HorsesAss.Org

Ron Paul had a disappointing finish in Alaska, placing 3rd behind Romney and Huckabee. I think the most fascinating thing about the Ron Paul Revolution is that if Paul officially drops out now, half his supporters will be deciding whether to support Obama, while the other half will be deciding whether to assassinate him.

I had missed this news from a week or so back, but Gene Johnson from the AP (who is a friend and co-rec soccer teammate of mine) alerted me to this hilarious bit of irony on Seattle’s new strip club:

There’s no word yet on whether neighbor-appreciation night will include black robes and gavels, but Seattle’s first new strip club in 20 years is going in less than a block from the federal courthouse.

And from his chambers on the 14th floor, U.S. District Judge James Robart — who struck down the city’s ban on new cabarets two years ago — has a bird’s-eye view.

“There is some irony there,” said Marty McOmber, a spokesman for Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels.

Déjà Vu Showgirls is planning to open the club, the city’s fifth, in the basement of Fantasy Unlimited, an erotic boutique and movie theater less than a block from the courthouse.

As long as I live, I will never understand the weird hang-up this city has with strip clubs.

Finally, opium production our attempts to eradicate opium in Afghanistan continue to fuel the Taliban. As always, the AP report fails to mention several relevant points. The first being that the reason that the Taliban can impose a 10 percent tax on the opium production is because our eradication efforts allow them to set up a protection racket. The second being that unless western nations can greatly reduce the demand for the illegal drugs that rely on the opium production, a woman in a burqa will be planting the Afghan flag on the moon before we ever succeed in stopping it.

On the Today Show this morning, Democratic strategist Paul Begala said, “If McCain wins, he’s running for a third term for Bush. He wants to make Bush’s Iraq war permanent, Bush’s economic program permanent.” To which Pat Buchanan responded, “He will make Cheney look like Gandhi.” Think Progress has the clip.

One thing you gotta admire about Buchanan… he always speaks his mind.

Obama. Maybe I’ll change my mind once I sleep on it, but I’m pretty sure Obama was the big winner. Sure, maybe Clinton won a few more delegates — or maybe not, nobody seems to be exactly sure — but anybody who thought her nomination was inevitable certainly doesn’t anymore.

So yeah, it was Obama.

I’m live blogging from the Montlake Ale House, and the big news here is that Elizabeth is back. And oh yeah, Obama is the projected winner in IL & GA, and Clinton is the predicted winner in AR, OK and TN. Meanwhile on the Republican side (as if anybody cares) McCain has scored early victories in NJ, IL, DE & CT, but Huckabee is doing well throughout the south, with victories in WV and AR, while Romney’s likely going to pick up quite a few more states than MA and UT.

Oops, food arrived.

UPDATE [6:22]:
Finished eating. It was the Buffalo chicken burger. It was okay. Also, Clinton has been declared the winner in NJ and MA, two states where the early exit polls predicted a slight Obama lead. Clinton as gets NY, as expected, while Obama picks up DE and KS (and probably AL, though nobody’s called it yet.) Of course, what really matters is the delegate count and its unclear how that is breaking down thus far.

UPDATE [6:30]:
I does look like those early exit polls everybody was posting (including me) are not holding up. Both Romney and Obama have lost states the exit polls suggested they might win, while Obama’s margin in GA is turning out to be much narrower. Oh… and the networks haven’t done it yet, but I’m calling ID for Obama.

UPDATE [6:47]:
I’m sitting on pins and needles waiting for the Utah polls to close. Or maybe that’s just my sciatica….

UPDATE [7:00]:
Romney wins Utah! (I told you so.)

UPDATE [7:03]:
MSNBC calls ND for Obama. And UT.

UPDATE [7:05]:
The graphics on MSNBC are making me dizzy.

UPDATE [7:55]:
It looks like Obama is going to win a majority of states, but then, we don’t elect presidents by the square mile. We’ll see what happens in CA, but right now it’s looking like Clinton will win the delegate race tonight, the only question is by how much, and how that will be represented in the press.

UPDATE [8:00]:
CA has closed; “too close to call” for both parties. Meanwhile, Obama has claimed MN and ID. Is it interesting that Romney and Obama are winning many of the same states?

UPDATE [9:21]:
Clinton wins CA. But Obama will end up winning 12, maybe 13 of the 22 states in play tonight, so he wins, since of course, we elect presidents by the square mile. (Or so Republicans wished.) Or at the very least, Obama is still very much alive in this race.

UPDATE [9:56]:
Crowd is thinning out at the Ale House. Early night. Anyway, Obama got AK and MO (just barely) giving him 13 states to Clinton’s 9… unclear how that influences the media narrative, and no clear idea about the actual delegate count, as many of Obama’s wins were in caucus states. In fact, Obama kicked ass in the caucus states… that tends to indicate either a strong ground game, or an activist movement. Considering he was up against Clinton, I’m guessing the latter.

Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an extraordinary evening of electoral politics under the influence. We officially meet at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.

Many of us will show up at 5:00 pm (when the place opens), and enjoy the excellent cuisine while watching the election returns.

Tonight’s theme song? Alice Cooper’s Elected, of course:

If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.

Romney wins Utah, and big!

Other than that, early, early exit polls suggest we’re gonna have a barn burner tonight, possibly in both parties. (Actually, if the early exit rumors are real, it could be a very good night for Obama, except if anybody says that publicly and it’s not a good night for him, then folks are gonna start yelling fraud again.) Use this as an election night open thread for now, and then I’ll probably live blog for a while from DL, until I get bored with it.

UPDATE (3:41):
Oh what the hell, here are the totally unverified “first wave” (so don’t get your hopes up or down) Democratic numbers making the rounds in DC:

Alabama: Obama 60, Clinton 37
Arizona: Obama 51, Clinton 45
Arkansas: Clinton 72, Obama 26
California: Clinton 50, Obama 47
Connecticut: Obama 53, Clinton 45
Delaware: Obama 56, Clinton 42
Georgia: Obama 75, Clinton 26
Illinois: Obama 70, Clinton 30
Massachusetts: Obama 50, Clinton 48
Missouri: Obama 50, Clinton 46
New Jersey: Obama 53, Clinton 47
New Mexico: Obama 52, Clinton 47
New York: Clinton 56, Obama 43
Oklahoma: Clinton 61, Obama 31
Tennessee: Clinton 52, Obama 41
Utah: Obama 61, Clinton 40

Matt and Tim explain the numbers over on OpenLeft.

UPDATE (4:10):
The polls closed in Georgia ten minutes ago, and CNN has already called it for Obama. No surprise there, no idea of how the delegates will be split, and no call on the Republican side, which is being reported as a three-way race. So far, consistent with the exit polling.

With the presidential candidates jetting around the nation today putting their final campaign touches on the Super Duper Tuesday, I thought “Jet City” voters might be interested in their transportation choices. Mitt Romney was spotted flying around the south on a Boeing 737-400 yesterday, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have chartered ATA Boeing 737-800s… and then there’s the familiar Ron Paul Blimp.

And what about that great American patriot, John McCain? He’s flying a French-built Airbus A320.

I’m just sayin’.

Yeah, I know most of you are focused on today’s Super Duper Tuesday contest, but with both the Times and the P-I ignoring Rep. Dave Reichert’s pathetic fundraising report (Really? It wasn’t worth a single mention?) it is apparently left to me to cover what could be the biggest local story of the election season: Reichert and the Republican’s slow-motion collapse in Washington’s 8th Congressional District. And while Seattle’s two dailies haven’t seemed to notice yet, the inside-Beltway media certainly has, with first The Hill placing Reichert amongst the most vulnerable GOP incumbents, and now The Politico warning that Reichert may not be able to count on the NRCC to pull his ass out of the fire this time around.

Six House Republicans holding seats that are being eyed by the Democratic majority are confronting the new, brutal reality of their party’s fundraising slump. They are limping into highly competitive reelection races with less cash than their Democratic challengers.

The latest fundraising reports are a gut punch for this six-pack of GOP incumbents: Reps. Christopher Shays (Conn.), Dave Reichert (Wash.), John R. Kuhl (N.Y.), Tim Walberg (Mich.), Jean Schmidt (Ohio) and Bill Sali (Idaho). With the exception of Sali, all represent swing districts.

But it’s also a blow to a House Republican conference that for years has prided itself on using aggressive fundraising tactics and mandates to make sure all of its incumbents held a significant money edge for their reelection.

A senior aide to a prominent House Republican requested anonymity to explain the significance of this fundraising downturn. “You’re going to see all these members in tough shape,” the aide said. “You have all these seats out there that are so expensive because of the money we’ve put in in the past. We might not be able to save some of these guys that we brought back last time.”

In the deft political hands of the late Rep. Jennifer Dunn, WA-08 was a cash cow for the national party, a safe seat in a wealthy suburban district that reliably pumped dollars directly into the NRCC and other campaigns. But over the past two cycles, Reichert has transformed his district into a congressional money pit, a political fixer-upper in constant need of expensive repair and maintenance. That “anonymous” comment from a “senior aide” to a “prominent” House Republican…? That was meant as a warning to Reichert and the others: either get your house in order and start paying your own bills, or prepare to find yourself out on the street, sleeping under bridges with our nation’s veterans.

Really.

