Tuesday, February 28, 2012

TriMet GM Sees A Problem, Will CRC and C-Tran Take Note?

The excessively high cost and expense of the Columbia River Crossing project is no secret. This blog, other Conservative blogs such as Clark County Politics, Couv.com and even the Columbian sometimes have spoken about it.

The Oregonian, Willamette Week and the Reflector in Clark County have lent their voices to the problems seen by citizens and some elected officials, to no avail. Any and all voices are written off as “designed to stop the project” of replacing the aging Interstate Bridges and dragging Portland’s financially ailing Light Rail into Clark County, even though 3 times in the past voters indicated in election we did not want it.

Even an independent forensic audit was soon shoved aside by WSDOT officials who seem to have no problem with millions of our tax dollars being unaccounted for in this project.

Tiffany Couch, the forensic auditor stands behind her report.

Couv.com recently informs us of how business owners downtown Vancouver are being left “in the lurch” as CRC admits their scheduled date of 2013 to start likely will not happen until 2014 or later.

They also inform us of officials looking for new ways to squeeze funds out of citizens for transportation upgrades, realizing there just is not funds readily available in this “Great Recession.”

So what possible problem could Portland’s TriMet General Manager Neil McFarlane see that hasn’t been already seen?

I’ve not seen mention of it in the Columbian and honestly, I was surprised to see the Oregonian publish, TriMet general manager tells Portland crowd that union contract is ‘slowly strangling’ public transit.

The Portland Business Journal also covered it with a softer headline of TriMet officials say union must give concessions.

Mr. McFarlane states TriMet’s union contract is “one of the richest in the country and ultimately unsustainable.”

He continued, “If union employees don’t contribute more, TriMet is on course to pay more than 50 percent of the payroll tax it receives for services toward benefits by 2020. Currently, those benefits not only include $5 co-pays, no deductibles and no premium contributions but lifetime health care up turning 55 after just 10 years on the job.”

McFarlane added, “The agency’s Blue Cross health care bill averages $22,000 a year for each union worker. The agency is on a path to becoming a health care agency not a transit agency” as TriMet is facing another budget shortfall of $17 Million!

Not too surprising, the Amalgamated Transit Union 757 is hoping to have the two-year old contract dispute brought before an arbitrator and settled in their favor, not contribute more to their own healthcare premiums or care.

C-Tran also has union representation and as was brought out during the Proposition 1 debates last year, to raise our sales tax, C-Tran claiming they had to have to keep bus services at current levels, C-Tran union members have received steady wage increases while the rest of us have cut corners, tightened our belts and bore increased costs, “paying our fair share.”

Portland’s Light Rail is also operated under TriMet and I have to imagine Light Rail operators are covered by the same union currently “strangling” Portland’s public transportation. Is there any reason to believe that once that same Light Rail is drug across the river into Clark County that we won’t be paying part of TriMet’s union employee wages and benefits, as well as those of C-Tran?

As we saw recently with the union representing employees of the downtown Hilton Bed and Bankruptcy, demanding a 54% wage and benefit increase because union employees in Portland are paid more, will C-Tran employees begin demanding equal pay and benefits as generous as TriMet was dumb enough to capitulate to?

C-Tran intends to seek yet another increase to our sales tax in this years’ election to cover Light Rail operations & maintenance.

We already know this $3.6 Billion boondoggle will likely cost closer to $10 Billion and destroy downtown Vancouver during the upwards of 10 years of construction that will drastically increase the congestion seen daily in that corridor.

Now, we can add the union strangling us just they are doing in Portland.

Isn’t it time to reel in this monster before it consumes us all?

Media Hype, "Remains of some 9-11 victims went to landfill"

There are some things that the public just doesn't need to be told and some things they are told seem more designed to stir up contentions, sell newspapers of draw an audience to a certain TV or Radio News station. The headline titled in this post seems to be a perfect example of that from Portland, Oregon's KPTV 12.

Remains of some 9-11 victims went to landfill

Reading the headline, who wouldn't be angered believing human remains from the terrorist attacks were so cavalierly dumped in a landfill? Who wouldn't be concerned over ecological damage from human remains just thrown out in an open landfill?

Reading the article, we see that this was revealed as part of the investigation into the military's mortuary at Dover, Del. who was accused of "gross mismanagement" over "some cremated partial remains of at least 274 American war dead were dumped in a Virginia landfill," as was allowed by a policy that was changed in 2008.

We are told of the investigative committee's chairman, retired Gen. John Abizaid saying, "We don't think it should have happened."

I couldn't agree more that remains of our fallen should be treated with a great deal more respect.

But what of the revelation of remains of 9/11 victims being dumped in a landfill too?

We read, "The number of victims involved was unclear according to a Pentagon report, but it involved some of those killed when a terrorist-hijacked airplane struck the Pentagon, killing 184, and another crashed in Shanksville, Pa., killing 40."

That is still enough to anger anybody, if that is all we are told.

But dropping down to the very last part of the AP article we read, "This policy began shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, when several portions of remains from the Pentagon attack and the Shanksville, Pa., crash site could not be tested or identified."

"It said the partial remains were cremated, then given to a biomedical waste disposal contractor who incinerated them and took them to a landfill."

These were remains that for whatever reason, could not be matched by DNA testing and had no way of identifying where they belonged.

So, they were cremated, then incinerated by proper bio-waste disposal methods before being disposed of, just as is all bio-waste if properly disposed of.

What else would be expected to do with them? Saving them seems a bit ghoulish to me.

I suppose they could have been memorialized, but were there plans for memorials at the time? What Memorials were being planned shortly after, were they not with the remains of known victims?

We aren't told the amount of remains or even the size.

It just seems someone at AP is going out of their way to sensationalize something that there is no need to and stir up contentions.

The remains were disposed of properly in accordance with proper procedures in effect for disposing of bio-waste and hazardous materials. Just as is done with the placenta after birth or any other bio-waste generated in hospitals.

Just more media hype and disinformation.

Monday, February 27, 2012

Have I Ever Been In Her Shoes?

Far left Moveon.org asks, "Have you ever been in her shoes? Watch:"

I'm not a huge fan of Mitt Romney, so this is not in support of or an endorsement, but yes, as a matter of fact I have been in her shoes. After 20 years at a Chrysler dealer and at age 61, I found myself unemployed in an area with 15% unemployment when the White House helped compile of a list of 789 Chrysler dealers to have their franchises yanked, including some very profitable ones.

Should I feel pleased this young lady feels so good about saving her ass on the backs of taxpayers while hundreds of thousands of the rest of us were thrown out of work?

Maybe she needs to look at the real world.

Unemployment was 7.8% when Obama assumed office. Within a few months it exceeded 10% and only in the last couple of months dropped slightly below 9%.

Our National Debt has increased by over $5 Trillion (that's $5,000,000,000,000) in just the 3 years Obama has been in office, currently sitting now at about $15,451,060,345,845 and change and increasing as you read. Each citizen shares $49,474.64 of the debt.

America had an AAA credit rating and now, we have been downgraded to an AA credit rating.

We see unrest in the streets rivaling that of the 1960's with loosely labeled "Occupiers" marching, chanting and taking over empty homes, seizing public property and demanding more debt so they can have "free" stuff given to them.

The price of a gallon of gas was about $1.61 when Obama took office. Today, we see the price of a gallon of gas is exceeding $4.00 a gallon in many areas and climbing. And, not a whimper from those Democrats who were lambasting President Bush over the price of gasoline.

In answer to Moveon.org, I have been in the young ladies shoes. In fact, the whole country has been in and remains in the predicament she says she was in, except maybe for the Obama's who seem to enjoy frequent multi-million dollar vacations as often as they can.

Of the stimulus bailout she boasts about saving her, Obama's former auto czar Steven Rattner wrote in his book ‘Overhaul,’ “about $19.4 billion the government put into GM before the 2009 bankruptcy is ‘lost money’.”

He also stated, “Taxpayers will lose about $14 billion on the $82 billion investment to restructure General Motors, Chrysler and Ally Financial” here

Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner acknowledged, “the taxpayers will not recoup $1.9 billion of the Chrysler bailout” here

OMG 2012

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Chevy Volt: Do You Smell Something?

A parody of GM's Chevy Volt ad.

