HorsesAss.Org

I agree with O-Dub in general that when protesting you’ll be more effective if you, “Get a haircut. Wear a nice shirt. Carry a sign with a message that makes some kind of sense to an average American.” I’m sort of proud of the fact that every piece of B-roll I’ve ever seen myself in at a protest, it’s been in a coat and tie. Sometimes, especially if you’re marching, it gets hot.

Still, I don’t think that if the occupy Wall Street people were dressed to the nines, that they’d be taken particularly seriously. I mean, the Tea Party dress pretty silly, and still manage to mostly get glowing coverage since they’re protesting for the pro-wealthy, pro-corporate position. No, I’m afraid that as long as you’re pointing out that power maybe shouldn’t be concentrated in a few hands, the rest of your message is going to mostly be ignored, obscured, and fought.

So while I say, dress with a seriousness equal to your cause, also, try not to blame people for protesting differently. Especially when they’re generally right.

– Can we finally admit that the war on cars is a war by cars?(h/t)

– What would you like to see in the next Seattle budget?

– What should happen in the upcoming special session?

– Will Rick Santorum ever get rid of his Google problem?

– Is there anything sadder than Jonah Goldberg trying to think?

– Does Amazon want its employees to suffer from heat stroke, or is it just indifferent?

– Anybody going to the Safe Streets Social?

– How many muffins for that surgery?

It’s time for more Republican kkkraaaaazzzzy! Tonight’s debate is brought to you by the odd team of Google and FAUX News.

The livestream can be found here.

I’ll liveblog as I have the chance and inclination…provided the dry heaving doesn’t turn into actual vomiting.

5:58: Okay…I’m getting a little more psyched. I’m curious to learn whose death will bring on raucous cheers from the audience, this time.

6:00: Gary Johnson is allowed to participate!?!

6:07: Bachmann wants everyone to keep every single dollar that they earn. Does she even know where her salary comes from?

6:08: Santorum said something, but I was writing the above comment. It sounded really icky anyway.

6:15: “And that dog don’t hunt”, Herman Cain channels Bill Clinton.

6:24: Nice…America’s least popular Governor (Scott) wishes the candidates good luck.

6:25: Rick Perry on Social Security: I didn’t really mean to eliminate Social Security…its just that we should allow people to be in other programs just like they are already doing in almost every state!

6:32: Why does Herman Cain hate Richard Nixon?!?

6:34: Newt brings back the Contract on America™!

6:41: Huh…did you know that Michele Bachmann is the mother of 5 biological children and foster mother of 23 children?

6:42: Huntsman one-ups two-ups Bachmann. He has 7 biological children.

6:44: The Great Wall of Bachmann

6:46: And…The Great Wall of Newt

6:48: And The Great Wall of Mitt

6:51: Chris Wallace just said, “Senator Santorum…no need to butt in!”

6:52: The Great Wall of Santorum. Eeeeeeewwwwwwwwwww!

6:54: Someone should tell Ron Paul that the term “data bank” hasn’t been used since 1979.

Tacoma teachers ratify the new contract.

The final vote was 1,683 YES, 15 NO and three invalid ballots. Classes will resume Friday throughout the Tacoma School District.

Tacoma teachers said the contract is a huge victory for them and their students. School district administrators and the Tacoma School Board proposed increasing class sizes, cutting teacher pay and imposing subjective and potentially discriminatory policies regarding teacher staffing decisions. Unwilling to continue working under an expired contract, and refusing to concede on those issues, 87 percent of Tacoma teachers voted to strike Sept. 12.

…

Here are the highlights of the new contract:

• Protects existing class-size/caseload limits for all TEA certificated members
• Protects existing salary scheduling; one less building optional day
• Protects current displacement language for this year; committee with equal representation from TEA and administration will study and implement new policy using objective and appropriate criteria in the 2012-13 school year. Any new policy must be approved by two-thirds of the committee members.

Kudos to governor Gregoire for bringing both sides to Olympia to hammer something out. Still, I imagine that the special session if it happens and the next regular session of the legislature are going to have a lot to do with if there are future strikes. If we get even more cuts, there will probably be more strikes as the issues will be tougher to negotiate.

1) Crime is down in the city, but we’ve seen some horrible incidents with the police in recent years. How do we ensure public safety and not have those sorts of things happen in the future?

