As the Boeing tanker deal and the resulting protests get more attention, the possibility of this state being a "battleground" disappers.

Unfortunately, there are some out there who will use the Boeing deal, where not all those involved went to prison, even though they should have (Sen. Murray) as their excuse to beat up McCain.

Murray, her cronies, and Boeing were set to rip us off for billions. McCain put a stop to that. And for that, I give him props, and point out that corruption can take many forms... (Sen. Murray)

Unfortunately, however, this state is so socialistically blue that the Boeing excuse is not needed. If the leftists didn't have that, they'd make something else up in a lame effort to justify their opposition to anything with an "R" after its name.

I will be sitting this election out at the top for a variety of reasons. In this instance, McCain's insistence on democrat positions concerning illegal alien amnesty, ANWR and the fraud of global warming make him the same as Obama. And a President Obama would almost be as psychotic and dangerous to this country as a President Paul.

Further, as this state creeps more and more to edge of the cliff of "leftist-ism" it becomes increasingly less likely that we will ever become a battle ground state in upcoming presidential elections in my life time... certainly until the state and local GOP organizations gain some level of competence now absent from the playing field.

Why buy more electronics for a sinking ship. The state GOP is such a bad investment that it makes McCain look like a good one.

I've seen enough comments like above by Hinton about ''sitting this election out'' that I have lost patience with this irrational line of thinking. It's astounding how some people, even those who have in other cases presented reasoned arguments, seem willing to sacrifice the overall best interests of our county because of actual or (wrongly, IMO) perceived disagreements with Senator McCain on single issues.

This reminds me of one of the most perceptive comments Ronald Reagan ever made: If somebody is with you 80 percent of the time, they're not your enemy: They're your friend. An unbiased review of Senator McCain's lifetime voting record says he more than meets this test for reasonable (R)s. Plus ANY rational comparison of a McCain Presidency versus the frightening specter of left-wing eco-extremist big government socialism that we would get with a total of (shudder) 12 or even 16 years of the Clintons or Barack Obama in the White House should give anyone pause, if they care about our future in an increasingly competitive and still dangerous world.

Beyond the above, here is detailed rebuttal to Hinton's post:

1. He was O.K. in the 1st 3 paragraphs: The Boeing deal smelled; people went to jail; and the fact Boeing happens to be in WA is no reason to put parochial short-time financial gain ahead of the best interest of the nation as a whole. Senator McCain led the charge to fix this.

2. Hinton claims Sen. McCain is still insisting on (D) positions concerning illegal alien amnesty. I'm a strong proponent of ''secure the borders first'', and oppose anything that amounts to blanket amnesty just because people successfully violated the law and entered our country illegally. But I also recognize need for a rational, large-scale program for LEGAL guest-workers. I know people who run fruit-packing operations down on the Columbia, and have looked in their packing sheds: Maybe those workers are not quite 100 percent Latino, but its close. Sen. McCain tried to work out a comprehensive deal as one big package, and I had problems with that, but he has recognized the will of the people and some time ago said ''secure the borders first''. Nobody can in any way claim that the Senator's current position is anywhere CLOSE to the (D)s mantra; i.e. (effectively): Let everybody in the world who wants to cross our border illegally do so anytime they want.

3. Drilling in ANWR: I disagree with Sen. McCain on this one. Contrary to ludicrous claims by eco-extremists (which Sen. McCain is NOT), with modern exploration methods ANWR can be developed while disturbing only about 2,000 out of 20 MILLION total acres. That's 1 part in 10,000. But ANWR by itself cannot come anywhere close to making us energy independent; Sen. McCain is right about that. It's only a partial bridge to 4th-generation nuclear and eventually a hydrogen economy. So whether we drill ANWR now or 10 years from now probably does not make a huge difference in the extended big picture. But you can take it to the bank that we WILL develop ANWR eventually. In any case: To make this a deal-breaker makes absolutely no sense; and to try and suggest that McCain = Obama in this area defies logic.

4. Al Gore and AGW: The HadCRUT and other data (look it up) shows that since the 1998 global average temperature peak, average temps have leveled off; plus the last 6-8 months have been some of the coldest on record in 20+ years, even though atmospheric CO2 levels continue their slow, steady rise. Give the hard data a few more years, and IMO odds are good this will start to work itself out; i.e.: Objective science still has a shot at winning this one. And unlike the (D)s, I firmly believe that Sen. McCain is open to continued unbiased evaluation of hard data.

SUMMARY: Clinton is most likely done, in which case the next President will be either John McCain or Barack Obama. So for conservatives not to vote for Sen. McCain is the same as voting (D). And to somehow try and suggest there would be no real difference between a McCain and Obama administration flies in the face of reality to the point of deep-space disconnect. In fact the sentiment to ''sit this one out'' in the Presidential race almost seems to approach the level of ''we may have to destroy the county in order to save it''. Consider this: We may not have much left to save after a few more years of total (D) control; i.e.: To ''sit this one out'' is an unacceptable and unconscionable abdication of citizen responsibility: Get real, get serious, and support John McCain.

Methow ken wrote:
"...And to somehow try and suggest there would be no real difference between a McCain and Obama administration flies in the face of reality to the point of deep-space disconnect...."

Exactly. The single issue(s) voters are so obsessed with the trees in front of them, they can't see the forest.
They want politicians and government to fix everything to their exact specification, and when it doesn't happen (it never does) they pout like spoiled children.
Further, this arguable lack of "love for country" knows no particular political affiliation.
We're just seeing more of it among R's this time.

Having said that, Ken - and while totally agreeing with most of your analysis - you're on the wrong side, buddy ;-)
It's not just the individual R politicians that have failed, it's their political philosophy.
No degree of skilled implementation or ethical integrity can overcome schemes and theories that simply don't work - have never worked - for anyone but the highest rollers.

Psychological hit? David, you seriously underestimate the fortitude of Washington State Republicans.

It would be a very unexpected bonus to be a presidential battleground state --until then I'm delighted to "make do" with:
Dino Rossi,
Rob McKenna,
Sam Reed,
Doug Sutherland,
Allan Martin,
Dave Reichert,
Shawn Bunney
and other excellent Republican candidates. I feel great about 2008!

Remember that McCain is a good match for Washington, even polling ahead of Hillary Clinton, and certainly not a drag on the ticket like we would have seen from other possible Republican nominees.

Funny that McCain doesn't feel that way about a state that is pouring the largest ever grassroots money into Rossi.

Of course- McCain is probably seeing the smallest grassroots support of any GOP candidate.

I hope Michelle Malkin is still selling those McCain nose plugs in November. We'll need them.

Methow Ken, I couldn't have said it better myself, good to go on all points.

JimD, you said "It's not just the individual R politicians that have failed, it's their political philosophy. No degree of skilled implementation or ethical integrity can overcome schemes and theories that simply don't work - have never worked - for anyone but the highest rollers."

Would that be like tax cuts increasing the federal income? That is something that is an R philosophy and has worked time and again. You're on the wrong side buddy, I want to keep more of my hard earned dollars and keep the economy rolling, not the federal government.

They want politicians and government to fix everything to their exact specification ...

That is where you are so wrong. I don't want politicians or government to fix anything. I want them to stay the hell out.

Traditionally, it's your side of the aisle that looks to government and politicians to solve things.

John McCain wasn't my choice for the GOP nomination, but he won it and that's how it is. I will NOT be sitting out the election just because my candidate lost in the primaries.

The Democrats have a huge, unfair, advantage in that they rely on PAID union hacks and thugs to do their precinct work. The GOP, on the other hand, have only UNPAID volunteers doing their work for them.

As to McCain's ideas about the environment, while I totally disagree with his position on global warming scam, I do agree that the private sector, not government, should be the arena where answers should come from and solutions should be paid for.

Governments; local, state and federal, have grown way beyond their means. There is so much corruptions, featherbedding and waste that all of our schools systems could be totally funded and our taxes lowered if we could undo what the Democrats have done to our state over the last twenty years.

Anyone who sits out this election cycle will regret their decision if Obama wins in November.

I understand why the McCain people won't share. No promise the state GOP will use the funds for anything other than the Gov's race and to protect Reichart's congressional seat. Given the state GOPs fundraising of late it seems it will be tough on them just to make payroll.

Anyway, Washington State will be impacted by what happens in state Senate and House races not who wins the presidency. Olympia is really where our taxes are raised.

I saw a website that has a different idea. It is www.gowashingtonpolitics.com Maybe their approach will work this year.

D.

Bothsides wrote:
"...Would that be like tax cuts increasing the federal income? That is something that is an R philosophy and has worked time and again...."

Actually, it hasn't. Nice theory, and taxes have to achieve a sweet-spot where they create maximum revenue without discouraging growth, but one only has to look to our current economy to realize that simply lowering taxes doesn't guarantee economic growth. The burden we've put on future generations by reducing taxes on the wealthiest Americans and corporations is a disgrace. And for what? Show me a real benefit from Bush's tax cuts, other than a 9 month waiting list at Jaguar dealerships...
You're paying more than your fair share, Bothsides.
And a vote for McCain is a vote for more of the same.

Actually JimD, I didn't say anything about the economy, I said the federal treasury takes in more money, which would lend one to believe there was more prosperity by lowering taxes, and is a fact. The current situation is based on runaway spending, and the Bush tax cuts were initially instituted to bring us out of a recession early in his term, which they did, or don't you remember blaming Bush for the recession he inherited caused by the dot com bust. Also, those tax cuts are for anyone who paid taxes, so you can give up the left wing rhetoric / talking points of "for the welthiest American's" because everyone knows that you could tax the hell out of the top 10% and not increase revenue by very much.