HorsesAss.Org

I’m typing this from a borrowed laptop in a Cannon Beach coffee house. I’m on vacation again. Instead of driving through Longview, WA and into Oregon, I decided to get frisky and try a SW Washington route. We left I-5 at Olympia, went west, and then south across that big ‘ol bridge at Astoria, OR. A few notes:

1. Aberdeen is depressing. Now I know why Kurt Cobain got the hell out of there. But seriously, Aberdeen is in rough shape. I’m told its always been a rundown kind of place, but Jesus! Huge parts of its downtown are deserted and empty. Cheap furniture stores are aplenty. The electrical infrastructure looks about 50 years old. The people I met were very nice and down home, but Aberdeen needs some serious work. Which reminds me… Richard Florida, the author of Rise Of The Creative Class, once said that the people who made places like Seattle, Austin TX, Boston, and San Francisco so great are now leaving, moving to places like Pittsburgh (among others). I think some of the under-35 set who are flocking to the Seattle area could do well in Aberdeen. A lot of places in WA seem ready to pivot from resource-based economies to creative economies. It’s definitely a ways off.

2. Property rights are sometimes bad for business. Cannon Beach, a seaside town in OR, is great. But it couldn’t have been made without restricting the rights of who could build what and where. Resort towns have to protect their image. Cannon Beach is gorgeous while nearby Seaside, OR isn’t.

3. Train travel in America sucks, unless you live in the NE. Seriously, if we’re going to ween ourselves off foreign oil, America should build a passenger train service that’s good, if not great. When I travel, I always check Amtrak first, before I fly or drive, to see if I can get to my destination by train.

4. Every congressional district in Oregon west of the Cascade mountains is held by a Democrat. In Washington state, Dave Reichert is the last Republican left on the westside. If Democrats are locked out of eastern Washington for years to come, I’d at least like to do the same to the GOP in western Washington.

This thing is acting up, so it’s TTFN.

University of Colorado—Boulder law Professor Paul Campos wrote another interesting and provocative opinion piece a few days ago. He begins by pointing out the creepy obsession that many right-wingers still have with the attacks of 11 Sept 2001:

When Stu Bykofsky, a columnist for The Philadelphia Daily News, wrote a column last week in which he openly hoped that America suffers “another 9/11,” he merely had the poor judgment to say what many a right-wing politician and pundit is thinking.

Evidence for this is everywhere: in the fact that Bykofsky was invited to appear on the GOP’s unofficial network, Fox News, to “explain” his comments; in the keen disappointment that ripples throughout the right-wing blogosphere every time the collapse of a bridge or a steam pipe explosion turns out not to have been the work of Scary Brown People Who Hate Our Freedoms; and in predictions such as that made by former Sen. Rick Santorum, that the GOP’s electoral fortunes will improve as soon as there’s another terrorist attack.

Indeed, at this point one can practically see these people wringing their hands in frustration at the apparent inability of “the terrorists” to kill a few Americans somewhere (preferably in a solidly red state, although New York or California would do in a pinch), so as to once again give war a chance.

On a local scale, we saw this same right-wing virtual adrenaline rush with salivation a little over a year ago when an American of Pakistani descent, Naveed Afzal Haq, forced his way into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and killed one woman and wounded five others.

Matt Rosenberg was quick to label the act one of “terrorism.” He suggested this might be the outcome of…

growing advocacy of “individual terrorism” by jihadist opinion leaders….

Whether he drew inspiration from online jihadist preachers is of interest, but not necessarily crucial to the definition of individual terrorism.

This definition of “individual terrorism” is a right-wing substitute for the left-wing term “hate crime.” But right-wingers feel they get more political mileage out of it by including the term “terrorism.” Why? Because it brings back fond memories of an immediate post-9-11 period when Americans came together and didn’t ask critical questions of their political leaders. George Bush’s approval took a 35% point jump upward to 85%. Congress handed Bush almost everything he wanted, and Americans, in their collective post-9-11 foggy daze, offered no dissent.

