Search Results for: ’

Joni Balter has a column mostly arguing that McGinn should start doing things he’s been doing (and saying he shouldn’t have put the car tabs on the ballot, but I’m here to focus on her lecturing him to do the things he’s already done).

For example, McGinn could return more cops to the street. Budget woes stopped a five-year police hiring program, but any mayor can fund his priorities. He can and he should.

Return to the street implies there are fewer on the street now. It took me all of a couple minutes to find out that:

Despite the fact that SPD hasn’t hired any new officers for more than a year, it increased the number of patrol officers over the past year from 684 to 693.

Now you can argue that Joni meant that we should hire more police, or that trouble may be coming down the pike if we don’t hire police. But she used the phrase “on the street” so I think it’s fair to say she just doesn’t know. And can’t be bothered with a Google search or that pesky fact checking.

McGinn needs to ensure the Families and Education Levy passes. At least supporting schools and students are things most Seattleites can get their arms around.

Yes. The levy doubled in part because of his leadership. And now he is pushing for it.

At several stops, the mayor told neighbors that education was an important way to enhance public safety and that the levy would help ensure that every child in Seattle had an opportunity to learn and succeed. Staff said the mayor delayed a family vacation in Massachussetts so he could participate in the levy kick-off event.

Maybe it’s unfair to expect Joni Balter to know that. I mean who the hell reads The Seattle Times any more? Still, while the media (and Balter in particular) were bashing McGinn as a one issue mayor, he was actually doing other things.

I sent the following questions to all of the candidates for Seattle City Council. I’ll put the answers up in Tuesdays and Thursdays: Sept. 6 & 8 for position 1, Sept. 13 & 15 for position 3, Sept. 20 & 22 for position 5, Sept. 27 & 29 for position 7 and October 4 and 6 for position 9. First candidate to respond on Tuesday, second on Thursday. There is a good chance some of the candidates won’t respond, if that’s the case, I’ll probably make up snarky answers for them.

1) Crime is down in the city, but we’ve seen some horrible incidents with the police in recent years. How do we ensure public safety and not have those sorts of things happen in the future?

2) Now that the Viaduct is coming down, what should the waterfront look like?

3) As the great recession drags on, the city budget is still hurt. What do we need to cut, what do we need to keep, and do we need to raise more money via taxation?

4) With its budget shrunk at least until the end of the recession what should Seattle parks look like?

5) What is the Seattle’s role in education and public transportation given how important they are to the city, but that other agencies are tasked with them?

One of my favorite outcomes from Tuesday’s primary election was in the King County Council District 6 race.

Incumbent Jane Hague is in trouble.

Yesterday’s data dump shows Hague with 38.8% of the vote. Next is Democrat Richard E. Mitchell with 29.1% of the vote. Port Commissioner John Creighton is third with 24.6% of the vote, and Patsy Bonincontri took 7.2%.

(One reason I like this outcome is pure vanity. Political uberwonks Erica Barnett and Josh Feit predicted Hague and Creighton making it through. I predicted Hague and Mitchell. So there.)

We cannot generally read too much into a top-two primary result. But, holy shit, 38.8% for the incumbent? That cannot be considered positive. I see no way that Hague takes anything close to half the Creighton vote in the General. Many Creighton voters were making a statement—a protest against the incumbent.

The votes tallied yesterday were greatly skewed relative to the election night dump: Mitchell was within 2% of Hague.

Why the shift in the later ballots?

Mitchell’s campaign offers the explanation:

“Undecideds clearly are breaking for Richard because they’re tired of the personal and legal drama of the other opponents. That is clearly reflected in the numbers,” [Mitchell’s political consultant, Jason] Bennett said.

Maybe. Bennett offers another possibility:

[Hague] may have suffered from a backlash by Tim Eyman and other anti-tax conservatives over Hague’s decision to vote for an annual $20 car-tab fee to maintain Metro bus service.

This seems less plausible. First, as Goldy points out in this must read piece featuring Goldy defending Hague, King county rejected Eyman’s most recent “Thou shalt have $30 car tabs” initiative by a 60-40 margin.

