>The Columbian’s Moeller problem.

>.
Lately our local cancer on our community, the paper, has done a series of articles on the moronic candy tax that just went into effect.

They’ve editorialized about it, shown the stupidity of it and the hardship of it.

What they’ve also done for the last several months is deliberately fail to mention the sponsor of that bill, one State Representative Jim Moeller, (Socialist 49).

I’ve mentioned that on a few occasions; it goes to the pattern of their leftist bias and their efforts to help their political allies by lying through omission at all levels, like their despicable efforts to rehabilitate Brian Baird’s self-shattered image.

Compare and contrast that failure on the local rag’s part with this effort in an article today concerning the re-implementation of the license scofflaw squad and efforts to identify those who live here while licensing their vehicles in Oregon to avoid the sales tax and other fees; a laudable goal to be sure.

But said story also included this little tidbit:

Early this year, state Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver, persuaded lawmakers to restore the program, which brought in far more money than it cost. Rep. Jim Jacks, D-Vancouver, was a co-sponsor.

It’s not particularly rocket science to figure out why the scum at the Columbian cover for Moeller when his stupidity is on display and people would actually hold him accountable for his moronic “candy is not food” garbage.

It’s because these leftists want to protect him.

It’s just the tiniest bit odd, don’t you think, that they not only mention Moeller as the prime sponsor of this bill, but Jacks as a co-sponsor? Obviously, when it comes to a bill most people would like while they REPEATEDLY fail to mention that it was Moeller’s ability to “persuade lawmakers” that taxing candy and providing yet ANOTHER reason for us to shop in Oregon actually made sense, this rag will stop at nothing to keep the light of day from shining on these types of bills.

Why do you suppose that is?

Despicable scum.

Not Moeller. As a socialist, he can’t help taxing everything in sight to help pay for his union thug buddies.

No… I’m referring to the paper, where they shamelessly huckster for fringe leftists at the expense of telling the truth… ALL the truth… and doing what they can to make sure they make it harder to hold the fringe leftists they like accountable. But then, I’m sure that Moeller was also one of the bigger cheerleaders for the B&O tax break these slime arranged for while the rest of saw our B&O taxes went up.

I’d say at this point that these slimeballs ought to be ashamed of themselves… but it’s fairly clear that they’re incapable of that ability.
.

>Impressions from this morning’s candidate forum: Jim Moeller – "Candy isn’t food."

>.
I’ve got to admit, I’ve frequently wondered how it is that the fringe left can do what they do.

Well, I sure got a lesson this morning.

State Representative Jom Moeller (D-Vancouver) solemnly informed us of two different facts that I had never considered: the first “Candy is not food.” The second: We have undergone $12 billion in budget CUTS over the last 4 years.

Utter nonsense, of course. When an item goes from not being taxed to being taxed, that’s an increase.

No spin. No BS. Moeller’s take was that, in fact, the candy tax that HE was entirely responsibe for introducing, wasn’t an increase because according to Moeller, they had removed the tax from candy several years ago, and they were just “buying it back.”

Seriously.

As for the fictional $12 billion, that one wasn’t really addressed. What I know is that when I went to work in Olympia on Leg staff in January of 95, our biennial budget was around $13 billion.

Right now, it’s arorund $35 billion.

It took us a mere 108 years to get to the point of having a $13 billion dollar budget. It has taken 15 years or so to triple that figure.

There can be no doubt because no other democrat from the 49th or the 17th had the guts to show up, that Moeller’s presense was designed entirely to jam a stick in the eye of the Christian Chamber putting the meeting on… and he was doing it with a smile.

But his claims were so wildly inaccurate as to be worthless. His vituperative partisanship was a sickening display.

But the Christian Chamber is just learning. This was their first candidate forum. Maybe next time, they keep the d’s in their own forum until at least after the primary.

With big government, massive spending democrats like Moeller, is it any wonder we are where we are?
.

>Another example of why it’s wrong to confuse The Columbian with "journalism."

>.
In what must be their fourth story of the issue, the idiots at the bridger/looter Pravda Columbian paper have, once again, whined and snivel about the moronic “what is and what isn’t” candy tax.

