Search Results for: drinking liberally

When blogging, I can be a little harsh without realizing it. I’m not actually as big an SOB as I sometimes seem. So in this post I want to take note of folks I may have been too harsh on.

1. BUS DRIVERS

If you read this Seattle Weekly article, you’ll see what they have to put up with. While I knock Metro and their fleet of stinky, smelly, slow buses, I’m not knocking the drivers. Most of them are decent folks who put up with a lot.

2. JOEL CONNELLY

Everyone I know disagrees with Joel on something. I think this is what makes him a good columnist. He gets taken to task by lefties and righties. Joel sticks up for Old Seattle, and does it better than others. Also, he showed up to Drinking Liberally before it was cool popular.

3. PHIL TALMADGE

I bashed Phil for his goofball anti-light rail opinions. As it turns out, Phil was close to my grandfather, who was a long time PCO from the 34th legislative district. Phil even showed up at my grandparents 50th wedding anniversary back in the late 80’s. Very classy.

4. THE GOP

Ha! Not!

…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.

My righty critics sometime email 710-KIRO, accusing me of being a “hate talker,” apparently in the hope that I’ll be fired from my weekend hosting gig. (Tip to righty critics: management sometimes actually listens to my show.)

Well, if I’m a hate talker, what do you call this…?

Over at AMERICAblog, John Aravosis responds, “If you or I said this, we’d be arrested.”

Hmm. Would we? Let’s give it a try:

If I’m going to say anything about Vice President Dick Cheney in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.

There, I said it. Come and get me. It’s Tuesday night, so you know where I’ll be… sharing a beer or two with my fellow terrorists at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally, the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E., Seattle.

From the Washington Post:

War opponents dismissed the bill as a capitulation to Bush and said they would seek to hold supporters in both parties accountable. But backers said the bill’s provisions — including benchmarks for progress that the Iraqi government must meet to continue receiving reconstruction aid — represented an assertion of congressional authority over the war that was unthinkable a few months ago.

Bush, who had vowed to veto any legislation with restrictions on troop deployments, announced he would sign the $120 billion package, which was approved 80 to 14 last night in the Senate, after a 280 to 142 House vote.

Surrendering to a president who manages 30/70 approval ratings is amazing to me. Amazingly stupid.

The message Democrats sent is…

1. The are afraid of Mr “28 Percent”
2. They don’t know that the majority of Americans actually support the Democrats on the war funding issue.
3. That since Democrats won’t fight for the important “life and death” stuff, why trust them with leadership on anything?

It frustrates me that Democrats buy into the idea that they’ll be blamed, somehow, for not giving the President exactly what he wants. It is absolute bullshit, and political malpractice, to chicken out in such a obvious way. Democrats had real momentum, and they gave it away when they blinked.

Democrats initially showed real toughness by sending Bush a bill that funded the troops and ended the war. Predictably, Bush vetoed that bill (and vetoed funding for his own war!). Instead of realizing the vast storage of political capital they have on hand, Democrats folded quickly, and sent Bush a “clean” bill, which funded the troops without any real accountability.

And you know what? Maybe, at some point this summer, the coalition of Democrats standing up to Bush was going to break down.

But it didn’t have to happen this soon, this early, and in such a gutless manner.

A fellow liberal blogger asked me at last weeks’ Drinking Liberally if I too was quitting the Democratic Party… I had to smile, as I knew he was joking. I told him, “what the fuck else am I going to do?”

Some Democrats constantly throw in the towel in a way conservative activists don’t. First it was Bankruptcy Reform legislation, then it was John Roberts, then Sam Alito, then this. Certain lefties always threaten to ditch the party, to “work down ticket”, to stop doing whatever it was they were doing to support the candidates who have let them down. This goes on until the pain goes away, but is soon reignited by the next great “letdown.”

If I’ve managed to glean a difference between blogger activists and regular activists, it’s that the blogger activists are way too quick to throw in the towel. These so-called reality-based freedom fighters of the blogosphere are nothing more than fair-weather friends. It’s an odd thing to say, considering I’m a “blog-guy,” but the lack of resolve shown by liberals on the web illustrates why blogs are only good for so much.

