January 17, 2014
Inslee's State of the State aimed to please microtargeting segments

Gov. Jay Inslee delivered his constitutionally required State of the State message to the Legislature on Tuesday. The speech garnered most of its attention for Inslee's calls to raise $200 million for education, reversing course just weeks after unveiling his supplemental budget proposal with no such adjustment, and to increase the minimum wage statewide.

I'll leave it to the speech experts to judge the effectiveness of Inslee's State of the State. What stood out to me, though, was the strong emphasis on scoring political points with segments of the Democratic base that legislative Democrats will need to turn out in November.

Democrats here and elsewhere face the same problem every four years: portions of their base aren't reliable voters and are less apt to vote when there is no presidential race on the ballot. Even in presidential years this can be a problem. Washington Democrats needed both the gay marriage and marijuana initiatives on the ballot in 2012 to motivate voters who were not going to turn out otherwise.

Inslee's speech was tailor-made to appeal to microtargeting segments that Democrats will need voting this fall if they are to recapture control of the state Senate. First, Inslee made sure to keep the WEA happy with a call to give teachers a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) this year. He wrapped this in his call to raise $200 million more this year for education by ending as-yet-unannounced tax exemptions.

The teachers union is thrilled with the proposal, and the boost will help with the salaries-to-union-dues-to-Democratic-politicians cycle their party relies on, but not everyone is convinced a COLA is the best place to start with further education funding.

Inslee went on to call on the state Senate to join the House in passing the DREAM Act to allow undocumented students to receive state grants for college. For "progressive" groups such as One America, this bill is a top priority.

Hitting on the Democrats' top theme for 2014, Inslee pledged to do something about income inequality. His solution: raise what is already the nation's highest minimum wage. "I don't have the exact number today for what our minimum wage should be," but that "an increase in the range of $1.50 to $2.50 an hour is a step toward closing the widening economic gap." Inslee said an increase in this range "does not kill jobs."

Inslee hit on the Reproductive Parity Act and global warming in the speech too, but these seem more about general liberal politics than turnout. The other three issues? They're all about getting those ballots mailed in come November.

You can watch Inslee's speech here and read it here.

Posted by Adam Faber at January 17, 2014 04:03 PM | Email This
Comments
1. You lost.

Deal with it.

Please give it a break. He isn't doing things that much differently than you and your guy would have. You would have just microtargeted slightly different groups.

Your Partisanship is so outdated. Most conservatives have moved beyond simple Democrats Bad Republcans good dynamics.

I mean sure the Democrats are still bad, but after this vote we can't really say Republicans good can we.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/us/politics/in-defeat-for-tea-party-house-passes-1-1-trillion-spending-bill.html?_r=0

You look petty with your constant attacks against Inslee. Because you are. His people got the government retirement benefits that you would have had. Yeah, I know government jobs great benefits. But again, you lost so no benefits for you. And in the end that's what it's all about, isn't it. You.

By the way, despite voting for 1.1 Trillon of spending and all the waste that we are sure to find out about in the months ahead the Republcans were able to find the one area where even the Tea Party would be against cutting, and they cut that.

Talk about spite. How can anyone call themselves a Republican today without feeling an extreme sense of shame. The one area they did cut...benefits for our Veterans. Yeah, sure seems like spite to me. Find the area that they knew we didn't want to cut and cut that. I can just feel their hatred pouring out over that one.

Petty doesn't even cover it. Well, if they hate me that much, the Republican Establishment, then they can expect my hatred in return. Oh and they can forget about my vote. This year I am voting anti-incumbent which in my district means yeah, I will be voting for a Democrat. If that Democrat wins then two years later I will be voting against that person, but we just have to get these current people out at all cost this year. We have to stop the monsters WE have created before we can even think of going after theirs.

Posted by: Steve on January 17, 2014 10:53 PM
2. The Republican Establishment took out their hatred of the tea party upon our Veterans. You made them pay for your hatred of us!

How low can you go...

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/veterans-benefits-congress-budget/2014/01/16/id/547424

Next stop, Amnesty. Yeah, we know it's coming and it will be the final blow to the GOP. But the sooner the Republicans go the way of the Whigs the better.

Posted by: Steve on January 17, 2014 10:59 PM
3. Republicans slashed funding for our Veterans.

But, at least they saved the funding for the Food Stamp ads in Mexico.

http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/01/14/omnibus-bill-funds-usda-food-stamp-ads-mexico

I was a PCO a long while back and afterwards for a while when I was talking about Republicans I would still say "we".

Well, I have no problem with that anymore. I hate Republicans with all my heart and soul. I mean the Democrats are bad guys of course but they don't pretend to be anything else. There's a special hatred one develops for those who pretend to be good guys and then turn out to be as bad as the people they are pretending to fight with you.

In 2010 I didn't really consider myself tea party. Been there done that in 1994 and had the scars in my back to prove it.

But now the Tea Party has caught up to me. They realize now that while of course the Democrats are bad, we must FIRST defeat the Republican Establishment.

And that is what this year is going to be about. Defeating the Republicans. We have to do that before we ever can even get up to bat against the Democrats. They are the first enemy!

Posted by: Steve on January 17, 2014 11:24 PM
4. I mean how can any American come out of this without a supreme hatred of Congress regardless of Party.

And the Republicans are in the majority of the Congress.

Not enough funds to support our Vets, but yeah, enough for this...


http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/01/14/omnibus-bill-funds-usda-food-stamp-ads-mexico

Only an extreme hatred of their own constituents would make Republican Congresspeople vote this way.


Republicans are lower than dirt. The politicians I mean. So are the Democrats but its the Republicans who are constantly asking me for my money and my vote so that is why they are such a focus for me.

Posted by: Steve on January 17, 2014 11:43 PM
5. If you want to know why I am so angry well tonight I went to a movie about how George W. Bush and his so called "Rules of Engagement" got a bunch of Navy Seals killed in Afghanstan.

Sometimes men need to be sent in to war, but when these men are sent we need to give them the tools to fight and we must not tie their hands so they can't win. Bush betrayed our soliders with Rules of Engagement that ensured failure regardless of their skills. Bush tied their hands behind their backs and the Tailban killed them.

And I went out of the movie realizing that Republicans has just betrayed them again. This time just out of spite. This time just out of meanspriritness and a "you want us to cut the government - here take that tea baggers" attitude.

Look, the Democrats are bad. That goes without saying. But so are the Republicans. They have been in their own ways just as bad.

And we can't even get up to the plate against the Democrats if we don't first defeat the Republican establishment. They are enemy #1. Or to put it another way They are San Francisco whereas the Democrats are Denver (assuming as I am that they will win the AFC).

