HorsesAss.Org

When it comes to baseball, I’m not much of a traditionalist. Our good friend, N in Seattle, most certainly is. So I’ve been curious to hear his thoughts on the proposed playoff expansion. I might be wrong, but I’m betting he hates it even more than Tim Lincecum. That said, I think I have a proposal that he’ll hate even more than that, but it would be a much more exciting playoff format than anything I’ve heard proposed before.

The two main complaints that I’ve seen about expanding the playoffs by two teams is that it will extend the season even more, and it will give the division winners too much time to rest up while the wild cards battle it out. This idea solves both of those problems AND it adds two more teams to the mix. Here’s how it works:

Six teams in each league make the playoffs. The three division winners and the three teams with the next best records are all seeded by record (so if a team wins a division with a terrible record, like the Seahawks did this year in the NFL, they’ll still make the playoffs, but as the 6 seed). They then play 9 games in 11 days, 3 each against a different playoff team:

Seed 1 plays: 4, 5, @6
Seed 2 plays: @5, 6, 3
Seed 3 plays: 6, 4, @2
Seed 4 plays: @1, @3, 5
Seed 5 plays: 2, @1, @4
Seed 6 plays: @3, @2, 1

The higher seeded team in each match-up plays at home. After the 9 games, the two teams with the best record will move on to play in the LCS and the rest of the playoffs will continue as it always has. If there’s a tie in the standings at the end of 9 games, the tie-breaker should probably be run differential, which could make for some interesting strategies in some late games.

I’m now ducking…

UPDATE: I’m putting way too much thought into this, but I’ve updated the original schedule so that even the 1 and 2 seed will have to play some road playoff games and the 5 and 6 seed get home games. The top three seeds would get 6 home, 3 away. Wild cards get 3 home, 6 away. Still waiting for that call from Bud Selig…

– Oh my:

Pajamas Media’s resident fashion-plate and bow-tie adorned dildo brings us his latest installment in the wingnut myth that Obama Is a Muslim intent on imposing sharia law in the United States. Kimball’s editors — no doubt concerned that the typical Pajamas Media lip-moving reader rarely makes it past the headline — pack everything into the post title: “Why It’s OK for the U.S. Govt. to Burn Bibles But Condemn Burning the Koran.”

– The tunnel is a stupid project (also Pete Holems is a coward).

– Procession of the species!

– What Booman said.

Update [Darryl]

– I was going to write about Rick Perlstein’s feature in this month’s Mother Jones titled “Inside the GOP’s Fact-Free Nation. From Nixon’s plumbers to James O’Keefe’s video smears: How political lying became normal”, but will offer it as a link here instead. The article is an interesting history of the modern political lie in American politics.

Last week’s contest was won by waguy. It was Cheney, WA, where hopefully lots of Eastern Washington University students are working to get I-1149 on the ballot.

This week’s location is related to something in the news from this past month. Good luck and Happy Easter!

1 Timothy 5:23
Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.

Discuss.

Young Turks: Obama v. some reporter.

Garfunkel and Oats: Weed Card:

EARTH DAY 2011:

• Mark Fiore: Little Green Man.
• White House: Earth Day questions from the south lawn.

Newsy: G.O.P. struggles to find a candidate for POTUS.

Laura Flanders: Demonizing taxes and heightening inequality.

Young Turks: Sarah Palin’s disapproval is 61%. Oh…that’s in Alaska!

Seriously Trumped Up:

• Trump fuels birfer madness
• Newsy: G.O.P. attacks The Donald.
• Young Turks: The Donald attacks Jerry Seinfeld.
• TYT Network: Birfer king!
• Young Turks: Trump’s idiotic oil ideas.
• Ed: The Donald!
• Thom: Trump and his hair were born in South Africa?!?
• Ann Telnaes: The Donald’s foreign policy.
• Trump with sage words on gasoline, China and jobs.
• Young Turks: Is The Donald too stupid to be a racist?
• Sarah Palin sticks up for The Donald.
• Lawrence O’Donnell: The Donald gets confused over right to privacy.

The “Don’t say Gay” bill introduced in Tennessee.

