Archive for July, 2009

July 31, 2009

Clark Republicans vs Democrats Softball Game

by lewwaters

The Clark County Republican Party is cosponsoring a Republicans vs. Democrats charity softball game on Sunday, August 23 to benefit SHARE.

The mission of SHARE is: “to lead the hungry and homeless to self-sufficiency by providing food, shelter, housing, education and compassion through the strength of our community.”

To learn more about SHARE, please visit their website at

In this poor economy many people are struggling. We have a great opportunity as Republicans to reach out and assist those in need.

The game will be held at Memory Field which is located east of the Fort Vancouver Regional Library on Mill Plain Blvd , across the street from Hudson ‘s Bay High School in Vancouver . First pitch will be at 2:00 PM.

The teams will feature rosters of elected officials, candidates, party leaders, and local activists. Senator Joseph Zarelli, Republican Representative Ed Orcutt, Republican congressional candidate David Castillo, and 17th Legislative District candidate Brian Peck are among the many planning to play.

**Tickets for this event are available for a suggested donation of $20 to SHARE. Call Ryan Hart at (360) 904-9671 for tickets.

At a time of such political polarization in our country and community, seeing the Chairs of both party’s come together for such a charitable event is a positive step.

I hope all who can make the game will be there to see a great game and help SHARE.

July 31, 2009

Tim Leavitt Speaks Out

by lewwaters

Many in our country and even the city of Vancouver seem to have become lackadaisical in regards to voting and personally, I can’t blame them. We have become a very polarized community politically and neither major party has performed all that well in the past few years.

However, such an attitude just perpetuates the problem we complain about often.

Over on, Chief, the blog owner, displays such an attitude in a thread he put up, For Vancouver Mayor: None of the Above!!.

While I can understand such a sentiment, given that the current Mayor has led the city into severe financial difficulties, higher taxes and is hell-bent on forcing Light Rail on us, including tolls to pay for it, throwing your vote away will only secure another term for Royce Pollard.

The challengers, Charlie Stemper and Tim Leavitt met with Pollard for a Vancouver Mayoral Forum, July 28, 2009.

The Clark County Republican party sponsored event may be seen at CVTV Video if you missed the July 30 airing.

Many view the candidates as pretty much the same, with Charlie Stemper not standing much of a chance. As much as I like some of Charlie’s ideas, he had trouble articulating his message Tuesday evening. Still, many have said there is little difference between Leavitt and Pollard. To that end, Tim left the following comment on Chief’s blog,

Well…as much as I have tried to enlighten with facts (including on Clarkblog with previous posts), it appears those efforts here have been fruitless, based on the remarks posted by Chief and Waterbuffalo. I thought Chief was paying more attention than most to the ongoings of the Vancouver City Council.

Factually INCORRECT is the statement that I voted in support of a city budget last December. That budget included hammering citizens and businesses with a 20% utility tax (mind, you…during an economic recession). Those that were paying attention recall my remarks as such during our deliberations, and that the City needed to tighten it’s belt. I voted in opposition to the utility tax increase, and in opposition to the budget.

I will remind you that several years back, I voted in opposition to the sales tax increase that the incumbent pushed for, again in my comments noting that taxing isn’t always the answer to budget problems.

Several years back I fought against an effort by the incumbent to re-implement a local Business & Occupation Tax. You may remember that your current mayor was part of a city council that agreed to do away with the local B&O some dozen years back, in order to get approval from the Vancouver Mall to annex into the City. (The County doesn’t have a local B&O…so why would businesses want to come into a city and pay more taxes?). Promise made, and attempted effort to break that promise. As you might imagine, the folks at Westfield and the hundreds of businesses in the mall area were quite upset with the current mayor for pushing for a re-institution of the local B&O…feeling (rightfully so) that they had been swindled. Here they agree to annex, city agrees to drop the B&O (in order to benefit from sales tax revenues…and be a larger city), but a decade later, the same Mayor attempts to put the tax in place again!?!

In any event, I know memories can be short. Thus my attempt to remind you, as well as rebut the baseless assertion that there is no difference between me and the current mayor.

On the bridge issue, I refuse to submit to the higher-ups that we must pay tolls to get a project. If you want to roll over to tolls, then you know who to vote for.

How about this for a fresh idea: Feds pay for the bridge and immediate interchange improvements — like they should for their asset — to the tune of about $1 billion. Feds pay for the LRT — as they said they would — to the tune of about $1 billion. The remaining five interchanges are built as the money becomes available from — imagine that! Pay as you go! You see, the purpose of tolls is to have a funding source to pay for bonds for financign the whole project financed and built now. How about we do away with the tolls, and build the remaining five interchanges as cash flow — from the feds, state and local — allows? Might be another decade before they are all reconstructed, but there would be no tolls. The claim is that the bridge and LRT is necessary for the economic prosperity for our children and grandchildren and businesses. Well, what if our children and grandchildren can’t even affort to live in Vancouver and Clark County? Then, what’s the point of having a shiny new bridge and LRT? We’re following the path of another nearby large city — running local and small businesses into the ground.

How about this for a fresh idea: The largest public works project in the Pacific Northwest — projected to put thousands to work for the next decade — is a poster child for a ‘stimulus’ project!!! Obama, please send a couple of billion our way, amongst the billions of $$$ going in all directions, for this poster-child stimulus project! That is the purpose of the letter.

If what you’d like to see for our future — more taxes, tolls, and loss of local businesses and jobs — well, keep the status quo.

My experience in our community for 29 years — as a product of the Vancouver School District, as a graduate of Clark College and Washington State University, as a neighborhood association chair, as the president of my homeowners association, as president of the local chapter of the American Society of Professional Engineers, as a Board Member of the Vancouver Rotary Club, as a Board Member and Chair of the CTRAN Board, as a Vancouver Planning Commissioner, as the Director of Civil Engineering Services for a local small company (managing staff, clients and projects), as a member of the Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board (past), as a Clark College Alumni Association Board Member, as a member of the Pacific and Haagen Park Citizen Steering Committee, as a member of the joint County/City Infill Ordinance Steering Committee, as the first chair of the city’s Critical Areas Ordinance development Committee, as an alumni of the Leadership Clark County Program, and…well I guess as a city councilman for the past 6.5 years — tells me that we can do better at City Hall.

You might think I’m a novice…but then please do tell me then what other experience you deem necessary to be the Mayor of Vancouver.

I’m happy at anytime (as I’ve noted before) to answer questions you may have.


In all, I think Tim gave the best showing of him self Tuesday evening, neither displaying the arrogance of Mayor Pollard nor having trouble articulating his stance. Since I don’t live in the city, I won’t get to cast a vote for either nor will I endorse any that is up to those of you who live in the city.

But, I will remind you. Throwing away your vote out of exasperation or thinking there is no difference will just guarantee another term for Pollard.

You already know what Pollard stands for and if you desire more of the same, vote for him or throw your vote away.

On the other hand, if you feel Vancouver is ready for a change, vote accordingly and choose another Mayor.

The choice is yours to make. Make your vote count.

