Please remember, VOTE THE PRIMARY -
that is where most judicial elections are decided.
2008 Judicial Forum Election Picks for Washington State
INTRODUCTION
As most of you know, a year and a half ago, I fell off a roof and shattered my pelvis, severely. Because of this, I have had less time to review judicial cases and activities and, in some ways, I feel like I am getting out of the loop. We have had to shut down the Judicial Forum website because the coding was not compatible with the new server and I did not have time to remodel the site to conform to the standards. Furthermore, over the years, fewer and fewer people were going to the site, largely because Judicial Forum maintained a Biblical emphasis and there have been several secular sites established to offset our influence. It is sad to say, even the majority of professing Christians are ashamed of Christians who continue to use the Bible as a standard in the political arena.
Not to worry - if you are still looking for Judicial Forum's material and archives, you will find them on my personal website, http://cominus.com and if the demand is there, I will eventually rebuild and update the Judicial Forum site. A word of caution: if you do not like the idea of mixing God and politics, especially if you believe Jesus Christ is only good for salvation from fire and has no authority over men and nations, stay far away from cominus.com.
Here is our report. We endeavor to remain unbiased toward our own views, but biased toward the candidates view of the need to judge by the Constitution and the law or their need to rewrite the law, or legislate form the bench. I hope this is helpful for you and your friends.
Sincerely, Dean Isaacson
SUPREME COURT POSTION 3: MICHAEL BOND
Mary Fairhurst's position on abortion and same-sex marriage is very well known - she is not on the Biblical side of the issue.
Michael Bond has a good understanding of the Constitution. He is not swayed by corporations, environmentalist, social justice types and other special interests. He understands the difference between making judgments according to the law and rewriting the law to fit the purposes of the bench.
SUPREME COURT POSTION 4: CHARLES FRANK VULLIET
Charles Johnson is the incumbent. He has had a lackluster career, which makes him the doll-baby of the secular "conservative" groups. Since the court has had the influence of Justice Sanders and Jim Johnson on the bench, he has tended to side with the conservative view a little more often than he did prior. He appears to lack a foundation and tends to drift with the flow.
Charles Frank Vulliet has come into the limelight by refusing to sign Judge William Baker's bogus WCEJC pledge. Baker's goal is to get candidates to say nothing of their opponent on the pretext of hosting ethical campaigns, but the real purpose is to maintain the status quo and prevent whistleblowers from running for office. Vulliet understands the difference between a smear campaign and informing the public. He is not a conservative, at least not wearing the hat; but I think he will be a little to the right of Charles Johnson.
James Beecher thinks of himself as a consensus builder. He wants the length of written opinions to be reduced and all dissenting opinions combined into one document. The purpose is to project a more unified body. Outside of the usual, feel-good answers to the question of "why?", this model can only serve to bring the ultimate demise to justice. The last thing we need justices to be are team players.
COURT OF APPEALS, DIV 2, DIST 2: TIM FORD
Joyce Robin Hunt is the incumbent. She is a political animal and the sweetheart of the liberals and abortion crowd.
Tim Ford has been on the right side of property rights cases. He has protected citizens from overweening government and he understands that a judge is to determine what the law is - not what it should be.
COURT OF APPEALS, DIV 3, DIST 1: HARVEY DUNHAM
Kevin Korsmo is qualified. Not especially good, not especially bad; and he has been on the bench a long time but that is no reason the citizenry are obligated to vest him in his career.
Harvey Dunham has long held the Constitution and the law as the standard for judicial decisions, through the years practicing law and his term on the superior court bench. He is the man of the hour.
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: TIM BRADSHAW
Susan Amini, Tim Bradshaw and Suzanne Parisien are running for this seat. They have all chased after and received the endorsement of racial, women, democrat and labor groups. Tim Bradshaw appears to be the lesser of the three evils.
