>Oregon blows it: Blount should not only be suspended… he should go to prison.

>.
Can somebody… anybody… explain to me why it is that this thug wasn’t arrested on the spot?

The game was over. This moron sucker-punched a Boise State player who had removed his helmet while this scumbag courageously had his own still on.

There shouldn’t be some sort of magic force-field surrounding football players that allows them to commit felony assault on nation-wide television without immediate arrest, subsequent trial and subsequent imprisonment.

If I were to have just walked up to this moron and popped HIM in the mouth, wouldn’t *I* be subject to arrest and etc, etc, etc?

Of course I would. And this clown is no different.

Oregon didn’t go nearly far enough. Like any other criminal, his thoughtless act injured another, cast a pall over an entire organization and state, and reminds us all of the Jailblazers.

For that, this scumbag SHOULD have not only been kicked off the team, he SHOULD have been expelled from the school and tried for assault. His scholarship COULD have gone to someone much more deserving… someone much more understanding of the honor being done in exchange for playing a game… someone who could appreciate the sacrifice made by the taxpayers to pay for this man’s education.

Instead, we get this garbage:

The response came Friday afternoon, as the Ducks suspended Blount for the season, but allowed him to remain with the team. He will retain his scholarship; he will be allowed to practice; he will have access to support staff such as trainers and tutors.

Why anyone would want to have a lowlife like this one infesting their organization is simply beyond me. And the concern for BLOUNT, of all things, shows that many have a screw loose in their respective thinking processes.

Clearly, Blount has no business being in college football. His actions were an affront to the sport, a fact that is ironic when you consider that Blount and other players from both teams took part in a new NCAA-mandated handshake prior to kickoff. All in the name of sportsmanship, or something like that.

But you have to wonder what would have become of Blount had he been completely removed from the team. You have to wonder whether he would have stayed in school, whether he would have graduated, how he would have reacted to having his entire life ripped away because of one incident.

Actually, you have to wonder those things now. But at least he has an opportunity.

What? I “have to wonder?” First, the idea that his “entire life has been ripped away” as if HE wasn’t the one doing the tearing… as if he was now going to DIE or something, is utter, blithering, nonsense.

He, presumably, will have his health. He has 3 years of education already completed and paid. I know of hundreds… if not millions… who would gladly, cheerfully and instantly trade places with this idiot in a New York second.

How could ANYONE believe that this minor suspension, as opposed to the multiple penalties he SHOULD have suffered, equates to his “entire life being ripped away” has a screw loose.

The ONLY thing I HAVE to wonder is why or how is it that a thug like this could possibly be going to what is, allegedly, a major institution of higher learning on the taxpayer’s dime.

The LAST thing that’s going to happen is that I will worry about what would happen to this idiot after he was expelled and after he completed his well-deserved sentence in prison.

In short, I don’t CARE what would happen to him. With a mentality that could possibly result in this sort of behavior, does ANYONE have ANY doubt what’s going to happen to him… either now… or later?

And this garbage about “these poor, little old 18-22 year old kids?”

When I was 17 and 5 months old, I was fully deployed as a member of the Recon Platoon for an Infantry Battalion in the 3rd Infantry Division in Germany.

Who had the greater responsibility? Who had the most pressure… the most adverse living and working conditions? Blount…. or me?

Yet, I managed not to behave like a psychotic. So the “age” argument has absolutely nothing to back it.

Yes, I do agree… this IS a “teachable moment.” And in this case, what he’s being taught is that there are few consequences for engaging in felony assault if you’re a major college football player.

Where he SHOULD be getting his “teachable moments” are in a prison cell with Bubba.

Meanwhile, this clown keeps the benefits of being a member of a major college football team, keeps his multi-thousand dollar per month scholarship, and continues to get a FREE education while being required to do even LESS to earn it.

Yeah. THAT’LL teach him.

I had little respect for the Ducks BEFORE this happened. Now, I have none at all.

They COULD have sent a message that would have reverberated across this country when it comes to accountability and college athletics, a message that when you act like an animal, you can feel free to do it some place else.

Unfortunately, the message they sent will have the opposite effect… sending the opposite message.

And some are proud of that. Although only God knows why.

You heard it here first: Blount will be back in uniform before the season is over, because, well, he’s “suffered enough.”

Why else would they want this clown to keep practicing with the team… keep hanging around them?
.

