Way back in July, days after the signature deadline, I predicted that “I-912 will fail, if the media does its job.”
I was disappointed, though not entirely surprised, to see the anti-roads initiative, I-912, turn in 420,000 signatures on Friday. Barring historically massive signature fraud the measure will surely qualify for the November ballot. But I will not join the gloom-and-doom coming from some opponents, for its passage is no sure thing, and there is an attainable strategy towards defeating I-912: the media must simply do its job.
I don’t mean that it is the media’s job to defeat I-912… I mean that their job is telling voters the truth about what the transportation package means to their local communities. It will take a lot of work and a lot of research, but it’s their responsibility as journalists. And if voters across the state understand exactly what their communities will lose if the transportation package is repealed, then I-912 stands a reasonable chance of being defeated.
Well… I-912 did fail, and much of the credit should go to my friends in the MSM, whose coverage was somewhat less thorough than I had hoped for, but considerably more than I had expected. While reporters generally eschewed the emotional angle I had urged, they also avoided relying on the usual political horse race schtick, and in many cases did an admirable job of laying out the facts behind the gas tax increase and what it paid for. Meanwhile, editorial boards throughout the state nearly unanimously opposed the initiative, and were not shy about repeating themselves during the months and weeks leading up to the election.
But no editorial board was more relentless than that of the Seattle P-I, who embraced a Hearst-like crusade against the initiative, publishing daily “no on I-912” editorials during the final two weeks of the campaign. While it can be difficult to measure the effect of editorial endorsements, there can be no question that the P-I had an impact in King County, where the initiative failed by a stunning 33 percent margin.
The P-I should be unabashedly proud of their efforts, but the crusade seemed to have sparked a little crisis of conscience for editorial page editor Mark Trahant, who asks today, “which is a higher journalism value, fairness or truth?”
I start with fairness as a given; it’s deeply embedded in my character. I want to play fair. I often seek dissent or give weight to opinions that challenge what we’ve written in an editorial. In general, the voice of dissent helps me understand my own arguments.
But is that always the right approach — especially when it comes to opinion?
My thinking evolved during this election. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer Editorial Board decided to crusade against I-912. We wrote daily “no on I-912” editorials beginning Oct. 23, outlining why we thought the measure was a terrible idea. We tried to keep our readers’ attention focused on this issue.
We did print letters from readers who disagreed with us and printed a couple of opposing views on the Op-Ed pages. But not many. The fact is we were not, strictly, fair. We had an opinion — a strong one at that — that was repeated daily, and countered by faint balance.
I think we did the right thing. It’s also worth remembering that when we started the daily “no,” we thought — at least most of us — that it was a done deal. We had no doubt that the supporters were getting their message out to the public. In fact, we expected voters to pass I-912 easily.
In fact, voters defeated I-912 easily, and part of the reason why is that the P-I did indeed do the right thing.
Trahant goes on to discuss global warming, and the way overwhelming scientific consensus is often overwhelmed in an MSM, that in the interest of fairness and balance, employs a kind of he-said/she-said methodology that tends to give equal weight to dissent, no matter how marginal.
The story becomes one of conflict. The scientists said this, while the critics said that. The conflict overwhelms the research, reducing it to a sentence or two, reported without context.
Perhaps fairness (or what passes for fairness) wins. But what about the truth?
Too often the truth is lost to a tried and true PR strategy that exploits the MSM’s lazy love affair with balance, to create the impression of debate where none exists. This is the strategy the tobacco industry followed for decades, to absurd extremes, producing fake science to refute the obvious dangers of smoking. And this is exactly the strategy that The Discovery Institute has brilliantly executed in their astoundingly successful efforts to use theocratic quackery like “intelligent design” to not only publicly challenge the overwhelming scientific consensus supporting evolution, but as a wedge to undermine the scientific method itself.
It is the MSM’s feigned and futile “objectivity” that is often it’s greatest weakness. It is a weakness that sometimes gives credence to outright lies, in a misguided effort to equally present all sides of an issue. But some sides are simply more credible than others.
Trahant concludes that “the highest journalism value must be truth,” a sentiment with which I wholeheartedly concur, but without the same degree of self-reflection… for while I make every effort to be truthful, I have never once claimed to be either fare or balanced.
That of course, is the advantage us bloggers have over traditional journalists. I wear my bias on my sleeve, present the facts as I see them, cite my sources, and then leave it to the reader to make up his or her mind. There is a context to everything I write on HA… that of an aggressively liberal blogger with a distinct political agenda. Those who whine in my comment threads about my lack of objectivity or my refusal to cover Democratic foibles with the same vigor that I cover those of Republicans… are pissing into the wind. It’s not my job to provide balanced news coverage. Indeed, the only balance you should ever expect from me is that with which I countervail my counterparts on the right.
As to Trahant and the rest of the “real” journalists out there, admittedly, they’ve got a much tougher job. And many of them deserve some kudos for performing it so well during their coverage of I-912.
One again Goldy, you nailed this on right on their collective, tin foil covered heads.
That’s right, the PI has a tougher job. Blogs, it is generally know, have bias and are upfront about their bias. No big deal. Go in and read with eyes wide open (as opposed to reading with eyes closed- ha!). But newspapers and newscasts should be about facts, not opinions. Sadly, there are few, if any, that are “fair and balanced”, yet the perception to most of the public is that what’s printed in the newspapers is truth.
Do the newspapers owe the public to publish and uncover the truth? Or do the papers owe to the advertisers to process entertainment?