H/T The Blaze

Where Are Obama and the Democrats as Gasoline Prices Soar?

As gasoline prices hit and in some area pass $4.00 a gallon, what happened to the outrage from Congress we saw in the past?
“Someone is making a killing,” said John Kerry, Democrat Senator from Massachusetts.

“The American public is angry. They have a sense they are being held hostage to you, the oil companies. One is left with the inescapable conclusion that profiteering is occurring at the expense of the American consumer,” said Senator Richard Bryan, Democrat of Nevada.

“In the last week, American consumers have been ripped off on a massive scale,” says Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut who added, “Mr. Bush should summon executives of the big oil companies and tell them to exercise price restraint.”

OPEC “may not be the only greedy people in this picture,” said Democrat Representative Phil Sharp of Indiana.
At the time Democrats were lambasting President Bush 41, yes the first President Bush in 1990, the AAA was reporting the average price of gas had risen to $1.20, as quoted in an August 8, 1990 New York Times.

Fast forward 18 years to 2008 and we see Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. Saying, “I don’t know what President Bush thinks, but four-and-a-half dollar-a-gallon gas is an emergency for America's families. When was the last time the president filled his own tank?”

We did exceed $4.00 a gallon back in 2008 in Washington State for a short bit. But, in spite of Democrats holding strong majorities in both houses of Congress in July 2008, another election year mind you, as usual we saw Democrats saying that they had a “different plan to combat record-high gas prices, but that Bush and the Republicans in Congress are blocking it.”

Bush 43 said, “The only thing now standing between the American people and the vast oil resources of the Outer Continental Shelf is action from the United States Congress.”

In December 2008, after Barack Obama won the election, we began to see the Democrats plan as Steven Chu who would become Energy Secretary under Obama said, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

Joining him in such expression was Jay Hakes, former head of the Energy Information Administration under President Bill Clinton who chimed in with, “There's no way we can create a better future without the price of fossil-fuel-based energy going up.”

In the summer of 2008, Democrats in congress, including then presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama killed any idea of giving American consumers any relief in high gasoline prices by cutting federal gasoline taxes and in fact, were contemplating raising gas taxes by 10 cents a gallon.

By January 2011 we saw Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell of Washington State joining in with the other Democrats up and down the left coast advocating a “Permanent Moratorium” on off-shore drilling.

In March 2011, expressing support of the U.S. Export-Import Bank’s plan to lend $2 billion to Brazil’s state-run Petrobras to help develop their off-shore drilling operations, Barack Obama stated, “We want to help you with the technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely. And when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”

He would go on to kill the Keystone XL Pipeline project designed to bring Canada’s Alberta Oil Sands oil to the Gulf Refineries in January 2012, placing all blame for killing the project squarely on the backs of Republicans.

Just today, February 25, 2012 we see Obama coming out saying there is “No Easy Answers to Lowering Pump Prices” and once again, deflecting all blame away from him and right back on Republicans.

He says, “We know there’s no silver bullet that will bring down gas prices or reduce our dependence on foreign oil overnight. But what we can do is get our priorities straight and make a sustained, serious effort to tackle this problem.”

As is expected, he adds, “Republicans have one answer to the oil pinch, drill. You know that’s not a plan, especially since we’re already drilling. It’s a bumper sticker.”

But, it’s not a “bumper sticker” for Brazil?

And, we’re “already drilling?” Not so, according to the American Petroleum Institute’s Mark Green who tells us, “the administration’s latest plan for offshore development scales back on the previous plan by removing the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and areas in the Atlantic.”

Exxon Mobil goes further in telling us we are actually exporting refined oil in record numbers, adding, “the single-largest determinant of the price of a gallon of gasoline is the price of crude oil – which is set on global markets where buyers and sellers react to supply and demand factors around the world.” They continue, “One way to put downward pressure on the price of a barrel of crude oil is to increase supplies. The United States can play its part with policies that support access and development – including opening up its significant domestic oil and gas resources that remain off limits to exploration, from the east coast to the west coast and north to the Arctic.

On Obama’s claim of his “all of the above” policy, EnergyCitizens.org informs us, “In his budget, President Obama outlines a laundry list of tax hikes for U.S. producers of oil and natural gas. All told, the targeted tax increases, repealed deductions and accounting mandates would add over $85 billion to the already hefty annual tax bill payoff American companies that already pay their fair share.”

It’s time Democrats in Congress and Barack Obama stopped playing these blame games and blocking the progress of Americans struggling under the “Great Recession.” We are not looking for a “magic silver bullet” or “overnight remedies.” We want jobs, reasonable taxes and reasonable energy costs.

The time for excuses and finger pointing has ended. We see that Democrats have not changed their tune over 20 years, time in which many of these problems could have been averted.

We have energy resources we are not using, resources that could add hundreds of thousands of good paying jobs. Jobs that will get people back on their feet and paying revenues back to the treasury. Improving our output will have the oil companies sending even more revenues to the treasury.

But first, we need elected officials who know what they’re doing, leading and not following special interest groups. That is an “easy answer.”

The "Apology" Obama Should Have Given Afghani President Karzai

This young lady speaks well and sees clearly that we are all Americans.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Freedom of Religious Expression Endangered In Washington State

Every campaign, politicians stand before us telling us what they think we want to hear in order to gain our votes. Democrat, Republican or Independent, all think they will gain our support with just a little tickling of our ears. Occasionally though, one will lower their guard just a bit and those with a discerning ear might just pick up on what the real candidate thinks or stands for.

Such is the case now with Democrat candidate for Washington State Governor, Jay Inslee.

Most of my readers know that I am not very supportive of Democrats, but before you write this off as just another piece opposing Democrats, I urge you to read on and see how not only Jay Inslee, but outgoing governor Christine Gregoire actually opposes your First Amendment right to Free Religious Expression.

As most know by now, a controversial legal case on the state mandating a Pharmacist stock and dispense the “morning-after pill” was decided in favor of the Pharmacist by U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton in Tacoma February 22, 2012.

The Washington State Board of Pharmacy required the Pharmacies and Pharmacists, under pressure from unnamed state officials and Planned Parenthood, to sell the drug or face losing their license.

The Pharmacists filed suit against the regulation in 2007, claiming that dispensing a drug designed to terminate a pregnancy was against their religious beliefs.

In his decision, Judge Leighton wrote,
“The board’s rules were designed to ‘force religious objectors to dispense Plan B, and they sought to do so despite the fact that refusals to deliver for all sorts of secular reasons were permitted’.”
Indicating a strong possibility of appealing Judge Leighton’s ruling, Governor Gregoire issued a statement saying,
“The purpose of the Board of Pharmacy rule is to ensure safe and timely access to lawful and lawfully prescribed medications, with particular concern about time sensitive medications. I remain concerned about the impacts on patients if pharmacies are allowed to refuse to dispense lawfully prescribed or lawful medications to patients. I am especially concerned about those living in rural areas, many of whom may have few alternatives and could suffer lengthy delays in receiving medication or go without entirely.

“My position in the matter has been clear from the start, and that is that patients should be provided with lawful and lawfully prescribed medications.

“Secretary of Health Mary Selecky, the Attorney General’s Office and I will confer regarding the best path forward to ensure patients have access to medications, especially those that are time sensitive. There are strong arguments to make on appeal from this lower court decision.”
That the current governor would consider appealing the ruling comes a no surprise. But Jay Inslee, the man who would be our next governor if chosen by voter issued a statement and with much stronger wording. He stated,
“It is beyond reason that women are still forced to battle for something as basic as contraception in the year 2012. We just witnessed the Republican Party’s attack on women in the recent House hearing on copay-free contraception, and now this federal ruling that would allow pharmacists to deny contraception to women in crisis. This is not a battle over religious freedom – it’s a battle to let science guide our discourse instead of ideology. This ruling must be aggressively challenged and women’s full access to contraception restored and protected.”
Let me repeat that one sentence, “This is not a battle over religious freedom – it’s a battle to let science guide our discourse instead of ideology.”

Does it escape Jay Inslee that people do have and hold deep religious beliefs? It is a cornerstone of our Republic and a large part of why our founding fathers came to this land centuries ago to establish a land where people no longer feared a tyrannical government imposed religion.