Secondly, the anti-government nut jobs that would actually change their vote in response to Tim Eyman’s apoplectic screeds against Hague would most likely throw their vote behind the politically androgynous Creighton before Mitchell, who told The Stranger Election Control Board that

…he would approve a $20 car-tab fee to avert a devastating 17 percent cut in Metro bus service and believes in a minor sales tax bump to rescue the county’s underfunded criminal-justice system.

(As an aside, Eyman produced a:

wanted poster-style enemies list that pictures and labels four County Council members. The word “Liar!” appears below mug shots of Jane Hague and Kathy Lambert.

Does Tim “Biggest Lie of my Life” Eyman really want to go there?)

My hunch is that some folks who mailed their ballots at the last minute simply did a little on-line research. Mitchell looks great when investigated on-line. Hague…not so much. Like here.

Michelle Bachmann will be awful for the country. The fact that she’s even in contention is worrying. Her policies will be bad for working people, bad for the environment, bad basic decency. She may be the worst person to run for president with any chance of winning in my lifetime. A lifetime that includes Pat Robertson’s George W. Bush’s Newt Gingrich’s run and many other horrible people. Please don’t vote for her. Believe me when I say that I hate the fact that I’ll be defending her for the rest of this post.

I somehow missed a lot of the Newsweek cover when it came out. So I didn’t comment on it. But it’s still pretty awful. Then during the last GOP debate I noted that she was asked a sexist question. And now this! Seriously, everybody, stop with the sexist bullshit.

Let’s start with the pictures. Everybody takes bad pictures and good pictures. And there’s nothing inherently sexist about choosing an unflattering picture. We’ve all seen men politicians with bad pictures taken of them. The main problem with Newsweek is that it was a studio shoot. Generally in those they pick better pictures of the subject. Newsweek chose that picture to look strange in a way that I can’t recall them doing to a man in a cover shoot.

In the picture of her eating a corn dog, well if you can’t spot what’s wrong with it, perhaps I won’t explain it here on a nice family blog. I’ll just say that I don’t recall similar pictures of men on the campaign trail.

Finally, the question York asked at the Republican debate:

In 2006, when you were running for Congress, you described a moment in your life when your husband said you should study for a degree in tax law. You said you hated the idea. And then you explained, “But the Lord said, ‘Be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.’”

As president, would you be submissive to your husband?

Seriously, what does that even mean in context of the presidency? One time your husband said you should go to law school and you did, therefore will he decide the cabinet? What treaties to sign? There’s no evidence whatsoever in her time in the MN legislature or Congress that she’d submit her public policy decisions to her husband. And while I don’t think women should submit to their husbands in their personal lives, I don’t see how that’s relevant to her qualifications for office, nor do I see this sort of question being asked of a man.

All of this isn’t to say you can’t criticize her on a whole range of things. Nobody’s above criticism and she’s got a particularly awful track record. Just let’s try to keep sexism out of our criticism.

The Washington Post’s Jonathan Bernstein makes a couple of good points today. First:

Here’s what you need to know about the Republican candidate field: this is it. No one starts running for president in August, less than six months before the voters start getting involved in Iowa and New Hampshire, and has any chance at all. At least, it’s never happened since the modern process has been fully in place (say, by 1980).

He does suggest that Sarah Palin could be a quasi-exception, because she has been running for President—in her quirky, Wasillaly way. (I think she started her Presidential bid in September of 2008, after realizing that there would never be a President McCain.)

So if you are a Republican, don’t hold out for a savior in Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, The Donald or even John Bolton’s mustache.

The second point:

What you’re upset with isn’t the candidate — it’s the party. It’s inconceivable that anyone could get the Republican nomination while using anything but solid Tea Party rhetoric on pretty much every issue. They’re all going to claim that taxes should never, ever, ever be raised no matter what, that half of what the government does is evil or unconstitutional or whatever, that the scientific consensus on climate is some sort of crazed conspiracy, and so on down the line.

In other words, the Republican Party has vacated the center for the fringes. The party hasn’t really moved to the traditional right-wing, fiscal and social conservative fringes. Rather they seem to have moved to some fringe in another dimension: a fringe in which validation and proof comes from the emotional reaction an idea evokes; a fringe where facts that don’t pass the “feels good” test are dismissed; a fringe that is largely divorced from the everyday wants and needs of Americans.