July 30, 2009

Brian ‘Big Brother’ Baird

by lewwaters

If you didn’t have adequate reason to vote Brian Baird out of office next year, this one should fulfill any questions you ever had as to his worthiness to represent Washington’s Third Congressional District.

Baird has introduced a new bill, H.R.3247 – “To establish a social and behavioral sciences research program at the Department of Energy, and for other purposes.”

The bill has passed out of committee already along a party line vote with no Republicans voting for it, although a couple were said to have supported it.

Masked as a study to “better understand why people make certain decisions about energy technologies in an effort to spur greater market adoption,” that “for other purposes” at the end of the title should give all of cause for concern.

Republican amendments were all voted down.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) pointed out an obvious danger in this bill with, “At some point controlling people’s behavior and social engineering becomes a threat to people’s freedom.”

As late as May 2009 Baird was saying, “Changing Consumer Behavior is Crucial to Reducing Energy Use.”

And yet, Baird joins with other Democrats in blocking tapping of our own energy resources within our own borders.

Baird, who holds a doctorate in clinical psychology, is no stranger to controlling behaviors of those who sought his help. But, do we need Washington D.C. politicians deciding what behavior we practice?

Although masked as a method to eventually reduce energy consumption, where else could it go under that “for other purposes?”

Even if it remains restricted to energy use, do we really need behavior modification as mandated by politicians, who waste more energy and tax dollars that any of us?

Do we really need another Czar overseeing behaviors?

Brian Baird no longer represents citizens in the 3rd District. He is trying to rule us. He and the rest of the dictatorial Democrat cabal in power currently.

Washingtonians, we must stand up for our freedoms and liberties that are slowly being stripped from us by an ever-growing government.

We can start next November by throwing Brian Baird and his calls for behavioral modification into the unemployment line.

UPDATE: Gary Wiram, another Third Congressional District constituent of Brian Baird, takes the congressman to task at Red County with Portland (OR) Area Radio Host Calls Baird On “Stealth Town Halls”

UPDATE: THe Oregonian ran an article addressing this, Brian Baird and the politics of behavioral change.

From that article, supposedly in humor, addressing those os us alarmed by this bill, “The first thing we need to do is send aluminum hats to people to protect them from mind rays.” He also claims our questioning and pointing out the dangers of is bill, “feeds into the paranoia that is so prevalent right now.”

Tapping the massive sources of energy we have sitting idle remains out of the question, it appears.

July 30, 2009

The Camel’s Nose Is Inside The Tent

by lewwaters

Proposition 8 Protestors

In November 1987, two Gay Activists penned an article published in a Gay Magazine titled THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA, which was essentially the outline of “a propaganda campaign to confuse and deceive the American people about their objectives.”

Tactics mentioned include “intimidation, lies, and fear to silence opposition.”

Nowhere is then seen any better than in California after passage of their Proposition 8, overturning the legislative action allowing same-sex marriage in that state.

It can also be seen quite vividly today in Washington State as a measure allowing Domestic Partnerships legal standing, laughably referred to as “Everything but marriage,” faces a challenge from Washington States Citizens.

Almost immediately after the bill was signed into law by Liberal Democrat Governor Christine Gregoire, efforts to launch a citizen initiative against the law was launched as Referendum 71, a petition drive to place a measure on the November 2009 ballot to overturn Washington’s legislatively passed Domestic Partnership Bill.

In spite of a campaign by pro-gay activists in opposition to the petition drive, enough signatures were gathered to have the initiative placed on the ballot, angering those same Gay Activists who have launched their own effort at voter intimidation by demanding they be given the names and addresses of all who signed the petition for public dissemination on a searchable site they would place on the internet. They do this under Washington States Public Disclosure Law and would be on web sites known as and

Their intent is an obvious call for harassment and intimidation of more influential people or business owners who signed the petition even though they attempt to mask their effort as a means to “Provide Washington State Voters with a way to check that the public record of their advocacy is correct.”

Can’t we already do that through the Secretary of State?

Their tactic is very reminiscent of what we saw in 2006 when a pro-gay blogger ‘outed’ former Republican Representative from Florida, Mark Foley, vowing to target more who “support anti-gay activities.” In other words, Gays who do not walk lock step with the Gay Activists.

Yesterday, November 29, a Federal Judge in Tacoma granted the request for a temporary restraining order against such release of the signature names and addresses, further angering Gay Activists, as can be seen by many comments left at the article and by a Bellingham resident’s call of “It Is Time to use Violence Against Property .”

Signers are referred to as “bigots,” “KKK members,” “cowards” and you name it. As can be expected, as soon as reference is made to their tactic possibly resulting in a “Krystallnacht” type event against citizens, cries of homophobia and “whoever first mentions Nazi’s in an argument automatically loses the argument” is heard from the heterophobic Gay Activists.

One is left to ponder, should the measure pass muster and be approved in the ballot, will these same heterophobes demand they be given the names and addresses of who voted for its passage, also to be placed on an internet searchable site? Have we come this close to denying citizens their right to anonymity under the secret ballot, thereby guaranteeing voters the freedom to vote their conscience without fear of intimidation or retribution?

Are the heterophobes so afraid of due process that they cannot launch a campaign to try and convince voters to vote down R-71 and instead encourage intimidation and harassment?

Can you imagine the outrage from Gay Activists should backers of California’s Proposition 8 demand the names and addresses of all who sign the petition against Proposition 8 to be made available for public scrutiny on a searchable internet site?

The authors of “The Overhauling of Straight America” said in their article,

First let the camel get his nose inside the tent—only later his unsightly derriere!

Not only is the camels nose inside our tent, we are now seeing its “unsightly derriere.”

July 29, 2009

Mayoral Candidate Forum Video

by lewwaters

For those that may not be able to watch the CVTV airing of last nights Mayoral Candidate Forum on channel 23 Thursday, the video is now available.

Mayors Forum

July 28, 2009

Vancouver’s Mayoral Forum, July 28, 2009

by lewwaters


As scheduled, the Clark County Republican Party hosted a forum this evening featuring all 3 of Vancouver’s Mayor candidates, Incumbent Royce Pollard, Council member Tim Leavitt and challenger Charlie Stemper.

Over 30 questions were submitted to Party Chair, Ryan Hart. The full list of questions was submitted to all 3 candidates with each candidate allowed to choose 3 questions they favored.

Each then gave answers to 9 questions in all, 6 of which were favored by the other 2 candidates.

Questions ranged from the decaying condition of downtown to proposed tolls on bridges to pay for construction of a new I-5 bridge to include light rail.

Leavitt and Stemper both are opposed to tolls while Pollard advocates adding tolls of some amount. At one point, Mayor Pollard expressed that “tolls were the way of the future.”

I found Stemper and Leavitt both composed and respectful while Pollard performed his usual antics of shaking his head, rolling his eyes and other displays of disagreement when the other 2 spoke, particularly Charlie Stemper.

I find that a distasteful way for a sitting Mayor to act towards those running against him in an election.

It was worried that turn-out would be slight due to triple digit temperatures, but attendance exceeded 80 people who all sat through the forum listening to the candidates.

Members of both parties were in attendance to hear what they said and the Clark GOP made bottled water available to help with the heat.