South Carolina teabaggers speak up:

Cenk: Boehner appoints high-priced lawyer ($520 per HOUR) to defend DOMA.

Nutcase Pastor Terry Jones accidentally fires his gun after meeting with Imam (via Crooks and Liars).

Apple Tracks:

• Rep. Inslee (D-WA) wants answers from Apple.
• Sen. Franken (D-MN) to Apple: You got some ‘splaining to do on iPhone tracking (via Crooks and Liars).
• ONN: Should the nation’s unemployed buy new Apple computers?

TYT Network: Glenn Beck’s corn cow conspiracy.

White House: West Wing Week.

“Family Values” Sen. John Ensign Resigns:

• Maddow: Sen. Ensign resigns over sex scandal.
• Cenk: Sen. John Ensign’s C street connections.
• Newsy: Sen. Ensign decides to resign afterall.
• Young Turks: Sen. Ensign goes down!

Young Turks: The James O’Keefe “music video”.

Pap on FAUX News crushes opponent on “fair tax” issue.

ONN week in review: 268 feral cats removed from U.N Headquarters.

Cenk: Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS) making outrageous statements about his state’s health care.

Maddow: The idiotic Bush color coded alert system is no more. Kiss your Terror Rainbow goodbye!

U.S. Budget:

• Cenk with Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA): Some Town Hall “issues” over killing Medicare
• Ed: The G.O.P. holds the country hostage over debt ceiling.
• Obama: Town hall on America’s fiscal policy
• Ann Telnaes: Rep. Ryan criticizes Obama budget speech.
• Pap and Ed: Republicans “budget plan” and their Ayn Rand fetish.
• Ed: The Republican “plan”
• Cenk: G.O.P. plan to kill Medicare is a DISASTER (for Republicans).
• Lawrence O’Donnell: Greenspan says, “Go back to Clinton”. Oops!
• Liberal Viewer: Republican budget fail!
• Ann Telnaes: Republican budget defense.
• Jon: Slashdance…The Dem deficit reduction plan (via OneGoodMove).

Young Turks: Former Gov. Gary Johnson says end child labor laws.

Thom: Atlas Shrugged.

Laura Flanders: Another bad effect of the Citizens United decision:

Young Turks: The Glenn Beck comedy show.

Teabaggers get excited some times (via Crooks and Liars).

Newsy: Gov. Brewer vetoes birfer bill.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.

The Northwest Progressive Institute (NPI) has been a strong voice in the progressive activist community in the Northwest for over seven years. One of their early projects was a set of tools for progressive bloggers that enabled them to connect, share ideas and information, and disseminate their work. In past years, they have put together a number of influential workshops that brought bloggers together and put bloggers in touch with politicians (I’ve attended a number of them). NPI has also been a strong, consistent voice against Tim “Biggest Lie of my Life” Eyman’s abuse of the initiative process in Washington.

On Thursday, April 28th, NPI is holding its Spring Fundraising Gala at the Community Center at Mercer View, 82346 SE 24th Street on Mercer Island (map). The reception begins at 6:30 PM and the main program begins at 7:15 PM.

This is your chance to hang out with other folks in the progressive community over a buffet dinner. There will be music by Don Mock. Featured speakers are Rep. Jay Inslee, State Rep. Reuven Carlyle, Timothy Ford, Peter Steinbrueck, and Scott Macklin. And Bob Ferguson will be the Master of Ceremonies.

You can find information about tickets and whatnot on the NPI web page.

In my post on I-1053, I wrote, “I’m not a fan of the initiative process, but I think we do need to respect the will of the people.” This post will expand on that a little. Initiatives are simply a tool to make laws. We shouldn’t treat them as anything more or less.

The biggest problem is that they are a blunt tool. The legislative process has hearings and amendments. Better (or worse) ideas make it into the final product. With initiatives, the final outcome is the same one people were collecting signatures on months and months prior. It doesn’t take into concern the opposition. You don’t need to talk to attorneys to see if it passes constitutional muster, or look into other ways of doing something. It is all or nothing.

