and pariah for the left, radio talk show host Michael Savage. On his show yesterday Savage made the observation that Sharon, being almost 78 years old, and 5' 7" tall, and weighing in at 260+ lbs, the argument can be made that God actually went out of his way to keep Sharon alive and healthy 10 years longer than he really deserved, and maybe God did that precisely so Sharon could give Gaza to the Palestineans.

Savage is one of those guys that is reviled by both the left and the right. The left hates him for his ideas. The right is embarrassed by him. I admit that he is bombastic, even incendiary, often to a cartoonish degree. But if you listen patiently, with willing suspension of disbelief, you will not be disappointed and will find genuine pearls in what he says. Just about every day in fact.

You Say You Want a Revolution? Well, Alright.

2006-01-05T13:12:00.000-08:00

If you look closely at the rights extended to us by the US Constitution, you will realize that several of them are not just rights, they are the duties of free peoples. This is because the very EXERCIZE of those specific rights helps us maintain them and all other rights. The first two amendments of the constitution stick out foremost in my mind -- by worshiping as we see fit, we are reminded that our rights are endowed to us by our Creator, not the whim of the state. It is by speaking freely that we keep the flame of freedom lit in the hearts and minds of our fellow citizens, and it is by assembling that we can communicate and coordinate any and all efforts to protect our freedom.

But the second amendment is even more essential, for an unarmed populace is powerless to do anything to protect itself or its freedoms except to call upon and trust in the good graces of the powerful. That is not a bet I care to place. You see, while I do not intend to downplay the usefulness of firearms as a way of securing food (hunting) or self-defense, I believe, as many of us on the right do, that the core purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect us all from Tyranny -- and not just to arm the military to proterct us from foreign tyrrany, but to arm the populace against domestic tyrrany. The Founding Fathers had taken up arms in such a cause once, they intended to provide for the possibility of a repeat performance in the future.

I came to the above realization while pondering the recent brouhaha regarding the Christmas Cross that Lars Larson was planning. At least on poster at Portland IndyMedia made comments fantazizing about doing bodily harm to Lars. I supported Lars' decision not to go through with the cross raising, believing he had taken the moral high ground. But two things about the incident struck me: One was that I found it highly ironic that those on the Left (Let's be clear here, I'm not talking about liberals, I'm talking about THE LEFT -- people whose politics make Howard Dean seem centrist) would call Lars a Fascist and in the same breath threaten violence to silence him. But while I was bemused, I was not surprised.

The Left's fringe has become stronger, louder, and more openly embraced by the "Party" in general. And it's become apparent to anyone paying attention that the Left is becoming more and more comfortable with the idea of doing anything they must to further their views, including using violence and lawlessness. They also seem more than willing to do what they must to silence the expression of opinions contrary to their own. And while they might believe they are "Freedom Fighters", they are striving for a political and social order that is frighteningly oppressive in its tolerance of personal freedom. It seems more and more apparent that what the Left wants is Revolution, or at least Civil War. Case in point, note the tone taken by the reader "Unapologetic Liberal" in the comment thread of this post at Ace of Spades HQ.

But the left may be biting off more than they can chew.

This was the second impression I got from the Christmas Cross incident. As one conservative (I can't remember who or where) pointed out that this would be unwise, ever since a leftist idiot revealed Lars' home phone number at Michael Moore appearance and Lars began receiving death threats, Lars has had a CCW permit and actively exercizes his Second Amendment rights. While Lars decided to back down to prevent violence, if any of the PDX IM crowd really tried to do Lars bodily harm, I'm sure they would regret it -- if they lived.

There's a lesson about the Right to be learned by the left from that angle to the story, just as we are learning about them from their reaction. You see, while there is a fringe element to both sides of the political spectrum, it seems that in recent years, the Right has more and more marginalized its fringe, distancing ourselves from it, rejecting its extremes in a way that the Left has failed to react to their fringe. And while it's popular to cast the Right in the light of being the oppressors, we have for the most part shunned violence and domestic unrest as a means to our ends. We have tried to take the moral high ground, abide by the law, distance ourselves from unscrupulous allies and distinguish ourselves from unscrupulous adversaries.

But we can only be pushed so far. And if we find ourselves in a position where our own ability to push back is all that stands between us and being overrun by those who wish to oppress us, we will push back -- and our push is harder. We strive to uphold and respect the Rule of Law. But if you finally get what you want, if you achieve revolution in the streets and open conflict between us, remember this: We're the ones who believe in and exercize our right to bear arms as a means of protecting our other rights. Usually that means from the random criminal who would mug or rob or rape us or our families. Strategically that means from a tyrant who would invade our country from without. Theoretically, the Framers believed it could mean from a corrupt government that would usurp its authority from within. But make no mistakes. If you try to impose a Marxist order on us through violent overthrow of the Government, we are highly likely to decide that you are a greater threat to our freedom than the Government ever could dream of being.

And you won't like what happens when we take sides.

What Iraq Will Cantwell See?

2005-12-14T08:02:00.000-08:00

If you haven't heard, Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) took off last night for Iraq. She is heading there as a part of an "official election observation delegation".

KOMO TV and KIRO 7 have picked up the AP story.

I opined in an earlier post that Cantwell is trying to cast herself as a champion for the environment, energy, and now it looks like democracy! Er, scratch that last one. In my view, Cantwell is getting her face in the news, and cranking out the press releases like Willy Wonka's choclate factory. Much like that analogy, there's a lot of fudge in her self-reporting, or perhaps more appropriately, self-adulation.

Then again, perhaps Cantwell will come back as a champion of the cause for freedom. Afterall, when Diane Tebelius travelled to observe the elections in Afghanistan last fall, she came back with some powerful insights. Unfortunately, I don't think Cantwell is going at this with an open-mind. Which begs the question, when she returns, what Iraq will Cantwell claim to have seen: the utter failure of the Howard Dean Party, or the hard path to victory of President Bush? In the end, perhaps it's just the simple difference between philosophies; between being optimistic in the face of adversity, or the pessimist who is constantly advocating CUT and RUN.

Either way, I can't wait to see how Cantwell spins her experience in Iraq.

Cantwell gets slick

2005-12-06T08:08:00.000-08:00

Cross posted at Respectfully Republican

Awhile back, I wrote a letter to the editor of the Seattle Times focusing on the apparent absence of Gov. Christine Gregoire from the political and newsmedia spotlight. I remarked (somewhat snidley) that it was hard to discern whether her noticeable absence was a "trick or treat" (alright, alright, it was a dumb Halloween pun).

Of course right after Ron Sims was re-elected, there she was again! Poof, right back in action. (See e.g. Election Night Party at Westin Seattle or better yet, King5 Video and the Seattle PI Election blog captures the same sentiment) My musings about Gregoire's PR strategy seem to have been validated, that is Ron Sims took a page from Al Gore's "failed" playbook. Essentially Gregoire kept off the Sims Happy Bandwagon campaign trail, as an appearance might have sparked backlash against Sims. (My hypothesis was that Gregoire is still followed by storm clouds, and Sims couldn't afford any more rain on his parade) Then again, the personal trash traded between Gregoire and Sims in the 2004 gubernatorial primary is still steaming.

Another interesting media strategy is that of Sen. Maria Cantwell. She's up for re-election in 2006, and it looks like she's finally decided to put up the flag in Washington (state). Today's story in the Seattle Times highlights "comprehensive oil-spill legislation" that Cantwell plans to propose. In my best political estimation, Cantwell will try and sell herself as a "leader on energy and environment issues". She'll try and use her media debut as a Meth Fighter to her advantage as being "tough on crime". And then there's Tech Central's ultra-sizzling expose` of The Senator From Windfall.

But much like Gregoire, where has Cantwell been hiding out--especially in the past six years?!? Despite 772 press releases about her "work for Washington state", I'm skeptical-- at best--about her ability to effect change in this state. Why you ask? Because six years is a long time to wait for someone to "find their voice". We can't afford to have a "back-bench" Senator, we need someone who'll take the lead--someone who doesn't just fly the flag around election time.

Some have speculated that the Seattle media helps "lazy" or seemingly voiceless politicians get re-elected. I think in Cantwell's case, having the MSM help usher her back into office is anything but a sure bet. Her own party knows she's vulnerable, and I think we'll see a strong challenger emerge (in either Mcgavick or Hutchinson). Cantwell had better not be counting on the media to come through in the clutch; the treatment in today's paper was benign at best.

Take for instance this important counter-point allowed in by the Seattle Times:

Frank Holmes of the Western States Petroleum Association said much of Cantwell's proposal appears to duplicate what is already going on or to require additional, unnecessary protections.

It's not everyday that the Seattle Times allows in viewpoints that contradict the liberal Washington Senate Delegation. Cantwell had better open the checkbook.

(PS - Senator Cantwell's website is pathetic - Are we still living in the stoneage?)

Help say 'THANK YOU' to Joshua Sparling

2005-12-06T00:41:00.000-08:00

This is way too important to pass by in my quest to prepare for tomorrow's final.

Thanks to Michelle Malkin for getting the word out. This was also on Fox & Friends yesterday morning.

Some sick person sent a Christmas card to a wounded soldier...with an interesting inside message: "P.S. DIE" And yes, this was apparently the only card Joshua Sparling recieved.

Please send him a real card right away:

Joshua Sparling
c/o Walter Reed Army Medical Center
6900 Georgia Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20307-5001

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Sedition 101

2005-11-30T13:09:00.000-08:00

Cross-posted from Memento Moron.

Thanks for the Memory to Lars Larson.

What the hell is this doing on the wall of a public high school in Newport, Oregon?

Is there an equally large display of recruiting material and accounts of the heroism of those who wear or have worn this country's uniforms? That's what I thought.

And no, don't tell me this is a Freedom of Speech issue. This is a public high school, funded by taxpayer money, and as a taxpayer, I don't particularly appreciate having my pocket picked to display such blatant hatred for our military. To steal a phrase from Billy Joel, you can speak your mind, but not on my time (or dime)!

And if the entire project was done extracirricularly, then again, I ask, has the same access to the school's walls been offered to those who support the military? If there's anyone reading this from Newport, especially a student, I'd like to know that -- is there a similar display of an opposing point of view?

Sheehan: over and out?

2005-11-28T11:18:00.000-08:00

It's a good question.

I'm sure more than a few "moderates" are thinking Cindy Sheehan's star has gone the way of a black hole. Here's a couple links that indicate a great deal of disenchantment over someone who has turned her "private grief" into a marketable bushbash.

First, there's the pretty AP photos from her Crawford book-signing.

Then, wow...a scathing Salena Zito column, putting Cindy down (to use the lighter term) for the infamous "open letter to Barbara Bush."

Sheehan has become the quintessential freak show, making everyone uncomfortable as we watch the drama -- her drama -- play out. In our heart of hearts, we really do not want to believe this mother has become a handmaiden of the Left.

Few things ever are what they seem to be. Truth often is awkward. And facing the reality that Sheehan's sincerity has ended and absurdity has taken hold is one jagged little pill to swallow.

Indeed, that's just a fraction of the criticism. I recommend reading whole column.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

'I'm just dad'

2005-11-23T21:43:00.000-08:00

Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana has done more in his five years in congress for the conservative cause than many do in their lifetime.

A super communicator, socially and fiscally conservative, a proven record of true leadership...what more could you want. I'm almost tempted to say to those who want him to run for president to just let him stay in congress so he can keep doing some good there. But then I look at the current field of RINOs and I'm more inclined to agree with the Draft Pence Movement.

That title quote comes from an article in The Indianapolis Star.

The dragon

2005-11-22T17:34:00.000-08:00

It just won't go away...the specter of Chinese domination. It's an old, old story that no one seems to know what to do with.

The Washington Times did a series of features on Chinese buildups during the summer--I had the chance to glimpse a friend's copy. Condi Rice has recently been critical of continued Beijing military buildups.

Now, it seems those closer to the giant have an acute sense of insecurity--no surprise. Allies such as Japan plainly don't think U.S. support is enough to secure their safety in a crisis, according an article from Insight Magazine...

The overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China. It has been an assessment relayed to U.S. government officials over the past few months by countries such as Australia, Japan and South Korea....Most Asian officials have expressed their views privately. Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara has gone public, warning that the United States would lose any war with China.

The upside is that it may motivate our allies in the region to be a little more enterprising with their own military budgeting. I believe a limited but solid presence in the region is essential. But we should only be there to maintain a threat and foot in the door--not the primary defenders of a dozen sleepy at-risk countries.

Perception of U.S. weakness seems a little exaggerated.

Mr. Ishihara said U.S. ground forces, with the exception of the Marines, are "extremely incompetent" and would be unable to stem a Chinese conventional attack. Indeed, he asserted that China would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons against Asian and American cities—even at the risk of a massive U.S. retaliation.

Yes, we can always improve. Let the Japanese think we are weaker than we are, though, if it means they will be more assertive in securing themselves.

As a result, Asian allies of the United States are quietly preparing to bolster their militaries independent of Washington.

Go for it.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Thus says Cheney!

2005-11-16T18:21:00.000-08:00

"The President and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory, or their backbone – but we’re not going to sit by and let them rewrite history.

We’re going to continue throwing their own words back at them..."

Amen and amen! Read the rest of the except on the Drudge Report.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Al-Qaeda's Foreign Policy?

2005-11-10T07:59:00.000-08:00

(CNN: Protesters to al-Zarqawi: 'Burn in hell')

It appears that Zarqawi's foreign policy is to blow up his compatriots, and anger other Arabs and Muslims who would otherwise be sympathetic (or apathetic) to his cause. I think the outrage over this event, and other recent attacks on fellow Muslims (including in Saudi Arabia) will fuel an outpouring of condemnation, one that has been both particularly and sorely lacking from the Middle East and Southeast Asia.

