I have just received word from the Navy that I will be recalled to active duty for one year in support of theatre operations in Afghanistan. My deployment begins in July 21 and will take me first to Camp Shelby, Mississippi for 60 days of combat and weapons training, and then in-theatre where I will work to provide critical intelligence to troops on the ground.
While this will obviously will be an emotional strain on me and my wife and family, I am anxious to serve my country and advance the cause of freedom.
This, of course, also means that I will leave Spike behind for the next year as well. However, I intend to start a new blog soon chronicling my adventures in Operation Enduring Freedom. I'll post a link to that new blog once it's up and running.
Thank you all in advance for your support and prayers.
Monday, July 17, 2006
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Golden rules
Blogger Ken Germer has a great idea. On his site, Not that you asked me, but… he has begun a running list of rules to live by. I am inspired. So much so, I have begun my own list of life’s rules. These are things I have long thought, so I am pleased to able to rip Ken’s idea and share my own. I will add as I see fit, and these are in no particular order.
The first 20:
1. Men should never curse in front of women unless it is with good humor. Women shouldn’t curse period. There is nothing worse than hearing an f-bomb dropped from the mouth of a lady.
2. Showering together saves time and water. Plus, it’s always more fun.
3. Kia and Hyundai are for people who hate cars, hate driving, and therefore must hate life. I can’t think of a more boring automobile than either of these two brands.
4. Don’t fake the funk on a nasty dunk. That’s not mine, I just heard it somewhere and it sounded good. Which brings me to my next rule:
5. The first time you retell someone else’s anecdote, give them all due credit. The second time, just say you heard it somewhere; and the third time you tell it, it’s all yours.
6. The scent of a woman will never cease to bring a man to his knees.
7. If you wear glasses, then you shouldn’t have any facial hair. It just makes you look like a tard…or a Canadian. You pick.
8. The shoes make the man. Don’t cut corners here. Get some nice kicks to go with that Burberry suit.
9. Not because they don’t understand good fashion, and not because they have better taste, but solely because they never wear them, women, will never be able to understand the importance of a good tie.
10. It has been said that no electronic device should ever be clipped to your belt. I agree, but that is just not a feasible solution on today’s information highway. Therefore, limit one device per belt please.
11. NASCAR is no longer just for rednecks. And for that, the sport has suffered.
12. I know you think nobody can see you when you pick your nose while driving. Nay, we can all see you. Don’t do it. It’s gross.
13. Always, always tell your spouse you love her/him upon your departure. Whether you are going on a business trip or going to the supermarket, it is a necessary last utterance.
14. Make it a point to drive upwards of 100mph at least once in your life. You’ll be surprised at its affects on your lifestyle.
15. Some say that in order to find the true love of your life, you must first endure a miserable heartbreak. That’s crap. Don’t go through that if at all possible.
16. Nobody ever really regrets their military service. If you are thinking about doing it, then nut up and enlist.
17. For the record, you can wear black shoes with a dark blue suit. This is one of the few exceptions.
18. Abbott and Costello is not just funny to old people, rap is not just for young people and Manischewitz wine is not just for Jews.
19. Don’t be inhospitable. Be a warm host and have people over often. Make your house their house while they visit.
20. Deal with tragedy as it happens. It is okay for men to cry.
21. Never, EVER use phrases like laying cable, pinching a loaf, or poking cotton in reference to going number two. Terms like that are gross. Just plain old gross.
The first 20:
1. Men should never curse in front of women unless it is with good humor. Women shouldn’t curse period. There is nothing worse than hearing an f-bomb dropped from the mouth of a lady.
2. Showering together saves time and water. Plus, it’s always more fun.
3. Kia and Hyundai are for people who hate cars, hate driving, and therefore must hate life. I can’t think of a more boring automobile than either of these two brands.
4. Don’t fake the funk on a nasty dunk. That’s not mine, I just heard it somewhere and it sounded good. Which brings me to my next rule:
5. The first time you retell someone else’s anecdote, give them all due credit. The second time, just say you heard it somewhere; and the third time you tell it, it’s all yours.
6. The scent of a woman will never cease to bring a man to his knees.
7. If you wear glasses, then you shouldn’t have any facial hair. It just makes you look like a tard…or a Canadian. You pick.
8. The shoes make the man. Don’t cut corners here. Get some nice kicks to go with that Burberry suit.
9. Not because they don’t understand good fashion, and not because they have better taste, but solely because they never wear them, women, will never be able to understand the importance of a good tie.
10. It has been said that no electronic device should ever be clipped to your belt. I agree, but that is just not a feasible solution on today’s information highway. Therefore, limit one device per belt please.
11. NASCAR is no longer just for rednecks. And for that, the sport has suffered.
12. I know you think nobody can see you when you pick your nose while driving. Nay, we can all see you. Don’t do it. It’s gross.
13. Always, always tell your spouse you love her/him upon your departure. Whether you are going on a business trip or going to the supermarket, it is a necessary last utterance.
14. Make it a point to drive upwards of 100mph at least once in your life. You’ll be surprised at its affects on your lifestyle.
15. Some say that in order to find the true love of your life, you must first endure a miserable heartbreak. That’s crap. Don’t go through that if at all possible.
16. Nobody ever really regrets their military service. If you are thinking about doing it, then nut up and enlist.
17. For the record, you can wear black shoes with a dark blue suit. This is one of the few exceptions.
18. Abbott and Costello is not just funny to old people, rap is not just for young people and Manischewitz wine is not just for Jews.
19. Don’t be inhospitable. Be a warm host and have people over often. Make your house their house while they visit.
20. Deal with tragedy as it happens. It is okay for men to cry.
21. Never, EVER use phrases like laying cable, pinching a loaf, or poking cotton in reference to going number two. Terms like that are gross. Just plain old gross.
In memory of 1st LT Forrest P. Ewens
KXLY: Whitworth ROTC graduate killed in combat in Afghanistan
Whitworth College Press Release
Forrest was a friend of mine in college. We lived on the same hallway in Stewart Hall my first year at Whitworth and kept a friendship throughout our years there. I have always held him and his twin brother Oaken in the highest esteem.
