Archive for June, 2009

June 30, 2009

Obama: No Friend of Freedom; In Honduras or Iran

by lewwaters

Obama, Honduras Protestor
It is with utter disgust that I write this about the newly seated poseur in chief occupying the White House in what I supposed to be the leader of the free worlds seat. Barack Obama has shown his weakness and allegiance to tin horn dictators and oppressive leaders everywhere, even worse that that we saw in the late 1970’s under Jimmy Carter, unarguably the worst president ever in the history of the United States of America, until now.

In what a blind person could see was a rigged election, Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was retained in power over that theologically oppressed nation. Supporters of challenger Hossein Mousavi took to the streets in Tehran in protest, only to be met by thugs who beat and killed them by the scores.

Although they begged for help and support in over a week of protests, the beatings and killing persisted, eliciting a weak voice of “displeasure” from Obama, issued after days of silence and calling for everyone to just accept the election.

North Korea’s Kim Jung Il thumbs his nose at America and starves his own people while amassing weapons and building nuclear weapons in violation of nuclear treaties. He threatens even to annihilate America and Obama imposes more financial sanctions upon the starving military nation.

But, what takes the cake is his demand that Honduras reinstate their deposed president, in spite of him being removed under the authority of their constitution and by court and congressional order.

Aligning himself with Marxist dictators, Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro, Obama calls on Hondurans to reinstall ousted president Manuel Zelaya, calling his constitutionally sanctioned removal an illegal coup.
Zelaya was removed from the presidency by members of the Honduran Military, ordered by the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress after he illegally attempted to rewrite the Honduran constitution on his own, which the Supreme Court there ruled illegal.

Not to be thwarted, Zelaya called upon Marxist buddy, Hugo Chavez to send him the ballots he wanted voted on and ordered the Military to disperse those ballots. When that order was refused, Zelaya fired the Commanding General, who refused due to orders from the Supreme Court, who also ordered the general be reinstated. Zelaya refused and led a group to break into the warehouse where the ballots were stored to disperse them and force a vote on his referendum, even though the Congress and Supreme Court ruled it illegal.

For this, Zelaya was arrested and placed on an airplane to Costa Rica. The Military turned the country over to the Congress who swore in a new president, Roberto Micheletti to finish Zelaya’s term, with a promise of free elections at that time to choose a new president.

You can read the full story at Honduras Defends Its Democracy.

Clearly, Honduras acted within their constitution and with full sanction of their law and political leaders. Past Military Coups in Central America were known for bloodshed and deposed leaders being killed.

That did not happen here and all went peaceful and in accord with law and order. For Obama to now state, “It would be a terrible precedent if we start moving backwards into the era in which we are seeing military coups as a means of political transition, rather than democratic elections,” is ludicrous.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton chimed in with, “We do think that this has evolved into a coup.”

No, Mrs. Clinton, it is the evolution of a free people following their constitution to retain their freedom.

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs says, “the [Obama] administration had worked in recent days to try to prevent the coup from happening, and our goal now is on restoring democratic order in Honduras.”

Remember that Obama refuses to meddle in Iran where Iranians stood up for a free voice and free elections, but he now sees no problem in meddling in Honduras where a free people took constitutionally mandated steps to remain a free people?

Recall too that all communist nations refer to their oppressive regimes as “democratic order.”

Perhaps Obama fears the American people may wake up to his own putsch toward Marxist socialism and he will be removed from office as per what is left of our own constitution?

Hondurans acted within their constitution in a legal and peaceful way to retain their freedom and keep their constitution and laws intact. They must be applauded and supported, not condemned. Only a small minority of Zelaya supporters has tried to create unrest while upwards of 95% of Hondurans support this move.

Obama is off base and out of order in his demands upon Honduras, as is the rest of the world who cries foul for the Honduran people acting within their constitution.

Democracy and law and order prevail in Honduras. Honduran people, not outside forces and not by bloodshed, have removed a power mad wannabe dictator peacefully. The small country retains its dignity and democracy.

Perhaps American citizens could learn much by looking to Honduras.

June 29, 2009

A Farewell To Chrysler

by lewwaters

It was with mixed emotions that I read and hear Chrysler Corporation announcing reopening plants in Canada and the U.S. While I am sure many are elated that the plants will reopen and Union workers will be returning to work, for at least a short time, to assemble Chrysler Vehicles, many others are not.

I am one of those “many others.”

I have been a loyal owner of Chrysler products for the past 43 years and have worked at various Chrysler and Dodge dealerships over the past 32 years, being at the last one for 19 1/2 years.

We were one of the 789 carefully chosen by White House officials to lose their franchise.

I obtained my first Chrysler vehicle shortly after graduating High School, a 1956 Plymouth Belvedere. Although 11 years old at the time I obtained it, it was stout and dependable. Unlike others cars in Southeast Florida, it was not rusted out by the salt air we had at the time.

That was the beginning of my loyalty to Chrysler Corporation that I held until June 16, 2009, as I was told my technician experience and skills learned at many Chrysler factory technical schools were no longer needed, after the dealer I had been at for so long lost their franchise.

I first hired on at a Chrysler dealer in 1977 shortly after my US Army enlistment ended. We weren’t permitted to own private vehicles in Viet Nam, but after finishing my tours there and being transferred to Germany and having sold my 1965 Plymouth Belvedere II prior to Viet Nam, I took a portion of my Army Reenlistment bonus and bought my first ever brand new car through the PX, a 1971 Plymouth 340 Duster, later swapping it for a 1970 Plymouth Road Runner.

Leaving the Army in 1977 and going to work for a Chrysler dealer, I fell in love with the Chrysler LeBaron and ended up buying one brand new in 1978 as the 1979 models were coming out.

Two years later I obtained a brand new Dodge Van which I tricked out, as was popular at the time.

During this time period Chrysler suffered their first difficulty financially. As the workmanship of the late 1970’s cars declined and concession’s were made to remain in business, the dealer I had been working at ended up laying off several of us, eventually being sold to another owner.

I went through a 8 year absence of working for Chrysler dealers, but retained my loyalty as an owner, losing the LeBaron in a divorce, but gaining a 1979 Plymouth Volare a few years later while keeping the Dodge van.

By 1987 I hired on at another Chrysler dealership, staying there until returning to the Pacific Northwest in 1988, where I hired at another dealership and remained until January 1990, when I moved to the current one that just lost their franchise.

Along the way I obtained a 1986 Chrysler New Yorker, a 1995 Plymouth Voyager and my current ride, a 1998 Dodge Dakota.

As you can see, I have been a loyal owner and liked the vehicles enough to hire on at Dealerships to repair others vehicles, gaining much knowledge, both from hands-on and attendance at more factory sponsored tech schools than I care to recall at this moment.

Technicians’ remaining at one dealership for nearly 20 years is almost unheard of in the Automotive Mechanics trade, but many others and I did just that. A change in Service Manager led others to leave last year, leaving me as the oldest employee in the shop and the Dodge technician with seniority. Being non-union, that part is meaningless, naturally.

It is well known that I do not support the current administration, but I never expected that even Obama would direct sending so many people to the unemployment line or a company like Chrysler complying with such a directive.

As expected, the administration denies such action, but evidence suggest differently. I also do not expect anything to come of it, either.

So here I sit, approaching 61 years of age, highly trained in Chrysler vehicle repairs and unemployed as younger less experienced techs fill what few positions may become open, as there is now a glut of factory trained Chrysler Technicians in the jobs market and not enough dealerships for all of us.