Ryan Hart opened the forum with announcements of upcoming events, and then turned the forum over to the moderator panel consisting of Ann Donnelly, Karen Washabaugh and Camas attorney, Shawn McPherson.

CVTV was present taping the event, which is scheduled to air Thursday, July 30 at 4:45 PM on channel 23.

Be sure to tune in if you can or view afterwards and see how the candidates did.

Above all, be sure to vote in the August 18 Primary and again on November 3.

Our government is no better than those we vote in. Be an informed voter and know who or what you are voting for.

July 26, 2009

Traditional Marriage Foes Try To Intimidate Washington Voters

by lewwaters

A group has sprung up in our state calling themselves and whose sole purpose appears to be intimidating people who may disagree with the recent Domestic Partnership law passed by our legislature.

Citizens in disagreement with the passage of SB 5688 exercised their rights by beginning a petition to place the matter before voters statewide and not just the legislature.

Referendum 71 was required to obtain just over 120,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot and supporters claim to have gathered 130,000 signatures.

As could be expected, groups opposed to R-71 have sprung up utilizing their rights to lobby against the effort by forming an argument against it, not by proposing intimidation.

The official campaign opposing R-71 does not support this effort at citizen intimidation.

This fringe group, claims on their website,

What we are doing

Once signature petitions for initiatives and referenda are submitted and verified by the Secretary of State they are part of the public record. When signatures for Referendum 71 have been verified WhoSigned.Org will:

· Work to make this public record signature information accessible and searchable on the internet.
· Flag the 3% signature sample that is certified by the Elections Division of the Secretary of State.
· Provide Washington State Voters with a way to check that the public record of their advocacy is
· Provide Washington State Voters with a way of reporting when their signature has been recorded
either fraudulently or in error.

As has become the norm with fringe leftist groups, knowing following proper procedures all too often fails their agenda, intimidation becomes their next step.

While they try to hide their true intent with words as seen above, they really desire to expose citizens who disagree with their agenda and subject them to possible harassment, if they are persons of note.

It is obvious this group fears a similar outcome as we saw in California’s Proposition 8 as California citizens overwhelmingly voted to overturn their same-sex marriage law imposed by the legislature, not the voters.

To date, no state passing same-sex marriage has done so by a vote of the people, only by Judicial Decree or state legislatures caving in to a small minority.

Where was this group as hundreds of fraudulent votes turned up to propel Christine Gregoire in the governorship in 2004?

Do you really think they would want the signatures of voters who signed a petition to grant same-sex marriage made public and subject them to possible harassment or boycotts?

We must stand up to the intimidation tactics employed by and preserve our Representative Republic.

While I disagree with those groups who oppose Referendum 71, I applaud their distancing themselves from this fringe group and opposing the initiative by the proper and legal methods.

July 24, 2009

David Castillo on Healthcare Reform

by lewwaters

Castillo, Republican candidate for Washington State’s Third Congressional District, has posted his thoughts on a viable solution towards reforming America’s Healthcare on his blog under the title An American Solution.

I find it refreshing to read sound ideas over the rhetoric and fearmongering we continue to hear from the Obama administration and the Democrat Party.

Unlike Obama and the Democrats, Castillo reminds us that we do have a “system of healthcare delivery remains the envy of the world,” in spite of some problems identified within.

Three critical reviews from knowledgeable sources have disputed recent claims on the current proposed healthcare ‘fix’ being pitched by the administration and Democrats,

Experts Dispute Some Points in Health Talk

FACT CHECK: Obama’s health care claims adrift?

Health Mandate Will Kill Jobs, Most Small Businesses Argue

It reassuring to see a candidate for office offering workable ideas on healthcare reform.
Castillo, currently a Financial Advisor with Edward Jones Investments, lays out, four steps,

The President and Congress should:

1) Expand and promote Health Savings Accounts, which allow the individual to control their own healthcare dollars – NOT the government.

2) Allow Association Health Plans. This would allow small businesses and like-minded trade associations to pool together in purchasing their health insurance, thereby driving down costs and insuring more people.

3) Allow people to purchase health insurance like they purchase auto insurance. Right now, you cannot purchase a plan in Texas if you live in Washington even if the Texas plan better suits the needs of your family and is less expensive.

4) Reduce payroll taxes. Most Americans get their health insurance through their employer. Rather than raise taxes on small businesses – the backbone of our economy – to pay for a government run program, let’s incentivize business to provide insurance coverage by lowering their rates, or by providing tax credits.”

About all I would add to Castillo’s list would be some serious Tort Reform legislation.

To quote Louisiana governor, Bobby Jindal,

No health reform is serious about reducing costs unless it reduces the costs of frivolous lawsuits.”

That does not mean David Castillo’s thoughts are not serious or shouldn’t be taken serious, he gave some real good ideas, but that I would add the much needed Tort Reform to curb some of he more outrageous lawsuit settlements that cause defensive medicine, all those extra tests Democrats are currently complaining about, and excessively high malpractice insurance premiums Doctors must pay, which end up being passed on to patients in the form of higher fees.

Castillo reminds us “American’s innovate.” We do not follow countries whose ideas and systems are wrought with problems and out of control costs, while rationing care to citizens, many having to extend periods of pain waiting weeks to be seen or who may die before their turn comes around to be seen.

As Castillo says,

I believe Americans will always rise to the challenge. We can meet the challenge of providing accessible, affordable healthcare to all Americans without resorting to failed ideas fraught with danger and inefficiencies.”

I couldn’t agree more. All we need is for government to get the hell out of our way.

UPDATE: It has been confirmed from the Castillo campaign that David Castillo is a strong advocate for Tort Reform. As thought, it was just an oversight to not include it in his post. Understandable since we all discuss it so much.

July 23, 2009

Religious Bigotry On The Rise

by lewwaters

Submitted by Sharon Long

Religious freedom is under assault in our country. Under the guise of “Separation of church and state” that does not appear in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, people are attempting to remove religious speech from the public square.

I was working a political booth at Esther Short Park on Saturday, July 18, when a vendor came up to us asking our position on religious speech in the public park. When I expressed support for it, quite a discussion ensued. This person believed that freedom of religious only meant I could go to any place of worship I desired, not that I had the freedom to express my religious thoughts. In fact, he believed that any public expression of religious thought must be banned from the public square because of “Separation of church and state”.

He went so far as to say he had a right not to be “offended.” Since when? We are guaranteed the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There is nothing that says we have a right not to be offended. Lots of things that happen in public offend me. Some humor offends me but others find it hilarious. Where is our “tolerance” of differing points of view? For some it seems to stop with religion.

How can allowing personal expressions of faith in public be establishing a religion? It doesn’t. The flip side of the establishment clause is that government cannot be ‘hostile’ to religion and that is what this individual proposes. He proposes singling out religious speech to censorship. Prohibiting free speech in the public square certainly violates the Bill of Rights portion that says the government cannot “establish a religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof.” A huge part of the Christian faith is expressed in evangelism, seeking to share our faith with others. Our forefathers wanted to insure that freedom by allowing freedom of religion. The term ‘separation of church and state’ is used to justify just the opposite. Our freedom of religion is being distorted into freedom “from” religion in the public square. We must not allow that to happen. We must raise our voices whenever there is an attempt to silence us. I am not a member of the religious group at Esther Short Park, but I am publicly protesting any attempt to remove them against their will. I applaud the management of the Farmers Market for standing up to religious bigotry.