The Democrats who know nothing of blogs are often the toughest. These Democrats know that the road is long, and it is hard, and that you can’t explode in outrage at every opportunity. Even if Democrats keep voting for more funding for Bush’s war, I’ll still be around. Somebody has to be, if only to tell them that they’re wrong.

Last night, at Drinking Liberally, a handful of us liberal bloggers decided a few things: Jerry Falwell was an ass. Billy Graham, however, is not. And I offered this hypothesis: Pat Robertson has his moments of clarity, such as his sudden realization that global warming is happening and his association with George Clooney. Weirder things have happened, folks.

It’s posts like this that make me wish Joel Connelly wrote a “No on Impeachment” column every week, if only to see how few people know what exactly a columnist is.

At Monday’s fund raiser for the Parks levies, the food was amazing. If you’re going to an M’s game, check out King Street Bar and Oven. I recommend the BBQ Chicken pizza.

If you like Seattle and like blogging, you should consider blogging for Friends of Seattle. However, if you don’t like Seattle and like blogging, you should probably leave town, Mr. Sharkansky.

Here’s a clip of Ron Sims doing what no other Seattle pol can do- a kick-ass rally speech. Sims is like the Brett Favre of local politics. No matter which team he’s on, his team wins. I tried to tell him that the new parks levies are going to be gold at the ballot box, but he would have none of it. Even though parks are popular, a good pol doesn’t take anything for granted.

Also…

It’s a girl! Congratulations to Mr. and Mrs. You Know Who.

I’ve got a busy schedule over the next week, so here’s a peek at what’s coming up.

• Extra Radio:
  I’ll be filling in for Frank Shiers tomorrow (Friday, May 11) from 9PM to 1AM, in addition to my usual Saturday and Sunday shows, 7PM to 10PM on Newsradio 710-KIRO. Scheduled guests include:
  • Friday, 9PM: liberal pundit Cliff Schecter talks smack about flip-flopping Republicans.
  • Saturday, 7PM: What does our local media elite’s chumminess with our local business elite have to do with $100,000 no-bid contract issued by Safeco Field? The Stranger’s reclusive Josh Feit comes into the studio to explain all.
  • Saturday, 9PM: TJ from Loaded Orygun joins me for our monthly rundown of what’s happening South of the border.
  • Sunday, 7PM: Jonathan Cohn of The New Republic joins me to talk about his new book “SICK: The Untold Story of America’s Health Care Crisis — and the People Who Pay the Price.“
  • Sunday, 8PM: King County Councilman Larry Phillips joins me to talk about the upcoming Parks Levy and other issues, and to take your calls.

• Portland World Tour:
  I’ll be reluctantly absent from Drinking Liberally this Tuesday, May 15, as I head down to Portland to join David Sirota at the Digital Politics Forum, sponsored by the Oregon Bus Project, the Portland Mercury and my friends Carla and TJ at Loaded Orygun. 7PMish at ACME, 1305 SE 8th in Portland. Free admission, but feel free to buy me a drink afterwards.

• 48th District Dems:
  Are you an Eastside party activist wannabe who just can’t bring yourself to attend your local Legislative District meeting? Well you 48th LD‘ers can drop by Stevenson Elementary School (14220 NE 8th ST, Bellevue) at 7PM, Wednesday, May 16 to hear me give my usual spiel on how the key to politics is telling a better story, and how if Dems want to tell a better story they could learn a lesson or two from the progressive blogs.

Last Saturday (April 28th) was a day filled with pro-impeachment events in over 125 locations in the U.S., and even a few locations overseas. The nationwide impeachment protests were organized by A28.org, and consisted of many types of public display of free speech. Here is an example from Madison Park in Seattle:

One of my favorite forms of this type of exercise in free speech is the posting of signs along the freeway. And the foremost proponent of this technique is Scarlet, a.k.a. The FreewayBlogger, who has personally posted over 4,000 such signs. (I believe it was Scarlet who first used the word “Chimpeachment.”)

Here is FreewayBlogger’s collection of freeway blogging from the April 28th Impeachment Event.