They’ve done it before, and they’ll most like do it again.

What did they leave out?

The moron who is behind this law. The simple idiot bent on jacking up our taxes in the midst of a horrific recession. The fringe-leftist whack job that this rag has supported since he first climbed out of his “screw the people” hole.

Jim “The Candy Man” Moelller, (Socialist 49th District).

If these morons were true “journalists,” isn’t it obvious they would have pinned the “credit” for this complete stupidity where it most properly belong? They obviously know he’s behind it: why are they protecting him?

This tax didn’t develop in a test tube. Saying

“Others say Washington is not the first state to separate candy from baked goods for sales tax purposes, using the pivotal ingredient of flour. The language, drafted by the multistate Streamlined Sales Tax Governing Board, aims to makes sales-tax rules more uniform across the nation.

“At least 24 other states have this definition,” said Mike Gowrylow, a spokesman for the Washington State Department of Revenue.

If EVERY other state adopted this stupidity, that wouldn’t justify ANYTHING. It’s pretty clear these leftists are making a concerted effort to spin this for their fellow travelers so it isn’t used as yet another in the series of excuses to bludgeon these morons at the polls in November.

But the quiz question today is this: why are the scum at the Columbian so bent on protecting Moeller? Why aren’t they telling the whole world who is directly responsible for this garbage?

Well, I think we know why, don’t we?

For more on the background, check out Lew Waters on the Candy Man.

>Columbian does another piece on Jim Moeller’s candy tax; again fails to mention Moeller is behind it.

>.
So, the local cancer on our community did another article on Communist Representative Jim Moeller’s tax increase which will, of course, make our economy worse while, like the cigarette tax increases, drive SW Washington consumers over the bridges into Oregon to make these purchases.

The idiocy of such a bill is, of course, self-evident. But that’s perhaps a subject for another post.

The idiocy of the Pravda Columbian’s coverage of that bill and it’s implementation? That’s why we’re here today.

The Columbian has done an editorial “jeering” the tax in question. But in that editorial and today’s article, what did they FAIL to do?

Why they FAILED to mention who was behind this tax increase… one Jim Moeller (Socialist-49)

Yeah, this tax is indefensible. Like his buddy Pridemore, there can be no doubt this is an attempt… but only an attempt (there is absolutely no way this tax will raise the projected revenue. People will buy these products in larger quantities in both Oregon and Idaho, or they won’t buy them at all. But who ever put reality and Moeller in the same room?) to “balance the budge on the backs of the poor and the powerless.”

How they can babble about this tax and its impacts without also naming the idiot behind the whole thing?

Well, they certainly don’t want people like me to come along and remind them that they, in fact, have repeatedly endorsed this clown ever since his political shadow has darkened our doorway.

I’m sure it was just one of those deliberate oversights that the rag will set right at some point, aren’t you?
.

>The Columbian fails to master cause and effect: They endorsed Moeller, condemn his idiotic candy bill…

>.
….fail to understand that it was THEIR guy that pushed this idiocy…

… and then failed to mention idiotic stick in their rant:

Jeers: To the state’s new candy tax, which takes effect June 1. Even someone without a sweet tooth can find something to hate in this new tax, recently enacted by the state Legislature as part of a package of budget-balancing gimmicks. One of the biggest problems is defining “candy,” which, according to the state, is made with “sugar, honey, or other natural or artificial sweeteners combined with chocolate, fruit, nuts or other ingredients or flavorings and formed into bars, drops or pieces. …”

Clear on that? Three Musketeers chocolate bars are taxed. Starburst fruit chews, too. But, wait. Nestle’s Crunch is exempt, along with Milky Way bars and Twizzlers. They all contain flour, so they aren’t candy. To figure out which sweets are taxed, the Department of Revenue has examined the ingredients of 3,000 food items, placing some on the tax rolls and others on the exempt list. We wonder how much that cost, even as we wish lawmakers remembered what our mom always said: Candy isn’t very nutritious.

Lew Waters has the low down.

How weird is this? How unethical? How much of a tank job is it when this paper condemns legisklation without mentioning the one responsible for it?

THIS PAPER ENDORSED THIS CLOWN.

