HorsesAss.Org

Naturally I was really busy on Thursday, on a news day replete with interesting Republican accomplishments. Here’s a recap….

First there was Bush’s report to Congress (and the nation) on “progress” in Iraq since the Surge™ began. Check out Fred Kaplin’s Slate piece on the “accomplishments” titled “You Call That Progress? The outrageous White House report on Iraq.” I sense skepticism.

President George W. Bush achieved something of his own “benchmark” when he tied Richard Nixon’s low mark in a recent Harris poll of presidential approval.

Florida Rep. Bob Allen (R-Men’s Room) shows that even Republicans can try earning $20 the good ol’ fashion way.

President George W. Bush creates more scandal by trying to fire someone.

Now 3600+ U.S. soldiers have given their life for Saddam’s WMD Saddam’s role in 9-11-2001 stopping the Iraqi humanitarian crisis ousting Saddam training…er…fighting them over there oil somethin’ or the other that is really, really worthwhile.

Daniel at On the Road to 2008 noticed that Rep. Dave Reichert’s web site has carefully documented Reichert’s “record of independence and bi-partisan leadership.” Mmmmmm….impressive!

Republicans show their fund raising prowess by finishing somewhere in the top five.

Wingnut Pundit Jack Burkman demonstrates his commitment to small businesses.

President George W. Bush finally takes credit for his administration’s accomplishments in the Valerie Wilson covert dissemination case.

You gotta give them wingnuts credit…they’re always accomplishing stuff….

…and unlike Goldy, I don’t have as cerebral a response:

The film was funny, it was moving, and yes, at times it was uplifting. I laughed out loud throughout, which those who know me well will tell you is a huge compliment indeed. The film also brought tears to my eyes on a number of occasions.

I laughed too, and at the end, when the Cuban firefighters honor the Americans who volunteered at Ground Zero on 9/11, the floodgates opened, and I wept. I surprised myself, and I was glad the theater wasn’t full. It was an especially touching moment.

I went in the theater as a healthcare reform moderate, a sort of “mend it, don’t end it” attitude towards our current health insurance system. (Matt Miller, a fellow at the Center for American Progress, has some creative ideas that fit this definition.) I did not support Congressman (and doctor) Jim McDermott’s health plan. After leaving the theater, I’m a changed guy.

It’s war. It’s the American people on one side, and the insurance companies and their DC lackeys on the other. What’s needed is an old timey ass whoopin’, a beating, a clock cleanin’. The for-profit health care system needs to become a historical curiosity, an urban legend, an anachronism. In 50 years at Drinking Liberally, I want young bloggers gathered around a “Joel Connelly” type character while he regales them with stories of how things used to be. You mean people used to go broke from medical bills? they’ll say. The wise, aged columnist will reply, It was a different time.

We need to blow up our current system and replace it with a government-run health care system that serves the needs of every American and is beholden to no corporate bottom line. Considering health care outcomes in America routinely trail those in other countries, I think it is only a matter of time until Americans get what they’ve paid for: a health care system that works.

Shameful behavior:

A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate’s morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors’ gallery.

Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day’s Senate session. As he stood at the chamber’s podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting “this is an abomination” and other complaints from the gallery.

Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, “we are Christians and patriots” before police handcuffed them and led them away.

I’ll remember to mention this event the next time someone accuses a Democrat of being anti-religion.

For decades our government has been dominated by a conservative ideology that claims to despise big government, abhor regulation and adhere to an unswerving faith in the infinite wisdom of the market. Rick Perlstein dubs this philosophy “E. Coli Conservatism,” and in practice it is not only flawed but corrupt: a calculated conservative project intended to gut our regulatory systems in the interest of sheer corporate greed. We eat adulterated food not because we cannot adequately regulate the industry but because to do so would eat into the profits of the corporations our regulators serve.

In the six years since 9/11, food-borne pathogens and toxins have quietly killed ten times the number of Americans who died in the terrorist attacks. How many more Americans must conservatism kill before our leaders embrace a more responsible ideology?

That is the provocative conclusion to “Poison for Profit”, my new piece on food safety (or the lack thereof) in the July 30 edition of The Nation. The issue won’t hit newsstands until the end of the month, but you can read my contribution online now.