Locally, the Backbone Campaign has been busy placarding in Seattle for some time. They’ve recently had a showdown with the police, but it appears that the police backed down. I’ve not heard of any police-related incidences from this weekend.

The fact is, this is generally considered free speech protected by the first amendment. But, state and local laws may restrict where signs can be placed. Here’s an easy way to find out what is legal in your area:

It is your right as a citizen to display non-commercial signs and banners, with some exceptions. Rules regarding signposting along roadways vary from state to state, and locality to locality. So, call your local department of transportation to find out more. Ask for public relations and say you’d like to put up some American flags and “Support the Troops” signs… they will likely be more than helpful. Don’t feel bad if that’s not precisely what you intend to put up: this is America, and the rules apply equally to all points of view.

And Scarlet offers these defiant words of inspiration:

It is our contention that the town square of colonial times has now become the interstate: for better or for worse, that’s where all the people are. With this in mind, we feel it is our God-given and constitutionally-granted right to post our messages on the interstates, freeways, or wherever-the-hell-else-we-think-people-will-read-them and we’re willing to fight for this right all the way to the Supreme Court.

But you’ll have to catch us first.

Interested in doing you own freeway blogging? As can be seen in his video the making of signs is extremely easy. For about a buck per sign, you too can reach 100,000 readers a day!

The really fun part comes after you make the signs. “Picking locations for signs is something of a chess game,” Freeway Blogger told me last July when he showed up at the Seattle gathering of Drinking Liberally. I’ve been saving large pieces of cardboard ever since….

Candidate Bruce Harrell stopped by Drinking Liberally last night. He’s the second of Michael Grossman’s clients to visit our Tuesday night lift-cup sessions. Other consultant’s candidates are no shows thus far.

Big props to Grossman for reaching out to a 3rd tier political gathering. The local bloggers and activists who meet up at the Montlake Ale House have been visited by all sorts of folks- congressmen, county council folks, state reps- but the city has been mostly absent. Boo! Tim Ceis was a highlight, but Mayor Nickels has to visit us soon.

Bruce Harrell seems like a very civic-minded guy. He’s really concerned with fixing the schools. (This is a tough one, because City Hall has very little sway over the district) He sees the nine on the council as go-along, get-along types who don’t take a stand. Then again, all challengers say this. I’m curious to find out what he wants the city to look like in 40 years, not just 4 years. But he is willing to listen. I almost turned him from being anti-districts to pro-districts. (In Seattle, the council is elected at-large, which is dumb) Next time I’ll seal the deal.

One big piece of advice to anyone running for city council:

Don’t let Stefan endorse you. Don’t email him campaign updates. Hope he doesn’t write about your campaign in any way favorable. Make no mistake, Stefan is the “Kiss of Death”. Just ask Robert Rosencrantz and Casey Corr, who both got hammered (Rosencrantz twice!) in city races. I’m amazed that Seattle’s preeminent wingnut blogger doesn’t understand how radioactive he is. Republican Jim Nobles, the first “out” Republican to run for city office since the 1980’s, is too smart to embrace Stefan and his mean–spirited, petulant, race-baiting politics.

Words to the wise, candidates.

I’m just coming off of a week long break from blogging, and what a great time to be back. A few thoughts:

Mayor Greg Nickels is going after slum lords. I’m estatic. I went to high school across the street from a guy who is infamous for his criminal behavior.

Crosscut: It didn’t take 24 hours for Knute Berger to come out slamming growth in the Puget Sound area. I remember when my Pops was looking to buy a house in Seattle. It was the mid 90’s, before prices exploded during the “Go-Go Clinton Economic Boom.” No-Growth folks like Charlie Chong were trying their best to slam the door shut to new Seattle residents like me and my Pops. Today, it’s hard to find a townhouse in Seattle that is much cheaper than the average house price.

I have a new favorite beer.

What’s up with the enviros? They totally bailed on new parks in downtown Seattle. Yes, Nickels shares the blame, but enviros should have had his back on this.