Read the developing story in Jordan on CNN Online.

Ward Churchill at Shoreline Community College

2005-11-09T15:57:00.000-08:00

The traveling circus that is Ward Churchill's speaking tour visited Shoreline Community College in North Seattle last night.

I had earlier posted a run-down of every remark that struck me as odd. Of course that put my post at over 2,000 words and probably wasn't even all that interesting, other than to be a reminder of how sick and wrong Ward Churchill's garbled lies about America sound.

The fact that Ward is now "performing" on the community college circuit is enough in and of itself to illustrate his level of credibility. I have to agree with Travis Savala, who earlier commented on this blog that Ward's influence on politics is negligible.

One thing that struck me as meaningful about Ward's approach: he treats this whole thing like an act, and has a huge bag of tricks (both rhetoric and comedy). He recycles the whole peformance wherever he goes, and knows when to say just the right things to spark the audience off into either laughter, gasps of horror (but nonetheless agreement), or even:
"F*$# yeah man, REVOLUTION NOW!"

Here's a copy of the handbill and my ticket; a small showing of College Republicans holding Support Our Troops signs was dismissed by Churchill, when he said, "I AM THE GOD DAMN TROOPS!" Needless to say, it was well worth the money to confirm what I already knew: the guy's an America-hating loony-tune, and should enjoy zero credibility with sane individuals. His views are esoteric, and likely only make sense to him and his merry band of self-described "anarcho-daoists".

[Note here are some fun quotes I just couldn't pass up: Ward said that Condi and Colin are actually "white, because white is a state of mind"; he said that 9/11 happend because of "ghostly kharma", and all of the groups that America or Euro-centric Americans had 'screwed-over' were riding on the wings of the hi-jacked planes when they crashed into the Twin Towers; The ASL interpreters had a difficult time keeping up with the long-winded moonbat, and their faces were constantly contored trying to express the venomous hate coming out of Ward's mouth; he called the Vietnam Veteran's memorial wall in D.C. a waste of space; downplayed the significance of the Holocaust and the Jewish experience of persectution; claimed to put papers and "stuff" together by visually placing the pieces of his essay like a jig-saw puzzle, "you know thesis here, annotations[sic?] there..."

GOP: Media's best friend

2005-11-05T15:06:00.000-08:00

What is a good indication of political balance in the media? When lawmakers and politicians from both parties support media "shield laws" to protect confidential sources.

In the past, I've tended to consider this a more liberal issue, but not totally. My hesitation stems from being leery of the liberties many journalists take in using anonymous interviews--as I wrote in The Western Front last spring. At the moment, there is no federal shield law to protect journalist from grand jury subpoenas and the like. What conservatives have come out in support of more journalistic protection? The names are surprising.

Congressman Mike Pence, a conservative superstar in the Midwest, and increasingly more recognizable as one of the most effective conservative leaders in the House, has become one of the primary sponsors of a federal shield law. I hate to say it, but The New York Times reporter, Judith Miller's fight to protect a Republican source may have had something to do with the surge in GOP attention. That source, Cheney aid, “Scooter” Libby, has since, of course, been indicted in the leak you all know so much (or so little perhaps) about by now.

Note: I added a new link on my blog for my good friend Aaron Hankin, who heads up the "Draft Pence Movement" dedicated to promoting a Pence a presidential bid in 2008. There's a lot of material on his blog.

On the Washington state level, conservative Attorney General Rob McKenna has garnered the respect of journalists everywhere by first getting his hands dirty cleaning up the access laws (freedom of information laws) in Washington, and now, by publicly endorsing a state shield law. While Washington doesn't have a shield law per se, some Washington courts have ruled favorably to journalists in the past, setting minor precedent for partial protection. As stated in The Seattle Times, many would like the protection to be more water tight.

"Someone might say we don't need it; we've only had a few cases," (McKenna said.) "But not having it can chill the speech of a confidential source. You don't have to have a case where someone is being put in stocks in the public square for this to be a good idea. It will encourage confidential sources to reveal important information to the media."

It bears noting that Stefan Sharkanski of Sound Politics.com doesn’t really care about it, just as long as bloggers are included, and I would agree that there can’t be special privileges granted to some citizens just because they are gathering the information for a certain kind of publication. If the first amendment is going to be construed to protect one person, there had better not be a double standard.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Moonbats Take to the Streets

2005-11-02T20:54:00.000-08:00

(Cross posted at Respectfully Republican)

I interviewed with Dori Monson on KIRO Talk 710 today about the YAWR protests. A lot of people participating were duped into thinking this was simply "standard liberals" doing their "standard protest". Today's march was far from standard Left procedure.

Unbeknowst to many participants, today's march was organized by the Socialist Alternative, a group advocating the replacement of American-style capitalism and democracy with State Socialism (no joke). What was normal were some of the tactics used. The Seattle Times reports that one man was arrested for a parole violation, and as I can personally attest, he wasn't the only unshaven "downtown local" (read: panhandlers) in the bunch ;0)

(Courtesy of King 5 News Helicopter)
At the end of the day, I wonder how much it even matters that the march and events were sponsored by the FAR-FAR-FAR Left. Afterall, the media hasn't made any meaningful distinction (except for Dori Monson on KIRO).

(Courtesy of KIRO 7 News) What's with the mask kiddo? Don't want your parents or grandparents to recognize your mug on TV, and figure out that you're skipping school to hang out with commies?

(Courtesy of KIRO 7 News) And your telling me these guys are students against the war?

Thank God for patriotic Americans like Anthony Mantova, the organizer of the Tacoma counter-demonstration. I was informed that Clara Lightner & Co. of Tacoma YAWR were met with a lively resistance of veterans, troop supporters, and military families. More info, including pictures, will be forthcoming.

I-901: the great conservative sellout

2005-11-02T10:44:00.000-08:00

I hate to use such a vitriolic headline, but I can't find better words for it. I'm seeing just how uneducated conservatives can be in their own professed philosophy. I'm seeing Washington republicans throw away their principles just because they happen to not like smoking.

The source of my problem is Initiative 901, which is intended to effectively ban smoking anywhere but reservations and your own house (you might get away with it if you stand in the middle of an intersection too). Of course, you'll also probably have to be careful that you shut all your doors and close all your windows and light up in the basement...just in case your neighbor smells it inside his equally sealed house, get's a headache and lung cancer, files a complaint, or worse, sues you to pay for his lung transplant. If you happen to own a bar that smokers like to frequent, you'd better get a whole new set of customers because catering to smokers will be against the law.

Property rights? What are those?

Susan Rosenberry of The Western Front did a good job of covering it in last Friday's issue. One quote that struck me:

If it passes, the initiative would ban smoking inside Washington public spaces, including restaurants, bars, bowling alleys and public transportation vehicles such as taxis, said Dr. Chris Covert-Bowlds, a Bellingham physician and sponsor of the initiative. The smoking restriction would also extend to 25 feet away from the entrance of the public establishment, he said.

“It’s not that we are trying to force people to stop smoking,” Covert-Bowlds said. “We are just trying to protect employees’ rights to breathe smoke-free air.”

WHAT RIGHT WAS THAT? Where do we keep coming up with all these new-and-improved, extraconstitutional rights? What right can an employee claim if they knew they were applying to work in a smoke-filled environment?

A friend of mine who is a leader in the Whatcom County Republican Party (he helped write our county platform last year) had this to say about his support for the initiative when I asked him (email excerpt):

Never ask an ex-smoker (like me) how they feel about smoking! We converts/previous smokers all hate it and can't stand the smell of it!...Bottom line, your ability to smoke ends at the end of my nose and if I can smell it, you can't do it. Majority always rules sooner or later.

I have never heard anything quite so abhorrent to the basic principles of our constitution or the free market. He complained he can never bowl because they all are smoking establishments. So? Start your own bowling alley...don't sit there and force them, through trumped-up laws, to cater to you just because you have a medical aversion to something they do.

Is there a better way of saying this that I'm missing? Is something unclear? Does anyone know what private property means?

Smoking is still legal. Until it is outlawed, I will not support anything that restricts a business owner's right to cater to smokers. I'm sorry if your nose starts running and you get a headache...I sometimes do too. You've survived up to this point.

The government isn't here to make laws for my convenience!

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

Hugh Hewett's SCOTUS Poll

2005-10-31T14:36:00.000-08:00

Hugh Hewitt wants to take the temperature of the blogosphere when it comes to the nomination of Sam Alito to be supreme court justice. So take the poll here .

Scooter Libby

2005-10-29T09:48:00.000-07:00

The whole "Joe Wilson - Valerie Plame is a supposed supersecret undercover operative who Karl Rove went and spilled the beans about" is one of two big MSM stories of the last year that I've never blogged about in any way. But now that charges have been brought in connection with it, I'll say this much about it. If Scooter Libby lied to the grand jury while he was under oath --and I really hope he didn't-- it's a crime. Period. It makes no nevermind what else was going on, or if the whole underlying case is bogus as a partisan get-Bush witch hunt, or whatever. It's a crime to lie under oath. In fact, it's a felony.

Just like it was a felony crime when Bill Clinton lied under oath in a civil deposition. Same same. Yeah, then it was about whether Clinton had sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky. Yeah, it was just about sex. And, yeah, Paula Jones was being egged on by the conservative right wing to bring her suit, but none of that matters. What matters is that Clinton swore to tell the truth, and he lied.

The same standard applies to Libby. I don't know if Libby lied to the grand jury, but if he did, it's a crime. Like I say, I hope he didn't. But if he did, that's that.

Why do I say I hope that Libby didn't tell these lies to the grand jury, as alleged? Lots of reasons. First, for his own sake. He is reportedly a good and smart man, a man with a remarkable career. If he did this, it'll all come crashing down. I also hope he didn't do it for the sake of this administration. Bush has, thus far, run a squeaky-clean ship, as far I as I can see. If Libby did this, it becomes a blot on it. Waltzing in front of a grand jury and blithely lying through one's teeth is just so Clintonesque. I had believed that the Bush administration was better than that. Much better. I also worry about the system of justice, but not too much. The system seems to take care of itself.

But the main thing I worry about is what this portends. By reputation, Libby is anything but stupid, and in fact he is well known as a very shrewd lawyer in his own right. The word "circumspect" is used to describe him too. So, that being the case, the question quickly becomes --why? Why would he do it? What was so important that he would risk his reputation, his livlihood, his career, his very freedom over it? Was he protecting someone, taking the all arrows in the chest on behalf of someone else? Who might that be? What is it that he's protecting? Who is he protecting? Who would that logically be? What would Occam's Razor predict? I worry about where that takes us. And that's why I hope he didn't do it.

Now Let's Just Try To Keep Some Promises

2005-10-27T12:53:00.000-07:00

Thankfully the "doomed from the beginning," nomination of Harriet Miers is over.

Unfortunately GW Bush tried to break another political promise and this time his base, those that worked so hard for him, said "enough is enough."

The opposition to Miers was not, as the administration elitists would have you believe, about sexism or elitism. Those were just all excuses made up by some folks that made a mistake and lost the idiological high ground. As we have seen over the last ten years, the idiological low ground is not a good place to be.

So now we are back. Back at looking at nominees. Some things for Bush to consider this time around. First is, remember the promise you made to the American people while running for office. You said "I will appoint justices in the line of Scalia and Thomas." Sorry Mr. President but is it too much to think that you meant it?

Point number two to consider is that now the base is as united as it ever has been. Now is the time to enter into a battle of ideas.

So, as noted over on my blog NWRepublican the rumor mill is sending out two names. They are:
Emelio Garza

and

Michael McConnell

Now, check the intellectual background of these two fellas. There is some firepower there.

Yip Yip

Just the beginning

2005-10-27T09:22:00.000-07:00

I won't be sappy and say this is a tragedy because it's totally the president's prerogative. I'm sure he had his reasons for withdrawing Harriet Miers’ nomination. I guess I figured it would be better to just give her a shot at the hearings instead of preemptively "borking" her. Not only did a potentially good justice not get a fair shake, the White House also just shot itself in the political foot. What chance is ANY candidate from Bush going to get if he is subject to the whims of political know-nothings like you and me and the far left in an area that the constitution gives him the sole prerogative. It's his job to do the nominating. The only veto we have is from the Senate. So why didn't the Senate get it's say?

I have never seen so many political opportunities open for the Democrats. Not only did they get to say she was a bad choice--and have Republicans agree--they also get to criticize conservatives for acting like liberal jerks. So what now? If the conservatives are happy with the next nomination, the liberals will be mad. Oops...

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Amy Goodman teaches reporting

2005-10-25T22:08:00.000-07:00

So I spent over half an hour listening to a far left propaganda machine this afternoon.

My professor admitted jokingly he was probably force-feeding...his reasons for playing a pod cast of DomocracyNow! in class is still a bit obscure, besides the fact that he "highly recommends it." You see, he probably thinks it's time we graduated from the elementary and archaic elements of journalism like, say, objectivity.

The pod cast was an interview with British Indy journalist Robert Fisk, a "veteran" of numerous conflicts and, from what I could tell, a pacifist as well. His rant was one continuous stream of deranged pessimism regarding Iraq and how it is simply a mess and he suspects he might not be brave enough to risk another trip.

One half-hour later, as he finished his rant, Goodman asked a final question after the audience finished applauding...

After all you have been through, and all the wars you have covered, all the death you have seem, "what gives you hope?"

...*silence*... "...Nothing...nothing. *shaky voice* I'm sorry, maybe ordinary people speaking out, but nothing really."

I didn't know whether to laugh or to cry. I should choose the later I suppose because, as a Christian, I hurt for people who have this kind of empty hopelessness. That's got to be an awful way to live.

