Barack Obama’s FDA has issued a directive banning over-the-counter asthma inhalers because they utilize chlorofluorocarbons as a propellant.

What does this have to do with poor, black children, you say? As it happens, black children are more likely to suffer from asthma than any other major demographic group in the United States.

Additionally, data indicates that their asthma is less likely to be well-controlled.

What’s more worrisome is the fact that black children with asthma are twice as likely as white children to be hospitalized because of the disease, more than three times as likely to visit the emergency department — a sign of uncontrolled asthma — and slightly more than three times as likely to die from asthma as white children. Some studies in large urban areas like New York and Boston report hospitalization and death rates three to five times higher than whites.

It doesn’t take a genius to make the connection between uncontrolled asthma leading emergency room visits and lack of access to quality preventive care. The kind of non-care that poor children might be likely to receive.

…Poor minorities, tend to have less access to health care, she notes. And even when they see a doctor, the care they receive tends to be of lesser quality than white children. Poverty probably also plays a role. For instance, black children from disadvantaged backgrounds are twice as likely to have asthma as black children who aren’t.

It strikes me as quite likely that poor black families – just the kind who may lack access to quality health care – would be more likely to use over-the-counter asthma inhalers than, say, Bill Gates’ children. The kind that will no longer be available after the end of this year. But I’m just guessing.

So back to my original question, why does Barack Obama hate poor, black children?

It’s a mystery.

Cross posted at it’s only words.

King County residents may remember that back in the fall of 2007 the  County Council approved a special property tax on all residents to support the creation of a Ferry District to fund the Vashon Island passenger ferry and year-round service for the West Seattle Water Taxi.

The Ferry District was sort of a pet project of King County Executive Dow Constantine when he sat on the Council. Constantine was so desperate to get the Ferry District off the ground that he allegedly pressured fellow Council members to vote for it by threatening to kill a separate tax aimed at funding flood control projects. (Don’t get me wrong, I’m all about killing taxes, but if I have to choose between a tax for foot ferries or a tax for flood control, I’m going with flood control.)

Now we learn from the Washington Policy Center that after having chosen to abandon its contract with Argosy Cruises and operate the West Seattle route directly, King County has managed to drive up costs nearly five times.

2009 (Argosy) op cost April-September: $692,814
2010 (King County) op cost April-September: $2,097,258

2009 (Argosy) ridership April-September: 189,302 trips
2010 (King County) ridership April-September: 138,706 trips

2009 (Argosy) cost per trip April-September: $3.66
2010 (King County) cost per trip April-September: $15.12*

*Note: Even with ridership at 2009 levels, the cost per trip for King County operations would still be $11.08.

A quick trip to the King County website tells us that the highest fare on the West Seattle route is $3.50, but many riders are likely paying less – sometimes much less.

Adults
$3.00 - ORCA fare
$3.50 – Cash or ticket fare

Seniors (65+) and persons with disabilities
$1.50 with a Regional Reduced Fare Permit. Fare applies to both cash and ORCA payment.

Youth (6-18)
$2.25 - ORCA Youth Card fare
$3.50 – Cash or ticket fare

Children (5 and under)
Free

So for the highest paying riders, residents in places like Enumclaw, Black Diamond, and Skykomish are footing the bill to a tune of $11.62 a pop. As opposed to $.16 if Argosy were still operating the route and charging the same fares.

I bring all this up just in case a run for the Governor’s mansion is in Dow Constantine’s future plans. At a time when our State is facing a budget crisis and with no guarantees that things will be much – if at all – improved by 2012, our Governor and State legislators need to be looking at all possible options to reduce costs. If Constantine pigheadedly insists on operating the Water Taxi at a per trip cost to the taxpayers more than 72 times the cost if the route were being operated privately, why would anyone expect him to take a hard look for services that might be privatized at the State level?

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

Joni Balter

Not many people are as self-satisfied and self-important as Joni Balter. She’s recently penned two op-eds, not on any topic with relevance to the real issues facing voters in this election, but something even more important; the race for newspaper endorsements. And of course by this vital yardstick, Dino Rossi may as well concede the race now.

I’m not even sure why this was stretched out to to pieces; they’re nearly identical. From the first piece, published on 10/14:

People ask editorial writers from time to time about newspaper endorsements — how much do they really change voters’ minds? In local races, such as school boards or city councils or county councils, they matter a ton. In statewide contests, like the U.S. Senate contest, endorsements always have an impact but it is harder to measure because there is so much other inpurt. Have you turned on your TV lately?

My take on endorsements in contests of this magnitude is they, especially if they are plural and there are a fair number of them, become part of the narrative and momentum of an election.