Forrest died for America’s cause, and in the service of his country; I believe the world is better place because of people like him.
Forrest was truly a great American and a real patriot.
My prayers are with his family as they mourn his loss.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Sticking it to the Man
Video clip of dude trying to cancel his AOL serviceThe world needs more Vincent Ferraris. Talk about sticking it to the Man, this guy went through all the hoops with AOL just trying to cancel his account. Speaking from personal experience, this is what really peeves me about big companies.
Ever try to cancel your phone service with Verizon? Or try to actually get that rebate that was promised by Comcast? How about retrieving the additional charge placed in error on your credit card by Enterprise? The experience will damn anyone to socialist philosophy (until they remember socialist philosophy has worse customer service).
To Vincent Ferrari I say, "Bravo." You stuck it to the man!
Saturday, June 17, 2006
TRIVIA: Villians named 'Jaleel' for two-hundred please, Alex
The name of the White Witch in Disney's version of The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was:
1. Jadakiss
2. Jadis
3. Jamiroquai
4. Jaleel White
1. Jadakiss
2. Jadis
3. Jamiroquai
4. Jaleel White
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
The Columbian: State voter database needs more work
As published in The Columbian newspaper 5/24/06
Sometimes I think the citizenry is too anxious to be assured that their elected officials are making things better.
The Columbian recently published an editorial that, once again, praised Secretary of State Sam Reed for his work to reform Washington state elections. Back in February, Reed released to the public the new and much anticipated statewide voter database. The Columbian followed up the release of the database by saying, "Bring it on."
But the problems with the database were all too apparent. The Evergreen Freedom Foundation and other organizations and concerned citizens pointed out serious flaws with the new system.
Even Reed acknowledged some of the problems, but said he would fix it. He has since made the effort to remove 55,000 dead and duplicate voters from the database. While this is a step forward, it overlooks the fact that there are still federal felons, double registrants, and noncitizens registered in many Washington counties, with no plan to actively check for them.
The Columbian's most recent editorial commending Reed for his work to cleanse the rolls is jumping the gun. The editorial board states, "Washington state elections have become more efficient and reliable since the hotly contested 2004 gubernatorial race, when Chris Gregoire won the governor's race by just 129 votes after three counts, and after 2.9 million votes had been cast."
Really? How do we know? The state has yet to endure a single general election since the introduction of the statewide voter database.
Continue reading State voter database needs more work
Sometimes I think the citizenry is too anxious to be assured that their elected officials are making things better.
The Columbian recently published an editorial that, once again, praised Secretary of State Sam Reed for his work to reform Washington state elections. Back in February, Reed released to the public the new and much anticipated statewide voter database. The Columbian followed up the release of the database by saying, "Bring it on."
But the problems with the database were all too apparent. The Evergreen Freedom Foundation and other organizations and concerned citizens pointed out serious flaws with the new system.
Even Reed acknowledged some of the problems, but said he would fix it. He has since made the effort to remove 55,000 dead and duplicate voters from the database. While this is a step forward, it overlooks the fact that there are still federal felons, double registrants, and noncitizens registered in many Washington counties, with no plan to actively check for them.
The Columbian's most recent editorial commending Reed for his work to cleanse the rolls is jumping the gun. The editorial board states, "Washington state elections have become more efficient and reliable since the hotly contested 2004 gubernatorial race, when Chris Gregoire won the governor's race by just 129 votes after three counts, and after 2.9 million votes had been cast."
Really? How do we know? The state has yet to endure a single general election since the introduction of the statewide voter database.
Continue reading State voter database needs more work
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Dishonoring memories, part II
Here are the three mitigating factors the federal jury used in deciding the sentence of Zacarias Moussaoui:
1. He had a dysfunctional upbringing.
2. He was abused by his father.
3. He was subjugated to racism as a Muslim youth growing up in France.
While these three factors may bring to light Moussaoui’s modus operandi, they do not by any means excuse him from the grave significance of his involvement in the plot to attack American sovereignty.
One of the more prominent comments I have heard in conciliation of Moussaoui’s life sentence in lieu of the death penalty is that he would be labeled a martyr, and that’s what he wanted anyway. So we are taking away his last desire.
I’ll cry fowl to that argument. First of all, who cares what Moussaoui wanted? Further, who cares what the rest of his radical extremist colleagues make of him? He could just as easily still be called a martyr simply because he got caught. This is not about a label; this is about justice amidst a great war on terrorism.
Second, shall we then apply that same precedent to Osama bib Laden someday? A man responsible for the deaths of thousands, but we won’t want him to viewed as a martyr? Why give the death penalty to anyone if we do not—by precedent—give it to the worst of those in the world?
Death is, and always will be, the ultimate price to be paid whether for good or for evil.
I do not take the death penalty lightly. This is a serious thing, and a hard decision to make if you are a judge or juror. But keep in mind Moussaoui’s involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy:
He was trained to fly commercial jets for the purpose of carrying out the same detriment his cohorts caused;
He lied to federal agents regarding any knowledge he had about the 9/11 plot;
He was involved in a plan to fly a fifth plane into the White House that day until he was arrested on a visa violation.
I agree with the many who have said that this sentencing should not be about vengeance. But it should be about justice.
This man was involved in the worst attack on American soil ever. Thousands died leading to a war that has cost the lives of thousands more. For that, there must be a judgment that requires his life. For such a horrible tragedy, one man’s life shall be only the tip of what justice serves.
I am more than disappointed at the jury’s quiet decision. Unlike many politicians, pundits and diplomats, I do not ‘respect’ that decision. I believe it is an awful one that is, to reiterate my last post, horribly dishonoring to memories of those who innocently paid the ultimate price that day for being regular Americans.
It is not enough—it is never enough—to skirt justice because of a hard knock life. While that is sad, tragic and unfortunate, never should excuse one from committing the gravest of sins. Human nature is flawed. We are not perfect. We do horrible things in this life; commit horrible transgressions against each other and against God. However, we will always be accountable for those actions despite our circumstance.
