Sunday, May 29, 2005

A good summation of Washington State election case

For anyone that might have questions over all the "to do" in the Washington State Governors election case, Peter Kirsanow of National Review does a very good job of summarizing what is happening, and why.

Hat tip - Stefan Sharkansky of Sound Politics.

Finally! After four long years, an up or down vote!

As reported here, the Senate has finally confirmed one of President Bush's judicial nominee's, Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals - after making her, and the rest of us, wait for four years (just another example of our government at "work")!

And how did this finally come about? After the spineless Republican Senators caved in to the demands of the minority Democrats! And what is the reward for this caving in? Are all the rest of the nominee's going to now get an up or down vote? Um, no. Only two more will will receive up or down votes - Justices Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor.

What caused the four year delay in getting Justice Owen confirmed? Charges by the Dems that her conservative viewpoints were "out of the mainstream", which is Dem speak that says she makes rulings based on what the Constitution actually says, rather than an "interpretation" of what she thinks it says - unlike the leftist, activist, judges who "interpret" what the Constitution actually says according to their leftist political bias, whims, and maybe what day of the week it is.

Making rulings based on what the Constitution actually says, rather than trying to "interpret" it on whims and political bias, is "out of the mainstream"? Um ... no.

Is Sen. Voinovich a RINO, or just infected with PCism?

As reported here, Republican Senator John Voinovich (Ohio) has circulated a letter to other Republican Senators urging them to vote "No" on the nomination of John Bolton to become UN Ambassador, stating in the letter that Bolton would be "ineffective" because of the so-called controversy over Bolton's supposed "abrasive" leadership style.

How does Voinovich know that Bolton would be "ineffective"? Has he worked with Bolton, or is he only going on hearsay about Bolton?

Is Voinovich going the way of McCain, and becoming a RINO (Republican In Name Only), or has he fallen victim to an infection of PCism?

Budget shortfall? What budget shortfall?

This is outrageous. The former Attorney General and the Legislature have been braying for quite some time now that there is a huge budget shortfall in Washington State - which is why they have been so eager to raise taxes - so what happens?

As reported here, the former Attorney General, Legislators and Judges have been given a pay raise by a citizens advisory panel! And they accepted it!

Now, I'm all for getting a pay raise - I'd like one, too! - but not when there is a budget shortfall! The former Attorney General and the State Legislature should have at least deferred this pay raise until such time as the budget was out of "crisis", but did they?

Of course not!

Protesters march on recruiting offices

As reported here, about 100 protesters angry about military recruiters coming to their schools, marched on several recruiting offices this past Monday, demanding that recruiters stop coming to their schools.

As the protesters arrived at the recruiting offices, they began to harangue the recruiters using bullhorns, chanting slogans, and also forced their way into some of the offices - and were then promptly "ushered" back out. Kudos to Sgt. 1st Class Jessica Hicks for doing the "ushering"!

At one of our local high schools, the left leaning PTSA passed a resolution to ban all military recruiters from that high school, which is a violation of the 1st Amendment Free Speech clause. This is very ironic to me, in that, the US military's main job is to protect our freedoms - including the ability to speak freely - and yet, the local PTSA wants to deny the recruiters freedom of speech by denying them access to the school, which is oh so typical of the Left.

Also in the article, a 17 year old student from one of the local high schools was quoted as saying, "I don't want to go to war. I don't want to die, I want to learn." While I can understand the youngsters desire to live, and learn, I have news for him - it's rather easy for you to not go to war and possibly die, dude. Don't join the all volunteer military. The same military, by the way, that is doing what it is supposed to do - protecting your freedom of speech, and enabling you to make choices for your own life.

Sunday, May 22, 2005

When does scientific theory become scientific "fact"?

When I was in school (I know, a couple of thousand years ago plus or minus five hundred years) scientific method included throwing as many questions about the theory as was possible to see if it could stand up to the scutiny of the other scientists. A few years ago one theory came out with a lot of fanfare and excitement due to the potential wonders this theory could do for EVERYONE. The theory, "cold fusion". What a boon that would have been for all sorts of things. Just to think that we could get energy of fantastic quantities with a generator working at room temperatures, instead of the fantastic heat and pressure necessary for fusion. The media was all over the upside of this "discovery" until it was found that no one else could repeat the cold fusion group's experimental results. Of course, the media then pooh-poohed the whole idea and somehow passed on the thought that they "knew" the idea was full of bologna even before the scientific community had made any efforts to prove or disprove the theory. While the "cold fusion" scientists were disappointed and disheartened by the lack of substantiation, they were men of science and didn't point fingers at the "non-scientists" for any kind of conspiracy against "cold fusion". One theory that held a lot of promise for a lot of people was shown to be false by the scientific method.

There are two areas of science related theories that still have not been proven or substantiated to any great extent that have proponents accusing those who don't "believe" that the evidence is sufficient to accept the theories as fact are right wing religious fanatics and (even worse) ignorant non-scientists. The two theories, Evolution and Global Warming. I want to make clear that I can understand the concepts of both, BUT I don't agree with everything that is being said about them. I have stated before in other areas that those who believe in Evolution or in Intelligent Design are both starting from a philosophical premise that is diametrically opposed. One believes that there is no god and so tries to figure out how everything came to be. The other believes in the possibility of a god and so tries to figure out the same thing. Where the Intelligent Design folks are trying for dialogue with anyone including Evolutionists for discussion on many points, the Evolutionists pooh-pooh the idea of ID and refuse to even allow for anyone to hold those concepts without ridiculing those who do.

The global warming folks fall into the same trap. They refuse to even have dialogue with anyone who disagrees with their "science", even going so far as to shout down any disagreements. Do they use science to ridicule opposition? NO! They call those who disagree all kinds of names, including, right wing religious fanatics.

Somehow these two concepts have become "scientific facts", without the benefit of efforts on both sides to have a dialogue about the disagreements. Somehow the ones who want dialogue are involving themselves in a "conspiracy to quiet the proponents of these "scientific facts". The amount of anger and disdain directed at the disagreeing people seems to me to rise to the level of, shall I say it?, religious fanaticism. Polite discourse is something of the "old-fashioned" sort, especially when the ones holding one concept's "absolute inviability" feel that no one else's ideas have any merit or should have an audience.

So, the answer to my question seems to be, when enough people get emotional about the ideas to be able to scream louder than the others.

Washington State Legislators are hopelessly clueless

As if our Legislators aren't clueless enough, now they take away metal detectors from the State capitol building because they were 'inconvenient' to people who worked there and to visitors, and because it will save two million dollars over this biennium.

I wonder how inconvenient it will be when a terrorist or nut case enters the building with a gun, and either starts shooting or takes people hostage. Which is more important - keeping people safe from potential terrorist or nutcase activity, or saving money?


Election contest trial set to start on Monday, May 23rd, 2005

This article lays out fairly well, what is at stake, and how each of the parties are approaching this case. It also includes a link at the bottom for people to watch or listen to the trial live.

First audit of KC Elections Office has begun

The first audit of the KC Elections Office began this past Tuesday, with two more audits to follow, one by an outside agency, and the other by a citizens oversight committee to be named later. Will what they find, and recommend, actually be taken seriously? Will their recommendations actually be implemented this time?

Sunday, May 15, 2005

Utopia - the impossible dream

In a must read article at, Phil Brennan writes about the ultimate goal of the secularists - a Marxist-based Utopian society - which they are trying, with everything in their power, to achieve.

Hat tip - Littlebee55, a dear friend of mine.

Also, one of my favorite bloggers, David Limbaugh, often writes on this subject as well. If you haven't read his blog, I highly recommend it.

Washington State Legislators feeling the heat

And, according to this article, may be getting worried about voter backlash, in the wake of the recent passage of a new gas tax hike.

Many legislators are hearing from their constituents, and what they are hearing isn't being said in 'happy' tones, as people here are downright steamed about the newest gas tax - as well they should be.

But, of course, the Dems are saying that they aren't worried, because this is a 'needed' tax (as every tax is 'needed', in the eyes of the Dems) that will go to fixing the Viaduct, the 520 floating bridge, among other roads, as well as expanding I-405. They are also saying that passing this showed 'leadership'. Not passing new taxes - as promised by the former Attorney General during her campaign - that hurt the lower income people of the state the most, would have shown even more leadership, however.

