Goldy

From the Washington Post:

Palin’s routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness. In Clearwater, arriving reporters were greeted with shouts and taunts by the crowd of about 3,000. Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric’s questions for her “less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media.” At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, “Sit down, boy.”

Of course, hate talk unleashes hate.  That’s what it’s supposed to do.

Yes Virginia, there is a race for Attorney General.  Though you wouldn’t know it from reading the newspapers.

Consider this an open letter to the editorialists, columnists and commentators at all our state’s news organizations:  if you care about open government, if you care about clean elections, if you care about maintaining the integrity of our state’s campaign finance and disclosure laws… now is the time to weigh in on the emerging Buildergate scandal.  Not two weeks from now, not two months from now, not two years from now after this twisted tale has finally finished wending its way through the courts, but now… now while the public still has an opportunity to judge Dino Rossi’s character for themselves, before casting their vote for governor.

No doubt the amen editorialists at the pro-Rossi Seattle Times, whose news pages have curiously remained silent on this scandal (but, you know, there’s a “wall” between news and editorial and all that), will reassure themselves  that Rossi remains innocent until proven guilty, and thus a moral pronouncement would be inappropriate until the court has passed a legal judgement of its own.  But of course, that’s a load of hooey.

The Times has a long established history of inserting itself into active court cases (for example, here, here, and notoriously here), and of lambasting the court for decisions it disgrees with on issues of principle or policy, sometimes with little regard for the law itself.  In these and many other cases, the Times’ editorial board and their colleagues throughout the media have routinely taken it upon themselves to weigh in on the hottest issues of the day, and with the election only weeks away, now is as good a time as any.

No, not all the facts have been revealed, but the facts we know are damning.  The BIAW did create “a fund for Rossi” with the sole intent of influencing the 2008 gubernatorial race.  The BIAW did ask the Master Builders Association to contribute over half a million dollars to this fund, for that the express purpose.  And when the MBA hesitated, Rossi did call three board members to press them to cooperate.  The documents are clear.  Rossi’s public statements are clear.  The context is clear.  And the law is very, very clear.

The BIAW is now being prosecuted for numerous “egregious” campaign finance and disclosure violations in relation to this $3.5 million illegal fund… but only after nearly all of the money has been spent attacking Rossi’s opponent.  So to wait until this case has wended its way through court before publicly holding Rossi responsible for his actions would only reward him and the BIAW for their perfidy.

To our state’s opinion leaders this should not be an issue of whether or not Rossi successfully skated through a technical loophole in the law, but rather, whether he was morally and ethically right to attempt to do so.  We all know Rossi was a candidate for governor back in May of 2007, whether he had officially declared or not, and so any effort by him to aid the BIAW with their “fund for Rossi” would be a flagrant violation of the spirit of the law, regardless of whether he is ever held liable for violating its letter.

Our media’s instinct to dismiss these allegations as mere partisan stunts is an insult to the highly repected former justices who have brought these suits, and a disservice to the voting public.  Read the court documents.  Read the FAQs.  Use your judgement and tell me whether or not the BIAW’s “fund for Rossi” constituted a political campaign of which Rossi was both aware, and an active participant.  Or better yet, tell your readers.

Dino Rossi routinely slanders Gov. Gregoire for “laundering” money, while his party is currently being prosecuted for doing exactly that, and yet nobody in our media is willing to seriously question his blanket disclaimers in this Buildergate scandal, or hold him accountable for his actions?  I find that hard to believe.

Shortly after receiving a complaint in Utter vs. BIAW this morning alleging illegal collaboration between Dino Rossi and the Building Industry Association of Washington, a King County Superior Court judge has issued an  order approving the plaintiffs’ request to immediately subpoena witnesses and begin taking depositions.  Subpoenas will be served by October 7, and depositions will begin October 15.

In a press release, plaintiffs’ attorney Knoll Lowney said:

“One of the purposes of this suit is to learn Dino Rossi’s precise role in this fundraising effort, which the State Attorney General has deemed illegal.  We obviously have substantial evidence that Rossi assisted in this fundraising, or the Justices could not have proceeded with their lawsuit.  Now that the Judge has allowed us to begin discovery immediately, we will learn how deeply he was involved.”