Owners in many markets now must travel a much farther distance to receive service or warranty repairs, discouraging many from buying or keeping their Chrysler vehicles. To a man, every one that I worked with agrees that they have purchased their last Chrysler vehicle. Many others across the country join us in deciding to take our few remaining dollars to spend elsewhere, most likely foreign, as a socialist government and unions now own the American Automakers.

While I’m sure others will continue to buy Chrysler, once they see the shoddy workmanship directed by the UAW and Fiat, don’t be surprised to see Chrysler still struggling in the near future.

You dug your own hole, Chrysler.

I bid you a not so fond farewell.

June 27, 2009

Eight Republicans

by lewwaters

Friday, June 26, 2009, a disastrous piece of legislation narrowly was approved in the House of Representatives. HR 2454, also known as the Waxman Markey Bill, or more commonly known as Cap and Trade, was approved by a vote of 219 to 212.

Clark County Conservative outlined Representative Brain Baird’s YES vote on the bill here. However, much anger and dismay is being expressed towards 8 Republican Representatives from across America that crossed over to vote YES, giving the Democrats the needed votes to approve the measure.

Brent Boger, Vancouver, Washington Senior City Attorney and Republican State Committeeman for Clark County submitted the following analysis as to why the 8 may have voted as they did,

When I looked over the list of the 8 Republicans who voted for the cap and trade, cap and tax bill, my impression was that most of them had tough districts that could easily flip Democrat and they voted for their political survival. Spending a couple of hours researching this, my impression appears largely true.

We should not take issue with the eight just because they failed to vote the same as the 168 Republicans who voted against the bill. The calls should address why their reasons for voting for the bill are wrong. Their votes were not in the interest of: (1) sound public policy; (2) their political future; or (3) their constituents.

Most important of these reasons is the evident collapse in the global warming so-called scientific consensus. The overall vote was driven by dogma and a desire to raise revenue to support Obama’s reckless spending. See Friday’s editorial in the Wall Street Journal that discusses the signs of collapse in the international scientific consensus:

“The collapse of the ‘consensus’ has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth’s temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon.”

I am not a scientist. Nor are any of the eight congressmen scientists–and Al Gore’s journalism degree does not give him much in the way of credentials on this issue either. My own training has been in economics and the law. Perhaps my economics training is what makes me particularly note that absent from the discussion on climate change is any serious discussion of cost and benefits. Even if global warming is man-made, might it not be more cost-effective and might we all live better if we deal with its effects rather than pass legislation like King Canute decreed (who was thought to be so great he could command the tides).

There are other reasons besides the merits of the bill that might have driven the votes of the eight. My approach to political analysis is to understand political behavior. I mostly focus on the electorate’s behavior, but I also try to understand why elected officials vote as they do. I think I can explain their votes based on three factors.

1. They think the vote was better for them politically.

Obama carried seven of the eight districts and Kerry three of the eight over Bush. None of the districts are safe Republican seats. One district is represented by Obama’s nominee for Secretary of the Army. At least seven of the eight members of Congress could have reasonably concluded that their vote was to their political benefit.

No one likes a politician who abandons principle and cravenly votes solely on their political interests but certainly it is something that should be considered. Yet 27 Republican members of Congress who voted against the bill also represent districts Obama won. Most of these 27 members, however, represent districts that only barely went for Obama and can be expected to flip back our way in the next election. A Republican Congressman representing a district Obama won by 2% would be expected to look at their prospects for survival differently than one who represents a district Obama won by 14%, like Reichert. Three of the five represent districts Obama won by more than 10% (including Reichert). Three represent one of the six districts in the country won by John Kerry in 2004 currently represented by a Republican in the House: Reichert, Mike Castle of Delaware and Mark Kirk of Illinois. Castle and Kirk could take the Senate seats abandoned by our current President and Vice President next year.

If the Republican members voted based on political calculation, they should note the collapsing scientific and understand that what looks popular now may look foolish in the future.

There is another, less cynical way to look at their votes but related to political self-interest discussed next.

2. They are representing their districts, or they think they are.

Seven of the eight wayward Republicans represent suburban districts and seven of the eight had to run ahead of our national ticket to win. Generally suburban districts still favor Republicans and conservative positions on many issues. One general area suburban voters depart from general Republican views is on environmental issues (or perhaps better expressed as environmental dogma). Unfortunately, many suburban voters come to these positions not from any serious analysis but simply reacting to the relentless global-warming drumbeat emanating from the mainstream media and pseudo-scientists. As noted above, the dogma is starting to collapse, but word of that has not reached enough of their constituents yet.

The eight should have considered that what they think their constituents like now will change when prices go up to pay for the hidden tax, small business fail because of the legislation, and we get a couple of cold winters. (It is interesting to note that only Bono-Mack’s Palm Springs district has a more pleasant winter climate than Dave Reichert’s wintertime cold and rainy Washington district).

3. They really believed the bill was good public policy.

Five of the eight members had fairly high ratings from the League of Conservation Voters (a somewhat dogmatic, though not always, environmental political organization). Thus, their votes on this bill are not out-of-line with the positions they had had taken in the past. This could be because they really believe in these environmental issues or for the two reasons listed above. In particular, I would like to point out Chris Smith of New Jersey who initially was elected to Congress on a very pro-life platform but has otherwise taken pretty moderate positions. Some in the evangelical Christian community have also taken general positions justifiably protective of the environment but I am not sure they are embracing global warming dogma. Though I sharply disagree with Smith on his vote, I still have a great deal of respect for him as a politician who stands on principle.

I wonder whether the members understand that the scientific consensus is less of a consensus now than it was. Have they noted the trouble the Labour Party government has had in getting a global warming bill through the Australian Senate? Do they know many in Europe are growing skeptical about the validity of the science behind climate change-theory? Have they considered a cost-benefit analysis and that should be expected of all members of Congress, especially Republicans?

What about the high number of Democrats who voted against the bill? Lost in our focus on the eight Republicans are the 44 Democrats who voted against the bill. 28 of these Democrats represent districts won by John McCain and 36 represent 2004 Bush districts. Not surprisingly, we find among the remaining 8 Democrats those who voted against the bill because it didn’t go far enough like Dennis Kucinich (OH), Peter DeFazio (OR), and Fortney Stark (CA). The remaining Democrat “no” votes come from Democrat industrial along with a couple heavily-minority agricultural districts especially impacted by the bill. Do these Democrats see something coming that the eight Republicans do not?

We should also not get carried away in our criticism of the eight. Remember that the eight Republicans have been with us on important issues. For example all 8 voted against the Obama stimulus package. So unless we are willing to say that Dennis Kucinich is better than Dave Reichert because Kucinich voted right on this bill and Reichert did not, we probably ought to cut them some slack. I am pleased that Reichert is still in Congress and not the angry left’s Darcy Burner. From what I know of the Democrat challengers to the other seven districts, I would expect we are better off that the Republicans are there as well.

I conclude with the political situation each of the 8 Republicans find themselves in. While I understand their votes and would probably still support them, I am disappointed.

Reichert, WA.8

David Reichert represents a traditionally Republican suburban district that has trended noticeably to the Democrats over the last 10-15 years with both Obama and Kerry winning the district–Obama by 14%. The district is composed of eastern King and Pierce counties. Republicans have been largely wiped-out in legislative seats in the King County portion of the district–holding only the 5th, and two seats in the 31st. The district has an environmentalist tilt. According to the National Journal, Reichert has had a moderate voting record that is only a bit more conservative than average. He does have fairly high ratings from the League of Conservation voters.