They not only fail to mention that MOELLER SPONSORED AND PUSHED THIS BILL THEY HATE SO MUCH, they naturally fail to mention that he’s a democrat, representing the district where this paper is located… or that they’ve endorsed him for every election he’s run.

These chickens are coming home to roost, and this kind of pap is the best this cancer on our community can do?
.

>The questions that will determine the 3rd Congressional race.

>.
Face it. Next November is going to be extremely tough on leftists in Congress.

Even now, as democrats work hard to socialize medicine, each day where the focus is on that issue instead of the issues important to the American people make it less likely that a democrat will win in the 3rd.

The tin ear syndrome will make it very difficult for any of the leftists running to make it to the top. With upwards of 10 candidates announced or about to announce, the top two in the general may be the two who got over 10 percent of the vote.

Who will those two be?

Will, the easier targets are who they won’t be.

And they won’t be Pridemore, Wallace, Moeller or any other SW Washington democrat representing anyone in Clark County.

It won’t be Hatfield. It won’t be Russell. It won’t be Salazar. It won’t be Crist.

The reasons it won’t be the democrats mentioned run the gamut from the fact that many of them support that moronic bridge replacement and loot rail; at least one was involved in a job scam; one is clueless and one has been a joke the last two times she ran.

A fake, unethical conservative won’t survive.

Because here are the questions the leftists won’t be able to answer in any way that will get them elected:

1. Do you support the massive and unneeded waste of $4 Billion to replace a bridge that doesn’t need replacing, including the $100,000,000 Wallace has wasted on the CRC… to include running legislation to gerrymander the voters of the tax district to pay for loot rail, like Pridemore did?

2. Will you actually read all bills before you vote on them?

3. What would your votes have been on the porkulous, cap and swindle, and the neo-communist socialized medicine program the empty suit is ramming down our throats?

4. What steps will you, personally, take to end Pelosi/Reid/Obama’s efforts to bankrupt this country by building a mountain of debt?

5. Will you vote yes, like Pridemore voted yes, on a budget “balanced on the backs of the poor and the powerless?”

These are tough questions for leftists to answer truthfully. Of course, if they take the Obama method, they’ll just lie outright. But if they tell the truth, no one will vote for them.

And when you add that to a democrat brand where Bush looks wildly popular in comparison… man, it sucks to be a leftist in 2010.
.

>Did Herrera jump the gun… and the shark… by announcing last night?

>.
Other discussions were taking place when State Representative Jamie Herrera (R-DC) got WAYYYYYY out in front of those discussions and announced on Politico that she was all in. The article ratcheting back her persona that she was being “groomed” for this by moving her position backwards to “considering” this run lends itself to that conclusion

Not so fast, Herrera. There are other, MANY other much more qualified then you to represent this district in Congress.

See, Jamie… to actually be a Member of Congress requires far more substance than a smile that’s the poster for an orthodontist.

Unfortunately, that’s all Herrera’s got.

While she’s never worked to get what she’s been given, while she has zero experience, while she’s never had a private sector job… while, in fact, she’s done nothing except be a career intern… that’s simply not enough.

That’s not to say I don’t believe she shouldn’t run. On the contrary, I think she should announce and then resign her seat in the House. That way, we can get rid of her there… and then, when she gets hammered in the primary, she could just be gone altogether.
I’d also like to see Moeller, Wallace, and the rest of the leftist caucus down here announce.

They have no chance… Wallace is toast because it’s too easy to hang the bridge and the wasted tens of millions around her neck; no one north of 39th would ever vote for Moeller…. Steve Stuart is over no matter what he does due to both his desire to jam this unwanted bridge with its unwanted and unneeded loot rail down our throats along with the corruption that got him elected in the first place… the $100,000 from David Barnett that bought Stuart like the 13th Amendment had never been passed.

Yes… it’s gonna be a hoot to see which leftists line up to get their asses kicked… almost as much as a hoot watching Herrera getting beaten like a rented mule.

Who needs the NFL when you’ve got this?
.

