HorsesAss.Org

Margaret Talev in McClatchy has a dispatch from a wingnutty corner of Pennsylvania that is hard to believe:

“I like her backup man,” said retired machinist Ronald Duser, referring to former President Bill Clinton. “And her family’s from Scranton. She seems to be an honest person, just like my wife.”

Of Obama, Duser said: “I’m not crazy about voting for a colored guy, but that’s not why I don’t support Obama. I’m not prejudiced. I just like Hillary.”

A couple tables over, Jean Fetterman, a foster grandparent, said of Clinton: “Oh, I love her. She’s a very intelligent person, and she has her husband who went through this.”

She scoffs at the idea of voting for Obama: “I don’t want to be a Muslim!” She looks dubious when told Obama is Christian. “Then why did he go see what’s-his-name over in Iraq, that Lama?”

She isn’t clear about whom she means. She may have seen a photo of Obama wearing traditional clothing during a visit to Africa. “I don’t care what color he is, I don’t care if he’s pink,” she said. “I don’t think he’s got the same education Hillary has, and he’s so young. He’s arrogant, too.”

In the past, people haven’t believed me when I’ve told them that during the years my family lived in rural Chester County, Pennsylvania, we met people who still believed that Jewish people actually had horns. Hopefully, we’re all closer to understanding how that’s even possible.

Media criticism is really more Goldy’s thing, but I’m reading our newspapers’ reaction to plastic bag fee scheme announced today.

Seattle Times:

Forget the canvas sacks at home? Shoppers at grocery, convenience and drug stores will pay the price starting Jan. 1, if the City Council approves. A family buying six bags of groceries a week would spend $62.40 a year in bag fees.

That’s sixty bucks a year if you forget, every single time, when you go to the supermarket. That’s every single time. Who forgets every single time? If you’re that forgetful, maybe you have more pressing problems than grocery shopping.

You can read the P-I’s “Sound Off” on their article. When I go to the market, almost always, all of my purchases can fit into one (or maybe two) canvas bags. Of course, I often forget to bring my canvas bags along. If I had to pay twenty cents a shot, I’d remember every time. Or if I was one of those rugged libertarians, I’d pay the surcharge.

In a way, I’m glad we didn’t decide to ban plastic bags. Consumers have always had a choice: paper or plastic. Consumers can still choose, but their choices will better reflect the environmental realities, not to mention that giant floating garbage pile in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Banning the bags is a demand; charging a fee is a suggestion.

Speaking of jack-booted European-style socialism, I’ll be at this Transportation Choices Coalition house party.

Seattle House Party:
WHEN: April 3, 5:00pm – 7:00pm
WHERE: South Lake Union Discovery Center, 101 Westlake Ave. N, Seattle, WA 98109

But don’t forget the 425:

Eastside House Party:
WHEN: April 21, 5:00pm – 7:00pm
WHERE: Kirkland Performance Center, 350 Kirkland Ave, Kirkland, WA 98033

Stalin (who made everyone ride trains!) would approve.

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens gives us a little historical perspective on the much maligned practice of “earmarking”:

[audio:https://horsesass.org/wp-content/uploads/stevensearmarks.mp3]

Again, you can listen to the whole interview, unedited and in context, here.

OMG OMG OMG!!!

Next time the cashier says “paper or plastic,” think outside the bags. Think about ocean pollution, giant landfills and global warming, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels says.

Then think to next year, when you might have to either pull out a reusable tote or pay 20 cents a bag.

Nickels and City Council President Richard Conlin proposed a 20-cent “green fee” Wednesday on all disposable bags to encourage customers to carry their milk and eggs home in their own bags.

I’ll be a guest on KUOW’s Weekday Conversation today, sometime between 1:20 and 1:40PM, talking about taxes. Just thought you might want to know.

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens recently gave an extended interview to public radio station KDLG in Dillingham Alaska, and I thought you might enjoy his unique take on the subject of net neutrality:

[audio:https://horsesass.org/wp-content/uploads/stevensnetneutrality.mp3]

See, that’s what happens when you have an 85-year-old man attempting to dictate the future of the Internet. You can listen to the whole interview, unedited and in context, here.

