"the dumbest blog i've ever seen."

    "Get out a little more dude."

    "Is it more conservative to write about Red Bull, spelling errors, or whining about liberal teachers?" -Former contributor

    "a well-kept and activist-orientated blog"-Chris Collins, Seattle Times

    It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.

    -Samuel Adams

    Comments are only subject to editing in case of spam or malicious, unrelated content. Dissenting opinion on this blog will never be censored

Friday, April 29, 2005

Russo disqualified, run-off scheduled

The election board ruled last night on four separate grievances by various candidates. All but the two involving Cizek and Russo were dismissed. Both candidates were found guilty of all the charges brought against them. The only action taken by the board was to disqualify Russo for violations of three sections of the elections code.

The election results, which were announced a couple hours after the ruling, made it clear Russo would have won with approximately 57 percent of the vote. He said he is planning an appeal.

The code-mandated run-off between Hutchinson and Cizek is scheduled for Wednesday, April 4 (next week).

***

That's the short answer many students already know since it was in The Western Front this morning--thanks to fellow Front reporter Peter Jensen and myself. We stayed the whole time and when he offered to let me take part of the story for the Front, I couldn't resist--this was big stuff and there's nothing like staying up all night on deadline.

Unfortunately...

Because I covered the story for the Front, I need to refrain from commentary at the moment on the events of last night to avoid ethical conflicts. Rest assured that last night was pretty straightforward and you probably didn't miss a whole lot by just listening to the facts, after the fact.

Stay tuned.

Be sure to check the Front article.

Thursday, April 28, 2005

National Grievance Filing Day?

Emotions are running like crazy today, and the sad thing is that most students walking through red square don't realize it…even the ones who are voting.
The latest number I heard was five. Five grievances have been filed by AS candidates today. Hearings will commence at 7 (when the polls close) and go until decided. This whole situation is just plain not pretty.

You know how when you campaign with a group on election day there is the line you can't cross and there's always a person in the group that's paranoid about people crossing it? But no one ever does. Picture that they allow posters inside the polling area but no candidates with signs or any form of campaigning, and picture thousands of people just passing through the polling areas, and maybe this whole deal won't sound like such a fluke to you.

Here's the rundown of today's grievances filed as I've been told by a few of the candidates:
  • Nick (maybe Shannon too?) against Tony (it may be the one about handing out candidate statements for the presidential race while holding Russo signs that was filed yesterday). All I know is Tony appears to be freaking out about it and if you see him you'll understand what I mean--he looks like it.
  • Tony filed against Nick for a comment about decreasing tuition when he really just lobbied for a lower increase (sounds similar to accusations I've heard in other types of political debates)
  • (Christy Valle?) and Brian Perrow filed against Alanna (forgot last name) because of a supporter handing out handbills in red square during the polling.
  • Same as above for one of Alanna's posters that was blown down by wind, I'm not sure the exact story but apparently supporters folded the poster up and did not make a reasonable effort to leave red square with the campaign material expediently, instead walking the long way across campus. (they claim to have pictures that they will present at the hearings)
  • Monira against Mark Iozzi for the same handbill in the grievance against Alanna case (I'm sure you may have noticed their names together on a lot of material).

It's been an hour or more too, so who knows what the final number will be (although the candidates are currently being extremely cautious and uptight).

I am certainly thankful at this point that I am not on the election board because there are no set policies as far as actions for the board to take when they find a candidate guilty of an election code violation after the voting is concluded. From what I have been told they have authority to level any punishment they see reasonable. From what I've seen, the election board doesn't seem to be very forgiving. So it appears reasonable to assume that there will be at least one guilty verdict. The only punishments I have been able to imagine are public apology and removal from the race. What happens then though? Because this was not instant runoff voting, does second place become prez/VP? or do we have another election?

The hearings start at 7pm in the VU (not sure which room but if you're there on time it shouldn't be hard to get the info).

