That’s the local news media for you; always looking for the pony… before, you know, shooting it in the head and leaving it to rot on the side of trail.
Don’t get me wrong — I love ponies — and I hope whoever capped those two ponies in North Bend are brought to justice for their cruel and inhumane act. But you’d think if the region’s news media was going to spend an entire weekend obsessing on yet another high profile case of animal cruelty, they might want to focus a little on the race for the office of the guy whose job it is to prosecute the evil doers, and report the obvious fact that Dan Satterberg and his Republican cohorts are cheating. I suppose if Bill Sherman was found shot through the head on the side of a trail, lying dead in a pile of Skip Rowley’s business cards, our objective media would want to wait until after the election to report all the facts.
Yeah sure, I know, that’s a pretty violent image, but I’m feeling pretty violent right now. Must have been all those Bugs Bunny and Road Runner cartoons I watched as a kid:
Preschool boys who watch violent television become markedly more aggressive and anti-social as they grow older, according to a study by Seattle researchers in one of the largest examinations so far of such connections.
At the same time, girls appear impervious to the effects of television violence, a finding that has the researchers puzzled.
Hint to researchers: testosterone. Hint to media: you know what else causes violence? War. The media dutifully reports President Bush’s latest upbeat update on the war, at the same time 2007 is headed toward becoming the deadliest year yet in Iraq. How do we explain the constant contradiction between the news in the headlines and the facts on the ground? Um…
The Iraq war represents the end of the media as a major actor in war. … [I]n Iraq the number of journalists killed (now at least 138) means that this war is near private – the images and people who might make the horror of this war real don’t reach our screens. It’s no longer a war that is accessible to public scrutiny or to democratic engagement.
Perhaps if there were more images of dead ponies, Americans might finally take to the streets in opposition to the war.
And you know what else isn’t being made accessible to public scrutiny or democratic engagement? The fact that Skip Rowley, Bruce McCaw and Martin Selig illegally earmarked $100,000 in excess contributions to Dan Satterberg’s campaign. You’d think, maybe, a scandal like this coming in the final days of a high profile race might garner at least a little interest from working journalists. You’d think somebody might sit down and try to connect the dots instead of just taking Satterberg at his word that he is above politics. But apparently they’re all too busy focusing on King Tut’s mummified face, or the man who lost his penis in prison, or gee, I dunno… wild mustangs being offered for adoption.
That’s the local news media for you; always looking for the pony.
Hey wingnuts: I understand you’re calling all the young women who support Hillary “stupid” and even worse names like “slutty”. You even want to take away their right to vote.
I love how you’re sealing your own doom!
Goldy, your reference to the article on the man who lost his pen1s to necrotizing fasciitis in today’s Seattle Times says a lot about what is happening to Democrats in King County in this election. We stand ready to lose some good key positions — which by all rights should be solidly Democratic — to the necrotizing fascists in the Republican Party — all because our leadership seems to have lost their balls.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....on05m.html
Why the noticeable lack of support by Governor Christine Gregoire and King County Executive Ron Sims for a strong candidate for Prosecuting Attorney — something we haven’t held in 60 years? And their implicit support for Dan Satterberg (Gregoire’s personal lawyer, Sims’ sincere professional compliments)? What’s a good Democrat to think?
And it looks like more of the same on the Port of Seattle and the King County Council. This is really sad. You can bet that Dan Satterberg, Bob Edwards, Bill Bryant, and Jane Hague will not be returning any major favors for the top Democrats who stayed neutral in their races. No, you are going to see all of them go all out to support Dino Rossi next fall — just like they did back in 2004.
Goldy,
Last night you said you would run for State Rep IF someone would come 8op with the 200K.
I do nmot hav ehtat sort of money but it seems to me the answer is apparent. At some oint, blogdom shyould emerge as a really new form of politics. Thge parties are .. dspite your fondness for smkle filled rooms .. beyond rescue.
In our post McCluhan world, the media will be in the hands of the corporately self interested. This means a focus on either the interests oif the few able to buy time or the amprphous suits with there please the mases obsession.
IF there is an answer, the web seems like it. I wish I were more copacetic. The Sherman Satterrberg fiasco is a bad exmaple of the residual power of the wealthy AND the parties.