I think the Dems, looking through their rose colored glasses, will be seeing some things in the next election that will catch them by surprise, such as lost seats in the Legislature, and a Republican in the Governors office - if that doesn't happen sooner, that is.

Annan trying the "I don't remember" defense

As reported here, the corrupt head of the corrupt UN is trying the "I don't remember" defense. Annan failed to report meetings he had with leaders of Cotecna, the firm his darling little boy worked as a consultant for, during his first interrogatory with the Volcker-led commission, but then suddenly "remembered" that he did have meetings with those people, and tried playing down any signifigance of those meetings after he checked his calendar and e-mail.

Koffi, Koffi, Koffi ... it won't work, pal. Your days are numbered, and the numbers are getting smaller.

PETA is making the news - again

As reported here, PETA is now using shareholder resolutions with major corporations to push their agenda regarding using animals to test products. In order to do that, someone has to own at least $2,000.00 worth of stock. Now that seems "interesting" to me, in that, by owning stock in a company, you are expressing tacit approval for their policies and practices - including using animals to test products. So, in effect, PETA is both supporting and protesting corporate policies and practices in this area, at the same time!

And, get this - not only is PETA trying to shove their agenda down corporate throats, but according to this, they also kill animals - by the thousands - at their Norfolk, Virginia headquarters. How hypocritical of them. I guess the end justifies the means in their eyes.

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Is a rift developing among Al-Qaida factions?

Apparently, the Pakistani's believe that to be the case. In this remarkably well written - for the AP, no less! - article, the Pakistani's claim that there is a rift between Central Asian factions and Arab factions, of Al-Qaida. Will this be enough to eventually bring Al-Qaida down sooner than expected? Only time will tell. Go read the article - if you're like me, and don't like the usually left leaning bias of the AP, you will be pleasantly surprised.

Monday, May 09, 2005

Is Government supposed to take care of us?

The other night I was watching the news and was astonished to hear someone make the comment that the government should have been taking care of them better. I will admit that the problem was of sufficiently large scope that government involvement was probably warranted, however, since when is the government supposed to go the next step and take care of the people? There is a town in California that is situated on naturally occurring asbestos. While there has been no recorded instances of cancer or other problems associated with asbestos in this town, this lady apparently felt that the town should not have been built there and even though it had been, the government should have moved everyone off the property to a new and presumably safer location. I am not one to believe that asbestos is that good of a substance in every circumstance, but when did the government take on the responsibility to make our decisions of where we would buy our homes and all the rest of our life choices? Ack!!!! Someone should tell this person that they have the choice of selling and moving or continuing to live there. If she feels that it is too dangerous to continue to live there, she should leave, not blame the government for the lack of care, after all, isn't "choice" the law of the land?

Sunday, May 08, 2005

Happy Mothers Day

Today is the day set aside to honor all the Mom's in our lives, and I think this e-card says it all. Go check it out. :)

The best explanation of the failings of Social unSecurity I've seen yet

If you've spent any time at all at our blog, you've noted the other blogs listed in the side bar. While checking out what others had to say on various topics, I came upon this post at Reality Hammer, that is the best explanation that I have ever seen on the failings of Social unSecurity, and why it needs to be fixed - now!

This is something you absolutely need to read, if you have any confusion at all (or even if you don't) about Social unSecurity. I just wish the Dems would read it, too but they won't. They just don't get it.

Breaking campaign promises, and proud of it

As reported here, after making campaign promises to not raise taxes if elected citing the fragility of the states economy, the former Attorney General is now proud to have done just that, and feels 'comfortable' in the governor's mansion.

All I can say is, she better have a phone number handy for a moving company, as she hopefully will need one soon.

Another "Clitonista" spews out vacuous comments

As reported here, former "Clintonista" Secretary of State Albright spews out some rather vacuous comments about the state of affairs in the war on terror, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. As if she was effective during her time as Sec State!

