This hit piece, paid for by the BIAW of Whatcom County, is hilarious. The BIAW is supporting some pretty right wing candidates and instead of running ads about how great their candidates are, they’re trying to smear the other side.

Voters don’t know what Progressive Majority is or what they do. Most of all, they don’t care. Voters do care about sustainable development, protecting neighborhoods, and protecting the water quality of Lake Whatcom. Unfortunately, all three of the BIAW’s candidate’s don’t do very well on any of these points.

What’s more, Progressive Majority isn’t even organizing the bus campaign. Who is? The Washington Bus, an organization that gets young people who are left-of-center involved in politics in a fun way. Here’s what they look like:

and this:

A bunch of hippies? I think not. Those kids look like they’re having fun getting involved in politics.

Goldy wrote about this recently:

Why the fearful reaction to progressive organizers, and the sudden public embrace of non-partisan ideals? Because in a region where Republicanism has been discredited perhaps more thoroughly than anywhere else in the nation, these nominally non-partisan races are the only chance most Republicans have of ever holding public office.

Non-partisanship has become the last refuge of political losers.

Speaking of losers, I can’t wait to see how much more money the BIAW will flush down the drain on crap ads like this one.

I know next to nothing about science. When scientists (or at least those who aren’t on the payroll of Exxon) agree that human beings are having a significant effect on the climate, I tend to believe them.

That’s not some sort of hipster affectation, mind you. When people with doctorates in earth sciences speak in one voice, I try to set down the PBR and the graphic novel and listen. But what throws me for a loop is when good people, with the right idea, go off the rail.

Like the “Save The Polar Bears” crowd.

But really… Who should the polar bears fear the most? Local Sierra Club boss Mike O’Brien and his Nissan Pathfinder? Or some drunk Canuck with a shotgun?

The Canuck, it turns out.

Polar bears would stand a greater chance of avoiding extinction if people stopped shooting them than if they reduced greenhouse gas emissions, according to a book by a leading environmental skeptic.

Bjorn Lomborg, the Danish professor who achieved international fame with his previous book, The Skeptical Environmentalist, examines and rejects claims by environmentalists and the former president Al Gore that polar bears are drowning because the sea ice they hunt on is melting.

Lomborg says the story about drowning bears is taken from a single sighting of four dead bears the day after an abrupt windstorm. The bears came from a population that was actually increasing, which has been the overall trend in the polar bear population since the 1960s.

Lomborg, whose PhD is in political science and who doesn’t claim to be a scientist, gets all sorts of hisses and boos when he speaks. He even got nailed with a custard pie in Oxford. Hmm… Pie target Bill Gates is still shipping software, and the mannish Ann Coulter hasn’t been eaten by wolves. Perhaps the “pie throwing as a means of affecting public policy” meme is a bit played out, no?

Lomborg continues:

[He] points out that over the past decades, the global polar bear population has increased dramatically from about 5,000 members in the 1960s to around 25,000 as a result of the regulation of hunting.

Even if a decline in the bear population has taken place since the 1980s, he says, if we try to help them by cutting greenhouse gases we can at the very best avoid 15 bears dying, with realistic option meaning that it is probably only around 0.06 bears per year.

But he says, if we care for stable populations of polar bears, dealing with the 49 polar bears from the same population around Hudson Bay that get shot each year might be a smarter and more viable strategy.

I’d much rather see enviro groups pushing an American-style “cap and trade” system for controlling carbon dioxide in a way that would spur innovation and reward creativity, rather than more of these goofball vanity campaigns.

Jean Godden’s campaign manager has an interesting hobby, as detailed by Gentry Lange (a supporter of Godden’s opponent, Joe Szwaja):

Carlo Davis, the campaign manager for Jean Godden, has spent a significant amount of time trolling the blogs distorting the facts, and posting under a list of fake names. Until recently this was simply a suspicion that I had no way to actually confirm, but recently The Paper Noose Blog traced his IP address and Carlo Davis then admitted to at least one of his blog pseudonyms.

Commenting under different fake names is nothing new in the blog world. People do it, sometimes just for fun. If you are a campaign professional, or if you value your credibility, anonymously trolling isn’t a good idea.

There’s a lot to look at, but this one is my favorites:

Posted by landsfarthereast at 8/17/07 1:08 p.m.