2008: Reichert (R) 53%, Burner (D) 47%; Obama (D) 56%, McCain (R) 42%
2006: Reichert (R) 51%, Burner (D) 49%
2004: Reichert (R) 52%, Ross (D) 47%; Kerry (D) 51%, Bush (R) 48%

Bono-Mack, CA.45

Bono-Mack is Sonny Bono’s widow and was the only Republican to vote for cap and trade in committee. She represents a district that includes Palm Springs and fast-growing LA suburban areas in Riverside County’s Moreno Valley. I personally experienced the district’s environmentalist tilt during my time on the staff of California Governor George Deukmejian. The district voted strongly for Bush in 2004 but went to Obama in 2008. Bono-Mack has a moderate voting record but is clearly more right than left. Her ratings from the League of Conservation voters have not been high.

2008: Bono-Mack (R) 58%, Bornstein (D) 42%; Obama (D) 52%, McCain (R) 47%
2006: Bono (R) 61%, Roth (D) 39%
2004: Bono (R) 67%, Meyer (D) 33%; Bush (R) 56%, Kerry (D) 43%

Castle, DE-AL

Mike Castle is Delaware’s lone Congressman. Prior to being elected to Congress in 1992, he served as the state’s governor for eight years. He is being mentioned as a potential candidate for the US Senate against Joe Biden’s son, Beau, next year. Castle has been ahead in the polling. Delaware is a state dominated by New Castle County, which is effectively part of suburban Philadelphia. The state recently has been reliably Democratic giving comfortable margins to the Democrats for president since 1992. Castle’s record has been moderate and perhaps slightly more left than right. The League of Conservation voters gives Castle high ratings.

2008: Castle (R) 61%, Nagel (D) 38%; Obama 62%, McCain 37%
2006: Castle (R) 57%, Spivack (D) 39%
2004: Castle (R) 69%, Donnelly (D) 30%; Bush 46%, Kerry 53%

Kirk, IL.10

Mark Kirk represents a suburban Chicago district along the north shore of Lake Michigan. Kirk is likely to run for the US Senate next year and runs well in the polls in Obama’s home state. The north shore suburbs have been trending against the GOP since the 1990’s and both Kerry and Obama won Illinois 10–Obama in a home state blowout. The Chicago suburbs are not the same place they were in 1964 when the suburban “collar” counties stuck with Goldwater in the Johnson landslide–including local resident at the time and “Goldwater Girl” Hillary Rodham. According to the National Journal, Kirk’s voting record is middle-of-the-road: slightly right on economic issues and slightly left on social issues. He has high ratings from the League of Conservation voters.

2008: Kirk (R) 53%, Seals (D) 47%; Obama 61%, McCain 38%
2006: Kirk (R) 53%, Seals (D) 47%
2004: Kirk (R) 64%, Goodman (D) 36%; Kerry 53%, Bush 47%

McHugh, NY 23

Obama nominated New York Congressman John McHugh to be Secretary of the Army and he is awaiting Senate confirmation. McHugh has had a clearly right-of-center voting record but is generally considered a moderate. He has high ratings from the League of Conservation Voters. McHugh has had no problem at the polls even as his district was going for Obama. In a more normal political year, the district can be expected to go Republican at the presidential level. McHugh is the only congressman of the 8 defecting Republicans whose district is not suburban–it is rural and small city in the far north of upstate New York.

2008: McHugh (R) 65%, Oot (D) 35%; Obama (D-WF) 52%, McCain (R-C) 47%
2006: McHugh (R-Ind-C) 63%, Johnson (D-WF) 37%
2004: McHugh (R-Ind-C) 71%, Johnson (D) 29%; Bush (R-C) 51%, Kerry (D-WF) 47%

Lance, NJ.7

Leonard Lance was elected to Congress in 2008. He represents a suburban New Jersey district that runs across northern New Jersey from almost the Newark Airport on the east to just across the Delaware River from the Leigh Valley area of Pennsylvania on the west. The district was designed to be Republican, which explains its contorted boundaries. Even with these boundaries, former Congressman Mike Ferguson only barely held on to the district in 2006 and the district went narrowly for Obama in 2008. Against Ferguson’s 2006 opponent, Lance had an easier time, running well ahead of McCain. As a newly elected member of Congress, Lance has not yet established a record.

2008: Lance (R) 50%, Stender 42%; Obama (D) 50%, McCain (R) 49%
2006: Ferguson (R) 49%, Stender (D) 48%
2004: Ferguson (R) 57%, Brozak (D) 42%; Bush (R) 53%, Kerry (D) 47%

LoBiondo, NJ.2

Frank LoBiondo represents a south Jersey district that includes Atlantic City, exurban areas near Philadelphia, some small industrial cities and agricultural areas. The district went for Gore and Obama by about the same nearly 10% margin but Bush managed to eek out a win over Kerry in 2004. LoBiondo has had little trouble holding this marginal district. According to the National Journal, LoBiondo has had a generally moderate voting record more conservative on social issues than on economic issues. LoBiondo has high ratings from the League of Conservation voters.

2008: LoBiondo 59%, Kurkowski (D) 39%; Obama (D) 54%, McCain (R) 45%
2006: LoBiondo (R) 62%, Thomas-Hughes (D) 36%
2004: LoBiondo (R) 65%, Robb 33%; Bush (R) 50%, Kerry (D) 49%

Smith, NJ.4

Chris Smith is the only one of the eight who represents a district that John McCain won. Smith was elected to Congress in 1980 with prior experience as the Executive Director of New Jersey Right to Life. His record is generally moderate but more conservative on social issues. Smith has long had high ratings from the League of Conservation Voters. The district straddles the invisible line between north Jersey (which watches New York television) and south Jersey (which watches Philadelphia television). It is getting more distant suburban growth (exurban) from both Philadelphia and New York, which probably explains why it is, rare for the northeast, trending Republican.

2008: Smith (R) 66%, Zeitz (D) 33%, McCain (R) 52%, Obama (D) 47%
2006: Smith (R) 66%, Gay (D) 33%
2004: Smith (R) 67%, Vasquez (D) 32%, Bush (R) 56%, Kerry (D) 44%

(The information above comes from Congressional Quarterly and the Michael Barone’s Almanac of American Politics)

Brent Boger
Washougal, WA

I would like to add to Brent’s analysis that European countries that jumped headlong into such “Green” legislation years before we in the Unites States have are seeing the folly of their ways. An April 9, 2007 Washington Post article, Europe’s Problems Color U.S. Plans to Curb Carbon Gases outlines the negative affect such plans had on European Country’s.

A brochure has been assembled outlining the negative impact on Jobs such moves has had in Europe and is available in a pdf file HERE.

Our Representatives should have been aware of such economic affects before they voted for such a piece of legislation. I will be curious to see how, if at all, each justifies their YES vote on such a monstrous bill.

June 26, 2009

Baird Sells Out Constituents….. Again

by lewwaters

Brian Baird 1
Brian Baird, six term Representative from Washington States Third Congressional District and author of the infamous “72-Hour Rule” has once again cast a YES vote for a massive bill, without even reading it fully or studying it.

Baird says, “Our votes have consequences. My congressional colleagues and I owe it to both our constituents and to this institution to know what it is we are voting for.”

