Ken Schram, a populist democrat commentator for KOMO TV, is putting his hands over his eyes and sees no evil in the 2004 gubernatorial election.
Schram seems eager to rush to the defense of Republican Sam Reed for "doing his job" and described Reed's performance as "great" on KVI's John Carlson show yesterday.
Schram doesn't see any military voters being disenfranchised. This despite reports of State Elections Director Nick Handy (a Democrat) sending an e-mail marked "URGENT" to all county auditors informing them that the Justice Department "is preparing a lawsuit to be filed tomorrow against the State of Washington." Nothing wrong with the Secretary of State's office even though Washington State was last in the nation to send ballots to military voters, right Ken?
Or how about the fact that there are more votes than voters? The Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a government watchdog non-profit organization, reveals that Sam Reed violated his own rules by ceritfying the results without requiring counties to reconcile the votes.
But Ken thinks that Sam Reed did a great job and we should all just tone it down and let the courts handle it. Ken - By the way, did you know that Sam Reed seeks to delay discovery in the election contest? Maybe he doesn't want the truth to come out in a timely manner?
Schram finds the Reed recall petition "entertaining" and likens it to Repbulicans eating their own. Well what if Sam Reed certified the recall petition and it contained a million signatures of felons and dead people? I guess that would be okay with Ken Schram (Sam Reed's newest, best blind buddy.)
Do we have any artists that can morph Schram's head onto the three monkeys (See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil?)
I understand that he was in a difficult spot. If he had failed to certify, he would have been accused of partisanship. But he went along with the funny numbers, which was cowardly, and which just passed the buck to someone else.
He should have resigned in protest. That at least would have focused more attention on the issue, for the benefit of the voters of WA state.
Posted by: Bostonian on January 14, 2005 09:48 AM Some great news courtesy orbusmax.
dino rossi will be on hannity&colmes
tonight at 6pm on foxnews channel.
It will be live interview.I'm interested
to see what that idiot colmes will come up with
as a defense for his parties actions.
I can only imagine.dont worry whatever it is
will be weak. it always is.
That description also fits Fisher Broadcasting generally and KOMO-TV in particular. KOMO is more or less on it's last leg because no one watches them
Posted by: Mike H on January 14, 2005 09:57 AMWhich is it Ken -- Is it just talk radio hosts and blogs swaying our malleable minds or are the PI and times also delivering the same message? Ever stop to consider you might be wrong and we're actually forming our own opinions based on the facts?
Posted by: Joe on January 14, 2005 10:05 AMThe very best - well, the only - tool for keeping focused on issues which Barendt and Schramm brush off so glibly in interviews is Sound Politics - since the MSM in Seattle are studied in their indifference to the details of misfeasance in the Democratic-controlled King County Elections Board.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 14, 2005 10:11 AMY'all are going to pay a price for this !!!!
Posted by: Brad on January 14, 2005 10:17 AMThat is something I've been thinking about...don't leftys get tired of being wrong?
Posted by: South County on January 14, 2005 10:30 AM"... that people had been duped by conservative Talk Radio."
Consider this...THAT is a major admission as to the effectiveness of the COMPETITION!! We won't have to worry about advertizers. They'll notice and move their ads to our more effective stations. I'll give Schram credit for being polite when he sparred with John. Not many from that side do. It was interesting to hear them give and take and I'll give it to John. Schram tended to dodge questions and it showed!! Hope for more of that format. Of course Fisher Broadcast might have been listening and I'm sure that Schram got an interesting memo or two from the front office!
Remember we don't have to win the argument. The fact that they are arguing proves our point because it should be a slam dunk with most people. Regular Joe's and Jane's have never liked anyone changing the rules or cheating... be it when we were kids playing Monopoly or as adults in the real world.
Posted by: Victor on January 14, 2005 10:52 AMhttp://www.buyblue.org/alphalist.php
REVOTE!!!!
Posted by: niceville on January 14, 2005 10:59 AMIt was amazing to hear his self delusion. What I continually read from him and the other mainstream liberal reinforcers of Gregoire legitimacy is the mantra of "no proveable fraud."
Ken and the others like him seem to think that by repeating this mantra and out shouting the alternative media such as talk radio and blogs, that the facts will just go away.
But this entirely ignores the obvious. It's a plain fact that there are more improper felon votes than the margin of the election. It's also a plain fact that 1800 ballots don't have voters.
