HorsesAss.Org

I posted this video to Slog, but my editors deleted it, apparently because it is simply too offensive to objectify a man for his breasts. Huh.

But you know what? Politics is a nasty game. Republicans win all the time by portraying themselves as more manly, but this is one race in which the Democrat, Jay Inslee, has the clear and undisputed manliness advantage. Is it kind to point out McKenna’s man boobs? Is it mature? Is it relevant? Does it add to public discourse? Of course not.

But for some voters, if they perceive McKenna as less manly, it will cost him votes. So for me, this makes McKenna’s boobs fair game.

(Also, what the fuck? Who puts out a political TV ad with video like that? That’s media malpractice.)

Results of a new SurveyUSA poll in Washington’s first congressional district (via KING 5) are out. The poll was taken on the 24th and 25th of July on a sample of 563 likely voters in the district (4.2% MOE). The results:

• John Koster (R), 38%
• Susan Delbene (D), 17%
• Darcy Burner (D) 13%
• Laura Ruderman (D) 6%
• Steve Hobbs (D) 5%)
• Darshan Rauniyar (D) 2%
• Larry Ishmael (I) 2%

The best news about this poll is the 43% that Democratic candidates take, edging out Koster’s support at 38% (or 40% if you include Republican-turned-independent Ishmael). In head-to-head general election contests:

If the race were between Koster and DelBene, SurveyUSA finds it’s a dead heat—42% each. It’s also effectively a dead heat if it were Koster vs. Burner.

Of course, with 17% (primary) and 16% (general) still undecided, there is a lot of room for change between the end of the primary and the general election.

While I’m still not thrilled with the fact that CEO’s can do this sort of thing [h/t]. But as long as they can, this is a lot better than them spending it on the bad side of an initiative.

Amazon.com founder and CEO Jeff Bezos and his wife MacKenzie announced a gift Friday of $2.5 million to the campaign to defend Washington’s same-sex marriage law.

With the gift, Washington United for Marriage has raised more than $5 million for the Referendum 74 campaign. Last month Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and co-founder Bill Gates each donated $100,000 to support the law.

Dominic Holden on Slog linked to a poll a while ago that suggested that marriage equality might be in trouble. So hopefully this will help turn things around.

There’s a garbage strike in Seattle and the surrounding suburbs. I’m embarrassed to say, I didn’t know the situation before the strike, and it certainly doesn’t look good.

Talks between Waste Management and recycle drivers, represented by Teamsters Local 117, stalled on Thursday because the company refused to bargain in good faith. The mediator called off negotiations after the company refused to respond to the Union’s proposal.

“Waste Management did not come prepared to bargain today,” said Tracey A. Thompson, Secretary-Treasurer of Teamsters Local 117. “We came back to the table to avoid a public health crisis but it’s clear that Waste Management wants to provoke a labor dispute.”

Waste Management has flown in out-of-state strike breakers to prepare for a lockout and has employed staffers from Huffmaster, a company that specializes in lockouts and strikes. “Waste Management is spending thousands of dollars on wages, plane tickets, rental cars, and hotel rooms for out-of-state strike breakers and security guards. That’s money that could be used to match proposals made by its major competitors,” Thompson said.

You can take that with a grain of salt being as it’s the union’s site. But I think it’s important for them to be able to get their side out.

… Late note, the link is old. When I wrote about not being aware of the situation, I thought that covered that it was for background, but re-reading it it looks like a current thing. So just to clarify.

Gubernatorial candidate and former Congressman Jay Inslee released a quite positive introductory ad a couple of weeks ago:

The ad does a great job introducing him and his past service. It’s one of those ads that can build name recognition. That’s all good.

Now compare it to this latest ad that takes a quite different approach:

I like this ad in that it covers some of McKenna’s weaknesses that I have been highlighting recently—namely, his paranoid, vengeful bunker mentality with the press (and here and here) as well as his contemptuous attitude toward others (and here).

