Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (238389)	2/11/2008 9:40:14 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793964

Also for WA State Residents....Fred Jarett, State Rep for my District, former Republican that recently turned Democrat, returned my call to his office of a few days ago. He spent about 15 minutes with me....Surprise! In response to our question on Voting in the Caucus and /or the Primary on the 19th…would our votes count? He hesitated, but did say the Republicans had “promised they would give one-half the delegates based on the results of the Primary. He hates the system that Olympia has dreamed up re our having to declare our party now, the caucus, etc…. We did agree on that. He seems happier as a Dem because "he likes the people on that side of the aisle down in Olympia".... He doesn't seem too amused about the Huck type folks that seem to dominate the Repubs here... He is a good friend and fan of Former Gov Dan Evans --so in essence he was a RINO, now a DEMO aka Tax AND Spend guy... Told him my 3 criteria for the President and any of the other elected officials we elect... 1) "Provide for the National Defense" (he mentioned "promote the general welfare") which I take from the rest of his conversation that he means "give em' money.....the "rich" will pay for it...., 2) Securing the borders (with the exchange there, we never made it to my 3rd want/need, the economy, helping new business to continue to be the engine that is growing America. He evidently is more of a "tax the upper incomes" more than I realized.... He is more for Open Borders than I would have guessed...although he didn't say it that way. He's bought into the ad that uses the excuse for ILLEGALS being here is "They are doing the job Americans" don't want to do.... Here, he said that we needed more people in this country. Said that Microsoft is setting up communities in Canada and China (I also mentioned India) where they can get the talent they need, because our Immigration Laws prohibit more people entering. He said that there didn't seem to be the will to stop ILLEGAL immigration....I mentioned there certainly was a tool, but it isn't routinely enforced ---the "I-9"....He said too difficult to enforce....I said "Well then, take it off the books, or change the law".....Or do they want all citizens to pick and choose what laws they want to obey? No reply there, because he headed another direction. That direction was bottom line; he said "it is the FEDS who are to take control of the borders, not the states...." And yet, I mentioned, the States want their rights preserved. He brought up a case before the Civil War: Marbury vs Madison" en.wikipedia.org ......Said this case showed the Feds were to be in control of things like that. To me, it sounds like we need some leadership, otherwise, BOTH State and National, will continue pointing their fingers at the other guy, and not getting the problem solved.

To: Neeka who wrote (238389)	2/11/2008 11:01:53 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793964

Our local paper carried an article headlined "Opposing bills target guns on campus. Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, proposed SB 6841 which would ban most people - including holders of concealed-pistol licenses- from bringing their guns onto state or private colleges in Washington. Violators would risk up to ayear in jail and a $5,000 fine. In response, Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, proposed SB 6860. It would prohibit college officials from adopting rules - as most have - restricting the carrying of concealed firearms by people licensed to do so. ... ... Murray argues that a uniform ban at all colleges only makes sense. It's comparable to the existing ban at public schools, he said. And developing good judgment, he said, can also take well into a person's 20s.