In case you’re wondering, America’s oldest continuously published weekly magazine pays even worse than The Stranger, but I’m told it’s a tad more prestigious. Yes, that’s right, a magazine that has published the likes of Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King, Jr., Gore Vidal, Hunter S. Thompson, Langston Hughes, James Baldwin, John Steinbeck, and Jean-Paul Sartre, has now also published potty-mouthed Goldy. I know there are those who sneer that my love of foul language is symptomatic of some character, literary or mental defect that will forever relegate me to the role of mere blogger, but believe it or not, I managed to get through an entire essay without writing the words “fuck,” “shit,” “asshole” or “cocksucker” even once. Imagine that.

So a heads up to all you local publishers: I’d just love to supplement my meager income with a regular column. Come and get me while you can still afford me.

“I don’t think, quite frankly, that Darcy being in or out of the race will make that big a difference.”

That was state Rep. Christopher Hurst in today’s Seattle P-I, and while I’ve never met the guy, I have to wonder… is he an absolute moron?

He doesn’t think Darcy being in or out will make a difference? He thinks now that he’s decided not to run, the nomination is Rodney Tom’s for the taking? What planet does he live on?

“No disrespect to Darcy,” Hurst told the P-I, while totally dissing her, “but she had her run, in what was probably the best year in 40 years to run as a Democrat, and she came up short.”

That is the sort of simplistic analysis that may comfort the thumb-suckers in the GOP, but as the basis for a Democratic campaign, it is downright embarrassing. It is also insulting, as it implies that the only reason Burner came close in 2006 was a national trend beyond anybody’s control or power of prediction.

But there were many, many factors that played out in 2006, and the Big Blue Wave was only one of them. As Chris Bowers pointed out in a post over on Open Left, as good a year as 2006 was for Democrats in general, it was an oddly bad year for Democratic women:

In 2006, of the thirty Republican-held House seats most heavily targeted by Democratic Party committees and allied progressive organizations, twenty-one of the Democratic nominees challenging for those seats were male, and nine of the Democratic nominees challenging for those seats were female. With the elections over, twenty of the twenty-one men in that group are now serving in Congress. However, Kirsten Gillibrand in NY-20 is the only woman in that group who is now serving in Congress. For some reason, of the top thirty Democratic House targets in 2006, Democratic men won 95% of the time, while Democratic women won only 11% of the time.

I’m not exactly sure what is behind this statistical anomaly, but it is unlikely to be explained away by simple randomness alone. Something unusual happened in 2006 that we don’t fully understand, and it left Burner in some very good company.

Of course, each race is unique, and you have to look at both internal and external factors to understand the final outcome. As I mentioned yesterday, the Burner campaign made some tactical missteps during the final weeks of the campaign, and the late vote ended up breaking toward Reichert. Those mistakes won’t be repeated. Externally, second tier races like WA-08 drew the brunt of the GOP firepower, leaving Democrats to romp in the first and third tiers. Karl Rove’s now infamous PowerPoint presentation highlights the Reichert/Burner race as the RNC’s top example of a massive get-out-the-vote campaign that targeted 585,164 voter contacts into the 8th CD — 41,666 on election day alone. That’s over 100,000 more than the next closest district.

I suppose if Hurst had been the nominee, this never would have happened.

But perhaps the biggest factor that Hurst, Tom and other nay-sayers ignore is the most obvious one of all: turnout. Despite the national Democratic tide, turnout was actually much lighter than expected in WA-08. Only 251,383 people voted in in 2006, compared to 336,499 in 2004. Democrats simply don’t turn out in the same percentages as Republicans during non-presidential years, and thus with greater turnout and presidential coattails, we can expect that 2008 will be a very good year for the Democratic nominee. And with the war in Iraq continuing its tailspin into disaster, who’s to say that 2008 won’t be the “best year in 40 years to run as a Democrat”…?

Finally, wave or no wave, Burner started out with zero money, zero name ID, and zero support from the Democratic establishment. She worked hard to earn her credibility, and the media and institutional attention that made her viable, and she continues to work hard today. All of those disadvantages have been erased, and if Hurst really doesn’t understand how this changes the dynamics of the 2008 campaign, one has to wonder why anybody would take anything Hurst has to say seriously?