Let's see now. The Oil For Food scandal got up and running during Clintons term; the USS Cole and the two embassies were bombed; Osama Bin Laden's head on a platter was offered to us - twice! - but we turned down both offers, with the reason given that OBL was just a "minor money guy, and not a serious player", among other abject failures. I could go on, but the failures of the previous administration, and especially the State Department are so revoltingly numerous, I might cause some of you intestinal distress.

If you have a strong stomach, and a high capacity to suspend belief, read the article. Memo to Albright: Your time is over. Please sit down.

KC Council Republicans pushing for ouster of Elections Director

As reported here, The minority KC Council Republican members are calling for the outer of KC Elections Director Dean Logan, as well they should, after the total fiasco the election has been, especially in King County.

But Dem Council member Larry Phillips, has ridden to the defense of Logan, stating that what the Republicans are trying to do is merely a political ploy (can you say Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?) to discredit Logan. Piffle! Logan has done enough to discredit himself. The Republicans don't need to do this to "discredit" Logan. All they are attempting to do is urge King Sims to ask Logan to resign, so that the people see that actual change is happening in the Elections Department, which may possibly help to restore voter confidence in that office.

Will this pass the council, and go before King Sims? Probably not, but resistance to this will not look good for the Dems in the eyes of many people. The same holds true for Sims if by some slim chance that it does come before him, and he refuses to act.

Once again the Dems are looking foolish for stonewalling yet again, as they oppose every effort by the Republicans, and more importantly by the people, to make needed changes in the KC Elections Office.

All I can say to the Dems is keep it up. The next election cycle isn't that far away.

A ray of hope amid the gloom of higher taxes?

As reported here, a consortium of conservative groups and business leaders have sued the State of Washington over the new taxes that have been passed, when the Dem controlled legislature amended the spending limitation initiative 601 - for the ninth time - to allow a simple majority, rather than the super majority as voted by the people, saying that it is illegal - which it is - even though an "emergency" was declared by the Dems. Emergency? What emergency? There is no emergency happening that would allow the legislature to amend Initiative 601!

Is there a budget shortfall? Yes, I'll grant that there is, and I have put forth my opinions on the reasons for that in previous posts, so I won't rehash that again here. Is there a specific emergency situation that warrants the amendment? No, there is not. So how does the legislature think that it can simply amend a peoples initiative, so they can raise taxes? The majority of them are Democrats, that's how.

Seattle Mayors "Urban Village Utopia" coming soon to a neighborhood near you!

As reported here, the Seattle City Council has approved the Mayors plan to let developers build fewer parking spaces for their new projects, in areas that already have high density and few parking spaces, enabling the moonbat "Urban Village Utopia" idea that is so near and dear to our Mayor, who is, what else, a Dem.

Why are they doing this? The Mayor has this grandiose idea that by increasing density in a neighborhood, people will be "encouraged" to not only live there, but find employment there as well, and by limiting the number of parking spaces, this will "encourage" people to get out of their cars, and use mass transit instead. A side issue that they are spouting, is that, because developers won't have to build so many parking spaces, it will save them money, and therefore the theory goes, developers will be able to build more affordable housing units.

So what's wrong with this idea? Well, first of all, they are targeting neighborhoods that already have to few spots available, and as the developers begin to build their projects, more spacces will be lost during the construction period. I know this first hand, as it happened in my neighborhood, and it hasn't changed, even though the projects here are finished.

Secondly, businesses need places for their customers to park while they shop, and for their employees who either just don't, or can't, use mass transit to commute, and business owners have already been complaining about the lack of parking in the targeted neighborhoods. How is this plan going to alleviate that? It won't - it will only make it worse - and some business owners have already stated that they may have to relocate simply due to the lack of available parking places. If businesses relocate, where are the jobs going to come from? Where the businesses have relocated to, of course. Which means that people will have to commute away from the "Urban Village Utopia" to get to their jobs.

