This week’s Birds Eye View Contest is a tough one.
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!
Geez, it looks like Algore is full of shit… as usual:
Quoting from the gawd of global warming: “Two thousand scientists, in a hundred countries, engaged in the most elaborate, well organized scientific collaboration in the history of humankind, have produced long-since a consensus that we will face a string of terrible catastrophes unless we act to prepare ourselves and deal with the underlying causes of global warming. Ladies and gentlemen, the warnings about global warming have been extremely clear for a long time. We are facing a global climate crisis. It is deepening. We are entering a period of consequences.”
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0912-32.htm
That sure was a helluva hurricane season we had this year. Let’s see… how many “major catastrophes” did we have.
Oh… none.
And none last year…
Hmmmm
@1
We weren’t invaded by aliens either. That Al Gore doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Dear Moron Mark the red-neck and no-brain:
Heard of the typhoon in Bangaladesh that just killed more people than were killed in Iraq?
Freakin’ idiots think the only weather is in the US – chances are we will get hit too, eventually, moron!
You global warming denialists are typical:
gee, today was warm so there is no global warming. the scientific consensus is in – global warming is a fact. It is also a fact that it is due to humans. I suppose you think the earth is flat too….because your street isn’t curved. You wouldn’t know a scientific fact if it hit you in the face…
Let’s see…we will face a string of terrible catastrophes in the future if we do not act to mitigate gloal warming. MTR, in his near-infinite wisdom, tells us that he can easily disprove what is predicted for the future by telling us what happened last year. He’s brilliant, I tell you.
Gullible Fool @ 3
Are MIT Perfessors included in your definition of “freakin’ idiots”.
http://www.projo.com/opinion/c.....97da1.html
Be sure to catch the part about global warming causing CO2, not the other way around.
Say, is that bruise on your face sorta shaped like a rake handle?
Can any of you gullible fools explain why the “hockey stick” graphic doesn’t appear in the latest alamrist report from the Murka haters?
And I’m still waiting for a good chi squared analysis of temperatures over the past few thousand years that shows that current temps are out of range of historical norms.
Here’s a math problem for you gullible fools:
MTR’s luxury SUV “spews” about 1.5 lb of C02 per mile. He drives about 2000 miles per month.
How many seattle kook progressives need to buy hybrids to offset the global warming that he creates?
For those who aren’t worried enough about global warming, it turns out that we have now decreased the lifespan of the whole damn universe.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear.....tviewedbox
Undoubtedly, it’s Bush’s fault…..
MTR- The following was included in the supplemental budget submitted by that well known “Seattle kook progressive” George Bush:
Climate research conducted over the past several years indicates that most of the global warming experienced in the past few decades is very likely due to the observed increase in greenhouse gas concentrations from human activities.
http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/L.....efault.htm
MTR- The following was included in the supplemental budget submitted by that well known “Seattle kook progressive” George Bush:
Climate research conducted over the past several years indicates that most of the global warming experienced in the past few decades is very likely due to the observed increase in greenhouse gas concentrations from human activities.
http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/L ibrary/ocp2008/default.htm
and THAT makes you believe it’s true?
Tell me, where are the WMDs?
The fact that scientists working on climate change finally had evidence so compelling Bush could not suppress it does carry some weight.
When a long time denier like Bush gives it up that also says something.
Shills from the fossil fuel industry glibly dispute the overwhelming scientific evidence for global warming. Then one other person quotes a study somewhere. Then somebody else quotes the first one. Suddenly there is a hallunication of truth in there somewhere.
Then casual doofuses (doofusi?) like our pal Mark can thus reassure themsleves that they don’t have to do anything and everybody will live happily ever after.
That plus the classic logical fallacy infests folks like Mark’s “thinking.”
MTR,
Rock, back, crawl. NOW!
The best news I have seen in a while is that 27 year old
woman had an abortion and then had her self sterilized
to reduce her carbon footprint. That is fucking beautiful.
We can only wish secretly to our intelligent designer that
this catches on in a big way.
@5 Let’s avoid the usual ad hominem stuff by skipping over the fact Mr. Lindzen, MIT professor (singular, not plural as in quote “MIT perfessers” unquote), gets paid by oil and coal companies and focus on content.