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 12:41 AM
6. " Washington Democrats needed both the gay marriage and marijuana initiatives on the ballot in 2012 to motivate voters who were not going to turn out otherwise."

Assuming, as Adam does, the truth of what he needs to prove here, it sounds like whomever put marriage equality on the ballot did the Democrats a huge favor.

"... Democrats will need voting this fall if they are to recapture control of the state Senate."

Given that the aforementioned turnout gave Democrats control of our state Senate back then, perhaps Adam can tell us why it is once again necessary for voters to re-impose our will upon our employees there. I seem to recall it involved a lot of sleazy back-room deals, and the violation of a century-old rule on how our Senate conducts our business there, but as most of it was hidden from view of us tax-paying voters, Adam's insider perspective may prove helpful.

What really stands out most about this post is what it doesn't contain: any working analysis of the many policies Gov. Inslee mentioned in his State of our State speech. Adam spends no words examining what effect each policy might have. If gubernatorial candidate McKenna hired a policy director who can't or won't analyze policies, it's little wonder Inslee won handily.

Posted by: tensor on January 18, 2014 06:53 AM
7. @1 - I'll keep your claims in mind (with the exception of the last paragraph - which is only an opinion) and will recap what the landscape looks like in December.

Posted by: KDS on January 18, 2014 09:44 AM
8. More censoring of criticism from the Right - typical Republican establishment.

You never see them censor Leftist criticism here.

Oh well, doesn't matter. There's a real change in attitude within Conservative circles these days. For the longest time they had "beatten spouse syndrome". The Republicans would do the most god aweful things to us, but most Conservatives would run back into the hands of the abusers.

But that's less the case these days. Like I said, I am because of the district I am living in, minus a Republican Challenger in the Primary going to as an anti-incumbent vote, actually vote for a Democrats. Many other conservatives won't actually bring themselves to doing that. They will simply stay home.

We are really seeing something relatively rare in the history of American Politics. We are seeing the death of a political party. What will come after it is anyone's guess.

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 10:15 AM
9. Adam is wrong. All they needed was a wimpy "me too" candidate to run against them for Governor. Actually looking back, they really didn't need even that given what was going on nationally.

But say for a moment Adam was right. Well you can blame the REPUBLICANS for giving them both initiatives. You had John McKay who was in the Daday Bush adminstration who was the leading supporter of the Marijuana initiative. And you had the "Tea Party" (they lied to the tea party) Senators who were the deciding votes on Gay Marriage.

Look, hatred of "the other guy" can only get a movement so far. The Republicans rarely gave me anything or anyone to VOTE FOR. So in the end, I just dropped out.

I agree with Beck when he told Obama that he celebrates the death of the GOP. And they are dying. I mean they pushed away the tea party, they pushed away principled conseravtives. The only thing they have left is "party of the rich" but they really don't have that much either because the Democrats have out Crony Capitalist them.

So, yeah, the party now consists of a few people sitting in a country club smoking cigars in Bellevue, Kirkland, Mercer Island, or Seattle. They can go....themselves.

I have to say the John McKay betrayal hurt me deeply. I had expected as much from the Tea Party Senators because I knew when they ran in 2010 that they were LYING. They seemed so transparent to me that I condemned the Tea Party for not seeing through theem. But I have much respect for the McKay family as in his parents who were real salt of the earth decent people. They were the type of people who real community has always been supported upon. But then for their son to do this... It's like everything decent and good in the world has been twisted and turned against us.

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 10:30 AM
10. @3 - Your paranoia is misplaced with nothing more than wavemaking - silly wabbit. The establishment Republicans are incompetent and stupid these days, but if you are looking for real fascism, all you need to do is look at the left and the Democrat party - progressive Republicans practice a watered down version.

Posted by: KDS on January 18, 2014 10:34 AM
11. Again KDS all you are giving me is hate. Hatred towards the other guy.

At one time that might have been enough...

But no longer.


Bye, bye GOP!

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 10:52 AM
12. I had posted some posts last night which Adam deleted. Not that I was surprised as that has been how the Estasblishment Republcans in my experence has always treated us. They have always been far, far more ruthless aganst the conservatives within the party than they have wth their Democrat "opposition" (and yes note the air quotes).

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 10:57 AM
13. Mikeyboyscout, you sychophantic, Jay Inslee jock sniffing hack. Your pathetic posts are a joke.

I just thought we would enjoy a little Hack humor at the expense of the ultimate sack sniffer, Miekyboyscout.

Posted by: Smokie on January 18, 2014 11:05 AM
14. @12 - Hatred toward the other guy is what politics today is all about. If the GOP doesn't want to defend the non-leftists, then maybe they deserve to disintegrate.

The Democrat/statist party will stay because they circle the wagons and practice incrementalism, thereby thriving off of corruption. They are a boil on the buttocks of America, but they know how to survive. If the GOP remains self-destructive, then they ought to be replaced by a new combination Libertarian/Conservative party.

Most GOP politicians do not have the guts or cajones to stand on principles and articulate it effectively. Mary Matalin is correct - most of America does not know what the GOP stands for because are collectively mealy-mouthed and are poor at stating their policy positions. ThIs begins at the leadership - the GOP leadership in congress must be replaced if they hope to win future elections.

Posted by: KDS on January 18, 2014 11:53 AM
15. Inslee is the scariest Governor of WA in my lifetime, which began in the Rosellini years.

Inslee is simply a puppet with The DalaiBama pulling the strings. His carbon cap and trade, and his "clean fuel" proposals will run the rest of the few remaining family wage jobs out of WA.

And the GOP will just sit there.

Posted by: Independent Voter on January 18, 2014 12:01 PM
16. Inslee is the scariest Governor of WA in my lifetime

Sounds like you frighten easily.

My suggestion: change your diaper, have some warm milk, and try not to think about it so much.

Posted by: scottd on January 18, 2014 12:47 PM
17. " His carbon cap and trade..."

Reichert voted for Cap and Trade too.


It's both parties.

Link to prove I am not lying about Reichert below.

http://seattletimes.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2013030414_controversialvoteearnsreichertenvironmentalendorsement.html

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 12:49 PM
18. I see that he put my comments of yesteday back up.

Yeah, the Republicans used to have the support of our Vets. I doubt they will this year.

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/veterans-benefits-congress-budget/2014/01/16/id/547424

Posted by: Steve on January 18, 2014 12:58 PM
19. Shame on those who ostracize people who primarily want the Federal Government to operate as described in the US Constitution.

And as is so typical these days, so few know enough about it to make any kind of intelligent statement. So, as is par for the page, they attack the messenger.

May your chains bear deeply upon your shoulders.

Don't Tread On Me.

Posted by: Independent Voter on January 18, 2014 05:21 PM
20. Inslee has committed to a fiat a'commpli that will eventually trash his career.

Being a true moron guided by morons and having no inner compass (morality) , he has no clue that this is true.
Inslees' political fortunes (as those of their party writ large) depend directly upon ObamaCare.

As America realizes that Democrats like OBAMA are committed to fuck them hard where they live, they will quietly move away from the leftist agenda.
Polls will not show it but the moderates and many leftists will move to the right.

Amusing to realize that the left is so friggin' dumb.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on January 18, 2014 10:03 PM
21. What stood out to me, though, was the strong emphasis on scoring political points with segments of the Democratic base that legislative Democrats will need to turn out in November.

Well, at least Adam wasn't saying that the speech cited no source, while not citing any sources.

Generally, though... who cares? The bigger story is that a former campaign communications coordinator doesn't understand that an elected official should acknowledge the issues that people voted you into office to manage. It's a craven double standard, and one that a former communications coordinator should know well enough not to wallow in.

Get to some substantial stuff, Adam. Right now you're just trying to score weak points with minutiae. Makes you seem like a sore loser, and it's helping to drive nails into this (u)SP coffin.

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 07:15 AM
22. @2: The Republican Establishment took out their hatred of the tea party upon our Veterans. You made them pay for your hatred of us!

But this comment is completely flying in the face of what the Tea Party (and to a lesser extent, most conservatives) blathers on about all the time. If you're saying that the federal government should cut back on federal employment and employee benefits, has no place in food stamps, and should privatize Social Security and other social programs, why precisely are you getting upset when the government cuts benefits to ANY government retirees younger than 62 and reduces cost-of-living increases? THAT'S WHAT YOU VOTED YOUR CANDIDATES INTO OFFICE FOR -- fiscal "responsibility" through government spending cuts.

And if you do believe that people employed by the American military should somehow get special treatment, then you're not being consistent -- you just want your representatives to vote for benefits for people that you like, and try to hurt the people you don't like.

@3: But, at least they saved the funding for the Food Stamp ads in Mexico.

This is one of the not-even-half-truths that conservative media spits out that no right-winger bothers to check or challenge. You CANNOT qualify for food stamps as a Mexican citizen, or as an undocumented worker. This type of advertisement covers "Mexico" in that brochures in Mexican consulates count as "advertising" -- there are no massive ad campaigns on Mexico City TV about American food stamps (although I would be fascinated if you could find one). Many low-income, Spanish-speaking, legal residents of the US need information about food stamps, and having information in Spanish at places where Spanish-speaking populations eligible for food stamps would go is a perfectly acceptable practice.

@4: Only an extreme hatred of their own constituents would make Republican Congresspeople vote this way.

Seems like you fail to understand that in a pluralistic democracy, you need to negotiate and concede.

@5: Sometimes men need to be sent in to war, but when these men are sent we need to give them the tools to fight and we must not tie their hands so they can't win. Bush betrayed our soliders with Rules of Engagement that ensured failure regardless of their skills. Bush tied their hands behind their backs and the Tailban killed them.

Committing atrocities and war crimes in the battlefield in a foreign country should be allowed, simply because it makes the job "easier"? Indiscriminately killing men, women, and children for no real purpose is justified? If you're condoning this type of violence against non-combatants, then everything is fair play, including terrorism and bombings against citizens within our own country. The true betrayal is to turn the United States into a band of lawless war criminals with no respect for the rights that we hold dear.

If anything, the only reason WHY there was a "lone survivor" was because there were humanitarian efforts going on in the region that swayed some locals to a slightly more pro-US side, which would be quite incompatible with the arrogant "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" attitude you seem to have.

So if that is the message you get from a war movie, and one where American troops sacrifice to do the right thing -- and then one of their number gets saved by the same local people that you would want them to kill! -- then you're either astoundingly dense, or kind of a sociopath. Either way, it is a dangerous attitude to have present anywhere near real power. Glad you're just stuck making stupid comments on a website with declining readership.

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 07:48 AM
23. One thing is clear: we need to shrink the empire to zero. We have far too much involvement in other countries' affairs. We should withdraw all troops from all overseas bases and mind our own business. To end Islamic terror, stop messing around in theMiddle East, for Pete's sake!

The first way to shrink government is to shrink the military. Then we can concentrate of shrinking the rest of government.

Posted by: Ten Years After - Roger Rabbit is just a liberal progressive troll. on January 19, 2014 09:36 AM
24. @20: Inslee has committed to a fiat a'commpli that will eventually trash his career.

You should change your name to "Amused by Proper and Polite Usage of the English Language".

The correct way of saying that would be something like: "It is a fait accompli that Inslee will trash his career." Which, of course, is not actually correct -- he's not the sharpest tool in the shed, I don't think that he's anywhere close to even being a bad governor. Signing non-binding agreements doesn't quite count as disastrous.

That being said, I don't think he's a GREAT governor -- he doesn't have a strong vision for the state, and merely seems to be keeping the seat warm for a better holder of the office.

However, I don't care. If he doesn't screw anything up (which he really isn't), he keeps a steady hand on the wheel (which he is), and he addresses minor issues as they come up (a COLA increase for teachers is not a really big deal), that's what most people would prefer from their state government.

Being a true moron guided by morons and having no inner compass (morality) , he has no clue that this is true.

Please. To make the assumption that your political opponents are not guided by morality, but that you yourself are somehow a moral center of the univerise, is completely absurd and arrogant.

Inslees' political fortunes (as those of their party writ large) depend directly upon ObamaCare.

And all Republicans everywhere should have their political fortunes dependent on a perfect replacement for the PPACA that solves every single problem, and has no error in implementation.

As America realizes that Democrats like OBAMA are committed to f**k them hard where they live, they will quietly move away from the leftist agenda.

Please. If you assume that, you cannot assume that Republicans and Tea Party-ists aren't committed to screwing over people they don't like too. What's worse is when Republicans and Tea Party activists claim that what they get from the government is fair and correct, but what folks that are poor and don't look like them get from the government is somehow immoral and wrong.

Polls will not show it but the moderates and many leftists will move to the right.

Or, in other words, evidence will not show it, but you'll still think it.

Amusing to realize that the left is so friggin' dumb.