>The continuing delusion of Lou Brancaccio: Looking for reasons for the Columbian’s bankruptcy? They start here.

>.
It’s not surprising that a local newspaper that’s empathy begins and ends with the Downtown Mafia of Vancouver and who reflects their community about as much as the despicable bridge replacement/loot rail project reflects Clark County’s citizenry would actually conclude that the paper he works for, a paper that, for example, endorsed ONLY democrats in EVERY open seat in the last election isn’t a leftist rag.

Since it is a leftist rag with a leftist editorial staff and editor, it’s also not surprising (and dead wrong) when this leftist democrat writes “But I would not conclude — as you have — that he ‘doesn’t appear to be voting the preferences of his constituency.'”

This constituency did not support Baird’s voting for ANY bill he hasn’t read. Even a delusional leftist like Brancaccio should know that.

This constituency did not support his votes on the Porkulous or Cap and Trade.

That Baird has scammed the people of this district for so long does not mean that his re-election amounts to a reflection of this district. After all, look at the empty-suited moron running this country… I’m sure, in the midst of his delusion, Brancaccio actually believes THAT idiot is reflecting the “preferences of his constituency.”

Whatever it is you “try” to do, you’re failing. In short, you DON’T do it. Every day that goes by where you don’t demand a vote of the people on this unbelievable waste of billions, this paper fails.

Every time Laird pukes out another column hammering everyone to his political right… which means almost everyone alive… this paper fails.

When it comes to Baird, you’ve printed these stories because you have absolutely no choice. Had you not done so, others would have picked it up, and you’d have looked even more foolish then you typically do.

Even now, Lou is doing his best to make excuses for Baird. While there is no doubt that the Obamatons approve of Baird’s failures as a congressman (cowardman) most people to the right of Lenin are incensed and offended by his cavalier, all-too-typical leftist tactic of referring to those wise enough to oppose them as Nazi’s and Brown Shirts.

This represents another reason why this paper is circling the drain. Rank, situational ethics when it comes to their leftist pets that carry their water.

by Lou Brancaccio : 8/8/09 4:13pm – Report AbuseDick,

As you know I have disagreed with the congressman on his approach to town hall meetings. But I would not conclude — as you have — that he “doesn’t appear to be voting the preferences of his constituency.”

I would respectfully suggest that if that were the case he would not have been re-elected so many times.

What I try to do — and what I feel The Columbian tries to do — is respect the decisions that are made by elected officials — regardless if they are a R or a D, if we believe they are good decisions. And disagree with decisions that we fell are not good.

But my sense is too many people look at an individual decision or a few decisons[sic] and then try to draw wide ranging conclusions from them.

Most newspaper find themselves in this situation as well. Some conservatives are a little confused by our stance against Baird on this issue. Many won’t say “hey I agree with you on this one Columbian” because they only want to continue pushing the idea that we are a liberal newspaper. And this doesn’t fit the box we have been painted in.

But I just go back to my earlier point. None of us should expect any elected official to always agree with us. And we should be able to see that some residents out there must approve of what he is doing. He keeps getting re-elected. So not everyone will agree with me — or you — on lots of things. That’s OK. Let’s just respect each other even if we happen to disagree.

>Another day, another clueless Columbian editorial.

>.
Today’s nonsense from the tax-dodgers themselves involves their opportunity to do some more PR work for Gov. Gregoire and the dems running our state’s legislature.

As anyone watching for more than ten minutes knows, Oregon is a slow-motion fiscal train wreck. Think of, say, a westernized version of Pakistan and you can get the drift.

While we have a high, business crippling sales and B&O tax, Oregon makes do with a high income tax. Lacking a sales tax kind of acts as a statewide commercial campaign to draw consumers from the surrounding states of Washington, Idaho and Kali-fornia into their state.

Now the primary motivation for our legislature was fear. The 1994 cycle is all too close a nightmare for our state’s leftists, and while 2010 is shaping up as a greater or lesser version of the same, that’s primarily a consequence of the stupidity, lack of depth, cluelessness and vision at the top of the ticket.

The local rag, of course, benefited from some of your basic quid-pro-quo. They stole money from the other small businesses of this state by arranging for their leftist masters to give them a massive B&O business tax CUT, a CUT that the rest of us didn’t get in the midst of this $10 billion deficit… and a cut that, you guessed it, WE will have to make up.