A note to folks who visit Drinking Liberally at the Montlake Ale House: don’t ask the bar staff to turn down the music. It’s a bar, and we’re not the only customers. We have guests all the time; authors, bloggers, pols, but it’s still a bar. One other thing while I’m on the subject: if you’re VIP at DL, don’t demand our attention for more than five minutes, tops. Drink a beer and mix with the crowd.

Barack Obama blows it.

That ridiculous racetrack near Brememton is dead. You’re welcome.

This is heartbreaking.

(note: this is my two cents on Goldy’s earlier post)

I hope Ross Hunter runs for Congress. I’m guessing that Darcy Burner will give it another shot, too [UPDATE BELOW]. Tony Ventrella is already saddled-up and on the trail. Unlike Goldy, I’m not committed to supporting a single candidate. At least not yet.

I think Ventrella is going to have to really earn the support of Democrats. Being a celebrity is not enough to win. Hunter has the resume, but is a “moderate” guy like him going to “fire up” liberal suburban Democrats while reaching out to “guns and butter” conservative Democrats? Does Burner even want to run again, considering her biggest opponent wasn’t even Reichert, but the lying-sack-of-shit Seattle Times editorial page?

I’m excited to see how this thing plays out. It seems all the big shots are lining up behind Hunter, with Andrew and Goldy (and more) with Burner. Tony Ventrella… well, what about Tony? Come to Drinking Liberally, Tony!

In other news, the GOP has a 2-to-1 “precinct committee officer” advantage in the 8th Congressional District. Perhaps this might be more important than the horse race stuff.

UPDATE:
Darcy’s in, according to Postman.

Joel Connelly, a Horse’s Ass “Friend of the Blog” and Drinking Liberally attendee, absolutely savages Mayor Nickels’ tunnel in today’s column. It’s not a surprise; Joel’s been pro-rebuild for a long time, but I can’t help thinking the anti-tunnel trash-talking is played-out.

Why? Simply put, the tunnel isn’t going to happen. It’s going to lose at the polls. Plus, we don’t have the money. We have projected money, but we don’t have cash money. And Frank Chopp hates the tunnel, so it’s “game over.” Joel’s column is titled “It’s time for Nickels to bury tunnel,” as if the thing isn’t already politically buried.

I’d like to see columnists from every paper realize that we’re down to two choices. Do you want an elevated rebuild? Yes or no. The incessant hacking at Nickels and his dead tunnel just short circuits the debate. However, Joel Connelly does address the “surface plus transit” option:

The crowning consequences will come if there is no tunnel, no new viaduct and the tear-down, don’t-replace folks win out.

It’ll send thousands of cars toward Pioneer Square, which in the ’70s was the first place downtown rescued from highway culture. (Garages were to replace historic buildings.)

And, if the predicted 12 hours of daily gridlock comes to pass on Interstate 5, thousands more cars will crawl along the freeway, belching greenhouse gases into the air shed of America’s greenest city.

While cars would go through Pioneer Square on a the new Alaskan Way surface boulevard instead of a Viaduct, lots of people would be able to use new transit investments. That’s a good thing for the historic district. As for cars on I-5 and their greenhouse gases, I’m confused. Do cars somehow emit no gases when their cruising at 40 mph on the waterfront? Oh well… I patiently wait for the column in which Joel interviews Cary Moon or Ron Sims, two prominent “surface plus transit” supporters.

Lastly, I can think of no better way to fight the highway culture than to not build highways.

Just kidding about the headline. I like David Postman. I think he’s a great reporter. And I don’t even know if he drinks. In fact, hypothetically, if I were developing my own online news venture to compete with our city’s two dailies, and I raised enough venture capital to do it right, Postman would be one of the first reporters I’d attempt to hire away from the Seattle Times.

But man can he be sensitive.

Yesterday I critiqued our two dailies’ coverage of the Sonics hearing in Olympia, posting the two ledes side-by-side. I thought it instructive that two papers covering the same hearing should come away with such different story lines. And to some extent, I think that Postman agrees:

I think it’s a good day for journalism when the Times and the PI take different angles or dig up different facts. That’s what makes having two papers important.

Absolutely.

So I’m not really sure why Postman understood my post to be a “baseless attack” on his colleagues, or why he felt the need to characterize me as “wrong-headed”, “fatuous” and, well… drunk?