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 10: LES PONOMARCHUK
Jean Bouffard has targeted the support of environmentalists, democrats and phfrszxcdf. . . (can't read my notes).
Regina Cahan has the endorsement of Bobby Bridge, the DUI justice that holds herself fully accountable, but not to the point of stepping down from her seat. She has the endorsement of the faux-republican Judy Maleng, who is chairing the campaign of another liberal judge this year. And, she has the endorsement of that rabid, anti-family prosecutor Rebecca Roe. Outside of that, she is chasing after minorities and democrats.
Les Ponomarchuk is the current court commissioner. This is, obviously, a career move. We have little idea of his judicial philosophy but it appears he is taking a more conservative approach in seeking endorsements.
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 22: JULIA GARRATT
Rebeccah Graham is looking for the support of women and democrats and has won the support of Ron Sims and Ed Murray.
Holly Hill - beautiful name; but she has the support of women, race and NARAL.
Julia Garratt has the support of the police, republicans and a few democrats. She appears to be on the conservative side of the mainstream. Her main downfall in this election cycle is her webmaster: If you Google her name, she does not show up until page three.
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 26: MATTHEW HALE
Laura Gene Middaugh took out Jeannette Burrage two elections ago and she is still running on the theme of how she rescued the public from that horrible judge who had the audacity to insist that female attorneys came to court with their clothes on. By her own choice, she lives in Jeannette Burrage's shadow because she cannot live up to her accomplishments. She is also the wife of Adam Kline.
Matthew Hale has a second feather in his cap: he made that liberal pixel-waster, horsesass.org, mad because he targeted support from people who were in opposition to Laura's liberal husband's overweening regulations. What a crime, that he would target a special interest that consisted of regular people instead of the victimized minorities!
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 37: JEAN RIETSCHEL
Nic Corning has received support from minority, labor and NARAL.
Jean Rietschel has a conventional approach to her campaign and appears to be seeking conventional endorsements.
Barbara Mack is chasing after the liberals, democrats and environmentalists. She is the co-founder of the Environmental Policy Center. Her campaign is chaired by the faux-republican, Judy Maleng and she is endorsed by the RINO Reagan Dunn (who was named after Ronald Reagan and the similarity ends there) and by a retired governor of the State of Idaho (why? - that is like Barack Obama campaigning in Europe!).
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 53: ANN DANIELI
Mariane Spearman has gone after every endorsement in the book - and the list is long; most are labor, attorney, democrats and NARAL.
Ann Danieli has pursued general endorsements from citizens and police. We know little else about either candidate.
PIERCE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 9: MICHAEL HECHT
Sergio Armijo is the incumbent. His life and his decisions seem to be filled with indiscretions and catering to minorities, especially Hispanic.
Michael Hecht appears to be a qualified attorney with a good head on his shoulders and a common sense approach to the position. He is pursuing conventional endorsements.
SNOHOMISH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 6: GEORGE APPEL
Joseph Wilson, George Appel and Jim Johanson are all running for this seat. There appears to be little difference in the judicial philosophy of the three and even the crowd they run in, however, George Appel appears to be the lesser of the three evils and may even temper his evil by his church activities. This does not mean he has a Biblical or a constitutional foundation.
SNOHOMISH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 8: DAVID HULBERT
David Hulbert is running for the seat he lost four years ago to Eric Lucas. David Hulbert has a history of conservatism; he understands the Constitution; he does not legislate from the bench and he understands that we are created in the image of God.
Eric Lucas was an electrician who changed his career to law (that explains his business failure). When he changed careers, he should have become a politician, because that is what he is practicing from behind the bar. Confusion, with an agenda, seems to be what sets the course for his life.
SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: GREG WEBER
Mark Vovos makes little known of himself or his views outside the fact that he runs in the privileged crowd. The same applies to Annette Plese.
Greg Weber is a prosecutor and seeks general endorsements. He would bring law to the courts, instead of catering to the good old boys. The prosecutors are the best choice in both seats for Spokane County.
SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 10: DAVID STEVENS
Linda Tompkins injects her political left ideals into her decisions. The Spokane Review endorses her - but it must have been an attempt at humor because their article said she was a bad judge and that David Stevens would make a good judge but that we still needed to keep Linda as judge. Beam me up!
David Stevens has been an effective prosecutor and is a strong conservative. He puts the law ahead of his views and will make his rulings based on that instead of rewriting it.
BENTON and FRANKLIN SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: BRUCE SPANNER
Salvador Mendoza Jr has pursued general endorsements and police.
Bruce Spanner has pursued general endorsements and fire. He has done much pro-bono work for Christian charities and he appears to have a conservative view of the law.
Jerri Potts is the current court commissioner, without endorsement and it appears she could come to the court biased by her single-issue regarding abused children.
BENTON and FRANKLIN SUPERIOR COURT, POS 5: VIC VANDERSCHOOR
Vic VanderSchoor has pursued general endorsements and police. He appears to be a good attorney.
Bob Thompson has served on city council and been a two-term mayor of Richland. Do we need another politician on the bench?
CLARK COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 2: ERNEST EDSEL
John Wulle is the incumbent. He has been under fire for flippant indiscretions spoken at a workshop in San Francisco regarding gays and blacks. I agree, these might have been better unspoken, but we all say politically incorrect things from time-to-time and I agree with John, that he should not have to wear his robe everywhere he goes. However, he loses my support in one of his recent rulings where he enhanced the sentence of a man for possession because he possessed the drugs in jail when the reason for the possession was he was jailed with the drugs on him and they were not removed prior to incarceration! Fortunately, and no love lost to the druggie, the appellate court reversed him and even, almost, said, 'duh!' While one case is not enough to remove a judge, these two things together show that he may be becoming too comfortable in his position and that he may have a drinking problem.
Ernest Edsel is a grandstander and may well, even, be the greatest attorney in the world - doing all his work pro-bono while living on a family trust of eighteen thousand per year, and eating granola. He is well written, although liberally biased. He doesn't explain why he came from the big city to make a name in this tiny, five pub town but he can't be any worse than Morris Dees.
CLARK COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 5: NO CHOICE
David Evans and Robert Harris are running for the seat that Robert currently holds. There appears to be no difference in the candidates.
GRANT COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 2: JOHN KNODELL
John Knodell is the prosecuting attorney for Grant County. There have been some problems in the department, but nothing more than you would find in any small town. We know nothing of his opponent Douglas Anderson and it appears this is intentional on Anderson's part. We will have to go with the prosecutor on this one.
ISLAND COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 2: CRAIG PLATT
Craig Platt is the president of Washington Defenders Association. He doesn't know how to break a paragraph. Fortunately, superior court decisions are seldom published. Otherwise, he appears to be a qualified attorney.
Vicki Churchill is the incumbent and has been a rabid anti-Religious Right all her political life and her politics does not stray far from her bench.
KITSAP SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: BRUCE DANIELSON
Bruce Danielson appears to have a solid grasp of the Constitution and law. He warns against legislating from the bench and he has the endorsement of Justice Richard Sanders.
Jeannette Dalton is a criminal attorney and has a social view of justice. That may be her job as an advocate for felons, but it is a dangerous view as a judge.
LINCOLN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: JOHN STROHMAIER
John Strohmaier, Joshua Grant and Ron Shepherd are running for this seat but we know little about any of them. Generally, when in doubt, vote for the prosecutor, which is Ron. However, in this case, we are making an exception: we are going to recommend the man who has run for this seat most often - and he appears to be a good attorney - John Strohmaier.
MASON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: DAN GOODELL
Dan Goodell, Amber Finlay and Richard Adamson are running for this seat. They all appear to be competent and qualified: Goodell has been a pro-tem; Finlay is a municipal judge; and Adamson is a court commissioner. However, Goodell appears to have a little more respect for the law, rather than the power of the bench.
