Posted: 9/9/2004 10:15:05 PM EDT
|
www.washingtonarmscollectors.org/admin.asp Heres WAC's list. I don't know if its good bad or other wise. So if there is some one bad on the list please point them out. 2004 PRIMARY RECOMMENDATION LIST Washington Arms Collectors Incumbents in capitals PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH (R) U.S. SENATE George Nethercutt (R) CONGRESSIONAL RACES 1st Randy Eastwood (R) 2nd no recommendation 3rd no recommendation 4th RICHARD “DOC” HASTINGS (R) 5th Cathy McMorris (R) 6th no recommendation 7th Carol Cassaday (R) 8th Luke Esser (R) or Diane Tebelius (R) 9th no recommendation STATEWIDE OFFICES Governor Dino Rossi (R) Lt Governor BRAD OWEN (D) Sec’y of State SAM REED (R) Treasurer no recommendation Auditor BRIAN SONNTAG (D) Attorney General Rob McKenna (R) +1 (see this thread) Comm Pub Lands DOUG SUTHERLAND (R) Spt of Pub Instr no recommendation Insurance Comm no recommendation Supreme Court -1 Jim Johnson -5 BARBARA MADSEN -6 RICHARD SANDERS -1 (see RS_Coyote's post about his wife's opinion) Clark Cnty Cmsnr -1 Tom Mielke (R) -2 Marc Boldt (R) Pierce Cnty Council -3: Roger Bush (R) -6: Dick Muri (R) KC Sup Ct -13 David Larson Pierce Cnty Sup Ct -18 Tom Faubion Pierce Cnty Assessor Ken Madsen (D) LEGISLATIVE RACES Dist. Position Name 1 Senate Jason Bontrager (R) House 1 Jeff Merrill (R) House 2 Joshua Freed (R) 2 Senate Deryl McCarty (R) House 1 no recommendation House 2 TOM CAMPBELL (R) 3 Senate Mike Casey (R) House 1 no recommendation House 2 Ryan Leonard (R) Dist. Position Name 4 Senate BOB McCASLIN (R) House 1 LARRY CROUSE (R) House 2 LYNN SCHINDLER (R) 5 Senate CHERYL PFLUG (R) House 1 JAY RODNE (R) House 2 GLENN ANDERSON (R) 6 Senate BRIAN MURRAY (R) House 1 John Serben (R) House 2 JOHN AHERN (R) 7 House 1 BOB SUMP (R) House 2 Joel Kretz (R) 8 Senate JEROME DELVIN (R)- House 1 no recommendation House 2 SEAN McGRATH (R) 9 Senate MARK SCHOESLER (R) House 1 DON COX (R) House 2 no recommendation 10 Senate April Axthelm (R) House 1 Chris Strow (R) House 2 BARBARA BAILEY (R) 11 Senate Bill Roenicke (R) House 1 Elizabeth Harris (R) House 2 Ruth Gibbs (R) 12 Senate LINDA PARLETTE (R) House 1 CARY CONDOTTA (R) House 2 MIKE ARMSTRONG (R) 13 House 1 JANE’A HOLMQUIST (R) House 2 BILL HINKLE (R) 14 Senate no recommendation House 1 no recommendation House 2 JIM CLEMENTS (R) 15 House 1 BRUCE CHANDLER (R) House 2 DAN NEWHOUSE (R) Dist. Position Name 16 Senate MIKE HEWITT (R) House 1 no recommendation House 2 BILL GRANT (D) 17 Senate DON BENTON (R) House 1 Paul Harris (R) House 2 Roy Rhine (R) 18 Senate JOE ZARELLI (R) House 1 Richard Curtis (R) House 2 ED ORCUTT (R) 19 Senate MARK DOUMIT (D) House 1 BRIAN HATFIELD (D) House 2 BRIAN BLAKE (D) 20 Senate DAN SWECKER (R) House 1 RICHARD DEBOLT (R) House 2 GARY ALEXANDER (R) 21 House 1 Roger Wilson (R) House 2 no recommendation 22 Senate no recommendation House 1 no recommendation House 2 no recommendation 23 Senate Doug Kitchens (R) House 1 Frank Mahaffay (R) House 2 BEVERLY WOODS (R) 24 Senate JIM HARGROVE (D) House 1 JIM BUCK (R) House 2 LYNN KESSLER (D) 25 Senate Rose Hill (R) House 1 JOYCE McDONALD (R) House 2 no recommendation 26 House 1 no recommendation House 2 LOIS McMAHAN (R) Dist. Position Name 27 Senate Kim Wheeler (R) House 1 no recommendation House 2 no recommendation 28 Senate MIKE CARRELL (R) House 1 GIGI TALCOTT (R) House 2 BOB LAWRENCE (R) 29 House 1 STEVE CONWAY (D) House 2 STEVE KIRBY (D) 30 House 1 Tony Moore (R) House 2 SKIP PRIEST (R) 31 House 1 DAN ROACH (R) House 2 JAN SHABRO (R) 32 House 1 no recommendation House 2 Margaret Wiggins (R) 33 House 1 Bruce Elliot (R) House 2 no recommendation 34 House 1 no recommendation House 2 Paul Byrne (R) 35 House 1 KATHY HAIGH (D) House 2 BILL EICKMEYER (D) 36 House 1 Floyd Loomis (R) House 2 Don Zeek (L) 37 House 1 no recommendation House 2 no recommendation 38 Senate no recommendation House 1 Kim Halvorson (R) House 2 no recommendation Dist. Position Name 39 Senate VAL STEVENS (R) House 1 DAN KRISTIANSEN (R) House 2 KIRK PEARSON (R) 40 Senate Gerald Baron (R) House 1 DAVE QUALL (D) House 2 no recommendation 41 Senate JIM HORN (R) House 1 no recommendation House 2 Fawn Spady (R) 42 House 1 DOUG ERICKSEN House 2 no recommendation 43 House 1 Zac Green (R) House 2 Mark Griswold (R) 44 House 1 Mike Hope (R) House 2 Stephen West (R) 45 House 1 Jeffrey Possinger (R) House 2 TOBY NIXON (R) 46 House 1 Brien Downie (R) House 2 no recommendation 47 House 1 Steve Altick (R) House 2 JACK CAIRNES (R) 48 House 1 James Whitfield (R) House 2 RODNEY TOM (R) 49 Senate DON CARLSON (R) House 1 Justin Riley (R) House 2 Mike Smith (R) WARNING: Recommendations are for September 14th Primary Election only. Some candidates may change depending on results of primary election. Additional recommendations will be published for the November 2nd General Election. |