At least as a public figure, McKenna is not a very nice person, and this ad begins to needle at that chink in his armor.

The ad also picks up on another theme: McKenna’s statements of being unprepared in a couple of circumstances. This is probably excellent politics, but it isn’t a serious argument against McKenna. From what I can tell, McKenna does take his work seriously and is nearly always prepared.

So, why does a normally prepared candidate have to resort to saying he is unprepared? Quite simply, it allows him to dodge a troublesome question. He doesn’t have to lay out his position on health care reform or on gun control without first carefully constructing an answer designed to minimize any damage from unpopular beliefs he holds.

But, hell, if he is going to use “unprepared” as an excuse for dodging answers, it’s fair game to turn around and hit him for admitting he is unprepared!

– The Stranger endorses the Arena. Although Goldy has some caveats.

– People with power need to stand up to the NRA.

– The last debate in the 1st.

– Fox News have lost their damn minds.

– Obama is removing imaginary crosses.

– Countries to root for in the Olympics that have never won a medal.

– The most logical thing said about The Dark Knight.

The Commission on Presidential Debates announced the format of the presidential and vice presidential debates this year. As usual, they don’t really feature a strong back and forth or the chance to get into the minutia of these things.

They will be a better chance to air their points than ads and press releases, so I suppose that’s something. Still, they won’t have to have more than 2 or 3 minute’s knowledge on any topic to sound intelligent. That’s a shame. So many people watch the debates. Even if they haven’t decided the outcome of many elections recently, it’s still an important part of our democracy, and it’s sooooo watered down.

My questions bold, Dusty Hoerler’s as they were sent:

1) The state’s paramount duty is education. Do you feel the state is living up to that duty? If not, what needs to happen to live up to it?

The state is clearly not living up to its duty to provide for the education of young people. I was heartened by the fact that our state’s education budget emerged from the last session relatively intact, but I’m not satisfied merely holding the line. We’ll need to dedicate an additional $6.8 billion per biennium through 2018 to fund K-12 education at a level consistent with our constitutional mandate. That’s a tall order, and it simply cannot be done without raising more revenue.

But this is about more than obeying a court order to meet our constitutional obligations – it’s about the long-term strength of our democracy and our economy. That means that we have to take a broader view of education, to include early learning and making our public universities affordable again. We are seeing an alarming trend in higher education. Tuition at University of Washington has nearly doubled in the last four years, and, according to an article in Monday’s Seattle Times, tuition is projected to surpass $20,000 per year for in-state students by the end of this decade.

Why? Because our state legislators decided to, in part, balance the state’s budgets on middle and working class families and their children. Just four years ago, tuition only covered 41% of the costs of a UW education, while today, tuition pays 71% of the cost. In addition to our four-year schools, we also need to support our community colleges and trade schools, who are seeing similar budget cuts.

2) Washington State voters recently rejected an income tax. Most of the revenue that the legislature might be able to raise is quite regressive. Will you push for revenue, and if so, how will you make sure the burdens don’t fall on the poorest Washingtonians?

Washington’s tax system is one of the most regressive in America. The wrong people are being taxed too much! I believe that the rich and corporations need to pay their fair share. Not only are the poorest Washingtonians being taxed, but our tax dollars are indirectly subsidizing special interest loopholes. Here’s what I propose:

A. Sunset all corporate tax breaks. I’m in favor of legislation that sunsets all corporate tax breaks automatically. There are certainly some tax breaks that I support: Those encouraging the development of clean energy and green jobs, for instance. However, the legislature should reauthorize them every five years – at a minimum. If they prove to be productive, we should keep them on the books. But some of the tax breaks are frankly silly and need to be eliminated.

B. Aggressively prosecute corporate cheaters. I believe that if hard working people play by the
rules, they should be able to get ahead. However, time and time again, we see big corporations who are willing to step outside the law. While most of these transgressions have occurred elsewhere, I believe that we must draw the line in the sand against abuses in Washington State.