We saw this same attitude from these same people in the run-up to their approving homosexual marriage recently. While they touted exemptions for clergy to be required to perform homosexual marriage ceremonies, amendments to extend those exemptions to others, non-clergy, private businesses, citizens who cater to weddings, photographers and such who may also not wish to participate in or assist in a homosexual marriage ceremony due to any deeply held religious belief you may have was defeated.

To the state of Washington currently, your religious beliefs come behind their belief in science. Your conscience is of no importance to them as their belief in scientific views is to be imposed upon you.

As Judge Leighton expressed, even though there are several secular exemptions permitted to not dispense the drug, your religious view was not to be allowed to decline dispensing it.

Such an egregious violation of religious views held must not be allowed. It’s not like this particular Pharmacy is the only place such a drug could be purchased. There are more Pharmacies than we can shake a stick at in Washington. Planned Parenthood could make the drug available too, since they have no aversion to killing an unborn child or a woman who engaged in unprotected sex and fears becoming pregnant could obtain it from a hospital. There is no shortage of their ability to obtain the pill, even if a few stand on their religious view to not sell it.

Attorney General and Republican candidate for Governor, Ron McKenna previously expressed support of the states view that they have supersede religious objections to selling this abortion pill. As of this posting, I find no statement from him or his campaign as to whether he would support an appeal or allow Judge Leighton’s ruling to stand if he were governor.

Conservative Republican candidate for Governor, Shahram Hadian issued a press release in support of Judge Leighton's decision here

Judge Leighton’s decision referenced how the state does not require doctors to participate in assisted suicides, abortions or even executions. He also referenced that the US Supreme Court has not established a constitutional definition of exactly when life begins, but the Plaintiff’s in this case sincerely believe they know that answer and are compelled to act accordingly.

He then notes the state argues that their “sincere belief about an issue at the core of their religion is not entitled to constitutional protection, but is instead granted (or not) as a matter of legislative grace.”

We cannot and must not permit elected politicians to determine and mandate what our beliefs, if any, are to be.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Obama Strangling the Middle Class With High Energy Costs

It seems hardly a day goes by that mixed in with the emails I receive hawking Viagra, enlarging a certain portion of my body, invited to chat with some 18 year-old hottie (allegedly) and proposals of marriage from Nigerian or Russian ladies offering me millions of dollars, I find something from the Democrat Party or Barack Obama’s reelection campaign telling me how only they are looking out for me and how Republicans want me to die, fund the rich, starve women, enslave Black people or other malarkey.

Listening to what is said in emails seeking donations for the Democrats you would be left with the impression that they and only they care about those of us in the middle class while the Republicans want all of us bankrupt.

So why has the middle class been hurting more since Democrats swept to power in January 2007 and since Barack Obama began his regime in January 2009? Why are we so much worse off with their fixes that were touted as saving us in the middle class?

We know about the housing bubble that finally burst in the waning days of the Bush administration and saw how all of the blame was laid at his feet, even though he repeatedly warned it was coming, only to have efforts to curtail it blocked by Democrats.

We know about the run on our money markets that happened weeks before the 2008 election and the bail-outs that today Democrats complain about, even though they held complete congressional power an approved of the bail-out and again approved when Barack Obama continued bailing out Wall Street, nationalizing the auto industry moving towards nationalizing our health care system.

Where Democrats have really hurt the middle class and again deflecting all blame is when it comes to our energy policies in recovering more of our own domestic supply.

After the blow-out of the BP Deepwater well in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, a moratorium was placed on offshore drilling. In reply to later claims by Democrats and the media of the Moratorium being lifted and Gulf drilling coming back strong, Mark Green of the American Petroleum Institute replied, “We wish.”

We saw Barack Obama kill thousands of potential jobs for the middle class when he killed the Keystone XL pipeline project to carry Alberta Canada oil sands to Gulf Coast refineries.

For years we have seen how Democrats repeatedly block any recovery of our own domestic crude in the 19 million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Northeast Alaska. Along with blocking efforts to recover our own energy source there, all 6 Democrat Senators from the west coast have signed onto a piece of legislation calling for a “Permanent Moratorium” on all Pacific Coast off shore drilling.

As the unrest in the Middle East escalates, with Iran cutting off oil to Britain and France amid threats of blocking oil shipments through the Gulf or Hormuz, a recent refinery fire in Washington State and continued efforts denying Americans not only fresh energy supplies but jobs as well, it comes as no surprise to read Unusually high gas prices not showing any signs of relief as once again American middle class drivers are seeing the price of gasoline threatening to exceed $4 a gallon in a very short period.

So called “green” energy is of no help as we have seen Billions of our tax dollars going down the drain for “green” energy companies such as Solyndra declaring bankruptcy, with 3 others, Evergreen Energy, Ener1 and Amonix, Inc. declaring bankruptcy all in the same week in January 2012.

Amid news reports of an improving unemployment rate, dropping to 8.3%, still higher than when Barack Obama assumed office, a deeper look reveals the true number exceeds 15% still. That amounts to many millions more unemployed or under employed than is being reported by the media.

So where is all of this caring about the middle class and the enacting of policies to benefit us?

It sure can’t be seen in the Obama Administrations reported intent to give away seven strategic, energy rich Alaskan islands to the Russians, denying America of even more sources of domestic energy and giving it away to Russia so they may recover it and use it for their energy needs.

Even though this was initiated during the Clinton and carried forward during the Bush years, Obama seemingly is choosing to move ahead with it, even though our own middle class continues to suffer with no jobs, increasing gas prices and threats of decreased energy supplies from foreign sources.

I fail to see how any Democrats can say how they are looking out for the middle class when nearly every “fix” they impose on us throws us even deeper into despair.

Isn’t it time we elected people that really do care about constituents and the middle class, instead of giving us lip service on caring?

Choose wisely this November. Let’s begin changing faces back in Washington D.C.

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Ron Paul and His Many Liberties with the Truth

It seems every election cycle, politicians come before us speaking in glowing terms of themselves and all too often, making promises they have either no intention of keeping or are unable to keep once in office and reality smacks them up side their heads. We have come to expect candidates to “stretch things a little” as each goes on voyages of disinformation, embellishing their record or ripping apart the candidate they are running against.

Most voters see it for what it is and either discard it or if egregious enough, call them on it. But not all see through the distortions and questionable claims.

Ron Paul is one who frequently goes on that voyage of embellishment, fantasy, revision of history and twisting of a truth to make it appear entirely different, not unlike Michael Moore’s many fantasy “documentaries” where truth is distorted until it fits the view he desires to be imparted upon those present.

In spite of being revealed many times, Paulbots, the more militant wing of Ron Paul supporters, casts aside any and all exposing of their messiah and clinging to his words as if listening to Jesus speaking the Sermon on the Mount. In fact, some have equated Ron Paul to Biblical Prophets.

But unlike Ron Paul, neither Jesus nor the Prophets found in the Bible ever felt the need to distort or embellish upon the truth.

A few examples of Ron Paul taking “liberties with the truth” can be seen at FactCheck.org, such as his “16,500 armed bureaucrats from the IRS to enforce the mandate that everyone have health insurance,” and the “NAFTA Superhighway” conspiracy theory.

There is also his and his supporters many claims of only Ron Paul is the “true heir to legacy of Ronald Reagan,” totally ignoring and casting aside Ron Paul’s 1987 resignation from the Republican Party, completely distancing himself from Ronald Reagan’s presidency.

Recently we have seen news releases from his campaign touting being endorsed by County Republican Party treasurers, city council members and just about anybody drinking his kool-aid. Included in one such newsletter was the claim “2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul bests President Obama in a head-to-head matchup in the key swing state of Ohio according to a new Fox News poll.”

Left out was that Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney both polled higher against Barack Obama in the poll than did Ron Paul. Only Newt Gingrich polled lower. Many see that as “lies of omission.”

We keep reading how Ron Paul leads in individual, cherry-picked polls while completely ignoring and making no mention that in National Polling he remains virtually dead last!

Moving on from there, we see his ludicrous claim, “Ron Paul Is The Choice Of The Troops,” based upon another technical truth of his receiving more donations from those identifying themselves as Military than the other candidate.