I believe that if the Seattle Police Department follows the recommendations of the City Council Public Safety Committee, real progress can be made to ensure public safety and public trust. Here are some of the key recommendations:

a. Establish a county-wide consistent approach to officer-involved deaths to avoid conflicts of interest;
b. Strengthen civilian oversight and increase public understanding and trust by implementing the recommendations of the civilian observer to the Firearms Review Board;
c. Review and enhance hiring standards and training as recommended by the Office of Professional Accountability Civilian Auditor including de-escalation training for all patrol officers with special emphasis on misdemeanor and other low-level encounters;
d. Monthly Office of Professional Accountability reports should summarize findings of misconduct; the nature of the discipline and changes to policy or procedure that have resulted from a complaint so that the public can see the actions taken by the department;
e. Expedite resolution of cases where there is a referral for possible criminal filing by referring the case file to both the King County Prosecutor and the City Attorney for review and recommendations;
f. Allow supervisors to use In-Car Video for instructional purposes;
g. Require mandatory and timely drug and alcohol testing of all officers involved in the use of deadly force regardless of whether a death has occurred and in all use of force incidents that result in the hospitalization or hospital treatment of a person;

2) Now that the Viaduct is coming down, what should the waterfront look like?

I would like the public places to be as beautiful and open and accessible and free from commercialization as possible. The waterfront should include great landscaping with many opportunities to gain access to the water and to view Elliot Bay and the Olympic Mountains. I would like the newly developed portions of the waterfront to be connected with and to extended to the walking and biking trails of Myrtle Edwards Park to the north and similar trails to the south.

3) As the great recession drags on, the city budget is still hurt. What do we need to cut, what do we need to keep, and do we need to raise more money via taxation?

We “need to cut” funding in areas where the City will not experience harm to public safety or deterioration to our infrastructure. I believe that all City Departments should be directed to find cuts and savings through efficiencies in operations and by reducing administrative and overhead costs. I would request department directors to engage their City employees and the public to identify where savings can occur and where budget reductions are possible with the least reduction in public services and with the least harm to our public facilities.

What we must ensure that we support is public safety: police and fire services; infrastructure maintenance and repair of our transportation system; our parks and other public facilities to avoid costly deterioration; public health and human service programs that are essential to the lives of the most vulnerable including the poor, children, seniors and people with disabilities.

I have proposed an increase in the vehicle license fee in order to help meet the maintenance and repair needs of our transportation system as well as to help improve its operations. This measure if approved by the voters would improve transit service; and would increase funding for repair of our roads and would fund bike and pedestrian safety improvements.

4) With its budget shrunk at least until the end of the recession what should Seattle parks look like?

Given the reduction in revenue the City will be cutting services. Of course I would like our parks to look beautiful and to be well maintained. But with reduction in staff that will be challenging. My preference and priorities are to minimize reductions to maintenance and repair staff and seek cuts in other areas of the Parks Department budget.

5) What is the Seattle’s role in education and public transportation given how important they are to the city, but that other agencies are tasked with them?

A strong and successful public school system and a good public transportation system both are fundamentally important to a thriving, healthy and successful City.

The role of the City in education is to support education both indirectly and directly. The indirect support can range from safe sidewalks and routes to schools to sharing of athletic fields and community centers. Direct support can and is provided through the City sponsored Family and Education Levy, which is up for renewal. The programs and services funded by the levy are designed to support, strengthen and ensure the success of students in the Seattle Public Schools. Other direct support should include support for arts and cultural programs that are affordable
and accessible to students.

Public transportation is funded, planned and provided for at the regional level with significant authority for planning and funding authorized by the state of Washington. The City’s role is to be an active and effective participant at all levels in public transportation advocacy and organizations.

Seattle City officials should be leading strong advocates for public transportation and for public transportation funding and expansion. Seattle officials must build strong relations throughout the region and the state to be able to be successful in creating and receiving support for public transportation.

There’s talk once again about having a primary election for the presidency. While I’m less anti-primary than Russ Feingold or Dennis G, I’ll stick with Obama.

Many of the complaints about the possibility of primarying Obama are the same complaints we heard about Hillary Clinton staying in the race in the last primary. That it’ll somehow damage Obama, and he won’t be able to win. That didn’t happen last time, and I trust Obama on the campaign trail enough that I don’t think it’ll happen if he faces a challenger this time.

While Kennedy challenging Carter is a counterexample, generally speaking primary elections are good for whoever emerges from them. Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and a bad economy were more responsible for the result of that election than Ted Kennedy. Primary elections serve the party that undertakes them in a few ways. They clarify where we are as a party and they draw some attention to the positions of the incumbent.

If Cornel West, Ralph Nader, or whoever wants to try to convince Democrats that they have a better way forward for the next election, that’s fine. We’re a big party that can accommodate its own liberal wing. I’d certainly rather they do it in a primary than in November when they might cost Obama votes.

