May 09, 2007
King County Elections E-mails (V): Political Bias

Last September the P-I published this op-ed by Jonathan Bechtle of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

Spokeswoman Bobbie Egan e-mailed her colleagues:

Subject: Kind of surprised the S.Times [sic] printed this garbage

For those of you who are not familiar with the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, they are an ultra conservative group out of Olympia who support requirements such as proof of citizenship to vote, and re-registration for all voters. They are funded, in part, by the BIAW.

Voters from across the political spectrum should be offended that our Elections officials make ad hominem attacks on citizens on the basis of political views and business affiliations.

If you'd prefer that the Elections office treat voters of all political stripes equally, this would be a good time to make a donation to the I-25 campaign for a separately elected non-partisan elections director.

(And please forward this to anybody you know who works for a BIAW member firm or supports the EFF).

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 09, 2007 12:57 PM | Email This
Comments
1. who support requirements such as proof of citizenship to vote

The HORROR!

Posted by: Palouse on May 9, 2007 01:03 PM
2. What are we to make of the Subject line of this e-mail? Is it against Seattle Times policy to print guest editorials in opposition to Ron Sims' political machine? Does this imply that the Seattle Times been bought by the Sims administration and Ms. Egan feels Ron Sims is not getting his money's worth?

Posted by: huckleberry on May 9, 2007 01:12 PM
3. For those of you who are not familiar with the King County Elections Office, they are an ultra liberal group out of Seattle who support requirements such as counting non-citizen's votes, recounting all illegal votes, "finding" ballots from liberal precincts, "losing" ballots from conservative precincts, illegally filing false ballot reports and registering people living in mailboxes. They are headed by an appointee of a leftist idealogue in Ron Simms and supported in part by Move-On.org, the WEA, and Hippies United against Common Sense!

Posted by: drw on May 9, 2007 01:12 PM
4. I don't see how proof of citizenship is considered ultra-conservative? Isn't citizenship a requirement for voting? This is like saying that it is ultra conservative for a cop to require you to present your drivers license when pulled over. There are basic standards for authentication and security is this world, despite what Bobbie Egan tells you.

Iraq has more secure elections than King County.

Posted by: Jeff B. on May 9, 2007 01:35 PM
5. Jeff: The term ultra-conservative need not be used in a sensible way. For people like Egan, Huff, et.al., the term serves only as a red flag. It's use is intended to get juices flowing and hackles raised. I look forward to the day when a majority of people are not excited when they hear the phrase ultra-conservative.

Posted by: huckleberry on May 9, 2007 01:42 PM
6. These e-mail renditions are getting funnier (in a sad way) and funnier as the more you put out there.

What real zinger are you setting us up for?

Disgraceful is what I call the County Elections.

Posted by: swatter on May 9, 2007 01:57 PM
7. For drw @#3
I'm thinking that the elections office also doesn't
have much regard for military ballots from those away defending our nation. But I don't have the details right in front of me.

Posted by: Pagar on May 9, 2007 02:34 PM
8.
It's amazing what the Liberal media have done to the word "Conservative".

For some reason, they have made it seem like far right fascism.

Conservative just means, basically happy with the status quo and wanting government to do less, not more.

Most American's are Conservative in their values, but they would never call themselves such because they have been brainwashed into thinking it means putting woman and children on the street.

Posted by: John Bailo on May 9, 2007 02:53 PM
9. The changes that Stefan proposes in I-25 don't really make a difference, they just turn the director into another partisan race. It fails to actually solve the problem. More partisan bureaucracy is not the solution.

Posted by: BS on May 9, 2007 02:55 PM
10. What or who is BIAW?

Posted by: Paddy on May 9, 2007 02:58 PM
11. BS: the idea is to make the Director of Elections accountable to the people rather than a tool of the county executive. Accountability is not everyone's cup of tea. Put one step between Ron Sims and King County Elections is a step in the right direction.