First of all, Prof. Lindzen, who is the usual “big name” scientist who is trotted out by global warming deniers in an attempt to give themselves a [thin] veneer of scientific respectability, agrees the climate is warming. He only disagrees about the extent to which human activities are causing it.
Secondly, Prof. Lindzen does not claim that human activities are not causing the global warming that he acknowledges is taking place. He only claims that current science doesn’t prove they are.
Third, Prof. Lindzen has not offered an alternative explanation of what is causing the global warming that he acknowledges is taking place. He simply responds, with unassailable logic, that “if somebody says you should take jelly beans for cancer and you say that’s stupid, and he says, well can you suggest something else and you say, no, does that mean you have to go with jelly beans?” This reasoning, although impeccable in its own right, does not constitute a scientific explanation of what is causing global warming, if one rules out human activities.
In fact, Prof. Lindzen usually is grouped with other scientists who “do not know what the cause of global warming is,” which, of course, by definition, does not rule out human activities.
Scientific skepticism is a healthy thing, except in the hands of a halfwit like you who takes things out of context while understanding none of what you quote or cite, and in general it’s useful to have people like Prof. Lindzen around to question the premises and conclusions of other scientists. Science is a process, not an answer. [Needless to say, I don’t expect you to understand a statement as profound as this, even though it comes from a non-scientist lawyer, and a rabbit lawyer at that.] But that does render invalid every correlation-based conclusion in the universe. That global warming is occurring (at least over the short run) is an observable and observed fact, not disputed by Prof. Lindzen, and something is causing it. The effects of CO2 in the atmosphere are understood. The various sources of CO2 are known. This is a connect-the-dots deal, Redneck. The fact the lines between the dots draw a picture doesn’t rule out other possible combinations of lines and dots, and who knows, maybe with more research and deeper understanding, deniers like you might get lucky, but I doubt it.
Now unfuck yourself and pay your past due gambling debt, you cheapskate welsher.
erratum
But that doesn’t render invalid
@8 No problem here that a buck-a-gallon gas tax can’t fix.
@9 Go back and read the GOP playbook again, dumbass. You’re supposed to say it’s Clinton’s fault.
@11 You’ve got us by the short hairs, George. For the first time, you’ve come up with a persuasive argument: If Bush says global warming is caused by human activities, it must be a goddamned lie.
@13 Don’t worry, I make a nickel off every gallon he uses.
15
Mark,
Shame your mom did not think of it first!!
As for the Bird’s Eye View contest, the house is way too small to belong to anyone of consequence, but the property obviously is adjacent to a tidal flat, which rules out Omaha. The architectural style looks like New England outside of New York City, I’m gonna say somewhere in Connecticut.
@11 You’ve got us by the short hairs, George. For the first time, you’ve come up with a persuasive argument:
Actually, I won the argument on the ferry system too.
Heh Roger, where are all those TAX CUTS you say only come from Democrats.
Like in the upcoming November 29th special session where they will BS their way through passing a 1% property tax session, but forget to cap the Saved 30% banked BS the cities are ready to jump on.
1% My Ass, My Island County taxes went up $700 last year alon, and that was over 10% in one year. Where the F is the 1% Limit dude?
I’m still laughing my ass off at the statement that Democrats are the Tax cutting party.
See Rangles new Tax Cutting Budget?
Guess not!
The Bush Economy: An American Catastrophe
Let’s shift gears a bit now, and discuss how badly Bush has fucked up the U.S. economy. Executive summary: For the rest of your lfietime.
This article is from the current issue of Vanity Fair, and is written by Joseph Stiglitz. C.V.: Mr. Stiglitz has a Ph.D. from M.I.T., is a professor of economics at Columbia University (and has also taught at Yale, Duke, Stanford, Princeton, and Oxford), has been a Fulbright Fellow, has chaired the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, and is a Nobel Prize winner. In other words, he knows more about economics than Mark the Welsher and Crackpiper put together.