The prof finally made some point about this can teach us that we should never hesitate to challenge power...

Ok...is that all? Can I go now?

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

So conservative they look liberal

2005-10-25T16:09:00.000-07:00

I had an early distaste for the tactics that GOP haters...er...critics of Harriet Miers have employed in trying to scuttle her nomination. They have fooled themselves into thinking they are taking a stand for principled conservatism, while all the while missing their own hypocrisy. The confirmation of Roberts was won primarily by debunking the myth that nominees needed to answer personal question and reveal privileged documents. Roberts stood fast and refused to answer hypothetical questions, brilliantly citing the Ginsberg confirmation hearings as precedent for his silence, winning general admiration even among those who were frustrated by his dodge.

And now...as soon as the "base" thinks they can't totally trust a nominee to be a carbon copy of themselves, they jump on the liberal bandwagon demanding the very hypothetical answers and privileged information Roberts and co. fought so hard to protect.

So for the first time, I suspect we are having conservatives partaking in the so-called "borking" of a nominee. I'm incensed. I began with just as much skepticism and disappointment as everyone else, and now I find I am totally dismayed. You see, if Miers is successfully borked by her own friendlies (as seems likely), there is an even greater chance of never again getting a strong constitutionalist on the bench of the United States Supreme Court.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Conservative benchmark: Sen. Tom Coburn

2005-10-23T22:54:00.000-07:00

I wonder if he will ever go to another dinner party again. Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma defied the Washington establishment by introducing legislation to slash pork spending to pay for Katrina rebuilding. Other senators, interested in keeping their precious pets back home happy, were quick to get hopping mad, as Mark Tapscott from the Heritage Foundation explained:

What Coburn got in response was pure bipartisan outrage. Sen. Patty Murray, the very liberal Washington Democrat, warned that any senator supporting the Coburn amendments would find projects in his or her own state getting the evil eye by annoyed colleagues who don't want to rock the log-rolling boat.

And Alaska's Ted Stevens, the Old Bull Republican moderate who has been one of the biggest obstacles in Congress to conservative reform since the Reagan administration, stood on the floor and thundered that he would leave the Senate if the Coburn proposal passed.

The amendments fail by a huge margin. Tapscott is a good read, though. Check it out. I heard elsewhere that Murry was angry at Coburn for condemning a proposed statue park (or something like that) somewhere in Seattle. The only way they have justified the project is by saying that they just need to make the land useful...

Coburn is one of the most principled people in America. He first served in the House of Representatives, but didn't stick around because he believes in term limits for congress members and had promised he would only serve a set number of terms. He kept his promise, took time of and then ran for the Senate and won.

Go get them again Tom!

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Slippery Slopes in the Cascades

2005-10-12T10:45:00.000-07:00

(Cross-posted from Memento Moron):

Here's the dilemma I face as both an Oregonian and a Non-Idiotarian: Pride in my home state, its natural beauty and pioneer spirit; and embarassment for my home state, its extreme politics and stupid government.

Here's what we're now famous for: Not our rugged coast, our majestic mountains, our lush forests; not Lewis and Clark, mountain men, the Oregon Trail. No, when people think of Oregon, they immediately think of Legalized Pot, Assisted Suicide, and now, Live Sex Shows. I doubt that's exactly the definition of "Westward Ho!" the pioneers had in mind.

This is what Bill O'Reilly talked about night before last. This is what's being discussed in newspapers and media outlets across the country. We're rapidly overtaking California as the Granola State -- the nuttiest, flakiest place in the nation.

I'm used to hearing (L)ibertarians, libertarians, liberitines, and liberals to one extent or another tell us that what kinds of activities consenting adults engage in in the privacy of their own bedrooms is their own business.

But now the supreme court has extended the definition of "bedrooms" to include "Joe's Tavern". As I've hinted at before, once we've established that any given system of morality is not applicable as a basis for law, NO system of morality can maintain its applicability. Each time ground is given way, it becomes harder and harder to defend the ground that's left. I'm wondering how far they'll eventually go before people have had enough. Heck, we have homeless people sleeping in our parks and under overpasses, that makes them bedrooms too, right? How long will it be before the defense of sex acts in public as Freedom of Speech is applied to ANY public place, not just private businesses?

I'd leave, but I fear that once the idiots are done clearcutting decency and good sense here, they'll just come after the next place. This is as good a place to make a stand as any.

Elitist fury: Miers in the line of fire

2005-10-12T10:16:00.000-07:00

It's coming to the point where the liberals may look on all she has endured and say, "you've earned a seat on the high court. Here, if it really makes Republicans that angry, take it."

It's getting beyond the point of pathetic. I'll admit to being a little disappointed at first at Miers nomination, but only because she didn’t fit into what I considered was the only thing we needed–a carbon copy of Scalia or Thomas. I'm definitely over it after, having gotten a more complete picture. One thing is perfectly clear--it's no longer ordinary pro-life advocates who are blubbering. Indeed, they should be very pleased with her appointment if they know anything about her.

Since the initial din of protest, the current noise seems to be mostly from Washington insiders upset she isn't stereotypical. No Ivy League school, no long record in politics, no party-line Republican history, nothing...nothing except a pristine record of skillful practice and conscientious, selfless service to God and country–how shocking someone would think that enough!

I think we've spent so much time fighting a politicized judiciary, we've forgotten what it could and perhaps should look like!

I half expected WORLD Magazine to reflect this kind of exasperation when I read their cover piece on Miss Miers. Marvin Olasky, in his usual level-headed way (as opposed to a Coulteresque tirade), examined her in great detail and as well as some of the reactions that have been going around. He did a lot of talking to those who know her best:

They see her as an evangelical who is meek—in the biblical sense of humble strength. For 25 years she has been a member of Valley View Christian Church in Dallas, a conservative evangelical church and not one of the city's fashionable ones. Never married, she has devoted herself to work, her extended family, and her church, serving on the missions committee for 10 years, teaching children in Sunday school, making coffee, and bringing donuts.

At the same time, she's practiced corporate law in a major Texas firm. Mr. Kinkeade calls her "a superstar here in Dallas before George Bush ever entered the picture." He believes that some critics are attacking her because "she's not from the East or West coasts—didn't go to an Ivy League law school. They don't like that."

I think it's time some people shut up and sit down. Stop ranting about Souter, OConnor and judicial trends, and just recognize that she is different from any previous nominee. If I black out all the naysayers and just look at her for who she is, I really like what I see.

One more thing: Rehnquist wasn't a judge before he was nominated to the supreme court. Why should that be a problem now?

Crossposted at Meneltarma

The premise

2005-10-03T23:06:00.000-07:00

Throw everything you have at him and hope something sticks.

That's the new rule of thumb for Ronnie Earle and co, the prosecutor leading the charge on Tom "the hammer" DeLay. You should have seen the utter giddiness of Western faculty when the first indictment was handed down. It was the first meeting of the College Republicans that evening and everyone had a story to share about their professors mentioning it in class. One prof. even went so far as to mix DeLay up with Senator Frist. What next!?

Good question. The judge had to throw out the first indictment because it was for a crime that wasn't a crime when he was alleged to have done it. Now they have gone back to the loading station to find a better caliber round. From the AP:

The new indictment, handed up by a grand jury seated Monday, contained two counts. The money laundering charge carries a penalty of up to life in prison. The charge of conspiracy to launder money is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

One thing is clear and indisputable from the events as they have unfolded: Earle has started with a biased premise: DeLay is a bad man and must have done SOMETHING wrong. (Is it door one? Door two?) Unfortunately for him, finding the right charge for DeLay is like playing a lively game of Pin the Tail on the Elephant.

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

The Pick

2005-10-03T07:24:00.000-07:00

I don't know. It just seems like a wasted opportunity more than anything else that can be said for or against her at this point.

--also posted at The Jaybird Nest--

Two cities: the concise answer

2005-10-01T13:42:00.000-07:00

Horace Cooper (from National Center for Public Policy Research) writes in his column, A Tale of Two Cities, what many have been thinking and few have said out loud. He is to be commended:

While it’s true that the two hurricanes hit at different intensity levels, the important differences can best be described as a tale of two cities – New Orleans and Houston.

No two neighboring towns better embody the differences between the two main political philosophies competing in the U.S. today – Houston, Texas which is the embodiment of the Lone Star State’s can do spirit of limited government and self-reliance versus New Orleans, Louisiana, aptly nicknamed the “Big Easy” and perhaps the embodiment of welfare state dependence in the South.

Catch the complete piece at Townhall.com

What energy crisis?

2005-09-28T09:31:00.000-07:00

Even I, a sceptic of doomsday predictions regarding declining oil reserves, found myself surprised by the latest reports on projected world reserves. A piece in the UK's Independant reveals just how thick the whool has been pulled over our eyes.

Exxon's Mr Tillerson told the convention in South Africa that his company estimated that global energy demand would increase by 50 per cent over the next 25 years. Mr Tillerson said that by some estimates there was as much as 7 trillion barrels of oil yet to be discovered. On a more conservative basis, the world still had more than 3 trillion barrels from conventional fields, oil sands deposits and other sources. "That is more than twice all the oil recovered up to now in all of human history," Mr Tillerson said.

The conservative projections are we still haven't used half of the world's supply! Does that even remotely square with the hype about unsustainable futures?

Now, before I get misunderstood, I should be perfectly clear that I don't think we should be sitting on our current status quo and ignore the future. I'm thrilled by the way the U.S. has started to lead in hybrid vehicle development--that stuff is great. I think we are sitting on a lot of technology that will prove once again that we are the most flexible economy in the world. I don't see a sudden shortfall and stagnation--that goes against the American way of problem solving.

And we have way more time than anyone thought to develop a better energy dependancy plan.

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

What's Up With That?

2005-09-24T09:22:00.000-07:00

--Posted Contemporaneously at The Jaybird Nest and Head West, Turn Right--

All these people, including members of the mainstream media, who hated Bush in 2000, hated him in 2004, never voted for him, never supported him in any way, have continued non-stop to bash him and call him the vilest of vile names, but now pretend like they are saying something profoundly new and different about him from which they've always been saying. To me it sounds like the same screeching band of losers. Why would we find the mouth-foaming noise of sore losers more palatable now, as they round themselves up to march? Give me a reason why I should.

Tebelius To Speak At PLU Tonight

2005-09-22T12:36:00.000-07:00

After just returning from Afghanistan, where she observed the recent legislative elections, Diane Tebelius will be speaking at Pacific Lutheran Univerisity in Tacoma tonight. Tebelius maintained a short weblog while abroad: http://dianeinafghanistan.blogspot.com/

As many of our readers likely know, Tebelius is considering a run against Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) in 2006, along with several other candidates including Safeco CEO Mike McGavick.

Click photo for website.

Come hear Tebelius speak about the democratic processes she observed in Afghanistan, as a member of the official U.S. Delegation, and enjoy the company of fellow Republicans. You should also expect to hear about her bid for the GOP endorsement in 2006. Liberal and radical activists expected to attend :0)

Where: PLU University Center Building, Scandinavian Cultural Center (directions)

When: Tonight, September 22nd at 7:00PM (come early for dessert social $5)

We hope to see you there! For details, contact colrepub@plu.edu

More money squandered

2005-09-18T16:09:00.000-07:00

More information about FEMA money getting squandered before Katrina. This AP story is even more specific about where it might have been spent... Talk about lunacy.

In Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, attention has focused on the inability of local and federal officials to evacuate or prepare for the large number of poor people, many of them minorities, who had no access to transportation and remained behind.

That possibility was one of the concerns that led Congress in 1997 to set aside $500,000 for FEMA to create "a comprehensive analysis and plan of all evacuation alternatives for the New Orleans metropolitan area."

Frustrated two years later that nothing materialized, Congress strengthened its directive. This time it ordered "an evacuation plan for a Category 3 or greater storm, a levee break, flood or other natural disaster for the New Orleans area."

So...where did the money go?

The $500,000 that Congress appropriated for the evacuation plan went to a commission that studied future options for the 24-mile bridge over Lake Pontchartrain, FEMA spokesman Butch Kinerney said.

The hefty report produced by the Greater New Orleans Expressway Commission "primarily was not about evacuation," said Robert Lambert, the general manager for the bridge expressway. "In general it was an overview of all the things we need to do" for the causeway through 2016.

Lambert said he could not trace how or if FEMA money came to the commission. Nor could Shelby LaSalle, a causeway consulting engineer who worked on the plan...LaSalle said it would be "ludicrous" to consider his report an evacuation plan...

This better get a lot of attention. The more fire put under incompetence and corruption the better.

The money trail to Katrina

2005-09-17T13:15:00.000-07:00

One of the questions that has rarely been asked and one I've been waiting for someone to answer is that much closer to being resolved: where has all the FEMA money for Louisiana gone all these years since they are a severe hurricane risk area?

Someone is getting to the bottom of it. From the LA Times:

Senior officials in Louisiana's emergency planning agency already were awaiting trial over allegations stemming from a federal investigation into waste, mismanagement and missing funds when Hurricane Katrina struck.

And federal auditors are still trying to track as much as $60 million in unaccounted for funds that were funneled to the state from the Federal Emergency Management Agency dating back to 1998.

It's gets better

Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington watchdog group, said recent Louisiana history showed that FEMA "money earmarked for saving lives and homes'' was instead squandered in "a cesspool of wasteful spending."

Louisiana's emergency office receives money directly from FEMA. It passes on much of the funding to local governments that apply for assistance.

The audit reports said state operating procedures increased the likelihood of fraud and corruption going undetected.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

What is the Impact of Offshoring on Washington State?