As for the news cycle, I don’t know about you, but I’d rather see coverage of someone going after Obama for being too centrist than hear Rick Perry and Mitt Romney discuss how much of a socialist he supposedly is. Of course with the 24 hour news there can be plenty of both. But a primary against Obama might crowd out some of the silly stuff from the Republicans, especially in print and network/local news where there’s more limited space.

Still, if there’s a primary challenge and it’s still going on, somehow, when Washington caucuses, I’ll proudly go for Obama. He’s brought us the most comprehensive health care reform of my lifetime, moving us a lot closer to universal coverage. He’s winding down Iraq. He’s passed meaningful consumer protection laws. Oh yeah, and he got Bin Laden. None of those is perfect, and there have been baffling strategic decisions along the way, as well as policies I’ve opposed. Still, he’s earned a second term.

And besides, if you’re looking for Democrats to primary, I’d like to suggest that there’s much more bang for your buck at the local level or at Congress.

The Supreme Court has denied a stay for Troy Davis, so he will probably be executed shortly. America is less of a country whenever the state puts a needle in someone’s arm and methodically ends their life. If they’re certainly guilty, and more so if there is a chance the person is innocent. There’s no need for any state to keep killing people, and I hope here in Washington we can be the next to end it.

My heart goes out to his family, as well as the family of Mark MacPhail.

– Hey, people who make fun of Seattle for being somehow uniquely dysfunctional, here’s Bellevue.

– Taxing the rich is popular.

– Tacoma School District negotiators should go back to the bargaining table.

– Don’t Republicans like multimillion dollar industries?

– Some scientists have nicknamed the planet “Tatooine” after the name of the home planet of Luke Skywalker, the hero in the 1970s science fiction movie Star Wars. In the story — in a hypothetical galaxy far, far away, — a circumbinary planet’s double sunset was first brought to the screen. The public’s vision of circumbinary planets thus goes back decades. But today science fiction has become science fact, and that galaxy far, far away has become our own galaxy.

Please join us for an evening of politics under the influence at tonight’s Seattle Chapter of Drinking liberally.

We meet every Tuesday at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but a few folks show up earlier for dinner.

Can’t make it tonight? The Tri-Cities chapter of Drinking liberally meets every Tuesday night. And the Everett chapter of Drinking Liberally meets at the Buzz Inn in Snohomish next Monday at 7:00 pm.

With 228 chapters of Living Liberally, including thirteen in Washington state and six more in Oregon, chances are good there is something near you.

1) Crime is down in the city, but we’ve seen some horrible incidents with the police in recent years. How do we ensure public safety and not have those sorts of things happen in the future?

I believe the Seattle Police Department is composed of very professional officers who take pride in protecting the well-being of our residents. But recent events have shown that there are indeed some “bad apples” in the bunch. The City Council should send a strong message to the Police Department that these types of incidents will not be tolerated, and that we should continue to support and strengthen the Office of Professional Accountability Review Board’s mission. I am certain with these actions, we will continue to have a police force that our Seattle residents will be proud of, and that unfortunate incidents such as these will become a thing of the past.

2) Now that the Viaduct is coming down, what should the waterfront look like?

I personally believe that the central portion of the Viaduct should not be torn down. As shown with the Highline in New York City, a fortified Viaduct (in conjunction with a rebuilt seawall and the removal of traffic from the structure) will allow the structure to remain in use for pedestrians for many years to come. In its existing state, the structure can connect all of the major attractions that bring visitors to downtown Seattle, including access to Safeco and CenturyLink fields, Pioneer Square, the Central Business District, and a possible connection to Pike Place Market and the Waterfront Sculpture Park.

An added benefit to the Viaduct is its double decking. The top levels could be used as a park, allowing City residents and tourists (both local and others) to enjoy an unparalleled view of Seattle’s downtown core, Puget Sound, and the Olympic Mountains. The bottom level could be used as a place for local merchants, including artisans and food vendors, to sell their merchandise. The top level would act as a covering, allowing the structure to be used year- round, allowing for increased usability and access throughout the year.

The street level beneath the Viaduct could be used as an alternative route to the Waterfront Streetcar, and would allow for a (reduced) number of parking spaces. This would allow the city to take much less of a hit on parking revenues, while allowing a place for cyclists to have an enjoyable trip along their waterfront.

3) As the great recession drags on, the city budget is still hurt. What do we need to cut, what do we need to keep, and do we need to raise more money via taxation?

Due to the Great Recession, many working people and families are struggling to make ends meet, and cannot afford to pay increased taxes. I believe that we should focus our efforts and available funding toward projects that will maintain our present infrastructure, while identifying areas of city government that need improvement and developing a plan to improve them. This way, projects that will be needed in the future will already be identified and can be executed when available funding can be secured.