“When we look back someday at the catastrophe that was the Bush administration, we will think of many things: the tragedy of the Iraq war, the shame of Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib, the erosion of civil liberties. The damage done to the American economy does not make front-page headlines every day, but the repercussions will be felt beyond the lifetime of anyone reading this page. …
“Up to now, the conventional wisdom has been that Herbert Hoover … is the odds-on claimant for the mantle ‘worst president’ when it comes to stewardship of the American economy. … The economic effects of Bush’s presidency are more insidious than those of Hoover, harder to reverse, and likely to be longer-lasting … our grandchildren will still be living with, and struggling with, the economic consequences of Mr. Bush. …
“The first major economic initiative pursued by the president was a massive tax cut for the rich, enacted in June of 2001. … The inequities were compounded by a second tax cut, in 2003, this one skewed even more heavily toward the rich. Together these tax cuts … mean that in 2012 the average reduction for an American in the bottom 20 percent will be a scant $45, while those with incomes of more than $1 million will see their tax bills reduced by an average of $162,000. …
“Inequality is now widening in America, and at a rate not seen in three-quarters of a century. A young male in his 30s today has an income, adjusted for inflation, that is 12 percent less than what his father was making 30 years ago. Some 5.3 million more Americans are living in poverty now than were living in poverty when Bush became president. America’s class structure … [is] heading in the direction of Brazil’s and Mexico’s.
“In breathtaking disregard for the most basic rules of fiscal propriety, the administration continued to cut taxes even as it undertook expensive new spending programs and embarked on a financially ruinous ‘war of choice’ in Iraq. … Agricultural subsidies were doubled between 2002 and 2005. … Tax expenditures — the vast system of subsidies and preferences hidden in the tax code — increased more than a quarter. … Although it railed against entitlement programs for the needy, the administration enacted the largest increase in entitlements in four decades — the poorly designed Medicare prescription-drug benefit, intended as both an election-season bribe and a sop to the pharmaceutical industry. As internal documents later revealed, the true cost of the measure was hidden from Congress. …
“You’ll still hear some — and, loudly, the president himself — argue that the administration’s tax cuts were meant to stimulate the economy, but this was never true. The bang for the buck — the amount of stimulus per dollar of deficit — was astonishingly low. Therefore, the job of economic stimulation fell to the Federal Reserve Board, which stepped on the accelerator in a historically unprecedented way, driving interest rates down to 1 percent. In real terms, taking inflation into account, interest rates actually dropped to negative 2 percent. The predictable result was a consumer spending spree. Looked at another way, Bush’s own fiscal irresponsibility fostered irresponsibility in everyone else. …
“All of this spending made the economy look better for a while; the president could (and did) boast about the economic statistics. … The president undoubtedly hoped the reckoning would come sometime after 2008. It arrived 18 months early. … Between March 2006 and March 2007 personal-bankruptcy rates soared more than 60 percent. …
“The war in Iraq … has cost the country dearly in blood and treasure. … Today, government figures officially acknowledge that more than half a trillion dollars total has been spent by the U.S. …. But in fact the overall cost of the conflict could be quadruple that amount …. The official numbers do not include, for instance, other relevant expenditures hidden in the defense budget, such as the soaring costs of recruitment, with re-enlistment bonuses of as much as $100,000. They do not include the lifetime of disability and health-care benefits that will be required by tens of thousands of wounded veterans … they do not include much of the cost of the equipment that has been used in the war, and that will have to be replaced. If you also take into account the costs to the economy from higher oil prices and the knock-on effects of the war — for instance, the depressing domino effect that war-fueled uncertainty has on investment … — the total costs of the Iraq war mount, even by a conservative estimate, to at least $2 trillion … so far. …
“It is natural to wonder, What would this money have bought if we had spent it on other things? … The president made a big deal out of the financial problems facing Social Security, but the system could have been repaired for a century with what we have bled into the sands of Iraq. Had even a fraction of that $2 trillion been spent on investments in education and technology, or improving our infrastructure, the country would be in a far better position economically to meet the challenges it faces in the future …. For a sliver of that $2 trillion we could have provided guaranteed access to higher education for all qualified Americans.
“The soaring price of oil is clearly related to the Iraq war. … It seems unbelievable now to recall that Bush-administration officials … suggested not only that Iraq’s oil revenues would pay for the war in its entirety … but also that war was the best way to ensure low oil prices. … Before the war, the oil markets anticipated that the then price range of $20 to $25 a barrel would continue for the next three years or so. …
“The continuing reliance on oil, regardless of price, points to one more administration legacy: the failure to diversify America’s energy resources. … [T]he administration has pursued a policy of ‘drain America first’ — that is, take as much oil out of America as possible, and as quickly as possible, … leaving the country even more dependent on foreign oil in the future ….