2005-09-16T16:37:00.000-07:00

By Island Republican

Bill Center, President of Washington Council on International Trade, a nonprofit, non-partisan association spoke to a luncheon meeting of Bellevue Rotary. The Washington Council of International Trade’s purpose is to inform, advocate and educate the public, elected leadership, educators and the media about the role and importance of trade. Bill Center’s topic was the impact of offshoring to the Washington State economy. Washington Council of International Trade is most widely known as the entity that invited the World Trade Organization to Seattle in 1999.

Washington State is the most trade depended state in the United States. In 2005, one-third of jobs in the state are related to trade. The per capita trade amount in Washington State is twice the next two highest states, California and Texas. In King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties, 27,800 jobs are destroyed each year. The four county region loses between 390 and 560 jobs to offshoring each year. 31,120 new jobs are created in the four county region each year. The average annual net increase in jobs is 3,320. The net job increase easily covers the jobs lost to offshoring.

As of August 31, the United States had 143 million jobs with an unemployment rate of 4.9%. Each year 30 million jobs are destroyed in the U.S. Approximately 600,000 jobs are offshored according to AFL-CIO, 2% of the total jobs destroyed. The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that 420,000 jobs are offshored each year, 1.4% of the total jobs destroyed. The U.S. creates 31.5 million each year for a net gain of 1.5 million jobs. The average new employees joining the workforce each year is 1.5 million. Currently, the job market is in equilibrium. The average salary of jobs created is higher than the jobs destroyed. Over 80% of the jobs created each year go to individuals who are employed. The remaining 20% of jobs created are filled by unemployed individuals.

The Washington Council on International Trade is working with Prosperity Partnership (launched by the Puget Sound Regional Council) to create 100,000 new jobs in the four county region by the end of 2010. These new jobs are in addition to the expected normal job growth. To meet this goal, the four county region must create 328,000 jobs between 2004 and 2010. As of September 1, 2005, the Prosperity Partnership is ahead of its job growth goals. The Partnership expects the majority of new jobs will come from five areas (“clusters” as defined by the Prosperity Partnership), aerospace, clean technology, information technology, life sciences and international trade. These “clusters” are based on strengths in the four county region and areas where we are competitive in the global market place. The clusters are expected to create high paying jobs.

Trade is very important to the economic health of Washington State, especially in the four county region. The public, unions, politicians and media need to understand that trade decisions in Washington, D.C. greatly impact Washington State’s economy. The Puget Sound Region should be the strongest supporter of international trade. It is interesting to note on the last major trade initiative in Congress, CAFTA, Washington State’s congressional delegation voted against CAFTA. Please see my posts, CAFTA Passes without Support from Washington State Delegation and CAFTA: The Complex Benefits of Free Trade.

Cross posted at Island Republican.

Remembering...

2005-09-11T23:52:00.000-07:00

Cross-posted at Musings..

Today is September 11, 2005. Four years ago, I watched in horror as unspeakable acts were committed against our nation. I remember.

I suspect that you do as well. I won't bother you with the oft overused pictures of the burning towers. I won't put up pictures of the men and women who were jumping out of the 115th floor of the building, because falling to your death was preferable to burning up in an inferno I can only imagine. Let us remember the grey faces of the firefighters and police. Let us keep the images in our mind of the planes flying into the sides of the buildings. I personally will never forget the face of my young daughter when she realized that the objects that were falling were people... I remember physically removing her from the room and putting on something else, as I had not known she was in the room watching. She deserved a bit more innocence than that would have given her.

Don't forget the Pentagon - the largest office building in the world, now restored, maintaining the vigilance that keeps us safe. Over a hundred men and women, some of the armed services, some civilian, died there too.

And the Angels without wings - the passengers and crew of United Flight 93 who died over Shanksville, PA so others might live.

For those who don't like our being in Iraq, remember the words of the President on 9/20/2001.

"....Tonight, we are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom. Our grief has turned to anger and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.

...Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there.

It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.

Americans are asking "Why do they hate us?"

They hate what they see right here in this chamber: a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.

They want to overthrow existing governments in many Muslim countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. They want to drive Israel out of the Middle East. They want to drive Christians and Jews out of vast regions of Asia and Africa.

These terrorists kill not merely to end lives, but to disrupt and end a way of life. With every atrocity, they hope that America grows fearful, retreating from the world and forsaking our friends. They stand against us because we stand in their way.

We're not deceived by their pretenses to piety.

We have seen their kind before. They're the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies. Americans are asking, "How will we fight and win this war?"

We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the destruction and to the defeat of the global terror network.

Now, this war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion. It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat.

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes visible on TV and covert operations secret even in success.

We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place until there is no refuge or no rest.

And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.

From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. Our nation has been put on notice, we're not immune from attack. We will take defensive measures against terrorism to protect Americans. Today, dozens of federal departments and agencies, as well as state and local governments, have responsibilities affecting homeland security.

...Many will be involved in this effort, from FBI agents, to intelligence operatives, to the reservists we have called to active duty. All deserve our thanks, and all have our prayers. And tonight a few miles from the damaged Pentagon, I have a message for our military: Be ready. I have called the armed forces to alert, and there is a reason.

The hour is coming when America will act, and you will make us proud...."

I'm guessing we aren't done yet. To those deployed, my heart goes to you and yours... come home as soon as you can. But, for the sake of those who have died, and those who may... finish the job you started. Go with God.

Remember these numbers.

Number of fatalities
Total	2,986
World Trade Center	Towers	2,595
	Flight 11	92
	Flight 175	65
Pentagon	Building	125
Pentagon	Flight 77	64
Shanksville	Flight 93	45

Same old (head)line

2005-09-11T15:26:00.000-07:00

It's helpful for a political junky (and journalism student) like me to be able to step back recite a basic fact to myself: a hyperpolitical outlook on the news can paint a very different picture than what really exists. For the average journalist, life in American is simply one long horse race in-between elections where every piece of news is compared and evaluated on the basis of how it will affect the next election.

It never changes. Just like all the other paint-by-number coverage from Katrina. The current line is this: a weak response from Bush shows he doesn't really care. From verbal celeb tirades to Judy Keen and Richard Benedetto's blowhard "news analysis" on page two of USA Today about the President's response to Katrina. What it amounts to is a hatchet job similar to what all implicit attacks on Bush post 9/11. I can still remember the sneering ABC line after Bush's rock-the-world speech a week afterward: "A president finds his voice."

Where do journalists learn to see everything through red and blue tinted glasses? In the classroom. I've heard it many times at Western: a political science depth or minor is usually recommended for journalism students so that's what a big chunk of them take. It may not be because their journalism professors want to have the news reported that way, but they might think a journalist wouldn't be able to survive in America without a solid political science education. Unfortunately, those "survival" skills ususally translate into bickering about how the president needs to be more expressive and empathetic--or the democrats might start looking like reformers (hint hint: the democrats ARE reformers!)

I've felt like holding my nose as I wade through the coverage of Katrina--and not because dead bodies disgust me.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Hurricane Katrina Disaster

2005-09-11T14:47:00.000-07:00

New Orleans—If God Didn’t Do it, Who Did?

After reading several articles about the media's coverage of the Hurricane Katrina disaster, I finally found what I was looking for. Several days ago, I heard a commentator making several parallels between the attacks of 9/11 and the present disaster. While not entirely "awestruck", I did quickly divert my attention away from my computer screen to the television. The comments sounded something like this:

When the towers fell, Bush stood on a still smoldering pile of rubble and said, "We'll hunt down whoever's responsible and make them pay!" Well, now what's he going to do? Do you think he'll come down to Louisiana and pound his fists on the ground, stare skyward and scream "IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT GOD!?!?" Hah, hah-- I don't think so [smirk] Back to you...

I was somewhat taken aback by this comment, and have been scouring the Internet in search of a religious discussion of the disaster. MAZEL TOV!!! I had to look no further than Washington's very own Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Here are some quotes from his latest essay on Toward Tradition:

The immediacy of the suffering makes us forget that disasters have afflicted mankind since the days of Noah. Like the Asian tsunami did, the New Orleans disaster provokes serious questions. Some ask, "What sort of God would allow so many innocent people to be killed?" Others present the quandary this way: There are only two choices. Either God is all powerful in which case he did this cruel thing or else he couldn't stop it in which case he's impotent and who needs an impotent deity?

In reality however, there is another approach. This catastrophe was horrible but instead of waving a defiant fist at God, let us calmly examine how He set up the world to work.

If you have time, read the full text available at www.TowardTradition.org by clicking here. I found the Rabbi's essay quite inspiring. In times of tragedy and great need we often forget how small we are compared to the bigger picture, Rabbi Lapin reminds us.

Blame Amid Tragedy

For a great commentary on the 'blame-game' taking place in the mainstream media, read the Evergreen States' very own Bob Williams' guest commentary to the Wall Street Journal (available here).

Just more food for thought as the response continues.

(hat tip to Brian Crouch at http://www.soundpolitics.com/ for blogging on the Rabbi's essay)

Oregon: A Swell State

2005-09-08T08:26:00.000-07:00

Cross-Posted at Memento Moron.

After meeting TFR at her work each day and taking the helm of the MoronMobile, We drive along I-205 back towards home, to be greeted by the picture-framed view of the Three Sisters, a set of tall peaks in the Cascade Range.

Well, soon there may be a fourth sister.

Or maybe not, according to the article.

I've known about the bulge growing in the area for some time, but I didn't have all the details right. I thought it was one of the Sisters herself. But apparently it's a region near the mountain.

I also learned something I didn't know, but doesn't surprise me, which is that Oregon is home to 4 of the 18 most active volcanoes in the U.S. (Putting us in such impressive company as Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii. Welcome to the Ring of Fire, baby!). Those four are Mount Hood (I suspected that), Crater Lake (I thought she was extinct, but apparently is only dormant), Newberry Crater, and South Sister.

It was also a bit unsettling to learn how inadequate monitoring of them is. Usually volcanoes give you some advance warning, but still, the sooner we know the better, doncha think?

Whether the magma will move again or ever reach the surface is a mystery. But if it did, geological history suggests it would result only in small cinder cones that spew ash and lava.

...but would still be cool to watch.

The good news is that such an eruption likely would not seriously affect any population centers, Chitwood said.

Yeah, except for Bend, that's pretty remote country.

This could be kind of cool. Back when I thought one of the Sisters herself was bulging, I was worried about the towns and the city of bend and all the potentially threatened wildlife. But if it results in a much smaller but still interesting to watch event, it's a win-win. Scientists get the chance to observe a volcano being born, Oregon Tourism gets a boost, and the Cascades get to blow off a little stress, all without any real harm being done.

Jason Atkinson Leads the Way

2005-09-08T08:25:00.000-07:00

Gullyborg over at Resistance is Futile reports on yesterday's meeting between GOP gubernatorial candidate Jason Atkinson and Oregon Bloggers. From what he has to say, I'm liking Atkinson more and more all the time.

I also look forward to the next meeting between Bloggers and Atkinson, hopefully I can attend the next one.

Voting Is No Fun Anymore

2005-09-07T13:57:00.000-07:00

Well, I voted in the primary. The ballot came in the mail and went out the next day. I hate this new system. There was a sense of ceremony in going to the polls and casting my vote. I enjoyed standing there with my neighbors, feeling so American. Now we vote by mail. Period. It sucks! And besides, I want my "I Voted" sticker!

I'm still so surprised that we don't have to prove we're eligible to vote legally, especially after the embarassment of our last election. I thought about registering my dog Riley. He's almost 18 in dog years, but I think he leans a little to the left, so I didn't do it.

Competition Works for Sea-Tac Airport

2005-09-01T18:28:00.000-07:00

By Island Republican

(Cross posted at http://IslandRepublican.blogspot.com/)

King County Executive Ron Sims has been negotiating with Southwest Airlines about using King County Airport, also known as Boeing Field, as its Seattle base. Using regional airports to lower its costs has been a standard business approach for Southwest. It then passes these savings onto its customers, which has made air travel more affordable. The negotiations have created consternation from the Port of Seattle, the operator of Sea-Tac Airport, and the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce. Southwest has explained that the landing cost at Sea-Tac is excessive compared to other airports throughout the country. The landing cost is charged by the airport for each passenger on every flight. Since this information has become public, the 2009 projected landing costs at Sea-Tac have decreased from $25 per passenger to $14.15 per passenger. Southwest expects the landing costs at Boeing Field to be less than $5 per passenger. If Alaska Airlines and Horizon join Southwest at Boeing Field, the landing cost could be under $3 per passenger.

The Port of Seattle and the Seattle Chamber of Commerce are concerned that the two airports will be competing against each other. The Seattle Chamber of Commerce has stated, “The proposal also ignores a comprehensive aviation plan for our region, jeopardizes international air connections to important markets in Asia and Europe, and has negative impacts on service to communities throughout Washington State.” Neither the Seattle Chamber of Commerce nor the Port of Seattle has commented on the savings our region will gain by this competition. If businesses and individuals who fly can save over $250 million in airfares over a 10 year period, these funds are available to grow our businesses and communities, not ‘invest” in “airport facilities”.

I find it unusual that a liberal Democrat like Ron Sims is willing to buck the system and create competition within a governmental monopoly while the Seattle “business” community wants to stifle competition. While I am uncertain what the right answer is to the airport issue, I believe we need to perform the correct economic analysis of Southwest’s proposal. The needs of our entire community must be considered, not just “governmental” entities.

I would like to thank Ron Sims for bringing this important discussion to the public.

Who is Giving to Ron Sims?

2005-08-24T22:39:00.000-07:00

Ron Sims is way out front in the fund raising race with David Irons for King County Executive. King County Executive Ron Sims has raised $506,554 through July 31, 2005 while Councilmember David Irons has raised $168,320 through June 30, 2005. This information is from the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission. It is always interesting to see who is giving to which candidates. The largest group of givers (321 donations) to Mr. Sims campaign is King County government employees. They gave approximately $51,000. The second largest group of givers was City of Seattle employees followed by Sound Transit employees. Below is a selected group of donors to Mr. Sims campaign.