Wow. This is just a whose-who of Joe supporters in the comment thread. We have his campaign manager (Gentry Lange), his biggest fan (Mike G), and I’m assuming the rest are probably Gentry using different aliases.

Of course, “landsfarthereast” is Ms. Godden campaign manager…

Then there’s this:

Posted by landsfarthereast at 10/10/07 10:29 a.m.

@ LoveYourViaduct
“Actually, the happiest woman in Seattle this morning is probably the Gossip Goddess. She can point to her opponent’s colorful history again.”

That is truly one of the most despicable things I have ever read. To imply that someone is happy over a serious and tragic incident like this is beyond the pale. Shame on you.

To imply that the Jean Godden’s campaign would politicize a sensitive issue such as an alleged case of domestic violence, that’s beyond the pale…

Except that Godden’s people did just that back in June:

Goldy says:

Just to back up Geov here on his explanation of the process, the story on Szwaja was fed to me a few days ago, so it was clearly being pushed to reporters and bloggers. Though I was a bit surprised to see it appear so quickly in the P-I.

Godden’s people probably don’t mind it that McIver’s troubles have put domestic violence back in the headlines, if only to remind people of Joe’s problems 20 years ago. When campaign managers feign outrage anonymously online, I just have to laugh.

Daily Kos:

The candidate, Cheryl Haskins, is the Executive Director of an anti-gay marriage group, and her husband is a pastor of a conservative megachurch north of the city. She is African-American, a fact which makes her candidacy attractive to many voters in the racially diverse community, which currently has no people of color on its city council. Until recently, however, her anti-gay political activism and ties to the Religious Right were not part of the political discourse, and with her campaign signs and huge billboards plastering the city, she was destined to win the election without controversy.

Only five percent of Haskins’ contributions have come from within the city of Renton. This isn’t so great for a self proclaimed ten-year resident.

Haskins’ is also on the board of Alliance for Marriage and Children along with her husband Aaron Haskins, who is employed by City Church in Kirkland. A huge amount of Haskins’ contributions have come from donors with ties to City Church. (Ties to working-class Renton? Not so much.) We should all remember that Alliance for Marriage, with all their feel-good, up-with-people rhetoric, worked hard to protect an employers ability to fire a person simply for being gay or lesbian.

For more info, check out rentonfacts.

I’m testing my new ability to embed video with one of my favorite ever Daily Show clips. It’s Steve Carrell riding the “Straight Talk Express” with Senator John McCain in 1999. I think the bit at the 3:12 mark is priceless.

The UW College Republicans (who haven’t bothered to buy their own url) are promoting “Islamo-Fascist Awareness Week” starting Monday.

Should we be aware of Islamo-fascists? Sure. I think the Bush Administration should be “aware” of Islamo-fascists, specifically one particular Islamo-fascist, who seems to be a wee bit slippery these days. But who can blame him? The guy is six foot, five inches tall, hooked up to a dialysis machine and puts out more videos than Kanye West. You might remember him. He’s the Islamo-fascist who actually attacked America on 9/11 and has so far gotten away with it. Yeah, that guy.

So why are the doughy-assed douchebags at the UWCR putting on this show? Because talking about Islamo-fascism is way more fun than signing up to do something about it.

Some of the programming this week:

And it’s hosting two events open to the public: a showing of “Suicide Killers,” a documentary about suicide bombers, at 7 p.m. Wednesday in Smith Hall, and a talk by conservative author and talk-show host Michael Medved at 7 p.m. Thursday in Kane Hall.

As for “Suicide Killers,” Medved has already told me the ending: the boxing coach helps his paralyzed boxer take her own life. Very sad.

The local Muslim community, no doubt excited for special attention they’re about to receive, respond:

Amin Odeh, a board member with the local Arab American Community Coalition, said he agrees that “radical anything is dangerous — radical Muslims, radical Christians, radical Jews. Education is needed.”

Education? Not for these patriots!

(Onward, Christian Soldiers begins to play on a pipe organ)

UPDATE:
I’ll be having the President of the UW College Republicans on my show tonight, 710-KIRO at 9PM. (– Goldy)

Dear Supporters,

Last night, I was cited for driving under the influence. I take this charge very seriously and accept full responsibility for my actions.

Today, I want to apologize to all of you, who have supported me since I began this campaign, given me your trust and invested so much of yourselves in this journey.