July 22, 2009

Tea Parties: Heir to an American Tradition or Ignorance in Action?

by freedomsflame

Various commentators (Gail Collins of the New York Times provides an example of this view) are claiming that the estimated one million people who came out to protest at over 2,000 venues last April 15th are ignorant of the history of Boston Tea Party of 1773, and why the colonists were in an uproar. The argument goes that the colonists were protesting taxation without representation, while today’s tea partiers HAVE representation, so why the complaints? Let’s review the basic history, compare the two movements, and then evaluate whether the tea parties are legitimate heirs to the American tradition, or are merely a manifestation of ignorance in action. provides a nice summation of the original Boston Tea Party:

“A series of actions including the Stamp Act (1765), the Townsend Acts (1767) and the Boston Massacre (1770) agitated the colonists, straining relations with the mother country. But it was the Crown’s attempt to tax tea that spurred the colonists to action and laid the groundwork for the American Revolution.

The colonies refused to pay the levies required by the Townsend Acts claiming they had no obligation to pay taxes imposed by a Parliament in which they had no representation. In response, Parliament retracted the taxes with the exception of a duty on tea – a demonstration of Parliament’s ability and right to tax the colonies. In May of 1773 Parliament concocted a clever plan. They gave the struggling East India Company a monopoly on the importation of tea to America. Additionally, Parliament reduced the duty the colonies would have to pay for the imported tea. The Americans would now get their tea at a cheaper price than ever before. However, if the colonies paid the duty tax on the imported tea they would be acknowledging Parliament’s right to tax them.”

Clearly, the issue was taxation without representation, compounded by prior abuse, and the fear that the Crown would use its tea taxation toehold to oppress the colonists at some future date when the time seemed more opportune.

It is the precise contention of modern tea partiers that the current Congress and Administration misrepresented their intentions (by both intent and omission) to drag the country along a course of radical socialization of the society. Tea partiers believe that unprecedented spending, under the specious cover of stimulating the economy, is actually a blunt attempt to buy permanent political power for the totalitarians now ruling by fiat.

It is not enough for a people to be served by those in power who merely purport to represent them. True representation is not a “bait and switch” operation whereby so-called representatives create a false perception in the mind of the electorate, and then opportunistically leap for raw and total power when offered the choice between upholding the ideals of the founders or crass material and political gain. It is clear (from the massive and growing nationwide demonstrations) that many who expected the direction of the country to change from radical partisanship to cooperation among all citizens now feel like they were sold a “bill of goods”. And despite President Obama’s continuing personal popularity, the popularity of his policies has plummeted as more and more people come to the conclusion that the only explanation for the decisions being implemented now, is that our leaders in Washington have stopped listening to us, and are blindly grasping after permanent power.

Who expected that the Obama Administration would attempt to bring the census into the White House in 2010, thereby contaminating the expectation that the 2012 elections will be conducted in a fair and free manner? Who expected that ACORN, an organization that has been accused of voter registration fraud, and is under investigation in more than 10 states would be awarded billions of taxpayer dollars to politic for those currently in power under the guise of “community organizing”? Every new initiative from the Administration puts 10,000 more people in the streets. For every person in the streets, hundreds sit at home and agree.

So to those who criticize the historical literacy of Americans who reject the despotism of a permanent political class which is now working feverishly to lock in a lifetime of power over a free nation, I have a message for your leaders: In the words of Dawn Wildman of San Diego, who organized four tea parties: “We’re seeing how you vote,” she says. “You’re not paying attention to your constituency. We put you there, and we can take you out.”

2010 is coming.


Dorell, O. (n.d.). Tax revolt a recipe for tea parties. USA Today, Retrieved April 22, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.

COLLINS, G. (2009, April 18). Twitters From Texas. New York Times, Retrieved April 22, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.

“The Boston Tea Party, 1773,” EyeWitness to History, (2002).

July 22, 2009

No Violation Of Civil Rights At Esther Short Park Farmers Market

by lewwaters


It seems a misunderstanding, or miscommunication occurred last Saturday, July 18 at the Esther Short Park Farmers Market. Understandably, this upset some people, primarily political candidates and some from political parties that set up in the free Public Information Area at the NW corner of Esther Short Park.

It was said that a Farmers Market official told these candidates “they had been banished from the Farmers Market Area and would have to move to the far away NE corner of Esther Short Park next to Vancouver Commons.” Or at least, that is how some took it.

It was reported that this official said, “the City Manager had issued a directive banning PIAs from the Farmers Market Area.”

Another person representing one of the political parties said she arrived and found it odd that vendors were setting up where the PIA’s usually set up. As she was setting up, the mother of one of the candidates came over to inform her that the PIA’s, Freedom Row they call it, had been moved and she felt she should know before the set-up was finished.

Some of the Political candidates returned to the NW corner to set up their tables, vowing they would remain and exercise their right to be there.

As I first said, this is all due to a miscommunication that could have been easily resolved.

I emailed the City Manager, Pat McDonnell to ask about any such “directive” on banning PIA’s from the NW corner of Esther Short Park. He replied to me, “I think there were some miscommunication and some construction issues that caused the confusion…We did not issue a directive banning this from the Farmers Market Area.”

He further told me that the Program & Event Coordinator for the City of Vancouver would send me a more detailed explanation of what happened and why. Below is her email I received,

I would like to explain the confusion and miscommunication that took place last week regarding the Public Information Area in Esther Short Park.”

Due to both the addition of the Friday Night Market and the need to relocate some Farmer’s Market vendor booths that were displaced as a result of gas line work being done on 6th Street, the Farmer’s Market obtained a permit to use the grass along the north side of Esther Short Park and 8th St.”

As you know, the PIA has traditionally been located in the NW corner of Esther Short Park immediately adjacent to the Farmer’s Market on Esther St. To ensure that the designated Public Information Area for Esther Short Park remained adjacent to the Farmer’s Market, careful work was done to locate the PIA adjacent to the Farmer’s Market’s new permitted area inside the park. New signage was created to ensure clarity that the PIA was not gone, just temporarily moved.”

My understanding is that the Farmer’s Market did not occupy the area in which they were newly permitted last weekend. This caused confusion about the PIA since the new-signed area now appeared to be yards away from the Market as well as its original location. I believe there may have also been some confusion with the Market’s staff in regards to the movement of the PIA and their obligation to inform the public of this move.”

In the future, you can be assured, the PIA in Esther Short Park will always be immediately adjacent to the Farmer’s Market, not yards away! There may still be a few weeks where the Farmer’s Market needs to be in Esther Short Park due to the continued work on the gas line.”