Photo of Poster

Again, a little further inspection reveals what a gigantic stretch it would take for Ron Paul to even reach 4.4% support of the Troops. Equally cast aside was his dismal performance recently in the first primary election of a state with a heavy Military population where exit polling revealed Ron Paul received the least amount of Military votes of any of the 4 Republican candidates reported in both the New York Times and Fox News.

Just today, February 21, 2012 sees yet another new release from the Ron Paul campaign with the dubious statement, “Paul Tied with Obama in Key Swing State of Virginia” in regards to the upcoming primary election in that state where only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul will appear on the ballot.

And again, another glaring example of a “lie by omission,” the Ron Paul campaign glosses over and ignores from within that poll, “Romney Leads Obama By 3 In Statistical Tie,” and gives the summary findings of,
1. Nearly six in ten Republicans and Independents are not satisfied with the choices of Mitt Romney and Ron Paul on the Republican primary ballot and would like to see other candidates on the ballot.
2. Romney leads Paul in the Republican primary 53%-23%.
3. Obama trails Romney and Santorum, beats Gingrich, and ties Paul; struggles with support from independents.

Looking back towards the “racist newsletters” bearing Ron Paul’s name, Politifact rates Ron Paul’s claims of “only about eight or 10 inflammatory sentences” as “false” as they easily found “nearly three dozen.”

Ron Paul favors and his supporters often chant “end the fed,” calling on the elimination of the Federal Reserve. That is an easy one for people to fall behind as much of the blame for our economic failures is often tied to Federal Reserve Policy, even if that is not the cause of the downturn. As shown in the Bloomberg book review, “End the Fed? Ron Paul Is Wrong for All the Right Reasons,” following Ron Paul’s advice would plunge backwards to even more severe economic upheavals that led to the creation of the Federal Reserve.

In yet another example of Ron Paul’s taking liberties with the truth, Politifact rates his claim of “The federal income tax rate was 0 percent until 1913” as Half-True, indicating his “disregarding two pre-1913 efforts to impose an income tax, one of which was in place for a decade.”

Ron Paul faced a lot of scorn in his 2008 campaign for basically indicating the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were because of we have our Troops in the Middle East. He lauds a policy of “non-intervention,” basically the same “Isolationism” policies that left us prone and susceptible to the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor that plunged us into World War Two.

Again, he calls upon a questionable knowledgeof American History in claiming that our founders practiced and believed in “non-interventionism.” He continually ignores example after example in our history of where foreign ventures were engaged to protect our interest or shores.

This is by no means an exhaustive revelation on the foibles and fallacies of Ron Paul. His hypocrisy over earmarks, lack of resolve in dealing with Iran gaining a nuclear weapon, the anti-Semitic views expressed by both he and his militant supporters and so many more are not even addressed here.

What is shown is that Ron Paul not only would be a horrible president, not that he really stands a chance of winning, but Ron Paul is in absolutely no position to label others like Rick Santorum as “FAKE.”

To me, a Vietnam Veteran, Ron Paul’s labeling others “chickenhawks” because they did not serve during the Vietnam war, and standing on his short service as an “Air Force Flight Surgeon” as qualifying him as the “ONLY Veteran running” while not opening his Military Record to clear up discrepancies seen or to show what, if any Command Experience he has to qualify him for the presidency is what borders on “FAKE.”

Saturday, February 18, 2012

CRC and C-TRAN Can’t See the ‘Elephant in the Room’

Undaunted by questions and growing opposition from taxpayers, the Columbia River Crossing and C-Tran continue to forge ahead with the multi-billion dollar project, ignoring or casting aside just about every single concern of taxpayers, business owners, elected officials, engineers, just about any and every person looking at this albatross and our economy and saying, ‘wait a minute.’

As was previously shown, an independent analysis of CRC finances raising several pertinent questions was instantly dismissed and the forensic accountant hired to wade through a “document dump” received through a FOIA request disparaged and demeaned.

As evidenced by the following Columbian video, Washington State Department of Transportation Director Paula Hammond makes no bones in her criticism of the analysis,

You can read more on Ms. Hammonds’ defending CRC over on the Columbian at Transportation agency defends work on CRC with additional video and coverage at Official: 2013 CRC start date not likely.

Of particular relevance to the elephant in the room being ignored by CRC & C-Tran is the second article linked. As noted, the anticipated start of construction in 2013 is “unlikely,” but tolling of the current bridge years before the completion of construction of the new bridge is very likely.

Also being ignored is that even with other regions of the state being more receptive to tolling, a recent poll revealed Southwest Washington dislikes tolls.

More than once, here and here we see how not only are traffic projections inflated, giving the appearance of an ability to raise more revenue than needed, but that many claims on this project to date have been inflated.

What should be concerning to officials is seeing the results after 6 weeks of tolling up north on a similar project where commuters are much more receptive to tolls than we in Southwest Washington are. Reported by King5 News in Seattle,
“After six weeks of tolling, data provided to KING 5 News, by the State Department of Transportation shows more than one-third of drivers have abandoned the 520 floating toll bridge, putting pressure on alternate routes.”
the data shows overall traffic volume is down on the 520 bridge by 34 percent. Eighteen percent in the morning commute, 25 percent in the evening.”
They are more accepting of tolls, yet in the 6 weeks of tolling the I-90 Bridge there, one third of commuters have sought alternate routes so as to avoid having to pay the tolls.

Just a couple miles east of the Interstate Bridge sits the I-205 bridge which is already paid for and in spite of efforts to also toll it, it remains toll free, at least for now. An amendment introduced by 18th legislative district representative Ann Rivers to the tolling measures recently passed intends to keep that bridge toll free.

If one third of the commuters in an area more receptive to paying tolls seek an alternative route, is it much of a stretch to imagine perhaps one half of Clark County commuters, where tolls are much more frowned upon, won’t simply jump over to the free I-205 bridge to get to work or shop in Portland?

Couv.com, Clark County’s Online News Network informs us in Independent analyst: CRC revenue-from-toll forecasts ‘simply look too high’,
“In its July, 2011 report to the governors of Washington and Oregon, London-based RBConsult Ltd. writes that ‘In the absence of very strong arguments backed by empirical evidence, at this stage in the analysis the CRC traffic and revenue forecasts simply look too high.’ Robert Bain, the principal of RBConsult, is a former Standard & Poor’s ratings analyst who has published widely on problems with the traffic and toll forecasting process.”
“Issues raised by the two analysts included information that was several years old, traffic patterns skewed by construction projects, and millions less in toll revenue than forecast.”
“Among the weaknesses Bain points out is that traffic and revenue reports ‘fall short when compared with typical ‘investment grade’ traffic studies,’ and the traffic modeling activities described in the reports ‘are confusing and much of the work now appears to be dated’.”
In spite of repeated warnings and cautioning, CRC & C-Tran push ahead like a bull running lose in a China Shop, putting off the decision on just who will be permitted to vote on the maintenance and operations taxing for light rail, all of us in the county or just a gerrymandered sub-district. This caught the attention of Marvin Case, Publisher Emeritus of the Reflector who states in his February 15, 2012 editorial, C-TRAN strategy is bad government,
“Virtually all county residents, not just residents of Vancouver, would pay the tax because they shop in Vancouver and at Westfield Shoppingtown Vancouver,” and “for the last voice in establishing the tax or the tax rate.”
Adding to this is the 10-page rebuttal released by WSDOT of Tiffany Couch’s analysis of CRC finances and clearly stated to be a review done by “David Dye, Deputy Secretary and Bob Covington, Director or Financial Services at WSDOT,” laughingly referred to as “an independent evaluation.”

Do they really think we all are that naive?

Just how large does this elephant in the room need to be before Paula Hammond, CRC Director Nancy Boyd, Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt, Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart, the self-anointed members of Identity Clark County and all of the others blindly pushing this ahead take notice of it?

Friday, February 17, 2012

Ron Paul, the “Biblical Prophet,” Anoints Vancouver and Beyond

I presume Vancouver, Portland, Clark County, Cowlitz County, Multnomah County, Marion County, Clackamas County and more feel blessed to have such a Biblical Prophet of Ron Paul’s stature lower himself to touch the ground at the Vancouver Hilton Bed and Bankruptcy Thursday afternoon.

True to his announced claim, Ron Paul, who I once thought was only a whiney congressman from a sparsely populated district in Texas held a campaign event in our little town today. Lucky for me that he did as I discovered that far from just being a human congressman, he is now a Biblical Prophet in the line of John the Baptist, Luke the Physician, Paul the Apostle, part Daniel part Elijah and here to lead us to the second coming of Christ.

In case you think I am making it up, I direct you to the Columbian’s live blogging of his Holy presence this afternoon and the comment left by a Michael Guenther.

Lest you think I am making too much out of one lunatic’s words, I also direct you to the Daily Paul and their post, Who is the Biblical prophet CLOSEST to Ron Paul?

To my initial surprise, adherents to the Holy Paul flooded in from all over to hear his Sermon on the Mount at the downtown Hilton Bed & Bankruptcy Grand Ballroom. Arriving a little before the announced 4 PM beginning, I saw an unexpected line of people stretching far down the sidewalk. At 4 PM one organizer, er Apostle of the Holy Paul said the line stretched all the way down to the Interstate Bridge, somewhat of an exaggeration as evidenced by the photo below, still a block north of the Rail Bridge.

Far be it that a lowly infidel as me questions an apostle of the divine Holy Paul, though.

Seeing the staggering numbers, 1,600 released by the Ron Paul campaign during the event in a news release, it began downing on me why the divine Ron Paul would meet with such mere mortals in a city of approximately 106,000 seeking to touch the hems of his garment.

To the immediate south sits another state, Oregon and the first city has a population of over a half of a million. A little further south of that is the state capital, Salem with a population of about 155,000. Both also have many worshippers of the Holy Paul who will attend any event to bow before his Holy presence.

None have a voice in the March Caucuses for Washington State, but does give the campaign a technically true claim of an overflowing crowd spilling out into the street.

Such technically true claims are a common tactic of the Holy Paul’s claims, evidenced by an earlier news release from his campaign, Ron Paul Leads President Obama in Poll of Ohio Voters

The release states, “2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul bests President Obama in a head-to-head matchup in the key swing state of Ohio according to a new Fox News poll.”

Beyond the questionable use of a poll issued by “Faux News” as many adherents label Fox News as they scream nothing on it can be trusted, I do appreciate their linking to it so that we infidels can see what is really said in the poll.

They claim the holy Paul besting Obama in Ohio with 41% for Obama and 42% for his divineness.

Left out of the news release, the poll also shows 40% Obama to 43% for Santorum, 43% Obama to 37% Gingrich and 38% Obama to 44% for Romney in Ohio.

So while technically true that the divine Paul bests Obama by 1%, completely ignored is that two other candidates best Obama by 3% and 6%. Only Newt Gingrich polls lower than both the holy Paul and Obama in the “Faux News” poll.

Technically true, but slightly dishonest by the omission. Not exactly what one would expect from a messiah.

Since I was unable to gain entry, along with hundreds of others, I must refer you to the Columbian recap of their live blogging of his version of the Sermon on the Mount. But, from what I read, it is the pretty much the same he has been repeating all over while the overall majority of us infidels continue to reject his salvation.

Jesus warned at Matthew 7:15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will know them by their fruits.”

Hate to break the news, but Ron Paul is no more than a mere mortal himself. Sorry Paulbots.

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Portland Oregon American Legion Post Challenges Schools Military Counter-Recruiter Policy

Submitted by Attorney Rees Lloyd

Wartime veterans of American Legion Portland Post 1 have voted to adopt a resolution opposing and calling for rescission of the Portland School Board’s recently adopted policy
granting “equal access” to anti-military, “counter-recruiters,” including self-declared “revolutionary” organizations, in Portland Schools at “Career Day” and other forums at which military recruiters have access to students pursuant to law.

The resolution of American Legion Portland Post 1 charges that the Portland School Board’s policy should be rescinded because it constitutes unconstitutional “view point” discrimination by the School Board’s creating and granting speech and expression rights in forums in the schools only to anti-military and/or pro-revolutionary organizations, while denying the same rights to pro-military, patriotic organizations like the American Legion and other veterans organizations.

Therefore, the resolution calls on the Portland School Board to rescind the policy. If the School Board refuses to rescind the policy, then it should grant “equal access” to representatives of American Legion Post 1 to counter the anti-military, and/or pro-revolutionary “counter-recruiters” favored by the school board.

More specifically, the resolution adopted by unanimous vote at American Legion Portland Post 1’s general membership meeting on February 15, 2012, provides in the resolved clauses:
RESOLVED, that American Legion Post No. 1, Portland, Oregon, opposes and calls for the rescission of the policy of the Board of Education of the Portland Unified School District known as “Providing Equal Access To Military Counter-Recruiters in High Schools,” established by Board Revised Resolution No. 4503, on the basis that said policy on its face constitutes unconstitutional view point discrimination by allowing equal access for expressive activity only to anti-military and/or pro-revolutionary organizations based on their viewpoint as “Military Counter Recruiters,” while that policy upon its face denies equal access to recruitment forums by pro-military, patriotic organizations, including the wartime veterans of American Legion Post 1 based on their view point.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Board of Education refuses to rescind its policy based upon view point discrimination, that the Board of Education should grant to The American Legion Post 1 equal access and equal right to engage in speech and expressive activity as is granted to anti-military and/or “revolutionary” organizations designated as “Military Counter Recruiters” and hand-picked by the Board based upon point of view.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Post 1 Adjutant is directed to transmit this Resolution to the Board of Education of the Portland Unified School District, and to each officer and member of said Board of Education, each of whom is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of the discriminatory and unconstitutional non-"Equal Access" policy based upon point of view challenged by American Legion Post 1.
The Portland School Board adopted its Resolution 4503, “Providing Equal Access To Military Counter-Recruiters in High Schools, in September, 2011. It states that its purpose is “to ensure that our students have complete and accurate information about committing to military service…,” (Recitals, Section B). But it acts to provide “accurate information” by allowing “equal access” to students in recruitment forums solely and only to anti-military and/or pro-revolutionary organizations, and not to pro-military and/or patriotic organizations. That is, more specifically, the resolution provides:

“In furtherance of this, Portland Public Schools will allow counter-recruiters to have access to high school students whenever it permits military recruiters to speak with students regarding military service career opportunities. Similarly, if literature encouraging military service is displayed for students to read or pick up, counter-recruiter literature may be displayed as well.” (Recitals, Section C; emphasis supplied.)

Besides limiting “equal access” to “counter-recruiters, only, the School Board’s policy provides for propaganda of anti-military, and/or pro-revolutionary organizations to be distributed by the schools not only to students, but to parents.

More specifically, the policy provides: “Each high school should be provided a packet of information from counter-recruiters about military service, including information for parents and students on their rights to privacy from military recruiters, information about the practices of military recruiters and the full range of service opportunities upon graduation. (Recitals, Sec. D; Resolution Sec. 1; emphasis added).

As to whom the School Board policy grants “equal access” and rights of speech and expression in recruitment forums inside the schools, the Board’s Resolution No. 4503 makes clear on its face that those rights are granted only onto those hand-picked individuals and organizations with whose view point the School Board agrees, to the exclusion of all others.

More specially, the Board’s policy states : “In order to further ensure that students have access to critical information about military service, the Board also directs the Superintendent to provide equal access to counter recruiters. ‘Counter recruiters’ include organizations that have a local presence and an established practice of providing information to students about military service and career alternatives, such as the American Friends Service Committee, Military & Draft Counseling Project, Recruiter Watch PDX, and Veterans for Peace, or other such organizations that wish to present information regarding military service.”

Thus, all the organizations to be granted equal access and speech and expressive rights are anti-military, and/or pro-revolutionary organizations, to the exclusion of pro-military, patriotic organizations like American Legion Portland Post 1 which has “a local presence and an established practice of providing information to students about military service and career opportunities…”

It is significant, I believe, that in identifying the organizations who would meet the board’s “counter-recruiter” limitation, the Board failed to include the War Resisters League, which was a leader in pushing for the “equal access” policy, whose representative testified for its adoption, and which openly identifies itself on its website not as merely anti-military, but as a self-declared “revolutionary organization,” seeking the overthrow of the United States’ form of government, albeit by allegedly “non-violent” means.

Thus, it is manifest that the Portland School Board has established a blatantly discriminatory and patently unconstitutional policy granting speech and expressive rights in the in-school forums solely based upon the “point of view” of the recipients of those rights, including even the pro-revolutionary anti-military “counter-recruiters.”