Our true grit as a nation defines us equally as much as our grace and eloquence. The grit demands our basic freedoms. The eloquence makes that freedom great. I think we tend to forget that the two are codependent. When we forget that, we forget that freedom demands justice. It appears that we have done so here.
My hope now is that our mistakes a people in delivering justice will not be repeated. Until then, Moussaoui’s real justice will be before God following a life sentence at Supermax with the Unabomber and actor Woody Harrelson’s dad.
1. He had a dysfunctional upbringing.
2. He was abused by his father.
3. He was subjugated to racism as a Muslim youth growing up in France.
While these three factors may bring to light Moussaoui’s modus operandi, they do not by any means excuse him from the grave significance of his involvement in the plot to attack American sovereignty.
One of the more prominent comments I have heard in conciliation of Moussaoui’s life sentence in lieu of the death penalty is that he would be labeled a martyr, and that’s what he wanted anyway. So we are taking away his last desire.
I’ll cry fowl to that argument. First of all, who cares what Moussaoui wanted? Further, who cares what the rest of his radical extremist colleagues make of him? He could just as easily still be called a martyr simply because he got caught. This is not about a label; this is about justice amidst a great war on terrorism.
Second, shall we then apply that same precedent to Osama bib Laden someday? A man responsible for the deaths of thousands, but we won’t want him to viewed as a martyr? Why give the death penalty to anyone if we do not—by precedent—give it to the worst of those in the world?
Death is, and always will be, the ultimate price to be paid whether for good or for evil.
I do not take the death penalty lightly. This is a serious thing, and a hard decision to make if you are a judge or juror. But keep in mind Moussaoui’s involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy:
I agree with the many who have said that this sentencing should not be about vengeance. But it should be about justice.
This man was involved in the worst attack on American soil ever. Thousands died leading to a war that has cost the lives of thousands more. For that, there must be a judgment that requires his life. For such a horrible tragedy, one man’s life shall be only the tip of what justice serves.
I am more than disappointed at the jury’s quiet decision. Unlike many politicians, pundits and diplomats, I do not ‘respect’ that decision. I believe it is an awful one that is, to reiterate my last post, horribly dishonoring to memories of those who innocently paid the ultimate price that day for being regular Americans.
It is not enough—it is never enough—to skirt justice because of a hard knock life. While that is sad, tragic and unfortunate, never should excuse one from committing the gravest of sins. Human nature is flawed. We are not perfect. We do horrible things in this life; commit horrible transgressions against each other and against God. However, we will always be accountable for those actions despite our circumstance.
Our true grit as a nation defines us equally as much as our grace and eloquence. The grit demands our basic freedoms. The eloquence makes that freedom great. I think we tend to forget that the two are codependent. When we forget that, we forget that freedom demands justice. It appears that we have done so here.
My hope now is that our mistakes a people in delivering justice will not be repeated. Until then, Moussaoui’s real justice will be before God following a life sentence at Supermax with the Unabomber and actor Woody Harrelson’s dad.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Dishonoring memories
Today a federal jury ruled-out the death penalty for 9/11 co-conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui deciding instead that he serves a life sentence.
This is by far the most dishonoring act in the post-September 11 era.
It has been nearly five years since that awful Tuesday morning when America awoke to the most horrid of tragedies. A federal trial apparently found that Moussaoui was guilty enough to be a part of the conspiracy to crash two planes into the New York cityscape, another into the heart of the nation’s capitol and yet another bound for an unknown target. However, Moussaoui was apparently not guilty enough that his own life was demanded as punishment for the act of war that was committed.
Over 3,000 people perished that day. To me, this jury verdict is dishonoring to the memories of each of those lives lost in addition to every life lost in the global war on terrorism.
Such a verdict sends a message to every radical terrorist that if you conspire to attack the United States of America, the worst that can happen to you is that you will spend the rest of your life in a warm bed to sleep in and provided three squares a day…with an option for cable to follow up on the actions of your buddies, or the occasional Lifetime movie special.
This decision begs the question, “When we finally find Osama bin Laden, we’ll he ‘suffer’ the same penalties as his associates?”
A decision like this makes all the flags unfurled and draped across America on September 12, 2001 a terrible display of vanity and sensationalism, destroying any true patriotic intent that was perhaps perceived by them at the time.
My apologies to the family members of the victims of 9/11 whose memories have been dishonored by this most recent decision.
Read the AP story here.
This is by far the most dishonoring act in the post-September 11 era.
It has been nearly five years since that awful Tuesday morning when America awoke to the most horrid of tragedies. A federal trial apparently found that Moussaoui was guilty enough to be a part of the conspiracy to crash two planes into the New York cityscape, another into the heart of the nation’s capitol and yet another bound for an unknown target. However, Moussaoui was apparently not guilty enough that his own life was demanded as punishment for the act of war that was committed.
Over 3,000 people perished that day. To me, this jury verdict is dishonoring to the memories of each of those lives lost in addition to every life lost in the global war on terrorism.
Such a verdict sends a message to every radical terrorist that if you conspire to attack the United States of America, the worst that can happen to you is that you will spend the rest of your life in a warm bed to sleep in and provided three squares a day…with an option for cable to follow up on the actions of your buddies, or the occasional Lifetime movie special.
This decision begs the question, “When we finally find Osama bin Laden, we’ll he ‘suffer’ the same penalties as his associates?”
A decision like this makes all the flags unfurled and draped across America on September 12, 2001 a terrible display of vanity and sensationalism, destroying any true patriotic intent that was perhaps perceived by them at the time.
My apologies to the family members of the victims of 9/11 whose memories have been dishonored by this most recent decision.
Read the AP story here.
What makes gas prices soar
As reported by one of my colleagues...For truth in advertising, the below story should have read:
Olympia: $2.56 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $3.05 per gallon
Seattle: $2.59 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $3.08 per gallon
Tri-Cities: $2.48 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $2.97 per gallon
Spokane: $2.40 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $2.89 per gallon
Vancouver: $2.46 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $2.95 per gallon
AAA: Average price of gas in Washington $3.04 gallon
5/3/2006, 6:48 a.m. PT
The Associated Press
SEATTLE (AP) — The Triple-A auto club says the average price of a gallon of gasoline in Washington is up another two cents today to three-dollars-four cents a gallon ($3.04).
That's up 44 cents in the past month.
Some gasoline prices for metro areas, according to the Triple-A:
Bellingham $3.16
Bremerton $2.98
Olympia $3.05
Tri-Cities $2.97
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett $3.08
Spokane $2.89
Tacoma $3.03
Vancouver $2.95
Yakima $2.97
Olympia: $2.56 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $3.05 per gallon
Seattle: $2.59 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $3.08 per gallon
Tri-Cities: $2.48 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $2.97 per gallon
Spokane: $2.40 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $2.89 per gallon
Vancouver: $2.46 gas + 18.4 federal tax + 31 cents state tax (increasing 3 cents 7/1/06, 2 cents 7/1/07 & 1.5 cents 7/1/08) = $2.95 per gallon
AAA: Average price of gas in Washington $3.04 gallon
5/3/2006, 6:48 a.m. PT
The Associated Press
SEATTLE (AP) — The Triple-A auto club says the average price of a gallon of gasoline in Washington is up another two cents today to three-dollars-four cents a gallon ($3.04).
That's up 44 cents in the past month.
Some gasoline prices for metro areas, according to the Triple-A:
Bellingham $3.16
Bremerton $2.98
Olympia $3.05
Tri-Cities $2.97
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett $3.08
Spokane $2.89
Tacoma $3.03
Vancouver $2.95
Yakima $2.97
Monday, April 17, 2006
Islam: Religion of contradiction
I have been reluctant to join in the anti-Islam overtures that have paraded many conservative columns lately like that of Ann Coulter. Admittedly, I think that Coulter and the like have made a valid argument that contradicts Islam’s slogan as a “religion of peace.” My voice on that matter has largely been diplomatic. I am hesitant to call Muslims names and beat on their religion. I don’t think this tactic does anything to resolve the post-September 11 tensions that exist. Nor do I believe it will curb the tendency of Muslims to act out violently. Positive reinforcement has been my mantra.
And yet, I am continuously disappointed at the results of that approach. My own patience grew thin when Muslims around the world responded in violent overdramatic fashion to the infamous Danish cartoon incident.
Muslims insisted that a visual depiction of the Prophet Mohammed was against the laws of their faith. No matter that the rest of the world may not agree. They were to abide by Islamic law, too.
The message: Respect our faith. Okay, after the flag burnings and rioting and violence and even death, we get the message. No more Mohammed in cartoons (see the latest South Park/Comedy Central controversy in case you’re not sure).
Turn now to a new story. Surfing through the news sites today I read this headline: Palestinians: Tel Aviv Bombing Legitimate. Here’s what happened:
It would be foolish to assume that the most recent act of mid-east terror had nothing to do with the timing of the Jewish holiday. Therefore, I cannot help but wonder why Muslims insist that the rest of world respect the principles of their faith, and yet they are not obliged to return the favor?
To me, this can only mean one of two things: Either radical Islam has very poor public relations skills or it truly does not care about the sanctity of any other religion or ideal. My money is on the latter. I think Islamic terrorists (two words keenly chosen to in conjunction with each other here) have executed their message perfectly well thus far.
In tit-for-tat logic then, this begs the question, “Why should the rest of the world show the respect for Mohammed and Islam that Muslims demand when Muslims have no intention of doing the same?”
That question may provoke criticism from my not-so-friends on the left. “Why have I associated all Muslims with a single radical group?” They will demand. Well, I don’t ever recall hearing the greater Muslim community condemn this or any other acts of Islamic terrorism (there’s those words again).
If Muslims continue to act in such a manner, they will find themselves increasingly on the fray of the public defense – even from those who have championed their religion up to this point (President Bush and Comedy Central included). The message ought to be clear to them, abide by the rules of a civil society or forever face defamation and bombings. That’s pretty blunt, but it’s the politically incorrect truth.
And of course, the reigning question here, “Is Islam truly a religion of peace?”
In answer to that, I urge my readers to refresh themselves with the above paragraphs and then flip through the news headlines of the day…or any day.
And yet, I am continuously disappointed at the results of that approach. My own patience grew thin when Muslims around the world responded in violent overdramatic fashion to the infamous Danish cartoon incident.
Muslims insisted that a visual depiction of the Prophet Mohammed was against the laws of their faith. No matter that the rest of the world may not agree. They were to abide by Islamic law, too.
The message: Respect our faith. Okay, after the flag burnings and rioting and violence and even death, we get the message. No more Mohammed in cartoons (see the latest South Park/Comedy Central controversy in case you’re not sure).
Turn now to a new story. Surfing through the news sites today I read this headline: Palestinians: Tel Aviv Bombing Legitimate. Here’s what happened:
TEL AVIV, Israel - A Palestinian suicide bomber blew himself up outside a fast-food restaurant in a bustling area of Tel Aviv during the Passover holiday Monday, killing eight other people and wounding at least 49 in the deadliest Palestinian attack in more than a year.
The Palestinians' new Hamas leaders called the attack a legitimate response to Israeli "aggression." Israel said it held Hamas ultimately responsible — even though a different militant group, Islamic Jihad, claimed responsibility — and would respond "as necessary."
A radical Islamic group took pride and credit in the Passover attack. For those who may not know, Passover is a Jewish holiday commemorating
the Exodus and freedom of the Israelites from ancient Egypt. For the Jews, and even many Christians, this is a big holiday.It would be foolish to assume that the most recent act of mid-east terror had nothing to do with the timing of the Jewish holiday. Therefore, I cannot help but wonder why Muslims insist that the rest of world respect the principles of their faith, and yet they are not obliged to return the favor?
To me, this can only mean one of two things: Either radical Islam has very poor public relations skills or it truly does not care about the sanctity of any other religion or ideal. My money is on the latter. I think Islamic terrorists (two words keenly chosen to in conjunction with each other here) have executed their message perfectly well thus far.
In tit-for-tat logic then, this begs the question, “Why should the rest of the world show the respect for Mohammed and Islam that Muslims demand when Muslims have no intention of doing the same?”
That question may provoke criticism from my not-so-friends on the left. “Why have I associated all Muslims with a single radical group?” They will demand. Well, I don’t ever recall hearing the greater Muslim community condemn this or any other acts of Islamic terrorism (there’s those words again).
If Muslims continue to act in such a manner, they will find themselves increasingly on the fray of the public defense – even from those who have championed their religion up to this point (President Bush and Comedy Central included). The message ought to be clear to them, abide by the rules of a civil society or forever face defamation and bombings. That’s pretty blunt, but it’s the politically incorrect truth.
And of course, the reigning question here, “Is Islam truly a religion of peace?”
In answer to that, I urge my readers to refresh themselves with the above paragraphs and then flip through the news headlines of the day…or any day.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Spike's Bottom Story of the Day
I'll gladly borrow from WSJ's Best of the Web to publish my own 'Bottom Story of the Day' This headline is worth it:
Ben Affleck: Bush Can Be Hung for 'Leaks' in Plamegate
Ben Affleck: Bush Can Be Hung for 'Leaks' in Plamegate
Monday, March 27, 2006
Why do liberals protect duplicate voter registrations?
A common voice of disdain for the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s recommended policy to require an update (see here) of all Washington’s voter registrations is that the objective is to “get a Republican majority by default.”
This objection to the policy I have seen numerous times in editorials, letters to the editor and liberal blogs.
Do liberal-minded opponents then concede that if it weren’t for all of the bad registrations in the statewide voter database their Democratic party would not fair too well in elections?
Liberals and conservatives alike surely agree that the database is full of illegitimate registrations (the dead, duplicate and dubious registrations).
So, is this the general consensus amongst Democrats? My own understanding of this argument is left wanting.
If there are liberal readers perusing this conservative blog (for kicks, we’ll say) then refute this by all means.
This objection to the policy I have seen numerous times in editorials, letters to the editor and liberal blogs.
Do liberal-minded opponents then concede that if it weren’t for all of the bad registrations in the statewide voter database their Democratic party would not fair too well in elections?
Liberals and conservatives alike surely agree that the database is full of illegitimate registrations (the dead, duplicate and dubious registrations).
So, is this the general consensus amongst Democrats? My own understanding of this argument is left wanting.
If there are liberal readers perusing this conservative blog (for kicks, we’ll say) then refute this by all means.
Friday, March 17, 2006
TIME: ‘Sticking to his guns’
The cover of the February 27 TIME magazine featured Vice President Dick Cheney, questioning his influence over presidential policy in the Bush White House. Here’s what the teaser line said:
From the Iraq war to torture to energy policy, DICK CHENEY stubbornly clings to what he believes. But how much does he still have the President’s ear?
Wow. I wish those darned elected officials would quit clinging to their beliefs! Don’t they know they are corrupting this country? The further atrocity here is that Cheney does so “stubbornly”.
I read this while in the bathroom and so perhaps I am overly philosophical on the subject but, doesn’t society traditionally mark one who sticks to their beliefs, even when the going gets tough, as virtuous? Or I suppose it is only noble to do so when ones beliefs coincide with your own?
This is just one of many, many examples that show how editorialized the news media really is. In fact, most news stories as they appear in TIME and NEWSWEEK are editorialized. There is an inherent bias that exists.
I don’t have a problem with full magazines devoted to opinions and commentary. After all, I don’t think I have ever written an unbiased piece on political subjects either. The difference is that TIME and NEWSWEEK claim to do so under the guise of compelling news. Yet, this is not compelling news at all. And TIME magazine is geared toward the neophyte political reader who is easily influence by mass media reporting. To me, this is a disgusting show of media ethics, purveyed in a subtle form.
When did this become okay?
Thursday, March 02, 2006
More on election reform
An editorial in the Seattle PI today is headlined, “King County Elections: Coming up short.” This headline should come as no surprise to anyone…except election officials.
It is interesting that while the public and the media understand that elections in this state are a mess, political figures have yet to grasp that.
Last month in a press conference, Ron Sims said, “We don't need an overhaul. They (elections officials) have really pulled their act together.”
Was he kidding?! I am afraid not. And sadly this is the tenor for many of those who are supposed to be “reformers.” Sam Reed, we mean you.
Here’s another example, the Seattle Times today also ran an editorial titled, “Restore faith in county elections.” The press gets it. They understand there is a problem.
These types of news stories and editorials have not stopped running since the 2004 election. Every week—and often every day—there is another article on this issue.
There is a tendency for conservatives to take opposition to the Washington state press corps. After all, this state is a blue, blue state dominated by the liberal metropolitan Puget Sound. The media here can be just as blue. But the media is not the opposition. They have done their job. They have reported every election nuance with utter scrutiny. Sometimes it is favorable, and sometimes not, but they have shown willingness to get to the bottom of the issue.
Many liberal blogs have offered sharp criticism of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s proposed initiative to require all voters to update their registrations. Some of that has filtered into editorial boards across the state.
One major complaint is that this would cost too much to “re-register” all voters. I fret at the irony of this objection. Liberals are too eager to spend every drop of state revenue—and then some, except when it comes to elections. (Is a Beer Commission more worthy of tax dollars than a clean voter roll? I digress.)
It is truly time for real election reform to happen. The real opposition is elected officials who don’t want to confess their sins that the election system is not fixed. Why should they? Their political careers rest on this issue.
There are plenty of great ideas out there. EFF’s Voter Integrity Project is at the forefront of most of them. I encourage you to read their proposals, they are worthy.
The media is one of the public’s greatest assets in this issue. There have been a lot of dumb statements (I reference Sims’ above quote), and the media has caught most of them.
The citizen is the greater asset, though. It is he who will ultimately decide the fate of our elections system, whether it be a vote on an initiative or a vote for a candidate. But it is the job of the citizen to pay attention to what the media is reporting. Our elections system is not fixed, and previous efforts for “reform” are bunk.