Royer, Charles	$1,350.00
Seattle Mariners	$1,350.00
SEIU 925 PAC	$1,350.00
SEIU Local 519	$1,350.00
SEIU Local 775	$1,350.00
Trades Seattle Bldg & Construction	$1,350.00
UA Local 32	$1,350.00
UFCW Local 1001	$1,350.00
UFCW Local 81	$1,350.00
WA Machinists Council	$1,350.00
WA State Council of County & City Employees	$1,250.00
WA Teamsters Leg League	$1,250.00
Intel Fed Prof & Tech Eng, Local 17	$1,125.00
Puget Sound Energy	$600.00
Rahr, Susan L	$50.00
Wallace Robert C & Joan S	$500.00
Ruckelshaus William D & Jill S	$1,350.00

Cross posted at Island Republican.

When Will Voting Be Safe Again?

2005-08-24T05:09:00.000-07:00

After a recent speaking engagement at the Downtown Seattle Republican's Club, King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng has found himself "tongue-tied". Maleng was kind enough to give lip-service to the standard Ron Sims and Dean Logan poppycock, but not actually bold enough to say IF, HOW or WHEN he would pursue election law violators. For more on Maleng's exact comments, and his bold new plan to take on car thieves, read the SoundPolitics (SP) transcript here.

Maleng has been a respectable public servant in King County for years. Why aren't his actions matching up with his record? Perhaps Ron Sims' reach extends further than we had imagined?!?

Don't think Maleng is off the hook just yet. The Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) is urging Maleng to pursue violators by enforcing the laws already on the books (read the press release). Stefan Sharkansky is also following this part of the elections fiasco very closely at SP.

All of this is happening as several individuals and organizations are promising to challenge illegally registered voters. Will the system be ready by 2006? I don't think anyone is claiming that by a long shot, but this just goes to further the electorate's concern about a "fixed" system.

TaDa!! It Was Senator Kate Brown (D) - Portland

2005-08-22T22:24:00.000-07:00

Posted also at Jaybird's Nest

On August 5, 2005 I asked the question here [and on August 8th here], with respect to House Bill 3486 (Oregon's "Megan's Law", creating a state-wide web site to list predatory sex offenders), "who is it that opposed this bill?" I sent emails out to 4 separate Oregon state legislators, two prominent Republicans and two prominent Democrats. I asked them what happened to House Bill 3486, and I further specifically asked them who it was that was playing games with it. It was bottle-necked somewhere in the Senate, and it looked like it wasn't going to even get a vote, even though it had broad bi-partisan support. I wanted to know who was behind the logjam. I got two responses to my emails. The two Democrats are the ones who responded, and they told me that at the last minute, on the eve of adjournment, the bill was voted on and passed. Unanimously. But nobody, not the Democrats, and not the Republicans, nobody, told me who it was that was playing games with it, i.e., who it was that had stalled it in the Senate, making the brinksmanship necessary.

Thanks to Bill O'Reilly of "The O'Reilly Factor" on FOX News, now we know, or at least we have a strong clue. Turns out that State Senator Kate Brown, (D) - Portland, Chairperson of the Senate Rules Committee, had played games with, tabled, and ultimately killed a companion bill to Megan's Law, Oregon's version of "Jessica's law," which, if enacted, would've established mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders, particulary when the victim was a child. Yep, Kate Brown killed it.

Steve Doell, the head of Crime Victims United, and who was a guest on Bill O'Reilly's program Thursday night said that there were powerful people --people with influence-- who'd gotten to and held sway with Senator Brown. It has been said that Brown was against the bill because it treated family members and strangers the same. In other words, apparantly, Brown believes that a parent or uncle or other family member who rapes a child should get off easier than when a non-relative rapes a child. Wrap your mind around that. Try to feature why Brown, or anybody else, might think thataway. And when you're ruminating about it, bear in mind the component of "powerful people" getting to her and influencing her.

THe Oregon State Legislature official website provides a nice little bio of Senator Brown. A more sterotypical standard issue leftwinger would be hard to find.

Lars Larson intimated on his radio show that Brown has strong ties to the gay and lesbian community in Portland, that it's that community that comprises her support base. Larson says that the sex offender bills were opposed by factions within the gay community, and it was from within that faction within that community that the influence was brought to bear on an accomodating Kate Brown. Larson theorized about a "chickenhawk" who has legally adopted his boytoy. You get the picture. And it didn't seem that Larson was talking about a hypothetical chickenhawk with an adopted boytoy, but rather a real live case.

Whatever. Be all that as it may, and whatever her motives, it nevertheless appears that it was Senator Kate Brown who worked to oppose House Bill 3486, "Megan's Law," and she also opposed and managed to successfully kill "Jessica's Law," which would've provided tough mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders against children.

And I'm wondering what it is that Senator Brown has on her colleagues in the legislature from both sides of the aisle where nobody wants to finger her for who she is and what she does.

Regarding Portland and Trammell Crow

2005-08-15T17:25:00.000-07:00

I decided to run Jim's numbers and they look OK to me. I did, however, find this. These are the summary minutes from the July 12, 2005 Portland Planning Commission. It states that the actual size of the 'affordable' unit is 514 square feet. After looking at other Alexan properties built by Trammell Crow across the country, I found that these may be the first 'affordable' units built into an Alexan community. On the other hand, they are significantly smaller than the smallest unit in other Alexan Communities. Additionally, they are among the most expensive smallest units in Alexan Communities.

OK, I got a little off topic, back to the math. Jim's point number one is just fine. Point 2 for the 'affordable' unit becomes $850 ÷ 514 sqft = $1.65 per sqft. This gives a difference of $.2593 between 'affordable' and penthouse.

Point 3 for the 'affordable' unit becomes $3037 ÷ 514 sqft = $5.91 per sqft, still more than three times the penthouse.

The 'lost rent' from point 4 for the 'affordable units' nearly doubles to $76770 per year. But how significant is that $76K to the entire project. If you listen to Trammell Crow in the PT article, every penny counts (as I laugh to myself and think that Trammell Crow wouldn't be pitching affordable if they couldn't make money doing it).

The above cited council minutes give us some clues. It tells us that

15,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space

will be included in the design. If we assume a square building all the way up, we know that there will be roughly 15,000 sqft per floor in this 22 story building. If we remove that square footage and that of the 'affordable units' we know there is just over 290K sqft left. Amazingly enough 13 penthouses will fit nearly perfectly in that 15K sqft.

So lets assume that only the top floor has penthouse. That leaves us with 275,378 sqft of space for the remaining 255 apartments, which is 1080 sqft per unit. I decided to pick an average rent of $1800 a month for those units (roughly equal to the $ per sqft cost of the 'affordable' units). With these numbers we can calculate yearly rents for the residential portion of the building.

48 affordable units x $850 per month = $40,800 per month = $489,600 per year
13 penthouse units x $2,200 per month = $28,600 per month = $343,200 per year
255 other units x $1,800 per month = $459,000 per month = $5,508,000 per year

Total yearly residential rent = $6,340,800 per year

At that rate, it would take Trammell Crow well past the 10 year abatement to begin to make a profit after taxes are figured in.

BUT I FORGOT SOMETHING DIDN'T I?!? There's that 15K sqft retail space. But it can't make that big of a difference, can it?

This is a study prepared by Economics Research Associates for the Portland Development Commission and Association for Portland Progress back in 2002. Among its findings, it states

Rents range from $12 to $20 NNN in the older buildings to $40 to $45 NNN in a few of the new well-located buildings.

Since this will, no doubt, be a "new well-located" community, I will assume the price per square foot for that 15K space to be $40 per sqft (again conservative due to taking the lower end and the fact this study is three years old).

So, 15K square feet x $40 per square foot = $600,000 per month = $7,200,000 per year

Add that to the $6,340,800 per year from residential space and we see that Trammell Crow will get $13,540,800 a year from this building.

Pretty sweet deal to me...

Is This In Spokane's Future?

2005-08-15T12:28:00.000-07:00

A recent story in the Portland Tribune (here) has really got some people thinking about Portland's "smart growth," planning. Central to the entire SG scheme is of course Light Rail.

Spokane is of course thinking about running some Light Rail lines around town at anywhere from $25 to $50 million dollars per mile. A recent email to a Spokane County Councilman from the Coyote has not been responded to... hmmm....

So for the good citizens of Spokane we here at NWRepublican thought we would share some of the email discussions that the citizens of Portland are having concerning these boondoggles and how they can radically spin out of control. If any of our our readers have any contacts with the Spokane County Commissioners you might want to alert them to the future of Light Rail developmente, being played out right here on this site.

Portland email discussion starts now:

First:
At 11:06 PM 8/14/05 , STEVE wrote:

Why should South Waterfront developers receive any property tax abatements?Trammel Crow and other land owners in South Waterfront have already been handed windfalls for their property.

With the public paying for streets, sewer and water, streetcars, and other infrastructure for the developers and zone changes which doubled building heights, sizes and values, Trammel Crow and the rest have already gotten far more than they deserve. Their prime, river front, high rise development is proving to be just that, as hot early condo sales reveal NO public subsidy was likely needed at all. Let alone a 10 year property tax abatement which will sever a future revenue stream of millions headed towards basic city services.Services which will be provided to this development even without their fair share of property taxes.

From the Portland Tribunehttp://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=31260 ---"DiChiara said that if the council does not approve the abatement, Trammell Crow will have no choice but to change the project to condominiums with no affordable units or sell the property to another developer. â€œIt would stop as rental apartments. Our fallback is to build it as condos or sell it to someone else,â€ he said."----They already conned the city into providing infrastructure and sweeping zone changes for their development.

Now they threaten insolvency and no ability to provide any affordable housing without the abatement. Why? Because they are confident that line of BS will work. If all it takes to get the 10 year abatement is to throw out a canned threat why not?---"The Portland Development Commission and the Portland Planning Commission have approved the abatement. Council approval is the final step in the program. The abatement would keep approximately $60 million off property tax rolls for 10 years."---Good thing Portland didn't buy PGE or they would be demanding free power too.Steve

Second
Jim Writes: -From: Jim
Here are some ways to look at the proposed Alexan abatement. (See math section below for details)
1. The abatement is enough to totally pay for a penthouse apartment for each “affordable” unit. (See 1 below)
2. The monthly rent for the “affordable” unit is only $0.14, per square foot, less than a penthouse apartment. (See 2 below)
3. The landlord’s actual income per square foot for those “affordable” units is about $6.33 per sq foot, over three times that of a penthouse unit. (See 3 below)
4. For giving up $39,318 in rent, the landlord gets a $1,200,000 abatement.(See 4 below)There is a name for the entity on the other side of this kind of deal: SUCKER!!Portland, the city that works.(Be sure to check my math & reading of the Tribune article)

ThanksJK
---------------- Here is the math -------------
1. Per unit, per month abatement:$60 million off tax rolls x .021 = $1,260,000 in annual taxes abated.$1,260,000 in annual taxes abated ÷ 12 = 105,000 monthly taxes abated.There will be 48 “affordable” units:105,000 monthly taxes abated ÷ 48 units = $2187 per month per unitRent of a penthouse (See Tribune story): “largest of them, 1,150-square-foot penthouse apartments. . . rent for up to $2,200 per month”

2. Per square-foot costs of each type of unit:1,150 sqft Penthouse rents for “up to” $2,200 per month or $2,200 ÷ 1,150 sqft = $1.91 per sqft. 480 sqft “affordable” unit rents for up to $850 per month, or $850 ÷ 480 sqft = $1.77 per sqft.Difference between “affordable” and penthouse: $1.91-$1.77=$0.1422 per sqft.

3. Per square foot income to landlord:Since the abatement is an avoided expense, it is just like income: $850 rental income+$2187 abatement = $3037 per month income attributable to the “affordable” unit. This is $3037 ÷ 480 sqft = $6.33 per sqft -- over three times the income per square foot ($1.91, above) that a penthouse unit produces.

4. Lost rental income due to the “affordable” units:It appears that they are giving up about $.1422 per sq ft (see 2 above)48 units x 480 sqft x $.1422 per sqft = $3276 per month for ALL 48 units.Annually: $3276 x 12 = $39,318

Finally
RAS writes:

This is not supposed to make fiscal sense -- but rather isn't this how they keep the Portland Democrat machinery well oiled and purring along even without rapist Neil Goldschmidt at the helm? What is amusing lately is that the rest of the state appears to be finally catching on to what Portland is up to and is now denying them the extra taxes they need to provide this generous tax abatement largess to their "supporters." Having seen how upset the Demos were that their attempt to hijack and extend an expiring tax on bonds was thwarted by the Republican House, it will be interesting to see how they attempt to extend the huge "temporary" Multnomah County income tax which is scheduled to expire next year -- they promised faithfully -- just like they were going to fix the high cost of teacher medical benefits as part of the deal.
So long as PERS hangs over the entire fiscal structure of Oregon there will be this on-going drum beating for more taxes to fund these lavish union giveaway programs. Have the people finally caught on to what is going on? The Portlanders I know say adamately that they have finally had enough and won't be suckered again. We know the companies which have left or don't locate here have finally figured it out -- but ordinary citizens -- how long will they remember that photo in the Oregonian showing the two early-retired teachers sunning themselves poolside in Arizona, living the good life while the rest of us toil here in the rain to provide their means?
ras

Rally in Bellevue

2005-08-15T04:31:00.000-07:00

Rally for the President! Come support the President's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Roberts, and enjoy a *sunny* day with fellow conservative activists!