The Haq incident initially offered right-wingers an opportunity to sell “give war a chance,” re-establish a fear of brown-skin peoples who practice that funny religion, and renew their offer to protect Americans in exchange for political power (and a few civil rights here and there).

The truth about Haq was a little more complex. The day after the shooting, it was revealed that Haq had recently converted to Christianity, going so far as to being baptized. Furthermore, Haq’s serious mental illness problems were revealed. (I couldn’t resist rewriting the hyperbolic “Islamic terrorist” script into an equally outrageous “Christian terrorist” satire.)

As an aside, the Haq incident resurfaced in the news this week, when Patrick Syring, a 20-year career Foreign Service officer was indicted for harassing and threatening employees of the Arab American Institute with phone messages and emails. Page 4 of the indictment attributes this email to Syring:

From: Pat1425@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006, 12:13 AM
To: James Zogby Helen Samhan, Nidal Ibrahim, Valerie Smith, Rebecca Abou-Chedid
Subject: AAI murders in Seattle on July 28

I condemn James Zogby and the AAI for perpetuating the murder and shootings at the Jewish Federation in Seattle on Friday July 28 (as well as the killings in Israel).

You wicked evil Hezbollah-supporting Arabs should burn in the fires of hell for eternity and beyond. The United States would be safer without you.

God Bless the State of Israel
God Bless America,

Sincerely,
Patrick in Arlington, VA.

Of course, the Arab American Institute had nothing whatsoever to do with the shooting. Haq isn’t an Arab. In fact, his family isn’t even from the Middle East. And Haq had renounced Islam in his conversion to Christianity. But I digress.

Campos ends his piece with the controversial point that…

[9-11] didn’t “change everything,” and it didn’t (and doesn’t) justify the Iraq war, indiscriminate spying on Americans, extrajudicial renditions, torture, or any of the other immoral actions that continue to be done in its name.

It’s high time to stop wallowing in our obsession with what is becoming the most overblown and shamelessly exploited event in American history.

I am afraid it will be a long time before the political right can relinquish the “promise of terrorism” for achieving their political aims. But while we’re waiting, can we at least get over this nonsensical fear of carrying liquids onto planes?

Oh, don’t get excited, it’s only for tonight. And next Saturday. And a couple other night games during this Seahawks season. I’ll be back on Sunday night, spouting my anti-America hate talk.

Keith Olbermann analyzes Cheney’s change of heart. It seems Cheney was lying to look mainstream in 1994:

Also, the Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza is posted at Hominid Views.

As Will mentioned below, Hempfest is this weekend. I’m sure most of you have noticed how much importance I place on the issue of drug policy, and as you’d expect, I’ll be spending much of the weekend down in Myrtle Edwards Park in the hemposium tent listening to speakers. I’m often told that by trying very openly and aggressively to bring about an end to drug prohibition, I’m fighting what will always be a losing battle. I very strongly disagree with that. At some point, it will simply become fiscally impossible for this country to sustain its massive prison system and its constantly growing international anti-drug expenditures and we will be forced to move in the other direction. I think it’s vital that we start to envision what the correct regulatory mechanisms should look like when that time comes.

It’s somewhat disheartening to remember that we could only end alcohol prohibition after the Great Depression actually hit and pragmatic public policy was the only way forward. Hopefully, the battle can be won before we hit some kind of financial armageddon. What makes me optimistic is that the numbers of those speaking up about the damage being done by the drug war is growing – and coming from more and more unexpected places. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) is an organization, founded in 2002, of current and former law enforcement officials that now has over 5000 members, including former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper. The King County Bar Association commissioned a Drug Policy Project, led by now-State Representative Roger Goodman, that produced a well-researched report calling for an end to drug prohibition and a transition to having government regulate and control currently illegal drugs, instead of simply handing their distribution to criminal gangs who bring violence to our cities to protect their profits. Countries like Switzerland, Portugal, Australia, Canada, Holland, and even Russia, have taken steps to decriminalize drug use.