With his YES vote on the massive “Stimulus Bill” earlier and now voting YES on the Cap & Trade Bill, which received a 300 page amendment in the final hours, raising the number of pages in it to over 1200, why does he continue to vote against his own words?

By his own claims, if he has not had adequate time to study such a bill that will have dire consequences on America and his Washington State constituents, why in the hell does he continue to vote YES!

In selling us out, he explains it away as he gained concessions on use of dead and diseased trees to be used for energy in what is known as “bio-mass.”

Baird then says, “It’s not my way of approaching this problem if I was given the choice.”

What does he mean by “if I was given the choice?” Isn’t voting NO a choice and one that should be used?

He goes on to say, “With the Earth heating up and oceans becoming more acidic, ‘Inaction is not a starter.’”

With all due respect, Representative, BULLSHIT!

Why does he continue to tout this canard when there is ample evidence coming out every day that the earth is not warming up and is actually in a cooling stage?

We know we can no longer count on the state owned media to publish factual matters when it comes to Democrats selling America down the drain, so we often have to turn to publications such as the Wall Street Journal and foreign media to get some truth. The Wall Street Journal has been doing an excellent job covering such matters as The Climate Change Climate Change where Kimberly Strassel let’s us know, “The number of skeptics is swelling everywhere.”

We also have the Investors Business Daily in what they refer to now as Carbongate informing us of the Environmental Protection Agency actually suppressing a report from the Competitive Enterprise Institute that shows how this heavy taxation on American Citizens will cause much damage and how the earths temperature has actually been cooling for the last decade.

Going back to the March 9, 2009 Wall Street Journal, we find an article Who Pays for Cap and Trade?

Who pays? How about the 95% that were promised a tax cut during the 2008 campaign by the current resident of the White House?

Supporters of this disastrous bill brag about how it will create jobs. But, where, China?

A report out of Spain, who jumped heavily into the “Green Jobs” canard years ago, tells us that 9 jobs are lost for every 4 created.

The report may be seen HERE.

House Republicans tried in vain to amend this largest tax increase in our history to suspend it should it prove as harmful as we know it will be, all denied by the Socialist Democrat Cabal in control of the House.

Previously, another House Democrat, Representative John Dingell of Michigan admitted to the nation, “Nobody in this country realizes that cap and trade is a tax, and it’s a great big one.”

Is Brian Baird unaware of that too?

At a time that unemployment is reaching its highest in several decades and Baird’s constituents are hurting all over the Third Congressional District, and the rest of America, shouldn’t we have a Representative who actually places us first, over special interest deals made in smoke-filled back rooms?

Baird has proven himself to be no friend to Washingtonians once again.

We now have two really good candidates filing to unseat Baird, Jon Russell and David Castillo.

I fully expect to see more in the weeks and months ahead, but only time will tell.

What I do know is it is time for Baird to go. He has gotten too comfortable off of our backs and now that he has once again sold us out for special interests, we need a Representative that will actually represent us in Washington D.C.

A note to Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell. We are watching and should you rubber stamp this massive tax increase, your seats in the Senate will become very precarious as well.

In closing, I’d like to bid goodbye to Washington State Representative for the Eighth District, Dave Reichert, who crossed the aisle and joined in with the Socialist Democrat cabal in rubber stamping this monstrosity of a tax increase.

I hope you enjoyed your time in the House.

Washington residents, it has come time to take the country back.

June 26, 2009

Numbers Of Climate Change Skeptics Swelling!

by lewwaters

As Obama and his Democrat cabal work to Rahm through the heavily flawed Cap & Trade Bill, aka Waxman Malarkey, other countries that were pushing for similar legislation have backed away from similar laws.

Today’s Wall Street Journal Online has an article, The Climate Change Climate Change detailing others growing skepticism over the claims of man-made Climate Change.

From the article we see,

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as “deniers.” The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country’s new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country’s weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. — 13 times the number who authored the U.N.’s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world’s first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak “frankly” of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming “the worst scientific scandal in history.” Norway’s Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the “new religion.” A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton’s Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists’ open letter.)

What is driving this “collapse of consensus?”


June 25, 2009

Meet Charlie Stemper

by lewwaters

NOTE: The following is not an endorsement of Mr. Stemper at this time. I post this to let readers know he is running for Mayor of Vancouver and how they may contact him to find out more about him.

Meet Charlie Stemper

Who is Charlie Stemper? First and Foremost, I am not a Power Hungry Career Politician. I am like you a Concerned Citizen who would like to return to you, the people of Vancouver, a voice in how our city is run. I also want all citizens to have a voice in how and why taxes levied and how and why they are spent.

I grew up in Chicago, Illinois. Although the draft had ended, I did, upon graduating from high school join the United States Army because I felt obligated to serve my country. After completing my tour of duty where I specialized in financing, I was employed by United Airlines where I began a 35-year career in United’s Customer Services Department. In the late ‘60’s United Air Lines transferred me to San Francisco. While in the San Francisco area and employed by United Airlines, I decided to further my education. In my off duty hours I attended San Mateo Community College and San Jose State. Rising through the Ranks of United Airlines Customer Service Department, I was in 1989 transferred to United’s Hub in Portland, Oregon where I served as Customer Service Director. I retired from United Airlines 1997.

Upon arriving in the beautiful Pacific Northwest my wife, Donna and I settled in Vancouver where I became active a community member. Currently I am the president of the Marion Neighborhood Association, President of the United Airlines Retirees (Portland/Vancouver Chapter) and an active member and officer of the Knights of Columbus of the Holy Redeemer Parish in Vancouver. I have served on the Mill Plain Safety Corridor Steering Committee, helped host Neighborhood Associations’ Light Rail Forums, and frequently testify at the Library Board of Trustees, Park and Recreation Committee and Vancouver City Council Meetings.

Why am I running for Mayor? I am concerned that many of Vancouver’s Citizens are, at the expense of Downtown Redevelopment being taxed out of their homes. To correct this injustice I will when elected work hard to:

· End the expensive current City Council “Portland Envy Syndrome”,
· Eliminate negotiated contracting and return to the open bid process,
· Put a stop to Smoke Filled Backroom deals that “gives away”, to developers, publicly owned property.
· Use some of your hard earned tax dollars to maintain and develop neglecting areas of the city that are outside the “Down Town” area.
· Reduce taxes
· Prioritize Spending and Balance the Budget.

“To achieve our goals and objectives I will need your vote and financial support”

· Please Contact me with your questions, issues and concerns
· I am available to speak to you, your group or organization
Contact me at

360 823 9202 or

June 23, 2009

As Unemployment Edges Up, Democrats Desire New ‘Guest Worker’ Program

by lewwaters

Obama & ReidHardly a day goes by that we don’t hear either the new president or another top Democrat telling us how the economy is in crisis and more American citizens are unemployed. B HO himself has even come out now saying, “People are going through a very tough time right now and I don’t expect them to be satisfied” as he expresses unease over the poor results of the $787 billion economic stimulus he rammed through Congress.

Unemployment in the United States is reaching levels not seen in decades as Republicans remind us that nearly 3 million jobs have been lost this year. House Republican leader John Boehner says,

The president did not lay out a clear path for how his administration will keep its promise to create jobs for middle-class families and small businesses.”

How could he, Representative Boehner? Democrats ensured not even their own party members had time to read the massive spending bill before voting on it.