I don't know about that. Apparently the right cannot use "fait accompli" properly in a sentence, does not understand the concept of statistical evidence, and somehow believes that their morality is superior... just because. Who exactly is "friggin' dumb" then?

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 09:39 AM
25. "Apparently the right cannot use "fait accompli" properly in a sentence, does not understand the concept of statistical evidence, and somehow believes that their morality is superior... just because."

LMFAO!!

"it's helping to drive nails into this (u)SP coffin"

Works for me, although when there's nothing but Miller here, the place is already dead.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on January 19, 2014 10:45 AM
26. Boy, throw red meat to the rats and what happens?
LOL!!!

You should change your name to "Amused by Proper and Polite Usage of the English Language".
The correct way of saying that would be something like: "It is a fait accompli that Inslee will trash his career." Which, of course, is not actually correct -- he's not the sharpest tool in the shed . . .

Notice I left out a comma (snerk)? Yours is certainly one slippery and slimy liberal way to admit that you have nothing better to do and no arguments to present; agree with my point but quibble vainly with the way in which it is written.

I don't care. If he doesn't screw anything up (which he really isn't), he keeps a steady hand on the wheel (which he is), and he addresses minor issues as they come up (a COLA increase for teachers is not a really big deal), that's what most people would prefer from their state government.

Really . . . you're joking right?
Can you say sycophant? Or in your parlance butt-licker?
BTW, this is now what leftists morons call an ad hominem attack . . . how amusing. They learned the meaning from each other, you know garbage in, garbage out.

The belief that Inslee has a steady hand on the wheel and that further damaging education is what most people would prefer from their state government, leaves nothing to do with but chuckle and move on. While he may not have just been released from Western State, Inslee is hardly what any sensible observer would term "steady."
You do seem literate. Are you really that clueless?

Please. To make the assumption that your political opponents are not guided by morality, but that you yourself are somehow a moral center of the univerise, is completely absurd and arrogant.

Your assumption that I assume to somehow be a "moral center of the univerise [sic]" in this discussion is just an empty tactic to avoid the fact that the left ignores real consequences in favor of the possibility to seize more power to themselves. And you know it or you would have made a genuine stab at a real argument.

"And all Republicans everywhere should have their political fortunes dependent on a perfect replacement for the PPACA that solves every single problem, and has no error in implementation."

(Chuckle) And you caviled about MY Usage of the English Language?
This makes no sense, which AGAIN proves that you have NO POINT.

Polls will not show it but the moderates and many leftists will move to the right.
Or, in other words, evidence will not show it, but you'll still think it.

Moderates and leftists will move to the right because they all need to eat and a place to live.
It's called survival -- you may have heard of it.

As history and observations of the world all around us proves, Government cannot provide these things -- at least not in enough quantity to support all of then people. As more and more economic problems emerge and as we experience another economic collapse, our government will no longer have money to support the huge burdens they have taken on and people will no longer get their checks.
And of-- course "polls" won't show it genius -- at least not until after it actually takes place. While GW Bush warned over and over again about the impending mortgage securities collapse before it happened in 2008, "polls" gave no warnings because they didn't care what Bush warned.

Of course -- as a liberal -- you don't have to agree with reality, but reality doesn't care about what you believe.

You are a blind (albeit more literate than most) partisan.

Thanks.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on January 19, 2014 11:07 AM
27. Damn. ANOTHER arbitrary thread end.

Well, I have facts and figures and I am posting them. Deal with it or ban me - I no longer care.

2012 WA had a high school graduation rate of only 73.7, which was down from 2007. Is that acceptable?

To be fair and honest it was up in 2013 to a whopping 77.2%. Is that acceptable?

Going back to 1990, it was NEVER better than than the 77.2% it is now and at one point (2003) in that time frame it barely cleared the mid 60's.(SNORT! Wasn't that the great WASL era?)

On the other hand in the 2010-2011 school year, while WA graduated only 76%, Arkansas had an 81% graduation rate, Indiana an 86% and Iowa an 88%.

63% of WA schools did NOT meet the Adequate Yearly Progress requirements in the 2010-2011 school year, while spending $9,483 per pupil in that same time frame. Arkansas and Indiana spent less and got more.

The United States continues to perform below-average in math and middle-of-the-road in reading and science when compared with other industrialized nations. December 3, 2013. Of course, that's DOWN from the 2009 survey

Even Huffpo noticed that

...four in 10 high school graduates are required to take remedial courses when they start college.

Researchers say that remedial numbers have increased from nearly one-third of incoming college freshmen in 2001, to about 40 percent currently. The most common remedial -- otherwise known as "developmental" -- classes are math, English and writing, and many students are unaware that they need theses courses until they start planning their schedules and colleges decide who is required to take placement tests.

About 1.7 million students nationwide take remedial classes -- a cost of $3 billion a year, since developmental courses often cost as much as regular college courses.

Experts also say that remedial coursework makes taxpayers pay twice -- once for students to learn in high school, and again in college. "

Congratulations loud lefty's, for with your votes, by your inertia, by your fad ideology, YOU BUILT THAT!

Thanks so much for keeping your kids in public schools, for not demanding the rigors of "rote drudgery" and diversity of a classic education.

And as for the "rote drudgery" of memorization and the dependence on machines dear loud lefty's, can your kids even tell time without digital? What if the clock has Roman numerals or slashes instead of numbers? I suspect the only Roman numerals they - or you - can read are the ones related to the Super Bowl.

Fun fact about me: I still have - and can use - the first slide rule I got all those many years ago in high school. Would your kids even recognize and be able to identify a slide rule?

About a year a go a 19 yr old young man was visiting our house and we all were congregating up in the bonus room. He asked if he could call his girlfriend in FL. I told him to go for it and pointed to the land line, which in that room happens to be a big, heavy, rotary phone from the 1950's. He looked at it, paused, then asked me 'How do I use it?'. How sad. After I explained and showed him, he tried three times then gave up. Evidently, dialing is hard for today's kids.

And for the snarky loud lefty who referred to having clothes made instead of learning to thread a needle - give THIS to your woefully lacking child ... and be a man, treat yourself too. You're welcome.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on January 19, 2014 11:39 AM
28. "a genuine stab at a real argument"

No matter how many times you click your heels, Amused, your deluded conclusions and tired ad hominems will never become arguments. As evidenced by your comments, you wouldn't recognise an argument if it walked up and slapped you in the face.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on January 19, 2014 11:43 AM
29. At #28,
[t]ired ad hominems, and "recognise [sic] an argument?"

Chuckle out loud

Why not go back to picking your nose while eating crap and flipping off your friends moron:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFTowjUQHzU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU6IXegH7NaR6OJ4YtD6BzSA

Does your mommy know you behave in this way?
How proud she must be.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on January 19, 2014 12:40 PM
30. #28 - So what the hell is the point you are trying to make, besides taking an argument made by someone you disagree with and spinning it on its head ?

Back to the original post's premises;
Gov. Inslee is intellectually lazy and only wants to propagate bigger government. There is a move underway for smaller and more efficient government. Inslee can say he favors more efficient government til he is blue in the face, but his works refute that premise and words without works is NOTHING and smells like progressivism to the core. Mr. Inslee's politics are a cookie cutter version of Owebama- the ideologue.

tensor and censor - a coincidence - I think not..

tensor and censor, more than a coincidence.

Posted by: KDS on January 19, 2014 12:58 PM
31. @26: Notice I left out a comma (snerk)? Yours is certainly one slippery and slimy liberal way to admit that you have nothing better to do and no arguments to present; agree with my point but quibble vainly with the way in which it is written.

No, I detailed my arguments. I was just pointing out that you were nowhere close to using the term "fait accompli" properly in a statement. Always good to confirm that bad English doesn't lead to misunderstanding.

Can you say sycophant? Or in your parlance butt-licker?

Again, I'm not entirely sure that these things mean what you think they mean. Being a sycophant and then calling the supposed target of my affection "not the sharpest tool in the shed" doesn't really go together.

The belief that Inslee has a steady hand on the wheel and that further damaging education is what most people would prefer from their state government, leaves nothing to do with but chuckle and move on. While he may not have just been released from Western State, Inslee is hardly what any sensible observer would term "steady."

Compare Inslee with LePage from Maine... Inslee is positively a brain surgeon in comparison, and far more of a responsible head of a state government.

All the claims here of "damaging education" are pointless, as they seem to be rooted solely in objections to teachers receiving a long overdue COLA. What tends to get difficult in these cases is that conservatives are so hung up on breaking a traditional source of support for Democrats (i.e., teachers' unions), and on getting public money to pay for private schools, that there are far fewer discussions of real changes that could make the difference.

Your assumption that I assume to somehow be a "moral center of the univerise [sic]" in this discussion is just an empty tactic to avoid the fact that the left ignores real consequences in favor of the possibility to seize more power to themselves. And you know it or you would have made a genuine stab at a real argument.

No, my real argument is this: people that claim they are the only moral people in the room (as you did) often are not. It's hardly an "empty tactic"... it is pointing out that spouting off about how your ideological opponents are "not moral" is absurd and often without any shred of objective proof, especially when you make overly broad generalizations.

Case in point: I can certainly call people immoral if they would cheer about people dying due to a lack of medical insurance. However, I don't imagine that each and every conservative would be happy about needless deaths -- many may instead point out that they honestly believe a market solution would work better for rationing medical care. So while I don't completely agree with the overall conservative rationale for certain positions, I cannot make a broad statement that all conservatives are immoral because they believe in market-based solutions for medical care.

(Chuckle) And you caviled about MY Usage of the English Language?

It wasn't a "cavil" -- it was just a point that you had no understanding about how to actually use the word. Are you simply looking up big words online to use?

Moderates and leftists will move to the right because they all need to eat and a place to live. It's called survival -- you may have heard of it.

And yet you haven't even started to suggest why this would be the case.

Government cannot provide these things -- at least not in enough quantity to support all of then people.

When did anyone say this? Can't see any mention of it. I certainly don't believe that government can provide everything, and I challenge you to find where I said this.

As more and more economic problems emerge and as we experience another economic collapse, our government will no longer have money to support the huge burdens they have taken on and people will no longer get their checks.

This whole "sky is falling" attitude doesn't seem to be supported by any reasonable proof of immediate "economic collapse". But hey... keep driving up the price of gold if that's what you think.

And of-- course "polls" won't show it genius -- at least not until after it actually takes place. While GW Bush warned over and over again about the impending mortgage securities collapse before it happened in 2008, "polls" gave no warnings because they didn't care what Bush warned.

Bush did NOT warn about the "impending mortgage securities collapse". I challenge you to point to any statement where he said ANYTHING specifically about the securitization of mortgages. The administration pushed the line that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were at risk to try to privatize these GSEs, and wanted LESS government intervention in the market. That would have done very little to solve the subprime issue or a collapse of the securities market that was largely overseen by private actors, especially since the Bush Administration actively subverted efforts to go after predatory lenders. (Heck, Bush even pushed low-income homeownership programs!)

If anything, the real risk that we face as a country is the uneven distribution of population by age. In twenty years, we are going to be faced with a massive turnover in real estate and wealth, significant gaps and churn in the labour market, and high costs of senior care. We are not going to nearly be as bad off as Japan or many European countries, but all this undeserved pessimism gets in the way of real discussions about very serious problems we're about to face.

Of course -- as a liberal -- you don't have to agree with reality, but reality doesn't care about what you believe.

Reality doesn't really care about what you believe, either.

You are a blind (albeit more literate than most) partisan.

Thank you for the complement, but I don't really find myself to be a "partisan" here. I'm not a registered Democrat, nor do I have some obsessive devotion to the Democratic Party. (The name is not indicative of my political allegiances.) However, if you're spouting off about "liberals", it makes me think that you care more about scoring points than actually coming up with solutions.

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 01:22 PM
32. @27: Congratulations loud lefty's, for with your votes, by your inertia, by your fad ideology, YOU BUILT THAT!

An absolutely unfounded and baseless conclusion -- you seem to think that because a dimwitted houseguest cannot use an antique phone, liberals, socialists, and communists are somehow to blame. You haven't shown anything except that you're bitter, old, and have a love for complaining.

In fact, for all of your baseless, pathetic whining about slide rules and rote memorization, you cannot even bother to read OECD report to see where we are actually lagging behind:

Students in the United States have particular weaknesses in performing mathematics tasks with higher cognitive demands,
such as taking real-world situations, translating them into mathematical terms, and interpreting mathematical aspects in real-world problems.

This has little to nothing to do with rote memorization of multiplication tables, and much more to do with addressing the types of real-world thinking that some modern math curricula are trying to impart.

And as for the "rote drudgery" of memorization and the dependence on machines dear loud lefty's, can your kids even tell time without digital?

Can you do rapid calculations on an abacus? You're not really providing much proof that kids today are dumb, just that you're attached to obsolete technology.

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 01:38 PM
33. an absolutely unfounded and baseless conclusion

Jimmy Carter
Dept of Education
Common Core
Unions

This has little to nothing to do with rote memorization of multiplication tables, and much more to do with addressing the types of real-world thinking that some modern math curricula are trying to impart.

You have to KNOW the basic before you can apply "real-world thinking". Have you ever raised a child? Did they lift their head, roll over, scoot or crawl BEFORE they walked? Do you still think "Dada" or have you LEARNED real words so you can attempt to carry on a conversation or debate. Do you spell by phonetically, by sound or by rules? If you need a machine for basic math, how will you ever know you've been cheated? How will you ever convert a recipe - to serve more people, to go from volumne to weight? What the hell do you do when a machine isn't available? Or can't do what you need it to do - Obamacare website for example cannot calculate what you OWE, if you're stupid enough to even log in.

Can you do rapid calculations on an abacus? You're not really providing much proof that kids today are dumb, just that you're attached to obsolete technology.

Of course and so can my kids. And now my 6 yr old grandson has one. AND on my slide rule.

Do you?

The real question is can YOU do without new technology? Can you tell time on an antique clock? We all noticed that you somehow, again, managed to ignore and/or refuse to answer direct questions.

New technology should be a convenience in learning not a dependence in place of learning.

I'm glad you and your kids are dependent, because compared to those who use them as a convenience instead of an addiction - your kids aren't even half as well educated.

Statistics and FACTS prove so.

dr dmo, i no u cn read ths - it ur lng & ur kds. sry. scks 2 b u.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on January 19, 2014 02:06 PM
34. you seem to think that because a dimwitted houseguest cannot use an antique phone

ps - to be considered an 'antique', an item needs to be over 100 yrs old. 2014 - 1950 = 64. That would be considered 'collectible' and, by some definitions, 'vintage'.

And golly, gosh, gee, whiz - I didn't need new technology to tell me so - only to educate YOU.

Oh.
Wait.
Let me translate so you can understand:

& gly, gsh, G, whz i no nd nw tech to no, jst to tch u.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on January 19, 2014 02:24 PM
35. @33:
Jimmy Carter
Dept of Education
Common Core
Unions

A list of conservative bogeymen that have nothing to do with this? Knee-jerk reactions are not reasonable analysis. I might as well rant about the Koch Brothers -- it's just as irrelevant as what you wrote here.

You have to KNOW the basic before you can apply "real-world thinking". Have you ever raised a child? Did they lift their head, roll over, scoot or crawl BEFORE they walked? Do you still think "Dada" or have you LEARNED real words so you can attempt to carry on a conversation or debate. Do you spell by phonetically, by sound or by rules? If you need a machine for basic math, how will you ever know you've been cheated? How will you ever convert a recipe - to serve more people, to go from volumne to weight? What the hell do you do when a machine isn't available? Or can't do what you need it to do - Obamacare website for example cannot calculate what you OWE, if you're stupid enough to even log in.

Again, from the OECD report (which you apparently didn't bother to read):

Relative to their overall performance in mathematics, students in the United States are stronger in interpreting mathematical results than they are at formulating a real-world problem into mathematics. Also, they perform relatively better on tasks in the content area change and relationships (e.g. algebra and the study of mathematical functions and relations) and less well in the content area space and shape (geometry - related content). Students in the United States have particular strengths in cognitively less-demanding mathematical skills and abilities, such as extracting single values from diagrams or handling well-structured formulae.

They have particular weaknesses in items with higher cognitive demands, such as taking real-world situations, translating them into mathematical terms, and interpreting mathematical aspects in real-world problems.

The problem is not, as you think, that kids today aren't doing rote math problems enough, but that they cannot apply that math to the real world. If your objection to the modern American education system is that all of this loosey-goosey new math stuff is rotting the brain or something, I'd say that the reverse is true -- not enough critical thinking and applied work is being done in mathematics classes. Better to teach kids finance, engineering, statistics, etc. in all math classes, rather than add more time with rote Singapore math tables so they learn basic skills they cannot apply.

So you're free to gripe about kids today -- but if you're not looking at evidence to find real solutions and you're merely bitching and moaning pointlessly, you're part of the problem, not the solution. You've clearly demonstrated that.

Of course and so can my kids. And now my 6 yr old grandson has one. AND on my slide rule.

Great for a museum display, but I'd prefer my bridges and airplanes designed with people using computers, thank you very much.

And I'll just ignore all of the cheap shots about me and my family. All you do is debase the conversation and show yourself to be needlessly, pointlessly, and very undeservedly arrogant and rude. It seems to be par for the course for you, but why bother with your lack of basic manners?

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 02:49 PM
36. ps - to be considered an 'antique', an item needs to be over 100 yrs old. 2014 - 1950 = 64. That would be considered 'collectible' and, by some definitions, 'vintage'.

I must have missed that part of the dictionary definition that said that 100 years was the cutoff point. Thanks for pointing it out. So if it were just a 99-year-old phone, it wouldn't be an antique until next year?

Call it "antique", or "vintage", or "obsolete" -- it's all relevant. I wouldn't expect that a teenager today would have had much exposure to a rotary phone, a record player, an eight-track player, or even a typewriter. I wouldn't really care, either. Why precisely should anyone care if kids master obsolete technology? Unless rotary phones are making a comeback, it's a pointless exercise.

Again, I prefer my airplanes designed by computer rather than slide rule, thank you very much.

Posted by: demo kid on January 19, 2014 03:02 PM
37. At #31,

"Always good to confirm that bad English doesn't lead to misunderstanding."

Bullshit. You obviously understood what I meant or you would have made a counter-argument rather than your slippery and slimy liberal way to admit that you have nothing better to do and no arguments to present. Or did I misuse the word bullshit?

"Again, I'm not entirely sure that these things mean what you think they mean. Being a sycophant and then calling the supposed target of my affection "not the sharpest tool in the shed" doesn't really go together."

You are not sure what you mean. Claiming their sainted leaders are "steady" but not the "sharpest tool in the shed" hardly stops liberals from being sycophantic butt lickers, as you prove with other ensuing comments herein.

"Compare Inslee with LePage from Maine... Inslee is positively a brain surgeon in comparison, and far more of a responsible head of a state government."

Another empty diversionary tactic. Unlike partisan leftists I don't need to make niggling comparisons; all any sensible observer needs is a clear view of Inslee's words, actions and records.

"All the claims here of "damaging education" are pointless, as they seem to be rooted solely in objections to teachers receiving a long overdue COLA."

You root claims here of "damaging education" in objections to teachers receiving a long overdue COLA, not me.