I imagine it has always been the entertainment side, with occasional truth throw in, yet . . . what if?
Is there a delay in posting here? Or a maximum length? I’ve had trouble posting on more than one occasion.
Part 2
Do the newspapers owe the public to publish and uncover the truth? Or do the papers owe to the advertisers to process entertainment?
I imagine it has always been the entertainment side, with occasional truth throw in, yet . . . what if?
Mobil
broke corporate records last week, posting a $9 billion profit on $100
billion in revenue in the third quarter. Right on cue, Democrats
demanded
that Washington confiscate some of those profits. Are they predictable
or
what?…Want to know who
is
making a bigger windfall than oil companies are making from the prices
paid
by the poor gasoline consumer? It’s good old Uncle Sam and his 51
little
brothers. Refining costs and profits combined make up about 15 percent
of
the cost of a gallon of gasoline, according to the U.S. Energy
Department.
State and local taxes make up almost double that, about 27 percent.
State and local gas tax
collections exceed oil industry profits by a large margin, according to
a
Tax Foundation study released last week. Since 1977, consumers have
paid
$1.34 trillion in gas taxes – more than twice the profits of all major
U.S.
oil companies combined during that same period. Last year, state and
federal
gas taxes took in $58.4 billion. Major U.S. oil company profits last
year
totaled $42.6 billion.
I see no reason for the media to worry about fairness here. Is it fair that KVI is in fact, purely republican radio? If it fair that the right wing controls the Washington Times, Fox News, the New York Post, Wall Street Journal and other unabashedly right leaning, truth distorting, American freedom hating media outlets? No it’s not fair. But life’s not fair. If the PI skewed its EDITORIALS to beat 912 so be it. There’s a difference between editorial and news coverage. Something that the FAUX NEWS people probably won’t understand.
Goldy, very well put. I just wish that the structure of the comments section didn’t give the nutcase and professional wingers so much power to effectively sidetrack or negate your missives.
Regarding Question @ 3: It’s always been both, with varying proportions depending on the era and the particular newspaper (or even department within a given paper). J-schools tend to train future reporters and editors to seek the truth “with neither fear nor favor.” Of course, once these often idealistic young scribes move into the real world they are confronted with complex roadblocks to acting in the public interest.
HA illustrates how blogs can spur more aggressive reporting by inspiring the latently idealistic, and putting pressure on the complacent. Are blogs a replacement for the MSM? Hardly. But the last election shows how they can be a valuable addition.
Chuck, what’s your point? Where do you think that money goes, into GWB’s and Cheney’s pockets? Oh, wait. In any case, it goes to paying for, you know, roads, stuff like that, that you can drive your SUV on while going to work for Mobil.
I’m not sure how it works nation-wide, but I thought local gas taxes were a cents-per-gallon thing; so the government collects the same amount whether gas costs $1.00 or it costs $5.00.
(Chuck, drowning in corporate bukkake just isn’t a good look for anyone.)
When the MSM stops being timid about Bush and the Republicans, the entire neocon agenda will fail, because like I-912 it’s snake oil.
@2
Long posts automatically go into Goldy’s spam filter.
Cheesy Chuckie @4
Don’t overlook that GOP congress-scum also are pandering to constituents angry over high fuel costs.
Cheesy Chuckie @4 (continued)
So, collecting money in gas taxes are bad, but oil profits are good, huh? I don’t see oil companies complaining about high gas taxes! Know why? If states don’t spend money on roads, cars will be useless, and oil companies won’t sell any gas – that’s why.
Clueless wingbots like C.C. are automatically against government spending money on anything, and against anything that government spends money on. Fucking idiots.
@6
“Of course, once these often idealistic young scribes move into the real world they are confronted with complex roadblocks to acting in the public interest.”
Not the least of which is Republican owners of newspapers and broadcast stations who don’t want their idealistic young reporters telling audiences how badly Republicans have fucked up the country and the world.
Chuck @ 4
heck, now i feel like i’m piling on, but your comments reflect what a lot of people think.
however, when the price of gas shot from $2 to 43 per gallon this year, who made the profit? The state took in no more tax per gallon than already mandated by law, so they didn’t.
When you say ” Refining costs and profits combined make up about 15 percent of the cost of a gallon of gasoline,” you are referrring to statistics gatherd BEFORE the current prices increases, aren’t you? What do you think that percentage was when I paid $3.10 a galllon this year? 15%? I don’t think so.
The Washington Post says: “When the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline peaked at $3.07 recently, it was partly because the nation’s refineries were getting an estimated 99 cents on each gallon sold. That was more than three times the amount they earned a year ago when regular unleaded was selling for $1.87…The companies that pump oil from the ground swept in an additional 47 cents on each gallon, a 46 percent jump over the same period.”
Now refining is a largely vertically integrated industry, which means that the big oil vcompanies own the refineries, right? So guess who made the big money on this year’s outrageous price hikes, and why? Hint: not the tax collector.
Where’s Mark the Redneck? Did Goldy whack him for not paying his gambling debt? Sure gonna miss that stupid, ignorant, redneck, trailerpark, trollfuck.
Corruption Watch: Sen. Cornyn, Ralph Reed implicated in Abramoff casino scandal.
http://www.statesman.com/
Bush Administration guts Justice Department’s civil rights enforcement; demoralized DOJ civil rights lawyers quitting in droves.
“Longtime litigators complain that political appointees have cut them out of hiring and major policy decisions, including approvals of controversial GOP redistricting plans in Mississippi and Texas.