|
My wife has been before Supreme Court judge RICHARD SANDERS several times with cases. And she thinks he is a flaming idiot. I guess she has had cases that she should have won but lost because he is unjust. She said he acts very liberal. My wife is very conservitive. Thats all I know. If you want more input ask and I'll see if she will post more details. |
|
It would be nice to see the reasoning and perhaps a brief note on how they came up with those recommendations. I am not disputing it nor endorsing it. I just think it would be difficult to blindly follow that list without a little input on how they chose the names on it. RS_Coyote, would it be too much to ask you to put in red or blue next to the names a number indicating any disputes with their selections based on individual posts in this thread, such as your wife's opinion? Please do ask if she could perhaps provide some examples of how she came to her conclusion. I know it's a lot to ask but it would be much appreciated. For example:
Of course, if R-32 chimes in that he doesn't like some district representatives hair color, no need to add that on the list, but if he says he thinks (s)he's not our friend and gives a little bit of reasoning, add it. (purely hypothetical example  ) Then we can read the posts to see if we agree with the dissent. If this is something you don't want to get into, do you mind if I edit your post to do this? I didn't want to just go in and do that without running it by you first. Thanks Jim edited to add: Perhaps we could use red for disagreement with their selection, and blue for people who provide examples in this thread that show it is a good choice? |
Jim (JAFO) Please go ahead and take over this post. I have been Bear hunting and don't have the time. And I'm sure you will do a better job than I could. Thank You |
| Okay, beginning now, if anyone has any comments to make about people on this list, please do so in this thread. I will add a red -1, -2, etc for each comment about a person that is negative. I will add a blue +1, +2, etc for comments reinforcing the WAC position on recommending each nominee. This is NOT scientific, and I will try not to add them without at least a logical explanation as to why someone thinks they are a good choice or bad. I did add a -1 next to Sanders on some pretty weak information from RS_Coyote's wife. I do not mean to offend in any way, but basically it's just saying she thinks he's liberal. Hopefully she can provide some examples as to how she came to this conclusion, but if not, no biggie. Just remember that this is only outsider opinion after the fact, and make your own decisions on whether to believe what is posted here or not. |
|
Jim you put a good idea to work. But looks like we are a little late in the game. Any how I spoke with my wife some more about the issues she had with this judge. And basically because of her line of work she has the opinion she has. I'm not going into detail about what she does. But it has to do with insurance. And she has to go to court often. So the bottom line is if their was a 2nd amendment issue/case before RICHARD SANDERS how would he rule? I don't know. And who is running against him? Is he the better of the two evils? Guess WAC thought so. I'm not into debating politics or candidates, this is one of my week areas. But I do try to figure out who the good guys are to vote for. Just my two cents. |
I understand about the line of work and not openly discussing it here. I just wanted to make it clear that the reasons weren't specific. I also understand that Liberal is Liberal. I question where they got the info from or who made the decision for them to add him to the list, since judges are supposedly non-partisan. I wonder if a WAC person knows him, or did they research his cases, or ??? (That's rhetorical, I know you can't answer that). It is pretty late in the game. Never too late for someone to chime in though if they bother looking it over and have any information to add. C'mon folks. Anyone have any opinions that are against or with the WAC opinions for selecting these people? |