And this all or nothing approach tends to hamper debate. If an initiative passes, then it’s the will of the people. This despite the fact that the people didn’t get any alternatives. Their will was based on if they approved the language of the initiative or not, not on what their most preferred alternative might have been. That has real value, and should be respected, but we should also keep it in perspective. And when an initiative fails, it often kills momentum for whatever was being worked for, like the income tax (although, I’m not sure how much momentum it actually had, and oddly it hasn’t done much about liquor privatization).

Another problem is the influence of money. Most of these Eyman initiatives in recent years have got on the ballot with the financing largely of one man. Of course, most normal people can’t afford to do that. And when they do get on the ballot, even political junkies like me get sick of seeing all the ads and getting mailings. Money does play too large a role in the initiative process. Still, money also plays too large a role in the legislative process. The rich and powerful will use their power in the crafting of laws, no matter how we make those laws.

Because of all this money, often the more grassroots voices the initiative process was envisioned to give a voice get shouted out. It’s tougher for grassroots signature gathering efforts to get a foothold amid the paid signature gathering. It’s tougher for the opposition to raise the money to compete with some of the corporate campaigns we’ve seen recently.

Still, even for all the faults in the process, people still do get to vote on specific issues, and that is rather remarkable. So, how do we judge an initiative? The same way we’d judge any law: who wins, who loses, who it helps, and who it hurts.

– Speculation probably does play a role in high gas prices. But the fact that it’s a finite resource that we’re using more and more of probably has more to do with it.

– Birtherism qua birtherism is really, really dumb, but as always Shakesville has an interesting take.

– I didn’t realize people vote straight ticket more often either, but I guess it makes sense as the line between Democrats and Republicans has sharpened.

– I’m amazed we didn’t do this already.

– The Seahawks’ schedule looks tough. Still, as we learned last year, you don’t have to have anything as fancy as a winning record to make the playoffs.

Oh look, here’s a press release from Representative Katrina Asay. Enjoy.

Last fall, voters overwhelmingly approved Initiative 1053 (I-1053), which requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to approve tax increases. Voters in the 30th Legislative District approved I-1053 by more than 66 percent.

Yes. I think it was a mistake. Did voters realize what would be cut if the legislature passed a no new taxes budget? Did they make a guess about the revenue forecasts that have come in since then? Would they vote for the kinds of cuts that Republicans (and too many Democrats) want if those cuts were on the ballot? I’m not a fan of the initiative process, but I think we do need to respect the will of the people. However, I don’t think we can divine the will of the people about this budget by any Tim Eyman initiative. And I certainly don’t think we can figure out the will of the people with regard to local tax revenues.

Voters have approved the tax constraints found in I-1053 several times, most recently with Initiative 960, which was thrown out by the majority party last year. This allowed the majority party to increase taxes with a simple majority vote, or 50 plus one. In no mood to be taxed even more in this battered economy, voters in November quickly repealed a host of tax increases put in place by the majority party in the 2010 legislative session.

I know what Rep. Asay means, but that first sentence seems to imply that I-960 happened after 1053. Also, the will of the people is Democratic control of both houses of the legislature. Has been for a decade. Yet, oddly I don’t see Republican press releases demanding whatever Democrats want in the legislature.

That’s why I was so disappointed when majority Democrats in the House passed an amended version of Senate Bill 5457, the so-called “congestion relief bill.” Despite the catchy title, I voted against this bill because, as it was changed in the House, it does an end-around the voter-approved two-thirds vote requirement to increase taxes.

1053 didn’t say anything about counties or municipalities. We’re now divining the will of the voters based on things they didn’t vote for or against. That simply wasn’t on the ballot. In fact, King County was pretty close to evenly split. I’d bet Seattle and some suburban cities opposed it. Does that mean that their city councils should have majority rule like the framers of the state constitution envisioned?

Senate Bill 5457, as amended, would authorize a simple majority of King County Council members to impose up to an additional $20 in annual car-tab tax to help maintain Metro transit service. From all reports, the King County executive, once the bill is signed into law, will ask for the full amount of the tax. This would raise an estimated $25.5 million for each of the two years the tax will be in place.