MASON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 2: MONTY COBB
Toni Sheldon fails in areas of family law. She has liberal views and exercises her views from the bench in disregard for the law.
Monty Cobb is a deputy prosecutor. We think he will do less legislating from the bench.
SAN JUAN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: JOHN LINDE
Randall Gaylord is the county attorney but we think John Linde will do a better job protecting people's property and containing over-regulation.
THURSTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 3: CHARLES WILLIAMS
Charles Williams is a judge pro-tem and he is endorsed by Justice Richard Sanders.
Carol Murphy is endorsed by Christine Gregoire.
THURSTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 7: GARY TABOR
Gary Tabor is the incumbent judge. The mainstream hacks love him, though he has done a rather lackluster job. Ed Holm is the county Prosecuting Attorney and sometimes he can be quite nasty - as they go. They both have a one-hundred percent fail rate (two cases each) in the Judicial Forum archives. Eeney, meeney - no, we are not going to go with the meany. We are reluctantly recommending the liberal incumbent.
WALLA WALLA SUPERIOR COURT, POS 1: JOHN LOHRMANN
John Lohrmann is a professing Christian - but don't expect him to uphold those values in public. However, he is a good attorney and a conservative, although mainstream and in many respects, he is a RINO.
Richard Wernette is the current court commissioner and, in that respect, probably well qualified for the job. Other than that, we know little about him, so we are going to recommend the poison we do know.
WHATCOM COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 3: CHUCK SNYDER
Douglas Shepherd may be a qualified attorney but it appears he will be siding with the socialists and environmentalists and this is too sensitive a county to play with those issues.
Chuck Snyder is the incumbent, and sometimes might have too high of a view of himself. But it appears his decisions have been consistent and conventional and he does not seem to lean toward a bias. Besides, he has an avid interest in sports cars and antique vehicles and his wife works, as a chemist, for an oil refinery - there must be some solid values there.
YAKIMA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 5: DAVID ELOFSON
Rob Lawrence-Berry appears to be well qualified and has a mainstream church background. However, David Elofson appears to be a little more conservative - and his wife's name is "Gun." Going with my guts on this one.
END
ADDENDUM
NOTE: These are comments from http://thereaganwing.com and are posted here because they are useful for explaining issues related to this report. To read the entire comments, click here.
I agree with cominus’ conclusion about Court of Appeals Division 3 District 1, but he has a couple facts incorrect. Kevin Korsmo was appointed as Judge of the Court of Appeals, Division Three, by Governor Chris Gregoire on February 13, 2008[site omitted]. Cominus says that Judge Korsmo has been “on the bench a long time.” That statement is factually incorrect.
Also, Harvey Dunham was a judge in municipal court [site omitted]. Cominus says that Harvey Dunham was on the superior court bench. That statement is factually incorrect.
I support Harvey Dunham for Judge in Division 3 of the Washington State Court of Appeals. Harvey’s record as a judge shows that he will not impose his own agenda or personal opinion in cases before him.
Matthew F. Pfefer
Attorney at Law
Spokane, WA
Matthew - True and I apologize for the indiscretions - both. Re Korsmo, he has been around a long time, it just seemed to me at the time of writing that he had been on the bench a long time.
This year, I had determined I was not going to review the judicial candidates as I have in every election since 1994. This was largely due to me being out of the loop and a death in the family that required my traveling across the States. Furthermore, because of the several new judicial organizations that had sprouted up, I thought nobody would ask me. However, a couple days ago, four organizations got hold of me requesting the report and they all had deadlines of less than forty-eight hours.
This was a huge undertaking and I had to rush. I am sure there are a few more inaccuracies and there are a couple recommendations that I am having second thoughts about. However, I have a policy, whenever I submit a report, it stands as written. I rest upon the severability clause.