Is it any wonder they lie and exaggerate in their support for the biggest waste of money the northwestern United States has ever seen, given that THEY won’t have to pay for it?

Now, this sets the table for today’s moronic idiocy. When it comes to matters of development, the morons pumping out editorials view this area as their own, personal, post card. This paper views the Gorge as their own personal fiefdom, advocating restrictions on the residents living there that they, themselves, would never CONSIDER living under.

And how many times has Koenninger regaled us with one of his “the way things were” columns while attacking anyone opposing his Utopian view and his efforts to force others to live under a standard that he, himself, does NOT have to live under.

That, of course, brings us to today’s drivel.

Regardless, it seems likely many entrepreneurs and wealthy people will vote with their feet and take a look at moving to Clark County. The county has long been a desirable place for wealthy Oregon retirees, who can enjoy Clark County and the Portland area without paying personal income taxes on pensions…

…So, for their actions on behalf of Clark County, we thank the Oregon Legislature and say, “Welcome, newcomers.”

When I left the Army and moved here in 88 or so, Clark County had a population of just over 200,000.

Today, it has a population far in excess of 400,000.

Since that time, our commissioners have done a great deal under the auspices of the growth management plan. But whatever they’ve done, this paper has been whining, moaning and complaining about the growth management boundary; how often it’s been changed (Massive, explosive growth notwithstanding) and the Californication of the region.

Now today’s idiocy appears to be throwing out the welcome mat for Oregonian Refugees to move here to a county already burdened by major shortcomings in all manner of infrastructure.

Of course, the preferred member of the O.R. class is that limited to the “wealthy” class… but the problem with that is ALL taxpayers are oppressed by massive tax and fee increases… and the implementation of thousands of dollars in tolls without a vote.

The result? The human tidal wave the idiot who wrote this editorial is referring to will not be limited to those with fat retirements and checkbooks. And if this rag’s vision comes to fruition, well, guess what? The commissioners will have to revisit the growth management plan AGAIN, because all of these wonderful people will require somewhere to live, and the kids will require somewhere to go to school, and somewhere to buy groceries, and somewhere to buy furniture and so on and so on.

I would be the first to admit that like the city boundaries of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Vancouver, I wouldn’t be caught dead living in Oregon.

That, however, does not explain this bizarre position where, on one hand, the morons running the paper want the “wealthy” to move here because of our oh, so, superior tax structure (soon to be obliterated by the fringe leftists this rag supports as they do everything they can to allow us to become a train wreck just like Oregon when they impose OUR version of an income tax) while, on the other, they bitch like cut cats over growth and it’s consequences.

Yeah… you can REALLY trust this waste of wood pulp’s vision for our future.

Idiots.

>I’m stunned. Are you stunned 2? Downtown Mafia incest continues as Columbian endorses Harris.

>.
It’s not terribly surprising that in endorsing fringe-leftist Jeannie Harris for her re-election bid, the Columbian engages in their institutional double-standard wherein they treat those they hate (anyone wise enough to oppose their world view and quest for local domination) completely different from those they support.

Take, for example, their tender telling and retelling of Tom Mielke’s two prior failed efforts to become a Clark County Commissioner. During the course of his last two efforts, (Mielke tried 3 times for the job, succeeding only on his last attempt) we were told, over and over, that he had lost twice before.

Yet, when these clowns endorse Jeanne Harris (Columbian Lackey, Vancouver) they fail to mention HER multiple failures to ditch this burg for a different office in their endorsement… clearly ONLY using her position on city council as a stepping stone to higher office.

Now… why is that? The West Point Honor Code at least used to be short and to the point: “I will neither lie, nor cheat, nor steal, nor allow a misleading silence to continue… nor tolerate anyone who does.”

The Columbian’s deliberate failure to mention Harris’s abysmal showings (Harris was smacked twice by Marc Boldt for county commissioner, and, if memory serves, did an abysmal job running for state representative) in their endorsement while going out of their way to remind us of Mielke’s defeats is just indicative of the lack of integrity this paper has and the despicable institutional double-standard that has turned them in to a leftist swindle sheet… and the misleading facts they deliberately left out.

If prior rejections by the public are important for ANY candidate… then they are important for ALL candidates… even those you avoid any pretense of journalistic fairness in supporting.

Again, Harris supports the I-5 Bridge replacement, the largest waste of money the northwestern United States has ever known. Like all the members of Vancouver City Government and the rag endorsing her, she has done absolutely nothing to force this question to a vote of the people and, as a result is a rabid supporter of the massive tolls the completion of this unneeded and unwanted project WILL require, her tolling “concerns” notwithstanding.