And from the second, published on 10/25:

Newpaper readers and media critics often ask how much weight newspaper endorsements carry in an election as big and fiery hot as the current U.S. Senate race in Washington state.

Such endorsements count quite a bit in races for school boards or city councils or county councils. In a bigger statewide race such as the contest between Democratic incumbent Patty Murray and Republican Dino Rossi, the impact of a single endorsement is less clear, because there is so much other input. Indeed, the television has become a Halloween-scary place.

My own sense of it is a grouping of endorsements, several in a row, can be quite powerful. And the advantage, therefore, goes to Murray.

Honestly, did Balter just forget what she wrote or was she so enamored of her own cleverness she just had to repeat herself? And which is it: do people ask this question of vital importance “from time to time” or “often?” Honestly, it’s never occurred to me to wonder. My assumption has always been that newspaper endorsements are handed out to advance the agendas of the various editorial boards.

But here’s the money quote, pulled from the second piece:

For all the blather about how tired everybody supposedly is of Murray, it seems newspaper editorial writers and publishers, who really know the work and impact of this senator, are not ready to throw out a talented public servant like Murray.

So here’s the deal.

Not only is making endorsements inherently self-important; not only does Balter choose to write about how important these endorsements are – Twice! In less than two weeks! – she takes it a step further by implying that editorial boards are far more qualified to judge the candidates because they’re so much better informed than their readers. And probably just smarter, too.

Not Present and Accounted For

Of course, she may have a point about the Times’ readers being ill-informed. If you were relying on the Times to keep you informed of news in the WA-01 contest between James Watkins and Jay Inslee, you’d be, well, ill-informed as well as completely unaware that the two debated on October 18th.

You’d also be unaware that the Watkins campaign had been desperately trying to get Inslee to agree to a debate since August, and that when he finally did agree, he set a date, time and place nearly guaranteed to ensure minimal press coverage (and it appears he was successful; none of the local television stations covered the debate and when last I checked, only the Kitsap Sun had given the debate any coverage).

You would, however, know that the gubernatorial candidates in Rhode Island will be debating tonight.

Apparently the Times is aware that fact that face time with Inslee doesn’t always endear him to his constituents. So as Balter bashes Times subscribers as ill-informed, the news department makes sure they stay that way. Sweet.

Endorsement Brain Twister

Try and wrap your head around this.

Back in June, Ryan Blethen announced that the Times would be taking “a new, hard look at elections and government” and added, “The editorial page will also explain to readers and lawmakers why government needs to be reset. We will examine the need for fiscal responsibility on the local, state and national level.”

Given that, a trip through the Times’ endorsements on the federal level is likely to leave the reader confused. Their list of endorsed candidates includes all the incumbents – Democrats Inslee, Larsen and Smith in the House and Murray in the Senate – plus Democrat Suzan DelBene in the 8th District running against incumbent Dave Reichert and Democrat Denny Heck in the 3rd District, running against Jaime Herrera for Brian Baird’s open seat.*

In other words, a full slate of Democrats. The party that did this to the federal budget deficit.

I wonder how the Times editorial board imagines that returning proven big spenders to Washington, along with some newcomers who are just as likely to vote for ever higher taxes and more spending will “reset government?” It’s a conundrum for sure.

*As far as I can tell, the Times made no endorsements in the 6th and 7th Districts, seats currently held by Norm Dicks and Jim McDermott, respectively, but I could have missed them. Of course, Baghdad Jim probably needs no endorsement running, as he is, in the Soviet of Seattle.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

As I noted here, the Murray campaign appears to be critically short of foot soldiers. How terribly inconvenient.

Fortunately for the Senator, this is another one of those distasteful jobs that Americans won’t do, but illegals are only too willing to take on. And at no cost to the Murray campaign! “Illegals for Democrats” is a project of OneAmerica Votes. Can you guess who tops their list of candidate endorsements?

And why not? Murray strongly supports “comprehensive immigration reform,” which is leftist-speak for amnesty. The way Democrats are salivating over this potential new constituency, amnesty is a near-certainty should they retain their Congressional majorities.

Off topic, but still interesting to note:

There are some Democrats who OneAmerica Votes rather conspicuouslyy failed to endorse.

Dino Rossi

Cross posted at It’s Only Words

Unsure whether or not their 1st LD candidates can win on merit in what appears to be a very bad year for Democrats (or a very good year for Republicans if you’re a glass-half-full kind of person), the Washington State Democratic Central Committee has chosen to instead muddy the waters with mail pieces intended to paint the Republican candidates, Dennis Richter (Pos. 1) and Heidi Munson (Pos. 2), with the extremist brush.

