HorsesAss.Org

The Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight (and every Tuesday), 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.

We’ll twist the barkeep’s arm into tuning in the election results, and Nick plans to bring his laptop for up-to-the-minute results. I may stop by another election night gathering first, but I’ll definitely be there.

I suppose I should have posted my endorsements before most people voted… but then I’ve never claimed to be as responsible, forward thinking and independent conservative as say… the Seattle Times editorial board. (Tip to future candidates: the secret to gaining the Times’ endorsement is to rail against the estate tax and shoot a few dogs.)

Anyway… for what it’s worth, here are my choices in a handful of contested races. Ignore them if you choose… just get out there and vote.

King County Council District 1: Carolyn Edmunds

I know I probably should like Bob Ferguson, what with all his grassroots, door-belling, bus riding, status quo stomping, gosh darn hard-workin’-guy style of politics… but I don’t. Where others see a refreshing independent voice, I see a calculating, ambitious politician, carefully cultivating his contrarian reputation.

Carolyn Edmunds, on the other hand, is a Democrat, with an established record and strong connections to community groups throughout her district. The way I look at it, outside of District 1 there’s going to be four Democrats and four Republicans on the council. Elect Edmunds and you give the D’s a reliable 5-4 majority. Elect Ferguson and he becomes an unpredictable swing vote.

For my peace of mind, vote for Edmunds.

King County Council District 9: Steve Hammond

Devout Democrat as I am, if I lived in District 9 I’d be grabbing a Republican ballot and casting my vote for Steve Hammond. Not that I like Hammond’s politics… he’s an arch-Conservative Christian preacher with an overbearing, holier-than-thou demeanor and a complete and utter lack of political nuance. But he is what he is, and pretty honestly represents his district.

On the other hand, who the hell knows who Raymond Shaw Reagan Dunn really is? He’s been running like an arch-Conservative Christian preacher with an overbearing, holier-than-thou demeanor and a complete and utter lack of political nuance… but it just comes across as so much grandstanding. I think he made a miscalculation running towards the right, as first impressions count. Republicans need to run towards the middle to win broadly in King County and WA state, and while he likely has the money, the consultants, and the name to overcome these early missteps, I think we’ll all be better off if this GOP golden boy learns a few lessons from stumbling early.

Clearly, a mere council seat is beneath a man of such lofty political pedigree, so we might as well give it to a candidate who genuinely sees the council as an opportunity to serve his community (however misguided his politics), rather than just as a springboard to higher office. Vote for Steve Hammond.

Seattle City Council, Position 2: Richard Conlin

I dunno… I’m just not feeling that “throw the bum out” spirit this year. Conlin’s not given me any reason to dump him, and his opponents haven’t given me any reason to give them a try… and then the Times sealed the deal by endorsing Paige Miller. Vote for Richard Conlin.

Seattle City Council, Position 4: Linda Averill

Fuck The Stranger! I mean really… fuck them! I was so absolutely sure that I would be the only person to the right of Trotsky’s ghost endorsing Linda Averill… and then those cirrhotic fuckers at The Stranger steal my thunder. Well fuck them.

Why Averill? Well mostly I just wanted to piss off my righty trolls by endorsing the only Freedom Socialist Party candidate on the ballot. And… well… The Stranger actually makes some good points in her defense. (But fuck them anyway.) But if you really can’t bring yourself to vote for Averill, I’d just like to remind you that Casey Corr was once an editorial writer for the Times. Need I say more?

Seattle City Council, Position 8: Dwight Pelz

I know I said I don’t have that “throw the bum out” spirit, and I really don’t want to throw out Richard McIver… but damn it, the Council needs an asshole like Dwight Pelz to get in Greg Nickels’ face from time to time. (And Dwight… I mean “asshole” in the best sense of the word.) Truth is, I really haven’t made up my mind on this race yet, and just want to see Pelz and McIver face off in the general election. So whatever you do, don’t vote for Robert Rosencrantz.

Port of Seattle: Molloy, Hara and Pope

No surprise on my first endorsement. Lawrence Molloy is every liberal’s favorite incumbent in this year’s Port Commission elections. The Weekly endorsed him. The Stranger endorsed him. The P-I endorsed him. The Times didn’t. Need I say more? (Plus, I met him last night at the Red Cross fundraiser, and not only is he articulate and knowledgeable, he came across as a nice guy.) Vote for Molloy for Position 1.

Position 3 was a tough one for me. I really, really wanted to endorse Peter Coates, a reform candidate with strong Labor backing… but the pragmatic, good-government Dukakis-Democrat in me thought, gee, I dunno… maybe the Port could use a former City Treasurer and County Auditor like Lloyd Hara. And then the Times ruins everything for me, by endorsing Hara too. Well… screw the Times… I’m voting for Hara anyway.

For Position 4, I’m standing by my man: perennial candidate and HA regular Richard Pope. Sure, Richard’s a little nutty, and he’s probably unqualified for the job, but he’s got a couple good points to make about the Port being a drain on taxpayers, and what the hell… he doesn’t stand a chance of winning anyway. If you really don’t want to throw away your vote, Jack Jolley’s your man… but I’m voting for Richard.

Seattle Popular Monorail Authority: Stockmeyer and Goldberg

The Monorail looks so dead right now, it’s really hard to get too excited over these races, but whoever wins, I think their first act should be to remove the word “Popular” from the authority’s name.

Cleve Stockmeyer is an easy choice for Position 9. Yeah… he wants to build the Monorail, but he’s a pragmatist, a principled good-government activist, and an all around good guy. In the proudest tradition of representative democracy, I trust Cleve to make an informed decision on my behalf.

I’m not so enthusiastic about Beth Goldberg, who is clearly running to kill the Monorail, whatever the circumstances or final proposal. Yet she grudgingly earns my reluctant endorsement because, as her opponent Cindi Laws knows, all us Jews stick together… so I really don’t have a choice. Mazel tov on my endorsement, Beth.

I keep searching for clues as to “Where’s Rossi?” on Initiative 912… but according to Andrew Garber in this morning’s Seattle Times, Dino is clueless:

The campaign, in its polling, found that former Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi could have a significant impact on how people vote if he endorsed or opposed I-912. Rossi said recently he has no position.

No position? Gimme a break. This is a guy who wants to be governor, and he has no position on an initiative that will determine the ability of the state to start addressing its massive transportation infrastructure needs? He has no position on a transportation package that passed both houses of the Legislature with a bipartisan majority, and which is strongly backed by his longtime patrons in the business community? He has no position on an initiative that has been sold by its backers as revenge for Rossi’s loss at the polls and in the courts?

Actually, what he told Garber was that he was not going to take a position, not that he didn’t actually have one, and I really have trouble believing that my friends in the MSM will let Rossi get away with this prevarication. I-912 rode Rossi’s election contest trial onto the ballot, and if he wants to be taken seriously in WA politics, he has an obligation to take a public stance, one way or the other.

In a companion piece, Ralph Thomas raises the ominous question of “Who’ll be to blame if viaduct, 520 bridge collapse?”

Politicians, clerics and ethicists agree we have a moral obligation to fix infrastructure such as highways and levees that we know pose a risk to the public.

But where does that obligation lie?

Well, if I-912 passes due to Rossi’s silence, and the resulting delays result in a catastrophic collapse, I know one person I’m going blame: Dino Rossi.

Just a reminder… tonight I will be co-hosting a Red Cross fundraiser at the home of Jennifer McCausland, 2601 Cascadia Ave. S., in Seattle’s Mt. Baker neighborhood. The event takes place from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

King County Executive Ron Sims will be the guest of honor — it was originally slated to be a campaign fundraiser — and he will be giving a short talk on the region’s disaster preparedness.

This is a great opportunity to meet Ron (and me) while raising money for a very worthy cause… the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Hope to see you all there. Please R.S.V.P.

So… where is Dino Rossi on I-912, the initiative that would repeal the recent gas-tax hike (9.5 cents over four years) and the transportation improvement package it would fund? Here’s a clue:

Dino Rossi’s 6% voting record with the Washington State Labor Council ranks among the worst and most partisan of any legislator during his 1997-2003 tenure in the State Senate. He managed only five positive votes in 77 chances, and those were on issues with which labor, business and the leadership of both parties were all in agreement. For example, his one positive vote out of 15 in 2003 was to approve the 5-cent gas-tax increase to fund transportation improvements.

That’s right… in 2003, one of the most partisan, anti-labor legislators in Olympia votes with labor on a single bill… a 5-cent gas-tax increase. Why? Because he’s a passionately pro-business politician, and business desperately wants transportation improvements.

Hmm. So where’s Rossi on I-912?

If the headline sounds like the opening to an offensive joke, well… it sorta is. Andrew at NW Progressive writes about Clark County’s Annual Mayor’s and Community Leaders Prayer Breakfast and how the organizers, the Full Gospel Business Men’s Fellowship International was forced to cancel a similar event last year in Beaverton OR:

Organizers canceled a planned prayer breakfast Tuesday after learning that most of Washington County’s mayors and one of two main speakers wouldn’t attend the May 5 event because a Muslim leader was excluded from participating.

Uniting the community’s pastoral, political and business people in prayer had been the purpose of the Mayors’ Prayer Breakfast of Washington County, he said. Without the host — Beaverton Mayor Rob Drake — and other mayors, he said, that couldn’t happen.

Shahriar Ahmed, president of the Bilal Mosque Association in Beaverton, along with Rabbi David Rosenberg of Portland, had been invited to the otherwise Christian breakfast at Drake’s request.

Ahmed had been scheduled to give the breakfast’s closing prayer from the dais before the fellowship informed him he couldn’t.

[…]

A fellowship spokesman, Peter Reding, had said the invitation was withdrawn by the steering committee because Muslims pray to a God they call Allah and they aren’t part of the fellowship’s “Judeo-Christian tradition.”

Ah yes… the Judeo-Christian tradition of excluding people of other faiths. And oh yeah… women too.

Andrew sums up the issue quite nicely:

The problem here is that this group is trying to hold an event with mayors participating as mayors – not as private citizens. It’s a “mayor’s prayer breakfast”, essentially. A prayer breakfast that is for “Christians” (certain types of “Christians”) only.

Hmm. I’ve got nothing against prayer. (Or breakfast, for that matter.) But if I were one of these mayors I’d think twice about attending this exclusionary event. Some blogger might get ahold of the list of attendees and publish it.

For a variety of reasons, I am thinking of moving HA to Scoop, the software that powers Daily Kos. I understand it is a bitch to install, and I’ve never worked with Perl, so if any of my loyal users have any experience running a Scoop system, and would like to offer some help or advice, please let me know.

Oh… and if you all want to chime in about whether you think this is a good or bad idea, have at it in the comment thread.

Keith Ervin summed up the race for King County executive quite nicely in the Seattle Times yesterday. Ervin listed a number of issues — the CAO, Southwest Airlines, and of course, KC Elections — that explain why the “GOP hopes Sims [is] vulnerable.”

And challenger David Irons’ campaign strategy?

County Councilman David Irons is betting these controversies will give the Republican Party he represents its best chance in more than a decade to win back the county’s top administrative job.

That’s right, Irons isn’t running on a resume or a platform, he’s simply running as “the Republican”… the guy who isn’t Sims. So perhaps what at first appears to be a meandering and ineffectual campaign, actually conceals a brilliant strategy. For the more he squanders campaign funds on takeout and balloons, the less opportunity he gives voters to really get to know him. And the less voters know Irons, the better the shot he has at defeating Sims in November.

Sure, Sims has some blotches on his record; every longtime executive does. Take Irons for example: as COO of Brigadoon.com, he oversaw operations of a huge dot.com failure that blew through tens of millions of dollars, leaving investors, vendors, employees and customers holding the bag. And Iron’s wants to make this a campaign about who can better manage the county’s bureaucracy? He couldn’t manage a well financed company, lauded at the time for its “brilliant” business plan… and we should trust him with a county of 2 million souls, a population larger than that of thirteen states?

Now I’m not saying Iron’s failed leadership at Brigadoon necessarily disqualifies him from the county executive’s office… but it doesn’t recommend him for the job either. And I’m not particularly impressed with his dot.com-like spending spree that has left his campaign coffers nearly empty, two months out from election day.

Sims campaign spokesman Christian Sinderman says Irons’ heavy spending shows “a clear lack of momentum and, frankly, poor financial management.”

The Sims campaign on the other hand, has not only raised more money, but spent substantially less; it’s $331,417 war chest is more than enough to set the record straight on his own accomplishments in office… which most impressively includes his unheralded success at keeping essential services functioning while closing a $135 million budget gap. Indeed, perhaps no government in Washington, state or local, managed to weather the recent economic downturn as smoothly and seamlessly as King County.

No doubt Sims has pissed off a lot of voters… for the same people who whine about the lack of leadership in this state are often the first to berate a politician as arrogant for daring to show some. And Sims willingness to lead has often made him a target of critics, from his championing of light rail to his strong push for the CAO, to his recent, unpopular effort to bring Southwest Airlines to Boeing Field. Leadership is about getting out in front on an issue you believe in, and then persuading, cajoling — even harassing — voters to come along with you. Call him arrogant if you want, but slavishly adhering to the “will of the people” isn’t leadership… it’s following.

So if this election was merely an up-or-down plebiscite on Sims’ job performance, perhaps he’s angered or disappointed enough constituents that he might lose. But it isn’t. This election is a choice between Ron Sims and David Irons, and voters will make their decision based on who they think is better qualified to run King County. And in the end, that is where Irons’ strategy will fail.

In a sense, this is one election where the Republicans really will have a cause for blaming Dean Logan for their defeat… for the moment KCRE prints Irons’ name on the ballot, is the moment he loses the election.

Talk about whatever you wanna talk about, but me… I’m still waiting to hear from Dino Rossi.

It may not have been what he intended, but last night President Bush ceded the ideological debate over the proper size and scope of government. Calling for “one of the largest reconstruction efforts the world has ever seen,” he made it absolutely clear where the responsibility for rebuilding the Gulf Coast region resides:

“Federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone, from roads and bridges to schools and water systems.”

This new found faith in the vital role of government was echoed in his mea culpa of sorts, in which he acknowledged the abject failure of FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security:

“The system, at every level of government, was not well coordinated and was overwhelmed in the first few days. It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces, the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment’s notice.”

But perhaps most significant was the president’s acknowledgment that our nation is rife with deep and persistent poverty, that it is rooted in history and race, and that the government has an obligation to provide opportunity to all its citizens.

As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. And that poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action. So let us restore all that we have cherished from yesterday, and let us rise above the legacy of inequality.

Of course, the actual proposals and platitudes in last night’s speech are just so many words — the devil remains in both the details, and the execution. But the overall theme of big government lending a big hand to those in need, is more reminiscent of FDR’s New Deal than the Reagan Revolution. While I do not trust the president’s deeds to match his words, it is important to note that the disaster has forced his administration to adopt a classic liberal-progressive frame that neo-conservative think tanks have spent the better part of four decades drowning. Last night’s speech acknowledges that a strong, functioning, compassionate America requires a strong, functioning and compassionate federal government. It is not just a recognition of the need for good government, but rather, an implicit reminder that in a functioning republic, government is good.

As with the Mississippi flood of 1927, historians may look back on Hurricane Katrina and see a tidal surge of political change. Author John M. Barry writes that before this unprecedented natural disaster there was no national consensus that the federal government should fund large public works. But the Coolidge administration’s initial inept and callous response gave way under popular pressure to massive and widely successful reconstruction and employment programs… setting a precedent for FDR’s vastly larger New Deal a decade later.

In the immediate wake of Hurricane Katrina, President Bush — like Coolidge before him — seemed genuinely taken aback by criticism of the federal response. Taken at face value, “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job,” was a declaration that everything was going according to plan… a plan that clearly did not envision a decisive federal role in a regional emergency.

All that has now changed. Confronted with an angry public backlash and plummeting poll numbers, Bush has been forced to adopt the language of liberalism, if not the ideals themselves. This is an opportunity that must not be wasted, and it is imperative now that Democrats in Congress remain absolutely disciplined and vigilant… for only relentless oversight can assure a successful reconstruction. The stakes are high, not only for the people of the Gulf Region, but for the future direction of our nation. $200 billion in reconstruction can buy a lot of roads and bridges and schools… but if it is spent wisely, compassionately, and effectively, it will also make a large down-payment on restoring Americans’ faith in government.

Hurricane Katrina cut through the impenetrable bullshit of Grover Norquist and his fellow neo-cons as easily as it breached the concrete walls of the 17th Street Canal. By abandoning their rhetoric, President Bush may have sounded the death peal of a movement, and history may look back on last night’s speech as the moment a failed ideology drowned in a bathtub of its own creation: the flooded, corpse-ridden streets of New Orleans.

[Cross-posted at Daily Kos]

The Seattle Times calls it “breaking news” but it really doesn’t come as much of a surprise:

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels is withdrawing his support for the monorail, and at a press conference is calling on the city to withhold construction permits.

Nickels is asking City Council President Jan Drago to hold an emergency session next Thursday to withhold the permits.

Nickels also called for a Nov. 8 ballot measure to advise city leaders on what to do next with the financially-troubled project.

The level-headed pragmatist in me voted against the Monorail, but I always kinda sorta really wanted to see it built. Ah well.

Democracy for America is hosting an online vote to determine which congressional candidate will receive their first national endorsement of 2006. The candidate with the most votes at the end of balloting will receive a DFA-List endorsement and a national e-mail from DFA’s Chair Jim Dean.

Two Democrats have declared their candidacies to challenge Rep. Dave Reichert’s 8th District seat in 2006… and while I am loath to take sides this early in the campaign, I urge you to go to the DFA website today and cast a vote for Darcy Burner.

The first round of voting closes Saturday at 2:00 pm Pacific Time. Only the top ten move on to the next round, and Darcy is currently ranked eleventh. Since Randy Gordon is not in competitive in the DFA poll, it seems useless to make this exercise a competition between the two of them, and thus deny both the opportunity for some national support.

That said, I like both Randy and Darcy. We were classmates at Camp Wellstone, and I could enthusiastically get behind either one of them… though I’m not yet convinced that either is the right candidate to take on Reichert. So I’ll wait a few more months before I endorse a candidate.

While it appears that there will be no official flood of Hurricane Katrina evacuees to WA state, the disaster is still taxing local relief agencies, as victims find their way to our state on their own. Megan Hampson of the Seattle Red Cross just emailed me the following information in response to a previous query:

You probably already know that there are not going to be large number of evacuees sent to our state by FEMA. However I do want to let you know that we have had over 400 evacuees from the Gulf Coast walk in our front door and we are providing assistance and relief to more and more each day. I know that many Red Cross chapters in the state are also working with families who have lost everything. There is still a need for support for these families who were able to make it to Washington on their own.

Gifts to the Red Cross for Hurricane Katrina will go to all the victims of the Hurricane, regardless of what state they are in so please feel free to share that information. If you wish to target donations for evacuees in Washington State only, then you should make your check payable to the American Red Cross and write “DR081”, the name of the Red Cross disaster operation in Washington State, on the memo line of the check.

So if you want to support the Katrina victims seeking refuge in WA state, make out a a check payable to “American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund”, be sure to write “DR081” in the memo field, and mail it to:

The American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund
PO Box 24325
Seattle, WA 98124-0325

There are number of other ways you can help in the local relief efforts, so for more information, or to make a donation online or by phone, go to the Seattle Red Cross Hurricane Katrina Relief Effort page.

I would also like to remind all my readers that I will be co-hosting a Red Cross fundraiser Monday evening, September 19. The event was originally slated to benefit Ron Sims’ reelection campaign, but Ron decided to change the focus to a worthier cause. You are all invited to attend… but for those of you who need an engraved invitation, this is the best I can do:

This is a great opportunity to meet Ron Sims (and, um… me), and have a glass of wine and some good conversation while helping a worthy cause. I hope to see you there, checkbook in hand. Please R.S.V.P.