I can’t take credit for the observation, but that won’t stop me from being the first to post on it.

We’ve all enjoyed poking fun at Dave Reichert’s ranking as the 401st most powerful member of the US House (though a respectable 73rd in earmarks), but we bloggers are a geeky breed, and HA regular “N in Seattle” (who blogs at Peace Tree Farm) recently observed how apt a metaphor Reichert’s rank rank turns out to be… at least in the parlance of HTTP status codes. For who amongst us (other than John McCain) is not familiar with following common error message…?

The request failed with HTTP status 401: Access Denied.

“Access Denied.” What better way to describe Reichert’s status in the corridors of power?

If there’s one thing Darcy Burner has proven over the past few weeks with her astounding success building consensus around the Responsible Plan to end the war in Iraq, it’s that she knows the password to getting things done. (And, I’m betting, she also knows her HTTP status codes inside out.)

It was a Beer Hall Putsch at Drinking Liberally Tuesday night, as us enviro-Nazis plotted the extermination of the BIAW.

Joining me (Goldy) in our communo-fascist treachery were Will, Carl, Lee and Seattle P-I columnist Joel Connelly. Topics of discussion include the BIAW’s bizarre hate speech and the consequences it might have for the candidates they support, Rick Steves’ reefer decriminalization crusade, and an update on Darcy Burner’s "Responsible Plan" to end the war in Iraq.

[audio:http://www.podcastingliberally.com/podcasts/podcasting_liberally_april_1_2008.mp3]

The show is 47:18, and can be downloaded here as a 43.4 MB MP3.

[Podcasting Liberally is recorded live at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. Special thanks to Darryl for producing the show, and Confab creators Gavin and Richard for hosting the site.]

BONUS PODCAST!!!
Last week’s podcast had some technical problems, and only through Darryl’s heroic editing was kinda-sorta recovered. And then I just plum forgot to post it. But now I have. So you can listen to it here.

The latest news out of Vancouver is that the plea agreement that would have sent Marc Emery to a fixed jail sentence and spared his co-defendants has fallen through:

But now there is a fresh wrinkle in the proceedings, one that even those most hostile to Emery’s cause should be able to see the absurdity of. Earlier this year Emery was able to arrange a plea bargain with U.S. prosecutors that would see him accept a 10-year sentence on their charges, of which he would serve half. Under the deal his co-accused colleagues would go free and Emery would serve the first 45 days of his sentence in the U.S., after which he would be returned to Canada to finish his stretch in a more comfortable Canadian prison.

All that was needed was the agreement of Canada’s department of justice. But last week, after a month of pessimistic media reports, they gave a final “No.” The Americans insisted on guarantees against Emery being released before his five years was up, and such arrangements are forbidden in Canadian law, so no Canadian judge can order the application of such a sentence. That means Emery will have to go ahead with the extradition proceedings that were held over in the face of the plea-bargain, and face a possible life sentence down south. Catch-22: because Canada is too humane and liberal to apply the punishment that the Americans would like — a punishment Emery has voluntarily agreed to — there appears to be no option but to hand him over to the Americans without protection against much worse treatment!

Now it looks like the April 9 extradition case will happen as planned. Emery thinks the Canadian government could do more to protect him from America’s justice system, where he could spend his entire life behind bars for running a business that the Canadian government collected taxes on for years. If Marc Emery and his co-defendants end up on trial here, I think all of Canada should go on strike.

The latest installment in the ongoing saga of the Washington State Senate Republican Caucus (popularly known as “The Great Unraveling”), involves Sen. Cheryl Pflug (R-Delusional) who observers have described as increasingly erratic since her divorce… even for a Republican. I’d ask her legislative assistant about it, but apparently she’s no longer on the job.

Rumors are flying that Pflug’s assistant is enjoying paid administrative leave after enduring sustained “verbal abuse” during the recent legislative session, while others say that Pflug has outright fired her LA. I guess the only thing tougher than being a Republican state senator these days is working for one.

Just out from Congressional Quarterly:

Democrats in the state of Washington are increasingly better positioned to keep the Governor’s mansion and to take over a key House district in the state’s most competitive contests this election cycle.