Hurst told the P-I that he and Tom “talked things over pretty extensively in the last six weeks or so.” If that’s true, it isn’t a very good sign for Rodney Tom fans.

This post is not about Seattle’s police this time. What recently happened to a Kent family is beyond a disgrace. From the NWCN website:

It was supposed to be a special trip for a Montana man and his 8-year-old granddaughter. But their truck broke down on Snoqualmie Pass and the grandfather was killed.

If this wasn’t tragic enough for an 8-year-old girl to see her grandfather get killed and be left stranded on I-90, this is what happened when the police brought her home:

The story took a strange turn when troopers were re-uniting the child with her parents in Kent. Police say they found illegal drugs. But the parents say it’s medical marijuana prescribed by a doctor.

…

The Osmans acknowledge growing marijuana. They say it’s prescribed by their doctors to treat symptoms of hepatitis C, chronic pain and other ailments.

They say the police didn’t care about the medical authorization forms signed by their doctors.

Even with the most recent medical marijuana bill passed, there still aren’t enough protections for patients under this state’s medical marijuana law. Raids like these are still common in the state, and legitimate medical marijuana patients don’t have any real protection under the law. The state board of health has been tasked with establishing what an acceptable medical supply should be, but until then, cops still have free reign to go after the sick and ailing.

The job of police is to protect and serve the public. In this case, the police have done neither. In the process of reuniting a horrified child with her parents, the child told them that her parents grew marijuana. Instead of trying to figure out whether or not her parents were medical marijuana users, this is what they did when they arrived at the house in Kent:

“(They) opened the door, immediately she was shoved inside, turned around and cuffed. Same thing happened to me. Dragged us onto the front porch,” said Bruce.

Lt. Sass says the Osmans had too many plants for personal use, but if Bruce Osman is correct about what happened above, the police certainly could not have known that at the time they dragged them onto the front porch and started tearing their apartment to shreds. Thankfully, the Osmans have a lawyer:

The Osmans’ attorney says police broke the law by seizing the marijuana, initially entering without a warrant, and for ransacking the couple’s apartment.

How is it that we’ve come to accept that wearing a police officer’s uniform is a valid excuse for acting like a degenerate? We overwhelmingly passed a law in this state in 1998 to allow for people with certain medical conditions to use marijuana if they and their doctor found it to be beneficial. The Osmans, like many others in this state, have a doctor’s authorization to use marijuana. What the police did in this situation is absolutely unacceptable. If there is any justice in this goddamn authoritarian hellhole of a society we’ve created for ourselves, the prosecutor should be deciding right now whether or not to charge the police officers with a crime, rather than the Osmans.

And at the national level, the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment is going to be up for a vote in Congress next week. This bill would prohibit federal dollars from being spent to arrest and prosecute medical marijuana patients in states where it’s legal. Please write your Congressman, especially if you live in the 2nd or the 8th, as Congressmen Larsen and Reichert have both voted against this bill (and against the will of Washington voters) in previous years.

UPDATE: I made a minor correction at the top and Dominic Holden writes much more at Slog.

So, state Sen. Rodney Tom is now officially unofficially in the race for the 8th Congressional District Republican Democratic nomination, telling the Seattle P-I that he will officially make his official announcement next Tuesday. Whatever.

There are two minds on this within the Burner camp. On the one hand there are those who welcome Tom’s challenge, as a primary fight will focus media attention on Burner, while a decisive victory over a sitting state senator can only add to her credibility and confidence. On the other hand, Tom’s announcement will definitely freeze some of the early money, shaving maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars off Burner’s 2007 totals.

I’m similarly ambivalent, having come to the conclusion that the positive or negative impact of Tom’s campaign depends on how he eventually runs it. If it is a positive campaign, focused on the issues, everybody wins. If it is a negative campaign, adopting Reichert’s dismissively sexist “oh, she’s just a little girl” meme, well, Tom still loses, but he’ll piss off a lot of people in the process. People with long memories. People who hold grudges.

But my overwhelming concern is whether Tom is willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary for the good of his recently adopted party. Last cycle, Randy Gordon, the first Reichert challenger out of the gate, pledged early on that he would drop out of the race if money and support coalesced around another candidate. It did, and he did.

