Put together my breakfast version of Croque Madam for my son this morning, since he gets to eat food. I have the joy of watching him eat my concoctions and later he describes the experience. Food with sauce and cheese and everything ruled wrong to eat by my good Dr. Killyasoon. The memory of this experience is slowly fading from my feeble brain, but I still remember how to make it.

My version of Croque Madam was to first caramelize an onion with a red pepper in olive oil, butter and white wine.

Next I took two slices of bread, buttered them and grilled them enough to get the grill marks.

Instead of ham I cooked bacon. I loaded the bacon and onion mixture on the bread and topped with cheddar cheese, which is all I had in the refrigerator.

I broiled that to get the cheese bubbly, then put the other piece of bread on top and some more cheese and broiled until bubbly.

I topped it with an egg fried in butter. I made hollandaise sauces and poured it over the  top. Béarnaise is more traditional, but hollandaise sounded right to me this morning for some reason.

I have stumbled upon the perfect solution for a problem that has plagued fathers since God mistakenly created daughters. The problem is boyfriends.
I’m not sure why God decided know-it-all daughters were such a dandy idea in the first place, but I didn’t get to vote on this one.
For the record, this entire boyfriend arrangement was not well planned by God. He must have been tired that day. I think there should have been a public hearing for dads only.
I have, however, devised the magic solution – arranged boyfriends. Not only will it solve the stupid boyfriend thing, I am convinced it will bring peace on earth. Such a deal.
Let me describe how this brilliant idea came to me.
Katy, my 23-year-old daughter who believes I have become dumber every day since she was born, called me a while back. During the conversation Katy happened to say she was “hanging out” with someone.
That’s how girls say it now. Hanging out.
Well I’m a quick one, despite what little-miss-run-my-life thinks.
“What’s his name?” I said quick as can be.
“I not telling you.”
“Why?”
“Because your nuts. You’ll try to investigate him or something stupid like that.”
“I would never do anything like that,” I said in a high-pitched whiny voice. “But do you think you could write down his social security number or driver’s license number? Just for my record keeping.”
“Not a chance,” she said.
OK, I will admit there may be a little, tiny bit of history for her comments, but that was a long time ago and I have reformed.
I have become a new dad and I now want to solve the boyfriend problem instead of crush it. Let’s remember this conundrum was not created by me, it was God’s fault, but I am willing to fix it.
Arranged boyfriends makes everything so slick. It is a simple and an easy-pleasy solution. It’s even Constitutional. All we have to do is skip certain sections in the middle that don’t really count anyway.
I rolled things around in my vacant head for a couple of days before I presented the exquisite harmony of my plan to Katy.
“I found you the perfect boyfriend that I know I will like. We’ll get along dandy. Maybe go fishing or bowling or play Yahtzee and do all sorts of zippy activities.”
She wouldn’t even consider it, not for a second. I couldn’t believe it.
The world I set up had such symmetry and balance – like living in a Nirvana with all the Twinkies and Ho Hos I could ever desire.
But no, let’s not listen to dad the dumb guy.
I patiently told her I could set this up with one phone call and a couple of boxes of chocolate dipped Twinkies. I told her I had only my best interests at heart, and I was thinking about her, too.
She threatened to have me sent to a home for crazy dads. Must be a long waiting list.
So much for peace on earth.
I hope you’re happy, God.

This is a press release from the office of Attorney General Rob McKenna.

Attorney General Rob McKenna today issued the following statement on the US Supreme Court’s decision to hear Doe v. Reed, a case involving the release of Referendum 71 petitions containing the names and addresses of those who signed the measure

• “This case involves a direct attack on public disclosure and transparency in elections. It affects not only all Washington state initiatives and referenda but also has major ramifications for every state with an initiative and referenda process and similar laws regarding public disclosure.

• Although the sponsors of Ref. 71 claim this case is about potential harassment and intimidation, the federal district court which blocked release of petition signers’ names did not address that claim.

• Instead, the legal issue in the case before the US Supreme Court is whether or not initiative and referendum signatures, gathered through a public process, should be considered anonymous political speech that is protected from public scrutiny.

• We look forward to the opportunity to defend transparency in the initiative and referendum process both for the people of our state and for all people in states that offer the right to initiative and referendum.”

The petitioners must file their opening briefs by Feb. 25, 2010, and the state’s response is due March 25, 2010. Oral arguments are expected in April 2010.