It seems inconceivable that the GOP would abandon a district that has never elected a Democrat, but facing a structural disadvantage that makes 2006’s Big Blue Wave look like a swim at the beach, Republicans are going to have to resort to triage.

These latest fundraising numbers, combined with a raft of Republican retirements, explain why many top Republicans are bracing for the possibility of losses in November that could stretch into double digits.

At a time when the cash-strapped National Republican Congressional Committee needs incumbents to raise as much money as possible, members who fall behind financially cannot count on receiving assistance in the crunch.

The NRCC emerged in the black this month for the first time this election cycle and had $5.5 million at the end of the year. But the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, with over $35 million on hand, still has a sixfold cash advantage.

And the GOP committee, which traditionally spends money to protect its incumbents first, also will have to spend money in many of the 28 open seats where Republican incumbents have retired or resigned.

The first group of members who may not be able to count on NRCC support are the ones who posted weak fundraising numbers for the year. In the past, the committee has funded members with notoriously weak fundraising, such as former Indiana Republican John Hostettler. But given the party’s fundraising woes, that same support is unlikely to come this cycle.

In the final weeks of the 2006 campaign the NRCC focused its dwindling resources almost exclusively on “second tier” races like WA-08, winning most of them, but in the process losing almost every single first and third tier race. Unless Reichert reverses his fortunes and manages to keep pace with Darcy Burner, WA-08 could end up being one of those first tier races the GOP abandons. That is, if Reichert doesn’t abandon the race first.

UPDATE:
Fair is fair. The Times has apparently reproduced an excerpt from the longer AP story on Reichert’s fundraising woes. It hadn’t shown up in Google News at the time I wrote this post.

SurveyUSA just published results of a primary and caucus poll in Washington state.

On the Republican side McCain leads with 40% support, and Romney is a distant second at 26%. Huckabee gets 17% and Paul shares 9% with the undecideds. (Yeah…there is probably an anti-Paul conspiracy involved in these results. Right.)

Obama leads the Democratic field with 53% to Clinton’s 40%.

Given (1) the fluidity of the Democratic race, (2) the fact that Super Tuesday comes before next Saturday’s Washington Caucus, (3) that polls–which assume statistical independence among respondents–don’t represent social processes like caucuses very well, and (4) that the poll excluded independents, I won’t be placing (or taking) any bets on the outcome. Even so, Sen. Obama must be happy with Washington state right now.

Personally, I don’t really care what the outcome is. I see great, if different, strengths in either of the Democratic front-runners.

Who plans on participating? About 26% of those questioned said they would participate in their party caucuses. But when subdivided by party, 28% of Democrats said they will participate in their caucus versus 22% of Republicans.

Overall, 88% said they would participate in the primary election, including 91% of Republicans and 86% of Democrats. The Democratic primary counts for almost nothing (except bragging rights for the winner, I suppose), whereas the Republican primary will determine about half the delegates.

Perhaps it’s wishful thinking on my part, but the higher planned participation by Democrats in the caucuses and the surprisingly high planned participation by Democrats in a meaningless primary election sure makes it look like the Democrats have the edge in enthusiasm.

(The more detailed poll cross-tabs are given here.)

Hey you-

Yeah, you!

Do you like live and local talk radio?

Then sign this open letter, and let Seattle radio stations know that live and local is worth something to you!

Letter To 710 KIRO

If you like talk radio, sign the letter. Liberals and conservatives agree that live and local talk radio is worth supporting.

All you have to do is sign the letter!

Letter To 710 KIRO

Make it happen, Horse’s Ass readers. Tell the radio brass that you want this kind of programming on the air.

Do it!

Letter To 710 KIRO

Cheer up Dave; you may have had another shitty fundraising quarter, but at least you’re not alone:

Nearly two dozen House incumbents were outraised by their opponents and another dozen candidates established themselves as early frontrunners for newly open seats late last week as fourth quarter financial reports were due.

Among the members on the short end of the fundraising battle in October, November and December were Republican Reps. Don Young (R-Alaska), Sam Graves (R-Mo.) and Dave Reichert (R-Wash.)…

That sure does put Sheriff Dave in great company:

Young raised just $40,000 and spent more than $400,000 in the quarter on unexplained legal fees (he is under federal investigation for his ties to the Veco Corporation), while Democrat Ethan Berkowitz raised $120,000.

The longtime congressman still has almost $1 million in cash, but it is dissipating fast due to more than $800,000 in legal fees in 2007.

With GOP incumbents facing tough battles in places like Alaska and Idaho, it’s shaping up to be one tough year for Republicans.

Um… it’s the Republicans who are supposed to be the party of fiscal conservativism, right?

President Bush is sending Congress a $3 trillion spending blueprint that would provide a big boost to defense and protect his signature tax cuts.