Indeed we will.  Though, even under this expedited process it unlikely injunctive relief can come soon enough to prevent the BIAW from spending the remainder of its illegal warchest.

Of course, Rossi and the BIAW could attempt to resist the subpoenas by requesting a protective order, but if, as they claim, they have nothing to hide, why would they want to do that?

So, the McCain campaign wants to take off the gloves, and try to turn the conversation away from the economy and on to Barack Obama’s “associations“…?  Well two can play at that game.

Learn more about Keating Economics.

The Buildergate scandal takes a new twist this morning as former Washington State Supreme Court Justices Faith Ireland and Robert Utter filed notice with Attorney General Rob McKenna of their intent to bring suit against Republican gubernatorial challenger Dino Rossi, alleging illegal campaign coordination with the Building Industry Association of Washingtion (BIAW) and its political committees.  They also filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court claiming that the BIAW’s coordination with Rossi disqualify it from making “independent” expenditures in the 2008 gubernatorial.

These dramatic legal developments could have a huge impact on the gubernatorial race.  The BIAW has already spent over $2 million on behalf of Rossi this year, mostly smearing Governor Chris Gregoire, and plans to spend an additional $700,000 during the final weeks of the campaign.  The justices are asking that further “over limit” expenditures be barred by court order.

These suits are just the latest in a widening Buildergate scandal for which the BIAW is already being prosecuted, in a case stemming from Utter and Ireland’s original October, 2008 complaint.  But while McKenna is pursuing the BIAW for numerous “egregious” campaign finance and reporting violations, he took no action on the assertion that the BIAW improperly coordinated its activities with Rossi, thus prompting Utter and Ireland to bring suit on their own.

In a joint statement, the two retired justices—both appointed to the bench by Republican governors—outline both the evidence behind their allegations, and their motivation for seeking enforcement.

The evidence upon which we base our legal action can be construed to show that Dino Rossi was not just a beneficiary of these illegal activities, but was a knowing and active participant.  The evidence shows, moreover, that the attack ads of the BIAW are not really “independent” of their beneficiary Dino Rossi.  This is because Dino Rossi helped the BIAW to amass the war chest for these attack ads.

This is an important issue for all races.  Special interests are increasingly supporting candidates through “independent expenditures” that are not subject to contribution limits.  These “independent” campaigns also tend to contain the most vicious and dubious negative attacks, since the benefitting candidate can say that they have no control over these messages.  It is critical to enforce the law that prohibits candidates from providing fundraising assistance to or otherwise coordinating with “independent” committees.

The fact that Dino Rossi had not publicly declared his candidacy when this alleged coordination took place is not a defense.  A person becomes a candidate when he helps a political committee to amass a war chest to support his candidacy.  And the evidence suggests this is what happened here.

If this coordination took place, then the BIAW’s expenditures would not qualify as an independent expenditure, and would be legally limited to $2,800.  The millions of dollars of attack ads that have blanketed our airwaves would be illegal, and further expenditures should be enjoined.

Washington campaign laws are in place to ensure our elections are fair, that all candidates know what they are facing from their opponents in terms of campaign financing. These rules are there to ensure that special interests cannot buy their way into a legislative process designed to serve and protect the interests of all citizens. Without enforcement our laws are meaningless.

When the Buildergate scandal broke last week, the Rossi campaign tried to dismiss it as frivolous, partisan electioneering, a sentiment that seemed to ooze into some of the press coverage (the Seattle Times, for their part, ignored the story entirely), but remember, these are two retired Supreme Court justices making the charges, and like their original complaint, for which the BIAW is now being prosecuted, their legal arguments seem to be fairly airtight.

In fact, Rossi has publicly admitted the action at the heart of this scandal, that he called board members of the Master Builders Association in May of 2007, when they were considering a request to contribute to the BIAW’s “fund for Rossi.”  Rossi excuses his actions:

“I didn’t ask them to put money anywhere but it would have been perfectly OK for me to do that because I wasn’t even a candidate.”