I am more impressed with KOS thna with MoveON. The latter, for much thta is imp0ressive, seems to me to be very thin on the ground. Whether it really is a Soros vehicle or not, MO seems to be very cent5ralized, like a party.
So, back to the 200k, back at KOPS, what would it take to buld a local version of KOS that could endorse candidates and provide the tools for publicity and fund raising. Kinda sorta like a less pink version of the LOWV (many odd allusions meant here)?
Jew @2,
Let me just say that I misspoke last night. Adam Kline is up for reelection until 2010. But my offer stands. I’ll wage a primary battle against him if folks pledge enough money to make it competitive. What I’m not going to do is take a year out of my life begging for money.
Is for reproducing Kos locally, we’re not anywhere near the point where we can generate enough money locally to make that kind of impact. This is a revolution that will take decades to reach full fruition. I may see the promised land, but I’m not sure I’ll live to enter it.
I’m a bit confused and ill-informed on how this works. Last night on the DGS didn’t Bill Sherman say that the state Democratic party was ready to give his campaign $30k, but hadn’t as of yet? If the WSRP can infuse $81k in one day, why would the Dem party wait, especially until the last day of the election?
Goldy,
The pony story is so yesterday…Last night’s TV news had a complete report on whodunnit, whereitbedun, and why…Turns out the pony’s owner put them down for humane reasons, albeit in a process that was less than sound from a PR perspective. Pays to check the morning news before posting a story that’s already consigned to the archives.
See http://www.king5.com/video/fea.....vid=189796
Maybe, though, the pony parable is part and parcel of your problematic perception of the pecuniary positions of parties in the PAO parade (like the alliteration?).
You still need EVIDENCE to support your earmarking allegations…Your outrage isn’t admissable in any save Roger Rabbit’s court of law.
For a guy as supposedly sophisticated politically as you, it’s amazing that you sputter and fulminate; election races are meant to be won, or they shouldn’t be run at all (listening, Pope?), and since nobody appointed you referee, you don’t get to definitively decide what rules apply or when they’re broken, if ever.
Who knows? Maybe this time Wednesday, Bill Sherman will join His Popiness, Richard XI (soon to be XII) in the category of perennial failed candidates. If such is the case, look for shouts of relief, expressions of gratitude to the Almighty, and exuberent choruses of “Hosanna!!!” from employees at the PAO.
The Piper
2 – these hate sites that you you refer to are nothing more than places for the extreme left to hang out and agree with each other. They are not winning over people to their side, they just preach to their own choir. In order to have an impact, you need to convince people and that is not happening.
@4…YP…
Maybe the state party is familiar with the term, “good money after bad.” After all, Dwight Pelz, Mr. Democrat himself, contributed be a few dollars to Sherman; while he’s exactly as grumpy as he looks, he’s not as dumb.
The Piper
Hey kids! Here’s a Kwik Kwiz!
The First Black President of the United States was …
A. [] Bill Clinton
B. [] None of the above
You and Toni Morrison answered A: Bill Clinton was our First Black President. Hardly. It was Harding. Progressive Democrats, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Klan, had destroyed the country in 1918 and 1919. The only way they could score points against Republican Warren G. Harding (not related to Warren G. Magnuson) in the 1920 election was to accuse him of being too dark to be president. He was, Democrats whispered, an Octoroon in the woodpile.
============
“Hillary Clinton Has a Vagina and So Do I …” – Erica C. Barnett
“Clinton has Scrofula and …” or “Clinton has Scabies and …” Yeah, we’d get it. But vaginas? The horror. Unless Barnett meant vaginitis …
============
The patriarchy is way too parochial. Time for the College of Cardinals to lighten up. When the incumbent moves on, elect Jane Hague. And elect Richard Pope as Pope Jane’s Cummunal Wine Steward. Word on the street is that she communes early and often.
Piper,
I want to check your honesty. Aside from issues of evidentiary admissibility, do you believe this last minute infusion of GOP money into the Satterberg campaign passes the smell test?
The truth is out! Dubya is a roadrunner gone bad.
And here we were led to believe Shrub’s brain was fried by coke when, all along, the real culprit was Saturday morning cartoons.
But never fear, the WingNut (TM) Reign of Error (SM) will end soon.