It seeks sizable savings in government health care programs and puts the squeeze on much of the rest of government, but it would still generate near-record budget deficits over the next two years.

In the wake of 9/11, with the nation rallying behind him, President Bush used his political capital to slash taxes on the wealthy and ask Americans to go shopping. And folks wonder why our economy is heading toward a precipice?

I guess it is possible to be both green, and… um… green.

To reduce energy consumption, Costco is installing skylights and solar panels in its massive warehouse clubs. Six stores in California and Hawaii have the solar panels, and seven additional stores are to get them this year.

The installer of the Hawaii panels, California-based REC Solar, says the installations at Costco’s Kauai and Kona stores are Hawaii’s two largest solar arrays.

The panels cost about $745,000 per store, and Costco typically doesn’t make that money back for three to five years. But Sinegal said they’re a sign of the times: “We recognize, like all businesses, that we must continue to conserve and save the planet.”

They’ll make back their money in only three to five years? Solar cells last thirty years or longer, so with that kind of ROI you’d think this sort of investment would be a no brainer.

Oh wait… global warming isn’t real, and it’s obviously in both our economic and security interests to run our nation on imported oil, so what was I thinking?

I hate the Giants and the goddamn New York media elite who hype them. Hope they get their asses kicked.

[UPDATE by Will]

The fact that Eli Manning has found a place with the New York Football Giants is proof positive that retarded people can be productive citizens. Yeeeaaghghh!!!

Tom Brady bangs supermodels, while Eli Manning bangs into closed glass doors. Yeaaahghg!!!

[UPDATE by Will]

I just saw a clip of the Giants back-up QB, Jared Lorenzen. He’s a big boy, coming in at a stunning 285 lbs. When he’s in the huddle, he snacks on summer sausage and cheeze whiz.

[UPDATE by Will]

Wasn’t FOX supposed to do some sort of “football and politics” gimmicky feature? Pols talkin’ sports, while the jocks talk politics? I haven’t seen it yet.

[UPDATE by Will]

It’s Halftime! Superbowl Halftimes last about a week and a half these days.

Favorite commercials thus far:

IRON MAN preview

Justin Timberlake Pepsi ad

“Beer hidden in cheese” beer ad

[UPDATE by Goldy]
Anybody else notice during the last set of downs on the drive in which the Pats went up 14-10, that the Giants had two “injuries” that gave their defense a rest, only to have the player pop up and walk off the field with no limp or ill effect? What a bunch of pussies.

[UPDATE by Goldy]
Fuckin’ Giants. Ah well, it’s only football. And it could be worse. It coulda been the goddamn Cowboys.

Last week, in the wake of the Seattle Times’ endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination for president, I wrote:

Big deal. Next week they’ll also endorse Sen. John McCain on the Republican side. If the Times really embraces the kind of change they believe Obama represents, they wouldn’t endorse anybody for the Republican nomination, least of all a warmonger whose idea of straight talk is promising crowds “there will be other wars.“

Today, the Times endorsed Sen. John McCain.

No, I’m not a psychic. But the Times’ endorsements have become nearly as predictable as they are utterly dismissive of the intelligence of their readers. Take this beauty for example:

For all his supportive votes and rhetoric on Iraq, he would have the easiest time of any candidate to engineer a reversal of policy.

McCain the Annapolis graduate, McCain the naval aviator, McCain the prisoner of war does not carry the burden of heavily footnoted, nuanced stances on national security and defense policy. He opposes the use of torture by Americans and would close the prison at Guantánamo. Against years of grotesque double-talk from administration hacks, McCain does not equivocate.

For him to announce a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq would carry an imprimatur others cannot produce.

Jesus… talk about “grotesque double-talk.” So, let me get this right… “for all his supportive votes and rhetoric on Iraq,” and despite the fact that he is out on the trail telling voters that there will be more wars, and that we’ll be in Iraq for another 100 years, straight-talking McCain, who “does not equivocate” and who does not take “nuanced stances” … “would have the easiest time of any candidate” getting us out of Iraq? Uh-huh.

Yeah, sure, I get their point. If McCain decided to pull us out of Iraq, he would bring unmatched authority to the decision. The problem is, his support for the war has been… well… entirely unnuanced and unequivocal. “For him to announce a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq” sure would “carry an imprimatur others cannot produce,” but it would also be utterly inconsistent with everything he has said for the past five years. The Times lauds McCain for his “capacity… to move in new directions,” but on this, the most important issue in the 2008 election, there is absolutely no indication that he would.

Touting McCain as the Republican most likely to get us out of the war in Iraq is like touting chocolate iced glazed as the variety of donut least likely to make you fat. So don’t be fooled by editorial sophistry; if you want to end this war and bring our troops home, your only choice next November is the Democratic nominee, whoever that might eventually be.