Should the State Legislature be overrun by these right wing extremists and their ilk, they will immediately put into effect a nefarious plan masterminded by Dennis Richter to “Abolish Social Security!” Once our seniors, deprived of their Social Security benefits, are sleeping under bridges and sharing Fido’s Alpo, they’ll move onto Phase Two of their wicked scheme…Did you have hopes and dreams for your children’s education? Kiss those dreams good-bye, people! Under Heidi Munson’s direction, the U.S. Department of Education will be dismantled, causing schools across the country to immediately collapse into rubble. Rubble, I say!

Sounds silly, doesn’t it? But is it any sillier than bringing up issues that are clearly irrelevant to State governance concerning a phase-out of Social Security or cutting the federal Department of Education? Whether or not you agree with these positions, logic forces the honest person to acknowledge that Richter and Munson won’t be in any position to act on them in the State Legislature.

Richter’s other “offenses” include his preposterous idea that private businesses should be allowed to decide on their own which goods or services to offer based on consumer demand and an interesting proposal based on the Texas sunset model.

From Wikipedia:

The Texas Sunset provision was established in 1977. Under Texas law, all agencies – except universities, courts, and agencies established by the Texas Constitution – will be abolished on a specific date, generally 12 years after creation or renewal, unless the Texas Legislature passes specific legislation to continue its functions.

A 12-member Sunset Advisory Commission oversees the provisions of the Texas Sunset Act. The commission consisting of five members of the Texas Senate and one member from the general public appointed by the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, and five members of the House and one member from the general public appointed by the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives. Legislative members are appointed for four-year terms, with half of the commission reappointed on or before September 1 of odd-numbered years, while public members serve two-year terms. The chairman and vice-chairman are appointed by the lieutenant governor and speaker, and the chairmanship alternates between the Senate and House every two years. The Commission is assisted by an executive director and staff, who review each agency subject to sunset provisions.

Under the process, each agency must perform for the commission a self-review of its roles and responsibilities, including areas in which its duties may overlap those of other agencies and the effect of the agency’s abolition on loss of federal funding. The self-review must be completed by September 1 of the odd-numbered year before the year when the agency would be otherwise abolished. The commission must then complete its own review by the following January 1 and hold public hearings by the following February 1.

About 20 to 30 agencies go through the sunset process each legislative session. Constitutionally-established agencies are subject to review, but they cannot be abolished under the sunset provisions.

The commission may recommend that an agency be continued in its present form (nearly always with recommendations to the legislature for improvement), consolidated with another agency, or abolished, with its duties either eliminated or transferred to other agencies.

Maybe not coincidentally, Texas is currently one of the – if not the most – fiscally healthy states, making the WSDCC’s contention that such provisions lead to excessive bureaucracy and “periods with no laws on the books” seem especially absurd.

As for Ms. Munson? You can’t vote for her because…Rush! Yes, she’s among the tens of millions totally non-mainstream people who make up Rush Limbaugh’s listening audience. Not only that, she opposes expanding State government beyond its Constitutional limits. If that’s not the crazy talking, tell me, what is?

So if it’s muddy water the WSDCC is looking for, how about this? We’ve been inundated with mail pieces paid for by the Washington State Labor Council AFL-CIO in support of the Democrat candidates in L.D. 1. If they’re elected, who will they answer to? The voters? Or the union bosses who purchased their seats for them?

Would Jay Inslee even recognize the truth if it walked up and punched him in the nose? Which is sort of what it did this week when he lied about his reason for missing a ceremony to rename a post office for local Medal of Honor recipient Bud Hawk.

Giving credit where credit is due, Inslee was responsible for passing the legislation renaming the post office, but when it came down to a choice between showing some personal gratitude and respect for Mr. Hawk’s extraordinary heroism or speaking to Puget Sound area business leaders, Inslee was M.I.A.

(Skip ahead to 6:48 and 8:05)

Inslee asserts on tape that he was in Washington, D.C.

“I don’t know if my opponent understands what it means to carry the hopes and dreams of the 650,000 people I represent to Washington, D.C., but it means standing up for them every single day and that is what I do.

Snip…

I honored Bud Hawk by passing a bill and I honored you by voting in Washington, D.C.”

Congressman Inslee was most certainly not voting on the day in question, February 26, 2010. A quick check of Congressional records shows that Inslee missed all six roll call votes taken that day.

So how does Congressman Inslee stand up for me when he’s not in the other Washington voting? Apparently by speaking at a luncheon of local business leaders. You know, the kind of people who can make big contributions to his gubernatorial campaign.

It may be the case the Congressman Inslee wasn’t lying intentionally. It may be the case that this ceremony honoring Bud Hawk was so insignificant to the Congressman that he just didn’t remember what he was doing that day, but is that really any better?