@5 “The pony story is so yesterday…”
Your attitude is soooo Republican. And you don’t understand the media. The pony story is only beginning.
“Last night’s TV news had a complete report on whodunnit, whereitbedun, and why…Turns out the pony’s owner put them down for humane reasons, albeit in a process that was less than sound from a PR perspective.”
Well, I can see why a Republican like you would want to sweep this story under the rug, because it’ll almost certainly turn out that both the owner and the perps are Republicans (only Republicans do things like this), and the real story is not the fact the ponies were destroyed, but the fact these fucking freeloaders did it by dumping the carcasses on public property to avoid paying for disposal — littering, as it were.
Now, how much did it cost taxpayers to send a crew out in moonsuits to clean up this mess, haul away and dispose of the carcasses, and disinfect the riding trail?
These people should be sued for the costs, and prosecuted for violating the littering law. We’ll see if Satterberg is up to the task. If he isn’t, expect to find a lot more dead animals, old tires, sacks of garbage, used car batteries, and barrels of toxic waste tossed onto public property by freeloading Republicans who are too cheap to pay for proper disposal and get around the expense by dumping it on taxpayers — you know, the people who complain about taxes other people pay.
@9…PL…
Not only do I not still beat my wife, I have never beaten my wife, nor do I intend to start…How about you?
The only test that matters is the legal one, and the contributions pass that test. Without standards of evidentiary admissablity, my allegation that you were involved in the Lindbergh kidnapping would be enough to have you second chair Bruno Hauptmann. You can’t just say something to make it so, you have to have proof.
Given the standards of most posters so charmingly evident here at HA, no contribution of any amount to a Republican will ever pass a so-called “smell test.”
The question you ought to be asking is of Dwight Pelz: “Hey, Dwight, where’s our swag??? Why aren’t you out there pimpin’ that donkey action for bags of bucks for Bill???” The answer is probably because Democrats who do contribute have already…to Satterberg.
There’s more jealousy about this than justice.
Goldy’s trying his leftist best to make an issue of the contributions, and he has the First Amendment right to do that. It is a free country.
But his history of strident, one-note partisanship has smell-test problems of its own. Anyone who would seriously endorse His Popiness, Richard XI (soon to be XII) is functionally estopped from claiming credibility as a serious political pundit or commentator.
That Goldy…there he goes again! If he ain’t bitchin’ bout somethin’, he ain’t a happy camper.
The Piper
Piper,
Your law school training still serves you well. Your eight-paragraph answer to a simple yes or no question is that you refuse to answer. Nicely done. You should think about reactivating your license.
@3 Goldy
I hope you are wrong. The problem, as I see it that the total price of the
SeattleOK Sonics is a lot less than it would cost, for example, to buy state dem. party.Once, the US media were pretty divers, widely read, and informative. Indeed, the free media of the 1700s was the source of our revolution. Everyone was depoendent on the broadsheets and the cost of priting was minimal .. like today’s web.
Things have changed. I just read that the Sunday NYT is down 7.5%. If it were not for the Sunday funnies, the Wed. food ads, weprobably would stop bothering with the Seattle Fish Wrappers. There is NO incentive for the mass media to do anything that promotes democracy. The scary exception? Murdock! I do suppose we would be better off if a lefty were to build the Unfaux, but is that really a good replacement for democratic debate? Do you know a lefty version of Murdock who wants to make a buck by creating a lefty version of BillO?
This is why I always cringe when you talk about the pleasure you get out of the caucuses. While I do realize that the caucus system is more open to actiism than the primary system, the history of that sort of activism seems to me to be bad. On our side it has led to largely ineffectual trysts from McGovern to Lamont.
Grassroots, with support from super monied folks, have been much more successful on the right to the extent that the rad right now controls the Reps. The idea of a Dem Party something akin to the Rep Party, with a left extremism, is not pleasant. Worse yet, given out two party system, is the thought that the coportate mediocracy will take over both parties.
So why support the party mechanism? Last night, you asked Prof. Ellis who founded the two party sustem. The answer, of course, was that Jefferson and Madison decided there was a need for an opposition party to counter the exclusivism of Hamilton. However, they did not create anything like the French or British public service. Instead, we got the spoils system and incorporated much of the power of a one party system into our two party system .. with periodic disruptions. The system disallows any alternatives. Third parties have huge, official obstacles that rival those set up in Putin’s Russia.
