Allpart of the ‘attitude’
While driving home from Spokane the other day I heard agovernment official testify before some U.S. Congressional Committee on the useof water boarding, and how some techniques of water boarding were used onsubjects to assist them into cooperating with the authorities.
As I pondered what this guy said it occurred to me that this”attitude” is used by the authorities in assisting the people of this state andnation into cooperating with them. The attitude that I’m addressing is thethreat to you or your family, or property by the state because of a lack ofcompliance with some new “law” or “regulation” or some “permitting” processthat is purposely expensive, or some decision made by a judge that is blatantlyunconstitutional. These forms of tyranny seem to be invented by our bureaucratswho seek to make their own statements of importance and power over our lives.While giving us the idea that their molesting and bullying us into submissionis good for us or the environment, fish, wolves, seal or whatever part ofnature they choose to “protect” or, in reality, “profit” from.
The DNR after stealing the use of private gravel pits herein Okanogan County has now apparently joined forces with the WashingtonDepartment of Fish and Wildlife and the Parks Department to require us topurchase a Discovery Pass of $30 so that we are then “legal” to use developedareas on state lands. The Department of Ecology and the Washington Departmentof Fish and Wildlife have been practicing these techniques for some time. The Mobwould call this small payment “protection.”
It is also the job of the various agencies of the state tocome up with ways to waste taxpayer money on “projects” that in their mind willbenefit the environment, or people or animals. These projects can be some ofthe most expensive failures fathomable, but this is OK because these agenciesare not accountable to the taxpayer, and for them, spending other people’smoney is the only thing they know. As we continue to have more of this”attitude” of the authorities’ total control rubbed in our faces, with theirdemanding our cooperation with rules that are poured on us with increasingvolume, I’m wondering if it would be possible to just defund these thugagencies that don’t produce anything other than more of themselves and ofcourse more regulation?
So, Bill I suggest that you skip the 2012 run for prez andbegin with your campaign for Governor. This state has never had a man in theWhitehouse, and if you could fix the mess here, you would be light years aheadof any community organizer.
In his latest exercise in ‘journalism’ in yourissue of May 19, Publisher Bill Forhan writes “Have any of these’environmentalists’ never heard of natural selection or survival of thefittest? (Careful Bill, you sound like a Darwinist. The ‘intelligent design’cabal will get you if you don’t watch out.) They have destroyed the logging,mining and domestic energy industries. They have shut down most of the farms inthe central valley of California.”
To paraphrase the immortal words of thattelevision dwarf, “What you talkin’ ’bout Forhan?” Such a load of&#160; ‘truthiness’ can only be the result of (1)writing whatever Bill feels like with no regard to accuracy or (2) anexperiment gone wrong with some peyote.
According to the USGS the domestic miningindustry, including petroleum and natural gas extraction, generated $478billion dollars in 2010. Not bad for a destroyed industry. As for shutting downmost of the farms in the central valley of California, one has only to drive upCalifornia Route 99 or Interstate 5 from the foot of the Tejon Pass to RedBluff to see that this ‘fact’ too is an utter flight of fantasy. Or is Billsuggesting that ‘they’ have cleverly preserved only the endless lines of fullyfunctioning farms adjoining these two highways, while the rest of the valleyhas returned to tule marsh? The Central Valley generated $17 billion dollars inagricultural income in 2002 from the pitiful remnant farms left. Sensationalprofits for so few farms!
Bill, as usual has relied on right-wing sources,in this case possibly the Wall Street Journal and Norma Lawrence of Sacramento,who wrote in her blog that 250,000 acres of Central Valley land now sit idlebecause of the delta smelt. This seems impressive if true and if forced, untila simple calculation shows that this represents about 1.7% of the acreage ofthe Central Valley. Most of the farms, indeed!!!
The Central Valley is indeed at risk, but fromtwo forces unrelated to environmentalists, (1) runaway urbanization and (2)they ain’t got enough water (unless they steal ours).
John F. Connot
Jason Mercier’s&nbsp;(Washington Policy Center) article of5/26/11 is a complete contradiction of itself.&nbsp;
My dictionary defines &quot;democracy&quot; as&quot;majority rule&quot; and the majority as &quot;more than half.&quot; ButMercier claims because the undemocratic &quot;super majority&quot; is writteninto the state constitution it is not undemocratic! By definition it is”undemocratic!”
The real intent behind the &quot;super majority&quot;is&nbsp;it simply makes it easier for the big money interests to buyoff&nbsp;smaller number of legislators to kill legislation they don’t want topay for.
Obvious example in the last session was the effortto&nbsp;get rid of tax giveaways to the rich.&nbsp;How many of the suckers whovoted for the two-thirds vote expected&nbsp;the elimination of free tax moneyto big business&nbsp;to be considered a &quot;tax increase&quot;?
Well as&nbsp;Mr. Mercier and hiscorporate-funded&nbsp;keepers know &quot;you can fool all of the people some oftime and some of the people all of time&quot; but as Abe Lincoln&nbsp;added&quot;you can’t fool all of the people all of time!&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp;
William F. Johnston
tyle='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Arial'>&nbsp;Tacoma &amp; Chesaw
Need more balance
In this era of chaine-rumors, blogs fraught with misinformation, and faux news outlets, it is nosurprise we are so ideologically and politically polarized. Do facts stillmatter? Contributing to this state is your publication. Yes, you print allletters but your featured weekly articles are near exclusively by staunchconservative ideologues such as Adele Ferguson, yourself, and the like. Howabout bringing back a progressive like Jamie Howell who you removed because ofhis views contrary to your own. Would this not foster a healthier debate andencourage again those who have one by one dismissed by you to contribute againand make this page more relevant?
And would it not be aservice to the business community who rely on weekend guests and potential newresidents, visitors who assume this page represents the values of thecommunity? Your response expressly welcome.&nbsp;
Publisher’s response: You make a legitimate point Mark,although let me clear up one factual error in your letter. I did not removeJamie Howell because his views were contrary to my own. Jamie quit submittinghis columns to me suggesting that my paper had become too conservative for him.Unfortunately, my experience is that it is the progressives who seek to stiflereal debate when the facts do not support them. Their primary tactic in thatcase is to cut off discussion or change the subject, instead of reexaminingtheir position. That said, I will endeavor to find some progressive columniststo “add more balance.” And I encourage you and your like-minded friends toengage the debate. We are about to enter one of the most important electioncycles in our country’s history. We must find a way to come together and electleaders who can affect real change or our country is doomed to collapse as aresult of our own greed, envy and selfishness.
Go big brother
I must say that when I read your headline about yourpresidential run I thought you lost it again. But after reading your platform,I agree with everything you said. You forgot to include term limits. Too toughto run as an independent as you don’t have deep, deep, pockets. But I wouldvote for you and even send you money for the campaign.
Yourmuch younger sister,
Publisher’s response: Thanks sis. It’s good to know yourfamily supports you. I’m just not sure about mom!