Services that are vital to the well-being to residents’ livelihood, such as transit, neighborhood infrastructure improvements (like sidewalks and street repairs) should be maintained at their current levels, while additions such as streetcar extensions should be postponed until funding becomes available.

4) With its budget shrunk at least until the end of the recession what should Seattle parks look like?

Despite the shrunken budgets, I believe that there is no excuse for Seattle’s park maintenance to become lax. Although it is desirable to continue to expand the park system, the current economic situation requires that we continue to maintain our parks at the same level of care that Seattle residents have come to expect over the years.

5) What is the Seattle’s role in education and public transportation given how important they are to the city, but that other agencies are tasked with them?

Seattle’s role in education, although limited, should be to provide a safe environment free of crime and intimidation. Over the last couple of years, we have heard about a disturbing trend of violent crimes being committed near some of our schools. This reduces the safety of our students and creates an atmosphere that makes both parents and students reluctant to attend school. The City should work with school administrators and Seattle Police to ensure that crime and intimidation will not be tolerated at any of our schools. By doing this, we can provide a safe, caring environment for those who are working hard to make a bright future for themselves and become productive members of our society.

Seattle’s role in public transportation is also quite pronounced. Even though Metro is not directly funded or operated by the city, it is important that the City provide decent infrastructure. I believe many of our residents are inclined to take transit and reduce vehicle trips, but are reluctant to do so when it is unsafe or inconvenient to access them. We must work to maintain our roads and arterials, which, when properly maintained, provide the foundation for all safe forms of transit, and help Seattle achieve its goal of reducing transportation’s effect on the environment.

The Washington State Democrats have officially endorsed I-502, the initiative from New Approach Washington (NAW) that aims to legalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana and establish regulated markets for its production and sale. A number of internet commenters are treating this as a new milestone, but it’s not the first time the state’s Democrats have endorsed a legalization initiative. The Washington State Democrats also endorsed Sensible Washington’s I-1068 in 2010.

But one thing is missing from both Just Say Now’s post and this editorial in the Spokesman-Review, and it remains the most divisive aspect of the initiative: the proposal of a 5ng/ml per se marijuana threshold for all drivers.

To most people, the idea of creating a system for marijuana similar to how alcohol is dealt with is a no-brainer. And the backers of New Approach Washington make no bones about the fact that finding an initiative that can pass a statewide vote is their priority. But the science behind this limit is simply not there, and it could have serious repercussions not only for medical marijuana users, but for anyone who uses the roads in Washington.

As I wrote last time I discussed this initiative, a ng/ml measurement of the active marijuana THC compound is not an indicator of impairment the way that a blood-alcohol measurement is. Medical marijuana patients often have very high ng/ml measurements at all times, even if they haven’t used it in over a day. And in some cases, those individuals no longer experience the psychoactive effects from the drug that creates the impairment in the first place.

Recently in Colorado, attempts to enact a limit similar to the one NAW proposes have stalled several times. Last week, a workgroup that was put together to establish a 5ng/ml limit ultimately decided not to move forward, citing these problems. Compounding the issue is the fact that – despite what many people seem to take for granted about driving while stoned – there’s very little evidence showing any correlation between testing positive for THC and road fatalities. In fact, the link above points out that the numbers of road fatalities have plummeted by 20 percent in Colorado since medical marijuana became legal. And another study has shown that there’s no increased incidence of accidents for even up to double the proposed limit (10ng/ml). (see update below)

The reasons for that are likely a combination of the inaccuracy of the ng/ml metric as a valid measurement of impairment, as well as the somewhat counter-intuitive nature of driving while stoned. While driving under the influence of marijuana is certainly not a smart idea, it tends to have some of the opposite effects that alcohol does. The common generality is that a drunk driver will drive through a red light while a stoned driver will stop at a green light. Alcohol impairment tends to go alongside reckless and aggressive driving while marijuana impairment tends to go alongside overly-cautious and passive driving. Despite that, the main reason not to drive stoned is that you won’t be able to act quickly in an emergency situation. Driving requires your full attention, and if there were a way to accurately measure impairment, I’d be perfectly fine with sanctions for those who aren’t capable of operating their car safely. But there just isn’t right now.

