HorsesAss.Org

Free to be me (and available at an affordable rate)

by — ,

The other week I was on the John Carlson Show discussing proposals to subject political blogs to federal campaign finance regulations, which not only would have forced unpaid bloggers like me to meet costly and time consuming public disclosure requirements, but would have also made it a felony to mention a candidate by name during the final 60 days before an election.

Well, the Federal Election Commission issued its proposed rules on Friday, and as Jerome Armstrong at MyDD explains, for the most part, they’re pretty darn good.

For a blogger, this is great news. However, for a campaign, I’m unsure of the implications of their ruling. From the sounds of it, Google ads and Blogads are now going to have to carry a disclaimer. I can’t imagine that even being practical for candidates to run disclaimers in their search-term ads.

As for me, I’m free to do what I do without any interference. In fact, I’m also free to do what I do and work as a paid campaign consultant, without subjecting HA to any reporting requirements.

Hear that candidates? The state’s most influential and effective progressive blogger is now available to help you develop and execute your new media strategy. Get me while I’m still cheap.

Daily open thread

by — ,

Wow. Over a half million people marched through the streets of Los Angeles today, protesting a proposed immigration bill that would amongst other things, build a 700 mile-long “security wall” across our southern border.

Hmm. You know, in addition to keeping people out, walls like this are also pretty good at keeping people in.

Green Party still a green party

by — ,

I’ve gotten a few angry emails over the last couple days, and I can certainly understand if some of you Green Party members and supporters mistakenly believe I’m just some Democratic Party hack. But local writer and activist Geov Parrish has impeccable progressive credentials, so perhaps you’ll accept his take on the Dixon fiasco as unbiased.

Writing in Eat The State (“Shame on the Greens and Aaron Dixon“,) Parrish berates the Greens for failing to vet their candidate.

David Goldstein and his readers at HorsesAss.org have been on a tear the last two days, destroying Dixon’s Senate bid and perhaps, along the way, permanently ensuring that nobody politically credible in town will ever take the Greens seriously again.

It pains me to write that. I like the Greens, in the same way, I guess, that fans root for the Chicago Cubs. Except the Cubs have winning seasons pretty often. And I like and respect Dixon, too. But the particularly painful thing about this is that it was all entirely preventable.

Parrish then goes on to summarize what has been gleaned from the public records thus far:

1) Eighteen criminal charges in the last 17 years, most (but not all) for traffic violations and unpaid traffic fines.
2) Massive debts from dozens of unpaid fines in both Seattle Municipal Court and King County District Court. A number are for driving without insurance (and yes, he can afford it.)
3) Dixon claims on his web site that the woman he currently lives with (and who is his campaign media contact) is his wife. She isn’t, and she’d better not be. He’s still in the process of divorcing his last wife.
4) And he owes thousands in unpaid child support to yet another ex.
5) Not only has Dixon not voted since registering in 1998 (which was reported Thursday), but he’s never voted before that, either. In other words, he’s never voted in King County. Ever, over an adult life spanning nearly 40 years. And his inactive voter registration lists a now-invalid address.

There’s probably more; the dailies will likely be all over Dixon now, starting this morning. And this is not to say Dixon is a bad guy; he wouldn’t be the first community activist whose personal life is a mess. But the point is, this is Campaign 101. You vet your own candidates, and you conduct opposition research, just like you know your opponents (if they take you seriously) will on you. Did the Greens expect not to be taken seriously, or are they just stunningly ignorant about how this “campaign” thing works?

Hmm. I’m guessing a bit of both. I don’t believe the Greens did take this campaign seriously… at least, not in the sense that they ever really believed that Dixon could win. So perhaps they just thought the media would play along with a wink and nod, giving their rhetoric a little ink as a fuck you to the incumbent?

I mean, let’s be honest, the media’s never taken the Greens seriously before… never bothered to scrutinize Green candidates the way they do real ones… so why should this race be any different? Because this ain’t your daddy’s media, folks.

It is stunning that such a supposedly progressive “party” has such an ass-backwards, 20th Century view of how the media works. For those of you who have criticized me for targeting Dixon… where have you been the past few years?! This is what I do! Dixon had muck in his past, and if I didn’t rake it, some other blogger would have.

Don’t blame me… blame the Greens. As Parrish points out, they recruited Dixon. They approached him because of his stature in the black community.

The Greens could and should have covered all this before ever talking with Dixon, and nobody would have been the wiser. And they could have found some other, more appropriate black community activist to run for U.S. Senate instead. They had no business not vetting Dixon.

[…]

Now, a good man is being publicly humiliated, his campaign badly damaged, and the Greens are a laughingstock. Ugly. Really ugly. And completely, absolutely unnecessary.

Once again, when it comes to learning the ins and outs of electoral politics, the upstart Green Party has proven to be an awfully green party.