Media lingo 101

"There is no reflection of reality in the mainstream media. The New York Times is completely biased."
There are things to keep in mind when speaking to journalism students. Mainly, it's a matter of knowing the vocabulary. For instance, most journalism students are very adamant about the inherent bias of the media.

"Oh," you say. "What's wrong with that? Don't we all think the mainstream media has a bias?"

Absolutely, and journalism students are the first to stand up and say it's wrong to do biased reporting. It's so simple: report the facts, interview both sides of the issue at hand and don't have a conflict of interest.

Not so simple.

First of all, the media bias the student is talking about is a right-wing bias.

"Huh?" you say.

Take my mass media history class this quarter. I don't think I've ever taken a class that took me so deep into the mindset of modern journalism. If you think the professors are the big lefties in journalism, you are partly right. But you can thank the liberal professor of this class for at least sounding somewhat moderate compared to the student responses he gets.

The quote at the top is from a student during discussion last week. Her point: The New York Times, the newspaper most identified (even by themselves usually) as being on the liberal side of the political spectrum, is completely right-wing.

So what's normal, unbiased, reality reflecting journalism?

One person she mentioned in class is Dahr Jamail, an independent "journalist" who recently visited Western to give a documentary on American "atrocities" in Iraq. His Web site is a compilation of his "reporting," interviews with such vaunted publications as Socialist Worker Magazine, photos of dead Iraqi "citizens" (he is so original as to use raw official identification photos--opened body bags, etc.), and his uniquely unbiased, behind-the-scenes perspective, which is a funny concept since he was quoted in the Bellingham Herald as saying he went to Iraq because he was mad about the job the mainstream media was doing, which would mean, of course, he went there with his preconceived notions of what the real story was.

I could keep going on about the many other notions students hold, at which I can only sit back and shake my head in bewilderment. After all, since when was the government a smaller threat to the freedom of the press than "corporate consolidation?" But for now, just be assured that there is a different language you must learn to talk about such things with the average student of journalism.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Elections update

Just a quick election update:

The AS board on Monday finally reviewed the decision regarding the Tony Russo party--I mean campaign. The elections are heating up.

I can't speak for all the writers here about the candidates...just for myself, and therefore I will limit my comments. Collegiate politics is an odd duck. I know many people don't vote ideologically because they might trust a good friend rather than someone with whom they agree. I don't have any friends per se in the crowd of candidates. I am acquainted with a couple but that's all.

I had the opportunity to hear some candidates yesterday and so far haven't been able to find much to dislike about Nick Cizek, candidate for AS president. I don't know if he has as much support as the other two candidates but he certainly does his best to make up for it in enterprise and appearance. He is the most conservative, which leaves me wondering why he hasn't received (unofficial) support from more conservative clubs.

No matter. Both Tony Russo and Shannon Hutchinson claim to be liberals. However it should be understood that I don't mean to label the candidates and end the discussion there. That wouldn't help anyone, least of all the students who are voting.

Conclusion: read up on the candidates and vote. Online voting is up and it couldn't be easier.

Friday, April 22, 2005

King County update

It's time for everyone to take another look at the postings on Sound Politics. Dean Logan is, from what I have gathered, a hair away from being deposed as the director of elections all the "irregularities." He's having to reveal everything in order to avoid perjury and what he's admitting is ugly.

County Executive Ron Sims will have a lot of backtracking to do soon on his constant and unfailing support of Logan. Today's Sound Politics postings are a veritable disaster for anyone who is trying to keep this out of the news. It will be there soon.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Hearing wrap-up: Russo guilty

Charges that Tony Russo made misleading statements regarding his involvment with the creation of the AS Review student publication were sustained and he was found in violation of election code 6a2.

He will no longer be allowed to display campaign posters like the ones below or destribute handbills on campus. He is still allowed to run, but his supporters will be limited to hand-held signs only.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com
(click for second image)

Developing...