“At the same time, prosecutions for the kinds of racial and gender discrimination crimes traditionally handled by the division have declined 40 percent over the past five years, according to department statistics. Dozens of lawyers find themselves handling appeals of deportation orders and other immigration matters instead of civil rights cases.”
For complete story see http://www.washingtonpost.com/
GOP = racist
I read it. Was not suprised by the following:
The Bush administration has filed only three lawsuits — all of them this year — under the section of the Voting Rights Act that prohibits discrimination against minority voters, and none of them involves discrimination against blacks. The initial case was the Justice Department’s first reverse-discrimination lawsuit, accusing a majority-black county in Mississippi of discriminating against white voters.
Reverse-discrimination? This from a party who will use any means, fair or foul, to make sure only the white, I mean “right” people have the full voting rights and privleges of a citizen.
Republicans have made no secret of their contempt for minorities and the poor. It is sickening, but it is the truth none the less.
I AM GLAD THE I-912 LOST! U KNOW WHY? I WANT BETTER BUS TRANSPORATION!!!! I DONT WANT IT GO BACK WHERE IT WAS IN 1987!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Trahant and his colleagues still have some ‘splainin’ to do regarding this editorial endorsement baggage claim: “Berkowitz admittedly comes with some baggage. But so does his opponent, Lloyd Hara.”
The problem? Nothing in the P-I’s reportage ever identified anything that might qualify as “baggage” in Hara’s background. Neither did the Times, Weekly, Stranger or King County Journal.
What we are left with is an unsubstantiated, unbidden slap with the tar brush … a clear cut case of editorial malpractice.
The “equal time” doctrine was eviscerated by Reagan in the late ’80s. Since then there has been a proliferation of the right wing noise machine largely enabled by the corporitization of media and the lack of a requirement for equal time. Progressives mistakenly believed that their battle had been won by virtue of the merits of their arguments. The tin hat brigade led by Limbaugh, Hannity and O’Reilly made sure that all was still in play exploiting the lack of “equal time”. Progressives have had thier butts kicked over the last 7-8 years as a result. Now that progressives have awakened they have created their own equal time in the blogosphere if not in the MSM. Daily Kos now has more hits than the entire conservative blogosphere. What they brought in noise we will now bring in numbers and argument. In the end the people always win in a democracy.
Permanent Republican majority? Not unless hell freezes over!!
The “equal time” doctrine was eviscerated by Reagan in the late ’80s. Since then there has been a proliferation of the right wing noise machine largely enabled by the corporitization of media and the lack of a requirement for equal time.
You forgot over 25 million listeners, a mark the donks will never achieve because no one wants to listen to their drivel. The fairness doctrine is anti-free speech. Let fredom decide who gets the audience.
RUFUS @ 22
“Let fredom (sic) decide who gets the audience.”
Or, in the case of Wingnut radio, freedom from being encumbered by thinking.
23
I will take brain dead over goofy liberal thinking anytime.
RUFUS @ 24
“I will take brain dead over goofy liberal thinking anytime.”
Ummm…yes, well, we did notice the brain dead part….
25
Speaking of goofy liberal thinking what is the latest on the diebold voting machines. You have got to love these donks and their fairy tales.
Will the French ever end their natural disaster?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....0BI82.html
Leave it to the Frogs!!!
RUFUS @ 25
“Speaking of goofy liberal thinking what is the latest on the diebold voting machines. You have got to love these donks and their fairy tales.”
Oh…probably filed on the shelf right next to the “King County Election Fraud” fairy tale.
RUFUS @ 27
“Will the French ever end their natural disaster?”
I suppose they are waiting for the U.S. to end its disaster in Iraq.
29
Yeah and Sadam to get back in power to extort more money from the oil for food program.
I second Goldy’s remarks about the P-I. I like the P-I and avoid the Blethen-Snort as much as possible. What was their coverage like?
If I close my eyes and imagine real hard, I see a scene where the Times editorial board votes against I-912, and then the “village idiot of the newspaper industry” (try Googling that phrase) dances into the room and overrules them.
RUFUS @ 30
“Yeah and Sadam to get back in power to extort more money from the oil for food program.”
Hey, but what is a little extortion compared to killing ~100,000 innocent civilians and 2065 U.S. Soldiers?
Hey, but what is a little extortion compared to killing ~100,000 innocent civilians and 2065 U.S. Soldiers?
Why do you care about innocent Iraq’s now, where were you when they were getting slaughtered in the millions. At least we slowed the rate down.
RUFUS @ 33
“At least we slowed the rate down. “
No we did not slow down the rate; we increased the rate of civilian deaths in Iraq through our invasion. You’ve clearly been listening to too much wingnut radio again.
Doofus @24
“I will take brain dead over goofy liberal thinking anytime.”
This isn’t something normal people would brag about.
Doofus @ 26
“Speaking of goofy liberal thinking what is the latest on the diebold voting machines. You have got to love these donks and their fairy tales.”
Oh, you’re gonna love this, Doofus! The non-partisan General Accounting Office issued a report confirming problems with DRE (direct recording electronic) voting machines. http://www.bradblog.com/Docs/G.....102105.pdf
Investors are bailing out of DRE manufacturers! Diebold’s stock plunged from $58 in April to $38, and Sequoia Systems was recently sold to a Venezuela company for a measly $15 million. A lawsuit seeking to invalidate Snohomish County’s $5 million contract with Sequoia, if successful, would be a body blow to the company.