Saturday August 20th at 11:00 am PDT
Bellevue Downtown Park, 100th Avenue N.E.
Contact: Megan R. DeVere megandevere(at)yahoo(dot)com
Western Region Operations Director
Washington State College Republicans Federation
Phone: (Two-Zero-Six)-241-9545

Watch for the announcement on Northwest Afternoon, hopefully coming this week. If you want to be one of the interviewees, or help us out by sitting in the audience, contact Megan (see above).

We hope to see you there!

Seattle Department of Transportation – Where $800 Million is Nothing to Worry About

2005-08-12T21:54:00.000-07:00

I listened to a luncheon speech on July 26 by Grace Crunican, Director of Seattle Department of Transportation. This speech was given at a Bellevue Rotary meeting and focused on the Alaskan Way Viaduct. Ms. Crunican was a good speaker and presented a number of interesting facts regarding regional transportation projects. She repeatedly referred to the “great” job the governor and state legislature did on passing a major transportation “funding” package. She commented often that the business community had to “get behind” the No on I-912, which would repeal the 9.5 cents gas tax increase.

While discussing the tunnel option including a great animated movie showing how traffic will move through the new tunnel, she did not present other options for the project. She discussed the problems with the sea wall, which will be replaced whether or not the viaduct is replaced and how the construction projects will impact traffic in the area. The Alaskan Way Viaduct handles 25% of the north- south traffic flow through downtown Seattle.

During the question and answer section, she was asked about funding and the cost difference between a tunnel and replacing the viaduct with a similar but updated structure. The cost for the tunnel option is $4.4 billion. The replacement project would be $3.0 billion. The current funding is $2.0 billion from the new gas tax, $500 million from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and $500 million from the Port. She stated that would leave $800 million of “local” funding to complete the project. How this adds up to an $800 million shortfall (it looks like $1.4 billion) is a mystery. To replace the existing viaduct as is would only be $3.0 billion for which there is current funding. But she stated the additional $800 million cost for the tunnel was not a major concern. And all these costs do not add any additional traffic capacity.

The numbers don’t add up - $800 million vs. $1.4 billion and only one option is being presented by the City of Seattle. The money is available to rebuild the viaduct and if Seattle wants a tunnel then Seattle should pay for it.

What Lies Beneath... Or Not

2005-08-11T11:10:00.000-07:00

(Cross-posted at Memento Moron)

Oregon's quarter came out this year, and I've finally had a chance to look at it, even spend it. I'm still disappointed.

Like most Oregonians surveyed, I wanted this design to be chosen:

But Governor Kulongoski went with this one:

He said this about the process of choosing a quarter design: "This is a unique opportunity for Oregon," said Edwards. "Our quarter will communicate to the nation and the world our values and Oregon´s natural beauty."

I think this one falls short.

I have to admit, in it's final minted form it's a rather pretty design:

But despite my love for Crater Lake, it really doesn't convey the significance of the Oregon Trail design. The Oregon Trail was the single most defining event in the history of this state, and indeed, one of the most important events in the history of the NATION. It's that significant.

The rationale behind Kulongoski's decision was at least in part a desire to avoid upsetting Native American groups. And while I understand that the colonization and settling of this continent by Europeans is a sore issue for First Peoples, pretending it didn't happen isn't going to make things any better for anyone. There's more to this state than pretty scenery. There's history here, there are stories to be told.

In a way, the image on the quarter itself suffers from the same lack of depth in portraying Crater Lake as it does in portraying the depth of this state. You see a shiny, flat surface to the lake. What it doesn't -- indeed what it CAN'T portray, is the fact that Crater Lake, at over 1,400 feet, is the deepest fresh water in North America. It's also some of the cleanest, clearest, bluest water anywhere in the world.

So come visit this state. When you do, go see Crater Lake -- it's worth the trip, and the quarter doesn't do it justice. The sight will take your breath away.

And while you're at it, see the rest of the state too. Take in all the beauty about which I've blogged. Visit Fort Clatsop, where Lewis and Clark spent their Pacific winter. Visit the Oregon Trail museums (we have 2), and the Brownsville Pioneer Museum. learn about our culture, our history, as well as our scenery. The quarter doesn't do them justice either.

Where Oregon Ranks

2005-08-08T07:56:00.000-07:00

Like I posted on my blog here, I have no particular interest in the area of sex offenders, other than being just an regular plain old vanilla citizen, with a wife, two daughters, and a grandaughter, and armed with a little bit of information. Like the fact that sexual predators aren't rehabilitatable. Like the fact that they typically abuse upwards of 100 times before they are caught. We now know enough, psychologically, sociologically, and criminal justice-wise, to know that these guys have to be watched.

So those Oregon legislators who proudly preen about what a great job they did with this session they just wrapped up may want to think twice about all that preening. I did a little checking, and when it comes to which states have a website listing sex offenders on a state-wide basis, and which states don't have such a website, this is what I found. Check it out. See where Oregon comes in compared to all the other states and the District of Columbia.

I'm still waiting to see which Oregon legislator of the 4 legislators I sent emails to, which includes House Speaker Karen Minnis, will be the first to answer me and explain to me how House Bill 3486 got killed, why, and by whom. I haven't received any replies yet (other than this).

And the Oregon legislators are proud of the job they did this session where they allowed the bill that would have established an Oregon site to be killed?

Alabama: here
Alaska: here
Arizona: here
Arkansas: here
California: here
Colorado: here
Connecticut: here
Delaware: here
District of Columbia: here
Florida: here
Georgia: here
Hawaii: here
Idaho: here
Illinois: here
Indiana: here
Iowa: here
Kansas: here
Kentucky: here
Louisiana: here
Maine: here
Maryland: here
Massachusetts: here
Michigan: here
Minnesota: here
Mississippi: here
Missouri: here
Montana: here
Nebraska: here
Nevada: here
New Hampshire: here
New Jersey: here
New Mexico: here
New York: here
North Carolina: here
North Dakota: here
Ohio: here
Oklahoma: here
Oregon: ABSENT. Zero, zip, none, nada.
Pennsylvania: here
Rhode Island: here
South Carolina: here
South Dakota: here
Tennessee: here
Texas: here
Utah: here
Vermont: here
Virginia: here
Washington: here
West Virginia: here
Wisconsin: here
Wyoming: here

UPDATE - 8/08/05, 10:17pm

I received the following email today from State Senator Richard Devlin (D-Tualatin).

________________________________________________

Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:32:05 -0700
Subject: RE: HB 3486

From: "Sen Devlin"
To: "Jay Bird"

Dear Jay,

Thank you for your email regarding HB 3486. I appreciate your taking the time to write. This bill passed the House on 6/27 on a vote of 58-0. On 8/4 I carried this bill on the Senate floor and it passed with a unanimous 30-0 vote. It now goes to the Governor.

Regards,
Senator Richard Devlin

________________________________________________

And in response to which I sent the following email to Senator Devlin:

________________________________________________

Mon, 08 Aug 2005 21:48:18 -0700
From: "Jay Bird"
To: "Sen Devlin"
Subject: RE: HB 3486

Senator Devlin,

Thank you much for your information about HB 3486. And thank you also for your efforts in pushing it through the Senate. The last that I had heard was about 10 days ago when it was reported that the bill was stalled in committee or something to that effect, and it appeared at that time that it was going to not get a vote. What happened? How and why was it stalled? With those unanimous votes in both chambers, the brinksmanship and the necessity of heroic measures to save it just aren't understandable.

With your background in the criminal justice system I'm sure that you realize that this subject matter is too important to play games with. But it appears to me that there are some others in the legislature who don't realize that.

J

_______________________________________________

Senator Devlin deserves some credit for being the first Oregon legislator to respond to me --the only one so far-- of the four that I sent emails to. If his rendition of him taking the bill to the Senate Floor and getting it voted on is accurate, he deserves credit and kudos for that too. You've got to remember that the day he reports that he did that, Thursday, August 4, was the last day of the legislature. The bill was pushed through literally at the last minute. And media reports about what was happening in the legislature on that last day didn't mention that it was voted on.

So it now sits on Governor Ted's desk.

Peter Jennings Signs Off

2005-08-08T07:07:00.000-07:00

No breaking news here, everyone knows that Peter Jennings died of lung cancer last night.

Over the last couple of years, as the MSM has seemed increasingly adversarial towards the President, up to and including the open hostility displayed by the likes of Helen Thomas, it struck me that, at least from my perception, Peter Jennings made the most admirable effort among the Big 3's anchors to separate his personal opinions from his presentation of the news. I had respect for him due to that.

Furthermore, I was greatly impressed with his candor regarding his illness and the smoking habit that caused it. Especially human and oddly touching was the fact that it was the impact of the 9/11 attacks that caused him to take it up again. No one will ever be the same who witnessed those events, and Jennings' death bears witness to their continued influence on us.

In the end, though I no longer have much regard for the news arms of the old major networks, Jennings always struck me as genuine and personable. His death is tragic and he is to be mourned.

Raise the B&O Tax Level for Small Businesses

2005-08-03T18:11:00.000-07:00

Washington State has the honor of being the top state for creation of new businesses and infamous as the top state for business failures. Our population is extremely entrepreneurial. One item that causes a new small business to struggle is the state Business & Occupation tax. A new business must complete a Washington State Business & Occupation state form and pay taxes starting at $12,000 per calendar year. In addition to paying the tax, the entrepreneur must take the time to fill out the monthly forms. How can a business survive on such a small revenue amount?

Washington State needs to raise the minimum level for payment of B&O taxes from $12,000 per calendar year to at least $250,000. At this level, the business is still small and struggling, but it is at least more likely to survive. If Washington State raised the minimum amount to $250,000, this would exempt over 178,000 companies (70% of the companies who filed returns in 2003). The amount paid by these companies represent less than one percent (0.08%) of funds paid into the state general fund.

What a great way to support small businesses in the State of Washington!

Below is a summary of B&O taxes paid by all businesses in the State of Washington in the calendar year of 2003. The figures were provided by the Department of Revenue.

Size of Firm Based on Gross	# of Firms	Total Gross	Total Taxable	Total Tax due
Less than $250,000	178,401	11,368,565,546	10,766,654,292	90,839,024
Less than $500,000	205,036	20,841,745,194	19,589,685,184	161,004,211
Less than $750,000	217,542	28,504,864,896	26,642,899,164	217,481,067
All Firms	256,714	400,881,238,597	318,741,074,486	2,060,066,781
Total General Fund				11.3 billion

Please consider eliminating B&O taxes on companies with revenues less $250,000.

Cross posted at Island Republican www.islandrepublican.blogspot.com

Not sure how I missed this one...

2005-08-02T14:15:00.000-07:00

If the First and Fifth Amendments weren't already off the table at the Constitutional Death Pool, this from Reason would take care of it. Apparently, certain alleged gang members are being denied the right to move about their neighborhoods after 10pm, or associate with other alleged gang members. Even wearing certain clothing can get you arrested. All this is done by Civil Gang Injunction. Once served, the person must comply with all the rules of the injunction or be arrested. The police decided who is served based on things including wearing red or blue (does Red, White, and Blue qualify?) or being seen in a photo with another alleged member. No proof is required that you actually are a gang member.

Now I know these are gang members. They aren't exactly the cream of the crop. They may not be the nicest people. I'm sure most people would be very happy with them all off the street. But concocting crimes just to take certain people off the street is a very slippery slope.

Here in Seattle, they may decided that you qualify for a Civil Gang Injunction if you wear anything with the letters G, W, or B on it. Or if you are or have ever been seen around a likeness of an elephant.

Of course if Seattle had implemented one regarding dred-locks, Che T-Shirts, and Marijuana leaves back before WTO, we probably wouldn't have had any problems. Of course, some areas of Seattle would still be a ghost town...

It began in Gdansk

2005-08-01T23:04:00.000-07:00

I was there 25 years ago when the first domino piece fell. I gagged on the gas. I didn't think we had a chance. I was wrong. I left. They are still there. I can only observe, be proud but humble. Who had more courage, I who left or they who stayed? Regardless, we all will be better for it. The new, the better, the domino theory.

Regulating Nyquil

2005-08-01T16:09:00.000-07:00

Gosh, I hope that the meth cooks in Oregon aren't smart enough to figure out that they can go to Vancouver to buy their cold medicine.

I know I will be going over to White Salmon for mine.

Somehow I don't believe that the legislators in Salem really had a handle on this one, no matter how much they pat themselves on the back and tell each other how great they are.

What Would Teddy have Said Back THEN?

2005-08-01T08:47:00.000-07:00

President Bush has appointed John Bolton as US Ambassador to the Unityed Nations using a recess nomination.

Of course, Senator Ted Kennedy (D - Johnny Walker) was critical of the move.

"It's a devious maneuver that evades the constitutional requirement of Senate consent and only further darkens the cloud over Mr. Bolton's credibility at the U.N," Kennedy said."

As my good friend Vulture Six pointed out to me, The Senator's own brother used just such a manuover to put Thurgood Marshall on the SCOTUS bench.

But that's different, right, Ted Old Chap?

Closing the Gap

2005-08-01T07:56:00.000-07:00

Please welcome new Red Northwest Blogger, Jay Bird, out of Mosier, Oregon.

Watch it, Washingtonians, we're catching up!

That Was Fast

2005-07-29T11:51:00.000-07:00

Before I can even welcome him aboard, our newest member has posted. Please give a big welcome to Island Republican.

At the same time, we mourn the loss of a good Oregon Blog, "Ya Think So?" We're gonna miss you, Ricky.

Is Brian Sonntag Qualified to do Performance Audits?

2005-07-29T11:24:00.000-07:00

Washington State is about to join the “Performance Audit” bandwagon. In general, the concept of Performance Audits is good. But with any service provided by government, it is only as good as the leader of that government agency.