Frankly, the only candidate that stands out from the fringe is Mitt Romney—a candidate who is seriously flawed by his numerous position reversals, and a candidate that comes of as totally disingenuous every time he spews a talking point. Even with these flaws, chances seem high that Mitt will succumb, first and foremost, to right-wing religious bigotry….

Exodus 32:27-29
Then he said to them, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.’” The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. Then Moses said, “You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day.”

Exodus 20:13
Thou shalt not kill.

Discuss.

Yesterday CNN’s Don Lemon was roughed up by Michele Bachmann’s thugs. And the “thugs” included Michele’s totally not gay husband Marcus:

“She came out, after speaking for just a couple minutes,” Lemon said. “There were other reporters and cameras there. And I asked her very respectful questions: ‘How do you think you did in the debate last night?’ and ‘How do you think you’re going to end up in the Ames Straw Poll?’ And her two campaign aides started elbowing me.”

Lemon continued: “I told them, asked them not to elbow me. And then her husband Marcus started doing the same thing. And then he elbowed me into the cart. And I said, ‘You just pushed me into the cart.’ And he goes, ‘No, you did it yourself.’

“It was just, I don’t know, why they would choose to do that. We weren’t asking any ‘gotcha’ questions,” Lemon added.

Why, indeed!

I’m left wondering…is Don Lemon blacklisted by the Bachmann campaign? And if so, is it because he is gay? Or because he is black? Or both?

Either way, Don Lemon just needs to cool off and accept personal responsibility for their actions….

The other day when Patty Murray was appointed to the Superduperextraspecialcommittee, I noted that the choice of words calling her a co-chairwoman was potentially off.

Also, one other thing. The Caucus piece linked above refers to her as the future “co-chairwoman” of the committee. I assume that means the Republican co-chair will also be a woman. Otherwise, let’s hear it for gender neutral language in the future.

Well, sad to say, she won’t even be the co-woman on the panel. Yes, that’s right, our government has decided that a population underrepresented in Congress should be even underrepresenteder in the Awesomesaucepeachykeancommittee.

Asked by PubliCola whether Murray felt the makeup of the committee is fair or representative, Murray’s spokesman Eli Zupnick responded: “Senator Murray would always like to see more women at the table, but as the only one on this Committee she will be in there fighting for those women who don’t have a voice at the table—as well as for everyone who is counting on her and her colleagues to come together with a balanced plan that works for families across the country.”

Some other things Rob McKenna could use a special session to pass:

• The budget
• Transportation projects
• A repeal of the cost overrun provision
• A repeal of drug war legislation
• Marriage equality
• Universal healthcare
• K-12 funding
• Higher Ed Funding
• A progressive income tax

Now you may say, “Carl, isn’t that just stuff you’d like to see in the regular session?” Yes, yes it is.

Luke 19:29-34
As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’”

Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”

They replied, “The Lord needs it.”

Exodus 20:15
Thou shalt not steal.

Discuss.

It seems like the secretive American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) isn’t so happy about being less of a secret now:

Yesterday, at a conference in New Orleans, two ThinkProgress reporters were attacked by security guards for no apparent reason. Reporters Scott Keyes and Lee Fang were at the Marriott Hotel for the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) annual meeting, an event that brings together state lawmakers with corporate lobbyists to draft “model” legislation.

While we stood by the second floor lobby of the conference hotel, security guards surrounded us, demanding that we leave. As we were leaving, they approached us, violently pushed us and twisted our arms. A guard approached Fang from behind, tackling him and later bending his arm to take his camera. Keyes, faced similar treatment: two security guards roughed him up on the escalator, taking his video camera, and cutting Keyes’ hand as he attempted to leave the premises. As Keyes asked why he was being forced to leave, he was shoved from the back.

Asked why they were being so belligerent, the security guards said they were acting on instructions from ALEC.

The video is here.

This is going to be interesting:

The Renton City Prosecutor wants to send a cartoonist to jail for mocking the police department in a series of animated Internet videos.

The “South-Park”-style animations parody everything from officers having sex on duty to certain personnel getting promoted without necessary qualifications. While the city wants to criminalize the cartoons, First Amendment rights advocates say the move is an “extreme abuse of power.”
[…]

KIRO Team 7 Investigative Reporter Chris Halsne holds a key document that really lays bare the city’s intent. The document was quietly filed in King County Superior Court last week. It’s a search warrant accusing an anonymous cartoon creator, going by the name of Mr. Fiddlesticks, of cyberstalking (RCW 9.61.260). The Renton Police Department and the local prosecutor got a judge to sign off as a way to uncover the name of whoever is behind the parodies.