Daily open thread

by — ,

It’s been an eventful week for The Stranger’s Cienna Madrid. First I took a few rhetorical potshots at her, and today she gets body-slammed by the Seattle P-I’s venerable Joel Connelly: “Cantwell’s vilification by left is bizarre.” And in case you missed it, listen to Cienna taking on both me and Joel in the latest installment of Podcasting Liberally.

And don’t forget to vote for HA in the Koufax Awards.

verb vet (vet

by — ,

Oh man. I don’t mean to pile on poor Aaron Dixon… but Richard Pope — HA’s resident expert on quixotic election campaigns — has searched through court records and posted his findings in the comment threads.

Let’s just say that if this were a real candidate representing a real party, we would expect him to announce his withdrawal momentarily.

I’ve got nothing against Dixon. People who know him tell me he’s a great guy and a dedicated community activist.

What he isn’t, is a viable candidate for U.S. Senate, and I have absolutely no compassion for those in the Green Party who put him out there for public scrutiny, apparently without any vetting process whatsoever.

The Greens say they want to become a major party. Well start acting like one.

UPDATE:
Richard’s got more on Dixon’s court records.

Note to Dixon: call self on election day

by — ,

Geov Parrish has a piece in the current issue of the Seattle Weekly on Green Party senate candidate Aaron Dixon, and while I disagree with Geov’s broad condemnation of Sen. Maria Cantwell’s voting record, I know from our conversations that we share a lot of common ground… like our mutual criticism of the Greens’ failure to do the hard work necessary to build itself into a real party.

For example, if I were advising Dixon, I think maybe my first recommendation would be to, gee… I dunno… register to vote?

Yeah, that’s right… apparently the man so disgusted with Cantwell and the Dems that he’s willing to pour his energies into giving voters a third choice, isn’t even an active voter himself!

Go look it up in our good friend Stefan’s voter registration database, and you’ll find an Aaron L. Dixon, born Jan. 2, 1949, who registered to vote in 1998 at an address on the 500 block of 29th AVE S. But he’s listed as “inactive,” and there’s no record that he’s ever been credited with voting.

I suppose Stefan’s data could be wrong (it’s been known to happen) so I’ve made repeated inquiries with Dixon’s media contact (his wife Farah), and so far she has been unable to confirm or deny his voter registration status. She said she thought he voted in the last election, but King County’s voter database clearly doesn’t credit him with casting a ballot. And to further cloud his registration status is the fact that while he claims to live in the Beacon Hill neighborhood, the address on his inactive registration is smack dab in the Central District.

Perhaps there’s a reasonable explanation, and if so, I’ll print a retraction. (And if there is an explanation, then they need to get their media shit together, because I gave them every opportunity to refute this.) But it sure doesn’t look like during the past few years, Dixon has been much of an active voter.

So why the hell is he running for the US Senate?

Now I don’t want to get all high and mighty on him, but in my book, you don’t have much right to criticize the electoral process if you don’t participate. And if anybody should understand the importance of minority communities exercising their voting rights, it’s a longtime activist and former Black Panther Party leader like Aaron Dixon.

I mean, really… who the hell is Dixon to talk about “all the people fed up with the current political system” if he doesn’t vote?

One couldn’t help but wonder if the Greens’ recruitment of Dixon was demographically cynical considering his prior lack of history with the party, but an active voter registration is a technical prerequisite of candidacy, so you’d think they would have at least inquired about that one, basic qualification for office, huh? And it doesn’t say much about their GOTV potential when they can’t even get the top of their ticket to reliably turn out at the polls.

I personally sympathize with the Green agenda, but am endlessly disappointed by their half-assed and counterproductive strategy and execution. And as Geov points out, I’m not the only one giving a hostile welcome to Dixon’s largely fictional candidacy:

So far, the reaction to Dixon’s campaign among many progressive Democratic activists has been negative. In Seattle, Dixon’s home base, progressive bloggers mostly ignored or excoriated his campaign. Not one speaker on a panel of six of the most prominent local progressive bloggers, including myself, at last week’s “Podcasting Liberally” (www.podcastingliberally.com) defended Dixon’s campaign. Most, while professing sympathy for green ideals, savaged it and the Greens. What’s wrong?

“Aaron Dixon started out the campaign with two lies,” says David Goldstein of HorsesAss.org, Seattle’s best-known progressive blogger and a fierce critic of Dixon. “The first one being, ‘I can win’; the second one being, ‘There’s no difference between Republicans and Democrats.'”

Though in all fairness, I suppose when it comes to the vote you don’t cast, there really is no difference between which party doesn’t get it.