Let’s remember, boys and girls: there’s no amount of lipstick you can put on this pig that will change the fact that it’s a pig. And ANY candidate that wants this bridge and loot rail DOES want tolls… since there’s absolutely no way to get this thing built without tolls… spin by the rag notwithstanding.

Harris, who has really accomplished nothing of note during her tenure, save attempting to ram a movie theater-ticket surcharge down our throats after I-695 was voted in as she claimed that she wouldn’t let that vote “color her thinking,” has done nothing to be proud of except vote to jack up taxes and sue the voters… twice… to silence their dissent over downtown redevelopment.

So, yeah…. I’m stunned. Stunned that the paper would endorse yet another clueless idiot who lacks the vision that God gave a board fence, who has no desire to seek the will of the people on this, the most harmful project since Obama was elected; and who, you guessed it, carries the rag’s water like Gunga Din.
.

>Censorship of ideas on the Columbian web site.

>.
The Columbian newspaper practices a rank hypocrisy rarely seen anywhere else in the area, and it’s time for it to end.

In today’s editorial, Laird (or whoever it is) whines about the possible waste of $46,000 if everything in a report’s conclusions about the Vancouver Police Department morale issues were not addressed.

But if the report is not respected for its objectivity and expertise, then the whole thing will become an imprudent use of $46,440 the city spent on it; a waste of four months Matrix Consulting Group of Palo Alto, Calif., spent compiling the valuable data; and a troubling disregard for 139 pages of observations and advice.

They snivel about that when the CRC “study,” with it’s pre-ordained outcome, has wasted 10’s of millions… the same study that has wasted, literally, tens of millions of dollars in an ongoing to ram and unneeded, unwanted, wasteful economic black hole that will vaporize increasingly scarce transportation dollars at an unimaginable rate.

It’s ironic that the Columbian website censors the word “waste” and it’s variations. (Try it. And mention of the word “wasted,” for example, shows up as “******.”) It’s completely bizarre, but given all of the monumental waste this disgrace to journalism supports now and has supported in the past, it’s not surprising that they want to avoid the embarrassment of the constant reminders of their perfidy by the public paying attention.

This newspaper supports the waste of billions of dollars… yet they express concern over, relatively speaking, a few thousand.

Is it any wonder they face fiscal disaster? Is it any wonder that so few people actually are willing to fork over money to be insulted both personally and intellectually by a group wholly owned by the downtown mafia and city hall.

Who in their right mind would support such a rag… or those who advertise in it?

What a blight and disgrace on our community. Respond with a position that oppose their agenda… and see how long that idea reminds visible.

This despicable pile of pulp fears ideas that oppose their agenda. And as a result… they will silence them.

That didn’t work for Das Reich or Pravda Izvestia, either.

>When the leftist bent of the Columbian interferes with facts and journalism. (Lies about aliens)

>So I get a call from a friend of mine yesterday about a bizarre article in the Columbian that wrongly claims that “County can’t deny services to immigrants.”

First of all, the issue isn’t ABOUT denying services to IMMIGRANTS.

The issue is about denying services to ILLEGAL ALIENS.

IMMIGRANTS are those who came here legally from another country. I’ve yet to read anything about denying services to anyone here legally.

Providing services to those here in violation of the laws of this country here illegally… that is, ILLEGAL ALIENS, is another thing entirely.

So, why didn’t the newspaper make that distinction? Because they’ve allowed their bias to dictate their stories.

THIS paper doesn’t want illegal aliens to be held accountable. THIS newspaper doesn’t care that we have to reduce services due to expenditures to illegals. THIS paper doesn’t care that we’ve had to lay off county employees because of budget cuts.

Nope… spending tens of millions of our increasingly scarce tax dollars on people violating the law of this land as an incentive for them to stay here is just peachy for the Columbian.

And I get that.

The problem is when their biases interfere with the increasingly tattered remnants of what passes for journalism at this paper, then the public is misinformed.

Now, I haven’t decided if that’s a result of poor reporting, incompetence, or bias… or a happy (for the paper) confluence of all three.

But the fact of that matter is this:

This county CAN deny “services” to our illegal alien population. The paper is either wrong… or lying.