I suspect, though I hope not, that the Satterberg vs. Sherman will be determined not by the controversy YOU have raised but by who buys the most phonecalls.
Spo, back to the present, I hope HA ands its ilk can grow. I know you want this too. How does one get there from here?
@15…PL…
Thank you…I think…
Speaking of earmarks, you question had all those of a trap, and since I’m still recovering from the 12-stitches, black eye, and cracked rib of just over a week ago, I have no desire to trip and fall into anything new.
When the rules are followed, there is no smell test; there’s only the fact that the rules were followed.
BTW…you have a wonderful career as a push-poller.
What smells to me is Bill Sherman claiming he’s qualified when what we’ve all read here and elsewhere from attorneys and others at the PAO strongly contend otherwise.
And you ought to know better than to blithely sweep aside the requirements of evidentiary admissability. Shame on you! What’s next? The Star Chamber?
The Piper
” …turn out that both the owner and the perps are Republicans (only Republicans do things like this) …”
Aren’t you glad Rogered Rabbit is a process man? That he’s an exquisitely sensitive due-process man? Aren’t you glad he’s pissing away his time here instead of doing something dangerous, such as practicing “law?”
“BTW…you have a wonderful career as a push-poller.”
Every poll is a push poll. Mickey Kaus shows often that Big Media (the Jayson Blair Times) engineers its polls to generate a preferred result, then uses the results of its own engineered polls to frame its lead stories, above the fold, on page 1.
Trying to explain evidentiary admissability to proud leftists with hairy feet is like trying to explain temperance to Venus V.
Piper @ 17
I would define the smell test as something which gets the old gut roiling and leads to further inquiry. Good prosecutors and cops would know what I’m talking about. The rules of evidence do not constrain an investigation, only judicial proceedings. Certainly, you would not propose that a cop cannot rely on hearsay to pursue leads during the course of an investigation, right? So, let’s ask the question this way: doesn’t the temporal correlation between big donations to the GOP and the GOP’s donations to the Satterberg campaign smell enough to prompt an investigation?
Also, with regard to your comment about other prosecutors in the KCPO apparently preferring Satterberg to Sherman as their boss, I would say simply who gives a shit? In my office, staff might well prefer me to others as their boss. That, however, would not by any means mean I’m the most qualified to take over that job.
Let the PDC sort out the smells. Let Mr. Goldstein refrain from making the illogical leap from supposition to accusation.
(And I’m still trying to fumigate the bad smell of candidate Dave Ross using his KIRO show as a soapbox long after his candidacy was an actual fact.)
@21 “Also, with regard to your comment about other prosecutors in the KCPO apparently preferring Satterberg to Sherman as their boss, I would say simply who gives a shit? In my office, staff might well prefer me to others as their boss. That, however, would not by any means mean I’m the most qualified to take over that job.”
Except that the deputy prosecutors who have posted here and on Postman’s blog have explained WHY they give a shit and why the public should too, and have explained WHY Satterberg IS the most qualified. Their opinion shouldn’t end the inquiry, but should at least give it some consideration. Particularly since most of them are Democrats crossing party lines to voice their opinion and cast their vote. Can you logically refute their arguments with something better than “who gives a shit?”
@6 “these hate sites that you you refer to are nothing more than places for the extreme left to hang out and agree with each other”
Uh-huh … and rightwing sites are the internet version of Woodstock … ?
@7 Speaking of throwing good money after bad, the WSRP spent TWO MILLION DOLLARS proving in court that Dino Rossi got fraudulent voters …
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Yep, 24, and we’re waiting patiently for President Hillary to build us a museum.
@8 “Progressive Democrats, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Klan, had destroyed the country in 1918 and 1919.”
Thank God they’re in your party now. We don’t want them.
@14 “The only test that matters is the legal one, and the contributions pass that test.”
How do you know? This matter hasn’t been adjudicated yet (and never will be, if Satterberg becomes prosecutor). As for your opinion … well, you’re not even a lawyer.
@14 “That Goldy…there he goes again! If he ain’t bitchin’ bout somethin’, he ain’t a happy camper.”
It’s just that with Republicans running the country, there’s so much to bitch about.