I would like to see Tom take a similar pledge. By April of 2008 it will become abundantly clear whether Tom has a snowball’s chance of running a competitive primary challenge. If he doesn’t, and he stubbornly stays in a race he has no chance of winning, he will needlessly cost Burner a substantial amount of contributions and independent expenditures that will be committed elsewhere long before ballots are counted in our August primary, one of the latest in the nation.

If Tom is a real Democrat, then his primary focus should be on defeating Reichert. Whatever his personal ambitions, Tom should understand that should he contribute to a Reichert victory next November, he will earn the lasting animosity of those whose support he will need in the future.

I’m just sayin’.

So David Postman and Josh Feit have been doing some excellent reporting on Dino Rossi’s Idea Bank. What I find most fascinating is that Lou Guzzo and Matt Manweller of WhackyNation, according to Postman, “review submissions to his Idea Bank,” on a supposedly bi-partisan committee (and apparently have some lousy nettiquette). Now there are some things that Manweller has said that are annoying, like attacking the notion of helping pay for middle class children’s health care and his assumption that if we just impose capitalism on Iraq, then everything will be fine. But Manweller is pretty much a standard issue Republican. He’s annoying, sure, and against most of what Washington voters stand for, but isn’t every Republican in the state? Who I want to talk about is Lou Guzzo!

Feit describes him as a, “former D Governor Dixy Lee Ray staffer” and I’m guessing that’s where Idea Bank’s supposed bi-partisanship comes from. But if you think Rossi’s current employee might make his project a model of bi-partisanship, well let’s take a look at the record. This sampling is by no means complete.

It’s tough to know where to start with Guzzo, but I guess for this post, it might be a good idea to go with his repudiation of the Democratic Party. So, um, he seems to think that most Democrats may be surprised to learn that FDR existed. Oh, and by the way, he was totally a Socialist:

Completely ignored by the columnist and by virtually all of his Liberal mouthpieces in the print and broadcast news media is the fact that the real identity crisis now exists not in the Republican Party but in the Democratic Party, which has obliterated its once-honorable past and assumed a character that is anything but “democratic.”

Frankly, I don’t believe the Left Wing columnists and the rank-and-file in the so-called Democratic Party aren’t aware of what has happened to the party in the past half century, dating back to the days Franklin Delano Roosevelt assaulted the U.S. Constitution with a barrage of Socialist programs.

So you can totally see how he’s bringing balance to Rossi’s Idea Bank. But you know what I bet the ol’ Idea Bank needs? War mongering mixed with some sexism!

Shame on the Democratic Party! With its vote to defy the President’s authority as commander in chief and to withdraw its support for American troops and their mission in Iraq, the Democrats have also tried to destroy our role as the world’s peacemaker and our mission to bring freedom and democratic government to oppressed people.

The howling Democrats, led by their new standard bearer, Big Momma Nancy Pelosi, have also delivered a loud slap to the memories of their own Democratic Presidents of the past — Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy — all of whom pursued Teddy Roosevelt’s philosophy to “speak softly but carry a big stick.”

So now FDR’s brand of Socialism is now a good thing? And by the way, one of Kennedy’s policies he talks about is Viet Nam, and speaking of Viet Nam, oh sweet God.

It was a war we could easily have won. Because of the withdrawal of support at home, our generals, admirals, and Air Force leaders were persuaded to pull back their ground, sea, and air units and to table the final assault they knew could have routed the Communists and put an end to the war in Vietnam. It was clearly a war we could have and should have won. Instead, we permitted the Communists to swallow up South Vietnam, and we begn our humiliating retreat.

And no, “begn” isn’t a word. But don’t worry, that isn’t the only place that Guzzo draws a parallel between Iraq and Viet Nam, but um, not the one you think.

It bears repeating. We should have won the Vietnam War and made it possible for Vietnam to become a democratic republic, instead of the Communist nation it is now. The crucial battle in Vietnam, the Tet Offensive, was actually an American victory and would have led to the defeat of the Viet Cong Communists. But the loud-mouthed peaceniks at home and their allies in Congress withdrew support and funds from our military forces in Vietnam, with the assistance of that traitorous scamp, Jane Fonda — who is at it again today.