The following is a press release from the King County Sheriff’s office.

Sheriff detectives arrested a 22 year-old Skyway man on Friday, Jan. 8, for investigation of rape, robbery and kidnapping. They believe he committed at least two other rapes and perhaps more.

The suspect is currently in the Regional Justice Center with a $500,000 bail. Charges are pending.

In a Jan. 7 incident, the 26 year-old victim was in the Skyway neighborhood to respond to an ad posted on Craigslist for a “nude model”. Detectives believe the ad was posted by the perpetrator of the rape.

When the woman pulled into a parking lot about 9 p.m. to use her cell phone, the suspect suddenly appeared, got into her car and held a knife to her throat. He made her drive around for a short period of time before telling her to pull over. Then he forced her to perform a sex act. He took items from the car and the woman.

Detectives identified a fingerprint, which was found in the victim’s vehicle. They arrested the suspect on Jan. 8 as he left his Skyway residence.

Another similar case occurred in Skyway on Dec. 20. In that case the suspect reportedly got into the car while the 21 year-old victim was stopped at a red light. Again he held a knife to her throat and eventually had her perform a sex act. Detectives believe it is likely the same man is responsible for this rape as well, and are doing additional follow-up work.

Dec. 9, two women went to Skyway as a result of their Craigslist ad and were sexually assaulted by a man whose M.O. and description matched the other two cases. That investigation is also continuing.

Due to the connection to Craigslist in at least two of these cases, it is a possibility there are other victims who may not have reported the crime. Any additional victims should call the sheriff’s office at 206-296-3311, 24 hours or 911 to report the crime.

The state patrol is reporting a critical injury accident at 5:37 p.m. today on state Route 18.

An 18-year-old Auburn man riding a Yamaha motorcycle struck a blocking disabled vehicle driven by a 30-year-old woman from Kent. She was driving a 1996 Dodge Neon.

The man was driving eastbound on SR 18 and hit the car at about Southeast 304th Street

The man was transported to Harborview.


View Larger Map

The Tahoma High We the People team won the state championship.

The team will go on to represent the state at the national championship in Washington D.C. in April.

The Reporter will d be publishing a story with pictures this week.

According to a preliminary report windows were broken out at the Maple Valley Community Center and Den sometime Friday night or early Saturday morning.

More details when available.

View Larger Map

A decomposed body was found yesterday, Jan. 7, by state DOT workers clearing brushing along I-5 just east of Federal Way.

The workers found the body about 2:30 p.m. near the 3100 block of South 298th.

Due to the advanced state of decomposition, it was impossible to tell the gender or cause of death.  The remains were turned over to the Medical Examiner’s Office.

The following is a press release from the state Attorney General’s office.

Attorney General Rob McKenna and Secretary of State Sam Reed announced today they will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court the recent 9^th Circuit decision granting felons the right to vote in Washington.

The 9^th Circuit yesterday in Farrakhan v. Gregoire applied the federal Voting Rights Act to Washington’s felon disenfranchisement law and overturned Washington law barring felons in prison and under community supervision from voting.

“This case began back in 1996, it’s been to the 9^th Circuit twice already and now it’s time for the US Supreme Court to step in to resolve the split between the federal courts of appeals that the 9^th Circuit has created,” McKenna said. “The felon disenfranchisement laws of Washington and 47 other states hang in the balance.”

“The US Constitution, the Washington constitution and the laws of 47 other states all agree that felons may lose this important civil right when they violate the rights of others by committing egregious violations of the law,” Reed said. “I’m pleased the Attorney General will be taking this case to the US Supreme Court and expect a positive outcome.”

The decision will not go into effect until the 9^th Circuit issues its mandate on the case which is not likely to occur for at least 14 days.

In the meantime, the Attorney General’s Office will file a motion to stay the mandate, which would prevent the Secretary of State and county auditors from having to devise new voting systems to accommodate incarcerated felons and would prevent felons in prison or under community supervision from exercising their right to vote until the matter has been decided by the US Supreme Court.

The request for appeal to the US Supreme Court, known as a petition for certiorari, must be filed within 90 day.

If the U.S. Supreme Court accepts the case, McKenna plans to argue it himself. He argued and won a similar felon voting case before the Washington Supreme Court in 2007.