“America’s budget and trade deficits have grown to record highs under President Bush. … During the past six years, America — its government, its families, the country as a whole — has been borrowing to sustain its consumption. Meanwhile, investment in fixed assets — the plants and equipment that help increase our wealth — has been declining.
“What’s the impact of all this down the road? The growth rate in America’s standard of living will almost certainly slow, and there could even be a decline. … As confidence in the American economy has plummeted, so has the value of the dollar — by 40 percent against the euro since 2001. The disarray in our economic policies at home has parallels in our economic policies abroad. … Not surprisingly, protests over U.S. trade practices erupted … [b]ut America has refused to compromise …. This intransigence led to the collapse of talks designed to open up international markets. As in so many other areas, President Bush worked to undermine multilateralism … and to replace it with an America-dominated system. In the end, he failed to impose American dominance — but did succeed in weakening cooperation. …
“Globalization means that America’s economy and the rest of the world have become increasingly interwoven. Consider those bad American mortgages. … The originators of these problem mortgages had already sold them to others, who packaged them, in a non-transparent way, with other assets, and passed them on once again to unidentified others. When the problems became apparent, … it was discovered that billions in bad mortgages were hidden in portfolios in Europe, China, and Australia, and even in star American investment banks … global risk premiums soared, and investors pulled money out of … emerging markets, looking for safer havens. It will take years to sort out this mess.
“Meanwhile, we have become dependent on other nations for the financing of our own debt. … Cumulative borrowing from abroad during the six years of the Bush administration amounts to some $5 trillion. … [T]he Bush administration’s fiscal housekeeping has eroded our economic authority. …
“Whoever moves into the White House in January 2009 will face an unenviable set of economic circumstances. … [P]utting America’s economic house in order will be wrenching and take years. The most immediate challenge will be simply to get the economy’s metabolism back into the normal range. That will mean moving from a savings rate of zero (or less) to a more typical savings rate of, say, 4 percent. … Money saved is money not spent. If people don’t spend money, the economic engine stalls. If households curtail their spending quickly — as they may be forced to do as a result of the meltdown in the mortgage market — this could mean a recession; if done in a more measured way, it would still mean a protracted slowdown. The problems of foreclosure and bankruptcy posed by excessive household debt are likely to get worse …. And the federal government is in a bind: any quick restoration of fiscal sanity will only aggravate both problems.
“And in any case there’s more to be done. What is required is in some ways simple to describe: it amounts to ceasing our current behavior and doing exactly the opposite. It means not spending money that we don’t have, increasing taxes on the rich, reducing corporate welfare, strengthening the safety net for the less well off, and making greater investment in education, technology, and infrastructure.
“When it comes to taxes, we should be trying to shift the burden away from things we view as good, such as labor and savings, to things we view as bad, such as pollution. With respect to the safety net, we need to remember that the more the government does to help workers improve their skills and get affordable health care the more we free up American businesses to compete in the global economy. …
“Some portion of the damage done by the Bush administration could be rectified quickly. A large portion will take decades to fix — and that’s assuming the political will to do so exists …. Think of the interest we are paying, year after year, on the almost $4 trillion of increased debt burden — even at 5 percent, that’s an annual payment of $200 billion, two Iraq wars a year forever. Think of the taxes that future governments will have to levy to repay even a fraction of the debt we have accumulated. And think of the widening divide between rich and poor in America, a phenomenon that goes beyond economics and speaks to the very future of the American Dream.
“In short, there’s a momentum here that will require a generation to reverse. Decades hence we should take stock, and revisit the conventional wisdom. Will Herbert Hoover still deserve his dubious mantle? I’m guessing that George W. Bush will have earned one more grim superlative.”
Roger Rabbit Commentary: This article is excerpted under fair use, and due to length and copyright considerations is severely truncated here; you can read the whole thing for free at http://www.vanityfair.com/poli.....bush200712
@25 “1% My Ass, My Island County taxes went up $700 last year alon, and that was over 10% in one year. Where the F is the 1% Limit dude?”
My, my … you live in ISLAND COUNTY and pay taxes on property that must be worth close to $800,000* and you’re bitching about 700 bucks? But I digress.
* $700 is 10% of $7,000 which is roughly double the property tax on a typical $400,000 home.
To answer your question, the amount in excess of 1% is probably somewhat attributable to the EXCESS LEVIES that you and/or your neighbors voted for, but most likely is largely attributable to faster-than-average appreciation for your county.