In that respect, your input will serve to inform the readers and that will be helpful to them. Thank you for your input and thank you for supporting Harvey Dunham. He is a solid and good man - and he loves old cars, there must be some value in that.
* * *
Thank you Dean, for providing this insiteful review of all the candidates. I especially appreciate, how in the cases of “the lesser of two (or three) evils,” you didn’t just endorse the person, but didn’t hold back in pointing out their shortcomings. For those of us who don’t like voting for any evil, you’ve given us what we needed to make our decisions.
However, I do have a question in the case of the Snohomish Co. Superior Court Pos. 6. Can you expand on what you mean by “There appears to be little difference in the judicial philosophy of the three and even the crowd they run in”? Will you describe that judicial philosophy that all three appear to share, why you believe this to be true, and what is the crowd they run in? I have my suspicions, but I’d like to hear what you have to say. - Michelle
Michelle,
None of the candidates will discuss their judicial philosophy outside the usual, safe boundaries of experience, fairness, access, etc. A candidate with a foundation with usually say so in public. The reasonable conclusion is these men have no foundation, this is a career and political move for each one.
George Appel is new to the scene since I left Snohomish County almost ten years ago (1999, for the record). So I never watched him. Of the three, however, Johanson, has the most democrat and victim group endorsements; Appel has the most conservative-label endorsements; the rest of the endorsements from moderates and RINOs are fairly equally spread out, with some overlap.
Their endorsements indicate their crowds, so I imagine Appel running in similar crowds as the other two. At political functions, you will see Wilson and Johanson surrounded by the moderate and RINO crowd. There is no reason for a strong conservative to hang out with them. OK, now someone is going to write in that they are conservative and they have touched Wilson or Johanson, or they saw a conservative touch the man or men. Go ahead, I am talking about the general rule and what I saw, several years ago.
A man is judged by the praise he receives [Pro 27:21]. If you want to know the character of the man, look at the endorsements they seek and report. George Appel has a great list of conservative endorsements, I am told. But a republican endorsement is not a conservative endorsement. Few of these “conservatives” will stand up for Christian - or conservative - principles when tested under fire. Most of them play the game for their own political power. Compared to the list for Wilson, there is not much difference, even if party labels change.
And a Hans Dunshee endorsement for Wilson does not negate a Renee Radcliff endorsement for Appel.
I hope this is helpful and answers your question.
* * *
According to the Christian Coalition of Washington, Supreme Court candidate Vulliet states that his political philosophy is that of President Carter and his judicial philosophy is that of Justice Souter. See any of the judicial versions of their voter guides at [site omitted]. - Matthew Pfefer
Matthew, True again, but compared to what?
Johnson is a constitutional evolutionist; he caters to minorities and disenfranchised victim groups; he is endorsed by environmentalists, unions, teachers unions, democrats and RINOs; he calls for increased funding both State and federal; and he has endorsed every judge appointed by Governor Gregoire - because of their appointment (he said so).
Vulliet, on the other hand, is calling on the Court to clean up the lower courts, increase professionalism both in paperwork and presentation (sounds a lot like Jeannette Burrage). He says he will call on the CJC to discipline judges who are not faithful to the law and those who do not decide the case before them because they modified the case to fit their own agenda (this is what we call legislating from the bench). He would implement rules that would reduce the bureaucracy of the courts, reducing the cost, rather than calling on the taxpayer to supplement the cost. He is not seeking endorsements.
Vulliet told CC where he stands, Johnson would not disclose his views - who is the most evil? Charles Johnson is very liberal and his liberalism is only tempered by his professionalism. I still believe Vulliet is to the right of Johnson - but you decide.
* * *
Something else was damaged when you fell off the roof. Judge Korsmo has not been on the bench a long time. He was appointed by the governor in February of this year and has served on the bench for six months. He has been described as brilliant over and over by some of the best legal minds in the state and has appeared before the stae Supreme Court on appeals more than any other attorney in the state. The endorsement page on his web site reads like a who's who of the Washington legal system.