David Goldstein crows about how he has no pretense toward objectivity. That’s the only way to explain his fatuous bit of journalism criticism today. Goldstein read stories about the Sonics in the Times and the PI, and as he often does, decides that the Times is showing bias.

Actually, I decided that both stories were biased. No doubt I prefer the P-I’s bias, but I never singled out the Times. Indeed, I thought I was rather specific:

I’m not implying any intentional bias on the part of the various reporters, just that bias inevitably exists, and inevitably seeps through every journalist’s work, no matter how hard they try to suppress it.

Um… how is this a “baseless attack” on the Times?

Postman is clearly offended, and goes to some length deconstructing my rather brief post in an effort to show how little I understand the facts reported, or the business of journalism in general. His main point?

But Goldstein just isn’t paying attention if he thinks the financing plan was the news of the day.

As for the Renton vs. Bellevue angle, that was, in fact, news. It wasn’t known before yesterday. It was new.

Actually, the “Renton vs. Bellevue angle” wasn’t exactly news either. The choice of the Renton site was leaked way back in December, and widely reported at the time. (I spent an hour on it while filling in for Dave Ross.) If you’re going to say that it is only news when Clay Bennett confirms it, then you might as well just reprint Sonics press releases.

Given the fact that the details were already widely known, I’d say that the news of the day was the hearing itself, and how legislators reacted to Bennetts demands. But then, that’s just one man’s opinion.

Which once again is my point. I don’t know how many times I need to explain it on my blog, or say it to Postman’s face: I love newspapers and admire his profession. But I simply don’t believe that objectivity is humanly possible. I repeat:

The “journalism generally practiced in America” today is an historical anomaly that grew out of the media consolidation that shuttered the vast majority of dailies early in the twentieth century. “Objectivity” was a necessary sales pitch required to reassure readers that one or two dailies could adequately replace the many different voices to which they had grown accustomed. It is also a wonderful ideal, though unfortunately impossible to achieve in reality, for as Woody Allen astutely observed, even “objectivity is subjective.”

I’m not one of those bloggers who long for the extinction of the legacy media, nor do I think this modern American model of an objective, fair and balanced press will ever perish at the hands of us advocacy journalists. But there’s certainly more than enough room for both models to coexist, and to some extent, converge. Both models can be equally honest and informative, as long as the practitioners remain true to themselves, and to their slightly divergent ethical principles…

But in the end, how is my openly biased blog really any different from the op-ed section of any major daily? Facts are facts, and when I get them wrong my readers abrasively taunt me in my comment threads. The rest of what I write is nothing but personal spin and opinion…

Postman writes that “alleging bias in a newspaper reporter is a serious matter,” and he spiritedly defends his colleagues from what he assumes to be a personal insult. But I didn’t allege bias in a reporter or a newspaper or even his profession. I alleged bias in our entire species. That is the human condition. We are all biased. Each and every one of us will experience the same event somewhat differently, shaped by our own unique personal histories and perspectives. Two different ledes were written off the same hearing, and yes I do think it instructive to highlight the difference.

Postman refers to my Tuesday night Drinking Liberally festivities and jokingly implies that I should have slept off my hangover before writing. In truth, the post was admittedly rushed as I was late for a meeting. Perhaps Postman would have been less offended had I taken the time to pen my intended closing: an attack on Times publisher Frank Blethen for his efforts to make Seattle a one-newspaper town.

I apologize, David, for not being more thorough.

Toby Nixon is straight-up freakin’ over Senator Eric Oemig’s plan to put impeachment of Bush “on the table.”

The man Oemig beat in November to win the open Senate seat, former Rep. Toby Nixon, wrote to his supporters today questioning whether Oemig was honest with voters:

Oemig’s campaign web site said (and still says) “the Eastside needs a State Senator who solves problems and gets things done. We cannot afford more of the same old thing. I’m not a politician, and I reject the extremism and partisan bickering of Olympia”. It also says “Elected officials must live up to the highest standards of honesty”. Well, Mr. Oemig, was it honest of you to run a campaign saying you’re going to “solve problems and get things done” and that you “reject partisan bickering”, and to turn around “soon after taking office” and take the lead on impeaching the President? How is that living “up to the highest standards of honesty”. It certainly looks like “extremism and partisan bickering” to me.