But don’t think it’s just foreign policy. Oh no, Guzzo, a former KIRO 7 commentator and PI Managing Editor has also recently engaged in some media criticism. Basically, why don’t members of the media read people’s minds?

I wonder if the political editors of the print and broadcast news media, the politicos at the national and local levels, and particularly the leaders of the two major political parties are aware of a most interesting pattern of thought that seems to be going on in the minds of all the men and women who have their eye on nominations for the presidency in the 2008 election.

If any of them have glommed onto the “pattern of thought” but are wary of putting words to it for the press and the public, they are doing a good job of hiding it. And just what is the primary name that goes with that pattern of thought these days? It is the name of Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

Seriously, you can read the whole thing but it won’t make any more sense. But one of the things I especially like is his obsession with Silent Spring. In the less than a year he’s been writing on WhackyNation he’s written at least 7 posts on the subject. Including calling for murder charges for the people who got DDT banned.

After the Carson book was published, the Liberals and environmental fanatics attacked DDT because, they said, it has infected the eggs in eagles’ nests, a fairy tale without substance. And, even if the eggs were affected, how does anyone in his or her right mind prefer 3,000,000 deaths a year to the possible cracks in eagles’ eggs — even though the latter was something of a fairy tale, or nightmare?

I still say the perpetrators of the DDT ban should be put on trial for murder!

Anyway, I’m not sure if any of that is Rossi’s official position, but it’s one of the Idea Bank’s vetters. So you know the project is both non-partisan and totally legit. I’m sure old school Seattle people will remember other things about him from KIRO and the PI, but that’s it for me.

(cross posted)

Local Republicans are once again dismissing Darcy Burner, but they do so at their own peril.

As a no-name newcomer with zero electoral experience, Burner came within a shiny white hair of defeating name-brand incumbent Dave Reichert. Ask any experienced politico worth their salt (of either party,) and they’ll tell you the race could have broken either way in the final weeks of the 2006 campaign. It broke towards Reichert. And there are lessons to be learned from that.

Burner is nothing if not smart, and you can be damn well sure that she’s learned those lessons. And as her 2Q fundraising numbers prove, she’s also a damn hard worker.

Over at u(SP), Eric Earling says that’s it’s too early for me to be crowing about Burner’s record fundraising, but let’s put those numbers into perspective. Burner didn’t start raising money until March, giving Reichert a four-month head start (coming out of the campaign with a six-figure debt, Reichert never stopped raising money)… and yet she still beats Reichert $185K to $160K in cash-on-hand, the all important figure by which DC insiders judge the health of campaigns.

Last year the Reichert campaign never pre-released its quarterly numbers, even while Burner was making headlines for her surprising totals, but this time around the other guys blinked, rushing to match Burner’s announcement of a $200K quarter (yes, a WA state record for a challenger) with a $244K quarter of its own. But the cash-on-hand disadvantage is such an embarrassment that one Democratic politico laughed that “the idiot” who made the decision to release it won’t be with the campaign much longer. (I hear John McCain has some job openings.)

What do strong Republican fundraising numbers really look like? IL-10, in the suburbs just north of Chicago, is a competitive district somewhat comparable to WA-08, in which 3-term incumbent Rep. Mark Kirk got quite a scare from netroots challenger Dan Seals. After slipping by with only 53-percent of the vote, Kirk has transformed himself into a fundraising machine, chalking up $617K in 2Q for a comfy $1.1 million total cash-on-hand. Those are the type of fundraising numbers one might expect from Reichert, given his 51.5 to 48.5 percent squeaker. And you wonder why I’m crowing?

Earling knowingly points to a quote from the Seattle P-I, in which “other Democrats” criticize Burner for failing to defeat Reichert in a Blue Tide year, and for repeating the same campaign themes as 2006, but those “other Democrats” are those backing undeclared Republican Democratic challenger Rodney Tom. That’s okay. They’re entitled to their rhetoric. But they’re wrong.

Burner, like the other second-tier Democratic challengers, was a sacrificial lamb in a grand strategy in which all of the first-tier and most of the third-tier Democrats won. She played an instrumental role in the Democrats taking control of Congress, drawing heavy Republican fire in a district the R’s hadn’t planned on seriously defending. And yet she came within a few thousand votes, and a couple tactical decisions, of winning. Had she responded to Reichert’s derisively sexist “job interview” ad in kind — had she nailed Reichert on his fundamentalist opposition to reproductive rights (both abortion and some forms of birth control) — it would be Burner who was posting Kirk-like numbers in defense of her incumbency.