Harvey Dunham is a croney. As to not denegrate him myself I just refer to the couple paragraphs from the Spokesman Review rundown on this years election:
“Dunham isn't rated by either group, but when county commissioners appointed him to a District Court seat in 2005, he failed to make the Bar Association's short list. Then-County Commissioner Phil Harris acknowledged that it was a political appointment based on personal friendship. Voters turned Dunham out of office in the 2006 primary. Dunham has no experience with appeals. Nobody in Spokane County has handled more of them than Korsmo. It's an easy choice.” - Spokesman-Review, July 27th
Your opinion has no facts.
“Kevin Korsmo is qualified. Not especially good, not especially bad; and he has been on the bench a long time but that is no reason the citizenry are obligated to vest him in his career.”
This is Korsmo's first election. It is not even a re-election.
I would suggest to the voters that they do their research in fact before listening to your fact-less opinion. Research both candidates and make up your own minds. I am a lifelong Republican. I'm not some liberal loon. As the S-R says, there is no choice. Korsmo is the one for the job.
Dean? MY OPINION? I suggest you get an MRI. - Gary Mickelson
Gary, Sorry to do such a non-credible job in your opinion. But, of course, you would say this because you are involved in the Kevin Korsmo campaign.
You must have missed my explanation of the Korsmo affair above. I am sorry, I am not perfect. However, that does not change the candidate I would recommend. Korsmo is a political groupie and this is a career move for him. Dunham is interested in the law and he is a well-known conservative - and conservatives have a tough time making any of the bar lists.
As for the appointments: you criticize Dunham for being appointed because of “friendship” but it doesn't bother you that Korsmo was appointed by Governor Gregoire. The commissioners knew they were appointing someone who would stay true to the law - this is why the chose Harvey Dunham. Gregoire appoints liberals in return for political favors - this is why she chose Kevin Korsmo. This does not bother you - a lifelong republican?
We all know the Spokesman-Review is a credible non-biased source of information. Regarding Tompkins - Stevens race, the S-R said Tompkins was not well qualified but Stevens was, however, we need to keep Tompkins on the bench. Now, that is an amazingly credible opinion, if there ever was one.
Maybe next election, Doug might think about asking the Seattle-Times and the Spokesman-Review to take over this job for me. After all, we know we can trust the media for unbiased candidate information.
BTW: thanks for your interest in my head. God protected it and had two MRIs that verify that. Thank you, God in heaven.
* * *
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, POS 37: JEAN RIETSCHEL shows up as being a 100% pro-choice candidate endorsed by NARAL Pro-Choice Washington.
So, why is she on your list as your pick instead of Barbara Mack ?
Thanks, Elizabeth Lowry
Well, Elizabeth. I guess this race is a case of three evils to pick from. Nic Corning and Barbara Mack appear to be the greatest evils. Jean Rietschel looked the least evil in our analysis. I am not sure how we missed Rietschel’s NARAL endorsement. Either we did our analysis before her endorsement was listed, or we just missed it; if so, I sincerely apologize.
A NARAL endorsement is death for us. However, in this race there are no candidates who are prolife.
Barbara Mack will do more damage to the justice system than any of her opponents. There are things we know about this race that we cannot put into print. However, I will say this much, Barbara Mack is not prolife and I believe she strategically did not seek the NARAL endorsement. She has been an activist in environmental and women’s causes and she has all the right connections to make bad things happen. She will continue the legacy of Anne Ellington and maybe even surpass her - and we don’t say this only because she endorses her.
We would have recommended a “do not vote” for this race but we thought it more harmful to allow Barbara Mack to win. Either NARAL candidate, in this case, would be a better choice. I wish I could say otherwise, but this is how we see it.
* * *
Here is how the results shake out:
The liberals won both Supreme Court seats, sixty-one and fifty-nine percent. The same goes for both the Appellate Court seats, sixty-four and fifty-three percent. That is going to send a harmful ripple against out Constitution and law for quite a distance.