As part of the new gas tax passed in the 2005, the Washington State legislature required performance audits of large Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) projects. In addition, Initiative 900, Performance Audits of Government (I-900), will greatly expand the number and scope of performance audits in Washington State. In response to I-900, the legislature passed its own performance audit legislation. All these performance audits are required to be performed by the Washington State Auditor’s Office.

The Washington State Auditor will have to complete its first Performance Audit in the near future. And what type of experience does Brian Sonntag have to perform and supervise these audits?

Mr. Sonntag does not have a college degree.

Mt. Sonntag is not a Certified Public Accountant.

Mr. Sonntag is not allowed by law to sign an opinion on financial audits.

Mr. Sonntag does not have the minimum qualifications to apply for the entry level job of Assistant State Auditor (Bachelor's degree, which includes 10 semester hours or 15 quarter hours in accounting).

The political discussion in Washington State needs to address this issue. Could you imagine having the State Attorney General not being a lawyer? Washington State needs and should have a CPA as its State Auditor. Both the Democratic and Republican parties need to attract and promote candidates for State Auditor who are CPAs. Legislation should be considered requiring that the State Auditor be a CPA.

Washington State deserves better than Brian Sonntag.

McGavick Spoof Website Fools Seattle PI's Connelly

2005-07-28T04:48:00.000-07:00

If you haven't already heard, a spoof site designed by a "former" Young Democrat snared the Seattle PI's Joe Connelly.

This would probably have gone un-noticed if not for the careful and inquisitive eyes of both THE SHARK (SoundPolitics.com) and Pajama Jihad Warrior (pajamajihad.blogspot.com).

Links to more info on this story here, here, and here.

Cross Posted at Respectfully Republican www.plucrs.blogspot.com

23 Days Late

2005-07-27T13:13:00.000-07:00

(Cross-Posted at Memento Moron)

I have for some time found myself at a loss as to which modern American political movement closest matches my own beliefs, political views, and philosophies. I understand that it is more and more common, as well as admirable, for individuals to eschew party names or other labels in favor of voting their conscience. While this is an excellent way of applying your beliefs to your voting habits and to choices you make that affect political outcomes, it can become time-consuming in discussions to have to explain just what your beliefs are. Thus, it is often more efficient to identify yourself with a particular party or movement in general, and divulge any variations from that norm only when they are germane to the conversation. This becomes more problematic the more eclectic ones beliefs, I suppose. But I digress. Well, only just a little. The point is that while I find myself agreeing quite frequently with particular parties or movements, there have been numerous occasions where I’ve had to make exceptions to my support or agreement.

Over the course of the last year (wow, I’ve been doing this a year!), while expressing my own views on this blog, I’ve read the comments by my readers, and I’ve read other blogs and the comments by their readers, and in doing so, have learned more about politics and political theories and history than I ever knew before. And while I’m still a novice in such things, I feel confident in saying that I now understand my OWN political views better.

There was a time when I was a staunch modern conservative. This was as a very young person, and was mostly influenced by my family upbringing. During my college and early adult years, I was strongly influenced by opinions and attitudes within the culture of Christian Missionaries, which is what I aspired to be. This led to an odd mix of beliefs all based on what I perceived to be sound biblical doctrine, and I suppose you could say I was socially conservative, fiscally liberal, and a dove with regard to foreign policy. The High Water Mark for my adherence to these positions was in

Churchill’s comment about the effects of age on ones politics certainly rang true in my case, and as time wore on and I began to think out certain positions I held, I grew more hawkish and more fiscally conservative. On social issues, I found myself growing more conservative on some points and more liberal or moderate on others. Eventually I found myself once again firmly in what I believed to be the Republican camp (and, to be honest, that is the way I usually vote), though I found, and find, myself more in agreement with libertarians on some issues.

From there my understanding of my own views evolved to the point where I considered my self a constitutionalist. I believed, and for the most part still believe, that the Constitution was and should be the final benchmark for law in the United States.

But recently I found myself challenged – not to question my belief in the Constitution, but to question its exact place in my political philosophy. As I mentioned in an essay early on in my blogging days, my political views are still guided by my religious beliefs, as horrifying as that might be to some. The First Amendment was established, I believe, not to prevent an individual’s religious beliefs from having ANY effect on that individual’s political views, but rather to prevent organized religion from dictating public policy, and to prevent government from dictating religious doctrine. Therefore, I reject the Separation of Church and Brain.

This has put me in a dilemma with regards to my stance as a constitutionalist on several occasions, the most notable of which was the Schiavo case. Without launching into a separate debate on the merits of that case, for the purpose of THIS discussion, it must suffice that I believed I was helping to defend an innocent life in taking the stand I did on that occasion. In doing so, and in actively following the blogosphere’s discussion of the case, I was challenged by a post by Naked Villainy’s Smallholder, questioning the depth of commitment to the Constitution of Republican congressmen who were interfering in the case; and the depth of commitment to the Constitution of conservatives in general by their approval of these actions.

And while I’m not sure he was 100% right (not being as much of an expert in the Constitution as I am a believer), he did have a point, one I had to consider and finally concede, at least on my own behalf. In this case, I had to admit, I was willing to waver in my commitment to the constitution in order to remain firm in my commitment to defending life. I found myself further troubled when confronting the argument that the Federal Government was acting unconstitutionally in waging the Civil War, a war I believe achieved great good. This put me, you can imagine, in the unenviable position of once again needing to readjust exactly how I represented myself politically. Eventually I concluded that I still considered myself a constitutionalist, but what I call a Means Constitutionalist, as opposed to an Ends Constitutionalist. By that, of course, I mean that I believe that adherence to the Constitution is NOT the highest end of American Law, but rather, that the Constitution itself is the greatest means by which we strive to the highest ends of American Law. And what is that highest end?

For a very long time, in fact, ever since the days when I was an anti-abortion socialist-leaning pacifist, I held firm to a belief that in arguing the constitutional merits of any given policy or law, modern politicians were overlooking the importance of the Preamble to the Constitution. It was, and is, my belief that within the Preamble, the framers laid out exactly what end they intended to achieve, and in the rest of the Constitution, expounded on how to achieve it.

These are the ends of Law in the United States, and of the Constitution itself: Union, Justice, Domestic Tranquility, Common Defense, General Welfare, and Liberty. Any law that opposes those ends, whether technically adherent to the rest of the Constitution or not, should be opposed. Any law that promotes those ends, whether technically adherent to the rest of the Constitution or not, should be supported. The former should be rendered unconstitutional as quickly as possible, the latter rendered constitutional. But if the day ever comes when the Constitution ceases to uphold those ends, I will cease to be a constitutionalist. In short, my loyalty to the Constitution and to the United States is conditional upon their loyalty to the principles upon which they were founded.

How can I say such a thing? Sedition! Well, not yet. But sadly, the day may come when my words above would be seditious. So be it. For this belief of mine is based on another set of words that were, when coined, equally seditious. But you just said that the Constitution is the final authority on what the ends of our law are! No, I said that the Constitution, or specifically the Preamble, expresses what those ends ARE, and the rest of the Constitution expounds on how they’re to be achieved, but it is not the final AUTHORITY on what they are. Well, then, what or who is? I am. You are. We all are, individually and collectively.

It’s simple, really. With regards to the end of American government, the Constitution addresses almost all of the most important “5W/H” questions:

Who?
We the People of the United States

What?
in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,
Where?
Philadelphia

When?
done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

How?
do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Notice the glaring omission?

Why?

At first blush, I thought that that was what the preamble was about. But I came to believe that the preamble explains WHAT we are setting out to do. But why do we want to form this more perfect union? Why bother creating this finely crafted, well-thought out document?

I finally concluded that the reason WHY, the authority and motivation behind the Constitution, could be found in a document several years older than the Constitution. And I have come to view THIS document as the authority on which rests the constitution. Of course, I am referring to the Declaration of Independence. Specifically, I believe the foundational concept, the authority upon which rests the entire US Constitution and government, is expressed in the following clause from the Declaration:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

...That’s it. That’s why we have a constitution, why we have THIS constitution. And the rest of that clause goes on to explain why I think it right and proper and altogether fitting to hold to the position I do, which is that I am a constitutionalist only as long as the Constitution achieves this end. Because I believe…

...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Tom Cox For State Rep?

2005-07-25T16:38:00.000-07:00

Crossposted at http://nwrepublican.blogspot.com/

Tom Cox running as a Republican for House District 29? Ok ok, it is not as big as say running for governor or someone challenging Wu. However it would have some major implications on the state house.

Here's the deal... For the last ten years or so Mr. Tom Cox has been running for everything in sight as a Libertarian (or as I have been wan't to call them, Libercrats because all a libertarian can do is elect a Democrat.). Including running for House District 29 in the last election cycle.

He had a most terrible showing in that race even running against the pro tax republican Mary Gallegos. However he was successful in throwing the seat to the dems. Which is what many movement Republicans were secretly hoping would happen after Gallegos stabbed them in the back. Cox did significantly raise his name ID in that election however.

Now, I know Mr. Cox somewhat and I know his personality type even better. He wants to be in Salem in the worst way. After running a very high profile spoiler campaign for governor Cox almost switched parties to run for that district 29 seat back when. Almost...I opposed the campaign of Cox in that seat because I just don't think that third parties are the way to effect change. The Tom Cox campaign proved me right. However I did not oppose Cox on an issues basis, and rumor has it that Cox has matured and has learned a lesson.

That lesson is that, if you want to effect policy change you need to win elections.Now the rumor is that Cox is flirting with changing parties and taking his name ID and grassroots machine and throwing it after district 29 once again. This time as a Republican. SMART MOVE.

If he were to run as a Republican in that district he would be going into a general election starting out with about 47% of the vote instead of 5%. HUGE difference. The Republicans would stand a GREAT chance of ousting the DemocratICK Rep. Chuck Riley , and gaining another super solid vote on the Republican side. (note: one should not overlook the necessity of having not just republicans in the house but SOLID Republicans. You know those guys that won't break your hearts.)

So there is pressure for Cox to change parties again and Cox is, as some might say "bending under the pressure." However that is not how the Coyote would put it. No, we here at NWRepublican call it "maturing."

Tom Cox, if yer coming over, welcome aboard! I think you'd find the sailing much smoother than you think. Certainly much smoother than tilting at those windmills. THIS... Now THIS might just work. Might just work for everybody, Republicans, Libertarians, Oregonians.

Yip Yip

Exercising ignorance

2005-07-22T18:40:00.000-07:00

An utterly ridiculous commentary made its way into the LA Times today. Jonathan Chait has a bit of beef with a president who considers exercise important:

Bush can bench press 185 pounds five times, and, before a recent knee injury, he ran three miles at a 6-minute, 45-second pace. That's better than I could manage when I played two sports in high school. And I wasn't holding the most powerful office on Earth. Which is sort of my point: Does the leader of the free world need to attain that level of physical achievement?...

...My guess is that Bush associates exercise with discipline, and associates a lack of discipline with his younger, boozehound days. "The president," said Fleischer, "finds [exercise] very healthy in terms of … keeping in shape. But it's also good for the mind." The notion of a connection between physical and mental potency is, of course, silly. (Consider all the perfectly toned airheads in Hollywood — or, perhaps, the president himself.)

What a bogus thing to say. Since when did "all the perfectly toned airheads in Hollywood" bench press 185 pounds five times and run three miles at a 6-minute, 45-second pace. I doubt most of the actors in Hollywood could even run three miles without having a stroke or something. To make such an argument that mental and physical discipline aren't related is not a little spurious.

Fit though he is, as are most of our recent Republican presidents (no coincidence there I'm sure), I like to think Bush is just a small reflection of the impressive Father of physically fit presidents, Theodore Roosevelt. T.R was a lot closer to fanatical about exercise than any of us will ever know.

The Face Of Compassion?

2005-07-21T07:30:00.000-07:00

So is this the face of compassion? Reason? Understanding?

This is the man (Bret Harter) arrested yesterday for allegedly making threatening phone calls into Lars Larson's personal phone. Threatening his wife.

Sounds like the standard response for liberals doesn't it? I mean they cannot hold an argument so they always turn to name calling and trying to scream louder than the other folks. If that don't work threaten them, take their homes, sue them and finally... Find some kind of scandal.

So perhaps this is actually the face of reason. The new hero of the left?

I can't wait to find out if this guy is a DemocratICK precinct committee person, or made contribution to X-Pac or something like that. Inquiring minds want to know.

Just leave it to the Coyote to dig up some carrion... hehe...

Crossposted at http://nwrepublican.blogspot.com/

New Member

2005-07-21T05:53:00.000-07:00

Please welcome the newest Blogger to join the Alliance, The Polish Immigrant.

WSU plays dirty

2005-07-18T21:58:00.000-07:00

Imagine this: a group of 40 hecklers are paid to go and shout out threats at the actors in a "controversial" student play... Sound far-fetched? Think again.

This from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education:

On April 21, 2005, Lee and his student cast performed the final production of Passion of the Musical, a play they had widely publicized as being potentially “offensive or inflammatory to all audiences.” During the play, a group of 40 student protestors repeatedly stood up, shouted about being offended, and verbally threatened audience members and the cast. FIRE has obtained a document confirming that administrators at Washington State’s Office for Campus Involvement (OCI) purchased the hecklers’ tickets.

Read the full story on their site, but don't bite your cheek too hard!

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

O'Connor's notice

2005-07-01T23:17:00.000-07:00

Now let the insanity begin.

If the first retirement has to be one of the conservative bloc, it might as well be O'Connor because her checkered career is more ambiguity than brilliance. At least she her move was made on a positive note--right after her solid defense of private property in the recent Kelo v. New London case--although she shared much of that lost-cause-glory with justice Thomas.