Recently, the UK drug law reform organization Transform released an impressive document for drug law reformers called Tools for the Debate. It’s like a play book for anyone who wants to be successful in breaking down the rhetoric and the propaganda that has kept this massively unsuccessful public policy afloat for so long. One of the major stumbling blocks to getting the message out is described here in the report:

In this political arena a virulent disease known as ‘Green Room Syndrome’ is epidemic, where strongly held beliefs on reform disappear as soon as the record button is pressed for broadcast. This is something we have experienced again and again: fellow-debaters who privately admit to agreeing with us in the Green Room before a media interview, only to feign shock and outrage at our position once the cameras and microphones are on. There are many in politics and public life who understand intellectually that the prohibition of drugs is unsustainable, but who default in public to moral grandstanding and emotive appeals to the safety of their children.

(You can see a video of Bill O’Reilly getting caught in this hypocrisy by a 16-year-old high school student who starts reading from O’Reilly’s own book)

There’s more optimism today in this area than there’s been for as long as I’ve followed this issue. All of the Democratic Presidential hopefuls (and Ron Paul) support stopping the federal crackdown on medical marijuana in the states that have made it legal. California has been the epicenter of this battle for years. Having the federal government back off is likely to be the first step towards letting states come up with a more sensible policy dealing with both marijuana and more dangerous illegal drugs. And hell, it might even happen sooner:

August 6 — A coalition of California marijuana growers and dealers has offered Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger one billion dollars to solve the current state budget crisis. The group, calling itself Let Us Pay Taxes, makes the offer through its web site LetUsPayTaxes.com. The offer comes at a time when the California legislature is deadlocked on a new budget and California has stopped issuing checks for vitally needed social services. Legislators are currently arguing over which programs will be cut in order to balance the budget.

“It is ridiculous that California can’t pay its bills,” said spokesman Clifford Schaffer. “It is a tragedy that they will cut badly needed services and programs such as medical care for the elderly and prison drug treatment when the money to fund all these programs and more is there and available. Everyone who is currently waiting for a check from the state should be enraged at this foolishness.”

Regulation and taxation of marijuana could produce six billion dollars in additional tax revenue, according to economic studies linked from LetUsPayTaxes.com. In addition, it could save up to ten billion dollars in enforcement costs. “That is a conservative estimate,” said Schaffer. “By other estimates, the revenues could be five times that. The economists are with us all the way on this one. Marijuana prohibition is an economic disaster.”

There’s no shortage of negative stereotypes when it comes to those who flock to Myrtle Edwards Park every year. A generation of Americans has grown up dismissing the movement to reform our drug laws as a fringe cause led by a bunch of idealistic hippies. But when you get past the stoner stereotypes, the larger cause we’ve been fighting for isn’t just right, it’s becoming necessary to start addressing a number of glaring problems in our society today.

…and a decent human being. He’ll be speaking this weekend at Hempfest.

Is this an Open Thread? Yeah sure, you betcha.

About a week and a half ago I pissed off both righty and lefty readers alike by daring to question popular economic orthodoxy. A worldwide credit crunch was threatening to take the broader economy down the crapper with it, yet the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee unanimously refused to cut interest rates, acknowledging “downside risks to growth,” but restating that their “predominant policy concern remains the risk that inflation will fail to moderate as expected.” To which I replied, “fuck inflation.”

The FOMC was impassive at the prospect of 2 million American families losing their homes, but once the credit crunch threatened to tank Wall Street they leaped into action, first flooding the markets with liquidity, and today slashing interest rates by half a percent.

Stocks soared Friday, propelling the Dow Jones industrials up more than 180 points, after the Federal Reserve, acknowledging that the stock market’s plunge posed a threat to the economy, slashed its discount rate by a half percentage point.

[…] The Fed cut the discount rate to 5.75 percent from 6.25 percent, declaring that “downside risks” to the economy have increased appreciably.

Again, I gloat — not so much because I predicted the necessity of a rate cut (I could’a been lucky,) but because my original post clearly doesn’t paint me out to be the moron so many of my critics obviously wish me to be. Sorry to disappoint.

