Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's deficit has shrunk to less than two points- putting him in a great position as we surge towards November's general election.  Voters across this state are making it clear that they want change at the highest levels in Olympia.  Dino Rossi can be that change.  A common-sense approach to limited government, run like it should be- a business- is what this state needs.

 Rossi has experience in both the private and public sectors, and has earned his living running a company, and signing the FRONT of paychecks.

Just a quick Primary reminder; this election will come down to  turnout, and several state legislature races are trying to survive the Top 2. Remember, our Republican candidates are not necessarily guaranteed spots on November's ballot.

With the catastrophe of 2004 still painfully in the memories of Washington voters, the importance of turnout can never be overstated.  The winner of today's primary will gain an immense advantage in momentum, likely leading to a boost in fundraising.

 As the Election nears, the campaigns are only getting more intense, particularly the gubernatorial race.  While more and more attacks from the incumbent begin to surface, one obstacle continues to be a source of conflict: truth.  Read some of the attacks, and the facts on the link below.

Don't Know Dino - Get the Truth behind the attacks.

By now I'm sure that all of our Washington readers have heard the new radio ads comparing Dino Rossi to George Bush. On issues such as climate change, Roe v Wade, transportation, and health care, the ad makes factually inaccurate claims about Mr. Rossi and then adds the phrase, "just like George Bush." Let's take a minute to step back here. Roe v. Wade? I must have missed the press release that announced Rossi's campaign for Supreme Court. At any rate, the Gregoire people have made it clear that their strategy is to attack Rossi. Next time it graces the airwaves, listen to the very end. The ad was not sponsored by a PAC or union. It was paid for by "friends of Chris Gregoire."

As Gregoire has assumed the office of Governor for the last four years, one would assume that her re-election campaign would be able to boast her accomplishments. Apparently not.

Similarly, the state Democratic Party has sponsored a spoof website, The Real Rossi, which again compares Rossi to the President. Surely the Democratic Party, while controlling the Legislature as well as the Governor's Office, would be able to boast some accomplishments? Wrong again.

The Democrats are back to the only campaign tactic they know; attacking their opponent, because they know they have no records of their own to promote, except of course for:

• The highest gas tax in the country
• Overbudget and overdue transportation projects
• Early release of violent felons
• Education debacles

C'mon, Chris, who says you don't have any records of achievement to promote?

The President today lifted the executive ban on offshore oil drilling, putting pressure on the Congress to act. At this point, the only barrier standing between the American people and lower gas prices is the Democratic Party. Remember, when the Democrats took control of the Congress, oil was trading at less than $75 a barrel. Last Friday, oil closed at $145.

We all love paying close to $4.50 a gallon for gas, don't we? Let's do our part to keep Pelosi and the gang around, shall we?

Now I'm willing to listen to what any candidate has to say, and I've never been one to blindly vote strictly on party lines, but if you happen to be one of those people who do NOT like paying close to $4.50 a gallon, then remember this: a vote for ANY Democrat in ANY one of the 435 Congressional districts nationwide is a vote for Nancy Pelosi and the $145/barrel Congress.

The list of dignitaries now supporting Senator Barack Obama's candidacy for President now includes former secretary of state Madeleine Albright. Albright publicly condoned Obama's pledge to meet with enemies of our country (i.e. Iran). Very well; let's assume that unconditional meetings with Ahmedinejad would be a good idea. "Who is going to do the talking?," asks Dinesh D'Souza in a recent piece in Town Hall.

In order to effectively negotiate with leaders such as Ahmedinejad, Kim Jong Il, and Hugo Chavez, a President must possess the experience necessary to do so. D'Souza does a fantastic job summarizing the State Department's lack of effort to go after bin Laden, including how popular media were able to find him, yet the federal government was not.

Read the whole piece here and decide for yourself whether Obama's latest endorsement is a credible one.

Senator Obama this week continued to refine his position on the Iraq war, saying that he would call in the "joint chief of staff" and ask them to end the war. Whether the war should be ended immedately is a separate issue. But the manner in which Obama is going about this speaks volumes about his ignorance regarding our military command structure.

First off, any candidate aspiring to be the commander in cheif of our armed services should know that each branch of the military has it's own chief of staff, thus making "chiefS of staff" plural. Hence the word "joint".

Admittedly, that is a cheap shot and mundane detail. The real point here is that the joint chiefs of staff are not responsible for combat strategy during wartime. That duty lies with secretary of each department. Mr. Obama fails to realize that each branch of our military essentially has two separate heirarchies; one career military and one civilian. The members of the JCS are career military; they advise the President; the President does not advise them.

The Iraq war, and Mr. Obama's position on it are one issue. However, ignorance about the structure of our military is inexcusable. How can the commander in chief of our military not be familiar with the chain of command? Obama has proven once again the degree to which his inexperience will affect his performance.

Imagine this situation in a different context. You start at a new job as a lower-to-mid manager at your local Starbucks. After 143 days of work experience, you start to ask around your store to see about becoming the CEO. A month later, you offically announce your candidacy for the position.

This is exactly what Barack Obama did. He was inaugurated on January 4, 2005. 143 working days later, on January 17, 2007, he formed his exploratory committee. Now, that is two years, but the Senate had actually been in session for 143 days. That translates into a little over five months of work experience. With five months of leadership experience at the federal level, is Obama really qualified to be the leader of the free world?

Hey MoveRed readers! Want to recieve updates when new content is posted, without having to constantly check the page? Subscribe to our RSS feed by clicking on the orange button at the bottom of the page, and registered users will automatically be notified when new entries are posted.

The KCGOP team, as well as volunteers from MoveRed set up a booth yesterday at the Hispanic Seafair at Seattle Center. Right next to the former home of your Seattle Supersonics. A woman came up to us and at first seemed interested in our literature, but upon seeing the word
"republican", snarled and moved on. She then stopped and came back and asked, "are you for real?" and followed up with, "are you ****ing serious."

The woman, wearing two buttons that proudly declared "yo soy democratica" and "si se puede!" then suggested that I have my head examined, and shuttered and continued on her way. On the fourth of July, a gentleman in Burien told us that Republicans were "not welcome in his city." The list of such anecdotes could go on and on.

We at KCGOP feel that crucial to the elections process is an open exchange of ideas, not personal attacks on volunteers. We feel that every citizen is entitled their own beliefs and values, and often must "agree to disagree." Regardless of one's views, comments like the ones above are worse than polarizing; they are rude.

Such rudeness and blatant disrespect do no good for either party. One gentleman came up to our booth and challenged us on immigration policy. While our opinions differed, we were able to engage in a polite and respectful discussion on the issue. Such a dialog is more than welcome, for it challenges both sides to articulately and carefully examine their points of view. The more one considers their opinions, and why they believe the way they do, the more informed their notions become.