JOHN KOSTER, candidate for Washington's First Congressional District – which includes parts of Kirkland, Redmond and Woodinville and extends north to the Canadian border – holds many of the same views as Todd Akin, who is the GOP’s candidate for U.S. Senate in Missouri.
Akin recently took the deplorable public position that certain forms of rape are legitimate and that in no case should a woman, even in cases of rape, be allowed to terminate her pregnancy. It is clear that Koster shares Akin’s stance on rape and abortion: In an April 2012 Seattle Times article, Koster was quoted as saying that he “opposes abortions under any circumstances, including incest and rape.”
But there are other terrifying ways in which Koster is Akin’s replica. For example, Koster would kill the education department. During a June 2010 Snohomish County Liberty Action Committee event, Koster said that we need to “abolish the Department of Education.” Akin too shares those views.
According to an August 17 Kansas City Star article, Akin said that he is against federal spending for the National School Lunch Program, which provides cash and surplus food for nearly 650,000 school lunches in Missouri each day. And in response to the question “Is it something the federal government should do?” Akin answered: “No. … I think the federal government should be out of the education business.”
Koster denies climate change. In response to the following question posed at a June 3, 2010 Snohomish County meeting, “Do you believe man is responsible for climate change,” Koster stated his answer clearly: “No. Absolutely not.” Akin is no different.
Addressing the House floor, Akin – a member of the House Science and Technology Committee – called the threat of global warming a “comedy.” Specifically, he said “This whole thing strikes me if it weren’t so serious as being a comedy you know. … Who in the world wants to put politicians in charge of the weather anyways? What a dumb idea….”
Koster and Akin are both Tea Party proponents. During a June 3, 2010 Snohomish County meeting, Koster said “The Tea Party movement…is one of the most exciting things that’s happening to this country for a long time.” As part of that Tea Party, Koster shares its goal of privatizing social security. During a February 16, 2010 speech given at a luncheon on Whidbey Island, Koster claimed that we would be better off if social security, Medicaid and Medicare were handled within “individual retirement accounts.” Put another way, “privatized.”
In 2001, Akin co-signed a letter to President Obama’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security calling for privatization. The letter said “Social Security reform must offer younger workers the opportunity to improve their rates of return using personal retirement accounts.”
And it is no surprise that Koster opposes same sex marriage. In fact, Koster believes it undermines “the very cornerstone of our society.” And Akin? Well, during a 2006 speech made to the House floor, Akin said that “Anybody who knows something about the history of the human race knows that there is no civilization which has condoned homosexual marriage widely and openly that has long survived.”
There are other similarities: Koster is pro-gun. He would reject “any legislation” that might curtail a person’s ability to own a gun, while Akin willingly advertises his “A” lifetime rating with the NRA. Koster, like Akin, supports increased domestic oil drilling. During a 2010 radio interview, Koster said plainly that we should “Drill here and drill now.” And despite the recent Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster, Koster still takes the position that our current “regulatory structure is, believe me, more than enough at this current time to protect the environment.” Akin is no different.
In fairness to Koster, according to an August 20 Seattle Times article, Koster criticized Akin’s recent rape statements as being “reprehensible and bizarre.” But Koster added that he wanted people to know that “not all pro-life people are crazy.” That might be the case. But it is more likely the case that Koster is not among the exceptions, but instead embodies the rule.
_____
Trent Latta is an attorney and lives in Kirkland. He may be reached at TrentLatta@gmail.com.
If the laws were changed to protect women in these situations, and if the rapists received longer jail times, women may in fact feel differently. As a party we should focus on this and change the laws so more women consider not having abortions. On this we most definitely agree.
I think you misunderstood Chris. he said he doesn't believe the rapist should have access and believes the laws should be changed to protect women in these situations.
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/former-gov-charlie-crist-heres-why-im-backing-barack-obama/1247631
I especially appreciated his comment: "...the president served as the nation's calm through a historically turbulent storm." Ah yes... he has definitely been calm... I rather wish that other emotions, and policies, were evident to improve the economic conditions for all; not just his cash bundlers posing as "green energy" peddlers or bailing out union auto workers at the expense of the American tax payers and bond holders.
Proposed National Energy Policy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Task_Force) Using energy wisely is cited as the first challenge for the nation, as this will lessen the burden on our finances and the environment. The second listed challenge was to repair and add onto the existing network of refineries, pipelines, generators and transmission lines. It was stated that the refining and distribution of natural gas was effected by an inefficient and inadequate infrastructure, and that this issue could be remedied by 38,000 miles of new pipeline and 255,000 miles of distribution lines. The third challenge is "increasing energy supplies while protecting the environment
Solyndra is child's play in comparison. All you do is trot out the Republican talking points...
So you feel that mention of Solyndra is a “Republican talking point.” I mentioned Solyndra only because most people know about it. If I had mentioned the $1.6 billion to NRG Engery, or the $646 million to Exelon, or the $737 million to SolarReserve, would you know what I was talking about? You can’t dismiss a point merely because it is often talked about among Republicans. You can argue the merits of the argument, but it will be an uphill battle for you with Solyndra. Incidentally, I never argue military actions on the issue of budget or cost. In my mind, you justify the action based on the need, but you don’t make a decision based on the cost. If you factor in the cost, you might win the battle but lose the country.
In a race of a US competitor vs a Soviet, the US came in first and the Soviet came in 2nd. The Soviet press reported it as "US comes in next to last and we came in 2nd". It's the truth, but is it HONEST? I think we all know the edgy morality involved in this story. What do Trent Latta and this Soviet story have in common? A LOT! Shame on you Trent for not only transparent distortions but also for clearly NOT identifying that you have a personal interest in promoting DelBene - by slamming her opponent via inferences (as Chris adequately noted). Not nice.
Trent
Trent
That's the only way it could be true that Koster's views have been demonstrated wrong by history, AND have DelBene be a reasonable alternative on these same issues.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJE3BzD5vTg
Has your arguing style devolved into finding controversial statements, including those for which the speaker has apologized, and claiming that those statements represent the core beliefs of those who speak well of them? If so, I can't wait until you post the video of Rev. Wright screaming "God Dxxxx America" and our President saying that he won't disavow him any more than he would his grandmother. Is that a fair point of argument? Honest debate or slimy politics? If so, I guess we can all go to our political web sites and share 'moments from the past' or we can discuss issues.
It's much more than devolved - your tactics show desperation Trent. Btw, I like listening to Rush - he's an ENTERTAINER, not a political figure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=hwQWuQVE6sw
John Koster is the one who wrote a letter praising Rush Limbaugh, not me. If you think that type of politics stinks, then take it up with Koster. Also, Rev Wright may have said those things Ken James referred to, but Obama didn't. Once again, what I've stated here are comments made by, and positions held by, none other than John Koster.
Whether Akin said what he said or not, the fact remains that these are John Koster's personal views. Trent
Since you claim that Obama never said that, how does praising Rush mean anything? Using your exact same inference, how does what Rush say have anything to do with Koster? Remember, Rush is an ENTERTAINER and says what he says for audience ratings. What Wright said is for a very different reason. Trent, put on your big boy pants here - Obama apparently agreed enough that he wouldn't repudiate the remarks and said so (video makes that clear). Interesting isn't it what your sort of tactic result in when applied to clearly the same sort of 'guilt by association'. Only thing is, I like Rush (along with millions) and I don't think many people like Rev Wright's remarks. What say you now Trent?
http://kirkland.patch.com/blog_posts/back-to-charter-school