To clarify, the Public Information Area in Esther Short Park is a designated area that individuals and/or organizations may set-up tables and/or canopy tents for the purpose of passing out and/or displaying information. The PIA is by no means the only location where individuals can disseminate information to the public. A person can, at any time, talk with people and pass out literature on any public right-of-way (sidewalk), but they may not block that right-of-way. Since they cannot set-up a table and/or tent in a public right-of-way, we created the PIA in Esther Short Park. The PIA in Esther Short Park is the only space besides the playground area that may not be reserved/rented for an event.”

Rest assured, it appears our Civil Rights remain intact and political candidates of both parties, as well as information booths of both parties, will still be there next to the Farmers Market on Saturdays.

On a related measure, a vendor who objected to another booth set up by a particular religion confronted the lady who I spoke of above. As she said,

Aside from a personal bias against that particular religion, he was also very bigoted about ‘separation of church and state’ meaning that religious speech should not be allowed in a public park. That is a quieter but more insidious threat to our freedoms than anything about where we are located in the park.”

I have to agree with her on stifling anyone’s freedom of speech to speak of their religion in public. No one has to listen to them and they are free to walk away, just as we are if anti-religious people speak out in public or political candidates we disagree with.

Freedom is precious and if we wish to retain ours, we must accept that others also have the freedom to speak out, even if we are offended.

July 20, 2009

Funeral Services in Detroit For Michael Jackson Stuffed Animals

by lewwaters

I have tried to avoid adding to the nuttiness we have seen engulf the nation after the untimely death of Pop singer, Michael Jackson late last month. But, seeing this one and how ridiculous fans have been just has to be mentioned.

Fans and mourners had left a number of stuffed animals and toys outside of the Motown Historical Museum located in Detroit, Michigan. Someone apparently decided that it would only be fitting to memorialize those stuffed animals with a burial in Woodland park cemetery, who donated two plots for the burial.

A headstone was donated and the stuffed animals were driven to the cemetery in two open hearses, filling both.

Unbelievable is that the hearses received a Police escort, at taxpayer expense!

Detroit is city that currently has some of the worst economic downturn in the nation and highest crime rates. So, instead of protecting the cities citizens, two Police cars were diverted to escort two hearses filled with stuffed animals!

Stuffed animals! Toys!

Debbie Schlussel has 3 news videos up on her site covering the burial and procession.

The Detroit News ran an article criticizing the use of taxpayer paid Police vehicles Saturday, July 18.

Seeing and hearing the gushiness of fans who felt this to be the most appropriate way to handle those stuffed animals left outside of the Motown Historical Museum leaves me wondering about the sanity of some people in the country.

Not only was Michael Jackson just another entertainer, although a popular one, our Soldiers, Sailor, Marines and Airmen sacrificing their lives to protect America barely rate scant mention in the media, where Jackson’s death received weeks of coverage.

What really makes me wonder, though, is that since fans claim Jackson cared so much for children, wouldn’t it have been more fitting to have donated the stuffed animals to abused children, orphans and children’s hospitals to bring a smile to their faces instead of burying them in the ground?

July 19, 2009

Looney Ron Paul; Jealous of Sarah Palin Too?

by lewwaters


Ron Paul, the looney Libertarian who has twice ran for president and never even came close to the Oval Office, other than a visit, has come out attacking Alaska’s soon to be former governor, Sarah Palin.

Although I consider Paul to be a whiny nutcase, primarily on his foreign policies and advocacy of stripping America of sound security measures, he was the last one I thought would become infected with Palin Derangement Syndrome.

Sarah Plain stands straight and speaks forcefully, compared to Paul’s whiny performances in the debates last year. Still they share some similarities in independence from the party, both being somewhat mavericks.

Shortly after being selected as John McCain’s Vice Presidential choice, Mrs. Palin was asked about Paul in an MTV interview. She said of him,

He’s a good guy. He’s so independent. He’s independent of the party machine. I’m like, ‘Right on, so am I.’ ”

In return, Paul is quoted in a Politico article dismissing Mrs. Palin’s supporters as

more establishment, conventional Country-Club type of Republicans.”

On Mrs. Palin herself, he states,

I wonder whether she’s energizing the 15-20 year olds. That would be a question I would have. Because she doesn’t talk about the Federal Reserve and some of these issues. She doesn’t talk too much about personal liberties, civil liberties, getting rid of drug laws, attacking the war on drugs, punishing people who torture.”

No, she instead addresses real issues facing the nation. In her announcement speech on her resignation from the governor’s office of Alaska, she spoke of Energy independence and national security, fiscal restraint, smaller government, and local control have being her priorities and that they will remain her priorities.

Country Club Republican is a derogatory expression used towards Republicans considered to have higher than average income or wealth, lack of sympathy with lower income citizens, and liberal views on abortion, gay rights, and other social issues.

Asked by John Stossel in December 2007, “Should gays be allowed to marry?” Paul answered, “sure.”

Sarah Palin says marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Paul advocate legalizing drugs, Sarah Palin does not.

By definition, Paul is more of a “Country Club Republican” than any Palin supporter I know, my wife and I included.

Ron Paul made a lot of noise in the 2008 campaigns. He raised a lot of money and misled a lot of people. But he could only gather some 35 delegates. He did even poorer when he ran as a Libertarian candidate in 1988.

For him to now come out attacking Sarah Palin, who isn’t even running a campaign currently, tells me he is as jealous as can be of her success and fame while he fades away into the morass of political irrelevancy, regardless of what his glassy eyed, brainwashed supporters might think.

Sarah Palin energized conservatives in America like few other people have. She faced unprecedented attacks against her family and herself, all because she is a woman of strength and character who would shake up the “good old boy” network Ron Paul slinks around in.

Paul rails against earmarks in bills, but then inserted 22 earmarks worth $96.1 million into an Omnibus bill earlier this year, making him the number one Republican to receive earmarks.

It is little wonder the country rejected a candidate who is as much of a hypocrite as Paul or one who is passing into obscurity and decides he must trash a woman who is twice the man he will ever be.

Sometimes I don’t know who is the bigger loon, Paul or that relatively small number of starry-eyed, in your face, bloviators who worship his ever word and think they will be able to sell their rejected ideology by high jacking the Republican Party.

Attacking Sarah Palin and alienating conservatives will only appeal to that very Country Club Republican sect Paul accuses us of being. It sure won’t gain him any support amongst rank and file Republicans.

If it isn’t jealousy, it’s fear. Fear that she will clean his clock should both decide to run in 2012, when Paul will be a feeble 76 year old and Sarah a spry 48 year old.

Other Discussions: Evergreen Conservative; Texas For Sarah Palin; Adam Brickley and Thomas Lifson @ American Thinker

July 19, 2009

Stay Strong Honduras, You May Be Freedoms Last Stand

by lewwaters

Zelaya Supporter 1

Falsely labeled as a coup d’état, the Honduran government, through their Military, deposed their president, Manuel Zelaya in June due to his illegal conduct in efforts to bypass the tiny country’s constitution.

Ever since they have been under assault from outside forces, including the United States current Obama administration to reseat Zelaya and in opposition to Honduras’s constitution and the wishes of the majority of its citizens.

Left-leaning media and supporters of worldwide Socialism have spared no effort in obscuring the legal maneuver of the Honduran government and ignore the deposed leaders call for insurrection, civil war, to return him to power for a scant 3 months, the scheduled termination of his constitutionally limited one term in November, 2009.

Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, mediating talks between the deposed leader and the interim government of Roberto Micheletti continues calling for Zelaya’s return and proposed a “unity government.”

Hidden within the proposal is the proposition to “grant amnesty for all political crimes committed before and after the June 28 coup.”

That proposal would negate Honduras’s charging Zelaya with the very crimes against “the economy, the citizenry and against the constitution” that brought about his ouster and could also allow him to reinstate the massive planned voter fraud to change the Honduran constitution to allow him to serve more than one term, that has been uncovered since his ouster.

Zelaya continues his threats to slink back into Honduras and set up a parallel government, undoubtedly to lead revolutionaries from other Latin American countries from which he will “lead the final battle against coup leaders.”

Initially, Zelaya accepted the terms of the proposed “unity government,” but has since said he “would not accept any form of power-sharing government,” claiming it would “unjustly reward coup leaders.”

In effect, should he win reinstatement, the entire Honduran government that unanimously voted for his ouster would have to be replaced, ostensibly with supporters of Zelaya who would then be free to allow Zelaya to impose his de facto dictatorship he was trying to set up.

On the other hand, interim President Roberto Micheletti has said that he is willing to step down only if Zelaya is not allowed to resume office and to move the date of the election up to allow the Honduran people to elect a new president.

Zelaya calls for Civil War.

Which man really has the best interests of the Hondurans at heart over his own personal ambition?

The Hondurans acted within the legal parameters of their constitution and are now attempting to uphold the rule of law.

Unlike bloody coups and revolutions of the past where deposed leaders were killed and Military Dictators seized power, there was no bloodshed in ousting Zelaya and the Military swiftly turned the presidency over to the Honduran Congress, who swore in Roberto Micheletti as interim president.

Instead of being praised for a peaceful ousting of a criminal leader, they have been ostracized by world leaders who demand the criminal be returned to power in such a deceptive manner that he would be free to oppress the Honduran people as he chooses.

While the world is focused on battling radical Jihadists in the Middle East, the age-old scourge of communism, masquerading as socialism or progressiveness, is attacking on the flanks of freedom lovers in Latin America.

Honduras must be supported.

Zelaya must not be returned to power. His call for civil war alone should wake up the masses to his real intent.

As more and more Latin Americans lose their freedoms to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez’s socialism he is spreading across the hemisphere, tiny Honduras may represent freedoms last stand.

UPDATE: mp3 download of Fred Thompson on Honduras.

July 18, 2009

Walter Cronkite: Only The Good Die Young

by lewwaters

waltercronkitevietnam Walter Cronkite, long-time news reporter and anchorman for CBS News has died at the age of 92.

Labeled by many as “iconic” and “the most trusted man in America,” I cannot share that view of this man. Like Debbie Schlussel, I have no tears to shed for a man who held the responsibility of responsibly and honestly reporting the news to America, deliberately gave a false view of our involvement in the nation of Viet Nam during the 1960’s.

Much of America listened every evening to the man they trusted and never suspected that he was beginning the very biased news against America that helped lead America down the path of the communist nation we are now becoming.

In the Viet Nam War, many seemed to be surprised by the sudden attacks across the nation in the Tet of 68 offensive. Even though our intelligence was at best sketchy, American and South Vietnamese were not caught totally off guard and the offensive launched by the North Vietnamese Communist ended up a huge failure for the Communist North Militarily. Their numbers were decimated and it took many years for them to recover and launch the final drive South, defeating the South Vietnamese who no longer received any aid from America due to Democrat congressional policies.

In many regards the Tet of 68 Offensive was very similar to Germany’s Battle of the Bulge in World War Two, a desperate attempt.

It is ironic that Cronkite reported on both battles of desperation, accurately reporting the Bravery and steadfastness of World War Troops who pushed back the Nazi’s, but labeling our decisive victory in Tet as a “stalemate” and “unwinnable” in a broadcast aired on February 27, 1968 upon his return to America from Viet Nam and ending that broadcast with,

it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.”

Abandoning a struggling ally is hardly “the best they could do,” as millions of Asians in Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos paid with their lives as Communism spread across Southeast Asia and untold thousands more lost their lives as they desperately tried escaping the throes of Communism in rickety boats across the South China Sea in what was labeled the Boat People.

In an October 2000 speech, retired General Fredrick Weyand, who commanded II Field Force during the Tet of 68 offensive said in part,

After Tet, General Westmoreland sent Walter Cronkite out to interview me. I was in Command of the Forces in the South around Saigon and below and I was proud of what we’d done. We had done a good job there. So, Walter came down and he spent about an hour and a half interviewing me. And when we got done, he said, “well you’ve got a fine story. But I’m not going to use any of it because I’ve been up to Hue. I’ve seen the thousands of bodies up there in mass graves and I’m determined to do all in my power to bring this war to an end as soon as possible.”

It didn’t seem to matter that those thousands of bodies were of South Vietnamese citizens who had been killed by the Hanoi soldiers and Walter wasn’t alone in this because I think many in the media mirrored his view…”

When I was in Paris at the Peace Talks, it was the most frustrating assignment I think I ever had. Sitting in that conference, week after week listening to the Hanoi negotiators, Le Duc Tho and his friends lecture us. Reading from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Herald Tribune, the Atlanta Constitution, NBC, CBS, you name it. Their message was always the same. “Hey, read your newspapers, listen to your TV. The American people want you out of Vietnam. Now, why don’t you just go ahead and get out?” So finally a Peace Agreement was signed that everyone knew would be violated and with no recourse or hope of enforcement on our part.”

General Weyand went on to say he doesn’t blame the media entirely for the outcome of the war, but Cronkite’s words expressing how he had no intention of reporting the Battle truthfully evidence how the media spearheaded the anti-war effort at turning public opinion against the effort to keep the South Vietnamese free and towards supporting the Communist Forces of the North.

In short, he sold out America and our Troops as well as millions of Southeast Asians.

In the days ahead many will label Cronkite as “iconic,” “legendary,” and heap accolades upon him I feel are undeserved. Cronkite himself called what he said on Vietnam as his “proudest achievement.”

It escapes me how having the blood of millions of people, over 40,000 of which are American Soldiers on your hands could be seen as his “proudest achievement.”

Uncle Walt, as he was affectionately known, is gone. Dead at the age of 92 and who lived much longer than many of my brothers whose blood is on his hands that he sold out. His death at this ripe old age reinforces the old adage, “only the good die young.”

I have no tears for the man but offer condolences to his family and loved ones.

Others who sold out the Vietnamese and American Troops will join him one day. Jane Fonda, John Kerry, Ramsey Clark, Bill Ayers and so many others who today lavish themselves with the very luxuries they called for others to scorn as they spoke out against a free Viet Nam will also face the grim reaper in time.

Just as I hope and pray for Walter Cronkite, they too should face every single one of those well more than 40,000 American Troops their anti-American conduct helped kill on their descent to hell!