Gov. Christine Gregoire and 8th District candidate Darcy Burner came within a razor‑thin edge of their opponents in their last contests. But analysts now say that the Democrats have upped their chancing of winning as the state GOP party faces structural problems and GOP efforts to appeal to the state’s large number of moderate voters has been hampered by their strong conservative base.

CQ Politics is now changing its rating of the Washington state Governor’s race from No Clear Favorite to Leans Democrat and Washington’s 8th District rating from Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite.

And how has Darcy Burner done it?

In the 8th District, which encompasses the Eastern suburbs of Seattle, analysts say former Microsoft executive Burner’s organization, fundraising, and her views on the Iraq war have boosted her campaign. […] Burner has made the Iraq war, which is highly unpopular in the district, a centerpiece of her 2008 campaign. She initiated an effort to create a plan to end the war. After six months of consultation with retired generals and national security experts, she was joined by nine Democratic challengers in the release of a formal plan March 17. It reiterates many of the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group and calls for removing all U.S. troops from Iraq (without proposing a specific timeline), enlisting allies to help stabilize Iraq, and improving America’s international reputation.

Dave Reichert is now one of only three Republican incumbents whose race is rated a toss-up, and a lot of the credit goes to Darcy’s leadership in creating a consensus behind the Responsible Plan.

And how’s that plan progressing these days? The Politico devotes a ton of space to it today, reporting:

As congressional Democrats plot strategy for next week’s Petraeus-Crocker appearances, a growing number of Democratic congressional challengers are coming together around something called the “Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq.”

The plan’s author, Washington House candidate Darcy Burner, said that her original goal had been to have 50 candidates sign on to the plan by September. Just 2½ weeks into its life, the plan has nearly that many, picking up six more in the past few days to bring to the total to 48.

Um… as of 1PM today, 52 Democratic challengers had now signed on to the Plan. And counting.

MEDIA ALERT:
Darcy taped an interview with Rachel Maddow today, which will be aired on her show at either 3:30 or 4:30 PM Pacific. Tune in to AM-1090 or stream the audio live from their website.

Steve Benen at Crooks and Liars:

Maybe it’s just me, but I tend to think this observation might resonate with voters: John McCain could be denied coverage under John McCain’s healthcare plan.

Elizabeth Edwards, whose cancer is no longer curable, was pointed in her criticism at a meeting of healthcare journalists:

Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of former Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, said she and John McCain have one thing in common: “Neither one of us would be covered by his health policy.”

Edwards lodged her criticism of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s proposal Saturday at the annual meeting of the Assn. of Health Care Journalists.

Under McCain’s plan, insurance companies “wouldn’t have to cover preexisting conditions like melanoma and breast cancer,” she said.

McCain has been treated for melanoma, the most serious type of skin malignancy. Edwards in 2004 was diagnosed with breast cancer, and announced a year ago that it had returned and spread into her bones, meaning it no longer could be cured.

McCain’s plan focuses on offering new tax breaks for individuals who buy their own health insurance. But critics say the Arizona senator’s proposal avoids giving insurers requirements on whom they must cover and how much they may charge.

John McCain, who has received low-cost, taxpayer-funded government healthcare for his entire life, is content to leave millions of Americans uninsured. This is not surprising. (McCain is known for his robust lack of interest in domestic policy.) He used to be one of those Republicans who looked for pragmatic solutions to domestic problems, and even lent his endorsement to this book, in which Democrat Jim McDermott and Republican Jim McCrery came to an understanding on healthcare reform. Both men, liberal and conservative, agreed that any healthcare plan that didn’t cover everyone was a waste of time and money. I hope John McCain could come to that understanding too.

A study, written for U.S. Special Operations Command, suggested “clandestinely recruiting or hiring prominent bloggers.”

Information strategists can consider clandestinely recruiting or hiring prominent bloggers or other persons of prominence… to pass the U.S. message. In this way, the U.S. can overleap the entrenched inequalities and make use of preexisting intellectual and social capital. Sometimes numbers can be effective; hiring a block of bloggers to verbally attack a specific person or promote a specific message may be worth considering.

Jesus… sometimes it seems that everybody is making money off of blogging except me.