We can argue the economics all we want (and I’m sure we will,) and I stand by my original assertion that a little inflation can actually be a good thing for the majority of Americans who owe money on mortgages, car loans, student loans, credit cards, etc. But my initial reaction was mostly prompted by the Fed’s decades-long inflation policy, which I described as “obsessively narrow at best, and intergenerational warfare at the worst.” Ten days after restating that its primary concern was inflation, the FOMC dramatically changes course. In that short time have the “downside risks” to the economy really “increased appreciably”…? Or did the volatility on Wall Street finally get the Feds to see beyond their inflationary blinders?

I don’t pretend to be an economist, and I freely admit that every single member of the FOMC has more relevant expertise in the tip of their little finger than I have in my entire body. But science morphs into ideology when we fail to question orthodoxy… and under those conditions even the experts can sometimes make mistakes.

TANGENTIAL ASIDE:
I’m back.

When the Sierra Club sends me press releases decrying the “Roads” part of the “Roads and Transit” package, I sympathize. They see only the worst in the package. For example, they don’t see that a “yes” vote on “Roads and Transit” will build more light rail in the Seattle region than currently exists in Portland, Oregon. They don’t see the huge investment in HOV lanes that will make riding a bus in the suburbs quick and easy. They don’t see how RTID’s investment in Seattle streets will make possible the “Surface + Transit” viaduct replacement plan. And if anyone should understand that last item, it’s the Sierra Club. They, after all, were one of the first environmental groups to support the “Surface + Transit” plan.

It took years to get this package to the voters. If “Roads and Transit” goes down this November, don’t expect to see anything back on the ballot anytime soon. And what makes the Sierra Club (or Josh Feit for that matter) so confident that the next package will be any better than the current one? Count on the next measure to include far less rail and more buses. Money that would have replaced the South Park bridge or expanded the Spokane Street Viaduct will be shifted to replacing 520 and widening 405. Without roads investment, the “Surface + Transit” plan is toast. The ultimate irony would be if the Sierra Club’s campaign against the “Roads and Transit” package actually resulted in the building of another Alaskan Way Viaduct.

There is one upside for the Sierra Club concerning the viaduct. At least they’ll be able to get to their Interbay office that much quicker.

President Bush is insisting on more tax cuts in a time of war (and as we’re months away from hitting the debt limit). So expect to hear another round about how taxes are bad for the economy. And all things equal, I guess higher taxes are worse for the economy. But there are some things that are even worse for the economy than corporate taxes:

* Having a bridge fall into the Mississippi river, crippling traffic, and oh yeah, killing a dozen or so people.

* A massive structural debt owed in large part to foreign governments who are threatening to shut off the pipes.

* That power outage that hit the Eastern seaboard a few years ago.

* Sick employees.

* Their sick children.

* New Orleans drowning.

And this idea that tax cuts are the only good things for business is so silly. As if the best thing business could possibly hope for is a crumbling infrastructure, massive government debt, and exorbitant healthcare costs.

Now we can certainly talk about the bad, wasteful spending that goes on: The Iraq war, and our militarism in general. Sending non-violent criminals to prison for too long, and drug offenders there at all. The bridge to nowhere, and other pork.

But at the end of the day, our taxes are so low that bridges are collapsing. Our taxes are so low, that we refuse to help the sick unless they are elderly, very very poor, or children of the poor and working class (or in Washington State thanks to the Democratic legislature last session, children). Our taxes are so low, that an American city drown a few years ago, and we’ll only build the levies back to where they were before. Our taxes are so low that soldiers — American Soldiers, for God’s sake — are scavenging garbage dumps for armor for their vehicles. Our taxes are so low that public transit is pathetic in the Puget Sound region, and worse in the rest of the state.

Now, I don’t particularly like paying taxes, nobody does. But I also don’t like hitting potholes. I don’t like knowing that if the big one hits when I’m on the viaduct that I’ll probably die. I don’t like it when my sick friends and relatives without healthcare don’t see a doctor. I don’t like being in debt to China. I don’t like the fact that the bus system is a joke, especially outside of the city.