C. Our discussion about the income tax is not over – not as far as I’m concerned. I intend to be just as vocal a proponent of the progressive income tax in Olympia (and across the whole state) as I have been in this campaign.

3) There is a good chance that the State Senate and/or the Governor’s Mansion will be controlled by Republicans after the next election, and certainly most legislators will be more conservative than people who would be elected in a Seattle district. Given that, how will you get your agenda passed?

I’m a grassroots organizer – my political experience is in the hard work of organizing workers and mobilizing voters. I believe in the power of pressuring elected representatives from below, and I believe the voters of Republican-leaning districts share the concerns of the voters of my own district. We value effective schools and quality infrastructure, and we’re frustrated by a legislature mired in deadlock. I’ve been endorsed by normally Republican-leaning groups such as the Mechanical Contractors Association because I believe in reaching out, listening, forging relationships, and finding common ground. I think the best way to break that deadlock is to speak to voters in conservative districts directly.

I have volunteered to organize a Values and Priorities Tour that crisscrosses our state from small rural towns to urban city centers. In community centers and public school auditoriums, union halls and parking lots, we’ll have a frank discussion about our challenges, our values, the measures we need to introduce some common sense to our tax and budget systems – and what working people can do to help. I’ve learned something important: If we want to change the way our state does business in the face of special interest lobbyists, we’ve got to rally the people who have the most at stake in the decisions Olympia makes.

4) You’re running in a race with many Democrats who share similar positions. What separates you from the rest of the field?

I respect and appreciate the strong progressives in this race. But even in a race where each candidate can advance the right positions and promise the right votes, background matters: It molds the values you’ll refuse to compromise and determines what you’ll fight the hardest for.

I offer a blue-collar background. I’m a plumber by trade, a veteran union organizer and homeowner advocate. I co-founded SustainableWorks, an energy-efficiency nonprofit, to help jumpstart our state’s investment in clean energy jobs. (I’ve helped create jobs in the middle of a recession, while at the same time helping protect the environment — over the last three years, SustainableWorks has created 55 good, family wage jobs.) Last year, I organized a group of homeowners to travel to Olympia to testify in favor of foreclosure mediation legislation. My civic life has been dedicated to creating security and opportunity for working families, and this campaign has been bolstered by the contributions – of money, yes, but primarily of time and sweat – of middle-class workers. I believe that this is a seat we need to retain for working families.

5) Seattle and King County give more to the state than they get back. Part is this is reasonable things like the cost of providing education and social services in rural and suburban areas, but part of it is a lack of respect for Seattle and King County with the legislature that treats us as an ATM. How will you make sure your district gets its fair share of revenue without harming education or social services throughout the state?

The best answer is the politically hardest one: We need a restructuring of our revenue system, and that means communicating directly with our cross-state neighbors. We can change the way Olympia does business, but it starts with a discussion. I’m running to help lead that discussion.

Sometimes, the Seattle Times makes it too easy to criticize their endorsements. Really, Frank, what were you thinking??

• Jim Kastama for Secretary of State?
• Steve Hobbs in WA-01? They even suggest writing him in for the special election in the old WA-01.
• Dual endorsements for the US Senate (Maria and Whatshisface from Spokane), WA-02 (Larsen and some random Republican), and WA-06 (Derek Kilmer and the richie-rich 1%er from Weyerhauser)?

Even when they get one right, they often get something wrong. Consider state Supreme Court Position 8. In that particular race, with only two candidates on the ballot, the primary will decide who earns a full term on the Court. Like everyone who actually examines the candidates, the Times is endorsing the appointed incumbent, Justice Steven Gonzalez. His opponent is a little-known “strict construction” type, whose sole attribute is that he bears an Anglo-Saxon name. It’s well known, of course, that odd results may ensue in low-turnout, low-information elections. It’s also well known that in such races higher ballot position is a distinct advantage (the other guy’s name is above Justice Gonzalez’s on the ballot), and unfortunately it’s also known that in a state with Washington’s demographics a non-“ethnic” surname is a big edge in low-turnout, low-information races.