Thirdly, residents who own cars need somewhere to park their cars, whether they use their cars to commute, or use mass transit. Many people that live in Seattle, work in other cities, and will not give up their jobs to work "closer to home". Why? Salary, for one reason. Another is the type of job they do. If I worked at, say, Microsoft, and was making a decent salary, I would be foolish to give that up to go work somewhere "close to home" simply for the convenience factor, especially if there were no jobs available in the field I worked in. Am I supposed to give up my higher paying job at Microsoft to go work at a pizza restaurant, just because the pizza restaurant is "close to home"? The Mayor seems to think that is a good idea for some goofy reason.

Fourth reason. Even though the Seattle Metropolitan area has one of the most extensive mass transit systems in the US, buses go where they go according to schedules and routes set up by someone else, and not by the people who use the buses. Many people have to make two or three, and some even more, bus route changes to get to and from work, spending upwards of two to three hours a day on the bus! I do use the bus to commute to and from work, and I consider myself fortunate that I only have to take one bus to do it, and that it only takes me about 20 minutes to get to work. If I had to take more than one bus, and if it took me more than 30 minutes, to get to work, I'd drive.

The Mayors and City Councils reasoning is beyond me, but rest assured, the "Urban Village Utopia" idiocy is coming soon to a neighborhood near you ... and probably me, too.

Washington State GOP wins a key issue

As reported here, the State GOP won a key issue in the recent pre-trial hearing, keeping alive their law suit to overturn the November gubanatorial election results. But, Judge Bridges also allowed certain motions put forward by the Dems. The key thing here, though, is that Judge Bridges allowed the GOP to move forward with their proportional analysis method to determine how illegal votes could be subtracted from the totals, although the judge still isn't completely sold on the idea.

How does it work? Say there were 10 illegal votes in a particular precinct, and Gregoire won that precinct by 60%, with Rossi picking up the remaining 40%. Subtracting the illegal votes proportionally would mean that Gregoire would lose 6 votes, and Rossi 4, out of the total of 10 illegal votes. Since the vast majority of illegal votes cast came from King County, which Gregoire "won" handily, if this method is applied, Gregoire stands to lose the most, including the Governors seat.

The trial is set for May 23rd, 15 days from now. Whatever the outcome is, it will be appealed to the state supreme court.

Why won't this guy go away?

As reported in this article, "Mr. Irrelevant", aka Sen. John Kerry, showed his face in Washington State again at a state Dem Party fund raiser for the former Attorney General, Christine Gregoire.

Why he thinks he has relevance is beyond me! Memo to Sen. Kerry: Butt out of Washington State!

Losing a friend

It has been a while since I last posted anything. Several reasons and some excuses can be put forward but one is probably more valid than the others. My wife and I lost a friend. He had been with us for several years and had brought joy and love (as well as some discomfort due to his temper) to both of us. His name was Buddy and he was a black cat with a white spot on his chest that looked like an ascot. He developed diabetes a couple of years ago and I had to give him a daily shot. Diabetes is what finally caused his bodily systems to crash and so my wife had to have him put to sleep. Now with the background established, let me say that my wife was really devastated by his death. There is a lot of research that indicates that cats and humans can bond with one another to a high degree and that bond can cause much distress when severed. (I have heard that that can happen with dogs but I can't argue for or against that idea since I haven't had a dog in over thirty-five years.) I cared for our cat but not to the depth that my wife did. We seem to invest much of ourselves into our pets. I think that is a good thing for us as well as them. I am thankful for Buddy's life with us. I expect that we will get a replacement for him in due time, although the next one won't be Buddy but a new personality.

My brother's blog about JLo and PETA is a good one. I have almost an aversion to the airheaded thought processes that they consistantly exhibit. Their beliefs are SO focused on one aspect of things that they won't even discuss anything else. They have been asked on several occasions about other issues and (they are at least consistant in their refusal to answer) they refuse to even consider discussion on other issues. They also have the belief that they are "right" about their beliefs to the extent that they are willing to shout down anyone else in their advocacy. Just one more group that refuses to accept alternate opinions.

I believe that humanity should take care of animals. Using some for food and some for companions and some for clothing, etc., realizing that humane treatment should be on the top of the way we care for the animals. I DO NOT believe that animals are on the same plain with humans (although there are some humans that fit beneath animals because of their treatment of other humans, child abusers, radical Islamists who chop people's heads off, rapists, etc.). Whether you believe in God or not, the simple fact is that humanity is demonstrably the top of the scale for almost everything and we do have dominion over the animal kingdom. We can eliminate or expand habitat for animals or humans in reasonably short periods. The idea that we have this "ability" should give us pause when we consider the consequences of our actions.