Once again, Rudy stakes out a bold position on illegal immigrants. This time it is about sanctuary (but from 1996). Rudy, in his own words…:

It stands for “Google Fucking Exists,” and I think both David Postman and the folks in Senator Patty Murray’s office might want to familiarize themselves with it. Postman posted here about Senator Murray allegedly talking out of her posterior about a bridge that a school bus could not traverse without first letting the children off. Toby Nixon, who appears to be quite familiar with GFE, wrote in the comments:

Somebody needs to teach Sen. Murray’s staff how to search the web. It took me about 30 seconds to find a reference to this school bus story in U.S. Senate testimony from the president-elect of the American Society of Civil Engineers in September 2002 (he says it was in Washington County, Alabama, but doesn’t cite a source): CLICK HERE

I also found this reference to a similar situation in Guam: CLICK HERE

And that goes for Daphne Retter at TheHill as well.

UPDATE: This is not an open thread, so any comments not related to Patty Murray, Daphne Retter, David Postman, Washington County, Alabama, school buses, schoolchildren, rickety old bridges in the South, Guam, the American Society of Civil Engineers, Google, fucking, or how Toby Nixon is the coolest Republican in the state (next to Richard Pope, of course) will be deleted.

Without question, Rudy Giuliani has a strong and solid position on immigration.

I mean, just look at what he said at a campaign speech in South Carolina two days ago: “We can end illegal immigration. I promise you, we can end illegal immigration.”

No problem. America’s favorite cross-dressing Mayor promises us he can end it…period.

He had a strong and solid position on immigration back in 1996, too….

(Via TPM Cafe.)

This week’s Birds Eye View Contest is posted.

For Chapter One, click here.

Josh Feit, 8/15/07:

I’m not sure King County progressives owe that much to Gregoire (hello, elevated viaduct), but it’d sure be a fitting metaphor if Seattle sold out, compromised, and approved a package that includes $1.1 billion on I-405 expansion as a way to support her.

Josh Feit, 12/19/06

The surface/transit option involves investing in local transit, upgrading downtown arterials, investing in bike and pedestrian upgrades, and building a four-lane surface road to replace the viaduct and spark neighborhood and commercial development along the waterfront. (Total bill hovers around $2 billion.)

The Stranger’s News Editor, Josh Feit, is totally opposed to replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct with another viaduct. Josh is almost entirely opposed to investing money in roads, in the Seattle area or elsewhere.

He’s in a pickle.

The Roads and Transit package headed to voters this fall funds the investments in Seattle-area arterials. These are the investments that make the Surface + Transit option possible.

From the Roads and Transit website:

Lander Street Improvements: Builds overpass above BNSF train tracks between 1st Avenue South and 4th Avenue South to increase traffic flow for trains, cars, trucks, bicycles and pedestrians; I-5/Spokane Street Viaduct: Increases capacity by widening viaduct structure, adding one lane between I-5 and 1st Avenue South, building transit-only lanes and an off-ramp at 4th Avenue South. Adds shoulders and installs a permanent median barrier. Improves safety, freight mobility and traffic flow on the major east/west connection between I-5 and SR 99, Port of Seattle and West Seattle

To make Surface + Transit happen, we have to invest in the arterials south of downtown Seattle. If we don’t invest in these roads, it’ll be pretty difficult to keep the folks in Olympia from shoving another viaduct down our throats.

On my way home today I got stuck in some heinous post-Mariners traffic. To make matters worse, the closure of lanes on I-5 had put more buses on city streets. On city streets near the stadium, it was a parking lot full of Metro buses, Sound Transit buses, and maybe even a few Community Transit buses. The roads were clogged.

As it turns out, northbound bus traffic was directed from 1st Avenue South, 4th Avenue South, and 6th Avenue South all on to 4th Ave South north of Royal Brougham Street. I got home about 45 minutes late. The buses’ interior reach about 80 degrees or higher, and the toddler on the seat across from me crapped his diaper. (Although you never can tell on a Metro bus exactly who has shit their pants, the toddler was my best bet. Sometimes it’s the driver.)

I don’t know a single car owner who would give up their automobile for the kind of experience I had today. Even in Seattle, a city known for doing good for goodness’ sake, most folks won’t ride transit if they have other options. Which is why I’m amazed that serious people actually think that adding buses, and not light rail, is the best route to take.