The other day I pleaded with my fellow progressives to get real and accept the fact that our choice this November is between Cantwell and McGavick, and that sometimes, life forces us to compromise. I don’t expect the race to be nearly as close as it was in 2000, but if it is, even a pathetic showing by Dixon could be enough to give President Bush another rubber stamp in the Senate. And the political ramifications could be much broader.

Goldstein also points not only to the infamous “spoiler” factor but to the impact of Dixon’s presence on the ballot if the race between Cantwell and Republican challenger Mike McGavick changes from a comfortable Democratic win to a closer race of, say, 5 percent.

The loser, Goldstein says, will be Darcy Burner, whose challenge of U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert in the 8th Congressional District east of Lake Washington is the state’s second-biggest race this year. If Cantwell’s race is close, the theory goes, it costs Burner both campaign money and media exposure that will flow to the Senate race instead. That, Goldstein says, would hurt the chance to elect a progressive to Congress in a winnable race, all for Dixon’s quixotic bid.

Of course, Dixon disagrees… but then, what does he know about electoral politics? He doesn’t even vote.

Sen. McCain campaigns for Darcy Burner

by — ,

In one of his signature fits of truthfulness, Sen. John McCain told John Carlson that the 8th CD race between Darcy Burner and Dave Reichert will be “a close one to watch.”

Hmm.

Well I’d certainly hate to make a potential GOP presidential nominee into a liar, so that’s why I urge you to make a generous contribution to Burner’s campaign. NOW.

See, Burner is working hard towards an end of reporting quarter goal of $320,000 cash on hand, and if she meets it, she’ll be eligible for $250,000 of DCCC “Red to Blue” money. Burner’s on the verge of becoming a national Democratic darling… but she needs your support to help push her over the top. So yank out your credit card, go to my Act Blue page, and give what you can afford.

Please help make Sen. McCain an honest man… and give to Darcy Burner.

CORRECTION:
I’ve been told that McCain’s exact words were that he called it a “tight race.” Same difference.

BREAKING: County officials take bold stand against dipping puppies in acid

by — ,

Note to Stefan: it’s time to embrace a new scandal.

While the WA state GOP’s favorite conspiracy theorist has tirelessly devoted himself towards uncovering fraud and corruption in King County Elections (I’m sure he’ll find that smoking gun any day now,) he’s totally missing out on a raging controversy that threatens to bring county government to its knees: Mooie the acid-washed puppy.

Of course, I expect the media to pile on this story: it was a horrific, heart-wrenching crime, and… well… everybody loves puppies (except, I suppose, the person who immersed the poor, four-month-old pitbull in muriatic acid.) But I was nonetheless surprised to see my inbox fill with puppy-related news releases nearly two weeks after the incident. If there’s ever a sign that Puppygate threatens to explode into a full fledged political crisis, it’s the elected officials tripping all over themselves trying to prove who is more strongly opposed to dipping puppies in acid.

Yesterday, KC Executive Ron Sims office released a somewhat defensive sounding “Puppy investigation update,” which of course prompted Council Chair Larry Phillips to go on the offensive… lest the executive steal the anti-animal cruelty high ground. Phillips apparently had no choice but to send a letter to Sims urging a “prompt and thorough investigation of this tragic and shocking case” — a letter that somehow managed to make its way onto an animal rights website before it reached Sims desk. Imagine that.

So I asked Sims spokesman Sandeep Kaushik… “what the fuck?”… to which he replied that they’ve never seen public reaction like this before. More than with the 2004 election controversy, I asked incredulously? “Magnitudes greater,” he said.

Spurred on by websites like Dogster and Pasado, animal lovers (or as the FBI calls them, “terrorists”) have been inundating (i.e. “terrorizing”) government officials with impassioned pleas for action. The Executive’s Office, the County Council, Animal Control, the Federal Way Police… they’re receiving thousands of animated and sometimes angry emails and phone calls… some even threatening vigilante action if the authorities do not apprehend the perpetrators and bring them to justice. No other controversy has come even close to generating such an outcry… not the election contest or the Southwest Airlines deal or any number of issues that impact the daily lives of the region’s citizens.

Which makes me wonder… is the American public so jaded by man’s inhumanity to man, that nothing short of dipping a puppy in acid compels compassion these days? Are our politicians wasting their money on media consultants and handlers, when the secret to shaping public opinion is… puppies? Is the anti-war movement making a huge miscalculation by focusing attention on the human tragedy of the conflict, when the one thing that could finally provoke the American people to stand up and demand an end to the war would be grainy pictures from the Baghdad pound of hooded, shackled puppies with electrodes attached to their testicles?

Now, don’t get me wrong… I love animals (i.e. I’m a “terrorist”,) and what happened to this dog was truly horrible. It’s an appalling, saddening crime, and the pictures made me cringe. I even made my own puppy look the other way. I sure hope they catch the guy.