As a longtime constitutional attorney, veteran, and a Life Member of The American Legion, I testified, as an individual, against adoption of the policy at the School Board at its meeting at which the vote was taken. I objected that, in my opinion, the policy is facially unconstitutional as “view point” discrimination, and would lead to costly and unnecessarily litigation.

Indeed, even the “Oregonian,” while not calling for immediate rescission, criticized the School Boards’ adoption of the “equal access” for “counter-recruiters” only policy as unwise.

Now, the veterans of American Legion Portland Post 1 have taken a stand against and challenged the School Board’s “counter-recruiter” policy, calling for its rescission; or, failing that, inclusion of representatives of American Legion Portland Post 1 in the recruitment forums.

Those wartime veterans of American Legion Portland Post 1 should be respected, listened to, and not further insulted and slapped in the face by the Portland School Board members’ discriminatory and unconstitutional policy granting equal access and speech rights in recruitment forums to “counter-recruiters” only, including those openly declaring themselves to be “revolutionaries.”

[Rees Lloyd, longtime civil rights lawyer, veterans activist, and American Legionnaire, is the author of the resolution unanimously adopted by American Legion Portland Post 1.]

Friday, February 10, 2012

Columbia River Crossing, The Bridge To Bankruptcy

Bridges almost always end up with nick names as taxpayers cast aside the official designated name and express their views of them through locally attached names. We saw that with the Tacoma Narrows Bridge nicknamed “Galloping Gertie” due to peculiar gyrations and pitching those crossing experienced before it collapsed in a wind storm just 4 months after it opened in November 1940.

Sometimes the name is complimentary, such as “The Bridge of the Gods” up by Cascade Locks and sometimes the name expresses disgust at a high cost that isn’t justifiable, such as Alaska’s Gravina Island Bridge nicknamed “A Bridge To Nowhere” since it was projected to cost $398 million to connect Ketchikan with Gravina Island, a small community of about 50 people and a small single runway airport, accessed by ferry in about 7 minutes.

Locally, we have the Columbia River Crossing seeking to replace the aging but serviceable spans of the I-5 Bridge across the Columbia River connecting Washington and Oregon that with the forced inclusion of extending Portland’s financially troubled Max Line light rail a short distance into Vancouver is projected to cost about $4 Billion, before figuring in interest on bonds and the to be expected cost overruns. Once those are added, it is estimated to cost upwards of $10 Billion or more.

Saying the project is contentious is an understatement as it has been brought up in every political campaign for a number of years now. Current Vancouver mayor, Tim Leavitt campaigned heavily on not tolling residents for the bridge project, only to totally reverse his stand almost as soon as he was announced the winner. Our nickname for him now is “Tim ‘the liar’ Leave-it,” indicating how Vancouver citizens are disgusted with him and want him to leave office.

“Studying and planning” for the replacement since 1999, over $140 Million has been sunk into the insatiable abyss of the CRC with a recent approval of an additional $28 Million.

An independent audit of the finances of CRC raised several questions with no answers forthcoming from elected officials. Some, like Democrat 49th legislative district representative Jim Moeller choose to ignore questionable finances as he stated, “In a project of such huge scale and complexity, at least some errant billing and bookkeeping is inevitable.”

Such a dismissive attitude from an elected official over poorly kept books on over $140 Million of our taxes is completely unacceptable.

Since the release of Tiffany Couch’s independent forensic audit of CRC finances, our local paper of record, the Columbian has treated us to a series of articles and columns very favorable to the CRC. They have been favorable all along to the project, but the damning audit seems to have brought out a few more articles in rapid succession than previously seen.

We see CRC Ponders Slimmer Plan, an effort to convince taxpayers the project is being slimmed down to become more affordable. Portland, Oregon’s newspaper of record, also favorable to the project tried floating the same canard days earlier with Columbia River Crossing officials suggest significant downsizing to trim $650 million from the controversial project.

Portland, Oregon’s Willamette Week puts that erroneous notion to rest with their article, Still Big, Still Costly.

The Columbian also treated us to an op-ed by the Secretary of the Washington State Department of Transportation, Paula Hammond, 4 key reasons why CRC needs to move ahead to follow the Oregonian’s It’s time to invest in a bridge.

We also saw Economic groups urge lawmakers to find dollars for CRC informing us of three self identified “community leader” groups, the Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce, Columbia River Economic Development Council and Identity Clark County penning a letter to the Washington legislature urging them to “just find the money” to build this monstrosity.

Bear in mind, this at a time Clark County is entering the 4th year of double digit unemployment, schools around the state failing, the state facing a $1.5 Billion budget gap, the city of Vancouver having to beg for federal grant to reopen and man a fire station and Vancouver losing the fifth most jobs as a percentage in the nation!

All along supporters of plunging more of our dwindling tax dollars down the dark bottomless hole of the CRC rely on scare tactics, claiming how “unsafe” the bridges are should an earthquake hit our region. At time they sound as if the bridges face eminent collapse just from normal daily use, which is far from true.

As seen in Interstate Bridges good for 60 more years, says Oregon website, Oregon Department of Transportation official stated back in 2005, after an electrical upgrade and inspection of the bridge, “With ongoing preservation the bridges can serve the public for another 60 years.”

It should be pointed out that the two spans of the Interstate Bridge, the northbound opened in 1917 and the southbound span opened in 1958, and seeing an estimated 130,000 crossings daily (2006) are not the oldest bridges in the country.

New York’s Brooklyn Bridge opened in 1883 and sees an estimated 124,000 crossings daily.

The main problem with the Interstate Bridge is that it is a drawbridge to accommodate river traffic, which causes delays to Interstate 5 travel when it is opened. Daily morning and evening back-ups, although blamed on the bridges, is actually due to poor freeway design through Portland, Oregon, something they remain reluctant to upgrade.

Only recently have some elected officials even questioned the financial effects businesses downtown will incur during the expected 10 years of construction. CRC only replies, “we’ll handle it,” with no indication of how. Increased congestion during construction is also not being addressed.

Indicative of how the project has been managed in the over 10 years it has been wasting our tax dollars, it was only recently revealed that some businesses may be razed to accommodate constructing 3 parking garages where those driving into downtown to catch the light rail component would park their cars “for free” at taxpayer expense, who will also be footing the cost to operate and maintain the light rail as well as construction of it.

That voters declined the expansion of light rail from Portland into our community 3 times now, once directly and twice indirectly, had no affect on elected official who simply ignored the voters’ voices and approved it on their own.

The Alaska Bridge to Nowhere came under congressional fire and the federal earmarks to pay the bulk of it were cancelled in 2005. It was used as political tool to bludgeon 2008 Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin over the head with.

Other than half-hearted tries to bring the light rail component to a vote, most likely within a gerrymandered sub-district instead of the whole county, it remains primarily citizens and taxpayers screaming over financial hardships this project will place on the backs of everyday citizens in Clark County.

How else can we really describe this project except as a “Bridge to Bankruptcy?”

Wednesday, February 08, 2012

The "Whims of the Majority"

In the February 1, 2012 debate over homosexual marriage rights in Washington State, State Senator Lisa Brown, a member of the Democrat majority gives her reasons for opposing allowing voters in the state to voice their views through a public vote.

I guess it escapes Ms. Brown that the homosexual marriage bill passed in the Senate and the House by a "whim of the majority" there?

Isn't it funny how majority rule only counts when Democrats are the majority?

Footage from TVW, Washington State Public Affairs Network http://www.tvw.org/

Tuesday, February 07, 2012

PETA Sues SeaWorld Claiming Whales Civil Rights Violated

UPDATE: Judge Tosses Whale Civil Rights Case I still have to wonder why he even heard it

Just when I think the left can’t appear any more insane than they ordinarily are, sure as rain one of their groups step up and show me just insane the left can really be. As if we didn’t see enough leftwing insanity when Portland, Oregon city commissioner Dan Salzman declared “Trees have rights” or some dingbat female in Seattle, Washington decided she was having a “Gay Wedding” to a female building, we now see PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) suing SeaWorld in San Diego, California claiming, “animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings.”