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Grievance Hearing against Tony Russo campaign

There will be a Grievance Hearing brought against the Tony Russo for AS President campaign Wednesday April 20 at 7:30 p.m. in the Viking Union building, room 464. That is about all I know at this point. I don't know if it has anything to do with the previous complaint about Facebook campaigning with AS material.

I may try to be there myself, but I can't guarantee anything at this point. I do know there are two people bringing the grievance, and I would be there if you want to know what's really going on with these elections.

They are getting more interesting all the time.

NYTimes and Time left with one appeal

Things are looking grim for Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Judith Miller of The New York Times. They are both resisting a subpoena regarding the identity of their sources in the case of a leaked C.I.A. agent. The federal appeals court rejected their request for a stay on the subpoena and they now are limited to going to prison or attempting a last appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. It's unknown what part their testimony would play and I don't think liberals quite know what they want out of this case. Many are wishing they could pin the leak on the Bush Administration--something they have already done their best to imply without opening themselves up to libel charges. On the other hand, if these two reporters (from liberal leaning media outlets) hold the line and don't reveal their sources, then it would seem the Democrats have no chance to attempt to pin the tail on the elephant.

The case is a complicated one, seemingly full of rumor and intrigue. The case involves intelligence on WMDs out of Iraq and the case for the War in Iraq. Former Ambassador Joe Wilson was commissioned to confirm WMD reports and reportedly came up empty. His information was not given as much weight in the final decision and I cannot assume to know the reason--as does every liberal in Washington D.C.

His wife, an "undercover" C.I.A. operative named Valerie Plame, ended up getting leaked to the press via several "sources." The first to mention anything about her was syndicated columnist Robert Novak who "some say" has cooperated in the investigation. There is also confusion about whether her actual job description would have made it a bid deal for her name to be revealed--something Novak said is the case--that it wasn't a problem because it wasn't a secret really. The investigation, Novak said, is standard procedure in all leaks.

Novak's original beef was with Wilson's record of anti-Bush action--he didn't think that he could be trusted to get an accurate report with his record. Wilson was the one who then accused the White House of leaking his wife's name in retaliation...and that was just the beginning.

Here's some good links for background information:

An October 2003 CNN article here, Novak's original July 2003 "Mission to Niger" column that started it all, and also his response to the ensuing hoopla.

***

All that is neither here nor there and I hate to get into it. The issue at hand is the two reporters who have refused to reveal their sources. Again, the federal appeals court rejected their request for a stay on the subpoena and they now are limited to going to prison or attempting a last appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. And herein lies the greatest issue of interest to me:

I don't think the high court will take the case, but if they do, they would set themselves up for a landmark decision regarding reporter's privilege. Personally I think journalists, who constantly refer to “critics” who say one thing or another, or “government sources” who say this or that, abuse what privilege they may have. This forces the reader to put ultimate faith in the reporter--something the reporter doesn't have a right to ask of the reader. Journalists who cite anonymous people do so because they think they won't be able to get any information at all if government officials are cited by name. The two problems are these: first, there is the ultimate trust in the journalist issue, and then there is also the temptation on the part of the "sources" to leak something false to an unwitting press, and since they won't be named, it won't hurt them.

Enough about journalism for a few days. Thank you for actually reading this far and I hope I haven't sent you back to normal life more confused.

Crossposted at Head West, Turn Right

UC Santa Cruz 'tent cities'

A professor friend sent me this article regarding the tent city protesters in California.

My initial understanding, when I first heard about these protest plans, was that there was a significant effort to coordinate dozens of similar protests. The sentiment isn't as strong elsewhere so I don't know if any other universities came through. The purpose was not to attack faculty and institutions--although that's what they end up doing--but rather to protest the recent education budget cuts that hit California...(ok, that the governator just approved. You can imagine where their anger is aimed--hence my specific mention of Arnold because he is one figure liberal students love to hate--the very image of personal popularity translated into a successful ousting of bleeding heart liberalism from the governor's mansion)

The ABC article is brief so here's the full text:

Students set up tent city classrooms on the UC Santa Cruz campus, saying they would teach themselves. Campus police arrested the students for violation of a no-camping ordinance.