The following is a press release from Secretary of State Sam Reed’s office.
Washington’s longtime constitutional ban on voting by felons has been tossed out by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The state is expected to appeal.
The surprise ruling contradicts holdings in three other circuits, with cases out of New York, Massachusetts and Florida, and it may well be up to the U.S. Supreme Court to settle the conflict. If Tuesday’s ruling were the last word on the case, it would allow inmates currently behind bars to vote in Washington. The ruling could also be the basis of litigation in the eight other states in the 9th Circuit – Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Montana, Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, plus Guam.
Secretary of State Sam Reed, Washington’s chief elections officer, said, “We were quite surprised at today’s 2-1 ruling by the 9th Circuit, and we would expect to appeal the decision. We certainly support racial equality and efforts to make our criminal justice system free of bias. But we also support our state constitutional ban on voting by felons who are under Department of Corrections supervision.
“We believe that the loss of voting rights is an appropriate and reasonable sanction for society to demand of felons while they are incarcerated or on community supervision. Most states have this sensible policy. Once inmates satisfy their prison sentence and community supervision, our Legislature has recently provided that they may apply to have their voting rights restored as part of reintegrating back into the community.
“We are hopeful that this longstanding policy will be upheld as this case is appealed further. We look forward to the courts giving some finality to this question, which has been in litigation since 1996.”
The case was originally brought nearly 14 years ago in U.S. District Court in Eastern Washington by Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan and three other black inmates, and by a Native American and a Latino inmate. The inmates said minorities are disproportionately prosecuted and sentenced to prison, and that their automatic disenfranchisement violates the federal Voting Rights Act.
The Appeals bench concurred with the inmates that the state’s criminal justice system is “infected” with racial discrimination and that the challengers don’t have to prove that that it is intentional or racially motivated discrimination. The court said that “based on uncontroverted facts,” it would rely on academic research that showed Washington’s African Americans were over nine times more likely to be in prison than Caucasians, even though the ratio of black-to-white arrest for violent crimes was less than 4:1. Another study showed that Native Americans were twice as likely to be searched by state troopers than whites, blacks more than 70 percent more likely to be searched and Latinos more than 50 percent more likely. Other studies were cited.
The challengers didn’t assert that the felon disenfranchisement law was enacted with intent to discriminate, but said that when the law is applied in the context of the criminal justice system, it is more likely for minorities to lose their voting rights. That’s illegal, they contended.
The court held that the Voting Rights Act, adopted by Congress in 1965 for the purpose of eliminating racial discrimination in voting, does not permit disenfranchising voters who are behind bars when the criminal justice system is skewed toward greater incarceration of minorities. The judges also said it is irrelevant that the state Legislature last year approved a new law that takes away a felon’s voting rights only while in the direct custody of the Department of Corrections. Previously, voting rights were restored only after restitution and other costs were repaid, a matter of years for some ex-cons.
Three other circuits, the First, Second and Eleventh, have reached the opposite conclusion about felon voting. The decision in the First, out of Massachusetts, was in 2009; the 2nd Circuit decision, in a New York case, was in 2006; and the 11th Circuit, out of Florida, was in 2005.
In a strongly worded dissent, Judge M. Margaret McKeown said her colleagues have “charted territory that none of our sister circuits have dared to explore.” At the least, the court should have remanded the case for further fact-finding on some of the key points, she wrote.
State Elections Director Nick Handy said the conflicting opinions makes it likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will be asked to take the Farrakhan case on appeal.
The 9th Circuit opinion was written by Judge A. Wallace Tashima and signed by himself and Stephen Reinhardt.
Deputy Solicitor General Jeff Even of the Attorney General’s office said attorneys will review the lengthy opinion and consider the next steps. The state could ask the full 9th Circuit, rather than a three-judge panel, to consider the case. That would involve a hearing before 11 judges. Another option would be to ask the Supreme Court to hear the case, he confirmed.
The case has had a very long shelf life. It was originally filed in Spokane in 1996. The District Court upheld the state’s disenfranchisement law. That was appealed to the 9th Circuit, which reversed and sent it back to the district court for further consideration. The court’s subsequent ruling, along in favor of the state, was appealed a second time to the 9th Circuit. Last year, the state Legislature, at Reed’s request, amended the law to allow restoration of voting rights after an ex-convict completes his or her prison sentence and community supervision. Previously, an ex-convict also would have to satisfy all outstanding financial obligations, including court costs and restitution, before applying for restoration of voting rights.