Awesome. As a King County resident and a car owner, I’ll gladly pay my share. If enough people don’t like it they can either try to block it at the ballot like many of the state taxes last year, or if they don’t like it but not enough to do that, they can vote out the people who agree to the taxes. Democracy. Awesome.

What makes Senate Bill 5457 so offensive to me is that while the voters approved I-1053 to ensure any tax increase would be required to receive a two-thirds supermajority vote to be approved, the measure violates the will of the people by allowing a simple majority on the King County Council to approve the additional tax.

Again, NOBODY VOTED ON IF KING COUNTY SHOULD HAVE A 2/3 MAJORITY TO PASS ANYTHING. It wasn’t on the ballot. You can’t call the will of the people on an at best tangentially related question. This is crazy.

I see this as a way for the majority party to raise the ante when it comes to how many shenanigans voters will put up with when it comes to how new and increased taxes are approved. I feel as though they are basically telling citizens that while voters clearly and unequivocally directed the Legislature to have a supermajority consensus to increase taxes; they can snub that directive with a simple majority vote of legislators. Now, we are faced with a bill that could allow local governments to skirt the newly-approved mandate from last fall.

Local governments aren’t skirting anything. The mandates were to the legislature. And they were dumb. But even if they were the most sensible policy ever, they have nothing to do with King County.

If there is a good case to be made for higher taxes, let those who are asking for them convince others to support the idea. It’s that simple.

You mean like a majority of the King County Council, the King County Executive, enough voters not to sign a county wide referendum or initiative on that, or if there is a referendum to vote on it? You mean convince those people? Because there are already plenty of checks and balances in the system.

Additionally, and not to be lost in this debate, is that voters approved Initiative 695 specifically to ensure car tabs would cost no more than $30. Whether you like the idea or not, it’s what the people of this state approved. However, each year the Legislature has offered local governments the opportunity to add $20 here and there, weight fees and now this. Senate Bill 5457 is another example of why voters again decided to put such strict standards in place to raise taxes.

695 was ruled unconstitutional. So basically, we have to uphold the will of the people to support one unconstitutional thing, possibly another unconstitutional thing (the previous 2/3 rules have all been on standing, not on the merits). Also, 695 failed in King County. So by this logic, the will of the people is that they have higher car tabs. Why do you hate the imagined will of the people based on something that they didn’t really vote on, Katrina Asay?

This bill is a bad deal for taxpayers and breaks faith with voters. Because the House amended a Senate bill, it must now go back for the Senate to approve or reject the change. For all of our sakes, I can only hope the bill is set aside. It’s the right thing to do to maintain the integrity and spirit of I-1053.

It gives the voters plenty of say. As does every question before a legislative body in Washington. And it helps Metro get through tough fucking times.

HA has been experiencing server difficulties for, what…two weeks now?

The ISP has pinned the blame on a rogue router. They replaced it this afternoon. So no more problems, eh?

– Sensible Washington is having 4/20-related events around the state, including a press conference and rally tomorrow starting at 1pm in Westlake Park.

– Seattle city officials sent a very strong message today to both the State Senate and Governor Gregoire that passage of the medical marijuana bill is vitally important to ensure we have a well-regulated system for handling medical marijuana.

– Glenn Greenwald on the bizarre priorities of our government.

– Charli Carpenter writes about the opportunity that we’ve been wasting for the nearly ten years we’ve been in Afghanistan.

It’s finally starting to feel like spring around here! And maybe it is just me, but it sure feels like political passions are beginning to stir among us liberals. Let’s talk about it.

Please join us tonight for an evening of electoral politics under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but feel free to join some of us for an earlier dinner.

Not in Seattle? There is a good chance you live near one of the 222 other chapters of Drinking Liberally.

Sweet Jesus! You know the Wingnuts have huddled on the right-most precipice of crazy when Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has to step in as the voice of moderation:

Calling it “a bridge too far,” Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Monday vetoed the state legislature’s controversial “birther bill” and also rejected a bill that would have permitted guns on college campuses.