July 17, 2009

Congress Tries To Save Auto Dealers. Too Little, Too Late?

by lewwaters

Dodge 2

During the recent bankruptcies of both Chrysler Corporation and General Motors, much of America and Congress stood by as both passed judgment on hundreds of Auto Dealers around the country, pulling their franchises, effectively putting them out of business and handing the franchises to other dealerships, free of charge.

Ignored by all as the White House manipulated these closings and handed down directives to receive his socialist help is that the very proceedings by-stepped and ignored individual state laws on franchises.

Over a month later news is coming out that both Houses of Congress, seeing how many people they threw into the unemployment lines, are taking steps now to “protect and reinstate dealers” that so unceremoniously lost their franchises.

With Obama announcing his opposition to such measures, I feel these moves are just another smoke screen thrown up to convince voters they tried and not to be held accountable for all the newly unemployed laid off from so many dealerships.

Should, by some fluke, the auto dealers regain their lost franchises, it will most likely be too little too late.

For example, the auto dealership I was employed at for 19 ½ years as a technician is one of those that lost their franchise in Chryslers closing of 789 dealers. Locally, we were known as Vancouver Mazda Dodge owned by Allen Webb since October 2005.

Webb has retained his Mazda franchise and has renamed the Dodge portion to “Used Car City.” Webb recently finished and moved the dealership from its former location in Hazel Dell to a new $11 Million facility, just weeks before losing the franchise.

Many bloggers discovered a disproportionate number of dealers losing their franchises that supported Republican candidates over those who supported Democrat candidates, fueling much speculation on the closing having a political payback motive.

Nothing has ever been proven in that regard.

It is doubtful that played any part in Webb’s case, as he is a Democrat.

In my estimation, Webb brought on his own problems as from the time he purchased the dealership, adding it to others in his Auto Group, a series of mismanagement and bad calls coupled with poor customer service in the last year doomed the dealership as the long time customer ship present when he purchased it just walked away.

The day he took over the dealership the entire sales crew walked out, with only one returning right away and just for a short time.

When he purchased the dealership, we were known as Clark County’s Dodge Truck store, selling and servicing an awful lot of Dodge Trucks, especially the Cummins Diesel models. We had a contingent of factory-trained technicians that had been employed with the previous owner 20 years or more, the newest technician being employed with the dealership 4 or 5 years.

Dealership Service Departments with that many long term technicians is nearly unheard of in the trade, giving us an advantage over other dealers as customers new us by name and felt comfortable bringing their vehicles to a shop with such stability. Many would drop their cars or truck off and step into the Service Managers Office to chat with “John,” as they knew him well and trusted us.

We weathered previous recessions due to such trust and familiarity with customers who knew they would receive the best service possible.

None of this was good enough for Webb as he first trusted the newly acquired dealership to a General Manager who decided to put Dodge on the back burner and build up the inventory of Mazda Vehicles. That began losing sales as buyers began looking elsewhere for the trucks or cars they desired while Mazda sales rose only slightly.

Adding to the demise of the dealership was to pressure the Service Manager to leave and bring in more of a “yes-man” who was recently fired from another dealer, a Jeep Dealer that today, remains in business.

“John” realized that in order to keep well-trained and knowledgeable technicians, we must have an opportunity to make up lost pay from when we spent much time on difficult warranty diagnosis and repairs. Webb had decided that the “soup” work should go to lesser-paid lube techs so that service jobs would make him more profit personally.

“Floyd,” the new Service Manager, began right away alienating long term technicians as he brought with him other techs, not trained explicitly in Dodge, including his own son. Within a few months, as better paying jobs went to the new people “Floyd” brought with him and long term techs saw their paychecks dry up, those who had carried the dealer through rough financial times in the past began leaving, 4 in one day alone in September 2008.

Undeterred and leading many to think that was “Floyd” and Webb’s intent, more from the Jeep dealer were brought over as that one began recovering. More long-term customers began going elsewhere as they began discovering the trust they were used to enjoying was no longer there, as the new crew began their “shake them down” attitude towards customers.

Hours were changed to 6:30 AM to 8:30 PM 3 days a week per split crews, further leaving owners at the whims of the new “shake them down” crew who would at times leave a car set the 4 days they were off until they worked again.

New and confusing computer systems were instituted that managed dispatching of jobs and even time keeping for technicians.

In all it rapidly deteriorated into a very stressful workplace leaving older employees exhausted and with much lower paychecks to show for their years of loyalty.

The last long term Dodge technician was terminated June 16, 2009 just days after the franchise was pulled. The remaining technicians are all of the “shake them down” attitude and struggling to survive on used cars or those customers who may think there are still factory trained Dodge technicians there.

What they really receive are recommendations for unnecessary services and even unneeded repairs as the “shake them down” techs fumble through diagnoses.

In the final end, Allen Webb has no one to blame for losing his franchise but himself and his business decisions.

I find it unlikely that any of the franchises would be restored, given Obama’s strong opposition to the plan, but the off chance Webb were to regain his franchise, would it do him any good?

I’m sure that given time, a new customer base would be built and new technicians could be properly trained and hired, but he would never be able to rebuild what he threw away, either in technicians or the same customers who steadily purchased vehicles and returned for service and repairs for so many years.

It took the previous owner as well as “John” and every one of us techs years to build up that loyalty. It took just months to lose it.

I imagine other dealers around America have lost similar business base and technicians and also face the poor likelihood of regaining them in their employ.

While I still think the proposal is more of a smoke screen than anything, to negate an obvious vote loser for them, if Obama signed it into law, it will do little good over all as it will be just too little too late.

Perhaps everyone should have thought the matter out better instead of jumping headlong into such a bad decision in order to nationalize the auto industry and alienate the customer base.

July 17, 2009

Jon Russell Files To Oppose Baird In 3rd District

by lewwaters

Jon Russell Clark Counties own Jon Russell has thrown his hat in the ring seeking to unseat incumbent Democrat, Brian Baird for Washington’s Third Congressional District, alongside Centralia’s David Castillo.

Russell is well known in Clark County as a former leader of the evangelical Faith & Freedom Network and as Council Member on the Washougal City Council. In 2004 he served as the Southwest Washington campaign director for the State House Republicans’ political committee.

Russell’s Campaign Site lists him as,

a City Councilman and small business owner, an innovator in health care reform and most importantly, a husband and father of two girls.”

Together with his wife, Sarah, they are the owners of Columbia Gorge Medical Center, an urgent and family care clinic established in Washougal in 2008. The About Us page claims,

CGMC was founded on a belief that everyone should have access to affordable basic healthcare.”

In Russell’s Announcement page on his campaign website, he states,

This is a day that has taken a lifetime of preparation and months of planning. I look forward to meeting voters on the campaign trail and making the case for new representation for Southwest Washington. I represent a new generation of reformers who are fed up with career politicians in Congress because they suffer from a lack of vision and the will to do the right thing for the people. I am running for congress to represent the ideas and hard work of everyday people; I believe we can balance the federal budget, American companies should be allowed to develop alternative and independent energy sources, we can find a way to make healthcare work for everyone through non-profit and private sector solutions.”