James Watkins for Congress

Cross posted at It’s Only Words

A lot of hay has been made in California over the course of the past several months about Carly Fiorina’s leadership at HP; a quick Google search turns up article after article about the California Senate race that mention, usually in unflattering terms, the company’s fortunes – or lack thereof – during her tenure as CEO.

Contrast this with the treatment Suzan DelBene (D) is receiving in her WA-08 campaign against Dave Reichert. From DelBene’s Microsoft bio:

Suzan DelBene, corporate vice president of the Mobile Communications Business at Microsoft Corp., oversees all marketing efforts for the division, including for Windows Mobile software for Pocket PCs, Smartphones and Portable Media Centers, and the Windows CE operating system. Snip… DelBene, who returned to Microsoft in February 2004 after having served at the company from 1989 to 1998, brings a deep set of product management, marketing and business development skills to Microsoft’s wireless industry efforts.

Her own campaign bio proudly makes note of her time at Microsoft*.

One of just a handful of women serving in a senior leadership position at the company, she ran worldwide sales, marketing, and product management for the company’s mobile technology efforts.

You don’t have to be a technology geek to be aware that Microsoft isn’t exactly a giant in the world of mobile communications. A recent Seattle Times article notes:

Five years ago, the company’s PC-think appeared to slow its momentum in the mobile world. It seemed unable to turn on a dime when the iPhone came out, it may have underestimated the consumer market and it made a few bets that just went wrong.

The “five years ago” mentioned in the article would be about a year into DelBene’s stint as VP of Mobile Communications at Microsoft. She was still at the helm in 2007, a “watershed” year.

The watershed year was 2007. Microsoft made some incremental updates and called it Windows Mobile 6.0. A few months later, Apple unveiled the iPhone.

In the fall, Google announced Android, a free mobile operating system. Developers flocked to both platforms to build programs for their respective app stores. Microsoft, which has historically had the strongest developer support among the tech powerhouses, had no app store until 2009.

“It was a story of a missed opportunity,” said Matt Rosoff, a former analyst at independent research firm Directions on Microsoft in Kirkland who’s now with the Silicon Alley Insider news site.

Nowhere is DelBene’s involvement with the Windows Mobile product mentioned, which might be understandable, given that this is a business story, but an ostensible news article published in the Times on September 26th that specifically discusses her Microsoft experience and how her campaign is using that experience to persuade voters also fails to mention it. In fact, the story reads as though it were lifted intact from a DelBene press release. Given the Times’ endorsement of DelBene, I find their failure to qualify her Microsoft experience to be disturbing.

Side note and slightly off topic:

It’s also worth knowing that prior to Microsoft, DelBene was CEO at Nimble Technologies (and isn’t it ironic that DelBene was CEO of a company called Nimble, when her leadership at Microsoft appeared to be anything but). Her time there doesn’t appear to have been a rousing success, either. Started in 1999 with $30 million in venture capital, it was sold in 2003 for less than $10 million.

DelBene is claiming that her “real-world leadership experience” and “ability to solve problems, create opportunities, and get things done” qualify her to replace Dave Reichert as the 8th District’s U.S. Representative, but I wonder if she has the kind of experience we need in Washington D.C.

*DelBene appears to be proud of the time she spent at Microsoft and Nimble Technologies, but not of her service on the Board of Trustees of Reed College.

Donate to Dave Reichert.

(H/T Merlock’s Murmurings and @bryanmyrick)

Cross posted at It’s Only Words

Everyone knows by now that Clint Didier, despite having made it very clear during the primary season that he would support the GOP nominee, whomever it might be (and knowing that it could very well be Dino Rossi), has withheld his endorsement from said nominee. Rather than getting wholeheartedly behind Rossi, Didier chose to enumerate three conditions upon which his endorsment would be based.

I understand the issues involved are important to Didier – heck, they’re important to me! – but I think he may be failing to see the forest for the trees. (I wanted to use some really clever football lingo there, but, yeah. I don’t know anything about football.) So let me clear things up for Clint a bit and tell him everything he needs to know about Dino Rossi in order to feel good about an endorsement.

Here it is in a nutshell:

He’s not Patty Murray.

Yes, it really is that simple. Sure, we’d all prefer to vote for a candidate who shares all of our views and excites us with fiery rhetoric, but in the absence of that, we have to act like adults and ask ourselves, “What’s better? Something or nothing?”

None at all.

Congressman Jay Inslee won re-election in 2008 with 68% of the vote. It looks as though he won’t be having such an easy time of it in 2010. A poll of WA-01 released yesterday by James Watkins’ campaign shows Inslee to be more vulnerable than this WA-01 resident had previously had the audacity to hope.