The students say they are fed up with fee hikes, less financial aid, crowded classrooms, and low wages for campus workers.
So they are attacking the very institution that provides the jobs for those poor campus workers.

Despite the arrests, students plan to continue the protest.

Lauren Langone, UC Santa Cruz student: "We're just going to try to continue with our purpose, which is to form a democracy and have a space where everybody can be heard."

Campus officials say violators of the UC no camping policy could be suspended or dismissed from the university.

Students claim the arrests are denying them the rights to assembly and free speech.
Ok...

I wish that made some kind of sense. I shouldn't complain. At least they are clearing out of those crowded classrooms and providing plenty of space for students who are there to get an education. That's not said totally tongue in cheek because there is no statement that I can see regarding inability to learn because of what amounts to poor living conditions. Anybody else get the impression they expect college to be some kind of alternative welfare program?

Memo to tent city: Learn your ABCs, then go out and get a real job.

Crown him with many crowns, this man upon the throne

Ratzinger becomes the new Pope
I can not say I'm suprised; his name has been bandied about since the beginning of this process, to the exclusion of other candidates. It is interesting to see how the Catholics and the rest of the world is reacting. Whenever there is an election, the process always seems to sponser so much fervor. For example, recall the Bush/Kerry or Bush/Gore elections. People were demonstrating in the streets (Kerry fans) or getting into shouting matches with strangers (Bush fans). That kind of radical response is simply not present in this election. This may be due to the fact that the people do not have a direct say, or it might also be that this choice simply does not inspire passion in the Catholic people themselves.

One thing is sure: Benedict XVI will control the church with a right-handed policy. Having been his predecessor's advisor for 20 plus years, there is little to indicate that policy changes are on his agenda. Even in his choice of the name Benedict XVI, there is an inkling of how this papacy is going to run. Nicknamed "God's Rottweiler" for his tenacious hold on the traditional church doctrines, Ratzinger's record shows his zeal for conservativism through his many writings and advisos regarding homosexuality, celibacy and women's roles in the church.

Tradition has has always played a part in the Catholic church, from its music and liturgy to the stances it takes on political issues, however never has the issue been brought so to the foreground. Not surprisingly, this has the straying American Catholics upset.
"For American Catholics — often called “cafeteria Catholics” for picking and choosing appealing parts of the faith — the reaction to the new pontiff was mixed."
In the last two days, I have read countless articles blasting the conservative leanings of Benedict. Liberal Catholics are scared, my friends. They are scared that the house-of-card compromises they have so carefully built up by ignoring doctrines of the church and its foundation are about to be exposed for what they are.

On the other hand, what is going to happen to the body of the laiety? Benedict's conservative tendancies will doubtless drive some away from the Roman Catholic faith, claiming that they cannot exist in a church which does not in some way bend to their will. Most conservative Catholics might argue that it is better to prune the church of rotten branches in order to purify, rather than tolerating cells of malcontent. However, the Pope is in the interesting position of spiritual and political authority. He has influence in several nations with heavily Catholic populations. Some might label this a dangerous position for a man who makes it a priority to "silence dissenters".

So here is your thought for the day:
In a position of such power and authority, is it wise to alienate potential allies? Or is dogmatism exactly what the church needs right now?

Monday, April 18, 2005

Letter to the Editor

Here is a letter that I wrote about Bellingham's homelessnes problem to The Bellingham Herald that will appear in the "Letter to the Editor" in the coming days.

Title: "Empower those who want help"
The past week there have been many letters to the editor about the growing problem of people who are homeless in Whatcom County. As someone who has volunteered in the social services in Bellingham I can tell you we are not doing a good job at empowering those who want help. It seems to me that a growing problem in society is providing people with more excuses for their problems. I have seen this while volunteering helping domestice violence victims. A women seeking help is fed the usual feminist line about society holding women down and does not come away with any answers about how she can empower herself to change her dire situation. When people who want help seek it, we must be careful not to bombard them with ideological propaganda whether it is leftist feminist opinion or religious opinion. We must empower them to know that deep down they, the individual, has the power to change their life and it is only the individual who can get themselves out of an abusive relationship, drug abuse, homelessness, and many other problems.

Sunday, April 17, 2005

Childish tactics

It bothers me more than slightly that resorting to such tactics as "If you're not going to play our way, we're not playing." is still a legitimate course of action at the upper levels of government. That kind of behavior is acceptable (just barely) on the playground, and even then playground teachers are quick to have a word with would-be fillibusters.
See the full article here.
I particularly like the following paragraphs:
"The event is taking place as Democrats and Republicans alike are escalating their public relations campaigns in anticipation of an imminent confrontation. The Democratic minority has blocked confirmation of 10 of President Bush's judicial nominees by preventing Republicans from gaining the 60 votes needed to close debate, using the filibuster tactic often used by political minorities and most notoriously employed by opponents of civil rights.

Dr. Frist has threatened that the Republican majority might change the rules to require only a majority vote on nominees, and Democrats have vowed to bring Senate business to a standstill if he does."
What does it say for our country when grown men and women can not settle differences without resorting to school-yard politics?

Saturday, April 16, 2005

When Will The Madness Stop???

The trouble for House Majority Leader Rep. Tom Delay (R-Texas) continues to escalate this weekend when fellow republican Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) called for Delay to take a temporary leave from his position due to "ethic" violations. This follows a call from moderate republican Rep Chris Shays (R-Conneticut) who said earlier this week that Delay should step down.

Delay has been having problems with Democrats hounding him about campaign financing and payments to his family from a campaign fund. Tancredo and Shays are allowed to have their opinions expressed, but what worries me is how this will affect the party. An investigation should happen, but until then calls for Delay to step down from his leadership position should not start until he has been found guilty of actually doing something wrong.

A divide in the party is not needed, especially when mid-terms elections are slowly creeping up on us. With the republican party in control of the Congress and the presidency we need to be united as much as possible to win more senate and house seats next year. Also, with the high possibility that Bill.....errrr Hillary Clinton will run for the presidency in '08, we must be careful as a party to not damage any possible contenders for the republican nomination by saying things that are not true and/or causing a split in the party.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few days.

Facebook: profiles, groups, networks and...campaigns?

TheFacebook.com, the ever more popular online college social sphere gets more interesting every day. The most recent transaction I personally encountered on the highly addictive forum was an invitation to join a political campaign group. True, it's only a AS board of directors position, but I was surprised none the less. It was someone I know from class last quarter and I didn't join for the obvious reason that, while I think he's a great guy, he is a liberal who will only encourage more liberal-cause spending. I won't name him on here, but I will point the reader to the latest issue of The Western Front in which reporter Peter Jensen wrote about one candidate getting in trouble for something his campaign group did on the facebook.

The campaign group for Tony Russo, a current member of the AS now running for president, used some official AS trappings and violated the election code. Yes, this is also someone I won't be supporting for much the same reasons I named above, never-the-less, I am interested in whether candidates are able to make much of a difference on an online community that is known not a little for its frivolity.

I'll just have to keep my eyes open and see how large the campaigns grow.

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

A House Divided

In recent readings of the papal candidacy race (dare I call it what it is?), I have come across the idea that perhaps the Catholics themselves do not really know what they are looking for in their new Pope. While some denounce the ideals of the former Pope and cry for a more in-touch and politically correct candidate, others still cling to the hope that the new pontiff will usher in a revival of the faith in the European and American arena. Between such wide poles, I nearly find it useless to ask who can fill the shoes of the late John Paul. And indeed, why bother, when most Catholics cannot even come to an agreement on basic values:

American Catholics, … have come to accept that being Catholic means living with inconsistency. The roughly 65 million Catholics in the United States no longer have as distinctive an identity as they did a generation ago, and as they assimilated more thoroughly into American society, their views on social and moral issues came to mirror those of other Americans.
After reading the above paragraph in the New York Times, I am slightly disgusted that there is such a deplorable amount of indecisiveness represented in the world today, although it is not limited to the Catholic sphere. If moving to America means watering down your morals to suit the temperaments of your neighbors, then your “values” have been stolen by those great despoilers of the peace, the Joneses.

I would venture to guess that the majority of readers on a political blog will have long since decided most of their core values, and am therefore equally confident in assuming that they will agree with me when I state that people of all ages, creeds and genders should know what they stand for and why. Without basic principles, based upon some form of research or doctrine, people will be swayed by the slightest wind of hot-air politicians. Worse yet, they will be influenced by their own vacillating and self-comforting desires.

The next pope will have to unite a church with mottos so diverse and colorful that Joseph’s famed coat looks monotone by comparison. If Catholics honestly care about their new leader, they will determine why they believe what they do before they prattle on about the qualities of the pope they require to represent them.

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

'more than private concern'

If you will just tolorate another post on Terri Schiavo, I will point you to an impressive Slate article I just came across by Harriet McBryde Johnson. I would rather be moving on to other topics, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that just because Terri has passed on so tragically, doesn't mean I have to let the issue drop. I've already been guilty of letting many things pass that could have been shared.

It's literally been about two years since I read anything on Slate. I must have had an early bad experience. There was one terrific line I read in this article that took my fancy. If you read the full piece you will discover the interesting fact that the author is facing the possibility of a feeding tube in the near future. At least keep that in mind when you read this paragraph:
I hope against hope that I will never be one of those people in the shadows, that I will always, one way or another, be able to make my wishes known. I hope that I will not outlive my usefulness or my capacity (at least occasionally) to amuse the people around me. But if it happens otherwise, I hope whoever is appointed to speak for me will be subject to legal constraints. Even if my guardian thinks I'd be better off dead—even if I think so myself—I hope to live and die in a world that recognizes that killing, even of people with the most severe disabilities, is a matter of more than private concern.
(emphasis mine)

Powerful to say the least. Again, if you read the whole piece, she provides an even better context.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Monday, April 11, 2005

Dave Johnson: Postponed!

Here's the latest:

Dave Johnson apparently got a very bad case of food poisoning and is
in the hospital. As a result the meeting tonight is cancled/delayed
until futher notice.

I hope this hasn't thrown anyone for a loop.

CORRECTION Re: Dave Johnson

Dave Johnson will be speaking in BOND HALL 109 not Miller 104. This is sort of across the square...easy to find.

There seems to be a lot of interest around campus, so don't miss out on this informative event!

Again: 6 p.m. on Monday April 11 (tonight), in Bond Hall 109

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

A case study in faculty lunicy

Dr. Mike Adams from UNC recently wrote a column on an interesting piece of work teaching at North Carolina Wesleyan College. For those who think Dr. Adams is spewing a lot of exageration, he was good enough to include the link to her faculty Web site Jane Christensen is her name and when I went to her page, I thought it was some kind of joke at first.

One of the first things to catch my eye, even before I read it in Adams' column was her exam questions.
1. How has the war on terrorism contributed to the powers of the Bush presidency? (Discuss at least 4 ways).

2. Discuss the sweeping attack on democratic rights under the Bush administration and what this means for the future of democratic government in America.

3. Whose interests are served by the foreign and domestic policies of the Bush administration?

4. Describe and discuss the role of the Bush advisors. Who are they? What is their agenda? And how is it being carried out?
It's almost too funny to be true--and yet there it is right before my eyes, which means it's not so funny.

