By Matthew Hayward Under current law, Washington’s governor can engage in secret, closed-door contract negotiations with more than 25 unions whose impact on taxpayers equals hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer expenses. The problem is these same unions contributed to the governor’s campaign to $5.8 million dollars. There is clearly a conflict of interest in allowing elected officials to negotiate how to spend tax dollars with their campaign contributors, especially during secret meetings. Notwithstanding the fact our current governor promised salary increases even before negotiations ever started, what kind of negotiating is that? In 2002 , a law passed under Gov. Gary Locke that exempts state negotiating sessions from the Open Public Meetings Act. This means state-level collective bargaining is not required to be done in public. On the other hand, nothing is saying they couldn't be. It’s time to turn on the cameras and microphones and hold our representative...

By Matthew Hayward Happy Bill of Rights Day! Opening the paper this morning to read retiring liquor control board chair Sharon Foster's passionate comments against the free market was wonderful. While the privatization of liquor sales was voter-approved, Sharon says it was "the dumbest thing we ever did in our state." She then went on to point out that privatization has "led to higher prices and increased shoplifting of alcohol, especially by minors. We've heard stories there may be alcohol brokers in every high school,”  Let’s start with higher prices; the State is punishing the people with sin taxes and making more money than ever. Next shoplifting; yes, there will be an increase in shoplifting of a product when you now have the product. Sharon fails to mention adjustments made in security measures without State regulations. When liquor was first opened up for sale in the general marketplace, many store owners foolishly placed their products insecurely in open...

  Two things that are truly sad about this: 1. The fact that this is new to anyone. There have been congressional hearings about this and money publicly budgeted for these types of tactics. We also have declassified documents that show the US government has been engaging in infiltrating and discrediting   political and influential groups in the US for decades. Look up COINTELPRO if you are that uninformed as to question me. 2. The FACT that most people will hear this and go on living as if they hadn't. Most people who intellectually know and understand what is happening, psychologically refuse to accept it and live as if they know none of it. Likely this defense mechanism, this denial people live in, is based on feelings of powerlessness, helplessness and a deep desire to believe   that it is all for some greater good. Many people choose to live in ignorance because they know that reality is uncomfortable. Does our government participate in unethical an...

I found this article most interesting. It was published in 2010 and calls these conspiracy theories "right wing." But in 2006 a majority of the people who touted these theories were considered to be left wingers, crying about how George Bush was going to cancel the 2008 elections and declare martial law etc. Could it be that most people who question the government and fear large scandals and an organized elite engaged in social engineering are a mix of right, left, center? Maybe the real difference is if the conspirator believes it is the government behind the conspiracy, or the banks and corporations behind the conspiracy? And if a particular theory has merit and is actually true, would it not be logical that everyone could be able to accept it? (For the record, I am not one to buy into 'all' of these sorts of things, in fact I disagree with many of these after looking into them a bit; but simply because some of these theories, and other theories, maybe in ...

By Matthew Hayward Do you think Senator Rand Paul honestly believes these things or is he just saying them like BO did when he was a Senator? I really liked many of the things BO said when he was a Senator; in fact, his doing the opposite of much of what he ran is a big part of why I am so furious with him and his administration. If Rand Paul is sincere in protecting citizens' rights and his foreign policy of strengthening America first, who would oppose him as president? (Okay, I know the nonconservative, globalist, war hawks will not like him, and there will be some one-issue voters on the left that will not support him, but who would really oppose a candidate that is running on all of the positive things the last two presidents were initially elected for, and BOTH did the exact opposite. On the president unilaterally authorize a military attack "that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

Where do I fit politically? I am more fiscally conservative than a Republican. I believe in limiting government rather than just talking about it. And while I am socially conservative personally, I am more tolerant and accepting of liberal behaviors than Democrats.  So to sum it up, those who believe in limited government are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant. Unfortunately there is not a political Party that fits these parameters. Democrats make it clear they wish to engineer society through central planning, the education system and force. Republicans however claim to support limited government while   in practice always increase its size and join in with using it to manipulate and engineer society as they see fit.  It is very sad that people think they have the right to impose their moral beliefs onto others. Conservative or liberal, no one has the right   through legislating policy, especially at a federal level, to prevent or force pro...

By Matthew Hayward Now here is some political analytical truth. Two factions of the Republican Party, the ‘Christian conservatives’ and the Libertarians, have been working together in different capacities around the nation to restore integrity, first the GOP and second the Constitution. To one degree or another, the Tea Party is essentially made up of these two factions;. However, there are stark differences; we all agree that the party has moved so far to the left that it no longer represents people who believe in less government. So where do the Libertarian wing and the ‘Christian conservatives’ part ways? Libertarian-leaning Republicans have some things in common with the mainstream or moderate Republicans. Where moderates and ‘Christian conservatives often differ the most on social issues, the Libertarian wing falls closer to the ‘moderates.’   In fact, it could be argued that the   Libertarian wing is the real moderate wing of the Party,   and everyone agrees tha...