@33
“Why do you care about innocent Iraq’s now, where were you when they were getting slaughtered in the millions.”
Yeah, with weapons supplied by Reagan and Bush Sr. — when Republicans aren’t killing innocent civilians themselves, their dictator-proxies are doing it for them.
@33 (continued)
Most of the slaughter of Iraqis occurred in the 1980s, although there also was some in the aftermath of the Gulf War. The only thing Bush Sr. did to protect Kurds and Shiites who rose against Saddam was to set up no-fly zones, which were ineffective to prevent these two groups from Saddam’s retribution.
Here’s a plug for Bertha’s Store, the official Washington State Democratic Party’s sales outlet for caps, buttons, bumper stickers, and other patriotic merchandise. http://www.wa-democrats.org/Bertha.php
DeLay Buys Washington’s GOP Congress-Scum With Dirty Money
Dave Reichert has received $20,000 from DeLay, “Doc” Hastings $5,930, and Cathy McMorris $5,000. In return, all 3 of these GOP bottomfeeders have voted with DeLay at least 96 percent of the time. IN addition, Hastings used his position as chair of the House Ethics Committee to stall investigation of DeLay, while Reichert and McMorris both voted to weaken ethics rules in an effort to protect DeLay.
Source: WSDP web site.
CAMPAIGN TO RECALL GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER GATHERS STEAM
Here’s a link to the recall campaign’s web site: http://www.savecalnow.com/
IRAQ VOTING FRAUD
The Bush administration badly wanted Iraqi voters to approve Iraq’s U.S.-sponsored constitution. Seemingly, they did. But voting results are under investigation in no less than 12 provinces. Turnout among some Kurdish and Shiite groups exceeded 99 percent! WTF??! Could the ballot boxes have been stuffed?
For complete story see http://www.nytimes.com/
Roger, you need a blog. Sometimes your posts are like blog spam. But I like the links! Start a blog dude!
I’m really glad that the PI seems to be waking from that collective slumber within which most of the MSM still sleeps. At the same time, however, I’m still a long way from congratulating them for finally recognizing a few things that should have been obvious to them all along.
And even if I see them beginning to wake up to some important issues in their trade, they’re still stumbling around pretty groggily. For Trahant to even frame this as a decision between fairness and truth speaks to how low the Press has sunk in their thinking. I would ask Trahant: To whom precisely is the speaking of truth unfair? Have we really come so far to suggest that stating the truth somehow lacks balance or a proper recognition of fairness? Indeed, what Trahant’s piece reveals here is a generalized confusion in the MSM about who their constituency precisely is. The call for balance is invariably a call for a certain relation between the media and the objects and sources upon which it reports. One must be fair, that is, to all the sides on which you are reporting. The truth, on the other hand, is what the consumers of the media expect, and truth is the foundation on which the relation between the press and their readers/viewers is built. If the press would simply remember that their first, second and last duty is to their readership, and not to their sources or beats, the question of truth versus balance would not reduce people like Trahant into the uncertain Hamlets that they have become.
Truth: What is the truth? What each of us see wearing blinders based on a bias. Global warming. Some scientists say it is caused by carbon dioxide, others say there maybe other causes such as nature going through a cycle, others say it is a combination of the all. All have “scientific” evidence to back up their respective claims. So what is the truth? Newspapers have a duty to discuss all sides of the issue because the writers’ bias may not be the entire truth. However, newspapers can provide what they think is the, truth in their opinion section, not news section. I agree bloggers can distort the truth, tell the truth or somewhere in between based on their bias.
OK, I-912 got defeated. How about picking up the tab for the Narrows Bridge project?
Pot, For mortals such as you and me, Truth with an upper case “T” is of course beyond our ken. For us, instead, truth is what results from what we might call a good faith effort to determine the facts as best as possible and then to represent those facts as adequately as possible. Is this more limited “truth” somehow less satisfying than the more metaphysical one above? Perhaps, but this should not stop us from trying our best to live up to the second.
Let us not make the “perfect” into the enemy of the “possible”.
Newspapers have a duty to discuss all sides of the issue because the writers’ bias may not be the entire truth.
No, they have a duty to be fair. What they don’t have a duty to do is present all sides as equally valid or supported by the evidence. Sometimes it’s fair to point out that the weight of the evidence is clearly on one side or another. That’s not bias; that’s journalism.
However, in order to do this properly, reporters must do their homework. This takes time and resources. And this is where we run into the pernicious effects of corporate ownership of news outlets. By focusing on the economic bottom line, they tend to gut news gathering budgets. Fewer reporters are chasing stories, which leads to short-cuts and “he said, she said” articles because the reporter doesn’t know enough about the topic to call b.s. when it’s being shoveled at them. Your global warming example is nicely illustrative of this phenomenon.
Real journalism is a long-term investment, not a short-term money maker, and few (especially) corporate news owners seem to understand that.
dj@34 No we did not slow down the rate; we increased the rate of civilian deaths in Iraq through our invasion. You’ve clearly been listening to too much wingnut radio again.
Do you mean wingnut like PBS?
“After the Gulf War, the United Nations imposed strict economic sanctions on Iraq that critics charge have led to the deaths of more than a million people — the majority of them children. Saddam Hussein claims the deaths are in excess of one and a half million.”
http://www.pbs.org/frontlinewo.....tions.html
Michael @ 49
Try to keep up with the conversation…RUFUS was discussing the rate of civilians slaughtered by Saddam. The story you cite are Saddam’s claims for the number of deaths resulting from a UN economic embargo.