Posted by: huckleberry on May 9, 2007 03:00 PM
12. Paddy: BIAW is an ultra-conservative group that exists to defend the interests of the building construction industry. You know, fascists!

Posted by: huckleberry on May 9, 2007 03:03 PM
13. Elected auditor NOW! Enough of this garbage.

Egan, how many fake registrations (a la democrat fraud-group ACORN) has the EFF brought to you??? That's right---NONE! How many fake/illegal registrationsvotes is EFF trying to keep out?? As many as possible. That's a GOOD thing. Would that these people at KCE be for clean elections. That's a GOOD THING, people!

Posted by: Michele on May 9, 2007 03:05 PM
14. She's right about the not wanting to repaeat the last 3 years, as I as a taxpayer, and wondering how I can afford even the last one year of this state administration.

Posted by: GS on May 9, 2007 04:07 PM
15. Ms. Egan really isn't very bright, is she?

Posted by: Danny on May 9, 2007 05:11 PM
16. I have to agree that this is just not that professional. Work email should be for work business and any public official should exercise discretion wen using their public email.

I have to disagree though that an elected auditor would change things. How exactly would making the post political remove politics from the equation. I also find it odd that people who strongly disagree with the wisdom of the citizens of this county when it comes to whom they elect, somehow think the auditor they choose will be to their liking.

My prediction is that if I-25 does get enough signature (something I am no position to guess) it will likely pass. However I also have a feeling that you all are not going to be to happy with who wins the first term.

Posted by: Giffy on May 9, 2007 05:27 PM
17. Giffy, of course having a separately elected elections director will not 'remove politics from the equation'. That's a strawman. Nobody I know is saying that it will. What I-25 will do is make the position separately and directly accountable to the public and able to operate independently from the Executive.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on May 9, 2007 05:43 PM
18. We'll see Giffy. The Shark may put himself up there for the first time out till it gets settles out.

These e-mails are like manna from heaven. They keep giving. Any candidate that wants to win will want to clean house of Egan and others.

Up to these e-mails I was ambivalent, like yourself, Giffy, about the value of an elected auditor who has power to recommend firing, but also appointing people to better positions. Hard to fire, I understand, except for the exempts, which I assume, would include Huff and Egan.

Posted by: swatter on May 9, 2007 05:46 PM
19. Isn't it interesting that Bobbie Egan is "Kind of surprised the S.Times printed this garbage."

Indeed, I am sure it's difficult for Bobbie and her colleagues to understand when the Leftstream media, which usually runs cover for anything Democrat, decides to offer up something with a little bit of bite.

Posted by: Jeff B. on May 9, 2007 07:17 PM
20. Bobbie:
You are a sick, pathetic, perverted bastardress.
You call yourself a Public Servant?
With this type of bias???
You cannot possibly expect citizens to believe you can conduct a fair election, can you.

RESIGN immediately.

PS--I know you read SP. RESIGN.

Posted by: aaaargh on May 9, 2007 07:58 PM
21. DRW, you missed a couple, like running unverified provisional ballots immediately through the nearest machine. I forgive you, though. I realize it's a long list....

Posted by: Zarro on May 9, 2007 08:07 PM
22. Bob Williams would never manipulate the vote count or allow non existent voters.

The chickensh*ts are exposed again.

Posted by: Independent voter on May 10, 2007 05:19 AM
23. If our states republican party had any backbone, it would use these emails as the "smoking gun" to call for a federal investigation into the King County election offices.

If nothing else, it would help to get these emails out to more eyes and hopefully get people like this jerk off the payroll.

Too bad our local GOP has been taking whatever the opposite of Viagra is for years now.

Posted by: johnny on May 10, 2007 07:33 AM
24. I wonder if John McKay ever bothered to read King County Elections emails? Oh, I guess I know the answer to that question.

Posted by: JC Bob on May 11, 2007 08:59 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?