He also states, in part,

I come from a middle class family. My father was a Teamster truck driver, and my mom worked as an occupational therapist assistant. Growing up, my parents were very clear that I would have to make my own way through life and not to rely on them or the government for help. I had to financially pay my own way through college, working in lumber mills and distribution factories. I have had to work even harder to own my business,”

much like the background expressed by fellow GOP challenger, David Castillo.

It is not surprising that incumbent Representative Brian Baird is facing two such challengers, as his congressional performance has been dismal of late, alienating many constituents within Washington States Third District from both sides of the aisle.

Clark County Conservative has discussed his poor performance HERE and HERE.

Upon announcing his candidacy, Russell began coming under fire from leftist media like the Olympian who lead their story claiming, “a history of opposing gay rights” and also from the far left Northwest Progressive Institute who call Russell “virulently anti-gay.”

Such is the “intolerance” of the “tolerant” leftist as they continue in their smear tactics.

While the primaries and even the actual election are still far off, those of us who are fed up with Brian Baird’s selling out the 3rd District and taking lavish vacations on our dime to places as the Galapagos Islands, claiming to be “learning about climate change, ocean acidification, El Nino, maritime reserves protection and research,” have a choice now.

Castillo is better known in the north end of the district, Russell in the southern end. Both have humble backgrounds.

Only one will face off against Baird and that is the choice we voters must make.

Castillo has won the endorsement of State Attorney General, Rob McKenna as well as Republicans, Senator Dan Swecker and Representatives Gary Alexander and Richard DeBolt.

I am unable to find any endorsement announcements for Russell, but his campaign is just getting off the ground and either he or his supporters are more than welcome to let us know of any.

July 15, 2009

David Castillo: Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You

by lewwaters

David Castillo, Republican candidate for Washington States Third Congressional District, 4th of July speech.

July 15, 2009

Man Up Obama, Recognize The Honduran Government

by lewwaters

As we all know, the Honduran government deposed sitting president, Manuel Zelaya some weeks ago.

Falsely labeled a coup d’état, the move was in accord with the Honduran constitution and widely supported by the Honduran people.

No world leader will now recognize the newly installed Honduran government and demand the return of the deposed Zelaya, including Barack Obama.

Roberto Micheletti, current Honduran president installed by the Honduran Congress after deposing Zelaya, has offered to hold early elections and step aside while refusing to allow Manuel Zelaya to return to power.

Talks have been held in Costa Rica with no success in settling what Zelaya calls a dispute, but in actuality is his desire to continue ruining tiny Honduras.

There has been one death to date in the Zelaya called for protests, backed by Venezuela’s Socialist leader, Hugo Chavez.

In what I can only see as complete irony, the deposed Zelaya has now issued a call for citizen insurrection within Honduras.

Other words for “insurrection” would include, “coup d’‚tat, insurgency, revolution, rebellion, and mutiny.” In short, Zelaya calls for the country to plunge itself into a Civil War.

The irony is in Zelaya’s words of,

The Honduran people have the right to insurrection,” and “Insurrection is a legitimate democratic right when faced with a usurping government and a coup-supporting military,” as he urges his supporters in Honduras to “strike, march and engage in civil disobedience because that is a necessary process when the democratic order of a country is disrupted.

I hate to be the one to point out the obvious to the deposed Manuel Zelaya, but isn’t that what the Honduran people have done, through their duly elected officials and in accord with their constitution?

The difference is, they deposed Zelaya without bloodshed. Perhaps not in the most appropriate or dignified manner, but bloodshed and bloody insurrection was avoided and the country’s constitution and Democratic spirit remains intact.

In true Socialist fashion, Zelaya sits outside the country issuing ultimatums for his immediate return knowing he has the backing of Obama, the Organization of American States and the U.N. General Assembly, in spite of the vast majority of Hondurans agreeing with his ouster.

Honduras is functioning within the boundaries of their constitution and should be recognized. Zelaya’s call for plunging the country into a bloody Civil War shows he is not fit to lead Honduras and should not be returned to the presidency.

In a related matter, we now read of a formerly wealthy entrepreneur, Allen Anderrson, who spent his fortune not only on building libraries for poor communities in Honduras, but by his own admission, played presidential kingmaker in Honduras . . . and won.

Anderrson proudly describes what he calls “shenanigans” that he orchestrated in the final days of the 2005 presidential election that propelled Zelaya into power. Anderrson calls it a

saga sprinkled with heaps of cash, private detectives, sting operations, attack ads, internecine squabbles and Anderrson’s own epic grudge against the opposition candidate, wealthy, Pepe Lobo.”

In Anderrson’s own words,

I just had a taste of blood in my mouth. My mission was not to avoid poverty or bankruptcy or disgrace; my mission was to beat Pepe Lobo.”

Anderrson, a self-described “imperfectly socialized person” with the appearance of an “aging-hippie-who-made-it” look is indicative of many leftists stuck in their draft dodging anti-Vietnam attitudes from long ago. Anderrson says he was “a very, very serious draft dodger, devoting years to the study and practice of draft dodging to avoid the Vietnam War.”

Yet, he also says of his own wealth,

I decided that if I could make a couple billion dollars, I could do truly revolutionary things in Central America.”

Somehow, it escapes these draft-dodging long hairs that they are engaging in the very “horrible, pointless and wicked exercise” they describe Viet Nam as being when they decide they can manipulate what goes inside of a sovereign nation like Honduras.

Mr. Obama, it is past time for you to be a real leader. Man-up and recognize the Honduran government currently governing a nation desiring only peace and to remain free.

Man-up and extradite Allen Anderrson for prosecution for his “meddling” into Honduran internal affairs and manipulating an election, denying free Hondurans a proper voice in their own elections.

Man-up, Obama. Stop being a wuss being led around by the nose by the likes of the Cuba’s Castro brothers and Venezuela’s Chavez.

Man-up, Obama! Recognize the Hondurans right to create their own “Hope and Change” as Yes, they did!

Let’s Get It Right, another site supporting a Free and Democratic Honduras.

July 14, 2009

Clark County GOP to Host Mayoral Candidates Forum

by lewwaters

Ryan Hart, Chair of the Clark County Republican Party invites the public to a Mayoral Candidates Forum, July 28, 2009 to be held at the Clark Public Utilities office, 1220 Fort Vancouver Way, at 7 PM.

The forum will feature the three Vancouver Mayors candidates, incumbent Mayor Royce Pollard, Council Member Tim Leavitt and candidate Charlie Stemper.

The Vancouver Mayors position is a non-partisan position. Ryan Hart says, “There is a great amount of interest in the Vancouver mayoral race this year.”

Given the condition of the economy, proposed I-5 Bridge replacement, Light Rail and a proposed city budget deficit, Hart is correct as the next Mayor will have a formidable task as he maneuvers through the options available.

All three candidates have their supporters in the Republican Party, but the party is not planning on endorsing any.

Party members will submit a series of questions to the 3 candidates and each will be given time to reply.

The forum is open to the General Public and all are invited.

Now is your chance to have all 3 candidates seated together and see where they stand on issues of importance to Vancouver and to you.

Mark your calendars and please make every effort to attend.

Again, it will be held at the Clark Public Utilities office, 1220 Fort Vancouver Way at 7 PM.