But as Utter and Ireland point out in a FAQ posted to the website of attorney Knoll Lowney, Rossi’s claimed defense is little more than a distinction without a difference.  State law and prior Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) advisories make it clear that a candidate does not have to ask for a specific dollar amount to be involved in fundraising, and the very act of participating in such activity, even on behalf of a so-called “independent” campaign, automatically makes one a candidate by definition.

Indeed, back in June of 2004, the BIAW asked the PDC for an opinion on this very issue, to which the commissioners replied without equivocation:

One of the most fundamental ways a candidate could encourage a person to purchase political advertising supporting that candidate is to help make sure that person has sufficient funds to undertake an effective advertising effort. Assisting a PAC in fundraising fosters that committee’s ability to make the political advertising expenditure benefiting the candidate. As such, the PAC expenditure is not sufficiently removed from the candidate to qualify as an independent expenditure.
…
That collaboration disqualifies any resulting expenditure from the definition of independent expenditure.

You really can’t get any clearer than that.

Buildergate is shaping up to be a classic political scandal, and like most such scandals, it’s the coverup that will eventually bring down the perpetrators, for had the BIAW properly reported its activities like it knew it should have, we may never have known about Rossi’s illegal coordination.

With most of the BIAW’s warchest already spent, there may not be time for the courts to impose any meaningful sanctions, so the only question remaining is whether Rossi will suffer the consequences of his unethical and illegal behavior before the election, or after?  I await to see if our local media will fulfill their obligations as public watchdogs, or merely resort to the kind of half-hearted stenography on this scandal we’ve seen thus far.

Woke up to find the Dow down over 500 points, under 10,000 for the first time in four years.  Maybe we should just buy Dow Jones, and jigger the index?

UPDATE:
Somebody should do a remake of that memorable “crying Indian” ad from the 70’s, on it should be Dino Rossi shedding a tear at the sight of industrial polluters being forced by DOE to clean up their mess.

Damn, John McCain looks angry.  (And, is it just me, or is he putting on a little weight?)

Last week, Daily Kos’ “Hell to Pay” fundraiser brought in over $25,000 for Darcy Burner, and this week it is Charlie Brown’s turn, as he takes on mudslinging GOP apparatchik Tom McClintock in a race or an open seat in California’s 4th Congressional District.  So if you have a few dollars to spare, please toss a few Brown’s way.

As I’ve already written, Sen. Joe Biden clearly won Thursday’s Veep debate, at least on points.  But what really matters is the impact (if any) this debate might have on voters, and whether it changes the dynamics of a presidential race that has been shifting steadily in Barack Obama’s favor.  And the best measure of that, I suppose, are the various national tracking polls that are now being reported daily.

The following polls represent three-day running averages.  The first number is from today, which includes  results from Wednesday through Friday, and thus factors in one day of post-debate reaction.  The number in parentheses are those reported yesterday, and represents survey results from Tuesday through Thursday, all collected before the debate.

                Obama      McCain
Research 2000:  52 (51)    40 (40)
Rasmussen:      51 (51)    45 (44)
Diageo/Hotline: 48 (48)    41 (42)
Gallup:         50 (49)    42 (42)

This only includes one day of post-debate tracking, but as you can see, if there is any movement, it’s not in McCain’s favor.  Indeed, the Research 2000 poll, which is being conducted on behalf of Daily Kos, showed the best single day spread for Obama yet:

On successive days in the R2K poll, Obama was up +11 Wed, +12 Thurs and +13 Fri, which is post-debate and Obama strongest day yet (MoE +/- 5.1 for individual days.) Interestingly, the Obama numbers (48-52) are more consistent than the McCain numbers (40-46), but the polls are all consistent in picking up an Obama lead.

And Rasmussen, which is reporting the narrowest gap between the two candidates, observes a similar stability:

For each of the past nine days, Obama has been at 50% or 51% and McCain has been at 44% or 45%. The stability of these results suggests that the McCain campaign faces a very steep challenge in the remaining few weeks of Election 2008.