It's truly incredible that these liberals are able to will themselves into a state of comfort in light of these facts which would raise suspicion in any rational person.
The reason why so much of the state of Washington is for a re-vote is that the facts of irregularity are so obvious.
How do you do it Ken? I'd love to know the secret so I could hide from any problems that confront me as well. Life must be very convenient for you.
Posted by: Jeff B. on January 14, 2005 11:03 AMHe did claim to have voted for Rossi, but overall like Dave Ross who also claims to be a moderate, he's usually left of center. But it's his self-righteousness that has caused me not to be able to stomach him.
Posted by: Terry Mueller on January 14, 2005 11:07 AMI heard some of this guy (schramm?) on the radio yesterday and heard his comments that he believes the whole thing is being overblown by right-wing local radio, etc. Overblown! Do you know what they would do with this sort of thing back east! Not even the NY media libs would stand for a bloody stolen election! Just prior to moving here, my wife and I had moved outside the city to southern CT, a state that knows something about how to handle political toxic waste (gov Roland, for those who haven’t heard, was on the take). Never were there reasonable voices raised in defense of what more or less amounted to little more than a poor governor with an expensive divorce skim a little extra. He was roundly condemned and crucified. What we have here in WA is arguably much worse. We all talk talk talk about a revote, but that’s the legal stance at this juncture. The substance is a fraudulent election for the highest office in the state, and the media shrugs it off…why? Because they’re too nice? Because everyone here in WA is too nice to talk about anything but salmon? Is that what’s going on here?
I actually said to my wife yesterday, “why do we even subscribe to these local rags?” To which she remarked something about living a civic duty to subscribe to the local dailies if you live in a major metro area. I guess we need to know who’s having after-Christmas sales, if nothing else.
This is a long-winded way of saying that, as an outsider, you guys are all dead on with this. It’s got to be disheartening to pick up the papers (I don’t watch TV, but I’m sure that’s even worse) and see these posers pretending to be the intelligence of the collective Seattle soul. And the STimes and the PI wonder why they’re near death? Because there’s nothing worth reading. There isn’t even a decent sports writer in this town.
Keep up the good work. Don’t let the rest of the country think you’re all a bunch of salmon-hugging airheads who’ll stand for this kind of a shockingly blatant rip-off.
I heard some of this guy (schramm?) on the radio yesterday and heard his comments that he believes the whole thing is being overblown by right-wing local radio, etc. Overblown! Do you know what they would do with this sort of thing back east! Not even the NY media libs would stand for a bloody stolen election! Just prior to moving here, my wife and I had moved outside the city to southern CT, a state that knows something about how to handle political toxic waste (gov Roland, for those who haven’t heard, was on the take). Never were there reasonable voices raised in defense of what more or less amounted to little more than a poor governor with an expensive divorce skim a little extra. He was roundly condemned and crucified. What we have here in WA is arguably much worse. We all talk talk talk about a revote, but that’s the legal stance at this juncture. The substance is a fraudulent election for the highest office in the state, and the media shrugs it off…why? Because they’re too nice? Because everyone here in WA is too nice to talk about anything but salmon? Is that what’s going on here?
I actually said to my wife yesterday, “why do we even subscribe to these local rags?” To which she remarked something about living a civic duty to subscribe to the local dailies if you live in a major metro area. I guess we need to know who’s having after-Christmas sales, if nothing else.
This is a long-winded way of saying that, as an outsider, you guys are all dead on with this. It’s got to be disheartening to pick up the papers (I don’t watch TV, but I’m sure that’s even worse) and see these posers pretending to be the intelligence of the collective Seattle soul. And the STimes and the PI wonder why they’re near death? Because there’s nothing worth reading. There isn’t even a decent sports writer in this town.
Keep up the good work. Don’t let the rest of the country think you’re all a bunch of salmon-hugging airheads who’ll stand for this kind of a shockingly blatant rip-off.
After an appearance on Carlson's show one time, John answered some caller questions on the subject, saying that Ken prides himself on being a curmudgeon, being contrary, and triangulating himself to offend everyone. It's part of his effort to 'get people to think.'
I seem to recall that he's closer to being a libertarian than anything else. He also jokes about being the only person in town that bathes regularly who is persona non grata wherever he goes.
