Here are some numbers:
Tunnel:
Yes: 30.12%
No: 69.88%Rebuild:
Yes: 44.52%
No: 55.48%
I’ll be drinking a “victory beer” with the winning team (No Elevated) and then with the Friends of Seattle.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
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!
You would’ve thought all that money spent against the viaduct would’ve bought a better result.
Yep the Democrats loose again!!!!!!!!
You can not solve anything that requires a vision or requires a plan.
Goldy you are right do not build the AWV, tear it down and ride bicycles instead.
In the next thirty years Seattle will be living in the dark ages.
Fire all the government works and out source their jobs to Mexico.
Please take all the cons with them to save the Tax payers some money.
Only in Seattle do the hold election that are meaningless.
“winning team”??
last I checked, this was an advisory vote – i.e. MEANINGLESS!
just another small example of money that could have been spent on schools, stadiums, cops, or more public art. sheesh!
Roger Rabbit’s floating bridge wins! The Floating Bridge Option involves building a surface boulevard on top of concrete pontoons. This allows access to the waterfront via underpasses between the pontoons, eliminates intersections, and — most important of all — when global warming raises the sea level 21 feet, SR-99 will float up off the inundated waterfront with no messy retrofitting required!
Now we can take the $2 billion and put it into replacing SR-520, since the people of Seattle don’t want to spend it on replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct.
and what happens, pray tell, when the first bum gets run over by the new on the ground street?
roger will come slithering out of his burrow [if he existed and wasn’t goldy…oh wait never mind] to sue the crap out of the city.
welcome to liberal-land…where dumb is always in style.
Was McKay Fired for Refusing to File Phony Charges?
The Seattle Times reports that fired U.S. Attorney John McKay’s office conducted a thorough investigation of the 2004 governor’s election and concluded no crimes had been committed.
According to the Times, the BIAW’s Tom McCabe called McKay claiming he had evidence of forged signatures on absentee votes for Gregoire. McKay assigned an FBI agent to investigate, and says “it was not the conclusion of the FBI that they were forgeries.” This so incensed McCabe that he made repeated calls to the White House demanding that McKay be fired.
http://tinyurl.com/2l89vh
I think two things were going on. First, GOP party leaders wanted U.S. attorneys to file election-fraud charges against Democrats regardless of whether there was any truth to the allegations or any evidence to support them, in order to smear the Democratic Party. It didn’t matter if juries ultimately rejected the charges, because the mere filing of charges would create intense publicity making the Democrats look bad.
Second, they wanted to give their own nationwide election-stealing operations a free hand without interference from prosecutors.
Both objectives required U.S. attorneys who would put party loyalty above all else, including the law and their attorney oaths. That’s why they considered replacing all 93 U.S. attorneys with party loyalists.
Yahooo!! Seattle wins a reprieve! Hooray!! Hooorah!!
Put on your high heels, baby!!
Cuz we’re goin’ out tonight!!
Hooooray!!!
McCabe, not being a lawyer, isn’t bound by the ethical strictures on McKay. Apparently he has no personal scruples or conscience, either. So the idea of bringing a malicious prosecution against the Democrats didn’t bother him at all. But what bothered him a lot was that an appointed prosecutor from his own party wouldn’t go along with it. I wonder if it’s a crime to procure a false prosecution through intimidation and coercion?
@6 “christmasghost says: roger will come slithering out of his burrow [if he existed and wasn’t goldy… ”
It’s a given that ghost would be the last wingnut on this board to peddle this ridiculous allegation that I’m Goldy! You’re stupid enough, ghost.
I know this will make no sense to one of your limited intellect, buuuuut … if I’m Goldy, how do I manage to post on HorsesAss at the same time I’m talking on the air on KIRO?
@8 is a sequel to a post hung up in the spam filter citing a Seattle Times article that says fired U.S. Attorney John McKay conducted a thorough investigation of the 2004 governor’s election and found no evidence of fraud.
Stop and think about it … why would the White House want Gonzales to replace a U.S. attorney who created a task force of assistant U.S. attorneys and FBI agents, conducted an extensive investigation that (in McKay’s words) “left no stone unturned,” and found NO EVIDENCE that anyone had committed a crime?