You may remember me wondering back in August how Inslee has managed to pass himself off as a moderate. The answer is that he apparently hasn’t had to do anything; his constituents don’t have any idea what he’s been doing back in D.C. Of course that’s just the sort of complacency that got us to where we’re at today but the upside is that it also means that there’s the potential to change people’s minds. With 2/3 of district residents describing themselves as fiscal conservatives, Inslee’s own record is going to be a powerful tool.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

"We are not amused."

Because, really, she is the State of Washington, isn’t she?

Washington’s governor, Christine Gregoire, says she will oppose Attorney General Rob McKenna’s plan to to file a lawsuit against the federal government on behalf of the State. Says Gregoire, “He did not call and consult me. I don’t know who he represents. He does not represent me (emphasis mine).”

The staggering arrogance of that statement leaves me (nearly) speechless and I assure you, I am rarely at a loss for words. I am wondering why Gregoire feels that the job of the Attorney General is specifically to represent her personal interests?

Gregoire supports the federal health care legislation. Well of course she does. She’s never met a piece of budget-busting legislation she didn’t like, which is why Washington is in a budget crisis and the State Treasurer tells us we’ll run out of cash in mere months.

For his part, McKenna says:

“…He does not need Gregoire’s ‘blessing’ to file a lawsuit on behalf of the state.

‘My role is to defend the State Constitution and the people of the state,’ said McKenna, ‘That includes defending the state from inappropriate actions by the federal government.’

McKenna says the 10th Amendment protects states from being forced to follow federal laws that are not covered by the U.S. Constitution.

‘That’s why the federal government has never imposed an auto insurance mandate, has never imposed a drinking age minimum, has never imposed a motorcycle helmet law…’”

So listen up, Christine, the Office of the Attorney General operates independently of the Governor’s office and McKenna really doesn’t need your permission to act, or even to consult with you before he acts. Get over it. And while you’re at it, get over yourself, too. It appears that you may have mistaken the meaning behind the words when people call you Queen Christine.

Update 1: An interesting perspective Stefan Sharkansky at Sound Politics showing why why it’s far more likely that Washington voters agree with McKenna than Gregoire.

Update 2: The gloves are indeed off, as the Democrat controlled legislature considers adding language to the budget to prevent McKenna from using State funds to pursue the health care challenge. Gregoire says she would sign such a measure into law. God forbid McKenna take steps to protect Washington citizens from this unconstitutional over-reach by the federal government.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

You may be familiar with the 1969 book, The Peter Principle, in which Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull promulgated the theory that, “in a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.” This came to mind when I heard yesterday, via @nwdigest, that a “top Democrat” from Washington is rumored as a potential replacement for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar if he runs for governor of Colorado. I wonder if that’s code for Christine Gregoire.

If so, a new theory will need to be formulated. I’d like to suggest the Obama Principle: “in a political hierarchy, players tend to rise beyond their level of incompetence in direct proportion their WTF!?! factor.”

Obama’s Administration would seem to be a case study. Does Janet “The System Worked or Didn’t Work” Napolitano ring any bells for you? Or “Safe Schools” Czar Kevin Jennings, perhaps?

It seems Christine Gregoire would be a perfect fit for this Administration. She’s certainly proven herself to be incompetent. During her tenure as Attorney General, two avoidable errors cost the State millions of dollars. One of those errors led to the forced resignation of Janet Capp, who sued and eventually settled with the State to the tune of $1.5 million. “Gregoire said the settlement was a “good deal” for taxpayers. She estimated that it would have cost the state more than $500,000 to try the case.” I admit to having weak math skills, but it occurs to me that $500,000 is $1 million less than $1.5 million…so I’m going to conclude that the only way this could have been a “good deal” for the taxpayers is if Gregoire expected to lose in court on the merits of the case.

Either that or her math skills are even worse than mine, which could go a long way toward explaining our current budget situation. Speaking of the budget, Gregoire’s incompetence is truly remarkable. In just five years under her leadership, Washington has plunged from a series of budget surpluses and a fat rainy day fund to a situation so dire, the State Treasurer is warning that the State is about to go broke.

Gregoire’s dismal record on public safety and her penchant for blaming others for her own shortcomings (Gregoire has long-standing experience in this highly prized skill) add to her qualifications for an appointment to any position within the Obama Administration.

As much as I would love for Washington State to be rid of Gregoire, an Administration appointment would be a travesty. So I suppose she’s in.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

I may not be a genius, but I don’t think you need to use rocket science to conclude that Chris Widener will make his Senate run official tomorrow morning.

Patty Murray is the Senate’s most liberal legislator. Her lifetime ACU rating is 2.92, barely above Jim McDermott’s 2.52. But – get this – in 2008, Murray scored zero. She must be replaced.