King County Position 1:
Two will be going to the polls in November. They are Tim Bradshaw (46%) and Suzanne Parisien (30%). We still recommend TIM BRADSHAW.
King County Position 10:
Two for November are Regina Cahan (43%) and Les Ponomarchuck (27%). We still recommend LES PONOMARCHUK.
King County Position 22:
Two for November are Julia Garratt (35%) and Holly Hill (34%). We still recommend JULIA GARRATT.
King County Position 26 and 53 were won by the liberals.
King County Position 37:
Two in a DEAD HEAT for November are Jean Rietschel (38%) and Barbara Mack (38%). This is not just a dead finish race but these are both pro-death candidates. However, there are huge differences that we see in the effect of these evils. So, we are still reluctantly but strongly recommending JEAN RIETSCHEL.
Pierce County Position 9 went to the least liberal candidate Michael Hecht. The incumbent has done serious damage to the law and public respect for the bench. Michael Hecht should be a noticeable improvement.
Snohomish County Position 6:
Two for November are George Appel (40%) and Joseph Wilson (37%). We still recommend GEORGE APPEL. However, we caution all voters who believe he is a conservative - there is a difference between being a conservative and having conservative connections.
Snohomish County Position 8 went to the very liberal Eric Lucas (52%). Our man and fellow conservative, Dave Hulbert, fought a valiant effort to regain this seat. We hope he runs again.
Spokane County Positions 1 and 10 fell both to liberal candidates. We hope our fellow conservative, David Stevens, will run again.
Benton, Franklin Counties Position 1:
Two for November are Bruce Spanner (41%) and Salvador Mendoza (35%). We still recommend BRUCE SPANNER.
Benton, Franklin Counties Position 5 was won by our pick, Vic Vandershoor (58%).
Clark County Positions 2 and 5 were won by the more liberal candidates, seventy and fifty-eight percent.
Grant County Position 2 was won by our pick, John Knodell (64%).
Island County Position 2 was won by the perennial and liberal Vicki Churchill (72%).
Kitsap County Position 1:
Two for November are Jeanette Dalton (43%) and Bruce Danielson (33%). We still recommend BRUCE DANIELSON.
Lincoln County Position 1:
Two for November are John Strohmaier (39%) and Joshua Grant (35%). We still recommend JOHN STROHMAIER.
Mason County Position 1:
Two for November are Amber Finlay (40%) and John Goodell (32%). We still recommend DAN GOODELL.
Mason County Position 2 was won by the more liberal candidate.
San Juan County Position 1 was won by our pick, John Linde (63%).
Thurston County Position 3 was won by the more liberal candidate. Position 7 was won by our pick, the least liberal.
Walla Walla Position 1 was won by our pick, John Lohrmann (58%). However, just because he professes to be a Christian, don’t assume he has a solid foundation in biblical and Constitutional law.
Whatcom County Position 3 was won by our pick, Chuck Snyder (65%). I have never know any Chuck Snyder to have less than the highest integrity and ethics. Don’t let us down on this one, Chuck.
Yakima County Position 5 was won by our pick, David Elofson (56%).
AT THIS TIME, I would like to thank every participant in this blog [this was hosted at theReaganWing.com] for their comments, corrections and suggestions - even those who do not agree with us (but I do especially thank those who came to our defense and those who thanked us publicly). You are all what make this happen and make it interesting.
THANK YOU - from cominus.
* * *
Judicial Forum slogan
Setting the standard for attorneys and judges according to the Biblical definitions of law and civil governing. Judicial Forum is committed to reporting on the activities of the courts. We work to promote judicial accountability. We believe in a strict constructionist, or originalist, approach to law and oppose judicial activism, whether it be liberal or conservative. Cases are reviewed and reported. Judges and attorneys are graded on a pass-fail.