Roger Rabbit @ 15
I don’t think Godly bans people for not paying up on their bets. After all, Puddybud hasn’t paid up on his bet he made on this blog. Ol’ Puddybud was supposed to go on John Carlson’s show and rebuke David “the mother beater” Irons for not taking a Repbulican (lie) Detector Test to counter his mothers test that she passed.
He “claims” he called in on the appointed day, twice, but had a “bad” cell phone connecton “both times.” And, he wants me to call Carlson’s producer to verify that he called in. Like I’m going to trust another conservative to tell the truth.
Puddybud can still make good on his debt, though. All he has to do is make the arrangements with John Carlson (because he knows John personally and can make these arrangements, he said so before) pick a date and time, post it here on HA 48 hours in advance, then we can listen in and all will be forgiven.
Let’s give Puddybud one week from today to make the arrangements. That ought to be plenty of time. Let’s see if he comes through like a man, or if Republicans out.
I’m hoping for the former rather than the latter, but if I had to bet, it would be the latter.
dj @ 50 I am making a sererate point that the US invasion of Iraq ended the sanctions which are blamed for 1 to 1.5 million deaths.
Jimmy,
Roger has a blog; its this one; he’s either Goldy in drag, or Goldy’s partner in crime as it were. 40% of posts seem to be goldy and roger
I don’t need a blog. My job is to hunt down and annoy Republifuck trolls wherever they can be found.
@45
Newspapers do NOT have a duty to give equal space to fanatics who think Galileo was a heretic, and the sun revolves around the earth.
On the other hand, when a fanatic like Pat Robertson threatens a town with divine destruction for voting ID off their school board, that’s newsworthy — in the same way that a murder or grisly car accident or string of robberies is newsworthy. “News” is that which is abnormal, aberrant, harmful, disconcerting; e.g., a hurricane, riot, prison escape, or a Republican getting elected to public office.
when a fanatic like Pat Robertson threatens a town with divine destruction for voting ID off their school board, that’s newsworthy
Evidently it was even goofier than that. I read on the internets that the new school board members weren’t planning on completely removing ID from the curriculum; they were simply moving it from science class to a comparative religions class.
If that’s true, Robertson is even battier than it appears at first glance.
@46
“OK, I-912 got defeated. How about picking up the tab for the Narrows Bridge project?”
Whining about the Narrows Bridge toll seems to be a rather common refrain among the righty trolls these days (including those posing as Libertarians to avoid the taint of corruption and odium attending the GOP these days).
Hey, I thought you guys didn’t like big government and high taxes? Let’s suppose the state privatized the Narrows Bridge project. You guys like privatization, am I correct? You don’t really think a private owner would let you drive across his expensive bridge for free, do you? If this project had been privatized you would be paying, you guessed it, a toll. And not any 3 bucks per crossing, either!!! More like twenty.
So … WHY are righties complaining about having to pay a toll to use the new bridge? Because they want to use it for free, that’s why!!! Of course, they realize it costs money to build a bridge, and they’re not against spending money to build it — they just want to spend someone else’s money to build it, that’s all. They’re
F R E E L O A D E R S
Contrary to what their whining might lead you to believe, Narrows Bridge users are NOT being singled out or picked on. Bridges are very expensive, and using tolls to help defray their cost is commonplace; and tolls on large suspension bridges are the norm. (Some states use tolls to defray the cost of building highways, too, but that’s a different issue.)
Here in Washington, tolls have FREQUENTLY been used to help pay for bridges. Moreover, the $3 toll on the new Narrows Bridge is considerably less than many of Washington’s historic bridge tolls. Here is a list of Washington State bridges that have had tolls (toll expressed in 2007 dollars):
Agate Pass Toll Bridge ($4.11)
U.S. 97 Bridge ($13.13)
Evergreen Point Bridge ($4.53)
Fox Island Bridge ($5.53)
Old Hood Canal Bridge ($17.23)
Rebuilt Hood Canal Bridge ($10.27)
Original I-90 Floating Bridge ($7.08)
Longview Bridge ($23.74)
Port Washington Narrows Bridge ($1.37)
Highway 2 Spokane River Bridge ($2.74)
Original Tacoma Narrows Bridge (“Galloping Gertie”) ($15.57)
Rebuilt Tacoma Narrows Bridge ($9.05)
I-5 Columbia River Bridge ($2.68)
Vernita Toll Bridge ($9.44)
Source: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/
Everyone else paid tolls for their bridges; why should you whiners get special treatment? Whine on, crybabies.
You all completely miss the point of the initiative. Most of us who signed a petition were wishy washy on the actual tax itself but righteously pissed off that Christine (I won’t tax you) Gregoire signed the tax almost immediately and then allowed the emergency clause to be tacked on.
That is so par for the course in WA State politics.
I’m happy that we will have money for roads. I’m fully outraged that there are absolutely NO plans in place to fix the “emergencies” that all the dems have been screaming about. What is wrong w/ our department of transportation and politics / taxation in general in WA state is they ask for money with little or no plans in place.
If there is such an emergency why aren’t there plans in place to immediately start construciont on the “deathtrap” that is the viaduct. Same for the 520 bridge. The “we need money to draw up plans” is fully bogus. We have a planning department that is fully capable of drawing up a plan an estimate w/o extra tax dollars. Our govt. just doesn’t want them too because they want that blank check.