As for Tom, the presumed “Democratic” challenger, he’s in for a shock. In 2006 my fellow bloggers and I took great joy in launching withering attacks on Tom’s opponent, the much-hated state Sen. Luke Esser. Tom didn’t ask for our support back then, and he shouldn’t this time around either, because he ain’t gonna get squat. No doubt, he’s a nice enough guy, and a helluva lot better than Esser, but he has a voting record as a Republican legislator that’s not going to endear himself to many 8th CD Democratic primary voters. Talk about great blog fodder.

And for all Tom’s misreading of the 8th District (you know, that the best way for the Dems to defeat the Republican Reichert is with another Republican,) general election strategies don’t mean a damn if you can’t find a path to the general election. Burner is gonna kick Tom’s ass. That’s a fact. She’s smarter, she’s harder working, and with likes of Dan Kully and Sandeep Kaushik on board, she’s assembling a killer team with a killer instinct.

That said, run Rodney, run! It’s good for Burner. Keeps her looking over her shoulder. And it helps build cred to crush a state senator early in the campaign. All I ask is that you bow out gracefully next April when you’re trailing by 20 points in the polls, and $700K in the bank.

A great post showing Hollywood’s thickheadedness.

So Elaine and I scored some advance passes to “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix” tonight, 7 PM, at Cinerama. She left work a bit before 5 to get in line and hold our place; by the time she arrived, the line was already down the block, and the show was clearly going to sell out.

I got downtown from work around 6:15, joined her in line, and we spent the half hour chatting and catching up on the day.

So the line moves, we’re at the doors to the theater, turn in our passes, get our hands stamped, and then they want to look through our bags for camcorders, etc. I take off my backpack, open it. It’s all work stuff – binders and folders and notebooks, really – and then I open the front pocket, which has my wallet and my iPhone.

(Which is off.)

The woman’s got a flashlight and a little stick that she’s using to do security screenings, and, once she sees the iPhone, says, “I’m sorry, you can’t go in.”

I blink. “Excuse me?”

“No cell phones allowed.”

I point out that it’s off, and she says that doesn’t matter. “The rules are clear. No phones.” She then suggests I leave it in my car.

“I don’t have a car,” I tell her. “I just came from work. On the bus. All my stuff is with me, and I don’t have any place to put it.”

“I’m sorry,” she says, in a very I’m-not-at-all-sorry-voice. “The rules are clear. No phones.”

I blink, look at Elaine, blink again, shrug, and then we leave, walking past the hordes and noticing that replays of this conversation (“What? It’s my cell phone. I have it on me all the time…”) are happening all over the place.

So now Elaine has wasted two hours of her time, we’re not seeing the movie, and the studio (Warners) clearly doesn’t give a hang about it. I understand the need to combat piracy – I really do – but pissing off honest moviegoers with ridiculous (and ridiculously ineffective) rules like this is insane.

Be warned. Leave your phone at home.

As for us? We’re planning to rent something on DVD … and preferably not made by Warner Brothers.

The studio told the theaters, “no cell phones”, because some phones can record video. Never mind that cell phone video quality is awful, movie execs are freaking out industry-wide over piracy. Hollywood seems content to put their own anti-piracy responsibilities on their customers. Bad move. Seems similar to the RIAA suing teenagers for downloading songs.

Cell phone searches will likely end when the movie is released. Still, theaters nationwide should use readily available technology to fight piracy. Night vision goggles are great at spotting illicit recording, and I’ve seen them used effectively. Seems like a better plan than turning people away.

The Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight (and every Tuesday), 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. What better way to beat the heat than some icy cold beer, and… um… air conditioning?

Not in Seattle? Liberals will also be drinking tonight in the Tri-Cities. A full listing of Washington’s eleven Drinking Liberally chapters is available here.

UPDATE:
Almost forgot… King County Prosecutor candidate Bill Sherman will be dropping by tonight. I would publicly endorse him tonight, but I’ve pledged to keep Drinking Liberally above politics.