Nevertheless, while it is clearly foolish to rock a very shaky economic boat to force one group of people to provide more pay to another "privileged/protected" class, it is (at the very least) appropriate to point out that generally speaking "educators" don't merit any raise. Where many of those who will bear the burden are unemployed and less able than ever before to provide such pay-offs to democrat political insiders, and where it does nothing whatsoever to improve our education system, a COLA increase is objectionable.

"My real argument is this: people that claim they are the only moral people in the room (as you did) often are not. It's hardly an "empty tactic"... it is pointing out that spouting off about how your ideological opponents are "not moral" is absurd and often without any shred of objective proof, especially when you make overly broad generalizations."

Your argument is not only a diversionary tactic but utterly false. I never claimed to be anything, you projected your own meanings into what I wrote. I stated a broad generalization and you through your own expression of moral blindness confirmed it with evidence that I was right.

Ignoring the consequences that your actions will have on others lives is immoral. Pretending that you are helping people by seizing others money and redistributing it to others is immoral. Lying about problems to create false premises upon which to base phony solutions such as the ACA, is immoral. Being amoral, I don't expect you to understand these things, that doesn't render them moral.

You provide an excellent case in point:
You write that "I can certainly call people immoral if they would cheer about people dying due to a lack of medical insurance." First, this is red herring. I don't know who you are pretending to describe . . . not me. Secondly, there have been no needless deaths in America due to "a lack of medical insurance." There is a difference between health insurance and health care. Medicaid has been providing health care services free to many millions of people for many years and public hospitals are required by law to treat anyone that darkens their doors. You are full of false garbage and have no idea what you are writing about.

"Bush did NOT warn about the "impending mortgage securities collapse". I challenge you to point to any statement where he said ANYTHING specifically about the securitization [sic} of mortgages."

Easy.

Bush warned about the "impending mortgage securities collapse in many public speeches from 2002 through 2008, but little was said about it by anyone except Democrats like Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd who called Bush names and denied there were any potential problems with the questionable mortgages on the horizon. Remember . . . the ones that caused our economic collapse?

President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. http://sweetness-light.com/archive/bush-called-for-reform-17-times-in-2008 Bush not only warned and along with prominent Republicans pushed hard for legislation that would have significantly decreased the 2008 collapse if not eliminated it. http://bellalu0.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/bush-and-mccain-proposed-oversight-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac/

"Reality doesn't really care about what you believe, either."

Quite true indeed, but unlike you, I know the difference. Fannie-mae and-freddie-mac are back making risky loans all over again to people who cannot afford them. For that and many more reasons including the ACA, we are poised for another collapse. As our Governor attempts to take more money to give to his political base and leave education behind for shallow political interests, you suck up.

BTW, "not a registered Democrat . . . "
Neither is anyone else in Washington State.

Thanks again.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on January 19, 2014 03:04 PM
38. "Are you simply looking up big words online to use?"

Sigh! If only he'd look up proposition and premise. Sadly, I believe there's no hope for syllogism, no hope at all.


Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Swordsman on January 19, 2014 03:13 PM
39. At # 38,

I must admit it is amusing to watch as Dr."zuti gazootie flails aimlessly about.
Guess I'm bored.

So tell us Gazootie, what does your mommie think of your nose picking, crap eating, fingering degeneracy in front of the whole world to see?
Check it out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFTowjUQHzU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU6IXegH7NaR6OJ4YtD6BzSA

And by the way, "critical thinking wise," is that an ad hominem video or just a filthy disgusting moronic man-child behaving like a dope addled prison punk?

Just curious.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on January 19, 2014 04:37 PM
40. "what does your mommie think..."

Nope, no hope for a syllogism from this one.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on January 19, 2014 05:28 PM
41. "Sigh! If only he'd look up proposition and premise."

Your gibberish is getting tedious Dr. Pachouli. Are you talking about the premise of propositioning yo mama?

Posted by: alphabet soup on January 19, 2014 05:53 PM
42. At # 40,

"Sigh! If only he'd look up proposition and premise. Sadly, I believe there's no hope for syllogism, no hope at all."

O.K., what the heck, I'll play.

Syllogism #1.

Major premise: Mirriam Webster defines a degenerate as : "having low moral standards : not honest, proper, or good"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/degenerate

Minor premise: By picking his nose while eating crap and signaling to any observer "fuc* you" in front of the whole world to see (including his own mother), a person calling himself "Dr. Zatiochi" deliberately displays low moral standards that are not honest, proper, or good on a utube video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFTowjUQHzU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU6IXegH7NaR6OJ4YtD6BzSA

Conclusion: Dr. Zatiochi is a degenerate

and how about;

Syllogism #2.

Major premise: Mirriam Webster defines a moron as: "a very stupid or foolish person"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moron

Minor premise: By picking his nose while eating crap and signaling to any observer "fuc* you" in front of the whole world to see (including his own mother), a person calling himself "Dr. Zatiochi" deliberately displays that he is a very stupid and/or foolish person on a utube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFTowjUQHzU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU6IXegH7NaR6OJ4YtD6BzSA

Conclusion: Dr. Zatiochi is a moron.

So . . . I ask once again out of immense amusement and genuine curiosity;
Does your mother realize what a degenerate moron you are?
Is she proud?

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on January 19, 2014 07:44 PM
43. "Are you talking about the premise of propositioning yo mama?"

Actually funny. So rare from wingnuts. Is this like the squirrel and the nut? We'll see. Meanwhile, let's chalk up two points for Soupy.

Tedium is waiting months on end for one of you to back up your crazy, wild-assed conclusions with anything more than yet another crazy, wild-ass conclusion. That is not reason, boys. It is madness! So stop it!*

*Just kidding. I know you guys can't stop, what with your being pod people. Heh. The invasion of the reason-challenged pod people. I must say, your home planet has gotta be really weird.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on January 19, 2014 08:01 PM
44. "O.K., what the heck, I'll play."

Not very well. Sorry, but both times you're using "faulty analogies".

Fail.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Swordsman on January 19, 2014 08:27 PM
45. ..."respect for the rights that we hold dear."

And what rights would those be? After six years of "the One" and really actually much before then, I really don't see much respect for rights.

Obama has weaponized the IRS against his political enemies. That should make even the Left angry.

So, yeah you have no right to talk about rights! We have no rights! Perhaps we never really did.

Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 09:14 PM
46. The real question is can YOU do without new technology? Can you tell time on an antique clock?

Why would that be important. We have NEW TECHNLOGY becuase it makes our lives more efficient.

I can't stand luddities who think an unhealthy attachment to old tech is an attribute. It's not. It just makes you irrelevant. It just makes you slow and a joke.

For one I am glad we have new tech like the Internet to keep our politicians accountable.

Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 09:25 PM
47. They should have been allowed to shoot the damn goat hearders. War is Hell. War can not be refined.

Too many people who have never experienced war want to refine it, but by doing so they are responsible for the deaths of our soldiers.

I believe the Bush lawyers (see I looked back it happened during the Bush adminstraton) who made those rules of engagement should be in jail for assisting in the death of our troops!

Let us not forget that General David Petraeus first came into power under Bush. The Left hated him. But I did too for different reasons. See I am not a rah rah rah team GOP guy when the lives of our soldiers are at stake. It was obvious that he was going to get our soldiers needlessly killed and that is exactly what happened.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2008863,00.html

I hate Obama, don't get me wrong, but NO, I don't "miss him yet (Bush)". Bush in his own right was a very bad progressive President who actually put into motion a lot of the bad stuff that Obama eventially expanded upon. We must never go back to those times yet there are still people who want to put yet another Bush into the Presidency. The first Bush led to Clinton, and the second to Obama, I fear Jeb Bush, and more importantly I fear the next Democrat that would sure to follow him.... I would vote for any Democrat before I would vote for Jeb Bush.

Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 09:48 PM
48. The last war we really won was WWII. We didn't give a damn about "Rules of Engagement" back then. I remember a documentary about one of the battles they had in the Pacific. We didn't have any means to hold prisoners, so we just shot them in the head.

And then of course there was that scene in "Band of Brothers" when they had captured that German who happened to grow up in Oregon (so seemed American and could speak English well). BANG!

That's how wars are won. War is Hell!

http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/sherman/sherman-to-burn-atlanta.html

"You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out. I know I had no hand in making this war, and I know I will make more sacrifices to-day than any of you to secure peace."


Look, I am no peacenik BUT if we aren't going to allow our troops to win, then we shouldn't put them there to begin with. That's just killing our own people. That to me is immoral!

FIGHT TO WIN. OR GET OUR TROOPS OUT! There's no middle road in war. All in or all out!


Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 10:01 PM
49. Jay Inslee; State of Washington; State of the State; increased spending; increased taxes.

Any of that ring a bell?

Posted by: SouthernRoots on January 19, 2014 10:13 PM
50. You have to hand it to those Republicans. They found the one area they knew no one, not even the tea party, wanted cut, and they cut that.

That is so vindictive! And IN YOUR FACE.

Just like we took out the 49ers tonight, we must take out the Republicans this year. Only by FIRST defeating the monsters we created will we ever even have a real opportunity to go up aganst the Democrats.

Yes, the Republican Establishment is our FIRST ENEMY. The enemy that must be defeated first before we even think about scumbags like Inslee.

Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 10:16 PM
51. Any of that ring a bell?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1338&dat=19820108&id=D-tWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=WfkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7112,1733167

Yep, afraid so...

It's not Inslee. It's both parties. It's the Olympia environment that several Republicans ran for office in 2010 saying they were gong to change, but instead just jumped in as quickly as they were elected and became part of. (The Tea Party Senators elected in 2010).

This is what it is REALLY about with Adam. He so wanted to be part of the Olympic enviornment. That should be HIS people at the Trough he keeps thinking.

Why? You ran a piss poor campaign where your candidate seemed to go out of his way NOT to make any distinction between himself and his opponent. You protrayed him as a carbon copy of Inslee and then you are shocked that the public choose the real thing.

I can't stop thinking about that McCain Obama debate I watched at that bar in 2008. McCain said, I agree with Obama on this, I agtee with Obama on that, finally after one of these exchanges some guy at the bar said WHY DON'T YOU VOTE FOR HIM (Obama) then! (Everyone at the bar started laughing).

Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 11:11 PM
52. Great video about those who hate "modern technology".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbU4Cb4A4-o

I am so glad we DON'T have slide rules any more. We are much more efficient now that we have better ways of doing things.

We all grow older, we don't have a choice in that. But you can choose whether to grow old or not. Not liking modern tech is a sign of growing old. So is talking too much about Siegel as he hasn't had a local talk show here in years.

Posted by: Steve on January 19, 2014 11:27 PM
53. Do we get to win this time?

You can train someone very hard, but if you tie their hands, then no matter how brave they are, no matter how skilled they are, no matter how motivated they are, they are still going to lose.

I had a mental picture of Bush himself holding our soldier's hands behind him as he struggles, only to have the Tailban shoot him. Bush binds him, and the Tailban excutes them.

Our leaders helping the enemy kill our people, that wasn't part of the deal! But since world war two with BOTH parties that is what our soldiers have experienced.

Please don't think this lets Obama off the hook. I mean Benghazi. But this was BUSH'S BENGHAZI! Just because Obama was bad indeeed worse than Bush doesn't make Bush any better. Bush was bad enough and his Ivy League Lawyers were acomplices in these Soliders deaths.

Next time we should send the lawyers out on the recon. missions. Oh, we won't win any war this way, but then again we haven't been winning wars since World War II. But at least the ones who have been losing the wars for us would be the ones coming home in body bags, not our nation's finests as it has been.

Can we win this time? Not likely. Can't win when the people on your side is helping the other team. That goes for war and that goes for politics!


And again, it is both parties. Indeed it might be worse now, but it was bad under Bush as well.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/5/increase-in-battlefield-deaths-linked-to-new-rules/?page=all

Posted by: Steve on January 20, 2014 12:05 AM
54. Just because Obama was bad indeeed worse than Bush doesn't make Bush any better.

Say, Bush comes up and shoots a kid in the head. Bad, right?

Then Obama comes up and shoots five kids in the head. Does that make what Bush did "less worse". Oh, gosh miss him yet...

We all allowing the left to set our standards for us. We are saying it's okay for "our people" to be bad, just so they are slightly less bad than the Democrats, right?

I hate what we are going through now but it doesn't make me look back with any fondness. In fact as bad as things are now, I actually felt worse back then because I never supported Obama, but the stuff that Bush was doing that was a guy I supported so I felt a kind of responsibility for the evil he was doing where I don't now.

I hate Obama. I don't feel guilt over Obama. But since I did help Republicans in 1992-1998 I feel guilt over what the Republicans have done as co-conspirators. This a two headed monster we face. Both Parties are the problem and until enough conservatives realize that then all we will do is rant with no effective recourse to fight the onslaught. It is time we find a new way beyond the Republican Good Democrat bad game the elite has had us play for so long. Yes. Democrat bad, but then so is most Republicans. Too many people have treated the GOP as a sports team. It isn't!

Posted by: Steve on January 20, 2014 12:22 AM