Judge in San Diego hears both sides in killer whale slavery case

PETA’s attorney, and yes, some slip & fall ambulance chasing lawyer actually took the case argued before U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller, “captured killer whales are treated like slaves for being forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego and Orlando, Fla.”

Miller listened to both sides argue their case Monday Feb 6, 2012 for about an hour before announcing he would render a decision at a later date.

PETA’s attorney Jeffrey Kerr, claiming to be representing five Orcas labeled the case, “the next frontier of civil rights,” adding, “This is an historic day. For the first time in our nation’s history, a federal court heard arguments as to whether living, breathing, feeling beings have rights and can be enslaved simply because they happen to not have been born human. By any definition these orcas have been enslaved here.”

Sea World’s attorney Theodore Shaw understandably countered, labeling the lawsuit a “waste of the court’s time and resources,” adding, “it defies common sense and goes against 125 years of case law applied to the Constitution’s 13th amendment that prohibits slavery between humans.”

Shaw also mentioned, “Neither orcas nor any other animal were included in the ‘We the people’ ... when the Constitution was adopted.”

In expressing doubts that courts can allow animals to be plaintiffs in court proceedings, Judge Miller also expressed concern over just how far reaching such a decision could be, as he pointed out the Military’s use of Dolphins and Police use of dogs.

Not mentioned in just how far such a decision could reach should the Judge decide on PETA’s behalf or how would it not also have to apply to household pets, service animals like seeing-eye dogs for the blind, zoos, farms anywhere animals are.

How could those civil rights not also apply to the seals Orcas eat? If a liberated Orca was caught killing and eating a seal, would the Orca be arrested and drug back to court for violating the seals civil rights or murder?

While I am confident PETA would be well pleased if eating meat was outlawed, they don’t seem concerned that the handicapped could be left stranded or that domesticated pets released into the wild would not be able to fend for themselves and would be easy pickings for wild animals seeking food.

As is usually seen in such ridiculous moves to further degrade our country, PETA relates the issue to race by claiming, “Brushing animals off as property is the same argument that was used against African-Americans and women before their constitutional rights were protected.”

Is there an issue the left doesn’t play the race card?

Or does PETA not realize the civil rights movement in the 1960’s was for humans?

A common retort in the homosexual marriage argument, whenever we mention a slippery slope that could lead to people being permitted to marry animals is that the animal cannot state they are agreeable to the marriage.

So I am left wondering how five Orcas could have agreed to being retained by PETA in this lawsuit.

Just how far will this insanity go? Is it any wonder so much of the rest of the world believes America is going absolutely insane?

Monday, February 06, 2012

Democrats Continue the Highjack of the GOP Legacy

I’ve lost count of how many times liberal Democrats have bashed the Republicans for being mean-spirited, racist, cold hearted, evil and just the worst sort of people to ever exist on the face of the earth. Every election or whenever faced with a major piece of legislation they wish to promote, Democrats pull out the race card, the homosexual card and in spite of calls for civility, engage in some of the worst condemnations imaginable of conservatives and Republicans.

Listening to Democrats, especially since the 2008 elections that saw Barack Obama installed at the helm of the nation, the first ever Republican president, Abraham Lincoln was actually a strong liberal Democrat. Dwight Eisenhower, who led Allied Forces to Victory in World War Two and who was president during the 1950’s was really a strong liberal Republican.

And perhaps the strangest of all of their highjacking is after heavily bashing of Ronald Reagan during his time in office and since, he too is being embraced as more of a liberal Democrat.

It has even been said by liberals, “Obama is more of a Reagan/Eisenhower Republican than a Truman Democrat.”

Race huckster columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. even wrote a column titled Reagan wouldn’t recognize — or like — today’s GOP.

Perhaps in regards to their lack of spine today, he might be on the right track, but that is not what Pitts is saying. No, he is actually condemning Arizona’s Republican Jan Brewer because she had the audacity to wag her finger in the Lord High Mighty Barack Obama’s face and it was caught on camera. Blasphemy!

Pitts, like all of the rest of the hucksters bowing at the feet of Barack Obama forget he is just another man and one who has a history of committing that very sin himself, also caught on camera as seen below with Louisiana Governor Bobbie Jindal, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

No one raised any concerns over those finger wagging incidents.

Pitts continues, “It reminds us that Republicans are no longer about sunshine and can-do. These days, they simply seem cranky and dyspeptic.”

I find that especially ironic as during Reagan’s terms “Trickle down” was coined and used as condemnation of his economic policies. Reagan was very optimistic and restored America’s pride in ourselves after the years of Vietnam, Watergate and the Carter years where the “misery index” was used.

Democrats had no use for President Reagan as seen in this July 1985 Chicago Tribune article, Reagan Tax Plan Gets Bronx Cheer, a May 1985 Time Magazine article Addicted to the Loophole Habit: Reagan's tax plan and as the late Democratic presidential adviser Clark Clifford did in calling him “an amiable dunce.”

Have they forgotten their outrage over his firing of the air traffic controllers over their ill-advised and illegal strike in August 1981. Even today, the New York Times continues to label that as “undermining the bargaining power of American workers and their labor unions and polarizing our politics in ways that prevent us from addressing the root of our economic troubles.”

As seen in the following video, ABC News correspondent Sam Donaldson continually tried to be a thorn in Regan’s side, but was often chopped off at the knees.

Even Sam Donaldson came to respect Ronald Reagan, but I do not see him claiming he was actually a Democrat.

In the 1956 campaign against Dwight Eisenhower, Democrat candidate Adlai Stevenson promised “a ‘New America’ where freedom is made real for all without regard to race, beliefs, or economic condition ‘basically saying that the Republicans had benefits the rich and not the average American’.”

A great deal mellower than today, but the same accusatory rhetoric we continue to hear .

Democrats did focus much of their attacks in 1952 against Republican Joe McCarthy for his digging out communists who had infiltrated our government and entertainment industry, a call still heard today as Democrats seek any and all methods to taint the very party they now wish to embrace two of the more successful candidates in history.

In virtually every corner you look you will find Democrats bashing Republicans, ridiculing the policies and painting conservatives amongst the vilest beings ever to live. Yet, Democrats for some time now have been embracing the legacy of Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower in spite of condemning their policies at the time.

Barack Obama has continued many policies of George W. Bush even though he heavily condemned them in the 2008 campaign. Are they so ashamed of their own policies that they feel the need to camouflage their failures and economically damaging policies by embracing Republican policies?

As much as they cry “racist” against Republicans, who actually led the fight for Civil Rights for Black People throughout the history of America, will they ever acknowledge and atone for their own long history of racism in America and stop spreading The Myth of the Racist Republicans?

It seems even Democrats now realize Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower were right and their liberal policies were wrong.

So why would they encourage voters to vote for them when they can have a real Republican instead? Since even Democrats now promote Republican policies they have long opposed, it seems an admission that the country fairs better with conservative Republicans.

Something voters need to remember come the November elections.

Saturday, February 04, 2012

Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg to Egypt, "Don't Model Your Constitution After the Outdated US Constitution"

I find it absolutely appalling that such a person as Ruth Bader Ginsberg remains sitting on the Supreme Court with her obvious disdain for our constitution. In a recent televised Alhayat TV interview in Egypt, on their writing of a new constitution, she clearly says, “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the Constitution of South Africa.”

Full length Egyptian interview here

Labeling the United States Constitution as "rather old," she seems to feel our constitution is the "oldest written constitution still in force around the world," as if it was outdated and restricting what she would like to see done in the country.

Her recommendation of Egypt should model their constitution after South Africa's new constitution is frightening as South Africa is the number one nation for murders by firearms and Justice Ginsberg is a strong advocate for gun control.

In spite of efforts begun in 2004 to regulate guns, South Africa retains a very high murder rate.

She expresses hopes that there "genuinely will be a government of, by and for the people" in Egypt. Yet, we read of recent Islamic gains in the elections there are imposing Sharia Law largely acknowledged as degrading and demeaning to women and her embracing of the South African constitution over that of the United States is perplexing as South African Women are still having to struggle for gender equality under what Justice Ginsberg believes to be a "model constitution" in force now for over 15 years.