@18 We don’t give Republicans any due process here. They’re all presumptively guilty. After all, this is a liberal blog. We conduct business the same way wingnut blogs do, except Goldy doesn’t censor or ban Republicans because it’s more fun to watch them make public fools of themselves.
@21…PL…
Leads? What leads?
Nothing was hid from view or not properly disclosed. What was done was done above board and by the rules. Just because you or Goldy don’t like what was done doesn’t mean it flunks some “smell test.”
Contributions get made to political parties all the time, and political parties then allocate the money to candidates. This is older than than the hills and twice as dusty.
That the state GOP spent money on a hotly contested race is hardly surprising. That the money came from well-heeled donors, many of whom are regular GOP contributors, is also hardly surprising.
Like, you expect Luke Esser to say, “Better not donate to Satteberg, Goldy might object!”
This is a clear case of smear. You and Goldy accuse, therefore an investigation is in order? First, show me where a law has been broken, a crime committed…Problem is…you can’t!
Good prosecutors – meaning those in the PAO who support Satterberg – and cops don’t simply sniff around when there’s no evidence of criminal activity. If the shoe were on the other foot and Republicans were sniffing around your candidacy for receiveing large contributions, you’d howl like a stuck pig, and Goldy would howl with you.
Your temporal connection isn’t proof of anything, evidence in support of anything, anything but anything other than money was contributed, which is as it should be.
Where else would the state GOP have allocated the money? Jane Hague’s race? Not hardly, given Pope’s pathetic fund raising prowess. Where, then? Just sit on it? I know that’s your preferred solution, but since Luke Esser isn’t obligated to ask you, don’t be surprised or outraged when that’s not what happens.
This smacks more of a certain number of names in your briefcase of high ranking members of the State Department who…remember that one?
If you think this is worthy of investigation, go swear out a complaint that you have, of your own personal knowledge, reason to believe the law was violated and that you allege certain facts. Then be prepared to back up your allegation with hard facts and admissable evidence.
And the issue of PAO staff…That Sherman hasn’t the support of it while Satterberg has is definitely newsworthy. That Sherman is increasingly seen by staff is someone who will damage the office is worth noting. That PAO staff sees Satterberg as clearly more competent to run the office than Sherman, who they also see as clearly less competent than any number of other PAO attorneys.
Why is that? What prompts such strong reaction? What do they know about Sherman that we don’t? What is he claiming that they think is bogus? Why haven’t any in the PAO sprung to his defense even as more and more come out of the woodwork attesting to his being ill-suited to be the KC Prosecuting Attorney?
Talk about flunking a “smell test!”
The Piper
@20 You don’t need McCormick on Evidence to know when a Republican smells.
@32 was posted by Roger Rabbit after Mrs. Rabbit tampered with the screen name while I was momentarily in another part of this rabbit den. Mrs. Rabbit has a mischievious sense of humor.
It was inevitable that a Republican maggot would show up here. That’s what happens when you forget to take the garbage out.
@29…RR…
We aim to please; it’s our business to be at your service!
The Piper
sp mischievous
@34…RR…
Miss today’s meal, did you?
The Piper
@22 Don’t forget to turn that bug spray on yourself.
We-Don’t-Want-Them Kwik Kwiz:
To which party does Senator Kleagle, Democrat, West Virginia, belong?
A. [] Republican
B. [] None of the above
@17 It’s not surprising the DPAs prefer Satterberg. After all, Republicans have been doing the hiring in that office for 60 years.
@26 Wait a little, you’ll get that chance.
@40…RR…
Then why do they all seem to ID themselves as Democrats?
Or were all the Republicans tasked with convening non-existent county grand juries?
The Piper
@40 Rabbit, they’re almost all Democrats, I know a bunch of ’em. You’re a lawyer, call up someone you know and see if you can offer any evidence (hearsay or otherwise) to the contrary. Funny thing is, if Sherman wins, I bet he turns a lot of them into Republicans!
“Nothing was hid from view or not properly disclosed. What was done was done above board and by the rules.” Piper @ 31
C’mon, man. How can you possibly say that? You might be correct, but you have no evidence to support what you are saying other than those who might have dirty hands say they’re clean. I’ll I’m saying here is that an inquiry might be appropriate. Such inquiry might come up completely empty. But, to say confidently anything about the propriety of the late surge of campaign funding is foolish.