Look for Clint Didier’s announcement on January 11th.

It’s my belief that the primary will be a contest between these two candidates, unless someone with huge name recognition and expert fund-raising skills enters the race late.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Western Washington is reeling at the deaths of six law enforcement officers in just under two months: Officer Timothy Brenton, Sergeant Mark Renninger, Officer Ronald Owens, Officer Tina Griswold, Officer Greg Richards, and earlier this week, Deputy Sheriff Kent Mundell.

With a lightning quick response – Rahm Emmanuel would be proud – supporters of the Aaron Sullivan Public Safety and Police Protection Bill are using one of the deaths, Brenton’s, to justify the legislation, which would “ban the sale of military-style semi-automatic weapons.”

The bill is sponsored by Rep. Ross Hunter, D-Medina; Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle; and Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-Seattle. “The ban would cover semiautomatics designed for military use that are capable of rapid-fire and can hold more than 10 rounds. Semiautomatics designed for sporting or hunting purposes wouldn’t be banned.”

This is the type of empty gesture of which the left is so enamored. It gives the appearance that the sponsors are “tough on crime” yet does nothing to actually stop criminals from acquiring such weapons, nothing to actually increase public safety…while at the same time seriously infringing on the right of honest citizens to keep and bear the arms of their choice.

Yet Kohl-Welles doesn’t believe the ban would be unconstitutional.

She also said she doesn’t believe such a ban would violate the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms. “Did the framers of our Constitution ever envision something like a semi-automatic weapon?” she asked.

Whether or not the “framers of the Constitution” envisioned semi-automatic weapons has no bearing on the advisability of the current legislation. Rep. Kohl-Wells should re-read the 2nd Amendment and try to understand the thinking behind it. The 2nd Amendment wasn’t written to protect the rights of hunters and sportsmen; it was written to protect the “the security of a free state.” Consequently, it should be assumed that the author envisioned the citizens being well armed according to the standard of the day.

I believe that Hunter, Kline and Kohl-Welles are well-intentioned, albeit dangerously misguided. Here is the simple and rather obvious point that they are missing: You can never make enough laws to guarantee good behavior from people who are willing to break the law. You can, however make so many laws that the rights and freedoms we cherish are gradually eroded until…they are…no more.

I don’t really know all that much about Janet Napolitano but after her appearance on CNN’s State of the Union, I give her an F for her ability to evaluate the effectiveness of U.S. safety measures. Or as President Obama would say, she earns a solid B+. Napolitano’s assessment, from the transcript.

What we are focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe, that people are confident when they travel. And one thing I’d like to point out is that the system worked. Everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action. Within literally an hour to 90 minutes of the incident occurring, all 128 flights in the air had been notified to take some special measures in light of what had occurred on the Northwest Airlines flight. We instituted new measures on the ground and at screening areas, both here in the United States and in Europe, where this flight originated.

So the whole process of making sure that we respond properly, correctly and effectively went very smoothly.

I missed the show, so I don’t know if Napolitano managed to keep a straight face while letting this drop or not. I’m not sure how anyone could seriously say the system worked when a bomb was successfully smuggled onto a flight bound for the U.S. We have the incompetence of the would-be terrorist to thank for the failure of the attack as much as any success of the system. Still, I’m glad she’s is feeling good about how smoothly everything went and how everyone played their proper role, self-esteem being so important.

Apparently Secretary Napolitano sets a very low bar. I’d rather not have to rely on inept terrorists and brave, quick-thinking passengers to keep me safe on a flight. I’d rather that people whose behavior has become so problematic that family members report them to the U.S. embassy have their visas rescinded. Call me crazy.

Unfortunately, the new procedures being put in place (the ones we’re hearing about, anyway), appear to be regrettably misguided and reactionary. The measures, which seem designed to deny would-be terrorists access to and opportunities to deploy their cleverly smuggled bombs, seem more likely to inconvenience law-abiding passengers than thwart a determined terrorist. What’s to keep a terrorist from launching into action 90 minutes prior to landing rather than 59 minutes?

More importantly, will airport sales of Depends surge as passengers are forced to remain in their seats for the last hour of the flight? Should I buy stock?

Even sensible precautions such as pat downs become nonsensical when applied evenly across the board to blue-eyed grandmothers and young Muslim men with ties to al Qaeda who have recently returned from Yemen “vacations.”

Either Janet Napolitano deliberately chose to mislead the American people by calling this situation a success or she doesn’t have the mental capacity to perform her duties competently.

(As is becoming the norm, if you want all the details of a story that might reflect poorly on the Obama Administration, read the Telegraph. God bless the Brits.)