It should be remembered that Justice Ginsberg, prior to being nominated to the Supreme Court by President Clinton in 1993 was an advocate for gender equality and actually praised the U.S. Constitution saying, "we were just tremendously fortunate in the U.S. that the men that met in Philadelphia were very wise. But it's true that they were lacking one thing, that is there were no women as part of the Constitutional Convention, but there were women around who sparked the idea."

But now, she advocates for a system degrading to women in Egypt and recommends following the constitution of the country with the highest firearms murder rate in the world?

She says people must be yearning for liberty and freedom, but isn't that exactly what the US Constitution was patterned after and gave unprecedented freedom and liberty to the people, never before seen in the history of the world?

Yet she now says that notion is too old and not up to date compared to other countries that still do not have the freedoms and liberties Americans enjoy?

It is very troubling that a United States Supreme Court Justice holds such views on our constitution and remains sitting on the bench.

Friday, February 03, 2012

Japan Says Arigato (Thank You)

After the devastating earthquake and tsunami struck Japan last year, all hope might have seemed lost. Except the world turned out in large numbers to rush to Japan's aid.

How classy of the Japanese to now send a "Thank You" (Arigato in their language) out to all who helped through such difficult times.

I don't recall ever seeing such a thanks before.

Sad, Really Sad

Once again we are being asked all over the state to approve levies to send more money to schools, just as we have done nearly every election. School levies usually pass easily and funding never seems to be enough, according to the Teachers Union.

As our legislature focused primarily on homosexual marriage so far this session, some sorely needed education reform bills died in committee.

As you contemplate giving more of your money to schools, consider the following video taped in Washington State where High School students were asked basic questions that even Grammar School students should know. Ask yourself, are we getting our monies worth?

Read more at the Huffington Post

Thursday, February 02, 2012

Washington State Senate Approves Homosexual Marriage With The Help of 4 Republicans

As Washington State flounders in this ongoing “Great Recession,” with a $1.5 Billion budget gap, failing schools, court decisions demanding more school funding, double digit unemployment in several counties for 3 straight years, all has been put on the back burner as the top priority for the Washington State Legislature is to approve Homosexual Marriage in our state.

Last evening, February 1, 2012 the senate held a brief debate and voted to approve homosexual marriages after Democrats defeated amendments that would place the notion before the voters of the state and protections claimed to be in the bill for clergy and religions being extended to private citizens who may decline assisting in or participating in homosexual marriage ceremonies if they felt it violated their religious convictions.

For example, if you are a baker or photographer and decline to bake a wedding cake or take the photos for a homosexual marriage ceremony, feeling that your assistance or participation may violate your deeply held religious views, you may be held liable in a lawsuit for violating their civil rights.

That same protection is also denied judges, justices of the peace and others authorized to perform secular marriage ceremonies if they feel such participation may violate their deeply held religious views.

I also find claims of an $88 Million boost to the state’s economy by approving homosexual marriage specious at best.

Voicing opposition to an amendment proposed by Democrat Senator Brian Hatfield (19th district) that would have placed the final word on this before voters in the state, Democrat Lisa Brown of the 3rd district, relying on the announcement of her lesbian sister stated that such matters should not be left “to the whims of a majority.”

Openly homosexual Democrat Senator Ed Brown (43rd district) said, “The idea of a representative democracy is simply whether it is that small group (homosexuals) or whether it is small states, the majority, the whim of the majority as James Madison talked about in the Federalist Papers should not be decided in that fashion. That one half of one percent is the reason we exist.”

In 2009, passing the “Everything but Marriage” enhancement to Domestic Partnerships, Murray was quoted cautioning that “just because an almost-marriage law for same-sex couples will soon be on the books, that doesn’t mean the state will embrace same-sex marriage. California’s experience should be a lesson to us, not to move before we’re ready,” he said.

A refresher on the actions of homosexuals after voters turned down homosexual marriage in California can be seen here, here and here.

The final vote to approve was 28 to 21 in favor. Abandoning their party platform, four Republicans, Sens. Steve Litzow, Cheryl Pflug, Andy Hill, and Joe Fain elected to join the majority party to approve.

Democrats Tim Shelton, Jim Hargrove and Paull Shin came to the side of the minority party to vote against corrupting marriage in Washington State.

After the vote, addressing the legislatures lack of interest so far in working on real problems in the state, Republican Senator Jim Honeyford (15th district) said, “Now that this distracting and divisive piece of legislation has moved through the Senate I hope we can focus on the real problems facing Washington, especially the big gap in the state budget. I have been greatly dismayed by the lack of progress the Legislature has made so far this session toward dealing with the budget and other real problems the people elected us to address.”

Joining him was Republican Val Stevens (39th district) saying, “It is unconscionable that the Legislature has been disrupted the past four weeks focused almost completely on this issue. We should have spent that time working to address our state’s nearly $2 billion deficit."

Senator Mike Hewitt (16th district) joined the chorus with, “This issue has consumed the Legislature’s time and attention for four weeks. We’re almost halfway through the 2012 session and the Senate has yet to hold any substantive hearings on specific reforms or a proposed budget. It’s time to get on track and focus on what citizens sent us here to do this year – enact much-needed reforms and balance our budget.”

Addressing the defeat of amendments that would protect private citizens from allegations of discrimination by adhering to their deeply held religious views, Senator Janéa Holmquist Newbry (13th district) said, “I am worried about the religious liberties and free conscience of those who support traditional marriage. Individuals in domestic partnerships represent two-tenths of one percent of the state’s population, yet the Senate tonight ignored the remaining 99 percent of us. What we witnessed tonight is not the bestowal of civil rights, but the exercise of political power.”

Joining her with a similar concern, Senator Dan Swecker (20th district) added, “I am worried about the religious liberties and free conscience of those who support traditional marriage,” said Holmquist Newbry. “Individuals in domestic partnerships represent two-tenths of one percent of the state’s population, yet the Senate tonight ignored the remaining 99 percent of us. What we witnessed tonight is not the bestowal of civil rights, but the exercise of political power.”

In regards to the Democrats successfully blocking an amendment to place this issue before voters, Sen. Mike Padden (4th district) said, “Unfortunately the majority party rejected other important attempts to protect the rights of Washingtonians, as well as an amendment to attach a referendum clause to the measure and put it before voters on the fall ballot. The people of the 4th Legislative District, and all of Washington, deserve the last word on a subject of this magnitude.”

Adding her voice, Sen. Linda Evans Parlette (12th district) said, “Over the past several weeks I have heard from hundreds of people who have strong feelings on both sides of the issue. I think the Legislature should give them, and all the other citizens of Washington, the opportunity to personally weigh in.”

The bill is now before the House where I have no doubt that the Democrats will continue to ignore pressing issues to focus on passing this notion of sham marriage off on citizens in the State. I also believe that it will easily pass with the assistance of more turncoat Republicans as Rep. Glenn Anderson (5th district) and Rep. Maureen Walsh (16th district), who co-sponsored the house bill, have already signed on to it.

It will be signed by governor Gregoire right away instead of pushing for real problems facing Washington Citizens be addressed during this short legislative session.

There are already citizen initiatives being written and filed to allow voters in the state a say in this matter.

We can expect intimidation of those most likely to sign the petitions as, thanks to current Republican candidate for governor Rob McKenna, all of the names, signatures and addresses of any who signed the referendum petition on the ‘Everything but Marriage” bill were handed over to some 30 homosexual activist groups to be placed on internet websites with search engines.

Homosexual activists have already vowed to have “aggressive conversations” with those they feel most likely to sign petitions.

Republican candidate for replacing McKenna as Attorney General, Reagan Dunn has also announced his support for homosexual marriage. Of that announcement, Kirby Wilbur, chairman of the Washington State Republican Party said, “Dunn’s stance has sparked an emotional reaction from many. Dunn has 10 months to convince Republicans he’s on their side on most other issues. Reagan is an experienced politician. Can he handle it? We’ll see. I think he can.”

I believe conservative voters in the state, feeling abandoned by the Republican Party will best decide that.

Conservatives have choices in Shahram Hadian for governor and conservative Everett attorney Stephen Pidgeon who has announced his campaign for Attorney General.

Mr. Hadian will be visiting Vancouver again Friday night, February 3 at 6:30pm at Cascade Middle School. If you are feeling disenfranchised by the spineless actions of the WSRP and some candidates, you are invited to attend to learn more about Shahram Hadian.