That’s why I find it rather disingenuous of the Seattle Times to have chosen the photo of Justice Gonzalez displayed here when they published their endorsement on July 5. Mr. Gonzalez certainly looks, well, ethnic in this image.

But that’s not at all the way he looks these days. For that matter, it’s not what he has looked like for quite a long time. For example, video of the news story broadcast on KING-5 when Justice Gonzalez was sworn in is shown below. That video was shot on January 9, 2012, fully six months ago:

As further evidence, I offer several additional recent photos. The first one shown below is from his page on the Supreme Court website. Presumably, it’s his current official portrait. Also displayed here is a shot from his campaign’s photo page. Now, I could have chosen one of the three pictures showing him with a beard, but I instead picked one of the 48 clean-shaven photos. Incidentally, all of the with-beard photos on the campaign site show his facial hair in a much softer, much gentler, less “bandito” light than the one attached to the Times endorsement. (Yes, that’s Edgar Martinez with him.)

How difficult would it have been for the Seattle Times to locate a current photograph of the candidate they were endorsing for a vital spot on the state’s highest court? Is it presumptuous of me to ask whether anyone of the editorial board of the Times noticed that Justice Gonzalez was clean-shaven when they interviewed him in preparation for making their endorsement decision? Yet they still chose to accompany their endorsement of the Justice with a picture that could easily play into the worst preconceptions held by voters in the low-turnout, low-information primary election for Supreme Court Position 8.

Please join us tonight for an evening of politics and conversation over a pint at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking Liberally.

Also, if your name is Barack, and you happen to be in Seattle for the night, don’t be shy about an unscheduled visit…. I mean, dude, it wouldn’t be the first time a (former) presidential candidate dropped in on us unannounced (Gen. Welsey Clark).

We meet every Tuesday at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00pm. Some people show up earlier for Dinner.

Can’t make it to Seattle tonight? Check out one of the other DL meetings over the next week. The Tri-Cities chapter meets tonight, the Burien chapter meets on Wednesday, and the Woodinville chapter meets on Thursday.

With 230 chapters of Living Liberally, including twelve in Washington state and four in both Oregon and Idaho, chances are excellent there’s a chapter near you.

– Rick Warren is a real piece of work.

– Fuse’s progressive voters guide.

– Rob McKenna running away from Essex Porter is pretty great.

– I assume Darryl will have more analysis of this Elway Poll, but without wanting to get too excited over one poll, Inslee up 43-36 is good news.

– Jean Godden has a great remembrance of J.P. Patches.

– Mitt Romney just made:

That was so strange to type. I don’t know what to think of it. Still, fuck the Yankees and all, but fuck them a little less on days when he’s playing.

Yes, he’s past his prime. And yes, this will give him a chance to play in the post season, and maybe the World Series, while freeing his position in the lineup and salary for the Mariners. He hasn’t played as well this season as he has in the past. He’s pushing 40, and those infield hits don’t come around like they used to. Management didn’t really know where to put him in the lineup, and maybe there was nowhere to put him in the lineup.

Still, so much of the Mariners’ recent past revolves around him. It’ll be tough to see him in a Yankee uniform.

My questions in Bold, Shelly Crocker’s as they were sent.

1) The state’s paramount duty is education. Do you feel the state is living up to that duty? If not, what needs to happen to live up to it?

In a recent publication, Washington was given a “C” rating for our public schools overall, and is 42nd out of 50 in per-pupil spending. If that is the best we can do in achieving our paramount duty, we aren’t trying hard enough. How to approach K-12 education is a highly contentious issue, however. Voters have rejected charter schools time and again, and it is time to realize that there is no magic fix, but there are things we can do right away to get closer to meet our duty to the state. We need to make sure teachers are adequately paid with cost of living increases, but still held accountable for their performance. Increasing teacher’s attention to each student by reversing the size of our growing class is as simple as re-hiring some of the thousands of qualified teachers who have been laid off in the past few years.