As we look out across America we can see that we are falling on rough times as another policy of the newly elected Poseur in Chief closed or will pull franchises of nearly 3,000 Auto Dealers.

Democrats successfully took control of both the House and Senate in the 2000 elections by demeaning the economy then, bashing President Bush, his policies and the Republican Party. Their party slogan was “A New Direction For America.”

Obama ran in 2008 and captured the White House by the same platform promising “Hope and change.” We were led to believe that they and only they could correct what they said was the worst economy we have seen in decades.

Looking back at Unemployment Rates we see that during the Bush years, unemployment never exceeded 6%. Democrats cried that was unacceptable and a “New Direction” was needed.

Five months into their “New Direction” we see 9.4% unemployment as a national average with several states already exceeding the double-digit mark. Looking at the chart linked above, unemployment jumped more than a full percent in 2008, the year the Democrats pushed through their long desired minimum wage increase.

The closest jump to it was immediately after the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001.

Given the above it is with total dismay and utter disbelief that I read Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants to enact a new guest worker program as part of a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

During the campaign in 2008, Obama led Latino’s & Illegals to believe He would grant some sort of amnesty to those in our country Illegally.

Speaking before the National Council of La Raza, Obama said,

Yes, they broke the law. And we should not excuse that. We should require them to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for citizenship – behind those who came here legally. But we cannot – and should not – deport 12 million people.”

And now we have Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, another top Democrat, advocating not only a “sweeping comprehensive bill that will include not only amnesty for illegal aliens,” but also a “decent guest-worker program.”

While Democrats show concern for “bringing 11 million people out of the shadows,” what about the 15 million American Citizens currently without jobs?

What do Democrats propose for us? We are encouraged to “volunteer” ourselves under Obama’s United We Serve program. We are being encouraged to work for the state for free while they desire to bring more immigrants into the country, who will be paid money!

Obama sent out an email announcing his Volunteer Program saying,

Last week, I announced United We Serve – a nationwide call to service challenging you and all Americans to volunteer this summer and be part of building a new foundation for America.”

And when I say “all,” I mean everyone – young and old, from every background, all across the country. We need individuals, community organizations, corporations, foundations, and our government to be part of this effort.”

I find it unacceptable that when taxpayers’ unemployment is approaching record highs, we should expect citizens and taxpayers to volunteer and go without while bringing in foreign workers to fill jobs and be paid!

I could support a decent guest worker program if we enjoyed very small unemployment rates, but when our unemployment rate is rapidly exceeding double digits, does it make sense to dump on the citizens, the very voters who elected these clowns and instead bring more people from foreign countries to work?

It doesn’t make sense to me.

Sometimes, I wonder just whose side Democrats are really on.

June 23, 2009

Clark County to Host 2010 Washington State Republican Convention

by lewwaters

Clark County to Host 2010 Washington State Republican Convention

The Washington State Republican Party (WSRP) has selected Clark County as the site for the 2010 Republican State Convention. The Clark County Republican Party and the Southwest Washington Convention and Visitors Bureau announced on Tuesday that the Convention is coming to Vancouver next year.

“We are thrilled,” said Ryan Hart, Chairman of the Clark County Republican Party.

“This is really big. Not just for the local Republican Party, but for all of Clark County,” Hart said. The 2010 Convention is expected to be the largest convention ever held in Vancouver.

This is also the first time in history the Washington State Republican Party has held its Convention in Vancouver.

Hart said he has wanted to see Vancouver host the convention for more than a decade. “In 1998 I attended a State Convention in Kennewick, and that’s when I first thought, ‘why not Vancouver?'” He said.

Earlier this year, Hart began working with Republican State Committeeman, Brent Boger, and the Southwest Washington Convention and Visitors Bureau to put together a formal bid for the 2010 Convention. A final bid was submitted to the State Party by the Clark County Republican Party and Convention Bureau last week. The WSRP Event Site Selection Committee voted unanimously to award Clark County as the Convention site.

“This is a first for Clark County, the City of Vancouver, and the Clark County Republican Party,” Hart said. “I want to thank Rosemary Cooke of the Convention Bureau for helping us land this history-making event”

Clark County has not hosted such a convention since back in 1978, Hart learned.

The Convention dates are June 10 – 12, 2010.

June 22, 2009

Washington and Oregon, You Make No Sense About Suicide

by lewwaters

It was with much fanfare that proponents for Oregon and Washington States Assisted Suicide Law boasted about gaining voter approval of the measures.

Oregon was the first to pass such a measure in October 1997 with challenges making it to the United States Supreme Court, who gave the practice the SCOTUS stamp of approval in January 2006.

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor even likened the measure to Court mandated Executions of criminals when she pointed out “doctors participate in the administration of lethal injections to death row inmates.”

In November 2008, Washington State followed suit when voters approved Initiative 1000 by a margin of 59% to 41%, legalizing Assisted Suicide in our state now too.

Oregon and Washington State remain the only two states in the country that have declared Assisted Suicide legal.

Given that suicide has been embraced now by the neighboring states, it was with some surprise I read the article appearing in the June 21, 2009 Columbian newspaper, I-5 traffic resumes after police take man into custody.

Portland Oregon’s KGW 8 ran the incident as Suicidal man with bow and arrow closes I-5 bridge for hours.

For those who do not know, the I-5 Bridge mentioned is the main arterial between the two states, crossing the Columbia River between Portland Oregon and Vancouver Washington.

As the articles state, bridge traffic was stopped for 4 hours while Police and Fire Rescue personnel dealt with the unidentified man until they convinced him to surrender, holding him for mental health evaluation.

I cannot applaud the actions of Emergency Workers enough in preventing this man from committing Suicide.

But, I am left with a quandary as to why do we decide to show such care and concern over an obviously depressed and despondent person considering ending their life, yet pass a law legalizing other people who are also despondent and depressed in ending their life.

Many say suicide attempts are actually a despondent person reaching out, seeking some compassion, some attention and they don’t really seriously desire to end their lives. How do we know that those choosing Assisted Suicide weren’t also despondent, reaching out due to the pain of hearing a doctor say they were terminal and instead of true compassion, heard only the “Death With Dignity” crowd crying out “jump, jump, jump?”

Yes, Assisted Suicide is supposed to be only for those who are terminally ill, but when someone is considering suicide on a bridge or at home, do we know they too aren’t also terminally ill and wish to end their life prematurely due to that reason?

Personally, I voted against Initiative 1000, as I do not believe suicide is an appropriate answer for any reason. Obviously, the majority of voters disagreed with me. Even the Columbian, the newspaper reporting on the effort to save the suicidal man yesterday, endorsed passage of Initiative 1000 in October 2008.

Maybe I’m just a simple minded old man, but I simply can’t grasp how people, voters, who vote to legalize, and even encourage Assisted Suicide, justify shutting down the main arterial for the whole west coast for 4 hours to talk another out of ending his life prematurely.

With the majority seeming to think suicide is now a viable means to deal with life’s worst troubles, does it really make sense for them to also call for compassion for others choosing suicide as well? Is this consistency?

Perhaps this incident will plant a seed in voter’s minds that they were misled last year and the left’s continuing culture of death will begin coming to a halt.

Suicide is a very permanent solution to what is often only a temporary problem. Even the terminally ill can still contribute to their loved ones and society.

If we can justify shutting down the west coast of the United States for 4 hours to help a despondent person choose life, surely we can reach out to those who have been convinced their lives have become meaningless and that death is their best answer.