And all you rubes who think the tunnel will never be built just wait to see the next regional tax wish list from the kingco rtid. WSDOT already says that a tunnel is the choice of replacement avenues.
Seattlites pull your heads out of your asses so that kingco can stick what belongs up there. Your heads in the way are the only thing that are keeping you from realizing that you are getting screwed up the ass by your “representatives.”
@49
So Michael, do you believe everything Saddam says?
BTW Michael, PBS didn’t assert that sanctions killed a million people. PBS only reported that so-and-so said sanctions killed a million people. When Rush or Sean or Kirby says something, they’re asserting, not reporting. But I wouldn’t expect a wingnut like you to know the difference.
Anyway, only a dummy believes everything he reads in the papers or hears on TV. Reporters work under tight deadlines — generally only a few hours, or less — and it’s simply impossible to get at the truth of complex events or issues in that length of time. The media generally does its best work in feature stories to which reporters can devote weeks or months of background research, interviewing, and information gathering — for example, the Seattle Times’ recent series on global warming, or the Post-Intelligencer’s series several months ago on Puget Sound. The Seattle Weekly often provides in-depth coverage that Seattle’s dailies can’t, because they have a longer deadline to work with. Daily papers and TV stations excel at giving you a quick take on breaking news, but sacrifice accuracy for speed of reportage.
As a general rule, though, journalists provide a more accurate and unbiased view of events or issues than pundits who are trying to sell an ideology or agenda. Rush or Sean or Kirby can be relied upon to intentionally overlook facts or arguments unfavorable to their position on an issue. They’re merely propagandists who cherry pick and spin facts to sell you their viewpoint, much as a lawyer does in a courtroom.
@51
I didn’t say anything about banning MTR from HA for not paying his gambling debt. I said the law won’t enforce it, and pointed out the traditional way of dealing with gambling welshes is to kill them. Presumably, if MTR pays up, Goldy won’t kill him, and MTR will continue to grace us with his trollfuck presence.
Of course, I wasn’t advocating killing anybody; I’m merely a reporter making observations about a historical fact.
Michael @52
“the US invasion of Iraq ended the sanctions which are blamed for 1 to 1.5 million deaths”
Good point; by the same logic, terminating the Bush regime would end the military incompetence which is blamed for 2,056 U.S. soldier deaths.
Michael @ 52
“dj @ 50 I am making a sererate point that the US invasion of Iraq ended the sanctions which are blamed for 1 to 1.5 million deaths.”
Your point is idiotic—even if you believe the numbers. The US did not have to go to war to stop deaths of people through economic sanctions! That is as sensible as fucking for virginity.
Roger Rabbit @ 59 & 60
Read the quote again.
After the Gulf War, the United Nations imposed strict economic sanctions on Iraq that critics charge have led to the deaths of more than a million people – the majority of them children. Saddam Hussein claims the deaths are in excess of one and a half million.
PBS claims that the sanctions killed over a million. Saddam puts the number over 1.5 million. PBS does not claim to be reporting that so-and-so said the number was over a million, they stated it as a fact. That being said, I’m not sure I believe it, PBS isn’t too high on my credibility list, but the last thing you can accuse them of is being part of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
unsoundidiot @58
“Most of us who signed a petition were wishy washy on the actual tax itself but righteously pissed off that Christine” _________________ [fill in blank]
Christine this, Christine that. I have a suggestion, why don’t you cut off your dick to spite Christine. That’s about as intelligent as voting against necessary highway and bridge projects to spite Christine.
You trollfucks are even stupider than you look.
Roger,
How about a compromise: All the gas tax money (current and future) collected in Kitsap & Pierce Counties goes ONLY TO THE Narrows Bridge. All the gas tax money collected in King county goes ONLY to 520 & AWV.
That way we both can be self-trighteous.
Waddya say, Wabbit?
@65 & 66
How did you suggest ending the sanctions by your beloved UN? The UN loved the sanctions, lifting the sanctions brought oil-for-palaces to a crashing halt. There is no way the security council would have got a unanimous vote to end sanctions while practically everyone was getting their pockets lined with blood money.
Comment on 66
To the extent sanctions were causing Iraqi civilian deaths, those deaths theoretically could have been avoided by removing the sanctions — but then, the wingers would have been up in arms, accusing Clinton of coddling Saddam! I say “theoretically” because if Saddam was siphoning off the oil revenues and stealing the food, which he apparently was, the Iraqi people wouldn’t have gotten the food anyway — sanctions or no sanctions.
Michael @67
Read the quote again yourself: “After the Gulf War, the United Nations imposed strict economic sanctions on Iraq THAT CRITIICS CHARGE have led to the deaths of more than a million people – the majority of them children. Saddam Hussein claims the deaths are in excess of one and a half million.”
Where did PBS assert the sanctions led to the deaths of more than a million people? PBS simply reported that “critics charged” the sanctions led to … oh, forget it, it’s impossible to educate a box of rocks.
Reply to 69
“All the gas tax money (current and future) collected in Kitsap & Pierce Counties goes ONLY TO THE Narrows Bridge. All the gas tax money collected in King county goes ONLY to 520 & AWV.”
That works for me! Kitsap County is a net importer of gas tax revenues ($76.5 million gas tax paid vs. $96.8 million gas tax revenues received) and Pierce County is an approximately break-even county ($127.1 million paid vs. $126.0 million received).