@44 Goldy and Feit might get more traction if they exercised the degree of restraint you do in this post. Did Sherman file his PDC complaint as promised?
@44…PL…
What happened to the presumption of innocence? You’re now saying that there MUST be a presumption of guilt because A happened then B happened. No stone will be left unturned to find a causal connection between with two even if it means substituting partisan political opinion for objective evidence.
Late in the game contributions and last minute infusions of cash are older than the Republic. That one isn’t going in your favor is more at the bottom of your beef than anything else; were it Sherman shanking the Shinola, you’d defend him to the death.
Since you, on behalf of Goldy, Sherman, et al, are making the allegations, the burden of coming forth with evidence is upon you. So far, there’s nothing concrete to rebut other than your opinion. That and $3.95 gets you a short de-caf macchiato at Tulley’s.
The Piper
Piper @ 46: “What happened to the presumption of innocence? You’re now saying that there MUST be a presumption of guilt because A happened then B happened.”
Calm down, my friend. Here’s what I said: “I’ll I’m saying here is that an inquiry might be appropriate. Such inquiry might come up completely empty. But, to say confidently anything about the propriety of the late surge of campaign funding is foolish.”
I don’t think I said anyone did anything wrong. I just said there’s a bit of a stench in the air, and checking out possible sources makes sense. I will say this–if there’s been wrongdoing, I would hope and suspect that Satterberg was not in on it. Rather, the more likely explanation would be collaboration between the contributors and GOP party officials. But, hey, like I said, everyone may be as innocent here as a newborn. I think, however, that suggesting that no grounds exist here for an inquiry reflects your being either naive or a bit of an apologist.
If there were any pdc violations, surely Richard Pope would have found it and reported it.
@47…PL…
Sorry…investigations under those circumstances are always viewed as, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” They shouldn’t be undertaken on the dislike of an occurance, but, rather, because there’s some reasonable grounds to believe a law has been broken.
You want to investigate this, you better be prepared to investigate every political campaign in this state from now until Kingdom Come…and see the ire of your pals in the Democratic Party rise up and smite you as the heathen you are!
The presumption of newborn innocence exists until you, the party alleging impropriety, produce EVIDENCE warranting further inquiry. So far, what you have is EMOTION and IRRITATION, neither of which rise to the level of PROOF of anything other than a low threshold for angst.
This is an old political shell game. Be careful…it might come back to bite you in the butt; the law of unanticipated consequences is pretty hard and fast.
The Piper
Piper,
I think you’re quite a lot more riled about this issue than I am. A bit scared here, perhaps? Given the paucity of partisan races on the King County ballot this election, do you think those three gentlemen didn’t no damned well where their money was going? I believe one of them is even a registered Democrat. Why would he be giving money to the Republican Party at this time if he didn’t know exactly where it was going? I think the rest of your ranting, about the big picture, etc., suggests a low threshold for angst.
@43 I try to avoid getting acquainted with cops, prosecutors, and animal control officers.
@46 The presumption of innocence applies to prosecutors, not political bloggers.
@48 He’s busy.
@50 There are no registered Democrats in this state.
@50…PL…
I’m not riled at all; the complaints about all this are coming from you, Goldy (he admits he’s angry!), and Josh over at the Stranger.
Under your reasoning, if only one race was contested, a contribution to the party couldn’t then result in a contribution to that race since everyone (wink) would (wink) know (wink) where (wink) the (wink) money (wink) would (wink) go (wink).
Why would a Democrat give money to the Republican Party? Perhaps because he’s seen the light. Work for you? Does for me…
In an effort to eliminate all the stress, what say you simply…drop the issue? No skin off my nose…
The Piper
@54…RR…
Lucky us…
The Piper
Roger @ 54
You’re right, I used the wrong word. On the other hand, I believe Washingtonians do need to declare a party for purposes of obtaining primary ballots. The Satterberg contributor to whom I’m referring has called himself a Democrat in the past, even being a part of some dimwitted organization calling itself “Democrats for Bush.”
@57…PL…
You don’t need to declare a party to request a party’s primary ballot. But if you want your primary vote to count, you do have to request the primary of one or the other party.
A fine distinction, but a distinction nevertheless…
The Piper