The bill to permit guns on college campuses wasn’t so much about moderation as it was about poor authorship:

The bill would have initially allowed guns to be brought into classrooms, but was revised to limit gun possession to sidewalks and roads on campuses.

Brewer told Fox News that while she is usually a supporter of pro-gun legislation, she vetoed the bill because it “was just very poorly and sloppily written and it just was not defined in the manner of which people could interpret it or could it be enforced.”

In smacking down Teh Birfers Brewer expressed some concern…

“I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for president of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their ‘early baptismal or circumcision certificates’ among other records to the Arizona secretary of state,” she said in the letter. “This is a bridge too far.”

Huh? So Arizona lawmakers wanted the presidency limited to folks who have undergone genital mutilation and practice a subset of religions that baptize infants?

For infidels who are neither circumscribed nor baptized as infants, perhaps an original invitation to the placenta feast would work?

Well…good on Jan, although she may have ulterior motives—I just guessin’ she does not have an official Certificate of Circumcision Circumcision Certificate.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who really wasn’t born in the United States, applauds.

But Teh Crazy is being upheld by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal:

Gov. Bobby Jindal would sign a bill requiring presidential candidates to provide a copy of their birth certificate to qualify for the Louisiana ballot if it reaches his desk, a spokesman said Monday.

A spokesman says Gov. Bobby Jindal will sign a bill to require presidential candidates to provide a birth certificate as proof of citizenship.
“It’s not part of our package, but if the Legislature passes it we’ll sign it,” press secretary Kyle Plotkin said.

(And if the birfer legislation is part of the package, one must wonder if the candidate’s package would be part of the legislation.)

And Indiana is considering joining the Birferati:

Indiana Senator Mike Delph is seeking a summer study committee review of whether Indiana should require Presidential candidates to prove they meet the constitutional requirements of age, residency and citizenship.

(And The Donald is just getting warmed up, while awaiting the results from his investigative teams in Hawaii and Kenya.)

So…maybe not such a bad day for Birfers. In fact, it is turning out to be a downright joyous day, since a new Public Policy Polling poll of Iowa Republicans found:

There is a significant birther presence in Iowa- 48% of Republican voters say they don’t think Barack Obama was born in the United States…

I hear placenta makes an excellent pizza topping.

– I love, love, love that there are things that scientists discover that have been right under their nose for a long time.

– Here are some reviews of Atlas Shrugged. I assume they are more fun to read than the movie is to watch. Or, for that matter than the book is to read.

– Has the tunnel debate become too classy?

That’s my 6 word summary of what people want based on the comments at this thread. Well, I don’t know how to up the quality of our trolls, but here’s a post about Washington with swearing:

Hey assholes, turds, jackasses, fuckers, and various shits for brains! Are any of you as pissed off about some Democrats’ (and more Republicans, but they don’t control anything) attempts to fuck with teachers?

As amended by a coalition of eight Senate Democrats and 22 Senate Republicans, the bill now would require school districts facing layoffs to first get rid of teachers who have received the lowest evaluations. That would replace the standard method of using seniority only – the last hired would be the first fired.

Look, there are bad teachers who probably deserve to get fired. If district administrators want to work with the teachers unions to figure out the best methods to fire those teachers, I’m all for it. But it should be part of collective bargaining, not imposed on districts by the legislature. I just realized this paragraph hasn’t had any swear words, so: blumpkin. In any event, those evaluations had better be pretty rock solid if legislators want the state to impose them on school districts.

Gregoire said she doesn’t expect the layoff change to pass the entire Legislature. But if it does, she will not support it. That’s because the state is in the midst of a process to improve the way teachers are evaluated because the existing system doesn’t work.

Well shit, I hope at the very least, that there’s some compelling reason to make this change now.

Numbers collected by the state show that fewer than 1 percent of all teachers have received unsatisfactory grades while all others have been deemed satisfactory. The percentage of principals graded unsatisfactory is less than one-half of 1 percent.

So, if these legislators get their way, the state is going to fuck with collective bargaining to impose a system on districts that mandates hiring and firing based on a system we’re trying to fix. And if you do trust that system, there already is a better than 99% satisfactory rating for those teachers. Thanks, fuckfaces.