Because they want U.S. attorneys to file phony charges, that’s why. In order to smear Democrats.
In analyzing that advisory vote, it would be interesting to know what percentage of AWV users are suburban commuters who didn’t get to vote.
Since SR-99 is a state highway of statewide significance, paid for with gas taxes collected all over the state, why does the opinion of voters living within the city limits count for beans? It doesn’t. That’s like asking the residents of the Green Lake and Phinney Ridge neighborhoods — folks within walking distance of the zoo — what they think of the zoo building a parking garage to accomodate visitors who come from all over the region.
Klake, the word lose is different than the word loose. Mean two different
things. Please check your dictionary.
Why wasn’t this vote at least countywide? At a minimum, it should have included the entire City Light service area.
@14 Lose is what klake’s party did in the last election. Loose is what the screws in klake’s head are.
It’s too bad the Rebuild did as well as it did.
@17 Why? Because 45% of city voters realize you have to put 110,000 vehicles a day somewhere?
@18:
* ding * ding * ding * ding * ding *
We have a winner!
Let’s see if the surface + transit people have any ideas beyond “cars are icky.” I’ll just pop open a beer in the meantime.
#18, Because the Rebuild is just about as stupid (or even more) so than the Tunnel. I hate to see the Rebuild get much more support than the Tunnel. In my idea dream-world, they both would have received 20%, tops.
The problem is that a lot of well-meaning people like Goldy (and others far less-informed who have much more of an excuse) were ignorant, gullible or wanted to believe that the Viaduct couldn’t be Repaired. So the Repair option was not seriously considered because an awful of people found it convenient to toss-off oh-so-casually “Well of course we all agree that the Viaduct must be Replaced…”
That’s why.
I think a lot of people voted in favor of the rebuild because they were uninformed. I know I didn’t decide to vote no on both advisories until about two weeks ago.
It took a lot of investigation to determine that the “choice” was between “pretty and too expensive” and “pretty awful”.
One step closer to surface-with-transit.
Roger Rabbit @ 13
Maybe because Mrs. Gregoire requested that the Seattle City Council put some sort of ballot proposition before the voters? And after they did so, Mrs. Gregoire said the results of the vote wouldn’t matter anyway.
Roger Rabbit @ 11
Of course, maybe Alberto Gonzalez should resign for “job performance” issues. Anyone who knowingly re-hires undesired employees is not an effective manager.
I looked at 28 USC 541 et seq for the statutory authority regarding United States Attorneys.
Under 28 USC 541(b), they are appointed for a term of four years. To serve beyond that period of time, the President has to re-appoint them. So all of the recently fired U.S. Attorneys were re-appointed by Bush for another term after he was re-elected.
Not only is each term only four years, but there is absolutely no expectation to serve more than four years. If the presidency changes parties, you are basically fired. Why should it be any different (as for the president’s rights) if the president is re-elected to another term?
Why didn’t President Bush simply not appoint John McKay to another term? That would have been the easiest solution, and he couldn’t have claimed that he was fired.
If they wanted McKay or any of the others out of there two years ago, why in the hell were they re-appointed to another term, and then fired nearly two years later?
This is an excellent outcome!
The tunnel is dead dead dead!
The viaduct which did get 45% is far from dead.
The surface/ transit/ reduced capacity/ reduced parking option will now get a very close look.
This is a good thing but as a non Seattle resident, I have to say that I lack comfort in the cities ability to make a decision at all. Let alone to make a good informed decision and then stick with it. Delay costs huge money and I hope protracted delay if it occurs is somehow going to be charged to Seattle.
How come everybody and their dog gets to tell Seattle how to run their life, but if we even dare comment about another town..?
The good folks in Vancouver still arguing over the new bridge.
http://www.columbian.com/news/localNe ws/02282007news109770.cfm
Then there’s Spokane – “Since 1946, highway planners in eastern Washington have considered building the North Spokane Freeway…”
http://www.taxpayer.net/TCS/RoadRuin/ nspokanewa.htm
–
Enough said.