KIRO found two of the nine or so cartoons, here and here.

Apparently, the cartoons never identify individuals, or even the name of the police department. Basically the satirist did a brilliant job playing on people’s insecurities, to the point of provoked them into seeking revenge. Nice.

The complaint suggests this the author has engaged in cyberstalking. What. The. Fuck.

Unless there is some forthcoming bizarre twist in this story, it simply will not stand up in court. The ACLU is already itching for a fight:

The cyberstalking law is designed to protect individuals from serious harassment by other individuals, not to protect government from parodies by employees. People have a right to speak anonymously on the Internet, and employer-employee issues involving YouTube satires should not be pursued as criminal matters. We would very much like to hear from the individual who posted the parodies so that we can know more about the facts of this matter.

Clearly, the Renton police department is using a bullshit argument to get a search warrant to “out” the author (who they suspect is an insider). The author won’t be convicted of cyberstalking, but then that isn’t really the point, is it? The point is to extract revenge.

In other words, the Renton police department is administalking a person exercising their first amendment rights.

I’m sure the courts will do their job and find the author not guilty of cyberstalking. With a bit of luck, they will also rule in favor of the author in the inevitable follow-up civil lawsuit.

Will the press do its job? Will the press allow the Renton police department to get away with this bullshit? If they really do their job, this incident will result in many embarrassing internal affairs revelations, findings of abuse of power, and whatnot. Sounds like they have a “problem of internal culture” in the Renton PD.

And if the blogosphere does its job, the Renton police department will become a target. There will be many more satirical cartoons. There will be essays ruthlessly mocking Renton Police Chief Milosevich (yeah…that’s his name!), and whoever the fuck else is involved in this stupidity.

I haven’t tried one of those “make your own animation” tools yet, but this sure has me tempted!

King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg writes about the recent tragic death of Google engineer Steve Lacey:

Steve Lacey was on his way to Costco on Sunday afternoon, July 24, and was sitting in traffic, waiting for a light to change when his life ended. A minute before he was tragically killed, a 52-year old driver, Patrick Rexroat, was allegedly speeding southbound on I-405, carrying three and a half times the legal limit of alcohol in his bloodstream, and chasing a car that he thought had cut him off in traffic. While in hot and drunk pursuit of the other driver, Rexroat failed to negotiate the turn he attempted at high speed and slammed into the driver’s side door of Steve Lacey’s car, killing him instantly.

Witnesses report that the 52-year old Rexroat got out of his car and pounded his chest in a defiant gesture. When he was told that he had killed another person he shrugged his shoulders and started to walk away.

…

What sort of justice awaits the victim’s family, the community and the defendant in this case? The answer is as infuriating as the crime. Under Washington State sentencing guidelines, the killer of Steve Lacey faces no more than 41 months in prison, minus one-third of the sentence that will almost certainly be reduced for good behavior. That means that vehicular homicide offenders actually are removed from our streets for less than 2 and half years.

Want to be even more infuriated? Compare that to this:

The owners of two medical marijuana dispensaries in Spokane have been indicted by a federal grand jury.

Charles Wesley Wright and Jon Richard Vivian, owners of the THC Pharmacy on South Perry Street, and Jerry Wayne Laberdee and Dennis Lewis Whited, owners of Medical Herb Providers, face time in federal prison under multi-count indictments filed today in U.S. District Court.

…

Wright and Vivian face [up to 20 years] if found guilty of maintaining a drug-involved premise near a school. THC Pharmacy was located at 1108 S. Perry St. – which is less than 1,000 feet from Grant Elementary School.

Wright and Vivian are also charged with distribution of marijuana near a school, possession with intent to distribute marijuana near a school, manufacture of marijuana near a school. Each charge carries not less than a year and no more than 10 years.