>Jim Jacks hasn’t been there long and he’s a liar already: Light rail gerrymander bill approved: SB 5540

>.
Rep. Jim Jacks is new to the legislature. So, when he says that the measure “gives Clark County voters the final decision on the idea of creating a High Capacity Transportation Corridor area,” I can only think he’s a liar… or he’s stupid. If he’s the former, that’s too bad for the people of the 49th District, of Clark County and of this state.

Actually, if it’s the latter, it’s the same thing.

Rep. Jacks knows damned well that tens of thousands of Clark County voters who will be forced to pay this tax will have absolutely no say in whether or not it’s implemented. To suggest that “Clark County voters” will make this decision is disingenuous at best.

So, when his seatmate, Rep. Jim “Hussein” Moeller, says the bill as an essential piece of the plan to build a new freeway bridge over the Columbia River, actually, what it is, is an essential piece of their scummy plan to ram an unwanted, monstrously wasteful bridge down the throats of 65,000 commuters and 400,000 residents of this county without a vote.

“The legislators said the project is essential to the economic recovery of Southwest Washington.”

The legislators are liars.

Sucking $100,000,000 a year out of this county for tolls will do absolutely nothing to recover our economy. In fact, it will provide substantial damage to that already caused by the President with his multi-trillion dolar debt that he’s hammered us with.

What it will do is reward Moeller and Jacks’ political allies in the unions while they strive to waste $4 BILLION of our money so they can get light rail into Vancopuver… which is the entirety, begining to end, of the reason for this project.

These two make me ashamed of our Legislature… and the local government officials going along with this program equal a stain on democracy that will live forever on the local political scene.

Allow us a vote. Otherwise, democracy will have failed utterly in our local corner of this state.

House, Senate OK light rail tax bill
Several differences remain to be worked out

Monday, April 20 1:29 p.m.

BY KATHIE DURBIN
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

Legislation that would let C-Tran ask voters whether they want to create a taxing district to support the operation of light rail in Clark County has now passed both the House and Senate.

But differences between the original Senate bill and the version passed by the House remain to be worked out, including a House amendment sponsored by Rep. Jim Moeller that would delay a vote on such a measure until July 2012.

Moeller and Rep. Jim Jacks, both Vancouver Democrats, hailed the bill as an essential piece of the plan to build a new freeway bridge over the Columbia River.

“The federal government has made it abundantly clear that any new bridge will not be built unless the plan incudes a high-capacity transit component,” Moeller said in a statement. “This legislation helps our county meet that requirement.”

Jacks stressed that the measure “gives Clark County voters the final decision on the idea of creating a High Capacity Transportation Corridor area.”

The legislators said the project is essential to the economic recovery of Southwest Washington.

More:
.

>The theft that is Light Rail.

>The Vancouver Downtown Mafia is all about wasting $4 BILLION on an unneeded and unwanted bridge replacement and loot rail.

Their winged monkeys in Olympia: Pridemore, Moeller and Jacks; are out shilling for their gerrymandering bill that will give us all the opportunity to pay their taxes in addition to their horrific tolls, without once being asked if WE want this.

They won’t ASK us, because they KNOW the answer… and they don’t want the facts to interfere with their agenda.

Well, here are just a few “facts” that any sober individual could utilize to conclude what a colossal and horrific waste of money loot rail really is.

Light Rail Fact Sheet

“It’s hard for me to understand why intelligent people, who have access to the same information I do, continue to support light rail even though it is clear that it does little to nothing to relieve congestion problems.”

–Don Benton, State Senator, 17^th District (http://www1.leg.wa.gov/senate/benton)

.

· Six of the West Coast light rail systems (Los Angeles, Portland, Sacramento, San Jose, San Diego and San Francisco) require taxpayer subsidies to pay for 73% of operations and 100% of capital improvements per year and on average remove between 0.39% and 1.1% of cars from the roadway. (Washington Policy Center. http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/Centers/transportation/policybrief/08_Ennis_LightRail.pdf )

.

· The per mile cost of an urban freeway is comparable to light rail. ($30 million) However, a highway can carry five to ten times as many person-miles of travel as a light rail line. (Goldwater Institute. http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/Common/Files/Multimedia/122.pdf )

.