Additionally, the massive cuts in higher education (50% in three years) must be reversed. Our universities are a public good: we cannot make cost a prohibitive factor for students, and burdening students with debt is just another regressive tax.

2) Washington State voters recently rejected an income tax. Most of the revenue that the legislature might be able to pass is quite regressive. Will you push for revenue, and if so, how will you make sure the burdens don’t fall on the poorest Washingtonians?

Washington has the most regressive tax structure in the country, and if we want to give more than just lip service to the different worthwhile services that have been fighting in a zero-sum game down in Olympia, we need to create a fairer and more sustainable revenue stream. However, the reality in Olympia makes it extremely difficult to create substantial tax reform. It is the nickel and dime regressive taxes and fees that have made people so disillusioned with government, and I will do everything I can to avoid creating more of them. Whoever is elected to represent the 46th will have the privilege of being a strong voice for tax reform, including advocating for an equitable income tax, as our District strongly supports increasing revenues.

3) There is a good chance that the State Senate and/or the Governor’s Mansion will be controlled by Republicans after the next election, and certainly most legislators will be more conservative than people who would be elected in a Seattle district. Given that how will you get your agenda passed?

Frankly, to faithfully represent my District, there are many issues I will not be able to compromise on with Republicans. However, the obstructionist politics we’ve seen from Republicans at the federal level lead to dysfunctional government. Washingtonians do share many values, whatever their political persuasion, and I will work to find areas of common ground. Very few bills fit as cleanly along the ideological spectrum as we’d like to believe, and a high majority of bills that pass through the Legislature receive some level of bipartisan support. If Republicans gain a majority in the Senate, I will look across the aisle to find areas of agreement, and I will keep an open mind toward any bill that comes before me in the Legislature, no matter where it came from.

4) You’re running in a race with many Democrats who share similar positions. What separates you from the rest of the field?

All of my fellow Democratic candidates are competent individuals and share similar progressive values, but what sets me apart is the breadth of my life experience. If you name any walk of life, I’ve probably been there. I’m a high school dropout. I came out as a lesbian and left home when I was 15. I came to Seattle, and with the help of Pell grants, financial aid, and other government services I was able to work my way through Seattle Central Community College and the University of Washington. I understand the value of these services, and I can appreciate the situations of the less fortunate among us because I’ve experienced it firsthand.

Now I own a successful law firm, and I see a whole other side of our community. In my work as an insolvency and bankruptcy attorney, along with my continuing work in my community, I work hard every day to make sure people get a second chance. I’m not afraid to stand up against big banks and mortgage companies, and I’ve been taking on those fights in the courts, one family at a time. As a volunteer, I have also worked hard to end homelessness, travelling to Olympia as a citizen advocate to speak with legislators about preserving our social safety net. These experiences have taught me that working together, we can make our world better. It won’t be easy, but I’ve faced up to some of life’s toughest challenges and come through them stronger, and I am ready to take on the challenges of representing our District in Olympia.

5) Seattle and King County give more to the state than they get back. Part of this is reasonable things like the cost of providing education and social services in rural and suburban areas, but part of it is a lack of respect for Seattle and King County with the legislature that treats us as an ATM. How will you make sure your district gets its fair share of revenue without harming education or social services throughout the state?

We are lucky to live in an area of the state with so many successful companies and economic potential, and a part of being so successful means being a tax exporter: the taxes we pay are going to the places that need it most. What is needed is complete tax reform to bring about a more equitable tax system overall. The residents of the 46th District are generally not adverse to paying taxes when they trust that the money is being used fairly and effectively. However, there are also social and infrastructure needs right here in the 46th, and I will not let my constituents be neglected.