As with anyone, I’m in favor of having zoning laws that keep dispensaries away from schools, but just to provide clarification on the seriousness of that offense, here’s a map of the neighborhood:

Of the five Spokane defendants, Wright is the only one I’ve communicated with so far. He sent me a rather desperate email yesterday about his situation. He’s in the process of selling all his possessions in order to defend himself (his dispensary was only open for a very short period of time and it never actually made any money). Unlike the caricature that law enforcement likes to present, these folks weren’t high rollers raking in the dough. They’re generally patients themselves who had the resources and entrepreneurial drive to provide for the growing numbers of authorized medical marijuana patients in the Spokane area who couldn’t provide for themselves.

Comparing that to the circumstances and likely sentence of the man who murdered Steve Lacey is enough to make one ill. Long after Patrick Rexroat has served his time and is once again a free man, Charles Wright will almost certainly remain behind bars, never seeing his two kids (who are now 10 and 12) grow up. You may not agree with Wright’s choices, or his defiance after being told to close up shop, but you lack a soul if you find any of this to be acceptable for a civilized society. And that comment is directed most pointedly at Eastern Washington U.S. Attorney Michael Ormsby and his office.

Next Tuesday, August 9, 1:30pm at the federal courthouse in Spokane is Wright arraignment. There are some preliminary plans for protests both here in Seattle and in Spokane. If anyone would like to participate, please feel free to email myself or contact the CDC.

The Pro Tunnel people are running an ad trying to link Tim Eyman and Mike McGinn to the opposition to the tunnel. Tim Eyman opposes tolling but hasn’t done much one way or the other on the tunnel. This ad isn’t the first place to imply an alliance between them despite, you know, evidence. But since this narrative is out there, I’d like to remind people what Mike McGinn actually thinks of Tim Eyman (emphasis mine):

Let’s speak honestly about what’s happening to education in the State of Washington. Tim Eyman has set this state on a path that will let our schools collapse and our children fail in order to save a few dollars. Mr. Eyman, you may have talked the rest of the state into destroying what we hold dear. But we are drawing a line around Seattle, right at the city limit. And we’re saying it won’t happen here. We’re not going to stand by and watch our children fail. That’s why we’re doubling the Families and Education Levy. I ask Council to stand with the community and stand for Seattle values and place this levy on the ballot.

Further cementing this alliance, McGinn is opposed to Eyman’s latest initiative.

I do not support Eyman’s initiative. If we toll a road, the state should be able to use the tolling revenue to fund transit for people who can’t afford the tolls. In fact, that’s the only fair way to do tolling.

McGinn isn’t a one issue obsessive, unlike the people who call him one!

The Republicans are still trying to find a credible opponent for Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) in 2012. Former Bush Deputy White House spokesperson and Bush-Cheney ‘04 Press Secretary, Scott Stanzel is considering it.

But I said “credible.”

And now Seattle Weekly‘s Mike Seely writes:

…lately we’ve been hearing somewhat credible rumors that 8th District Congressman Dave Reichert might be up for abandoning his seat and challenging Cantwell. So is this chatter serious, or is there a stealthier factor at play here?

By “stealthier factor” he means that Reichert is using such rumors to leverage a more favorable redistricting outcome.

Seely ponders:

But what if Reichert’s motives are more pure? What would ensue would be a fascinating race between polar opposites: Cantwell, the wonkish brainiac who takes on issues of substance yet struggles with retail politics and staff retention, versus Reichert, the dull knife who gets by on Ken-doll looks, law-enforcement legend, and timely tacks to the center.

That would be fun! I like it. Reichert is, for sure, a stronger opponent for Cantwell than is Stanzel. But a Reichert challenge would accomplish two things. First, it opens up the Democratic-leaning 8th CD (which, of course, may be unrecognizable by 2012). Second, it means Republicans would dump lots of money into the race. Less so with Stanzel; Republicans would find more promising races upon which to spend their spoils.

This is Reichert’s big Window of Opportunity…but could he win?

In a statewide competition against an uberwonk, Reichert would not get away with his usual strategy of dodging all things substantive. He’ll have to speak in public and try to come off as intelligent and informed. No more “I’ve looked in a microscope and seen the heartbeat of a stem cell” moments; no more, “I don’t know enough about this issue, so I’ll pass on the question” answers like he gave in his 2006 debate against Darcy Burner. No more confessions of voting the way the leadership tells him to vote. The Cantwell campaign would eat him alive for such blunders.

So, no, he can’t. If Reichert sticks his head through that Window of Opportunity…he’ll get his freakin’ throat slit….