Sunday, May 01, 2005

PETA moonbats protesting J'Lo

As reported in this article, moonbats from PETA are protesting the use of furs in J'Lo's line of clothing.

J'Lo's response to all of this is priceless!

Lopez was asked what she thought of the protesters. "I don't," she replied as she headed into the premiere (of her new movie).

KC prosecutors have identified 648 felon voters

The KC Prosecutors office has identified 648 felons who voted in the November elections, according to this article. Is this on top of the 726 felon voters the GOP has submitted in court filings? I don't know, as the article doesn't state if this new number - 648 - is in addition to, or part of, the 726 felons listed.

Whatever, that is way too many felons who voted illegally in the election. Will this help Dino Rossi's case? The State GOP Chairman, Chris Vance thinks so, as he is quoted in the article as having said, "The government is making our case for us.".

We'll see if it does, as things in the lawsuit move along.

The new gas tax - how they voted

Here is the list of who voted for or against the new 9.5 cent a gallon gasoline tax over the next four years. If you are as upset over this as I am, contact your local legislator to let them know, and then follow that up with your vote in the next election cycle.

New gas tax won't just hurt lower income families

If you've been reading my blog, you'll know that I've been posting on all the new taxes the Dem controlled Washington State Legislature has been pushing through, and how these new taxes will hurt lower income families the most.

Well, as this article shows, the new taxes - specifically the new gas tax amount that was recently passed - won't just hurt lower income families, but small businesses as well. Businesses that fuel our still fragile economy, and provide jobs. As more and more of business budgets go to pay for fuel, there will be less and less money for payroll, and that means lay offs, which translates into less money being spent by consumers in our economy, creating a 'domino effect'. As less money is spent by consumers, more businesses will be affected by the loss of revenue, which in turn will mean more lost jobs, meaning even less money being spent, etc.

In the early 1970's, when the SST project at Boeing was shut down by the feds resulting in mass lay offs, and the economy was in a shambles with high inflation and low employment, caused by the war in Viet Nam and unwise taxing and spending, someone put up a sign on a freeway leading out of Seattle that read, "Will the last person leaving Seattle please turn out the lights?". Does anyone remember that? I do.

Does anyone know where that sign went? We may need it again.

KC Election Director Dean Logan gets deposed

In this article, Dean Logan had to answer some tough questions in his deposition, answers that will be used by the Reps in their lawsuit over the gubenatorial election last November. I'll let you read the article, and come to your own conclusions about his answers, and whether they will aid the Reps case, or not.

There is also a link at the bottom of the page to the Washington Secretary of State's website you should also check out.

In my opinion, the former Attorney General's time in the governors mansion is drawing to a close. To quote Martha S., "that's a good thing".

Washington State House passes their portion of gas tax bill

Well, this comes as no real surprise. According to this article, the State House managed to stop their bickering to pass their version of the 9.5 cent per gallon increase in the gasoline tax over the next four years. They say that this will help pay for needed repairs to the Alaskan Way Viaduct, (which is needed, I'll grant) and also for expansion of I-405 on the east side, along with other projects.

All well and good, I suppose, but, my question(s) to the Legislature is this - what have you been doing with the 28 cents per gallon tax on gasoline that we have already been paying for lo these many years? Where has that money been spent, and could that money have been more wisely spent, so as to preclude having to increase it yet again?

This new tax amount will only hurt those who are of lower incomes, as many lower income folks have older, less fuel efficient cars, and can not afford to buy something newer. "Oh, this will 'only' add between $50.00 to $200.00 to the annual cost of buying gasoline. That's not that much." say the Dems. Maybe not to you twits, but that extra $50.00 to $200.00 a year to a lower income household can be a significant amount of money. Money that could have gone to buying more nutritious food for their family, or new clothes, etc.

Why can't the Dems seem to get that? Maybe they'll learn during the election cycle.