You see, the state supreme court didn’t strike down the Eyman 1% lid until this month, so that couldn’t have affected the taxes you paid last year, and the Governor and Legislature haven’t enacted ANYTHING yet, so that couldn’t have affected your last year’s taxes, either.
Most likely what’s going on here is you don’t understand how Eyman’s 1% lid worked. It didn’t guarantee YOUR taxes (or any other individual property owner’s taxes) wouldn’t go up by more than 1%. The 1% lid only applies to TOTAL TAX COLLECTIONS in the county. As properties are reassessed every year, and don’t appreciate evenly, an annual redistribution of the total tax burden (plus the allowed 1% increase) occurs every year. If your assessed value goes up less than average for the county, your taxes go down, and vice versa. It appears you have the good fortune to own a piece of primo property that is increasing in value more rapidly than your neighbors’ property. You should be thankful to be so lucky.
Now go fuck yourself.
@25 BTW, if you feel you got screwed because Mr. Eyman limited the county’s revenue instead of your property tax to a 1% annual increase, you should contact HIM about that.
@25 “Heh Roger, where are all those TAX CUTS you say only come from Democrats.”
Well, let’s talk about this to set the record straight. Right off the bat, I can think of two:
1) The $30 car tab law was passed by a Democratic legislature and signed by a Democratic governor after Mr. Eyman’s defective initiative was thrown out by the courts; and
2) Washington’s inheritance tax was cut in half by a Democratic legislature and a Democratic governor.
There’s more, but that should get you started.
@25 I probably should add:
3) The $325 billion settlement that Attorney General Gregoire won for Washington State in the tobacco litigation is $325 billion of future taxes that Washington residents won’t have to pay. (This money reimburses the state for its Medicaid expenditures for smoking-related illnesses.)
Correction: The total settlement was $206 billion, and Washington’s share was $4.5 billion.
@24 Only in your overactive imagination.
Charlie Rangel has drafted a bill to “fix” the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) which was intended to create a floor to the amount under which super-high-income taxpayers could not creep, but in its original form it was not properly indexed to inflation or wages and thus more and more high-middle-income taxpayers have been required to pay it. Of course, these people are rich by world standards and are well into the top 10% of income earners in the US but the numbers still argue for making the move if only for political reasons.
However, this legislation cannot come to the floor of the Senate because it is being blocked by Republicans through holds.
If you pay the AMT this year when you didn’t last year, remember that it’s because the Republicans want you to. And when the Republicans tell you that Democrats don’t want to cut taxes, remember that they’re lying. After the last six years, it shouldn’t be hard to remember that.
A few months ago Naomi Klein (books=No Logo;The Shock Doctrine) wrote a short pece for the UK Guardian that I though was interesting at the time and become more chilling ever since.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html#article_continue
Fascist America, in 10 easy steps
“From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history shows there are certain steps that any would-be dictator must take to destroy constitutional freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush and his administration seem to be taking them all”
Excerpted:
1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
2. Create a prison system outside the rule of law where torture takes place.
3. Develop a thug caste (Blackwater, anyone?)
4. Set up an internal surveillance system
5. Harass citizen’s groups
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
7. Target key individuals
8. Control the press
9. Dissent equals treason
10. Suspend the rule of law
How are we doing against these measures? Read the article. Think for yourself.
3) The $325 billion settlement that Attorney General Gregoire won for Washington State in the tobacco litigation is $325 billion of future taxes that Washington residents won’t have to pay. (This money reimburses the state for its Medicaid expenditures for smoking-related illnesses.)
11/23/2007 at 11:28 pm
Roger Rabbit says:
Correction: The total settlement was $206 billion, and Washington’s share was $4.5 billion.
An interesting issue, that. She sort of implied to the court that future use of that money would be to sponsor stop-smoking campaigns to convince people to quit. In fact, it’s almost completely subsumed in the general budget, along with the $2 a pack state tax on cigarettes (third highest in the nation).
Now I’m no great fan of smoking, it contributed to the premature death of my father (as did his CHOICE to smoke three packs a day), but it strikes me as sort of wrong somehow that the state of Washington and the federal government BOTH make more from the sales of cigarettes than the coffin nail manufacturers themselves do, and are in their own way as dependent now on this revenue as the nicotine addicts are on their cancer sticks.