Cost should be a secondary evaluation to need. Coming from a true conservative, that should say a lot about the state of our elections.
We need real election reform now.
For solutions to our election woes, visit the links below:
::Balloting rolls will be wrong until every voter in state registers again
::Washington state’s new voter database is flawed
::New state voter database still has major problems
It is interesting that while the public and the media understand that elections in this state are a mess, political figures have yet to grasp that.
Last month in a press conference, Ron Sims said, “We don't need an overhaul. They (elections officials) have really pulled their act together.”
Was he kidding?! I am afraid not. And sadly this is the tenor for many of those who are supposed to be “reformers.” Sam Reed, we mean you.
Here’s another example, the Seattle Times today also ran an editorial titled, “Restore faith in county elections.” The press gets it. They understand there is a problem.
These types of news stories and editorials have not stopped running since the 2004 election. Every week—and often every day—there is another article on this issue.
There is a tendency for conservatives to take opposition to the Washington state press corps. After all, this state is a blue, blue state dominated by the liberal metropolitan Puget Sound. The media here can be just as blue. But the media is not the opposition. They have done their job. They have reported every election nuance with utter scrutiny. Sometimes it is favorable, and sometimes not, but they have shown willingness to get to the bottom of the issue.
Many liberal blogs have offered sharp criticism of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s proposed initiative to require all voters to update their registrations. Some of that has filtered into editorial boards across the state.
One major complaint is that this would cost too much to “re-register” all voters. I fret at the irony of this objection. Liberals are too eager to spend every drop of state revenue—and then some, except when it comes to elections. (Is a Beer Commission more worthy of tax dollars than a clean voter roll? I digress.)
It is truly time for real election reform to happen. The real opposition is elected officials who don’t want to confess their sins that the election system is not fixed. Why should they? Their political careers rest on this issue.
There are plenty of great ideas out there. EFF’s Voter Integrity Project is at the forefront of most of them. I encourage you to read their proposals, they are worthy.
The media is one of the public’s greatest assets in this issue. There have been a lot of dumb statements (I reference Sims’ above quote), and the media has caught most of them.
The citizen is the greater asset, though. It is he who will ultimately decide the fate of our elections system, whether it be a vote on an initiative or a vote for a candidate. But it is the job of the citizen to pay attention to what the media is reporting. Our elections system is not fixed, and previous efforts for “reform” are bunk.
Cost should be a secondary evaluation to need. Coming from a true conservative, that should say a lot about the state of our elections.
We need real election reform now.
For solutions to our election woes, visit the links below:
::Balloting rolls will be wrong until every voter in state registers again
::Washington state’s new voter database is flawed
::New state voter database still has major problems
::Cole joins Respectfully Republican as contributor
You can now catch my posts on the blog, Respectfully Republican. I will be contributing exclusives there periodically and will cross-blog my posts from here.
Respectfully Republican has traditionally been a College Republican blog maintained by the Pacific Lutheran University CRs. It recently underwent a facelift and is now branded as a Young Republican blog, with new contributors and a wider range of issue content.
I am excited to join them as a contributor and I encourage my readers to also wander over there for more great commentary on an astute blend of state and national issues.
See you over there!
Respectfully Republican has traditionally been a College Republican blog maintained by the Pacific Lutheran University CRs. It recently underwent a facelift and is now branded as a Young Republican blog, with new contributors and a wider range of issue content.
I am excited to join them as a contributor and I encourage my readers to also wander over there for more great commentary on an astute blend of state and national issues.
See you over there!
AFL-CIO rejects guest worker program
Reuters reports that the AFL-CIO rejects the US guest worker program. This is none too surprising; though I am a little shocked that it took them so long to decide this...aren’t they two years late on this?
Actually, this union policy makes sense. If immigrant workers are allowed in the country under this program, they can’t really join unions and pay dues. This means there are jobs being filled that the AFL-CIO (the largest worker union in the nation, they like to brag) can’t profiteer from.
After all, a union is a business, and what a better way to profit in capitalism than to snuff out any competition? I just wonder if it has occurred to the unions that perhaps the guest worker program is their own doing. Maybe if the union wage demands on corporations weren’t so high, maybe some companies could offer jobs to U.S. residents only and actually afford to pay them.
Sigh. I guess business is business.
Actually, this union policy makes sense. If immigrant workers are allowed in the country under this program, they can’t really join unions and pay dues. This means there are jobs being filled that the AFL-CIO (the largest worker union in the nation, they like to brag) can’t profiteer from.
After all, a union is a business, and what a better way to profit in capitalism than to snuff out any competition? I just wonder if it has occurred to the unions that perhaps the guest worker program is their own doing. Maybe if the union wage demands on corporations weren’t so high, maybe some companies could offer jobs to U.S. residents only and actually afford to pay them.
Sigh. I guess business is business.
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Legislative Gag Order
The Democrat controlled legislature does not like limits. It doesn’t care for the vox populi or the mandates imposed on them by citizens. This session, Democrats in the legislature have tried their best to stifle opposition to their rash agenda. No, I am not talking about their heinous success in censoring Republicans from criticizing their budget, though that counts, too. I mean that they have taken several disgraceful actions toward limiting the right of the people to participate in democracy.
Here’s what’s gone down this session. This shouldn’t make Joe Citizen happy.
If you hate opposition, eliminate it
Early in the session Senator Ken Jacobson, a longtime Democrat legislator from Seattle proposed SJR 8201 to eliminate our power of initiative and referendum. Jacobson said that initiatives undermine America’s republican form of government. Though Jacobson seems to have forgotten that a republican government means you actually represent citizens of the state. Should the legislature take this into account, perhaps there wouldn’t be so many initiatives.
If you can’t eliminate initiatives, the stick an e-clause on it
SJR 8201 quickly failed in committee, mostly due to political posturing. So, the Dems reverted back to last year’s session trend, the emergency clause.