By now you’ve heard about the Nigerian citizen, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was overwhelmed by other passengers while attempting a terrorist attack on a Northwest Airlines flight about to land in Detroit.

Why did Abdulmutallab possess a visa allowing him to enter the U.S., despite appearing in at least one U.S. database which one would hope would result in automatic disqualification?

The sources told CNN that the suspect flew into Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam on a KLM flight from Lagos, Nigeria, and is not believed to be on any “no fly” list, although his name does appear in a U.S. database of people with suspect connections. He did not undergo secondary security screening in Amsterdam, an administration official said.

Pardon my crudeness, but screw the “no fly” list. Why, in the name of God, would we grant a visa to someone with “suspect connections,” especially one whose behavior has been so strange as to cause his own father to report him to the local U.S. embassy.

Another government official said Abdulmutallab’s father went to the embassy in Abuja with his concerns, but did not have any specific information that would put him on the “no-fly list” or on the list for additional security checks at the airport.

Neither was the information sufficient to revoke his visa to visit the United States. His visa had been granted June 2008 and was valid through June 2010.

No “specific information.” “Insufficient information.”

I am reeling under the weight of that bit of bureaucratic ineptitude.

His foreboding was so great, the elder Abdulmutallab took the extraordinary step of visiting the U.S. embassy to report his son. Most parents wouldn’t take such an action in the absence of grave concerns; even then only after much soul-searching and with great anguish. What kind of simpleton would fail to recognize the significance of that act?

We don’t owe entry into the United States to any foreign national. Decisions as to who is or isn’t granted a visa should be based solely on the best interests and safety of the United States. I prefer that our officials err on the side of caution and if that occasionally results in someone wrongly being denied entry…yeah, whatever.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

That’s all I ask.

This is the kind of fighting spirit I expect from the GOP Congressional leadership; a bold play on 4th and 18. Going for the win rather than the tie in overtime. Instead, Mitch McConnell kicks a field goal to end regulation play.

Perhaps McConnell believes that capitulation is preferable to a glorious defeat in the defense of liberty and prosperity. Perhaps when he swore to “support and defend” the Constitution, he was just saying the words or perhaps he doesn’t think the Constitution is worth his best effort. Perhaps he doesn’t think the stakes are high enough to forgo his Christmas dinner in Kentucky. Perhaps he forgot that there are many thousands of US servicemen and women who won’t be making it home for Christmas this year or that United States Senators are above making the the same kind of sacrifice.

Perhaps he never watched Braveheart…

…But perhaps he should as it appears that he could use an infusion of fighting spirit.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom–go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen! ~Samuel Adams

Thanks for the swell Christmas gift, Mitch, but I’m not really loving it and from what I hear, the return policy stinks.

So crouch down, Mitch. Go ahead, lick the hands that feed you; you’ve earned it! Try not to think about my grandchildren growing up to work harder and have less. Try not to wonder if they’ll be the first generation in recent times whose life expectancy will be shorter than their parents’.

Merry Christmas. Or whatever.

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

And I assure you, I have a vivid imagination.

State of Washington Department of Corrections has lost an Arkansas felon. Sean Robinson, writing at the Tacoma News Tribune, fills us in on the details.

He’s William T. Forbes, one of 14 Arkansas parolees Washington is required to supervise under the terms of an interstate agreement.

Forbes is a fugitive – the only wayward parolee in the Arkansas group. His whereabouts are unknown; last known address in Moses Lake. An active warrant, valid anywhere in the country, calls for his arrest.

The Arkansas offenders, including Forbes, represent a sliver of the total; Washington supervises 2,393 out-of-state offenders, according to records from the state Department of Corrections.

It’s unclear how many of those offenders have violated the terms of their parole or absconded from supervision. The News Tribune recently requested a state-by-state breakdown from the Department of Corrections, with particular emphasis on Arkansas.

I especially love this part:

The numbers also reveal an apparent trade deficit. Washington’s exported offenders number 1,046 – less than half as many as the 2,393 the state received from elsewhere.

Corrections officials cite multiple reasons for the disparity.

“Offenders – like a lot of people across the country – are attracted to Washington’s quality of life,” said DOC spokeswoman Maria Peterson.

Other factors revolve around differences in state corrections law, officials say. Washington’s community supervision system differs from other states’, many of which use more traditional parole and probation systems. Some Washington offenders are from Washington originally, and have convictions here as well as elsewhere, Peterson said. She added that the interstate agreements governing offender supervision are not designed to create a 1-to-1 ratio among all states.

Right…our “community supervision system” differs from other states. I wonder if that isn’t some sort of code for “we just sort of shoo them out the door and hope they report in once in a while.”

Meanwhile, Governor Gregoire’s moratorium on accepting parolees from Arkansas is still in effect; smoke and mirrors of little substance that does little to protect the public, designed primarily to deflect attention away from her own abysmal record on public safety.

More on this subject:

• Gregoire’s Political Posturing Over Lakewood Shootings
• Christine Gregoire. Glass House. Throwing Stones
• The Buck Doesn’t Stop Here

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

I can’t believe when I was pounding away on Christine Gregoire and her Department of Corrections for failing to adequately protect the public from convicted felons (and more here), that I forgot all about the case of Phillip Paul, the insane killer who walked away from a “field trip” to a county fair while in the custody of the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS).

We’re reminded today, as the State announces tighter rules to govern outings for mental patients, that the previous rules “drew sharp criticism from Gov. Chris Gregoire.” In response, Hal Wilson, CEO for Eastern State Hospital, where Paul was being held, resigned one month prior to his planned retirement date. He is now, I’m sure, living comfortably on his generous public pension. Ooh, ouch! I wonder, can I get the governor to sharply criticize me?

I’m not so naive to think that the Governor could manage every State agency down to the last detail. That would be a nightmare of micro-management, to be avoided lest the State come to a grinding halt. But that doesn’t mean that when something goes wrong, the Governor isn’t the one who’s ultimately in charge. Gregoire likes to point fingers but given the State’s record on public safety under her tenure, she should be pointing at herself.

Do I look like Harry Truman? Do you see a sign on my desk that says, "the buck stops here?" I didn't think so; in fact, I don't even have a desk!

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.

Just because Patty Murray represents Washington in the US Senate, it doesn’t mean she should be insulting the residents of the great State of Alabama. As reported in The Daily Weekly:

With the Dreamliner finally up in the air, one could almost forget the unending controversy swirling in Boeing’s turbines.First there’s that little move to South Carolina planned to actually build the Dreamliner. But also back in the news is the battle over building tankers for the Air Force. Sen. Patty Murray, up for election next year, has been a driving force behind Boeing’s protest of the military’s initial decision to award the contract to Northrop Grumman. All Things Considered did a story last week on Northrop’s attempts to put pressure on the feds that included an interview with Murray where she managed to insult the entire state of Alabama.

Northrop planned to build the tankers at an assembly line in the southern state, which Murray says is a mistake.

Quoth Murray: “I have stood on the line in Everett, Wash., where we have thousands of workers who go to work every day to build these planes. I would challenge anybody to tell me that they’ve stood on a line in Alabama and seen anybody building anything.”

I’m trying to decide which is more egregious; Murray’s abysmal ignorance or the pernicious bigotry that assumes all Alabamians are uneducated yokels.

Perhaps Senator Murray has heard of “Hyundai.” They manufacture “automobiles.” She might be shocked to learn that Hyundai has a “manufacturing plant” in Montgomery, Alabama. She might also find it surprising to learn that Mercedes-Benz has a huge, state of the art manufacturing facility just outside of Tuscaloosa. The last time I heard, manufacturing plants had “lines” where people “build things.” In fact, according to the Manufacture Alabama! website, Alabama has a strong manufacturing base.

The bigotry we experienced first hand when our daughter chose to attend the University of Alabama. It was shocking, really, how contemptuous people were of her choice. Mooncat at Left in Alabama sums it up:

This is a perfect example of negotiating by tearing the other guy down — and I expected better from Patty Murray. Some of you may remember how she originally won her Senate seat by campaigning as a “mom in tennis shoes.” As a supposed champion for average Americans, Murray should have checked her facts before spouting what any educated person would realize was nonsense — and insulting, stereotypical nonsense, at that. We’re not still chopping cotton down here, Senator, barefoot and illiterate. Alabamians have long since embraced modern technology. In fact, my neighbor is a farmer and uses GPS in his rig that keeps his combine on the exact same path his planter traveled months before, right down to a little wobble he might have made reaching to answer his cell phone.

Alabama workers built Saturn V rockets in the 60′s and were instrumental in their design and testing and played major roles in the Space Shuttle, Spacelab, the Delta IV rocket (Delta and Atlas launch vehicles are now manufactured in a state of the art facility in Decatur, Alabama) and now Ares programs. Speaking as a former industry insider, I would put Alabama engineers and scientists — and yes, technicians and machinists — up against anything Washington state has.

For a United States Senator, there’s really no excuse for this kind of ignorance and bigotry is always indefensible. I really can’t add anything to that other than to extend my apology to the people of Alabama and promise them that I’ll do whatever is within my power to see that she’s given the pink slip next November.

Taken just last week near Tuscaloosa, this photo depicts typical Alabamians who probably don't even know what an airplane is, much less how to build one

Cross posted at It’s Only Words.