I am more sorry about this incident that I can express in words. I am also sorry for the impact this will have on you, my supporters. I would never intentionally put others at risk or violate the great trust so many of you have given me.

And I respect the system that will ultimately judge my actions.

I am committed to serving you, the voters and the city of Seattle. I will continue to talk about the issues that matter and why I decided to seek a place on the city council, but not here. Here I accept responsibility and hope you will accept my apology. And I hope I will continue to have your support on November 6th.

Please don’t hesitate to call me at [phone number redacted -Will] if you would like to talk more about this with me. I welcome your call.

Venus

I have family who are in the drug and alcohol rehab business. People who gets nailed for DUI usually go one of two ways. If they take full responsibility for their actions and avoid blaming others, they have a good chance of not reoffending. If they don’t, well, you know the rest of the story.

I talk trash about Dori Monson on a regular basis, but on alcohol and driving, he’s dead on. Drinking alcohol and driving is entirely unacceptable. Getting behind the wheel after drinking alcohol is gambling with other people’s lives. When I’m driving, I don’t drink. At all.

Other people have different rules. At Drinking Liberally, our Tuesday evening get-together, I know for a fact that many of the fellow participants are drinking, and then driving. Maybe it is only one or two beers spread out over an evening, but alcohol affects fine motor skills even when you don’t feel tipsy. Also, DUI stands for “driving under the influence” of drugs or alcohol. “Driving under the influence” doesn’t necessarily mean a .08 blood alcohol level. You can get nailed for less than an “oh eight”, but it is somewhat harder for the state to prove that alcohol was the cause of your impairment.

Drunk driving isn’t a liberal or conservative thing. As one political operative told me back in ’02 on my 21st birthday, “everyone drives drunk, especially in politics.” Drunk driving isn’t taken very seriously in the USA. Other countries, many of them European, take it much more seriously. One of the reasons I’m such a fan of public transportation is that people should be able to go out and party without having to worry about driving home. When I go to Pioneer Square to “tie one on,” I’m usually walking or riding the bus or cabbing it, but that’s because I live close to downtown.

I really care about my friends who drink alcohol and then, sometime later, drive home. It scares the shit out of me, to be frank with you. I don’t want to seem “holier than thou” about it, because I don’t care about being holier than anyone. I just want the people I know to get home safe.

It’s not expected: The Stranger is voting “no” on Prop 1. Why?

For roads, this package is the last gasp. No one in his right mind looks at the environmental realities we’re currently facing and says, “Let’s build hundreds of miles of new roads!”

I don’t think most voters consider “environmental realities” when voting on things. People think mostly about things they think affect them directly. Things like the length of time they have to be in their cars between their job in Seattle and their house in Federal Way. That’s why expanding light rail outside of Seattle makes so much sense. Deliver dependable, speedy transit to the places that don’t have it and you will change things for the better.

But not so says The Stranger:

The light rail in this proposal would be paid for with a regressive sales tax instead of user fees (like tolls). The line itself (through a low-density area) may feed sprawl in south King County, instead of promoting the dense urban development that will grow alongside light rail stations in North Seattle.

What, like this?

The city of Federal Way is remaking it’s downtown. They are turning parking lots into housing and shops and parks. They are doing everything Erica C. Barnett and Josh Feit would have them do, yet The Stranger tells them to “fuck off,” and that they don’t deserve light rail.

If we’re trying to convince people to embrace density, urbanism, and transit, wouldn’t it make sense to bring all of these things to the people who don’t have them?

Let’s look at that last quote again:

The line itself (through a low-density area) may feed sprawl in south King County, instead of promoting the dense urban development that will grow alongside light rail stations in North Seattle.

First, Federal Way is inside the urban growth boundary. That’s where growth is supposed to happen! Second, does transit really create sprawl? Of course not, (unless your name is Knute Berger, in which case transit creates “vertical sprawl,” which is not even a thing). Light rail creates density. That’s the whole point! You put light rail where you want people to live or work! That’s why Ron Sims fought so hard to put light rail down MLK and not Rainier Avenue South. (You are forgiven if you don’t remember that, some years ago, Ron Sims was a die hard champion of light rail.)

I do respect some of the people who are against Roads and Transit. But to play the “useful idiot” for Kemper Freeman Jr. by killing our first chance in 40 years to create a regional mass transit system, that’s too much.