With 21% of the population stuck smoking cigarettes (generally although not invariably those in the lowest economic groups) this is probably one of the most regressive taxes we have.
While we are on the subject of regressive taxes, the lottery is sort of the same thing. When I was a kid the lottery was called “the numbers game,’ and the mafia ran it, skimming about 5% off the top. We justified a lottery in the state of Washington largely for the schools, but they get a fairly trivial percentage of the state’s take…which is about 50%….ten times the cut the mafia used to charge. And yet the people who disproportionately buy lottery tickets are the blue collar crowd (often smokers buying tickets when they pay the inflated price for cigarettes), who can least afford an “investment” that only returns 48% on the average, and for most returns nothing at all.
I know they’re just poor people, and that dems are disproportionately the party of the rich
http://www.washingtontimes.com.....30087/1002
but you wonder how they can continue to justify this stuff.
35
So smoking is a choice, and you defend it as the user’s choice, but Democrats are creeps for taxing it.
And buying lottery tickets is a choice, and you defend it as the user’s choice, but Democrats are creeps for providing that choice and for using its revenue to fund education and other state services.
I get it.
35
And I believe the Washington Times when they quote Heritage Foundation study that purpots that Democrats are “the party of the rich.” No possible partisan motive coloring their “research” there, right?
Yes, Democrats are so much the “party of the rich” that we want billionaire fund managers to pay the same income tax you and I do on their pay, instead of only 15 percent, so that they pay their fair share and you and I don’t have to support our government’s essential services all by ourselves. But those defenders of the working man, the Republicans, think that these billionaires should pay less than you do.
Here’s the takedown of this new, desperate GOP meme:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c....._wingn.php
Quote:
Fuck those Bush lovers; they lose adn they deserve to lose:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11.....ref=slogin
My sister lives in Australia, and she says they were all totally sick and tired of ol’ John Howard. I’m not surprised, considering the EXTREME unpopularity of president 30%.
If only more of your leftist kind would do this the world will be a better place in 20+ years.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag.....ge_id=1879
So smoking is a choice, and you defend it as the user’s choice, but Democrats are creeps for taxing it.
And buying lottery tickets is a choice, and you defend it as the user’s choice, but Democrats are creeps for providing that choice and for using its revenue to fund education and other state services.
I get it.
No. You don’t get it. What IT is is that the rich dems tax OTHER people to support things such as light rail, ferries, etc., that they would not buy for themselves if the services weren’t tremendously subsidized, oftentimes by regressive taxes on the poor.
Do you think the rich commuters would live in Bainbridge and Vashon (both areas have higher median family incomes than the Seattle urban area) if they were paying the actual cost of that ferry ride at the farebox? They pay about 16% of the operating cost (perhaps 10% of the O&M and capital cost), and the other 84% comes from “other sources” such as the lottery and cigarette taxes.
Do you understand that I have no difficulty in the rich dems living in whatever luxury they want, as long as they pay for it themselves, rather than continually sucking at the public teat?
That’s wheat the tragedy of the commons is all about, and the dems exploit the commons every bit as badly as the repubs.
The only difference is the repubs don’t have a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude as they rip the commons off, and sometimes they even show a little bit of embarassment about it.
The dems appear to be restrained only by raw political power….witness Gregoire caving on the I-747 issue, knowing she’ll be out of office if she doesn’t.
Mark The Redneck-Goldstein says:
Here’s a math problem for you gullible fools:
MTR’s luxury SUV “spews” about 1.5 lb of C02 per mile. He drives about 2000 miles per month.
How many seattle kook progressives need to buy hybrids to offset the global warming that he creates?
None; you can ride a bike, ride a bus, or take that light rail to nowhere.
K says:
The fact that scientists working on climate change finally had evidence so compelling Bush could not suppress it does carry some weight.
When a long time denier like Bush gives it up that also says something.
When he realize that he can not win talking to a bunch of close minded fools. There is more important things to do with his time than listen to a bunch of cry babies. Science does not apply when you mix politices with scientists you now get logic mixed with emotion. The results is a environmental disaster beyond your imagination.
Yep there is some hope for correctnot right and maybe he/she can read.
correctnot right says:
Dear Moron Mark the red-neck and no-brain:
Heard of the typhoon in Bangaladesh that just killed more people than were killed in Iraq?
Freakin’ idiots think the only weather is in the US – chances are we will get hit too, eventually, moron!
klake says:
correctnot right says; now there is a funny little person who is afraid of his own shadow and was name by a drug out old hippie. Peace and love generation off spring that is hateful of anyone who is successful in life. Bad news COWARD we are winning in Iraq and in places you have never been, Life is great but not too little fools like you. Maybe you might start your morning off by helping some little old lady across the street in down town Seattle. You might feel good about yourself and appreciate other who is willing to risk their life to save others they don’t even know. Maybe you and Roger should play chess together and come up with some ideas on how to help others. Now his drives to sell bumper stickers to Free Tibet really work, right? Lots of Luck funny little people. Roger how is that silk prayer working with Goldy conducting prayers five times a day? Osama bin Laden thanks you all for your support on the war on terror.
http://tinyurl.com/3aon72
correctnot right says:
Guaranteed – that turkey found nothing in those chicken-hawk pants. Not even enough for Montana-fried donut holes. Have a great thanksgiving all you trolls – just remember that since GWB has been in office:.The war in Iraq has gone on longer than WWII and this year set a record for military deaths.The surge can’t be maintained by our weakened military and there has been no political progress in Iraq.oh yeah, GWB is the most unpopular president ever – lower than Nixon.
40 GH
Yes, I do. As another really funny person (besides me) once said, “That’s not an argument. It’s just contradiction.”
Like tobacco taxes and lottery taxes? Those taxes fund transportation? You’re losing me because you have ceased to talk sense.
Some would, some wouldn’t. Just like those people who would not use medical services if they had to pay the full cost. And the “hidden costs” you’re talking about apply to roads too, and bridges, and every other it of infrastrcture that is government-supported. But as a people we have spread those costs among our larger pool of payers to provide services that benefit everyone, such as transportation to our islands, even if some people benefit slightly more than others. But here’s a Q for you, Dr. Math, just HOW MUCH of that 84% from “other sources” comes from tobacco, and how much from the lottery? Be convincing. Look sincere.
Would that hold true for rich Republicans? I don’t think so. You want to eliminate a ferry service the YOU do not use. As I said, I get it. Dn’t forget to tell me I don’t.
No, they don’t. See, I can do it too.
I love this, that Republicans don’t pretend to hold the moral high ground. Really? I mean, the irony of that statement is staggering. Your whole SCHTICK is to pretend to hold the moral high ground. Heck, you’re doing it right now.
GH
By “other sources” don’t you mean the general fund? What about tranportation dollars from fuel taxes? If you want to state that lottery and tobacco tax monies constitute the BULK of the “other sources” funding for ferries, you should fucking well back that up. If not, then you’re just trying to deceptively inflate their importance. Not very ethical. But then, I consider the soruce.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/hom.....22026.html
What could have been an interesting and valuable new development:
Is probably not going to happen:
The world doesn’t trust us. The world thinks that we are insane assholes. The world watched us make demands of Afghanistan, ignore their offers, and then invade when our demands were not met. The world watched Iraq eliminate its nuclear program and allow IAEA inspectors to certify that it had done so, and then the US invaded anyway, with Republicans claiming to this day that they don’t believe that this elimination ever occurred.
Conclusion: The sooner we get rid of George Bush and Dave Reichert, and build a Democratic majority capable of legislating, the better.
I would point out that spreading the cost of the ferry system is predicated on the presumption that it is infrastructure in every way the same as the highway system. The ferry system is part of the Commons, and like the highway system allows the economic development of both the Islands and the Olympic Peninsula to the enrichment of the entire state.
The industries there, both woodland and tourist, enrich us all. The same logic applies to the subsidies given to highway projects in the eastern part of the state by western tax payers.
47 TFG
Yo’re right. I an’t never drove over no bridge or on no road in Yakima, but I paid fer it.
I should know better than to post on Apple Cup day.
*crickets chirping*
Klake: I usually don’t respond to moron trolls who don’t make any sense. I usually just thrash them with their own lack of intellect – in your case, you thrash yourself very well.
I can’t even tell what you are trying to say – but somehow you think you and georgie bush are somehow standing up to bin Laden – just remember –
Bush let Bin laden go.
Bush has screwed up the war in afghanistan and now half the country is back in the hands of the Taliban – all because of the obsession with the illegal war in Iraq.
so – thank bush and cheney for letting bin Laden off the hook – and go volunteer in the army (if that is your true conviction) and see if they take mental and physical midgets like yourself. You and the war supporters are the best ally Bin laden can has ever had.
Incompetent corrupt republicans – the perfect cure for the bin laden blues. You screwed up Iraq and Afghanistan and let Bin laden go free. Paul Bremer, Donald rumsfeld and Dick Cheney are the best thing that ever happened to Al qaida.
On second thought – I don’t want to weaken our armed forces that much if you actually do volunteer (they are taking anyone these days just to make quota). Just shut your sorry pie hole – nothing coming out of it is worth the cyber space it takes up.
Success in Iraq, Republican-style:
removing the threat of nuclear weaponsstopping torturebeing hailed as liberatorssecuring munitionsdefeating insurgencyusing Heritage Foundation interns to rebuild Iraqi infrastructurebringing electricity and water distribution to pre-Saddam levelsavoiding Shi’ite theocracyestablishing a stable governmentstabilizing the Middle Eastmaintaining an international coalition of forcesweakening international terrorismwinning hearts and minds of Iraqis– paying off Sunnis not to fight us
– ignoring that Shi’ite militias constitute the national forces
– call anyone who attacks our troops in Iraq “al Qaeda in Iraq”
– make sure press writes that down
– ignore worsening violence against women degrading their status
– stay forever whatever the conditions there
I would point out that spreading the cost of the ferry system is predicated on the presumption that it is infrastructure in every way the same as the highway system. The ferry system is part of the Commons, and like the highway system allows the economic development of both the Islands and the Olympic Peninsula to the enrichment of the entire state.
The industries there, both woodland and tourist, enrich us all. The same logic applies to the subsidies given to highway projects in the eastern part of the state by western tax payers.
Nonsense. Look at the percentage of the passenger miles that come from commuter tickets sold (at a discount) to the rich people of Vashon and Bainbridge.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ferrie.....ase_id=490
These tickets are disproportionately used by a small subset of the population of the state, those commuters who want to sprawl away from Seattle, while being employed in Seattle.
The Bainbridge to Seattle run is, by far, the most heavily utilized one in the system, however the traffic over the agate pass bridge can EASILY by handled by two lanes (one each way) at any time, day or night. To assert that the primary purpose of this run is anything other than for Bainbridge commuters is ridiculous.
http://www.fta.dot.gov/documen.....ne_doc.pdf
I have no gripe with them doing that as a choice…if they pay for it, but they aren’t…and to pretend that it isn’t a rape of the commons is simply untrue.
I would point out that spreading the cost of the ferry system is predicated on the presumption that it is infrastructure in every way the same as the highway system. The ferry system is part of the Commons, and like the highway system allows the economic development of both the Islands and the Olympic Peninsula to the enrichment of the entire state.
Nonsense, see above. BUT EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE, by constructing the Tacoma Narrows the DOT has now established the precedent that major capital projects are henceforth going to be paid for BY USER FEES.
http://bridgepros.com/projects.....arrows.htm
That being the case, it would appear that fares will need to be increased dramatically to continue to support commuters, given the capital budget of the ferry system. Typically it’s over $100 million a year (and with the replacement of the Steel Electric boats it will be considerably more in the forseeable future). Since the total fares for all runs only bring in about $32 million, ferry fares will have to be TRIPLED to meet this requirement.
http://www.ntdprogram.com/ntdp.....s/0035.pdf
Anyone care to guess the AVERAGE number of passengers carried by a Metro Transit vehicle? Let’s define our terms, a transit vehicle is a bus (of which they have 1176, a trolley bus (electrical) (of which they still have 159), or a van pool vehicle (of which they have 746).
You ready? According to the figures Metro provided to the Federal Transit administration, the average vehicle load is 5.2 passengers.
During 2006 they provided a relatively trivial proportion of the regions passenger miles, about 515 million, using 99 MILLION trips.
http://www.ntdprogram.com/ntdp.....s/0001.pdf
This does not include demand response (carrying invalids) or other high priority, low volume jobs, that they contracted out. It DOES include busses packed to the gunwhales carrying people to Husky, Seahawk, and Mariner games (Sonics game are more sparsely attended).
Ever notice the number of buses rubbubg almost empty…except for the (paid) driver. Those aren’t much of an exception from the rule.