· Tri-Met projected that the Eastside MAX would take 3 years to build and cost $135 million to construct. Actual time and cost: 4 years and $214 million. Tri-Met projected that five years after completion the Eastside MAX would carry 42,500 people per day. After five years, the MAX averaged 21,000 riders daily. The cost was 55% higher than projected and the actual ridership was 50% of the projected. (The Thoreau Institute. http://www.ti.org/FS3.html )

.

· Nationwide, the average cost of light rail $1.50 per passenger per mile. (Double the cost of bus transit per person per mile and FIVE times the cost of automobile transportation per person per mile.) (Goldwater Institute. http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/AboutUs/ArticleView.aspx? )

.

· Nationally, light rail brings in revenue of $226.1 million, while the annual operating costs total $778.3 million, leaving a $552.2 million burden on tax payers. This does not take into consideration construction costs. (Light Rail: Boon or Boondoggle, Molly Castelazo and Thomas Garrett of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pdf/light_rail.pdf)

.

· Sound Transit officials in Seattle estimated that nearly two‐thirds of its ridership would have come from the existing transit system if its second phase had been approved in 2007. (Washington Policy Center. http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/Centers/transportation/policybrief/08_Ennis_LightRail.pdf )

.

· A study of the Bay Area Regional Transit (BART) system in the San Francisco Bay Area estimated that only 18 percent of the residents within one-half mile of a transit station used rail to commute to work. Also, monthly ridership on Cleveland’s new Waterfront Line has fallen 42.8% since its opening in 1998. This decline is consistent with national trends. (Buckeye Institute. http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/docs/RailStudy.pdf)

>Well Done, County Commissioners: Several issues moved to next year.

>.
I had heard that, based on yesterdays story, County’s new rule gives nod to unions; the unions had managed to squeak in under the wire to hose the taxpayers once again.

But then what to my wandering eyes appears THIS morning?

An article entitled “County commissioners opt to let next board decide how to move on several issues”

Intrigued, I looked it over… and buried in the article was the observation that forced apprenticeship programs (which have no more place in this day and age than “prevailing wage” rules) were among those issues punted into oblivion… that is, pushed into next year.

There is, I would venture to say, no chance this union pay-off bill will ever see another sun rise.

While our own Vancouver Firefighters Union show they’re understanding of the economic realities confronting us, other unions at the state and national levels have shown a new definition for “clueless.”

Arrogance is usually a problem in the political arena. Jim Moeller, who epitomizes the trait, is the exception to the rule, but his re-elections go to another issue involving the sheepfulness of the people of the 49th District. Erstwhile megacasino developer David Barnett has spent $200,000 in his efforts to buy 2 local politicians as he continues in his efforts to ram a harmful, unwanted, massive casino down our throats here in Clark County using threats and intimidation against all wise enough to oppose his efforts. These two epitomize the type of arrogance that so many with the aura of entitlement… such as these state employ unions… bring to the table.

This is not the time for entitlement. This is not the time to put a cherry on top of sweetheart deals that used to be the order of the day. The unions must realize what’s happening here… and they must act accordingly.

They can be a part of the problem, as so many have positioned themselves to become; or they can become part of the solution, as the Vancouver Fire Department has proven themselves to be.

County commissioners opt to let next board decide how to move on several issues
Tuesday, December 30 10:54 p.m.
BY MICHAEL ANDERSEN COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

For Clark County’s outgoing board of commissioners, this looked like finals week. On their final day of service, they were scheduled to hand a favor to organized labor, hike fees for builders and landowners, and throw down a legal gauntlet to state government.

But in the end, the departing trio decided to give themselves an extension on all of it. The decisions will push all these issues into next year — and into the arms of next year’s more conservative board.

Storm runoff

* The plan: Defy a state order to tighten storm-runoff standards for new construction.* What it would mean: A likely string of lawsuits against the county.

* For it: Developers. They say the new state order is impractical and would add thousands of dollars to the cost of a new house.

* Skeptical: Environmentalists. Last month, the county’s clean water commission advised commissioners not to do this.

* The bottom line: Developers might have a point. But how much money does the county want to spend to prove it?

Labor standards

* The plan: Require apprentice workers on county projects costing more than $1 million.

* What it would mean: Want to do business with the county? Create an apprenticeship program.

More: