When the year began I was actually filled with some optimism. With a November 2004 election corrupted by King County and thousands of illegal and invalid votes counted, who would have thought that a judge would accept depositions from felons removing votes from Dino Rossi while allowing an admitted 1,760 illegal votes in a race decided by 129 votes to decide the election in Gregoire's favor?
A personal battle with the corrupt King County land use departments was coming to head and the Washington State Supreme Court would decide many of the issues once and for all. Who would have imagined that after 10 years the court would rule unanimously to excuse a decade of wrongdoing based on King County's acceptance in 1989 of an illegal subdivision application that the Superior Court, Appellate Court and even the Supremes themselves refused to even rule on given repeated opportunities?
Then last month the King County Board of Ethic refused to rule on a half-dozen ethical questions related to King County actions, keeping their 6-year record of non-action perfect. That then excused the King County Ombudsman from investigating even larger issues. I learned that in King County, ethics doesn't drive behavior, but the Ethics Code does. But what is the Ethics Code but a law written and adopted by politicians to make sure that just about anything can be done in King County and still be called ethical.
When the year began George W. Bush was the overwhelming victor in a Presidential race ran against an arguably treasonous opponent? But despite his strong victory, the mainstream media has only ratcheted up their efforts further to damage him and his popularity, with papers like the New York Times now even orchestrating the release of news to hurt the administration? It's a tribute to many Americans that they can withstand the barrage of unfair and untruthful negative coverage and still approve of the president's actions.
But as a conservative in Washington State what can one do? With a state Republican Party run by the growth industry and their poster boy Chris Vance, what kind of choice is it choosing between the Democrats' social welfare and voter "purchase plan" or the Republicans' corporate welfare agenda and corporate "purchase plan"? Democrats higher taxes to feed the dependency class versus Republican higher taxes to subsidize the growth industries profits? Or even the shared strategies supporting higher taxes to build tributes to the elite in the form of new coliseums or race tracks?
No, whatever optimism I had left in those first days of 2005 is gone in these early days of 2006.
As a conservative all I have to look forward to in 2006 is the unrelenting attacks on our "moderate" president for being too "non-Democrat". Democrats will continue to hope, and even attempt to orchestrate failures in Iraq while they and their allies in the media will continue to hype their version of the Iraq scorecard, which will continue to be centered around our soldiers' deaths and anything negative they can come up with or invent.
Brainless politicians like Maria Cantwell, elected only as a result of the tech boom and likely shenanigans in King County that helped her defeat Slade Gorton, will fight logical and reasonable efforts to drill in ANWR. Never mind that it might actually be environmentally friendly and would move tankers off the oceans where the greater risks are. But it's all political. Right and wrong don't count. What's best for Americans doesn't matter. To Democrats in Washington, both this one and DC, all that matters is winning. An America in flames would be acceptable to today's Democrats as long as they are in control of it.
I hope I'm wrong about 2006, but while conservatives argue between themselves about issues, this party has to wake up to the fact that they're up against a massive propaganda machine we call the mainstream media. The MSM doesn't care about issues. The issues are all decided, as far as they are concerned, and they just happen to be the exact opposite positions supported by Bush, Republicans and especially conservatives.
The fight cannot be won taking it to Democrat politicians. They were elected by constituencies that share in their liberalism or have been bought off with their handouts. Why would they turn on the successful equations that got them into office? These politicians, along with many liberal Republicans and other RINOs, have proven that they have no concern about right and wrong, but only gaining and holding onto power. The only way to fight this battle is to take it to the media and other forces of the miseducation of Americans in higher education and Hollywood. As long as the "left" controls those propaganda distrubution mediums, then the battle cannot even be engaged among the "majority" of Americans. As long as the New York Times, Washington Post, Network TV vews, or even the news pages of the Wall Street Journal are controlled by liberals, the alternative voice is nothing but a faint whisper heard by only a very few Americans.
Consider the amazing efforts of Stefan Sharkansky and SoundPolitics.com? What percentage of Washington voters even know of this site's existence? 5% maybe? If only they knew of the evidence of fraud uncovered by Sharkansky would Sims be able to push an all-mail election system?
How about KVI or KTTH radio? Maybe 10%-20% of Puget Sound adults have listened and are already on-board with conservative beliefs. As the only successful alternatives to the Times, PI, and the plethora of television and other radio stations spewing liberalisms (or more accurately - anti-Republicanism), while some inroads have been made, the "right" has a very long way to go before they can even get into the 'real' fight over issues.