My posting has been a little sparse as of late. Why? I don’t think I ever really announced it, but as of the end of September, I’m a full time student at Seattle Central Community College. I have one year to go until I can transfer to UW. I’m excited to be back, but the workload is more than I was prepared for.

With full time school and a very interesting part time gig, I’ll be super busy for the near future. Some things I will be looking out for:

Roads and Transit. The latest polling puts the measure at the mid fifties, which is decent, but not great. I get the sense that Seattle’s great civic tradition of screwing the pooch on transportation will pay us yet another visit this fall. Already, the whispers of “vote this down, we’ll come back with something next year” can be read in the blogosphere.

If this this is voted down, I’ll tell you what is coming:

Last January, a commission led by former Seattle Mayor Norm Rice and telecommunications billionaire John Stanton called for a new agency of members who would plan and finance road and transit projects for central Puget Sound. The new Puget Sound Regional Transportation Commission would take functions from the Puget Sound Regional Council, the Regional Transportation Investment District (RTID), and Sound Transit.

The Rice-Stanton report [2.5 MB PDF] concluded that there are 128 agencies who manage aspects of transportation in the four-county area. “Our current system of transportation governance delivers inadequate results and will need fundamental systemic change to meet our region’s transportation needs in the future,” they declared.

Sound Transit and others fought the proposal, which passed in the state Senate but died in the House.

If ST2/RTID doesn’t pass, the punishment will not be doled out equally. Sound Transit, an organization with no friends in Olympia, will get the lion share of the blame. The Rice/Stanton plan will likely pass both the Senate and the House. (Some ask, “why would Democrats shitcan Sound Transit?” Remember, we’re not talking about regular Democrats. We’re talking about Olympia Democrats. This blogger was once told the story of a Sound Transit community meeting in north Seattle, where state Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson showed up in a t-shirt that read “Mag-Lev Mama.” That’s how out to lunch they are on this issue.)

If Rice/Stanton passes, Sound Transit will be folded into a larger agency which will, in all likelihood, be governed by an elected board. Seattle, home to transit loving liberals, will have its political clout diluted by the new governance scheme. A transit board member in, say, Gig Harbor will have the right to veto transit funding in Seattle. And that, ladies and gentlemen (and Sen. Ed Murray), is bullshit.

Don’t forget that even if Prop 1 goes down this fall, roads will still get built. Why? Gov. Gregoire won’t allow 520 to plunge into Lake Washington. Expansion of the south portion of 405 is popular on the Eastside (and already partially funded), and with traffic congestion statistics showing this stretch of road to be the most congested in the state, it will be an easy call for legislators. Roads spending, unlike light rail, has sometimes be handled by the legislature without a vote of the people. Initiative 912 notwithstanding, two gas tax increases came out of Olympia without public votes. This could very well happen again, but this time to fund the projects that RTID funds.

The “Let’s Wait ‘Til Next Year” crowd sometimes cites Sound Transit’s success at the ballot box in 1996 as proof that light rail can do a quick turnaround to be approved by voters. What they don’t tell you is that Sound Transit’s failed measure in 1995 was paired down significantly to gain approval in 1996. The package in ’95 included light rail north to Lynnwood, south to Tacoma, and east across the lake to Bellevue. The package voters approved in 1996 was much smaller in scope. In fact, Sound Transit 2 greatly resembles the original Sound Move of 1995. Even with the much-publicized blunders made by Sound Transit during the 90’s, approval of the original Sound Move plan would have put the region in a great position today.

People who want more high capacity transit are rolling the dice by voting “no” on Prop 1. Don’t assume you’ll get another chance to vote for visionary transit investment like this in the near future.

That’s the same Jim Horn who was shitcanned by Bellevue and Mercer Island voters back in 2004. He’s also the guy who thought it a good idea to build another six lane freeway east of I-405. The Sierra Club and the teachers worked hard to kick him out of office.

It’s only a rumor, but I hear he’s thinking about going after the guy who beat him in ’04, Sen. Brian Weinstein.

How anemic is the suburban GOP? The Democrats are building a deep, deep bench with candidates like Maureen Judge in Mercer Island and Keri Andrews in Bellevue. Jim Horn’s spending his days carrying water for Dino Rossi and attacking light rail. I don’t know if he’s got another campaign in him. But let’s hope so!