And he does, on occasion, take stands on things that are distinctly against the leftist party line.
On balance, I don't read him, don't listen to him, and generally don't consider him cutting edge. And I'm the type of person he should be trying to reach. Tough.
Posted by: scott158 on January 14, 2005 11:19 AMIn the Human Events article a compelling case
was made that an entire units ballots were
destroyed by terrorists! Namely, Iraqi
terrorists destroyed a mail truck that was,
apparently, transporting absentee ballots. A few
soldiers received badly burnt ballots well after
the election, while the rest did not receive
their ballots at all. This indicates that an entire
unit had their ballots destroyed by terrorists!
What we know for certain is that this election
was extremely close. And, we can assume that
when felonous voters are discounted the apperent
margin will be even closer. The destruction of
these ballots by terrorists may very well have
effected the outcome of an American election!
Is it tolerable to allow terrorists to directly
affect the outcome of an American election by
destroying ballots in a terrorist act?
Apparently, it is to Christine Gregroire!
Already, Sam Reed is moving to ex post facto
outlaw her late antics in King county. And,
the federal government may very well step in
to insure that in the next election that all
overseas ballots are mailed at least 45 days
before the election. Already, her apparent
"victory" is tainted. But, is she willing to
be the governor who "won" with help of terrorists?
Christine Gregroire has proven to be shameless.
She is going to try to cling to her "victory"
even if it was tainted with the direct help of
terrorists. But, that is a bullet a lot of
Democrats will refuse to bite!
Make them bite that bullet!
Well if you are going to stretch the truth and bend it into a lie to support your argument, at least make sure your provided link doesn’t discredit your lie. The Reed’s position in court is clearly stated in the Times article:
“Secretary of State Sam Reed's attorneys filed papers opposing Rossi's request that discovery be allowed on an expedited basis, but they didn't claim all discovery should end, as the Democrats did.”
"Sam Reed's position is the facts should come out but not on this chaotic, truncated schedule," Reed attorney Thomas Ahearne said. “
I understand that the Revote crowed thinks that twisting facts to support your case is OK, but you just shouldn't make it so obvious. Ask the Shark for advise, he can show how an expert does it.
I have checked the buyblue.org site some time ago. They also list 'red' companies. While it is helpful to know - Costco is also blue, maybe we should switch to SAMS Club? - I find it a little suspicious. In the 'red' column they have listed TARGET as contributing mainly to republicans. TARGET/MERVINS/MARSHALLS FIELD/DAYTON are Minneapolis based stores and they belong to the democratic senator from MN, Mark Dayton. I don't believe he would contribute to his opponents.
Posted by: E.W. on January 14, 2005 11:26 AMI know Ken as I have spent a fair amount of time talking to him at various little league and high school sports events that our sons participated in.
Ken has an ego that is bigger than the Space Needle. He is not a reporter. He is an "on air personality."
That means he is focused on "entertaining" the mass TV & Radio audiences in ultra liberal Seattle. He tells them what they want to hear, not what is factual or what is news.
He wants to be a "little" controversial so that he gets more attension.
Think of him as a kind in the playground doing things that the other kids will like and that will call atention to himself.
Posted by: Bob on January 14, 2005 11:33 AMThe pseudo-intellectual elites remind me of Kevin Kline's Otto character in "A Fish Called Wanda", when Wanda calls him a gorilla.
"Well, Gorillas DON'T read Neitzche!" he says.
she answers, "Yes they do, they just don't UNDERSTAND it!"
Posted by: noel on January 14, 2005 11:38 AMThat's what Democrats in this state always say when the majority doesn't agree with them. It's part of their elitist stance. "We just know better, and people will accept that we are right after talk radio drops the topic."
Got news for ya GreGore - I haven't listened to a radio in years.
On the Sam Reed criticism: I think you guys ought to lay off a little. We vote him in there to do his job and follow the law. He's trying to do that. It would make all Republicans look very unattractive to independents in this state if he were to tow the party line like Chris Vance (the designated bull dog) instead of walking a fine line.
As unfortunate as it is, a Republican can't get elected to a statewide office in WA without being able to do better than 40% in King County.
He isn't going to commit political suicide by dissing King County completely and it would not be good for our point of view if he did.
Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on January 14, 2005 12:11 PMIn a court case one can not proceed without a full discovery. Mr. Reed's opinion that he wants the facts to come out, but on HIS time table, is in effect delaying the process. It is not unsual to request an expidited response when your case is due to be heard relatively soon in court. His office is quite capable of fullfilling the request. Referring to Tom as a liar because of his post is, IMHO, out of line.
Posted by: BlueKnight on January 14, 2005 12:42 PMDeadManVoting - I couldn't disagree with you more on this point. Reed's paramount responsibility is ensure that the law is upheld, and he apparently failed to do that, when he certified the results without having the documentation REQUIRED by THE LAW.
The only thing that makes it possible for me to tolerate having lefty buffoons like Gary Schlocke and Christine Fraudoire in office is the knowledge that they were lawfully elected by the votes of my fellow citizens.
Quite frankly, if Reed can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. But I think there's more to it than that. Why should Reed have been so concerned about the political fallout? A majority of the citizens of Washington (including, if memory serves, about 45% of Democrats) think that the election was hopelessly flawed, and want a revote.
Posted by: ewaggin on January 14, 2005 12:44 PMAs I was reading the comments from top to bottom, I found myself wondering, "Does anybody really know Ken Schram? Is he always a grousing, unpleasant man?". Thank you for giving us some personal insight into who he is.
I do not go out of my way to listen to or read Schram's opinions, but when I do I usually just ignore him. I am not part of his intended audience, anyway. If he wants to target me and other thinking conservatives, he needs to stop acting like a gruff old circus bear performing for his adoring Seattle audience, wolfing down their kudos like day-old donuts.
This is just one more reason why I do not watch local TV news or read the local newspapers for anything more than sports updates.
Gary
Posted by: Gary on January 14, 2005 12:48 PM
"Democratic Party attorney Jenny Durkan said searching for felons who voted is the sort of work Republicans should have completed before the lawsuit was filed."
I would assume that was the duty of the Elections Officers of each county to do that after the election to make sure only valid voters cast ballots before certifying. Failing to perform that duty by the Elections Officers makes obtaining these records important at this time because evidence is at hand that proves that many felons DID vote. How many? Only a close examination of the database will tell.
Posted by: JimL on January 14, 2005 12:54 PMHe does not answer the tough questions about the legitimacy of the Gregiore regime. No legimate election creates an illegitimate governor (with apologies to her parents).
Also, Reed must go! He has no integrity.
Posted by: freeman on January 14, 2005 01:26 PMI thought your comments as a transplanted New Yorker were on target. We seem to pride ourselves here on being nice. Unfortunately, doing that lets us be deluded into taking pride in being nice victims. It's always a spectacle to watch the libs be anything but civil or nice, and then, when criticism comes their way, start preaching that we all need to be civil and nice. Persuading people to be nice is a good way of keeping them under control.
I'm sure it is no accident that the Bronx cheer is named as it is. I don't know if you're from the Bronx, but I'm glad you're here to cheer the process on.
Posted by: Boonie on January 14, 2005 02:13 PMNope, not from da Bronx (and can't stand the Yankees, either, although my 4-yr-old daughter swears she’s a Mets fan – go figure).
My beef really is the media and their sense of responsibility. I used to be a journalist right out of college, and even went on to get an MA in Journalism from Columbia, where I was taught by the best of the best (right?) and hung out with people who are now in pretty high journalistic spots, many of them. What drove me crazy was two things: (1) most journalists I knew then were pretty poor, angry, and wanted to change the world. Eventually you have kids and grow very tired of being poor and angry. That was me, which is why I moved on. (2) The vast majority of journalists I worked with were totally blind to their biases. They literally can't imagine such a notion as wealth creation. Their assumption is that if someone makes a buck it can ONLY be because someone else gives up a buck -- or worse! It was most likely some suity Republican guy who stole that buck and it's their job, by God, to expose this shameless injustice to the rest of the world and make them suffer for it.