Mental note: Stay on Goldy’s good side.

In one of my very first posts here on HA, way back before pretty much anyone was reading me, I called out bowling alley operators for their ridiculous claims in support of Tim Eyman’s Initiative 892, which would have put tens of thousands of slot machines in bars, restaurants and bowling alleys, scattered throughout nearly every community in the state.

Support from bowling alleys comprised the heart of Eyman’s claim that his was a battle for equal treatment for mom-and-pop businesses versus a powerful “tribal monopoly,” and throughout the campaign a handful of bowling alley owners routinely made the rounds of talk radio and editorial boards, arguing just that point. I wasn’t convinced.

I remember one particular phone call from a woman who pleaded for slot machines on behalf of the bowling alley that had been in her family for three generations. She claimed she just couldn’t compete against the tribal casinos anymore, and if I-892 didn’t pass, she would probably shutter the family business.

Now, at the risk of sounding unsympathetic, I’d like to impart a bit of wisdom from one small businessperson to another:

YOU’RE RUNNING A FUCKING BOWLING ALLEY!!!

And perhaps, instead of trying to compete with the tribal casinos, you should spend a little time and effort promoting… gee, I don’t know… bowling?!

Saying that bowling alleys need slot machines to compete with tribal casinos is like saying Chuck E. Cheese’s needs a liquor license and strippers to compete with the Deja Vu.

The point is, if you can’t make ends meet enticing people to chuck balls at pins, then perhaps you’re in the wrong business. Or sadly, perhaps bowling just isn’t a viable industry anymore.

Well, apparently bowling still is a viable industry, with a brand new Lucky Strike Lanes set to open one floor below a trendy billiards parlor in downtown Bellevue.

Sure, it’s not the beer stained, smoke filled “family” bowling alley of my youth, but then, I don’t remember slot machines vying for space with the Charlie’s Angels pinball machine either. And surprise: all it took to compete for entertainment dollars was some good, old fashioned innovation.

Hmm. Bowling alley owners capturing new business by catering to bowlers? Who’d a thunk?

Local politics don’t inspire me much these days.

My favorite city councilman, Peter Steinbrueck, is quitting. The monorail is dead. The Alaskan Way Viaduct is being retrofitted. Mayor Nickels is doing a lot of the hard work put off by previous mayors. Everything is in its place. Sure, there’s some police department stuff, but when isn’t there some of that?

The two major candidates runnig to replace Steinbrueck are Venus Velazquez and Bruce Harrell. Harrell is the business-backed candidate, while Velazquez wants to be. Both want to fix the Seattle Schools even though it isn’t in their job description.

Council candidates talk small ball, but I want to know: what do you want the city to look like in 25 years?

Meanwhile, the guy I do want on the council is quitting. So if you want a “Steinbrueck for Council” t-shirt or some stickers, let me know.

Welcome the first bullshit of the rest of your life. Good bullshit locally.

* The Office of Professional Accountability has decided that professional accountability is a waste of time.

* Michael Medved thinks that the BBC describing the terrorists who drove a flaming car into the Glasgow Airport as members of, “the disfranchised South Asian community” is political correctness. Because doctors can’t be disfranchised. And they didn’t say Mohammedan, or something.

* Don over at Sound Politics thinks he has psychic abilities for having predicted the Libby pardon would come some time in a 2-year span. And the story proves that the beltway is out of touch with America, but not how you think.

* The final local thing, the Faith and Freedom network is concerned about the fate of the Dutch. Their sad experiment in secular humanism has come to an end, as evidenced by an article that says the most conservative member party of the ruling coalition, “say they are not pushing to banish legalized prostitution or soft drugs.”

And they gots some delectable bullshit nationally.

* Regular readers of HorsesAss.org know more than most about the tainted products from China. But did you know that former (?) coke head and rightwing gas bag Larry Kudlow has some thoughts. Maybe, the Chinese are secretly trying to poison our dogs and our kids. That makes a lot more sense than the problems being the effect of bad trade deals and a lax system of oversight in China.

* Wendy Shalit seems to be making stuff up.

* President Bush missed the chance to go after al Qadea leaders. The right wing doesn’t care all that much.

* And finally, John Edwards gets his hair cut, this is sinister.