CA Counties Cut Illegal Aliens Healthcare

From a deeply outraged Los Angeles Times:

California counties cut healthcare to illegal immigrants

With budget problems afflicting counties across the state, some have begun eliminating healthcare to illegal immigrants. Critics say this will only shift the burden to hospital emergency rooms.

By Anna Gorman
April 27, 2009

Forced to slash their budgets, some California counties are eliminating nonemergency health services for illegal immigrants — a move that officials acknowledge could backfire by shifting the financial burden to emergency rooms.

Sacramento County voted in February to bar illegal immigrants from county clinics at an estimated savings of $2.4 million. Contra Costa County followed last month by cutting off undocumented adults, to save approximately $6 million. And Yolo County is voting on a similar change next month, which would reduce costs by $1.2 million.

“This is a way for us to get through what I think is a horrible year for healthcare in California,” said William Walker, director of Contra Costa Health Services.

More:

Odd, isn’t it? California counties that seem to have to work under the same rules as Clark County now seem to be doing the very thing that OUR paper reports WE cannot do.

Maybe they’ll do another article, where first, they’ll mention that counties around this country actually ARE doing that which they wrongly allege we cannot; and second, how it is that they could write something… anything, without due diligence and fact checking.

I mean, after all, it took me all of about 10 seconds to discover that, once again, the paper has been dead wrong… as they’ve been dead wrong on so many other issues.

>A glimpse of the confirmed leftist bent of the Columbian.

>The local paper is a completely-in-the-tank organization for the democrats in this state. The democrats obliged that support by slipping in a massive B&O tax cut for this, and other rags, in the midst of a $10 BILLION budget deficit.

Even though the people of this area spoke overwhelmingly in opposition to affirmative action, our paper is as unconcerned about that community value expressed at the polls as they are about seeking our permission to saddle us with a $4 BILLION unneeded and unwanted bridge replacement/loot rail project.

Todays installment has peeked out in the middle of a blh, blah, blah editorial about buying locally. Here’s the offending paragraph:

Not unlike the way we should view hiring practices — when all other factors are equal, we should give consideration to a minority candidate — we should view buying practices: When all other factors are equal, we should buy locally.

NO ONE SHOULD EVER BE HIRED BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE (as hiring Obama because he’s half black has proven) AND NO ONE SHOULD BE DENIED EMPLOYMENT BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE.

In this idiotic excuse for a paper, the Columbian cannot help but spew this liberal pap as an affirmation of what they are.

Such racism is not welcome here, and is not wanted here. That our local paper advocates a racist policy is yet another reason it should be closed… sooner, rather than later.

>The scum of censorship at The Columbian

>.
Our local newspaper is VERY big on freedom.

Freedom of the press… freedom of THEIR opinions… (even to the point of lies) and, of course, freedom to censor those they disagree with.

As mentioned below, Brancaccio’s request for people to “start talkin!” because he’s”listening.” is limited only to those he wants to hear from. Those he doesn’t want to hear? Well, he squelches their voice to silence.

I’ve noticed an intrepid poster over there, one of many daring to stand up to the fringe-left propaganda of our local fish wrapper. And that person’s posts were almost completely obliterated this morning, regardless of content.

It’s kind of like a local version of BDS. Hatred for dissenting viewpoints can be a terrible thing.

This paper expresses that hatred in a variety of ways. Fringe leftist nut job John Laird, editorial page editor and a propagandist in ways that would make Minister Goebbels blush is a case in point.

And now, Brancaccio has again joined the cast of those who would silence opposition to his paper’s positions and agenda.

Gee. I bet he’s proud of himself this morning. His actions and those of the Iranian secret police have a lot in common.
.

>The utter absurdity of Brancaccio’s latest because of his censorship: Press Talk: What our RAC does for us

>.
It’s fairly clear that Lou Brancaccio, the editor of the Columbian, wants us to THINK the paper is flexible and responsive.

He babbled on about their Reader’s Advisory Council, a collection of bobble-headed, Amen Choir types that, to hear him tell it, seem to think, among other lies, that “Members felt our bridge coverage continues to be good. “

That any group could possibly believe that substituting opinion for news; lies for genuine polls, and failing to demand a vote for the entirety of this debacle simply confirms how utterly worthless this group is.

They are, in fact, a reflection of a student government, in, say, middle school. They have no real power; they go through the motions but rarely make any real change, and ultimately, they pretty much wind up becoming a reflection of the school administration.