But, even all of those well-intentioned but blind hyper-liberal friends of mine would give their soul for the wide open opportunity to write a major investigative piece on state election fraud at the highest level. I mean COME ON! Where are the journalists! Has a single journalist even called a stats professor to ask about probabilities and the likelihood of getting these kinds of results from a hand recount? Has any journalist written about the margin of error on 3 million votes? Even one-tenth of one percent would be 3000 votes, right? So any intelligent person knows that a win margin of 262, 42, 129 (or whatever the actual numbers were), we can never know with confidence who actually won...we're guessing. So how come not a single journalist has written about the Dems trying to shove this down our throats? This is such a prime opportunity it would make me want to quit my job and write it up -- it's the kind of things my school gives the Pulitzer Prize for. Come on! I keep thinking of that guy Schramm on the radio yesterday, telling everyone to simmer down and keep things in perspective. Keep things in perspective! We threw off a king 200+ years ago for evils like this.
Anyway, my wife thinks I'm nuts that I care about this. But how can we not? If I read one more front page story about...what is on the front pages besides the Seahawks and other garbage anyway. Even the uberliberal New York Times would be running a special daily section on something like this.
The most important part of The Seattle Times article that you linked to ( http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002150778_recount14m.html ) is this:
In papers filed Wednesday, Democratic attorneys said if the court sides with Republicans, it should at least delay discovery until some legal questions are answered. Those include:
• Should the election contest be heard by the Legislature instead of the courts?
It appears that the Democrats intend to do as I expected, i.e., wait until Gregoire the Pretender took the oath of office, then submit a motion to dismiss -- arguing that the constitution means what it says. A contested gubernatorial election "shall be decided by the legislature."
The article doesn't say the Democrats have submitted a motion to dismiss yet, but that would be the way for them to question the constitutionality of having the contested election decided by the court.
This contest might be going back to the legislature, unless the courts can live with a tortured construction of the words in that sentence of the constitution.
You're not the only one who sees the "sweep it under the rug and be nice, never communicate about anything of relevance" syndrome in Washington State.
Hey, I've lived here all my life, was born in Seattle. But I spend my hobby time fighting to preserve our true constitutional rights. There are liberals out there who hate me because of it. And I think I have grown to like it.
Why read the newspapers or watch television when you can select your data from online sources? That's what I do and it keeps me sane.
I really don't think GovNull Gregoire is going to get away with any of this. Times are changing for the liberals throughout the country, and in Washington too. They just don't know it yet.
Thanks for taking the time to let us know that you care.
Posted by: TADD on January 14, 2005 04:47 PMI for one am not nearly as disappointed in Mr. Reed as you folks are.
Those of us that live in Pierce County battled for years under the incompetence of Cathy Piersal-Stipek . Even after she was caught breaking state election law nothing was done.
Ralph Monroe claimed he could do nothing even though the Secretary of States office was supposed to oversee elections. County Prosecutors would do nothing claiming it was a political matter.
Now that incompetence and possible fraud have popped up so visibly I don't expect anything to change. Sam Reed follows the same doctrine that all he can do is rubber stamp what county auditors give him.
It was to be expected.
The real blame is at the County Auditor level and the lack of any recourse for incompetence and fraud. Auditors are elected and cannot be removed from office easily. Believe me it is hard.
Auditors are elected, so any claim of of malfeasence is always going to be considered political. When good old incompetence is found they just claim lack of budget as the problem.
When you look at the fact that over 4,000 votes were added to the total between counts it shows really sloppy work.
The auditors need to start at the precinct level with votes = voters. Those precincts should not even be accepted until that basic criteria is met.
In the case of Sam Reed the only thing I fault him for is not insisting on the same thing. He should not have accepted any certifications that did not meet the same votes = voters criteria. None of the three counts should have EVER been certified.
The only thing I can say is that we have never had a Secretary of State that was willing to stand up to the County Auditors and say "Do your job!".
Posted by: Vince Callaway on January 14, 2005 05:06 PMHow about passing a rule that if the total number of 'fishy' votes potentially attributable to the winning candidate exceeds the margin of victory, there will be a revote paid for by counties in proportion to the total number of 'fishy votes' therein?
A majority of the people in King County might not mind an election official who fudges things in the Democrat's favor (whether entirely legally or not). I don't think anyone is going to like an election official whose actions cause the election of their preferred candidate to get thrown out and leave his constituents paying the bill for a revote.
Posted by: supercat on January 14, 2005 05:31 PMI found picture that goes along with your statement about Sam Reed, and the Republicans not having a case. I never fully understood it your way until I saw this picture. Thank you for enlightening all of us.
Adriel
http://thethreemonkeys.com/175%20Meiji.jpg
Posted by: Adriel on January 15, 2005 10:27 AM