(Annual figures)
We in King County will gladly stop exporting $127.1 million a year to the likes of Kitsap County and use that money on AWV and SR-520 instead, to eliminate the need for tolls on those routes.
Please submit a list of highway/bridge/freight mobility projects in Pierce and Kitsap counties that you wish to divert funds from for the Narrows Bridge.
Goldy;
Gets boring reading 18 posts in a row by Roger;
righton @ 74
“Gets boring reading 18 posts in a row by Roger”
So? Were you under the impression that Goldy had comment threads to entertain the paid troll brigade?
@74
Who’s dumber, the rabbit who posted them, or the trollfuck who read them?
I obviously have an audience, so I’ll keep posting!! :D
(don’t want the trollfucks to get bored, do we?)
Ridiculous Rabbit @68:
You are a dumb fuck aren’t you. I signed the initiative to allow the citizens of the state to make their own choice by getting the initiative in front of the people. I voted no on 912 itself because I’d like to see some road improvements.
Just goes to show that backhanded assumptions will bite you in the ass.
My only beef now is get the work done. You have the money. No more screwing around. But that won’t happen because the other half of the dem party (the eco-nut) group will tie everything up in environmental litigation which will of course inflate the cost of all the projects and draw down the money we just voted for infrastrcture.
You go on your merry way with your head blocking kingco though.
@72 Unicef (part of the UN) estimated that 250 people were dieing every day due to sanctions. That’s a lot of people in 10+ years.
unsoundidiot @79
You voted against an initiative you signed? And you call ME a dumb fuck?
Ridiculous Raggit @81 (aka dumb fuck)
It’s called principle. Something you obviously know zero about. Or have zero of, or whatever. I felt that much money the citizens of WA should have a say in. Unlike our state legislators, and apparently you.
So, yes, I voted to put the initiative on the ballot so we as a state could vote whether to tax ourselves for that amount of money. Then I again voted my conscious and thus no on ratifying the initiative.
Our roads need the money but if the government ever wants the trust of the voters back in this state then they have to live with the consequences and start putting these types of issues to a vote. They start to manage our money correctly and we’ll vote to tax ourselves for infrastructure. This is a first step.
You appear to have been around long enough to remember the bullshit debaucle that is RTA and Sound Transit and our miserable attempt at light rail (a flawed transportation plan in WA anyway). So you should understand why we need to be able to vote on these things. Not like it matters.
Continue to drink that kool-aid and block that kick to your ass with your head. It appears maybe you’ve blocked one too many already.
Michael @ 80
“Unicef (part of the UN) estimated that 250 people were dieing every day due to sanctions. That’s a lot of people in 10+ years.”
Ummmmm…read the study published in The Lancet. This is the study the estimated mortality attributable to the U.S. militar invasion. Their finding are for mortality IN EXCESS of the background levels during the sanctions. In other words, death rates have increased since the U.S. invaded.
unsoundidiot @82
Let’s see if I’ve got this straight. You signed the I-912 petition on “principle,” but your “conscience” told you to vote “no” because “our roads need the money.”
It appears your principles and your conscience are conflicted.
You need either new principles, or a new conscience.
Goldy—
So will the Media do it’s job of holding those in power accountable???
There is a clear record of all the representations made by the anti-912 crowd.
Since the “newspapers” “did their job”, how are citizens to expect them to “do their jobs” in terms of holding WSDOT, Gregoire and ALL the anti-912 rhetoric accountable?????
ANSWER—-
It ain’t gonna happen!!!!
Whenever loser newspapers like the P-I take a hard position on an issues as they did opposing I-912….do you really expect the P-I to admit they were WRONG or for the P-I to condemn any actions or inactions which are not part of the anti-912 rhetoric???
Who is going to hold those in power accoutable????
Will the Seattle P-I????????
You’ve got to be kidding!!!!
Ethically, the Seattle P-I should be reporting on the I-912 promises EVEN MORE than they did in proting the NO on I-912. Do you LEFTIST PINHEADED CLOWNS really want to know the truth as GasTax dollars are committed and spent????
How will you know unless the newspapers disclose it????
You CLOWNS are most comfortable when left to your own Fantasy Island!!!!
GasTax====How holds those in power accountable?????
ANSWER—NO ONE…The Seattle P-I has already comprised their journalistic independence (AGAIN!!!)
I will take brain dead over goofy liberal thinking anytime.”
This isn’t something normal people would brag about.
Who said liberals were normal?
dj @ 83
The “Iraq Body Count” ( http://www.iraqbodycount.org ) project is a very left wing group and conservatives all agree that their number is inflated, but lets say for the sake of argument that their max estimate of 30380 “civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq” is correct. That adds up to less than 30/day. Yet somehow you are saying that number is more than the 250/day who died from sanctions alone (unicef est.) not to mention people killed by Saddam or whatever untimely death?
Michael,
Yes, I am well aware of the Iraq Body Count project. But, their work is based only on media reports of deaths—it vastly underestimates total deaths.
The definitive study is from Roberts et al. (2004) Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey, The Lancet. 364 (Iss. 9448):1857. The take home message: an estimated 98,000 excess deaths (as a result of the military invasion) with a 95% confidence interval of 8,000-194,000.
The Lancet study was an on-the-ground epidemiological survey using standard epidemiological survey techniques in order to estimate total mortality. The study made it through scientific peer review and was published in one of the most prestegious scientific journals in the world.
Michael @ 87
“That adds up to less than 30/day. Yet somehow you are saying that number is more than the 250/day who died from sanctions alone (unicef est.) not to mention people killed by Saddam or whatever untimely death?”