To say the least.

Early voting has already started in Ohio, and begins in earnest here in WA state and throughout much of the rest of the nation in another week and a half.  If John McCain is going to turn this thing around, he better get moving quick, because I don’t think Sarah Palin’s collection of half-answers, winks and folksy colloquialisms quite did the trick.

For all you Democratic Party elitists planning to attend tonight’s “4th Biennial Campaign Appreciation Party,” don’t bother; it’s been canceled.  Perhaps you’re just not appreciated anymore, I dunno… you’ll have to ask Jason.

I guess it’s all relative, you know, but apparently, the McCain campaign is about to go negative.  Relentlessly, deceitfully, viciously negative.

Sen. John McCain and his Republican allies are readying a newly aggressive assault on Sen. Barack Obama‘s character, believing that to win in November they must shift the conversation back to questions about the Democrat’s judgment, honesty and personal associations, several top Republicans said.

With just a month to go until Election Day, McCain’s team has decided that its emphasis on the senator’s biography as a war hero, experienced lawmaker and straight-talking maverick is insufficient to close a growing gap with Obama. The Arizonan’s campaign is also eager to move the conversation away from the economy, an issue that strongly favors Obama and has helped him to a lead in many recent polls.

“We’re going to get a little tougher,” a senior Republican operative said, indicating that a fresh batch of television ads is coming. “We’ve got to question this guy’s associations. Very soon. There’s no question that we have to change the subject here,” said the operative, who was not authorized to discuss strategy and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

[…] “We are looking for a very aggressive last 30 days,” said Greg Strimple, one of McCain’s top advisers. “We are looking forward to turning a page on this financial crisis and getting back to discussing Mr. Obama’s aggressively liberal record and how he will be too risky for Americans.”

That’s right, they’re “looking forward to turning a page on this financial crisis,” not as an actual financial crisis mind you, but as a political one.  They need to change the subject from, you know, actual issues, to Barack Obama’s “associations.”  Shit, they can’t even get Obama on what he’s done, but rather, who he knows.

Here in WA state, where we’ve largely been spared the presidential air war, it might not seem like an unusual election season, but viewers in other, more competitive states should be girding themselves for a political shitstorm of near Biblical proportions.

We have come to the point in this campaign where John McCain only has two possible paths toward victory:  character assassination or… well… the other kind.

I’m sure it comes as no surprise, but the P-I has endorsed Gov. Christine Gregoire, and in doing so, makes a strong argument for sticking with the incumbent during uncertain times:

In Chris Gregoire, Washington has a governor who has served the state well during relatively good times. She is a good bet for a future likely to be less rosy economically.

Washington voters should re-elect Gregoire based on proven performance, capability and drive. Especially for uncertain times, she’s a much more proven leader than her Republican rival, former state Sen. Dino Rossi.

Rossi was a capable senator and is a capable campaigner. But his avoidance of questions about his social conservatism, his unrealistic transportation ideas and even his unwillingness to be labeled Republican on the ballot all warn there’s a lot about how Rossi would govern that most of us, including perhaps the candidate, would learn only after he took on the job.

It should be noted that in a largely positive editorial that lauds Gregoire’s experience, performance and values, this brief excerpt comprises the full extent of their criticism of her opponent.

It will be interesting to compare that to the Seattle Times’ inevitable endorsement of Dino Rossi, which I expect in both tone and content to be substantially more negative… because honestly, even given poetic license, there are fewer positive statements one can manufacturer in support of the Republican.

The latest Rasmussen Reports survey, released today, shows Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire and Republican opponent Dino Rossi tied 48% to 48% tie in the governors race.  That’s a marked improvement for Gregoire over the last Rasmussen poll, which showed Rossi leading by a 52% to 46% margin.

I suppose I should be cheered by the trend, but this race really shouldn’t be this close, this close to election day.  I guess lying and cheating is a good strategy.

In the presidential race, Rasmussen shows Barack Obama regaining a double-digit lead, 53% to 43% over John McCain, after last month’s survey showed the race narrowing to within an unlikely two point margin.