Whoever these people are, their apparent discussions about paint jobs on this Titanic while they continue to support the nonsensical and indefensible positions of this paper… positions that have shoved them towards bankruptcy, serve to confirm how much they serve the role of window dressing… and how little impact or effect they could have, even if they wanted to have any impact, because it’s clear that as change agents, they fail.

If this group has not roundly condemned John Laird’s divisive and damaging columns; if this group has not repeatedly demanded fairness and accuracy in the Columbian’s coverage of the I-5 Bridge/Loot Rail propaganda or that this paper demand a vote on the entirety of that debacle, then they are worthless; not representative of this community and serve no real purpose.

When the Columbian ran those fake polls suggesting that everything is hunky dory about loot rail, did they protest, or did they just sit there and nod like idiots?

The failure of this paper to implement any substantive changes… to go out and scam a B&O tax break when the rest of small business in this state is suffering FAR worse than they are… the failure to actually LISTEN and CHANGE shows that, essentially, you’ve put together a group that amounts to just another Amen Chorus… or that the paper ignores their positions, much like they ignore most of the positions stated under Brancaccio’s columns.

You see, where this idea makes any money is where it’s resulted in any changes. And as carefully as I read Brancaccio’s column, I failed to note a single instance where this group or any other source of criticism has EVER made any real impact or difference to this paper. Brancaccio says they “WILL” see changes, but that infers that this group, which has been here for years, HASN’T YET MADE ANY DIFFERENCE.

Having the group? Swell. Ignoring them or any other opposition to what you’re doing, particularly while you’re in the midst of Chapter 11?

Moronic idiocy.

Kinda reminds me of the Supreme Soviet or the former Iraqi Congress under Saddam.

A lot of voting. But not a lot of opposing.

And then, as it turns out, if Lou doesn’t “like” you, he censors your ability to comment on his columns.

The irony of his latest scam is the end of his latest bogosity:

If someone wants to comment, let them have their say. I try to keep my pie hole shut as much as I can.

I learn more when I’m listening than when I’m talking.

So start talkin‘! I’m listening.

The absurdity of this is that as I write this, a grand total of FOUR posters have been allowed to comment.

FOUR. (There are 5 posters, but Lou is two.) Lou will probably point to the few comments as some sort of sign that everyone believes this paper is hunky dorry, and all’s well. Other columns Lou have written have resulted in 50, 60 or even more posters telling him how idiotic his positions are.

This column, magically… mysteriously…. not one.

Now, for several months (since the website was redone) many posters have commented on the incompetence of the system because posting there is a hit or miss business.

There have been a number of complaints; posters post, but the post doesn’t show up; posters post and the post disappears without comment (censored) and the like.

Brancaccio is fully aware of the idiocy of this system, but merely says his webmaster, Jeff Bunch, should be emailed about this stuff.

That’s odd, but yet another sign of Brancaccio’s incompetence: Bunch should be called in. He should be told to fix the problem, a problem that has gone on for 9 months now; and if HE can’t fix it, Brancaccio should get someone who can.

The incompetent aspect of this is very telling: If this moron won’t even fix an obvious SYSTEM problem with his web page, then how is it that anyone could possibly expect him to make any of the many, massive, substantive changes needed to make this paper even remotely competitive and fiscally viable?

Or, we have the second, likely, possibility: censorship.

When Brancaccio says “So start talkin‘! I’m listening,” what he REALLY means is “If you AGREE with me, I want to hear it. If you DON’T agree with me, then don’t bother.”

Either way, the RAC is a joke, a farce, and another in the series of offenses to this community.

Local News

Press Talk: What our RAC does for us

Friday, June 19 11:38 p.m.

BY LOU BRANCACCIO,
COLUMBIAN EDITOR

Lou Brancaccio

Summer’s here!

And if you’re lucky enough to have the summer off, have fun.

We typically give the summer off to our Readers Advisory Council. Of course, they have lives other than just hanging out on our council. But we do hope they have fun, as well.

Our council helps to guide us. In essence, they are another set of eyes on what we do. So throughout the year, we meet every other month to have them tell us how they think we’re doing.

We don’t turn down positive feedback from them, but we let them know that’s not what we’re looking for. We’re looking for what we can do better so we can get better.

The group is made up of community members, and it’s a pretty diverse group. They come from many walks of life.

The only requirement is that they read The Columbian and/or regularly look at our Web site.

We often take their advice, and they’ll see changes in The Columbian. Still, a few members feel their views aren’t executed. And that’s because we can’t execute every idea given to us. But certainly, we listen.

We listen to others as well, including those who comment on our Web site. I get quite the group, for example, that comments on this column online.

More, if you can stomach it.

>More hypocrisy from our local newspaper: The Columbian – In our view, May 21: Discrimination Fades

>.
So, those who don’t want to vote on this referendum don’t have to. But to insult and silence those who might not agree? The frequent bigotry of gay marriage supporters cannot be denied.

“What is needed now is a truce — temporary, perhaps, but better if extended — between the two opposing factions that are at war over the word “marriage.”

What a bizarre perspective.

One of the major problems (of the many) with editorialists on this paper is an inability to be forthright.

This paper wants a “truce” because gay-marriage proponents have gained 99 percent of what they want, and this paper does not want the Prop 8 scenario to play out here, since they rabidly support gay marriage as much as they rabidly support the I-5 bridge replacement/loot rail debacle.

For those who demand gay marriage, just like for those who oppose it, there can be no such thing as a “truce…” Advocating that those opposed to this development remains silent, particularly when this “truce” would represent a victory for the side this paper represents and a crushing defeat for the side this paper loathes, is an underhanded way to demand that the anti-side just accept it.

Gay marriage has NEVER been voted into place by the people. As a result, this sorry effort just serves as yet another in the series of Columbian hypocrisies, where in they’re all ABOUT the “will of the people” when it suits them or they want it, but are violently opposed to that same will if there is a risk where, as is typically the case, the people ignore the collective “wisdom” of this newspaper and go in another direction.

Once again, they PICK the issues where they fear our will… and make every effort to tell us that what WE want doesn’t matter… when they don’t happen to like what that might be.

Instead of saying “truce,” this paper should have just come out and said something to the effect of “OK, we’ve got most of what we want, now… so it’s time for those opposing this to shut the hell up, and end any effort to find out if the PEOPLE want this.”

This is the rank hypocrisy of this publication that keeps me from buying it. This is the double-standard that is editorial policy by social engineers who think we’re too stupid to think for ourselves.

Yup. These morons are ALL about getting our “will” when and WHERE they want it. But when we MIGHT oppose them?

They don’t want to hear it where it counts… at the ballot box.

No “truce” (which this despicable waste of pulp uses as a euphemism for demanding acceptance of what THEY want) is in the offing. And one can bet that had this bill died in the legislature, you can damned well bet that these morons wouldn’t be asking for a “truce” THEN, would they?

In our view, May 21: Discrimination Fades
Governor signs bill that expands rights of domestic partnerships; it’s time for a truce
Thursday, May 21 1:00 a.m.

When discrimination dies, it doesn’t always go quickly or quietly. Sometimes, prejudice passes incrementally. Although a judicial ruling might serve the same purpose of kicking down a door, the legislative process often unfolds in stages.

One of those seemingly small but profound steps occurred Monday when Gov. Chris Gregoire signed a bill that grants domestic partners all of the rights and privileges enjoyed by married couples. The measure often has been called the “everything but marriage” bill. We’ll get to the semantics debate a little later.

First, though, we’ll point out that the bill is significant because it accords long-overdue equal rights to more than 5,300 domestic partnerships that have been registered in two years. Domestic partnerships of gay or lesbian couples were recognized by the Legislature in 2007. The law also allows unmarried, senior heterosexual couples to register as domestic partners. That’s more than 10,000 people, representing all 39 counties, who have gained virtually all of the rights of married spouses. As Gregoire said at the bill signing, those rights “will make for stronger families, and when we have stronger families, we have a stronger Washington state.”

Among the latest rights granted to domestic partnerships are those related to sick leave to care for a domestic partner, unemployment and disability insurance benefits, business succession rights, adoption and child custody. In recent years, rights were accorded relative to hospital visitation rights, beneficiaries, the right to refuse to testify against each other in court and public assistance provisions.

What is needed now is a truce — temporary, perhaps, but better if extended — between the two opposing factions that are at war over the word “marriage.” The day might come when that word applies to gays and lesbians. But it’s not here yet, and for now, the best strategy is for everyone to calm down, recognize marriages and domestic partnerships as they are recognized by law, and save the semantics war for another day.

More, if you can stomach this rank hypocrisy.