Death comes soon enough, my friends. I can’t see hurrying it along.

June 19, 2009

Iraq Was A Just War

by lewwaters

Saddam 01An article appearing in the Australian, written by an Iraqi citizen, Omar Fadhil Al-Nidawi, who along with his brother Mohammed run the weblog Iraq the Model.

Iraq was a just war

Omar Fadhil Al-Nidawi | June 02, 2009

THE war in Iraq is officially moving to an end. Six years after Saddam Hussein’s regime was toppled, several coalition members have ended their missions in Iraq – including Australia, which pulled out its troops 12 months ago – and the US is preparing to wrap up its military involvement in the country.

Many still ask: Was it worth it?

If we examine the question from an American, British or Australian perspective, then it would be difficult to present an answer that could convince all critics. For the coalition members this was a war of opportunity, not a war of necessity. Going to war or not was never an issue that could affect the existence of a coalition member, nor was winning or losing.

For Iraq and its people however, this war was the beginning of a struggle for rebirth, a very difficult but necessary one, for sure.

People of my generation who were born in democracies may take the freedom they enjoy for granted. This is certainly not the case for me or my people. I was born a decade after the murderous Ba’ath Party grabbed power in Baghdad in the sinister coup of July 1968. To us, the war brought an end to that 35-year-long nightmare and the beginning of an era of freedom, thanks to our friends in the coalition.

For me and many Iraqis, it was certainly worth it. Life is better today than it was before 2003. That is even though we were on the receiving end of this war in all its phases, from initial invasion through the bloody sectarian violence and terror that paralysed the country for years. Despite the high price in blood, today is brighter than yesterday. Above all, we have hope – something we did not have under Saddam’s dictatorship – that tomorrow will be even brighter.

Excerpt, Read the rest HERE

The Iraqi people have discovered what all too many Americans seem to have forgotten, that freedom isn’t free and it comes at a high price.

The Iraqi’s now have a strong foothold in self-determination and setting their country on a path they see fit to.

Americans and coalition forces paid a price for their freedom and the Iraqi’s paid an even higher price. Mistakes were made and heavy opposition ensued. Yet, as Omar shows, freedom persevered and Iraq is now on its way to being the model for the rest of the Middle East.

Nowhere is this seen any better than in Iran, where disillusioned protesters take to the streets demanding a full and proper vote for president, in spite of beatings, mayhem and murder by Iranian Officials and their supporters.

Other nations have spoken out against the government’s treatment of Iranian citizens, while our own newly elected president turns his head away from the struggle.

As American and Coalition forces begin or continue their withdrawals from Iraq, I’d like to point out that there is not a single drop of Iraqi oil being carried out by them. All the cries of “No Blood For Oil,” accusing President Bush of “stealing their oil” were erroneous and what oil we do receive from the Iraqi’s in the future will be obtained legally and by payment.

As Socialism is thrust upon the American citizens, I hope our own citizens wake up and see what Iraqi’s were willing to pay to gain it and instead of fighting to get our own back years from now, help us keep it today.

Bush Was Right

June 19, 2009

They Call Me Senator!

by lewwaters

60sb Seeing a recent exchange between California Senator Barbara Boxer and Army Brigadier General Michael Walsh, I recalled a single line from the 1967 movie, “In The Heat Of The Night,” starring Sidney Portier and Rod Steiger.

Steiger, playing a Southern Sheriff in the waning days of Southern Segregation, with a murder on his hands, suspecting Portier, playing Virgil Tibbs, who the Sheriff doesn’t realize is a Philadelphia Police Detective.

Upon learning that, Sheriff Gillepsie asks Portier, “what do they call you up there?” This elicits the indignant reply of, “They call me Mr. Tibbs.”

Senator Boxer now treats us to her own Virgil Tibbs moment as she makes a request of the General she is questioning, who has just called her “Ma’am,” “Do me a favor. Could say ‘senator’ instead of ‘ma’am?’ It’s just a thing, I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it, yes, thank you.”

I always thought referring to a female as “Ma’am” was respectful and in the Military, proper etiquette for superior officers or elected officials. Males are referred to as “Sir,” a similar title of respect.

It is understood that Mrs. (oops) Ms. Boxer “worked hard” to get where she is and who all she stepped on getting there is unknown. But, does she think the Brigadier General didn’t work even harder to get where he is?

Does she forget that as an elected official, she works for us, the people? She seems to wear the title of “Senator” as one would see “Queen,” “Duchess” or even “Princess,” a sign of Royalty, not a servant of the people.

Titles seem to be very important to the Socialist Demokrats, for some reason, they wear them as a crown or tiara. Less important to them seems to be what is best for the country.

Mrs. (oops) Ms. Boxer, rated as one of the top 24 House members implicated in the 1992 House Banking Scandal, also did not seem to extend the “courtesy’ she requested to former Secretary of State Condolezza Rice as she referred to Secretary Rice as “Ma’am” three times in a hearing questioning her and as she dressed Secretary Rice down for being a childless woman.

Condolezza Rice too has worked very hard to arrive where she did and unlike Mrs. (oops) Ms. Boxer, had to overcome racial prejudice that Boxer can only give lip service too.

Given Boxer’s long and lengthy leftist history of undermining the very fabric of our nation, I can think of a title better suited to her, that I’ll leave to your imaginations.

Perhaps, had she shown a little respect for the General and made such a polite request in private instead of in Committee Chambers before the world to see her treating such a dignified General Officer this way, he would have complied and we would not see her mounting her broom to fly off.

Babs, ‘Ma’am,’ we’ve worked long and hard too to make America the shining beacon of freedom around the world and one of the more prosperous nations history has known. We’d greatly appreciate if you’d stop trying to destroy that. It’s just a “thing” with us, too.

June 15, 2009

Castillo For Congress, 3rd District, Washington State

by lewwaters

David CastilloBrian Baird, move over, you are soon to meet your match in David Castillo, Republican running to unseat you in Washington State’s 3rd Congressional District.

I had the honor of personally meeting David Castillo Saturday, June 13 and having the chance to speak with him personally and get to hear where he stands on issues. Needless to say, I was impressed and believe me, I am a hard one to impress.

David comes from a background, not of privilege, but hard work. He grew up as the only son of a single Mom with 3 sisters. Money was tight, as it was for many of us. His Mom and grandparents taught him the value of hard work, to aspire to better things than accepting or relying on government handouts, that education was key to any success he would find in life and that America is a great nation with great possibilities for those who are willing to work hard.

He learned those lessons well.

He joined the United States Navy in 1986, spending 4 years as an enlisted man with Helicopter Anti-Submarine Squadron SIX in San Diego. As a former United States Army helicopter Crew Chief/Mechanic myself, I can verify the hard work and tedious nature of Helicopters and what an important function they have with our Armed Services.

Receiving an NROTC scholarship in 1989, he attended the University of Washington where he earned a Bachelors Degree in Political Science, moving on to earn his Masters Degree in Organizational Leadership from Gonzaga University.

David is a Veteran of Operation Earnest Will, when President Reagan assigned the United States Navy to escort and protect Kuwaiti Oil Tankers from Iranian attack as they steamed through the Persian Gulf during the Iran/Iraq War on the 1980’s.

A native Washingtonian, born in Centralia, he served various posts in our State Legislature including as Chief of Staff to the House Republican Caucus and as Legislative Assistant. He also served at the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Labor and was Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Department of Veterans Affairs under President Bush.

He recognizes that in today’s world, there exist some extremely evil people who wish only to kill Americans and because of that, we must remain vigilant. To bring normalcy to Afghanistan, he feels we must remain on the offensive, push back the Taliban and that establishing a friendly government is imperative.

David is extremely concerned over the growing threat of nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran and North Korea and their potential to thrust the world into a nuclear war and that Iran’s president Ahmadinejad wants to do just what he says he wants to do – wipe Israel off the map. Continuing sanctions against Iran, insisting on inspectors, and continuing to build up US and Israeli missile defenses is a better defense than the empty platitudes currently being sent, which are ignored.

As China is North Korea’s only real trading partner, they must be encouraged to engage with North Korea in ending their quest for nuclear weaponry.

David supports ending earmarks along with scrapping the current tax system in favor of a more flat tax, of some sort. Lowering corporate taxes and reducing payroll taxes will lead to much needed job creation in our country and Washington State. Fraud, waste, and abuse in the Federal budget must be addressed and ended to bring us back to fiscal sanity.

Don’t forget that current Representative, Brian Baird touts his proposed 72-hour public review period for major spending legislation, yet when the recent stimulus plan was presented to the House with mere hours to review it, Baird voted yes and like others, did not even read it!

And now, we hear Vice President Biden come out and say, “everyone guessed wrong.”

Being a Financial Advisor with Edward Jones Investments, David Castillo wouldn’t necessarily have made a simple “guess” in such an important matter, following every other Republican in the House who voted NO on such a massive bill without any knowledge of what was in it.

David sees that the safety of the citizens is the paramount duty of government and the security of our borders is priority one. Then, we can decide appropriate steps that should be taken in the matter of Illegal immigrants. He has some ideas in dealing with this and is open to listening to any legitimate ideas others may have. But first, “our borders must be secured,” he says.

Asked about more specific steps he would take, Castillo said, “I would consider requiring that all businesses use the E-Verify system. It is free to them and is not labor intensive.”

A man of varied heritage who knows how it is when money is tight and “church and friends were a vital resource,” David Castillo is ready to give Washington States Third Congressional District “A new voice. A voice for people who believe that government is growing too big and taxes are too high. A voice for people who believe that America remains an exceptional country and that our best days lie ahead.”

He would like to “ensure that our children and grandchildren have the same opportunity to succeed that he had; to work to return fiscal sanity and the concept of savings to the US Congress; and to help create a climate in which businesses can thrive, succeed, and grow.”

Washingtonians, please join with me in supporting this fine man in his run for the US Congress. In these troubled times, his is a new voice with sound ideas that can only help keep America safe, prosperous and free.

Support and vote for David Castillo, Washington States Third Congressional District. Donations to his campaign may be made online at the link provided or sent to “Castillo for Congress, PO Box 247, East Olympia, WA 98540.”

Let’s all get behind David Castillo, for the betterment of Washington State and America.

June 9, 2009

Alycia Nipp’s Murderer Pleads Guilty

by lewwaters


The June 9, 2009 Columbian reports that Darrin E. Sanford, the accused murderer of 13 year-old Alycia Nipp, pled guilty and finally admitted what the community pretty much knew all along, that he had raped and then murdered the child.

Sex offender pleads guilty to girl’s murder

Pleading guilty removes the death penalty from case and Sanford will now spend the rest of his life imprisoned, without any possibility of parole.

Clark County Prosecutor Art Curtis agreed not to seek the death penalty in exchange for the plea of guilty to aggravated first-degree murder. Curtis, in a prepared statement, said he had discussed the plea with Alycia’s family and they agreed, seeing it is the best way to go and avoiding a lengthy trial and endless appeals awaiting execution.

The February 2009 murder drew national attention in mid-March when CNN picked up the story of this heinous murder.

Clark County Conservative contacted Washington State Representatives about this murder and the states lack of protecting our children. Senator Don Benton and Representative Ed Orcutt replied and led an effort at strengthening the laws to keep these Level III sex offenders, the ones deemed most likely to repeat, off of our streets and away from our children.

Not one of the Clark County Democrats responded to our call for strengthening the laws. Jim Moeller and Jim Jacks represent the 49th Legislative District where Alycia and her family live and where she was murdered.

Sadly, both Benton and Orcutt met stiff opposition and Clark County began seeing more of these Level III Sex Offenders appear on our streets, claiming ‘homeless’ and with only a GPS tracking device, which operates on a 5-minute delay, strapped to their ankle.

Sanford too wore such a device that placed him at the scene of Alycia’s murder at the time she murdered, but she still was murdered. The GPS device only can place a criminal at the scene of the crime after a child is harmed or killed, doing nothing to protect a child.

We at Clark County Conservative have not given up the fight to keep these monsters away from our children and off of our streets and will continue to demand our Representatives in Olympia pass stronger legislation in dealing with them.

My sympathies still remain with Alycia’s family. We hope this plea gives them some finality and they may one day heal from the heinous loss of such a beautiful child.

As the father of two lovely daughters from my first marriage and two more beautiful daughters from my wife’s first marriage, I can only imagine the pain they must feel.

We pray that our elected officials in Olympia see that pain and finally take strong measure to make every that no other family must feel it also.

June 4, 2009

3 Month Delay In Charging Washington State Commissioner In Brutal Beating

by lewwaters

Joseph Hooks, a Seattle city employee and a commissioner on the Washington state Commission on African American Affairs has been charged in the brutal beating of Michael McBain, who was entering an elevator to his Condo last St. Patricks Day.

Hooks, who initially denied even being in the building, claims it was “self defense” alleging McBain “pushed him and called him names.”

McBain and witnesses deny any such exchange occurred adding, “There was a big guy standing there, sort of blocking the door. And I guess I must have brushed past him.”

Story at KOMO News

Seattle Police claim the 3-month delay had “nothing to do with his professional life” as Seattle City employee or Commissioner on Washington State Commission on African American Affairs.

According to witnesses, the attack occurred as McBain was attempting to get past Hooks into an elevator to go home to his Condo upstairs. Hooks was a guest at a party within the building.

A relative of Hooks had previously filed for a protective order against him, fearing he would physically hurt her.

Seattle Police claim the 3-month delay was to “accumulate more compelling evidence.”

Hooks has been charged with “second degree assault.” Alex Fryer, spokesman for Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, said the charge has not prompted Hooks to be placed on leave from his job.

Hooks’ bio list him as member of the Civil Rights and Criminal Justice Subcommittee as well as having served on the staff of two members of the Washington State Democratic Congressional Delegation for over 5 years, Adam Smith and Norm Dicks.

Michael McBain is a white Medical Student.

June 3, 2009

Obama ‘Deeply Saddened,’ …………. Finally

by lewwaters

It took nearly 3 days and many expressions of outrage from supporters of the Troops, but the bama finally broke his silence on the heinous murder of Pvt. William Long and the wounding of Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula outside the recruiters office in Little Rock Arkansas.

Said the bama,

“I am deeply saddened by this senseless act of violence against two brave young soldiers who were doing their part to strengthen our armed forces and keep our country safe. I would like to wish Quinton Ezeagwula a speedy recovery, and to offer my condolences and prayers to William Long’s family as they mourn the loss of their son.”

In contrast, within hours, not nearly three days, of the heinous murder of abortion doctor George Tiller on Sunday, the bama expressed,

“I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence.”

Would those “difficult issues” be a Newly converted Black Muslims hatred of the United States Army and any who serve in it?

Considering there appears to have been additional attacks planned on our Soldiers, who are unarmed within the U.S. or at Recruitment Offices, being “deeply saddened” seems a tad bit inadequate.

Better than nothing, though.

Will it defuse the mass criticism of his prior silence?

June 1, 2009

Debbie Peterson Adds Her Support To Commissioner Mielke

by lewwaters

Debbie Peterson, Republican Candidate against Democrat Jim Jacks in last years election for hte 49th Legislative District Position One, joins in with Nancy De Leo in support of Clark County Commissioner, Tom Mielke.

Ms. Peterson says:

My thoughts: The illegal alien issue is a concern for all Americans who believe that sovereign nations have a right to protect their borders. For those who do not subscribe to that philosophy, they must then, by default, believe that America does not have a right to its own sovereignty. These two diametrically opposing views reach to the core of how America defines itself. It very well may be that this is the lynch pin debate that serves as the platform and will drive the outcome of many of our state/national debates.* The United States Constitution vests sovereignty in the Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court, the President, the fifty States, and ultimately, in We the People (Ted Cruz). The illegal alien undermines our sovereignty at every level. All countries, including our own, make provisions for securing their borders. There is an unspoken rationality for it, but there is also, in our U.S. Constitution, an implied demand for it.

Unfortunately, our U.S. Congressmen/women have chosen to usurp their powers. They ignore their primary charge, which is, according to the U.S. Constitution, to defend the citizens of this country. Our elected officials cower under the fear of being called racists, cower under the fear of losing campaign contributions, cower under the fear of losing elections, and in the meantime we are losing America. U.S. Congressmen/women by their abdication of Art.4, Sect.4, have thrown this extremely serious policy issue onto the states. Look at California. One year ago, 33 hospitals had closed under the burgeoning weight of illegal alien medical care. California’s deficits are staggering. People are hemorrhaging to other states as they see services decline and school’s fail (in spite of high teacher salaries, low classroom size, and school funding increases of nearly 10 percent between the 2003-04 and 2006-07 school years, while student enrollment declined by more than 30,000.)(1) In part, California’s politicians’ open border policy has crippled its government, rendering it impotent in its ability to protect the very people for whom they pledged to serve. They lied.

Commissioner Mielke is accurate, when he acknowledges the illegal alien problem. To assume it does not exist in Clark County is naïve. To assume that it will not affect our services, schools, and law enforcement in this community is a costly assumption, as Californians can attest to. Commissioner Mielke is doing what most politicians will not do. He is applying the scientific process to social issues. It is empiricism and not racism that is motivating his statements. Mr. Mielke understands the problem, has looked at statewide data, and has arrived at a conclusion, driven by the data. His policy suggestion was inevitable, given the data. The fact that he actually has the nerve to voice it, and attempt policy, to correct it, is refreshing. Unfortunately, “policy as usual” is driven by the politics, not by the data and not by what is best for citizens. These politically correct policies are almost always detrimental to American culture and the community.

What a refreshing change to have policy driven by facts. What a refreshing change to have a public servant who is actually serving us, and has taken up the banner of the tax payers’ plight.

*November 2009 candidates’ policies on illegal aliens issues vis-à-vis identity theft, drugs, overcrowded jails, health care, crime, loss of citizen jobs, lowering of citizen wages, and homeland security need to be measured against this plumbline: that is, the U.S. Constitution’s, and Washington State’s constitutional (Art.1, Sect.2). support for sovereignty protection If candidate policies do not support that, they do not deserve our vote.

(1) Vicki E. Murray, Pacific Research Institute

In these times of severe economic recession and with the ever-increasing unemployment rate, rising taxes to pay for programs for those that enter our country ILLEGALLY, it is refreshing to see people speak out on this egregious usurpation of our law.

Is it really so much to ask that our laws be honored and immigrants desiring the American Dream follow our laws and enter the country LEGALLY?

Or, do we just declare the entire population of the planet Americans and bring the in excess of 5 Billion people populating the earth into America to take advantage of our safety net?

It is neither racist nor selfish to take care of our own people in need and expect others to obtain entrance LEGALLY, just as they expect of us when we travel to their countries.

June 1, 2009

Outrage Over Abortion Doc Murder, Ho Hum Over Soldiers Murder

by lewwaters

By now all know of the heinous murder of abortion doctor, George Tiller in Wichita, Kansas by a nutcase. Pro and anti-abortion people have expressed righteous anger.

Attorney General Eric Holder was quick to dispatch the U.S. Marshals Service to protect “appropriate people and facilities around the nation.”

It should be noted this is the first murder of an abortion doctor in 11 years. That neither condones nor justifies the act, just some perspective.

Those opposing abortion face a backlash of unknown proportions as pro-abortion forces now line up to take advantage of this heinous crime, which was immediately condemned by all legitimate anti-abortion protesters.

Another murder happened just today, June 1, 2009 and the disparity of outrage or national headlines screams loudly.

A United States Army Soldier was gunned down and murdered outside an Army Recruitment Office in Little Rock, Arkansas and a second wounded.

Where is the quick condemnation from the anti-war left? Where is Obama’s rapid condemnation of this heinous murder? Where is the Attorney General’s mobilization of US Marshal’s to protect Recruitment Facilities?

Recruiting Offices are not armed and not fortified as many abortion clinics are.

Is the silence because the alleged murderer this time is a recently converted Muslim?

Or, is the life of United States Soldier unimportant to the Obama agenda?

June 1, 2009

Nancy De Leo’s Response to The Mielke Comment

by lewwaters

Clark County Commissioner, Tom Mielke has come under fire from elements within our county that advocate ILLEGAL immigration. Clark County Conservative covered the unrighteous trumped up anger here.

Readers on the Columbian’s website have submitted nearly 150 comments to the original article, with the majority in support of Commissioner Mielke comment on a possible way to curb excessive spending in Clark County.

Nancy De Leo, State Committeewoman for the Clark County Republican Party issued her support of Commissioner Mielke and asks for more Clark County Citizens to stand with Commissioner Mielke and help lessen ILLEGAL aliens from gaining entitlements they are not entitled to.

Nancy’s comment:

In regards to the recent criticism of Tom Mielke…..

I am curious if those complaining are citizens of the United States. Only USA citizens have the right to PUBLICLY discuss USA polices. We are not beholden to those who do not respect our laws. By definition ‘an illegal’ does not respect the law of our country, nor do they respect the rights of their fellow countrymen who have become naturalized citizens through legal channels.

The Social Security System is ALREADY BROKEN, and I am very concerned that it will be out of money before I retire. If we continue to provide FREE services for everyone in the world, our country will be in bankruptcy like California before Obama leaves office.

In our discussions we must keep things in perspective, and not be cowed by Political Correctness.
The only way to stop the nonsense is to get involved, stay involved and help us help our fellow citizens get involved. Citizens of the United States come from all corners of the earth and are of every nationality. Good citizens stand up for what is right and what is in the interest of the SURVIVAL of the United States of America.

Nancy De Leo

Citizens of Clark County, it is not racist to expect those who come to our country to follow our laws and enter the United States LEGALLY, just as they demand of us when we enter theirs.

We need to stand with Commissioner Mielke and any other who is ready, willing and able to finally address the flood of ILLEGAL immigrants sneaking into America or over staying their Visa’s.