Just so you know, Toby Nixon is well-liked here at HA. He even shows up at Drinking Liberally from time to time. Needless to say, I don’t agree with his assessment.

Democrats have been timid as heck, unwilling to stand up to Bush even when he’s been weak and wrong at the same time. Is it bickering to stand up to Bush, even at the local level? Maybe Nixon’s stoking the fires for a run at his old seat (won by Roger Goodman when Nixon ran for Senate). I’ve got a better idea…

Lieutenant Governor! Think about it, Toby… I don’t know anyone who’s “high” on Lt. Gov. Brad Owen. He’s got that ridiculous rock band which he takes across the state, trying to keep kids off drugs (If he had come to my high school, I would have STARTED smoking pot, just to spite him). He endorses right wing judicial candidates and wants to spend tax dollars on a NASCAR track. What a waste!

I guess what I’m saying, Toby, is aim higher! Imagine the satisfaction of swinging that gavel whenever Senator Oemig gets out of line. Sweet revenge, sir. Sweet revenge!!

I’ll be at tonight’s Drinking Liberally at the Montlake Ale House, and I’ll be staying late because I have no radio show to go home to. If you are going to DL, read my question and think about it, and then we’ll argue about it tonight.

Question: Is universal healthcare the same as single-payer healthcare to you? That is, do those two mean the same things to you? Also, would you accept a healthcare compromise that used “conservative” means (ie, the free market, etc) to reach “liberal” ends (affordable, good quality healthcare for every American)?

Think about it, and I’ll see you tonight @ 8pm.

***UPDATE***

Good answers, everybody! Although the turnout was a bit low at tonight’s DL, there were some good answers to the question. Even the right-wing trolls got in on the act. I especially like this answer:

And by the way… nobody is entitled to anything in this world. Nothing. Including health care.

If you want good health care, get off your ass and earn it. It really is that fucking simple…

Unfortunately, lots of the folks without insurance are full time workers, not the “lazy poor”:

Today over 70 percent of the 41 million uninsured Americans come from families where there is at least one full-time worker.

But good try, folks!

Some folks like to knock Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Seattle) for not being like other congressmen, for not being a log-roller or a guy who “brings home the bacon.” The guy is very vocal on Iraq, and does lots of good work on Africa, and pushes a good healthcare plan that will likely never become law, but he doesn’t do things the same way some of his colleagues do them. Some folks (Josh Feit, Joel Connelly and, uh, me) have mused openly about how we’d like to see the guy retire sometime soon in favor of some new blood.

With all of this taken into account, I come across this at Postman:

Congressman Jim McDermott was on his way to an “Open House to Celebrate the People’s House” this morning to celebrate the new Democratic majority and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s ascension.

But he also had some business to do. He was looking to corner Pelosi or Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., to lobby to get 2nd District Rep. Rick Larsen a permanent seat on the Agriculture Committee.

Just then Miller walked by on his way into the Cannon Caucus Room. Or tried to. McDermott grabbed him, pulled out some notes, and gave Miller the pitch: Larsen would be the only Northwest representative on the committee and he’s a good guy doing a good job.
Miller said he’d do what he could. And that was good enough for McDermott. “If you want to make sure Nancy hears it, tell George,” he said.

Fuckin’ nice! A liberal guy like McDermott doing what he can to help out a super centrist like Larsen, that’s class. What’s so great about this move? Rep. Rick Larsen represents the only district west of the Cascades that has lots of agricultural business. This means he’s Washington’s only Democrat to represent agriculture in Washington D.C. This will do good things for Larsen as far as keeping the GOP out of the 2nd District, which also happens to be (I heard this somewhere, correct me if I’m wrong) the only Democratic-held district in WA that is actually trending towards the GOP.

If Jim shows he’s playing the game this well in the majority, we’ll just have to postpone that retirement party.

Note: Jim! Come to Drinking Liberally when you’re back in town! We want war stories!