Up until now, charges for driving under the influence of marijuana are relatively rare. Without a per se limit, most defense attorneys know how to defeat them, and it’s often not worth an officer’s time to take a driver to get a blood draw that won’t hold up in court. In order to obtain a conviction, prosecutors have to prove impairment in other ways, which is difficult to do. However, if this limit is approved by the voters, that burden of proof is gone. What would happen then isn’t entirely clear, but it’s not hard to imagine that officers will be more likely to demand a blood draw for any situation in which they can conjure up probable cause (which is not very hard). In fact, one attorney I spoke with last month stated that under this new limit, if a medical marijuana patient is doing nothing wrong, but is struck by a reckless driver (who then dies), he or she could be given a blood draw and then charged with negligent homicide.

The folks behind NAW think that none of this will matter in the election, and they very well could be right. Medical marijuana patients make up only about 1-2% of the overall population. The vast majority of people will see this provision as a plus (as the state Democrats did), and perhaps for a small percentage of folks, it will be the difference between a yes and a no vote. But what worries me the most isn’t even the additional risk for medical marijuana patients. It’s the fact that we already have a very difficult time keeping drunk drivers off the road. The prospect of expanding the scope of that enforcement to include a subset of the population that is statistically far less likely than drunk drivers to kill someone is bad prioritization and will inevitably lead to even more repetitive drunk drivers falling through the cracks of the system.

I’ve had some good discussions with supporters of the NAW initiative, and the difference really comes down to how one sees this whole process playing out. While it would be nice to finally see a statewide legalization initiative finally pass, it’s also possible that if we pass it, the federal courts could strike down some parts of the law, but still leave us with the DUI limit and only a one-ounce decriminalization (which a number of states already have). There are some concessions I’m very willing to make in the greater effort of ending marijuana prohibition, but this attempt to appease the anti-science beast is still a bridge too far.

UPDATE: The study linked above (which I’ve struck) was using a different metric for measuring ng/ml than what the I-502 initiative proposes. The study only claims that there’s no difference up to the 5ng/ml limit. The complete study can be read here.

Ryan Blethen trying to explain The Seattle Times’ new feature, Just Fix It, doesn’t do a good job making me want to read it. I’m going to ignore the fact that the title implies simple solutions. And I’m going to ignore that the Seattle Times’ vehement opposition to tax increases means that they don’t really want to have the conversation they say they want to have. No, my problem is even more basic.

The intractable, sophomoric politics that has come to define this era is nothing new. Americans have been dealing with such bursts of dysfunction since the beginning of the republic.

While I don’t like the intractability of today’s politics, it seems that The Seattle Times would oppose the sorts of things that would make our politics more, um, tractable. On the state level, they should eliminate the 2/3 requirement to pass any taxes. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen editorials in favor of that very requirement. Nationally, I’d suggest eliminating the filibuster will tract the hell out of things. In both cases, fundamentally, make our representative democracy more democratic.

But I suspect people like me and the rest of the rest of blogtopia (y!sctp) are part of what he means by “sophomoric” (although he only names cable news). You know, people willing to admit an ideology. People who care more about outcomes than the game. People who say fuck and shit. People who aren’t the right people. People who didn’t have their idealism and ideology sucked out of them at journalism school and then learned the right way to do things with some father figure (sometimes more literally than others) in the business.

No, those of us with our sophomoric notions about how to express ourselves in the absence of our daddy’s newspaper will continue right along.

– I’m not much of a beer person, but the White House homebrew is pretty amazing (h/t).

– Perhaps the oddest thing about the people so eager to cheer the death penalty is that they don’t think the government can do anything right.

– Drug patents.

– The Mariners may be terrible but at least they aren’t going to lose 100 games.

– Boxing is my favorite individual sport, but the standards of sportsmanship escape me.

Last week’s contest was won by Liberal Scientist. It was the location of the “Cheers” bar in Boston.

This week’s contest is somewhere in Washington state, good luck!

Genesis 11:10-24
Two years after the flood, when Shem was one hundred, he had a son named Arpachshad. He had more children and died at the age of six hundred. This is a list of his descendants:

When Arpachshad was thirty-five, he had a son named Shelah. Arpachshad had more children and died at the age of four hundred thirty-eight.

When Shelah was thirty, he had a son named Eber. Shelah had more children and died at the age of four hundred thirty-three.

When Eber was thirty-four, he had a son named Peleg. Eber had more children and died at the age of four hundred sixty-four.

When Peleg was thirty, he had a son named Reu. Peleg had more children and died at the age of two hundred thirty-nine.

When Reu was thirty-two he had a son named Serug. Reu had more children and died at the age of two hundred thirty-nine.

When Serug was thirty, he had a son named Nahor. Serug had more children and died at the age of two hundred thirty.

When Nahor was twenty-nine, he had a son named Terah. Nahor had more children and died at the age of one hundred forty-eight.

Discuss.