I’ve been sitting by my computer all day, waiting for Dino Rossi to state his position on Initiative 912. He doesn’t call, he doesn’t write… I’m beginning to take it personally. But my bruised feelers are nothing compared to the hearts he’ll break in the business community should he sit silently by and permit the anti-roads initiative to pass in his name.

As we all now know, the polling data puts the fate of I-912 — and the transportation package it would repeal — squarely in Rossi’s hands. If he publicly states his opposition, the initiative loses. If he remains silent, it will likely win.

If Rossi wants to lead this state, now is a good time to start. He owes it to voters, and to the business interests who finance his campaigns, to take a stance on the most important issue on the November ballot… an initiative that is as much about him as it is about taxes or roads.

And so I will patiently sit here and await his answer… “Where’s Rossi?”

“Until you have been there, you don’t realize it is the middle of a hurricane.”
— former FEMA director Mike Brown

Well… duh-uh! Perhaps that’s why FEMA should be run by people who’ve actually been there before, huh?

I can’t help but find Mike Brown’s very public defense of himself as muddled and confused as the appointment that put him in the eye of the hurricane in the first place. To claim that he resigned because he didn’t “want to be a distraction”… and then to give a series of defensive, high profile interviews flinging blame at everyone except the guy who hired him, is beyond ironic… it is absurd. The simple fact is, as FEMA director, Brown was in over his head, and he’d probably serve himself better by staying as silent and anonymous as the hundreds of corpses that drowned with him.

Surely, Brown is more than justified in claiming that he has been made a scapegoat. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff scapegoated him. The media scapegoated him. Hell… I scapegoated him. But that’s not to say that the scapegoating wasn’t deserved, nor that it didn’t serve the useful purpose of illuminating the cronyism and incompetence endemic in the Bush administration.

And how does Brown respond to his scapegoat status? By trying to scapegoat Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and other state and local officials.

He focused much of his criticism on Governor Blanco, contrasting what he described as her confused response with far more agile mobilizations in Mississippi and Alabama, as well as in Florida during last year’s hurricanes.

But Mr. Brown’s account, in which he described making “a blur of calls” all week to Mr. Chertoff, Mr. Card and Mr. Hagin, suggested that Mr. Bush, or at least his top aides, were informed early and repeatedly by the top federal official at the scene that state and local authorities were overwhelmed and that the overall response was going badly.

Yeah, and neither Mississippi, Alabama nor Florida had their largest city totally wiped off the map, destroying much of its emergency infrastructure, and creating a half million refugees. State and local authorities were overwhelmed? No shit, Sherlock! Of course they were overwhelmed… they were wiped out by a fucking hurricane! That’s the whole reason we created FEMA in the first place… to provide a rapid and coordinated federal response to regional emergencies… a task the agency, under Brown, failed utterly.

But most absurd is Brown’s ridiculous insistence that the White House be held blameless for FEMA’s disastrous disaster response, an assertion directly contradicted by his own account of the chaos and confusion between him, Chertoff and White House staff. No doubt Brown was promoted more for his loyalty than his competence, but his unswerving defense of the incompetent who hired him suggests that his presidential sobriquet, “Brownie”, was derived more from the color of his nose than his surname. Moreover, Brown’s own bemoaning of the lack of resources at his disposal is a damning indictment not only of a failed presidency, but of a failed ideology that seeks to cut government “down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.” Well, now we all know what Grover Nordquist’s bathtub looks like: it is New Orleans under 20 feet of water… raw sewage and bloated corpses floating through the streets.

Brown intends to clear his name, but in doing so sets forth a narrative that confirms his critics’ deepest suspicions. He was the wrong man for the wrong job, appointed for all the wrong reasons. But what offends me most by his feeble effort to defend his reputation, is that he never apologizes — not for his poor performance, for I’m sure he did his best — but for taking the job in the first place. Until you have been there, you don’t realize it is the middle of a hurricane. The American people deserved a FEMA director who had been there before, and who knew a disaster when he stood in the middle of one… not three or four days after the fact.

Michael Brown was not that man.

[Cross-posted at Daily Kos]