But it’s a dog, for chrisakes!

I dunno… just thought we might want to readjust our priorities.

More liberal drinking

by — ,

The Burien, Tacoma and Spokane chapters of Drinking Liberally all meet tonight. Wow. That’s a lot of liberal drinkers.

The Burien chapter meets tonight (the 4th Weds. of every month,) 7:00 pm at Mick Kelly’s Irish Pub, 435 SW 152nd ST. State representatives Zack Hudgins (D-11), Shay Schual-Berke (D-33) and Dave Upthegrove (D-33) will be joining the festivities. That’s a great opportunity to sit down and talk shop with some legislators. Wish I could be there.

For those further South and further West, the Tacoma chapter meets every Wednesday, 8:00 pm at Meconi’s Pub, 709 Pacific AVE, and the Spokane chapter meets every Wednesday, 7:00 pm at the Red Lion Pub, 126 N Division St.

Podcasting Liberally with Joel Connelly (and Cienna)

by — ,

It was journalist night at Seattle’s Drinking Liberally, with one of the region’s most venerable political writers, The Seattle P-I’s Joel Connelly, duking it out with one of the region’s newest, The Stranger’s Cienna Madrid. Also joining me for our weekly political beerfest was Carl, Mollie, Will, and Lee. (Well, sort of Lee… we actually bumped him for Joel before he managed to say a word.)

Cienna and I continue our tussle over Maria Cantwell, Dirk Kempthorne and how political journalists influence the issues they cover. Then Joel joins in and the discussion ranges from Barak Obama, Al Gore, Mark Warner, John Edwards, John Kerry and the third anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

The show is 53:19, and is available here as a 34.4MB MP3, and archived at PodcastingLiberally.com.

[Special thanks to Confab creators Gavin and Richard for producing our show.]

Drinking Liberally

by — ,

The Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight (and every Tuesday), 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. I’ll be there, knocking back a couple of pints of Manny’s, and recording the latest edition of Podcasting Liberally… and who knows, perhaps Cienna will stop by so the two of us can exchange obscenity laden rants?

For those on the other side of the mountains, please join Jimmy at the Tri-Cities chapter of DL, every Tuesday from 5:30 onwards, Tuscany Lounge, 1515 George Washington Way, Richland.

Playing by the rules

by — ,

I’ve been told that state Rep. Ross Hunter was disappointed by the reception he and newly minted Democrat Rodney Tom got at last week’s 48th LD Democrats meeting. It wasn’t hostile or anything, they just weren’t welcomed with candy and flowers.

I’m not sure what Hunter expected. Flipping a Republican is big news and all, and Tom will certainly give state Sen. Luke Esser a run for his money — if he wins the primary — but the 48th had already recruited a strong challenger to Esser in Debi Golden.

Or more precisely, the Senate Dems had already recruited a strong candidate in Golden, and so if she and her supporters seemed a bit taken aback by Tom’s challenge, well, that’s to be expected. Commitments were made to Golden, and while I can’t really blame the Senate Dems for switching horses if they truly believe Tom is the stronger candidate, the manner in which they did it was rather ham-fisted.

According to Golden, both the Senate and House Dems recruited her for their respective races as early as July, and by October she had agreed to take on Esser with the assurance that she would have the backing of the SDCC unless Hunter himself decided to enter the race. Tom has told people that he knew he was going to switch parties as early as November, but Golden only started hearing rumors a couple days before he officially announced his candidacy. About an hour after the news broke, Sen. Karen Keiser stopped by to officially give Golden the bad news and ask her to exit the race.

As we now know, Golden refused to drop out, and last week the 48th LD Dems passed a motion affirming her right to stay in the race. This should be a good primary fight between two candidates who are strong in different ways, and I certainly wouldn’t count Golden out. In 2004, after a late start and with little money, Golden came within a couple points of beating Tom. Personally, I just think she’s a better fit for the district, and, well… quite frankly, female candidates tend to have an advantage out here.

I expect the primary to be a good, fair fight, and whoever wins should emerge stronger for it. I’ve heard the Dems have warned Golden not to “go negative” against Tom, but I’m not really sure what that means. Certainly his voting record should be fair game, as long as it is honestly represented.

One final comment on this whole affair. Like Hunter, I certainly encourage other Republicans — several of whom have seen the GOP leave them far behind — to seriously consider switching parties before the 2006 election. But before they do, I think the WSDCC might want to reconsider Section VI, Paragraph C of their nominating rules, which states that to be eligible for the party’s nomination:

The voter must not have been registered as a member of any political party other than the Democratic Party for at least one (1) year immediately preceding filing for office

If they’re going to ask Golden to take one for the team, the least the Dems can do is make certain that they are playing by the rules.

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Follow Goldy

[iire_social_icons]

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.