This clause is intended to be used only when the health or safety of state citizens is at risk. Most new laws do not take effect until 90 days after the legislative session adjourns. This allows citizens time to gather signatures to file a referendum (remember, one of those things Jacobson hates). Our state democracy is designed so that citizens ultimately have the final say on whether or not a measure becomes law. When an emergency clause is enacted on a bill, the right to referendum is denied.
This year, the abuse of the emergency clause has again been rampant. When Rep. Toby Nixon (R-Kirkland) introduced legislation to prevent the abuse of the emergency clause, Speaker Frank Chopp quickly killed it. In return, he asked members to “govern themselves” when using it. This reeks of dirty politics. The Democrats don’t want to eliminate the emergency clause; it’s their bread and butter for ensuring that their arrogance of power is not overturned by the people they are supposed to represent.
The slow death of I-601
In order to make legal their “tax-and-spend” “shell game” (I use these words copiously here since Republicans in the House have been censored), Democrats have to first further gut I-601. SB 6896 and PSHB 2552 would accomplish this. These two bills are supposed to appropriate money into savings accounts. Under the guise of fiscal foresight though, these bills are deceiving. The intent of them is not to truly save money, but to artificially inflate the 601 spending limit. What’s worse, the emergency clause again makes an encore appearance on both these bills. I am sniffing and sniffing but still don’t smell any smoke! Where’s the emergency?
Senator Joe Zarelli (R-Ridgefield) is leading the charge against these two bills by proposing a series of amendments to eliminate the emergency clause, changes the bill titles to show true effect, and prevents I-601 from being gutted. A vote in the Senate is due any day now.
I am beginning to think that when Tim Eyman showed up to a Senate hearing in January wearing handcuffs and duct tape over his mouth was more than just a political stunt. It now seems to be a valid analogy of what’s going on in Olympia.
Here’s what’s gone down this session. This shouldn’t make Joe Citizen happy.
If you hate opposition, eliminate it
Early in the session Senator Ken Jacobson, a longtime Democrat legislator from Seattle proposed SJR 8201 to eliminate our power of initiative and referendum. Jacobson said that initiatives undermine America’s republican form of government. Though Jacobson seems to have forgotten that a republican government means you actually represent citizens of the state. Should the legislature take this into account, perhaps there wouldn’t be so many initiatives.
If you can’t eliminate initiatives, the stick an e-clause on it
SJR 8201 quickly failed in committee, mostly due to political posturing. So, the Dems reverted back to last year’s session trend, the emergency clause.
This clause is intended to be used only when the health or safety of state citizens is at risk. Most new laws do not take effect until 90 days after the legislative session adjourns. This allows citizens time to gather signatures to file a referendum (remember, one of those things Jacobson hates). Our state democracy is designed so that citizens ultimately have the final say on whether or not a measure becomes law. When an emergency clause is enacted on a bill, the right to referendum is denied.
This year, the abuse of the emergency clause has again been rampant. When Rep. Toby Nixon (R-Kirkland) introduced legislation to prevent the abuse of the emergency clause, Speaker Frank Chopp quickly killed it. In return, he asked members to “govern themselves” when using it. This reeks of dirty politics. The Democrats don’t want to eliminate the emergency clause; it’s their bread and butter for ensuring that their arrogance of power is not overturned by the people they are supposed to represent.
The slow death of I-601
In order to make legal their “tax-and-spend” “shell game” (I use these words copiously here since Republicans in the House have been censored), Democrats have to first further gut I-601. SB 6896 and PSHB 2552 would accomplish this. These two bills are supposed to appropriate money into savings accounts. Under the guise of fiscal foresight though, these bills are deceiving. The intent of them is not to truly save money, but to artificially inflate the 601 spending limit. What’s worse, the emergency clause again makes an encore appearance on both these bills. I am sniffing and sniffing but still don’t smell any smoke! Where’s the emergency?
Senator Joe Zarelli (R-Ridgefield) is leading the charge against these two bills by proposing a series of amendments to eliminate the emergency clause, changes the bill titles to show true effect, and prevents I-601 from being gutted. A vote in the Senate is due any day now.
I am beginning to think that when Tim Eyman showed up to a Senate hearing in January wearing handcuffs and duct tape over his mouth was more than just a political stunt. It now seems to be a valid analogy of what’s going on in Olympia.
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Illegal initiative argument refuted
While perusing the liberal blogs the other day for amusement, I came across several disturbing posts. Not that their content was of any great controversy or that the ideas were x-rated, but because I have become more and more amazed at the lack of rational thought displayed in most liberal commentary.
Just this week, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation held a press conference on the job performance of Secretary of State Sam Reed, election reform and the prospect of a new initiative to be run by EFF’s c(4) spin-off, Grassroots Washington.
It is true; Grassroots Washington will likely run an initiative this year that would demand a clean voter roll. While the language of the initiative is still being worked out, the initiative would require all voters to update their registrations in order to vote a regular ballot in the next general election. Anyone who does not update their registration will still be able to cast a provisional ballot that will not be counted until the individual’s voter registration is updated.
The statewide voter database introduced by Reed last month can only maintain a clean voter roll, it cannot create one. With all of the erroneous registrations in the current database, there is little hope that it will single-handedly restore voter trust.
Thus, the best way to have a clean voter roll is to suspend all active registrations and allow legal, valid voters to update their registration to prevent further disenfranchisement by Reed, the Democrats and those who cast illegal ballots.
One blog in particular (found here) has made an especially crude argument. This blogger insists that the initiative to be filed by EFF/GW is illegal…and they know it. Gasp! The conspiracy! The deception! The mayhem! Please.
The blogger founds this argument based on the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. This act essentially states that no voter may be purged from the system once he or she is in it. The exceptions would be in the case of death or by the registrant himself.
Therefore, this blogger concludes, EFF/GW is knowingly drafting an illegal initiative.
This argument is mortally flawed. If the EFF/GW initiative would actually say that all voters will be removed and anyone who wishes to vote is forced to reregister then yes, it would be illegal. But the blogger is negligent in his argument. He did not bother to closely examine what EFF/GW is proposing.
They do not say that all voters will be purged from the voter database. Current registrations will only be suspended and they can still vote. So no law will be violated and no statute will be changed.
This initiative will be an important one to pass in November. It is obvious that our elected leaders will not pursue meaningful election reform. This initiative will restore trust in Washington’s electoral system because it will prevent double voters, duplicate registrations, deceased voters and non citizen voters.
This will be the first of many steps to real election reform.
One last thing, the blogger states:
“I could spend pages refuting the EFF’s arguments, but to do so in the context of an initiative that clearly violates federal law is not only a waste of time, it’s exactly what the EFF wants. The entire purpose of this initiative is to rile up the paranoid Republican base enough to turn them out on election day, and I for one, am not interested in giving the EFF the bogus debate they want.”
This is laughable. Not only is it sophomoric to claim you have so many arguments against something but you won’t waste the time listing them, it is weak. If you are not going to actually articulate your argument, then don’t make the claim. It’s generic, cliché and nobody buys it. The rest of us learned that in grade school.
Secondly, this blogger suggest that EFF needs this initiative to pass so that the Republicans can win. Ha! So is he admitting that the Democrats need illegal votes to keep winning in Washington? Looks like it.
Just this week, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation held a press conference on the job performance of Secretary of State Sam Reed, election reform and the prospect of a new initiative to be run by EFF’s c(4) spin-off, Grassroots Washington.
It is true; Grassroots Washington will likely run an initiative this year that would demand a clean voter roll. While the language of the initiative is still being worked out, the initiative would require all voters to update their registrations in order to vote a regular ballot in the next general election. Anyone who does not update their registration will still be able to cast a provisional ballot that will not be counted until the individual’s voter registration is updated.
The statewide voter database introduced by Reed last month can only maintain a clean voter roll, it cannot create one. With all of the erroneous registrations in the current database, there is little hope that it will single-handedly restore voter trust.
Thus, the best way to have a clean voter roll is to suspend all active registrations and allow legal, valid voters to update their registration to prevent further disenfranchisement by Reed, the Democrats and those who cast illegal ballots.
One blog in particular (found here) has made an especially crude argument. This blogger insists that the initiative to be filed by EFF/GW is illegal…and they know it. Gasp! The conspiracy! The deception! The mayhem! Please.
The blogger founds this argument based on the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. This act essentially states that no voter may be purged from the system once he or she is in it. The exceptions would be in the case of death or by the registrant himself.
Therefore, this blogger concludes, EFF/GW is knowingly drafting an illegal initiative.
This argument is mortally flawed. If the EFF/GW initiative would actually say that all voters will be removed and anyone who wishes to vote is forced to reregister then yes, it would be illegal. But the blogger is negligent in his argument. He did not bother to closely examine what EFF/GW is proposing.
They do not say that all voters will be purged from the voter database. Current registrations will only be suspended and they can still vote. So no law will be violated and no statute will be changed.
This initiative will be an important one to pass in November. It is obvious that our elected leaders will not pursue meaningful election reform. This initiative will restore trust in Washington’s electoral system because it will prevent double voters, duplicate registrations, deceased voters and non citizen voters.
This will be the first of many steps to real election reform.
One last thing, the blogger states:
“I could spend pages refuting the EFF’s arguments, but to do so in the context of an initiative that clearly violates federal law is not only a waste of time, it’s exactly what the EFF wants. The entire purpose of this initiative is to rile up the paranoid Republican base enough to turn them out on election day, and I for one, am not interested in giving the EFF the bogus debate they want.”
This is laughable. Not only is it sophomoric to claim you have so many arguments against something but you won’t waste the time listing them, it is weak. If you are not going to actually articulate your argument, then don’t make the claim. It’s generic, cliché and nobody buys it. The rest of us learned that in grade school.
Secondly, this blogger suggest that EFF needs this initiative to pass so that the Republicans can win. Ha! So is he admitting that the Democrats need illegal votes to keep winning in Washington? Looks like it.
Friday, February 24, 2006
Censorship anyone?
Just when you think House Democrats could not be more ludicrous in their majority rule, they have taken their arrogance of power to a new level.
Now House Republicans are banned from using certain phrases when talking about the Democrat supplemental budget, including “tax and spend” and “shell game.”
Heaven forbid anyone oppose them openly.
This reminds me of, say….totalitarianism. I seem to remember Stalin and Saddam doing the same thing. That's curious.
It's also good to note here that both the Chief Clerk, Rich Nafziger, and House Counsel, Tim Sekarek, are "non-partisan" staff. Humph, right.
My favorite quote in the article? Nafziger says, “You can’t use taxpayers’ dollars to sling mud.”
So, what is the essence politics again? I have forgotten.
Now House Republicans are banned from using certain phrases when talking about the Democrat supplemental budget, including “tax and spend” and “shell game.”
Heaven forbid anyone oppose them openly.
This reminds me of, say….totalitarianism. I seem to remember Stalin and Saddam doing the same thing. That's curious.
It's also good to note here that both the Chief Clerk, Rich Nafziger, and House Counsel, Tim Sekarek, are "non-partisan" staff. Humph, right.
My favorite quote in the article? Nafziger says, “You can’t use taxpayers’ dollars to sling mud.”
So, what is the essence politics again? I have forgotten.
THE OLYMPIAN
Move over, George Carlin.
House Republicans say there are “seven dirty words” you can never say when talking about the Democrats’ budget this year in Olympia.
Among the forbidden phrases: “Shell game.” “Lack of honesty with taxpayers.” “Tax-and-spend liberal.” “It’s not truthful to say this money is being put into reserve.”
Carlin wasn’t joking about the words not allowed on TV. And it appears the GOP isn’t joking, either.
Republican news releases using the forbidden phrases were removed from Web sites and edited this week by order of the House Chief Clerk’s Office and its legal counsel.
The reason: The words impugned the motives of the other party’s members at taxpayer expense, House Chief Clerk Rich Nafziger said Thursday. “You can’t use taxpayers’ dollars to sling mud.”read the full article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