If anyone knows just how important a ‘yes’ vote is this fall, it’s Jim Ellis.

He goes back to the 1968 transit vote that was part of another Ellis legacy, Forward Thrust, and one of his bitterest losses.

“We were ahead in the polls, right up to the last three weeks,” he said. “Then, some very clever ads came out, and one day General Motors showed up with a large trailer-truck. It had a huge window and inside was a chrome-plated jet engine, and the sign said something like, ‘This is the engine of the future. It will make buses faster than trains!’

“No one would ever put a jet engine in a bus, but people didn’t know that and we slowly lost the vote for transit. That was in 1968. If the people had voted for it — eventually it would have been 80 percent paid by the federal government — the system would have been finished in 1985, at three times the size of the one before voters this November. And the last payment for it would have been in 2008.”

Instead of General Motors, we have Ron Sims pushing the “buses instead of rail” idea. To think, we could have a 22 year-old rail system up and running today, if only the folks back in ’68 had had the foresight to make that investment.

My grandfather voted against Forward Thrust’s rail measure back in ’68. Why? It didn’t run a line from his home in White Center to the Renton Boeing plant. Not seeing the big picture, pops said “no” to Senator Magnuson’s free money. There’s still no rail from White Center to Renton. Maggie’s money, and our rail system, was put to good use.

In Atlanta.

Maybe pops thought they’d come back to the voters with another package a year later. Of course, they never did.

This poll was done before Ron Sims’ opinion piece in the Times came out, so the numbers have likely dipped. But still, a few points short of 60% is very good for a package like this.

Our latest survey of 600 likely voters taken within the RTID district on the 22nd/23rd of September shows the Roads and Transit measure continuing to hold a clear lead with 60% (57% vote for, 3% lean toward) with 37% opposed (34% vote against, 3% lean against). We have now seen eight polls (conducted by four different polling firms) since April giving the measure between 54 and 61% of the vote, with opposition between 32 and 39%. Transportation concerns continue to be the top issue in the Puget Sound area, and voters are
looking for solutions. Clearly, we enter the last six weeks of the campaign with a real chance to put this measure over the top, and are in a better position to win than I would have imagined possible eight months ago.

I’m one of the most pessimistic people I know in local politics, and even I’m buoyed by these numbers.

…stay away from your blog. At least that’s what I’m trying to do after this news.

There is an upside to this: I’m already thinking about who I want to support for King County Exec in ’09, since Ron is pretty much making it clear that he isn’t running again. One of my only rules is that the candidate has to have a consistent position on light rail. They can’t be for it…

…and then against it.

This screenshot was taken at uSP. That’s quite a reading list: Dino Rossi’s Lessons and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. What’s next, Tim Eyman’s How I Fought Herpes and Won and Mein Kampf?
———————————————————————————————–

If you said 50 cents a day (and a buck-fifty on Sunday), you’d be wrong.

At least, that’s according to “Slim” Jim MacIsaac, who’s goofball numbers are getting front page treatment at the P-I.

This is from an email received earlier today:

Using the same methodology reported in the PI to arrive at the $160B cost figure for the joint ballot measure, the Seattle PI costs a reader $60,000.

Here’s how it works: 50-cents per day for 6 days a week, plus $1.50 for Sundays. That’s $4.50 a week, multiplied by 52 weeks a year for $234 per year. But wait – those are 2006 numbers. Using MacIsaac’s terms, you go back to what you’ve been paying since 1996 and go forward to what you’ll pay through to 2057. Using ST’s/MacIsacc’s/PI’s annual inflationary factor of 5.2%, you deflate back to 1996, inflate up to 2057, add it all together and you get $60,075.37 – the true cost of the PI to the reader. I like Joel Connelly, but he doesn’t seem like much of a bargain at that price, now does he? Curiously, the PI does not use these figures to encourage purchasing their product.

But wait again – this is the “true cost” of the PI for one reader, not all readers combined. So, to find the “true cost” of the PI to the community you have to multiply the per reader cost by their circulation figure (since a growth inflator of 5.2% was already in the per reader figure, you don’t have to apply it again to the circulation figure). Keeping in mind that my degree is in Political Science, not Mathematics, the number I get is $7,943,946,401.21, or $8 billion.

I too love Joel’s column, but at 60k, that’s one expensive paper.