Replies

I wrote this article. It was not apparent to me how to list myself as the source, so I left the source field blank. Thanks to all who have mentioned how this all works (sourcing, etc).

As for submission to the Seattle P-I, I think I have about as much chance having them publish this as I would to have a dinner invite from the local ultra-left gay "intelligentsia" that control the alternative weeklies (read: entertainment listings and sex ad classifieds -- no hard journalism to be found).

I did, however, manage to talk with Dave Ross (KIRO radio) during his 3-6 PM show (first show of this time-slot). I figured this show might have a pretty good share, given the fact that he has just moved to this prime slot. For the benefit of those of you who are not local, Dave Ross is a character who fits in well in this region: the "stealth liberal." (It is, overall, a quite passive-aggressive region, so this is no major revelation). You know the type: always wanting to appear more mainstream than their actual politics, always talking loud in restaurants, often quite proud of being a big fish in a little pond. And personal manner and tone? One word: smarm. Oh, and he's the Democratic candidate from the 8th congressional district who got spanked by Dave Reichert (former King County Sheriff who has the Green River Killer's scalp on his belt, figuratively speaking). I'm not in that district or I would have helped spank Ross back to radio.

Anyway, the process was interesting: I called in, waited a bit, and an assistant asked my name and what I wanted to talk about (standard stuff). The WA Senate minority leader who was being interviewed by Dave was just wrapping up, and LO AND BEHOLD, I hear Dave ask the senator the very question I had told his assistant I wanted to ask DAVE. Ummm, is this sort of theft standard operating procedure for these folks? Excuse me -- I've answered my own question.

The question was basically a portion of my article -- essentially, wasn't Christine Gregoire following a double-standard (based on her past position, when she was initially behind in votes) in regards to her great reticence for any form of run-off. You know, he didn't really have any good answer for this. Liberal logic often relies heavily on either emotion or "smoke and mirrors" logic, so I was not really surprised.

Damn, but I thought it was a good question. After all, it's one of those classic "when the shoe is on the other foot, someone does a complete logical 180-degree spin" situation. Gregoire looks brittle and a bit rattled on TV -- she knows there are bodies buried somewhere and the bulldozers are scurrying to flatten out the landfill.

So, I went to Plan "B" -- I asked him this (also from my article): If Gregoire is so convinced she won by the most accurate count, why fear a run-off? After all, it's all about serving the people's interests (right, Christine?) and wanting to instill both public trust and a true enfranchisement of the voters (the whole "will of the people" thing). He was more direct about this -- he said: "Because she thinks she will probably lose." So, let's see ... she knows she doesn't really have the votes to be the FAIRLY ELECTED governor of a majority of Washington voters, yet she's hanging on by her glued-on fingernails? Hmmmm ... that's not exactly a mandate in my book.

I reiterated to Dave (question theft or no) that her re-vote position is a huge double-standard, and I suspect I made him uncomfortable with some new questions I posed about the exact agencies who would oversee any possible investigation into actual fraud (for when the buried bodies start to smell REALLY bad ... the landfill is already getting a bit ripe). Discussions that involve mention of "FBI" are not high on the favorite topics of Democrats, when it's their guys or gals on the firing line. Still, I mentioned there's no harm in waiting a few weeks for gubernatorial certification so that some digging can be accomplished in order to see what transpired. I even said: "You know, the usual stuff. Perhaps even the Feds might want to look at, say, any phone records between Dean Logan and Paul Berendt (as in, establishing any -- if they exist -- correspondences between them and how that might correlate to times of discovery of new votes) ... I mean, hey ... there were a new bunch of votes popping up with strange regularity for a while.

I'll give him this: Dave DID say maybe it would be good to put a whole bunch of people under oath and just get to the bottom of it. He made it sound as though this would forever put the issue to rest, but he doesn't fool me -- it was said with the same conviction as a drug smuggler just pulled over by the cops: "Yeah, I don't mind if you look in the trunk. I got nothing to hide." But, usual smarm-tone aside, I guess I'll have to take him at his word.

Wow, after my call, they sure played a TON of commercials. Including mine, there were only three callers that whole hour. When in doubt (and when popular revolt is brewing), sell crap ... they must teach you that in liberal radio school. The last call was a chipper young woman who pleasantly (and, I will admit, did so better than I) reamed Dave a new one. Boy, she was a sprightly little bulldog in her tenacity. Her position was one that is catching on more and more: whether it was due to incredibly gross incompetence or outright fraud, the voters of Washington would be best served by a new vote, and anything else does not truly respect the wishes of so many of Washington state's citizens.

Her call wrapped up the show; as I said, the first in that drive-time slot. Needless to say, I was pleased that two of the three calls that last hour were peppy in their push for both a re-vote and getting to the bottom of this mess, especially since this is the type of show where most callers parrot liberal media soundbites "Uhhhh, yeah ... CBS shoulda hung firm ... ya know, I tink evabody knows Bush got outa da service, I mean didn't finish his service during Vitnam." There was a much, much older lady who called, mumbling something about the 2000 election (some unintelligible comparison or analogy) but it was a pretty lame call and fairly incoherent. Gosh, loved that last caller, though ... she was delightfully feisty.

I hope many folks that were listening on the radio end up at the re-vote rally in Olympia tomorrow!

-- Keeso