At the very least, she has shown a vote of confidence in President Bush versus the possibility of a future liberal nomination. Perhaps a little anger over the Kelo case has something to do with her sudden timing.

Here's Your Chance to Fiddle While Rome Burns

2005-06-24T08:13:00.000-07:00

(Cross-Posted at Memento Moron)

In "honor" of the Supreme Court's ruling on Eminent Domain, a group of us have decided to start a Constitution Dead Pool. Here's your chance to "bet" on which part of the constitution will get dismantled next!

New Member

2005-06-23T13:02:00.000-07:00

Please welcome the latest conservative voice being added to our little coalition, Felis Of Palousitics from Pullman, Washington.

How do you know which wallet belongs to Justice Thomas?

2005-06-23T12:41:00.000-07:00

Today, the Supreeeeeeeeeme Court ruled that government can take your property for whatever the hell it wants. From CNN today,

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development.
As a result, cities have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes to generate tax revenue.

The Institute for Justice gives an abbreviated description of the case:

In 1998, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer built a plant next to Fort Trumbull and the City determined that someone else could make better use of the land than the Fort Trumbull residents. The City handed over its power of eminent domain—the ability to take private property for public use—to the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), a private body, to take the entire neighborhood for private development.

In regards to her dissent, the AP article says

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor…issued a stinging dissent.

Some choice excerpt from her dissent include

Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded–i.e., given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public–in the process.

In moving away from our decisions sanctioning the condemnation of harmful property use, the Court today significantly expands the meaning of public use. It holds that the sovereign may take private property currently put to ordinary private use, and give it over for new, ordinary private use, so long as the new use is predicted to generate some secondary benefit for the public–such as increased tax revenue, more jobs, maybe even aesthetic pleasure…Thus, if predicted (or even guaranteed) positive side-effects are enough to render transfer from one private party to another constitutional, then the words “for public use” do not realistically exclude any takings, and thus do not exert any constraint on the eminent domain power.

The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.

If legislative prognostications about the secondary public benefits of a new use can legitimate a taking, there is nothing in the Court’s rule or in Justice Kennedy’s gloss on that rule to prohibit property transfers generated with less care, that are less comprehensive, that happen to result from less elaborate process, whose only projected advantage is the incidence of higher taxes, or that hope to transform an already prosperous city into an even more prosperous one.

Today nearly all real property is susceptible to condemnation on the Court’s theory. In the prescient words of a dissenter from the infamous decision in Poletown, “[n]ow that we have authorized local legislative bodies to decide that a different commercial or industrial use of property will produce greater public benefits than its present use, no homeowner’s, merchant’s or manufacturer’s property, however productive or valuable to its owner, is immune from condemnation for the benefit of other private interests that will put it to a ‘higher’ use.”

But the truly scathing dissent comes from Justice Thomas

If such “economic development” takings are for a “public use,” any taking is, and the Court has erased the Public Use Clause from our Constitution…

Justice Thomas puts some sting into it with this

Today’s decision is simply the latest in a string of our cases construing the Public Use Clause to be a virtual nullity, without the slightest nod to its original meaning.

Much to my enjoyment, Thomas continues to define himself as a strict Constitutionalist. And he’s not afraid to show his love for Original Intent.

Tellingly, the phrase “public use” contrasts with the very different phrase “general Welfare” used elsewhere in the Constitution. (“Congress shall have Power To … provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”); preamble (Constitution established “to promote the general Welfare”). The Framers would have used some such broader term if they had meant the Public Use Clause to have a similarly sweeping scope.

He then takes SCOTUS to task for the ambiguity of this ruling in relation to others.

The Court has elsewhere recognized “the overriding respect for the sanctity of the home that has been embedded in our traditions since the origins of the Republic,” Payton, supra, at 601, when the issue is only whether the government may search a home. Yet today the Court tells us that we are not to “second-guess the City’s considered judgments,” ante, at 18, when the issue is, instead, whether the government may take the infinitely more intrusive step of tearing down petitioners’ homes. Something has gone seriously awry with this Court’s interpretation of the Constitution.

Justice Thomas then opens a can (whoop-ass, not Coke) and almost literally asks if those in the majority opinion are trying to gut the Constitution.

It is far easier to analyze whether the government owns or the public has a legal right to use the taken property than to ask whether the taking has a “purely private purpose”—unless the Court means to eliminate public use scrutiny of takings entirely. Obliterating a provision of the Constitution, of course, guarantees that it will not be misapplied.

To finish his lashing of the rest of the court, he closes by suggesting a review of all previous takings cases.

For all these reasons, I would revisit our Public Use Clause cases and consider returning to the original meaning of the Public Use Clause: that the government may take property only if it actually uses or gives the public a legal right to use the property.

Justice Thomas is leaving no doubt as to his understanding of the Constitution. And it is a beautiful thing. He’s also leaving no doubt about his opinion of some of his fellow bench mates. The more I read the decisions of Justice Thomas, the more I hope he becomes Chief Justice after the departure of Rehnquist.

To answer the question in the title, it's the one that says Bad Motherf**ker.
Crossposted @ I&I

Getting Really Old

2005-06-21T10:59:00.000-07:00

(Cross-Posted at Memento Moron. Posted here because it happened in Eugene.)

Back before the election, I blogged on an incident where my car was vandalized for sporting a pro-Bush bumper sticker. In the passion of the elections, someone decided that it was a legitimate means of registering their dissent to deface my property. But it hasn't let up since the elections. Not only is it obvious from the scratches on the replacement sticker that further attempts have been made to remove it as well, but both TFR and I have been subjected to dirty looks and obscenities shouted at us as we've driven in and gotten out of our car.

But this time, someone decided not to try to remove our sticker. They decided to add one. I won't repeat the obscenities it contained, but rather leave it to your imagination to decide how they chose to enumerate the old tired "chickenhawk" cliche.

You know what, I'm tired of this. I'm tired of blogging on incidents where Republican campaigners were harassed, attacked, and vandalized, of reading of incidents where people defame the very troops they disingenuously claim to "support", of hearing hyperbolic, hyperventilating, just plain HYPE of people who are willing to equate every action they disagree with to the most evil, oppressive regimes in history just because they have chosen George W. Bush as their own Quixotic windmill, and most of all, I'm tired of being told that *I'M* the one on the side of oppression, when I've noticed that it's those who dfisagree with me who seem most willing to silence or shout down their opponents.

So to those on the left who tell me that "dissent is patriotic", I say to you, it may be, but bullying, strongarm tactics aren't. So start standing up to those who side with you politically when they step over the line, or sit down and shut the F$#@ up.

Congress at its best

2005-06-18T00:59:00.000-07:00

This is what I call teeth!

From the AP:

Culminating years of frustration with the performance and behavior of the United Nations, the House voted Friday to slash U.S. contributions to the world body if it does not substantially change the way it operates.

The 221-184 vote, which came despite a Bush administration warning that such a move could actually sabotage reform efforts, was a strong signal from Congress that a policy of persuasion wasn't enough to straighten out the U.N.

I think the Bush administration has the wrong goal. They are operating under the assumption that the UN could be a credible authority in the world with just a few changes here and there. That way, if this passes the Senate, and UN doesn't follow through (I almost hope they don't), the current feelings of loathing for this world body might be put to even greater use to completely discredit and neutralize this farce of government (as if they aren't well on their way already).

The UN is simply hearing the voice of the American people in this vote. They ignore it at their peril.

Pictures from the district

2005-06-17T00:37:00.000-07:00

Yes, here's the inestimable Mike Adams as captured by my camera sites at the 2005 Eagle Forum Collegiate Summit in Washington D.C.

Other action in front of our esteemed Congressmen Larsen's office. Me and my traveling partner, Joshua (left) were disappointed he wasn't in his office so we could do a similar stunt in person.

And our photo-op with Eagle Forum founder, the great Phyllis Schlafly:

Thinking inside the box

2005-06-15T01:26:00.000-07:00

I'm sure everyone is shocked to learn that Kofi Annon is in more trouble and may actually have known more about oil for food issues than he let on...(shock and awe to be more exact).

One of the e-mails describes an alleged encounter between Annan and officials from Cotecna Inspection S.A. in late 1998 during which the Swiss company's bid for the contract was raised.

The second, from the same Cotecna executive, expresses confidence that the company would get the bid because of "effective but quiet lobbying" in New York diplomatic circles.

Ok, so I'm actually rubbing my hands together in glee and enjoying every last bit of it.

Making tracks east

2005-06-08T00:45:00.000-07:00

My finals are over and now I'm headed to Washington D.C. in a matter of hours.

For those who are interested, I'm going to Eagle Forum's Collegiate Summit this Thursday and Friday. It should be a good trip and I'm hoping to bring some pictures back. The potential highlight of the conference itself is that the inestimable Dr. Mike Adams will be speaking. I'm bringing along my copy of Welcome to the Ivory Tower of Babel just for the chance to get it signed.

Cheers one and all. Be back on Monday.

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

Oregon Daily Emerald: 10 reasons not to kill Bush

2005-05-29T18:27:00.000-07:00

A recent commentary in the Oregon Daily Emerald, a newspaper at the University of Oregon, made its way into the Drudge Report today. The provocative title, "10 reasons not to kill Bush," probably had more than a little part to play in attracting that kind of attention.

While written from a liberal perspective, I found the column by Jennifer McBride to be extremely refreshing and perceptive.

In all seriousness, I don't hate President Bush. I dislike a lot of his administration's choices, but I think he's a good man doing a difficult job. As a leader, you're always going to be hated. I am too often shocked by the vitriolic repulsion many people feel for our leader and America in general, especially because the loathing is often poorly informed. I've met people on this campus who see America as the worst human rights abuser in the world (unlike the angelic paradise of Cambodia) and people who sway liberal not because they actually know anything about issues but because it's popular.

If you want to see the original at the Daily Emerald's site, here's the link. If the site is really slow (as it was with me), the link at the top is faster.

Crossposted at Western Washington Unraveled

'World's greatest spamfest'

2005-05-26T16:07:00.000-07:00

Check out the latest from the IndyMedia crowd. There's a new devision open in Bellingham and I know they've started holding "workshops" from what some of my liberal friends have told me.

Joel from Western Unraveled came across a new protest they are sponsoring next week... Crazy stuff; makes me laugh!

The event is a completely online protest, by email. The goal is to encourage people to email hundreds of media news desks and politicians requesting Bush's removal and investigation.

It seems almost laughable to me. I hate to break it to you, but swamping the media with email is probably not the protest wave of the future. In fact, I would venture the guess that thousands of emails in one day about removing Bush from office will probably not help the cause even with those who oppose Bush. Rather, it will make the recipients mad. I know at least for myself, getting hundreds of emails in one day with the same old info I've heard hundreds of times could get really frustrating...

...I guess, I think the event is silly, but I'm interested to see if and how the media responds to the massive influx of spam...

...the event seems to be run by the "Independent Media Center" who apparently just opened a branch here in Bellingham. After searching online I found a copy of the flier ... but with a different title here.

Oh, and I just found the one for Bellingham here.

Medved Discusses Amnesty Intl. Claims

2005-05-25T12:21:00.000-07:00

Tune in to KTTH Talk 770, where Michael Medved is discussing the recent Amnesty International report which accuses the U.S. of increasing human rights abuses across the globe.

CNN has a preliminary report on this issue as well, although it's much more propaganda than reporting. Is this another example of the media making America look like the bad guy? Or do you think there is something more to this report? Another question that comes to mind is whether America really a threat to "global values", but moreover, what the HELL are "global values"?!?!?

As a quick sidenote, it's interesting that London based Amnesty International filed this report. Last Sunday (May 22, 2005) a Norwegian "peacebroker" addressed our graduating class at PLU. He had this to say about the Bush Administration's handling of Sudan, but also our humanitarian efforts abroad:

I wish to take this opportunity to pay tribute to President Bush and the US Administration for its constructive and all important contribution to the peace process. Without the active US engagement, we would probably not have had the present peace agreement in Sudan. (Read the full address here)

Ambassador Vraalsen lauded not just the United States' efforts, but also those of PLU. While I'm not sure of the latter (read: possible fundraising ploy) I do think the U.S. doesn't get nearly 1/100th of the credit it DESERVES for HELPING people around the globe.

Also today, the ACLU (read: American Communist Liberation Union) parrots the AI report as an opportunity for "self-criticism". A newsrelease put out today by the ACLU indicates that the Newsweek story (since retracted) is "confirmed" by FBI documents.

Try and remember that we are talking about what suspected terrorists have told investigators. Now take this in light of what know about the "al Qaeda handbook", which commands those in captivity to falsely accuse "the infidel" of committing acts that would inspire hate in the Muslim world. When the media carries such stories, it almost reminds me of the Bin Laden tapes (aired soon after 9/11 by nearly every network) and later alledged to have carried "hidden messages".

The ACLU also has released documents under a FOIA request that alledgely substantiate such claims. Take a look for yourself, then comment here!

The Story That Just Won't Flush

2005-05-23T15:54:00.000-07:00

Cross Posted at Respectfully Republican

By now, I'm sure most of our dear readers have heard about the Newsweek story, which was later retracted for lack of a credible source. The fact that the whole story's linchpin relied on just ONE precious source is another story in and of itself.

While most mainstream pundits claim that the "damage has beeen done", I'm not so sure. I think the story, and the fallout it engendered, continue to cause harm.

An earlier post about the lack of media attention to anything "positive" happening in Iraq received much attention here. That post naturally devolved into a consideration of Newsweek's complete ignorance, and possible intent to do harm to America's image abroad.

TownHall.com has some recent articles which greatly merit your attention! Anne Coulter and Diana West give some valuable commentary on the issues at play, and delve into what is REALLY at stake. More comments of my own will shortly be forthcoming.