Adams treats it with his state-of-the-art juicy sarcasm:
No food, drinks, gum, or cell phones are tolerated in the class of Jane Christensen (call 252-985-5118 or email jchristensen@ncwc.edu). But slander and anti-Semitism are permitted by a bigot posing as a scholar. That is, when she's not posing as a hooded terrorist with an M-16.
Check out her site and don't be frightened since I'm sure her posing in terrorist garb is just her way of endorsing al Qaeda...nothing serious of course.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

Political strategist Dave Johnson speaking Monday at Western

The fallout from the 2004 Washington State race for governor is still simmering. But what does this mean for the political climate in Washington for 2006? Could the neck-and-neck competition for the governor's race be a forecaster for the 2006 Congressional races? How many races will be as close as the Governor's race?

Able to answer this and more is Republican pollster and political strategist David E. Johnson, CEO and Co-founder of Strategic Vision, LLC, a nationally recognized public relations and public affairs agency in Atlanta, Georgia. Mr. Johnson has over 20 years of political and public relations experience, including work on the 1988 Bob Dole Presidential Campaign and overseeing numerous campaigns throughout the Southeast.

Dave Johnson has spent the months since the election polling Washington citizens and has a good sense for what they have been thinking all along.

Democrat or Republican, come hear him at 6 p.m. on Monday April 11. This lecture is funded and organized by the AS and College Republicans.

Location will be in either Bond or Miller Hall by Red Square on Western's campus. The exact room will be posted here as soon as tomorrow. Final confirmation of this activity was recieved late, but do show up if you would like to hear some good background and forecasting for Washington moods and elections.

UPDATE: It's been confirmed that the lecture will be in Miller Hall 104. That's basically in red square.

Monday, April 04, 2005

Logan's feet to the fire

I haven’t posted here regarding the election issues in a while. Here’s a juicy tidbit:

The last couple weeks have produced resurgence of interest in the election problems of last year. Most people know by now about the newest batch of mystery ballots (93) reported by King County over the weekend. While many may have thought this issue was going to finally die out, you can be sure that it won't. And now King County officials are plain fed-up with the controversy. King County councilmember Reagan Dunn has written a letter to Dean Logan, King County director of elections, asking for his resignation. I think this is huge because it will force a lot of attention. The letter is scathing and although not the mentality of all the council members, you can be sure there's a lot of angst across the board if one is willing to make such a request.

Excerpt:
I am asking that you resign your post and give over the operation of your department to someone who will be better able to manage it, who will be more forthright in admitting mistakes, and who will have the trust and confidence of the people.

Under your management and supervision, the King County Elections Department made repeated and inexcusable mistakes during the past several months. Washington State citizens have observed a repeated pattern of mistakes by your department, resulting in a serious erosion of public faith in the system. The failure of your department in administering the most recent election is clear from the many errors in registering voters, inaccuracies in counting and recounting ballots, failure to ensure that only legal ballots were counted and inability to reconcile voters with ballots cast. Every time you report to the Council and the public, the numbers of errors reported have increased.
Read the full letter here as linked by the incomparable Sound Politics.

Crossposted at Meneltarma

Saturday, April 02, 2005

King County: the continuing story

It's a good guess that the majority of those in this state have stopped considering the possibility of another election. It's been a while, so I don't blame them.

For myself, I think it's still up in the air. I don't think Gregoire is safe in the governor's mansion. The mess in King County is still unfolding, you see. Stefan Sharkansky of Sound Politics has been tracking things, and fighting to get as many records released as he can. He has been successful for the most part in proving the real picture is horrific when compared to the story the county officials are trying to tell. And then this latest piece of news he shared yesterday:

It's about more unverified ballots: "the number of mystery ballots goes up by another 87 to 867"

Read about it here.