ladybuglit

In Spokane, we are soon being required to have hands-free cell phone capability while driving.    I found this article on beginning level wireless bluetooth for my Suzuki Aerio 2004.    Sounds like I need to check out some options.

	Hey, CNET, I have to ask because I’m thinking of buying: Is anything better than the Parrot EasyDrive for Bluetooth that stays in the car?	Submitted by: Tiffany, CNET forums

Brian Cooley Editor at large

Tiffany, your question brings up a common misconception. The Parrot EasyDrive you’re considering is actually a removable Bluetooth hands-free adapter that doesn’t have to stay in the car at all; it simply plugs into the cigarette lighter and has no connection to your car audio system. On the other hand,  How useful was this  tip for you?  Very  Somewhat  Not at all View results hands-free kits such as the Parrot CK3100 and the Motorola IHF1000 are actually wired into the car. They have the advantage of integrating your hands-free call into the car stereo for automatic muting when a call comes in and so on. Along with the Parrot EasyDrive, I would also have you look into the Motorola HF820, which is even slicker and smaller. Both are good entry-level hands-free units, but making the right choice will depend on three personal preferences: Do you drive a lot of different cars and value portability? If so, you want a unit such as the Parrot EasyDrive or the Motorola HF820. Do you want something that manages your car stereo during outgoing and incoming calls? If the answer is yes, you want a model such as the Parrot CK3100 or the Motorola IHF1000. Those two things notwithstanding, what’s your budget? The self-installed portable devices I mentioned are around $100. The installed kits are around $200, plus maybe that much again in installation fees at a local stereo shop. Either way, expect to get good call quality unless you drive a noisy sports car or a convertible with the top down. No speakerphone kit I’ve tried works well in those situations.

Preface:     In 1988-89 Washington voters adopted a ballot primary.   The reason behind the vote was that caucuses discriminated against elderly, disabled,  and others.    Today in WA State the political parties decide what if any part of the ballot vote will be used by the delegates to the State and National Conventions.    This year the Republicans have chose 51% of the ballot vote and 49% of the caucus vote will make up the delegate numbers.   The Democratic Party has chosen that none of the ballot vote will effect the delegate numbers.     Political parties can choose to use all of the ballot vote, part of it, or none.      None of the ballot vote discriminates against the same groups of individuals who prompted a primary vote in 1989.      Do the democrats that faithfully filled out their ballots and mailed them in know that their votes don’t count?   The only democratic votes counted were at the caucuses.  I personally would be very angry if I voted and found out that my vote counted for nothing.      One last important question—–Who voted to give political parties the right to decide how the primary votes would be used?      Attached is a link to a document issued by Washinton Secretary of State, Elections Division.    It is a 3 page PDF.     The document fails to state how the parties got complete control of the primary election.  The link is: http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf