I write stuff! Now read it:
by Goldy — ,
I’ll be on KING-5 TV’s Up Front with Robert Mak this Sunday, talking about the War on Christmas. (The feds have me classified as an “unlawful enemy combatant.”) Tune in to KING-5 at 9:30PM or NWCN at 8:00PM.
And in addition to my usual Sunday night show on 710-KIRO (7PM to 10PM) I’ll be filling in for Frank Shiers Tuesday 12/19 and Wednesday 12/20 (9PM to midnight) and for Dave Ross and Ron Reagan all of Christmas week (12/25 through 12/29, 9AM to 1PM.) Good thing I like to talk.
by Goldy — ,
It’s rainy and windy in Seattle, and apparently that’s big news. Go figure.
UPDATE:
Yeah, well, I’m sitting in a Tully’s on Capitol Hill, charging my cell phone, my iBook and myself. I lost power about 2AM, apparently as did the entire SE area of Seattle. Didn’t hit a working light until a few blocks South of here.
All I can say is that the only time I’ve experienced sustained winds like that was a tail-end of a hurricane as a child. That was some windstorm.
by Goldy — ,
Last week, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that Sound Transit could continue to collect its car-tabs tax, which had been repealed by a statewide vote of the people. Legally, the court was probably correct, but it was not fair to taxpayers.
The case was about Initiative 776, sponsored by Tim Eyman. This page did not support I-776, but in 2002, Washington’s voters did, and it became law.
I can only assume that the Seattle Times editorial board is fully aware that I-776 failed within the Sound Transit taxing district by an impressive 43% to 57% margin, so when the Times complains that the Supreme Court decision is “not fair to taxpayers,” I’m not exactly sure which taxpayers they’re talking about. Is it “not fair to taxpayers” in the Seattle and North King County subarea of Sound Transit who not only pay the bulk of the cost of the light rail project, but who voted against I-776 in even larger numbers? Or is it “not fair to taxpayers” in Eastern Washington who… um… don’t pay any tax in support of light rail and who didn’t even have a local MVET tax to begin with, but who nonetheless voted in favor of I-776, mostly as a big fuck you to Seattle?
I-776 was a statewide initiative that promised to kill Sound Transit’s light rail project, but which overwhelmingly failed amongst those voters who actually paid the voter-approved local MVET tax it repealed. So how could one possibly describe the court’s decision as “not fair to taxpayers,” assuming one defines “taxpayers” as the voters who actually, um… pay taxes?
Hmm. Or to put it another way for the benefit of the Seattle Times editorial board: I-776 was soundly rejected by those voters who actually paid the tax it repealed, and any suggestion to the contrary would be misleading.
It is one thing to mislead your readers about, say, the Swedish tax system or a political candidate. But it’s another thing to mislead your readers about themselves.
by Goldy — ,
Circumcision not only cuts off your foreskin, it also cuts in half your risk of contracting HIV:
Two major studies released Wednesday confirmed that circumcision can dramatically slow the spread of HIV among African men, suggesting that widely offering the procedure could prevent millions of deaths in countries most seriously affected by AIDS, researchers said.
The studies, in Kenya and Uganda, found that circumcised men are about 50 percent less likely to contract HIV than those who are not, a result that echoed similar research last year from South Africa. In all three studies, the results were so persuasive that researchers stopped their experiments several months early and offered circumcisions to all of the subjects, deeming it unethical to withhold a procedure that might prevent an often-fatal disease.
In related news, recent studies show that Jews are over one thousand times less likely to be killed or injured due to Christmas tree fires. So there.
by Goldy — ,
South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson has apparently suffered a stroke:
Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., was hospitalized today, according to his Washington office.
He suffered from a possible stroke, and was taken to George Washington University Hospital in Washington, D.C..
Of course this is first and foremost a personal tragedy for Sen. Johnson and his family. But should the worst unfold, and he is unable to fulfill his term, Republican Gov. Mike Rounds would appoint a replacement to serve until the next general election in 2008. That would give control of the US Senate to the GOP, with VP Dick Cheney breaking a 50-50 tie.
No doubt, given such a scenario, the Republicans would claim a mandate and rule accordingly.
UPDATE:
CBS News now says the senator was hospitalized due to an “undiagnosed illness“:
Johnson, who turns 60 on Dec. 28, was admitted to George Washington University Hospital with an undiagnosed illness, said a spokeswoman, Julianne Fisher.
She said, however, the senator did not suffer a stroke or heart attack. His office had said earlier it was a possible stroke.
Let’s hope that’s good news.
by Goldy — ,
Back in January Dave Reichert’s campaign manager publicly gloated over having reached the $1.1 million mark, bragging to reporters that “a war chest of this size will put this race out of reach.”
Well, um, it didn’t exactly turn out that way. The final numbers have now been posted to Political Money Line, and Democratic challenger Darcy Burner — who entered the race as an unknown political novice — ended up outraising Reichert $3,080,275 to $2,989,379. Yes, she lost at the polls, but she made it closer than anybody but the most optimistic blogger had any reason to expect at the time. The race was never out of reach, and it forced the GOP to devote resources to Reichert that would have otherwise been spent defending vulnerable Republicans elsewhere. There is no doubt that Burner’s insurgent campaign contributed to the Democrats seizing control of the House.
With her impressive campaign and fundraising prowess, Burner has virtually assured herself an unopposed shot at the Democratic nomination in 2008, should she choose to seek it. And Reichert has assured himself a busy two years scrambling to raise enough cash to defend a seat in a district that is steadily trending blue. In 2006, Reichert benefited from a 2-to-1 advantage in PAC money (over $1.1 million,) but as a junior member of the minority that easy money might not be so easy.
It’s hard to beat an incumbent whatever the circumstances, and conventional wisdom says that Reichert’s reelection should make it tougher yet. But this will be a tough two years for Reichert. Rumor has it he’s losing several key staffers, and he won’t be able to rely on all the advantages that come from caucusing with the majority. The 8th CD will eventually go Democratic. My guess is that this switch will occur on Reichert’s watch.
by Goldy — ,
The Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight (and every Tuesday), 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.
Join us for some holiday cheer and hoppy beer as we devilishly plot our next strike in the War on Christmas. (I propose adding polonium to the eggnog.)
Not in Seattle? Washington liberals will also be drinking tonight in the Tri-Cities and Vancouver. Here’s a full run down of WA’s eleven Drinking Liberally chapters:
| Where: | When: | Next Meeting: | |
| Burien: | Mick Kelly’s Irish Pub, 435 SW 152nd St | Fourth Wednesday of each month, 7:00 pm onward | December 27 |
| Kirkland: | Valhalla Bar & Grill, 8544 122nd Ave NE | Every Thursday, 7:00 pm onward | December 14 |
| Mercer Island: | Roanoke Tavern, 1825 72nd Ave SE | (Starting January) Second and fourth Wednesday of each month, 6:00-8:00 pm | January 10 |
| Monroe: | Eddie’s Trackside Bar and Grill, 214 N Lewis St | Second Wednesday of each month, 7:00 PM onward | December 13 |
| Olympia: | The Tumwater Valley Bar and Grill, 4611 Tumwater Valley Drive South | First and third Monday of each month, 7:00-9:00 pm | December 18 |
| Seattle: | Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Ave E | Every Tuesday, 8:00 pm onward | December 12 |
| Spokane: | Red Lion BBQ & Pub, 126 N Division St | Every Wednesday, 7:00 pm | December 13 |
| Tacoma: | Meconi’s Pub, 709 Pacific Ave | Every Wednesday, 8:00 pm onward | December 13 |
| Tri-Cities: | O’Callahans – Shilo Inn, 50 Comstock, Richland | Every Tuesday, 7:00 pm onward | December 12 |
| Vancouver: | Hazel Dell Brew Pub, 8513 NE Highway 99 | Second and fourth Tuesday of each month, 7:00 pm onward | December 12 |
| Walla Walla: | The Green Lantern, 1606 E Isaacs Ave | First Friday of each month, 8:00 pm onward | January 5 |
(And apparently there’s also an unaffiliated liberal drinking group in Olympia that meets every Monday at 7PM at the Brotherhood Lounge, 119 N. Capital Way.)
by Goldy — ,
The Christmas trees have gone back up at Sea-Tac airport. Whoopee.
The story went national — and big — about how airport officials were forced to remove the trees after a local rabbi threatened to sue. Only problem is, the rabbi never asked for the trees to be removed, and certainly never threatened to sue to remove them. All the rabbi wanted was a single electric menorah to be displayed alongside one of the trees, a request for which there is established legal precedent.
But, well, I suppose you can’t blame Port officials for just assuming the rabbi would sue, because after all, he is a Jew. And that’s what us Jews do, huh?
Anyway, the trees are back, but the damage has already been done. Thanks to Port officials’ ham-fisted, insensitive and idiotic handling of the incident, millions of Americans are now enraged over the way us Jews are trying to destroy Christmas, and no retelling of the story will ever set the facts straight. Every year around this time, Sea-Tac airport will be memorialized as a major battleground in the mythical War on Christmas.
On my radio show Sunday night I repeated my assertion that all this War on Christmas bullshit — intentionally or not — is actually a war on Jews. I base this on two observations, the first being the simple historical fact that this theme was first popularized back in 1921 in Henry Ford’s infamous, anti-semitic tract “The International Jew.” My second observation is pretty straight forward: when you invoke the rhetoric of war, you imply an enemy. And…
When you talk about a war on Christmas, or anything Christian, most Christians do not instantly think of the enemy as secular humanists or even Muslims… they think of Jews. […] Whether the intent is to blame the Jews for the rash of secular “Happy Holidays” that’s supposedly destroying our nation is not the point… many Christians, in buying into this bullshit rhetoric, will naturally blame Jews.
Don’t believe me? Here’s just a sampling of the many, many angry comments left on KING-5 TV’s comment thread on the Sea-Tac incident.
Great, a group that makes up about 5% of the American population (if that), does it again. Disgusting.
Posted by: Tom at December 11, 2006 12:01 PMHe is gone too far. If he is so religious why don’t he go to his “promise land” and selebrate his holidays there.
Posted by: rita at December 11, 2006 12:10 PMI think we should consult Mel Gibson….
Posted by: Ron at December 11, 2006 12:11 PMLike it or not, this country was founded and settled by Christians; and they still make up the vast majority of the population. […] Give up! When you make up the majority, we’ll reconsider.
Posted by: WC at December 11, 2006 12:17 PMNot to worry, the Non Jesus Believing Jew will get his when he faces god. God does not take a fancy to those who conspire with other heathens to kill his only begotten son.
Makes you want to root for the Palestinians.
Posted by: Khan at December 11, 2006 12:26 PMI, like most Americans, are sick of being told what we can say and what we can do in our own country, by people who have no right. I think the NATIVITY Scene should be placed at every Jewish site of worship during their holidays!
Posted by: Sandy at December 11, 2006 12:27 PMI cannot believe that the Rabbi and other Jews from Seattle are attacking us Christians like this !! Our men and women are fighting and dying in the Middle East directly or indirectly because of our support for Israel and then he turns on us like this. How grateful !
Posted by: David O’Brocki at December 11, 2006 12:27 PMThe United States is a CHRISTIAN country! This country was founded on Christian principals! If someone migrates from their oppressed country to find a better life, don’t try to turn our country into what you ran from!!!
Posted by: Sam at December 11, 2006 12:39 PMI think that if the rabbi or anyone else does’nt like our ways of life ,our traditions and customs,that he or she should go back to wherever they came from so they can enjoy there own ways of life,traditions and customs in there own country,instead of trying to take ours away from us,and force us to learn there’s.
Posted by: W.R.Cannon at December 11, 2006 12:41 PMSomeone post a picture and the identity of the rabbi.
Posted by: Jon at December 11, 2006 12:42 PMOnce again 2% of the US population is telling 98% what to do-ain’t it enough they run the government,Hollywood,the big Media, the “Federal Reserve”(actually private banks),and AIPAC lords it over our Senate and House?? AND oh yes,the Iraq war is for ISRAEL and OIL, IN THAT ORDER.
Posted by: c. mead at December 11, 2006 12:42 PMMy father helped liberate Auschwitz in the closing days of World War II. An emaciated, thin Jewish man noticeing the cross he wore around his neck told him “Thank you. But one day my decendants will make airports around America remove your Christmas trees. Your schools will no longer have Christmas plays or mention Jesus in prayer. Nativity scenes will be outlawed across your land. But thank you for liberating me anyway”.
Posted by: Dean at December 11, 2006 12:53 PMRabbi…this is AMERICA !! We celebrate AMERICAN TRADITIONS…why do we have to honor your (one rabbi’) wishes ?? Take YOUR “traditions” and….”pound sand”. Oops…could be a double meaning there !!
Posted by: Bruce at December 11, 2006 01:07 PMI’m going to sue to have the Rabbi shave, as a person who shaves every day, that Beard offends me.
Posted by: Rob Dog at December 11, 2006 01:10 PMThe nation was founded by Christians not Jews or Muslins or Buddists.
Posted by: Maxine at December 11, 2006 01:11 PMIf that rabbi” do not likes the christmas trees!
go BACK to your country!!
this is the USA and move out!!
this is not a jewish state or country!!
give me a break!! to much crap, we are bowing down to! because of all the different races, that live in this country!!
and above all!! speak English!
Posted by: juanita at December 11, 2006 01:41 PMairport should put his picture, address and phone number up so public can chat with his sorry a–.
Posted by: charles glisson at December 11, 2006 01:49 PMOne more reason why we shouldn’t help Israel anymore…just let Iran and Syria take care of them once and for all.
Posted by: steve at December 11, 2006 02:23 PMWelcome to America. You chose to immigrate here so accept the American way. Don’t impose your father land on our land born of Christian principles. What chance do you think we would have in putting up a Christmas in Israel? The great, great majority of people in America are Christians. Blend in or move out.
Posted by: Arnie at December 11, 2006 02:35 PMGo back to your ancestors in Russia? Israhell? And stay away from America this is not JewSA but, USA.
Posted by: Ulisses at December 11, 2006 02:59 PMHOW DARE THAT MONSTER RABBI !!!
AFTER I SUPPORTED ISRAEL AND THE JEWS THIS LOWLIFE HAS THE GALL TO SUE THE AIRPORT BECAUSE OF CHRISTMAS TREES ! AND MEANWHILE HAMAS IS DECORATING BETHLEHEM IRONIC ISN’T IT . DID WE SUPPORT THE WRONG PEOPLE FELLOW CHRISTIANS ?
Posted by: GEORGE MARCHESE at December 11, 2006 03:04 PMThe rabbi is a hypocrite who represents Jewish supremacist views which are widely accepted among Jews. […] This is purely Jewish power exerting itself so they get a Jewish state for the Jewish people and we become a multicultural mosaic with no one people or religion having any power at all in this country -divide and conquer.
Posted by: Rich Fausette NYC at December 11, 2006 03:08 PMThe majority of people in this country are Christian, if the Rabbi doesn’t like looking at Christmas trees than it is time for him and anyone else like him to move out of the country. I have an idea may be he can move to Iran.
Posted by: Evelyn Gilliana at December 11, 2006 03:22 PMSee…I told you so…
Posted by: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at December 11, 2006 03:31 PMSeems as though the good Rabbi was very intent on winning friends and influencing enemies. Then “they” wonder why people “hate” them! Sign!
Posted by: Frank Spears at December 11, 2006 03:32 PMI hope Seattle people with Christmas trees refrain from spending their Christmas dollars with any Jewish business. I know I will in Vancouver and encourage my freinds to do the same. As for the Jewish community worried about looking like a grinch..if the shoe fits….perhaps you have earned that.
Posted by: rogarboy at December 11, 2006 03:44 PMAfter all we christians have done, and continue to do, for the Jews – this is the way they repay us?
Posted by: koko at December 11, 2006 03:47 PMI wonder how many Jewish business operations have Christmas trees in their stores ” cause thats where the money is” not that it’s a religous symbol
Posted by: XGI at December 11, 2006 03:51 PMCut all support to Israel, cut the MILLIONS of dollars the American people have paid out of pocket in taxes that has gone to support the Jewish state, see how they like us then.
Posted by: Mike at December 11, 2006 03:53 PMDoes it surprise anyone that a Jew would sue… ?This story just further serves to bolster the distaste the majority of good, honest, red-blooded Americans have for Zionist politics in the US of A. I know what the Port was thinking…: “Don’t upset the Jew. Dont’ upset the Jew.”
Posted by: t-d off at December 11, 2006 04:10 PMMy daughter goes to a Methodist Elementary School. This week they are viewing different holiday celebrations from different cultures. If she asks me what a Manorah is I will tell her it is a left over prop from the Phantom of the Opera.
Posted by: XGI at December 11, 2006 04:11 PMAnd you wonder why the Palestine people dislike the Jewish people. I am really trying to like everyone one but it’s getting to the point where I am losing any respect for the Jewish people. This Rabbi owes an appoligy to everyone. Maybe if the rest of us non_-Jewish people boycott the Jewish bussiness they will change their tune. The American people have had it!!!!
Posted by: Cathie at December 11, 2006 04:19 PMHe is just another example of why Jewish people, and others, especially the ACLU (which is supported predominately by Jewish people), are looked upon as the leading proponents of asking a nation, that history can demonstrate was based upon Judaeo Christion values, to mask / remove those values.
Posted by: og3p at December 11, 2006 04:22 PMLets stop exchanging gifts at Christmas and see if the Jewish owned stores want GIFTING brought back!
Posted by: XFI at December 11, 2006 04:22 PM
One of the arguments I’ve heard again and again is that by threatening to sue, the rabbi should have expected the reaction he would get from airport officials. Thus even if he never asked for the trees to be removed, the rabbi is directly to blame for the airport’s head-up-its-ass remedy.
Ignoring for a moment the fact that the rabbi never actually threatened to sue to remove the trees, I’d like to make a parallel argument: that the Christian warriors who shamelessly promote this fiction of a War on Christmas should likewise expect reactions like the ones we see in the KING-5 comment thread. Thus the propagandists responsible for promoting this theme are also directly responsible for the anti-semitic sentiment it inevitably arouses.
Of course when it comes to this particular incident it’s the Port officials who deserve most of the blame, both for making their inexplicably dumb-ass decision, and for willfully allowing the media to initially misrepresent the circumstances that led up to it. They should have anticipated that the rabbi — and by proxy, “the Jews” — would be blamed for forcing them to remove the Christmas trees. Indeed, it wouldn’t surprise me if some of these officials did anticipate the public reaction.
But then, in any war, there’s always going to be collateral damage.
by Goldy — ,
Reacting to an explosion in the use of so-called “independent expenditures” in Washington state — particularly in judicial races — the Public Disclosure Commission has asked the legislature to impose tougher restrictions on how PACs fund political campaigns. Not so fast, says the Seattle P-I editorial board:
Whoa. We have our own concerns about the distorting effects disproportionate amounts of money can have. The pursuit of large, centralized contributions can tend to draw candidates away from their individual constituents’ concerns.
But a citizen’s right to express support for a political candidate with cheers or checks seems pretty fundamental. So it could be that an increase in political spending is no more damaging to the process than an increase in political speech.
After all, some of the biggest spending didn’t pay off at the polls last month. John Groen’s noisy attempt to unseat Supreme Court Chief Justice Gerry Alexander is the prime example.
I don’t take as much comfort from Groen’s defeat as the P-I does. The nasty, mean-spirited and ham-fisted Groen campaign reflected the character and personality of his primary patron — the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) — and it just didn’t go over well with voters. But while the BIAW may be a bunch of rude, cold-hearted bastards, they’re not stupid. And they’re loaded. That’s why they’ve been one of the most effective political organizations in the state over the past decade or so. Thus I fully expect them to learn their lesson from this year’s embarrassing defeat, and spend their money more wisely next time around.
With few exceptions the initiative process has become the exclusive playground of well-financed PACs and wealthy individuals, with measures often devised more as GOTV tools than serious attempts to legislate. And for all the relief over Groen’s defeat, Alexander still could have been overwhelmed if supporters hadn’t scraped together a sizable if lesser chunk of change to fight back in kind. Do we really want our Supreme Court justices chosen via a multimillion dollar game of campaign finance chicken?
The P-I concludes by saying that in a perfect world “public financing for all candidates would level the playing field,” but apparently dismisses such a reform as panglossian. I don’t.
It is time to learn whether public financing would indeed level the playing field, and our state Supreme Court races are the perfect place to start. Don’t just limit the amount of money special interests can spend on judicial candidates, eliminate it entirely. Our Supreme Court is too important to be jiggered by money coming from the right or the left; if it was encouraging that voters saw through the tsunami of cash that was intended to sweep Groen to victory, imagine what kind of jurists we might elect if we took money out of the equation altogether.
Otherwise, if we accept the notion that political money is political speech, and therefore should never be limited, then we implicitly accept an electoral system in which some people have the right to speak louder than others.
by Goldy — ,
Can’t get enough of “The David Goldstein Show” on Newsradio 710-KIRO? Well tune in a half-hour early tonight as I take over the microphone from 6:30PM to 10PM:
6:30PM: Sonic bust? As long as I’ve got sports fans listening, I thought I’d ask the question once again: are you willing to pay higher taxes to finance a new arena for the Seattle (or Bellevue or Renton) Supersonics? If not, I’ve got a proposal — a tax on the income of visiting athletes. Twenty other states already levy a “jock tax,” why not WA?
7PM: Are we winning the War on the Christmas? Sea-Tac Airport officials removed 9 Christmas trees late Friday night after a Rabbi asked to have an 8-foot-tall menorah displayed next to the largest tree. Was this the latest battle in the much ballyhooed “War on Christmas,” or just an example of timid, narrow-minded airport officials acting really, really stupid? Either way, Barry Nelson and Tom Schecker, authors of “War on Xmas: the Official Field Manual,” will join me to offer useful tips on how us secular humanists can cast off the shackles of Christianist oppression.
8PM: Are you and your partner ready to take that big step, and get civil-unionized? With Democrats holding the Governor’s mansion and large majorities in both houses of the state legislature, now is the time to push for a civil union bill, but some in the gay community seem to want same-sex “marriage” or nothing, a political hot potato that many Democrats just don’t want to touch. How much is the word “marriage” worth, when civil union can offer most of the same rights and protections for a fraction of the political cost? The folks at “Think Equal” think a lot, but are Washington voters ready to approve “gay marriage” by any name?
9PM: To be announced.
Tune in tonight (or listen to the live stream) and give me a call: 1-877-710-KIRO (5476).
by Goldy — ,
by Goldy — ,
Just read Robert Jamieson’s column in today’s Seattle P-I: “Critics go after the wrong pastor.”
Hmm. I wasn’t aware that us critics were limited to going after only one pastor at a time.
It’s an embarrassment of riches out there with the likes of Mark Driscoll, Ken Hutcherson, Joe Fuiten, Ted Haggard, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Fred Phelps, and the inimitably mule-fucking Rev. Neil Horsley routinely making headlines. So many pastors, so little time.
by Goldy — ,
I have a career-ending confession to make. During the heat of Washington state’s US senate campaign, a senior Cantwell staffer once bought me a beer. Oh sure, we were both understandably giddy after a successful campaign event. And a little drunk. But nothing can really excuse my stunning lapse of journalistic ethics.
Had I disclosed this compensation at the time, I suppose my credibility might have survived tattered but intact. But now that I’ve made my mea culpa, it’s hard to imagine that my once-loyal readers could ever trust me again. Nor should they.
Or at least, that seems to be the thinking of some of our nation’s “professional” journalists.
Today’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer features an editorial chastising bloggers for their “rather surprising ties to specific politicians or parties.”
A New York Times article and chart showed extensive financial links between some prominent national bloggers and politicians across the political spectrum. Most bloggers promptly disclosed roles as campaign advisers and the like, as the article said and offended bloggers emphasized in responses. As at least one poster mentioned, though, disclosures can easily get lost.
[…] There remains a disconnect, however, between bloggers’ image and their increasing ties to the political establishment, whether the pay comes from Republican Sen. John McCain, Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton or a host of other figures.
Um… I’m not sure what “image” they’re talking about, but I find it a little offensive that “real” journalists feel that they are entitled to earn a living from their profession, but apparently us bloggers are not. And if there’s a growing disconnect, it’s between the legacy media and the millions of Americans who are now getting their news and commentary from us bloggers. Breaking news guys: our readers aren’t dumb. They know we’re biased. In fact, they expect it.
For example, I once received a small speaking fee from the SEIU for moderating a panel discussion. Should my blogging on labor issues now be discounted as biased, due to this previously undisclosed payment? No, my blogging on labor issues should be discounted as biased because I’m, um, generally biased towards labor. I’ve never claimed to be objective. I don’t think it’s even humanly possible.
Likewise, I provided plenty of advice to the Darcy Burner campaign, solicited and otherwise. Had I been compensated for my valuable political and media consulting, could my coverage of the Reichert/Burner race in WA’s 8th Congressional District have possibly been any more one-sided? I sure hope not. Once I decided that Burner had a shot at winning I was determined to do everything possible to help boost her to victory.
The point is, my readers aren’t idiots. They read me in context.
On both my blog and my weekly radio show I make it absolutely clear that I am unabashedly liberal. I wear my bias on my sleeve. I aggressively advocate for candidates and issues — and should one of these campaigns choose to hire me to do additional work behind the scenes… how is that any less ethical than the publisher of the largest newspaper in Washington state shamelessly using his op-ed pages to shill for an initiative that will save him and his heirs tens of millions of dollars? How is a payment from a candidate you openly believe in and advocate for, any more compromising than a paycheck from a publisher you fear to contradict? No one seriously believes that there is unanimity at the Seattle Times in opposition to the estate tax, and yet on such a high profile issue, of all the editorialists and columnists, only Danny Westneat had the balls to speak out against its repeal; and even then, only briefly. The Seattle Times is a newspaper that claims to objectively serve one of the most liberal, Democratic cities in the nation, and yet it had the unmitigated gall to endorse a slate of Republicans in a Blue Wave election, and suggest that the region’s interests would be better served by a half-wit, two-term minority member of Congress than a Harvard educated member of the incoming Democratic majority?
If some wealthy, Democratic benefactor were to pay me a much-needed stipend to keep me blogging, how could that possibly make HorsesAss.org any less credible than the op-ed section of the Seattle Times given its shameless, self-serving shilling over the past election cycle?
So my question for those who question the propriety of political bloggers seeking political consulting work on the side is: what is it about blogging that makes you think that we must do it for free if we’re to remain genuine and relevant? The vast majority of bloggers can’t possibly garner enough readership to earn a living from online ads — should our voices be silenced because the free market can’t support our efforts? Must the very best of us commit to a life of poverty in order to pursue our vocation full-time, or seek meaningful remuneration only from work outside our area of passion and expertise? Is a corporate paycheck the only legitimate income for an ethical journalist?
The Seattle P-I editorial board fears that we are regressing to the days when newspapers were once as openly biased as, well… us bloggers:
There’s also a back-to-the-future aspect to the one-sided advocacy. American newspapers began as organs dedicated to serving particular political parties. Advocacy is a political right and a fundamental source of U.S. strength. But it’s not the main thrust of journalism. And in the journalism generally practiced in America, accepting pay from politicians — disclosed or not — is about as far off the map as one can go.
But the “journalism generally practiced in America” today is an historical anomaly that grew out of the media consolidation that shuttered the vast majority of dailies early in the twentieth century. “Objectivity” was a necessary sales pitch required to reassure readers that one or two dailies could adequately replace the many different voices to which they had grown accustomed. It is also a wonderful ideal, though unfortunately impossible to achieve in reality, for as Woody Allen astutely observed, even “objectivity is subjective.”
I’m not one of those bloggers who long for the extinction of the legacy media, nor do I think this modern American model of an objective, fair and balanced press will ever perish at the hands of us advocacy journalists. But there’s certainly more than enough room for both models to coexist, and to some extent, converge. Both models can be equally honest and informative, as long as the practitioners remain true to themselves, and to their slightly divergent ethical principles… principles which most definitely include disclosing all relevant financial relationships.
But in the end, how is my openly biased blog really any different from the op-ed section of any major daily? Facts are facts, and when I get them wrong my readers abrasively taunt me in my comment threads. The rest of what I write is nothing but personal spin and opinion, and as long as I remain honest about who I am and what I’m trying to achieve, does it really matter who pays me?
by Goldy — ,
Washington businesses will save $89 million next year due to lower unemployment and workers’ compensation premiums approved this year by Gov. Chris Gregoire and the state legislature. Now Gov. Gregoire is proposing a six-month suspension of a portion of workers’ compensation premiums that could save employers and workers an additional $315 million.
The rate reductions and suspensions are made possible by higher than expected investment earnings on premiums, and L&I’s success at controlling health care costs. Workers have also filed fewer workplace injury claims.
This is great news for both employers and workers. A typical building contractor employing 25 full-time workers would save about $22,000 over the six-month suspension, a vegetable farmer with a similar sized work force about $5,300. And workers who have premiums deducted from their paycheck will also see substantial savings: $267 for an agricultural worker, $378 for food processing and manufacturing, $153 per health care worker.
You’d think such a win-win proposal would elicit cheers from business groups like, say, the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW), but so far… crickets. One reason for their silence I suppose is that when state government actually works efficiently and saves their members money, well, they lose their favorite rhetorical stalking horse. Another reason, just perhaps, is that these lower workers’ comp premiums actually cost the BIAW money.
See, the pro-business/anti-government BIAW earns most of its money managing a workers’ comp “retro rebate” program, in which it pools members premiums to spread out risk, and then earns a rebate from the state for filing fewer claims than anticipated. BIAW members get this money back, minus the twenty-percent the BIAW skims off the top to support its “operations”… operations which mostly consist of spending millions of dollars supporting right-wing judges, politicians and initiatives.
But if due to greater efficiency on the part of the state, businesses and workers pay lower premiums going in, they’ll get lower rebates coming back, and that means the BIAW will have lower revenues. And thus, less money to spend on politics.
I’d call that a win-win-win.
by Goldy — ,
Outgoing superintendent Raj Manhas, of whom I have been rather critical, has a guest column in the Seattle Times today defending Seattle Public Schools.
According to Manhas, scores have improved for seven straight years, and the district now outperforms the state average on standardized tests, matching or exceeding many of our neighboring districts. Over the past few years the district has also managed to turn a $34 million shortfall into a $20 million reserve. Hardly an argument for a state or city takeover.
Given all the talk about a district in crisis, I think many people would be surprised by the reality. Take a tour of the city’s elementary schools and you’ll mostly find well maintained, recently constructed or renovated buildings with orderly, well behaved classrooms and a dedicated teaching staff. These are not the inner city schools of Detroit or Philadelphia — many would be virtually indistinguishable from their nearby suburban counterparts. There’s a reason why communities fought so hard to save our local schools from closure… we love them.
That’s not to say there aren’t problems. Seattle is an urban district with all that entails, but the image propagated through hyperbolic editorials only makes matters worse. At least at the elementary school level I believe it is often a complete waste of money in Seattle to send your child to private schools, but way too many families now do exactly that. This removes from the district the children of many of our most affluent and best educated parents — the children who are typically the easiest and least expensive to teach — leaving behind a disproportionate number of students who face additional educational and life challenges.
As Manhas points out, our schools have these children for only six hours a day, nine months a year:
For us to make true strides in academic achievement, we need to pay much more attention to basic quality-of-life issues for our children. Research confirms what test scores also reveal: Childhood poverty and racism are the biggest factors keeping our kids down.
Yes, hands-on parental involvement is perhaps the most accurate indicator of academic success, but some of our parents are simply unwilling or unable to participate in their children’s education. You cannot blame an immigrant parent who works ten hours a day and who has no formal education nor competency with the English language, for not helping his children with their homework. And you cannot blame a child growing up in an unstable household for being unprepared to learn. What you can do is attempt to intervene as early as possible. Headstart, pre-school, and full day kindergarten are all solutions that are proven to work, and the only thing preventing us from implementing these programs for all our needy children is the political will.
It is critical to recognize that all that has occurred in Seattle Public Schools over the past decade — both the successes and the failures — has occurred in the context of systemic underfunding. Washington state’s public education funding now ranks in the bottom ten nationwide, and Seattle’s teachers are amongst the lowest paid of any major city when adjusted for local cost of living. To hear many of the district’s right-wing critics tell it, our schools already waste the resources they have, so any increase in spending would only be throwing good money after bad. But as Manhas poignantly asks, “How can we demand that our children reach for the stars when the grownups have them in the nation’s basement in terms of education funding?”
Of course money is not the only answer, but not a single educational reform being touted from the right or the left or anywhere in between can possibly have a hope of succeeding unless we adequately fund it. Our educators, editorialists, elected officials and yes, even us citizens have given way too much lip service to the ideal of educating all our children. Now it is time for us to put our money where our mouth is.
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!