Selected comments from readers who send me emails that merit discussion.

Nearly every day I get emails from our readers telling me what horrors they’ve endured at the hands of corrupt judges and lawyers. And I’ve decided to publish some for everyone’s information. Since these are emails to me, I’ll protect the “author”, but their comments, ideas, and stories should be told.

What I discovered in my experience dealing with Snohomish County and AFSCME was that the storylines for corruption are spelled out in the contracts. It’s actually quite amusing the way people will make up rules that they think are slick and create ways to subvert other rules that they accidentally didn’t make bad enough. If a reasonable person were to read their rules with an open mind, he or she would realize that the rules are the scripts for the soap operas. Talk to the actors and most of them will give you all the details that you need. If there were any good courts, they could dismantle contract after contract on various violations, pushing cronies out of positions of power and possibly into jail cells. If political tides were to shift, it would be easy pickin’s. It would amount to shooting special interest fish in a barrel. The “fish” seem to understand this and it’s why they put so much energy into making ever more impenetrable barrels. I would be curious to see how your readers respond to such a notion. Imagine if government employees and citizens started flooding the courts with very real discrimination claims and there was a court that actually prosecuted the offenders… A state and its counties could clean house if it shifted just enough politically. To me, this explains why the bar and the supreme court do what they do. They are the ones that citizens backed by new leaders will come running after with pitchforks. And they are merely the henchmen of industry, so they rig The Game to keep the rebellion at bay. This is a cyclical phenomenon. Many of the players and most “civilians” are unaware of much of the reality of The Game. This makes ex parte incalculable. I caution you this one last time to draw your lines carefully, because AMBIGUITY IS THE BEAST and so long as a Man walks this earth, there will NEVER be Certainty. Best case scenario… new and better ambiguities to replace the old ones. You can only demonstrate that old ambiguities are harmful to The People and that there are newer, better ambiguities available; You cannot claim that there is a possibility of a system that does not have ambiguities, because there is no such possibility. The best argument we can make is that our cultural heritage of valuing the rights of individuals depends on balances of power that must be carefully protected. Without such protections, our country is not America, the home of the free and the brave, but is instead reduced to a Mobocracy. Most Americans don’t realize that the U.S. Constitution (with amendments) was the first document in the history of the world to acknowledge and protect the individual rights of all citizens, including and especially minorities. Due to the various expressions of Reality, any one of us who steps foot outside the lines of our tribe becomes a Minority. The only way to not be a minority is to lock yourself inside a barrel of Singularity. All contracts are social contracts, even if you are meeting in private and think you are shielded from the herd of weaklings. You can soak the contracts in water, let them dry, burn them, digitize only the ones you want and have drones circle the Holy Computer, but it still won’t be enough, because Property belongs to Nature – not Men. The pursuit of Happiness has been distorted by the pursuit of property. Happiness as understood by both Locke and Jefferson involves property, but includes something beyond property. Look around. Does our absurd relationship with property make us happy? If only I had just a little more property, then I’d be happy… it’s the mantra of America. Here’s a contract: I will do no harm, lest my fellow citizens shall stone me in public. As civil servants, this is close to the Actual contract that they have made. Your pleading is a reminder. Feel free to use any of my thoughts or words that may be useful and just as free to discard them.

Representative Jesse Young

$90,000 study: Can we build a bridge from old aircraft carriers?By Associated Press Published: Apr 13, 2015 at 10:45 AM PDT

Michael Campbell, NL Evans and Brad Hofmann like this.

Michael Campbell http://houserepublicans.wa.gov/jesse-young/contact/

Contact Me
E-mail me: Call me: (360) 786-7964 Toll-free: (800) 562-6000 Mail me: Rep. Jesse Young P.O. Box 40600…
HOUSEREPUBLICANS.WA.GOV
April 14 at 9:00am · Like · 1

Colleen Smith Why would this be a good idea? I don’t understand the point. When the destroyers from WW2 were mothballed they were upgraded to modern code first. I think they do this for the purpose of using them if needed. Don’t they do that with the aircraft carriers too?
April 19 at 5:01pm · Edited · Like · 1

Michael Campbell They are being sold for scrap for a dollar. Why would not reusing them be a good idea? You must not think recycling is not a good idea.
April 20 at 12:27am · Like · 1

Bill Scheidler You can build a bridge out of toothpicks … the issue is what will it cost to build it, maintain it, make it environmentally friendly (possibly lead paint, asbestos and sump waste to contend with … ) but it is a good idea for distracting people from all that Rep Young isn’t doing to save money, protect citizens, and reform our corrupt judicial system.
April 20 at 5:04pm · Like

Charlene Christian Lead paint should have been removed by1980, asbestos removal should have been completed by 2005. There are no crews on board so all waste should already be pumped out. The ships are commonly used for storage while they are sitting there. If the study c…See More
April 21 at 11:12am · Like · 2

Bill Scheidler Yep… it is an interesting “Disneyland” idea … could even remodel the bridge as an apartment .. or penthouse, shops, fishing pier, heliport, could even imagine a large portal below waterline to see the fish. Or our representative could pass legisla…See More
April 21 at 12:33pm · Like

Colleen Smith Bill Scheidler, why do you post such ridicule? Matt Shea is a courageous American, an honest man and he stands up for your freedom as well as David Taylor but you criticize them?. Jesse Young does not impress me as he does others but that is me, a sk…See More
April 22 at 2:29am · Like

Bill Scheidler Hostility that is blatant, from me? I guess being a witness to corrupt judges who steal children from parents because every child the State takes from a family is worth about $20,000 in Federal money… I guess being a witness to judges and lawyers r…See More
April 22 at 5:02am · Like

Tony Stephens If there is an injustice that Matthew Shea, David Taylor, Jesse Lee Young,Elizabeth Scott, Lynda Wilson, Graham Hunt, or Dan Giffey can correct, but have not done so, it is because they are not fully aware of it. Self Governance involves getting to kn…See More
1 hr · Like · 1

Michael Campbell Well said Tony Stephens!!!!!
46 mins · Like · 1

Bill Scheidler What makes you think they are NOT AWARE … just because they haven’t done anything about the problems. Give me a break with this circular reasoning. I delivered to Jesse, Jan and Michelle a CD of EVIDENCE and spoke with Jesse at length (Michelle and…See More
28 mins · Edited · Like

Bill Scheidler Not that I care if you all don’t agree with me, believe me or give 2-cents, but I even drafted a “joint resolution” that all these “REPS” needed to do was to submit it. http://www.corruptwa.com/…/04/House-Joint-Resolution3.docx
21 mins · Like

Elizabeth Scott With all due respect, House Joint Resolutions are not used for this type of action. They are typically used for non-controversial accolades of some sort, such as naming a holiday or honoring a team or person.
10 mins · Like · 1

Bill Scheidler Have you read Article 4, Section 9? Isn’t it true that “All constitutional provisions are self-executing to the extent that they void all action taken in violation of them and preclude enforcement of any statute violating them.” So what “rule” has altered Article 4, Section 9 that has rendered “joint resolutions” NOT FOR THE PURPOSE of ART 4, Sect 9? Com’om people, quit flinging nonsense hoping it will stick!
Just now · Like

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*