You misunderstand. First, the Lancet study would suggest about 135 civilian deaths/day IN EXCESS to baseline mortality (mortality prior to the invasion). In otherwords there are now 135 additional deaths per day added to the 250/day that were occurring during the embargo.
@88 Yes, I am familiar with the methodology used by iraqbodycount.org They take random samples and try to extrapolate the data and try to figure out how many have died total. The problem is, they take a city like Fallujah, and try to extrapolate from that. Now all of us with a brain know that Fallujah is not a very representative sample. The Lancet study used exactly the same method of extrapolation. Just because 200 people were killed in 2 days or whatever in Fallujah doesn’t mean you can extrapolate that to 100,000 killed all over Iraq over a 3 year period.
100,000 Dead—or 8,000
How many Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war?
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Friday, Oct. 29, 2004, at 6:49 PM ET
The authors of a peer-reviewed study, conducted by a survey team from Johns Hopkins University, claim that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war. Yet a close look at the actual study, published online today by the British medical journal the Lancet, reveals that this number is so loose as to be meaningless.
The report’s authors derive this figure by estimating how many Iraqis died in a 14-month period before the U.S. invasion, conducting surveys on how many died in a similar period after the invasion began (more on those surveys later), and subtracting the difference. That difference—the number of “extra” deaths in the post-invasion period—signifies the war’s toll. That number is 98,000. But read the passage that cites the calculation more fully:
We estimate there were 98,000 extra deaths (95% CI 8000-194 000) during the post-war period.
Readers who are accustomed to perusing statistical documents know what the set of numbers in the parentheses means. For the other 99.9 percent of you, I’ll spell it out in plain English—which, disturbingly, the study never does. It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000. (The number cited in plain language—98,000—is roughly at the halfway point in this absurdly vast range.)
This isn’t an estimate. It’s a dart board.
http://www.slate.com/id/2108887/
Those are some real good numbers there. Somewhere between 8,000 and 194,000.
Michael @ 91
Sorry Michael, but it is apparent that you don’t know much about statistics.
Likewise Fred Kaplin does not understanding statistics either. Fortunately, actual scientists and statisticians reviewed the article and came to the conclusion that the numbers were correct, properly inferred and meaningful.
What you and Kaplan don’t understand is that a 95% confidence interval covering 8,000 to 194,000 does not mean, for example, that 8,000 is as probable as 98,000. The most likely number (the median) is 98,000. The probability of the true number being 8,000 deaths or under is about 2.5%. Likewise the probably of 194,000 deaths or more is 2.5%. BTW: there is a 68% chance that the true number falls between 53,000 and 146,000.
A confidence interval is part of the language that scientists and statisticians use to communicate with each other in a way that fully discloses the statistical uncertainty in estimates. The results are not invalidated simply because you don’t understand the language or how to properly interpret it!
Michael @ 90
“They take random samples and try to extrapolate the data and try to figure out how many have died total. The problem is, they take a city like Fallujah, and try to extrapolate from that. Now all of us with a brain know that Fallujah is not a very representative sample.”
Sorry Michael, you are completely wrong about the methods use by IBC. And, you are an idiot for speculating, because the methods are clearly given on their web site. You didn’t even have to make shit up. You could have gone to http://www2.iraqbodycount.org/.....tm#methods
“The Lancet study used exactly the same method of extrapolation. Just because 200 people were killed in 2 days or whatever in Fallujah doesn’t mean you can extrapolate that to 100,000 killed all over Iraq over a 3 year period.”
Not even close! Have you READ the Lancet study?????? The methods they used are standard epidemiological survey methods used for studying, for example, disease burden.
BTW: A neighborhood in Fallujah, by chance, was one of the clusters they had to canvass for the Lancet study. But, the mortality rates were so high in Fallujah that they treated that cluster as a statistical outlier—it was excluded from their analysis.
Got any more made-up shit you what to spew?
@92 What you and Kaplan don’t understand is that a 95% confidence interval covering 8,000 to 194,000 does not mean, for example, that 8,000 is as probable as 98,000. The most likely number (the median) is 98,000. The probability of the true number being 8,000 deaths or under is about 2.5%.
I do understand the idea of a bell curve, I have had college statistics, my BS is in Computer Science, where I learned alot about mathematical modelling. What you are saying is, there is a 2.5% chance that the number is less than 8,000, but you believe the number is closer to 98,000. I don’t think you mentioned such a large margin of error until I brought it up.
BTW: A neighborhood in Fallujah, by chance, was one of the clusters they had to canvass for the Lancet study. But, the mortality rates were so high in Fallujah that they treated that cluster as a statistical outlier—it was excluded from their analysis.
You are correct, they did throw out that village because the numbers were too far off. However, the surveys were sometimes hindered because the roads were blocked when they tried to get to a particular village, so that village was either left off completely, or what they judged to be a similar (but more accessible) village was substituted. That is like taking exit polls at polls in Seattle, because the pundit doesn’t want to have to go somewhere is harder to get to, and then assuming that those numbers are representative. That is why Bush won by 3 million votes despite exit polls that showed Kerry was the big winner; many of the Bush voters were in areas away from the Seattle Times/PI readership. You just can’t rely on numbers like that.
@89 You misunderstand. First, the Lancet study would suggest about 135 civilian deaths/day IN EXCESS to baseline mortality (mortality prior to the invasion). In otherwords there are now 135 additional deaths per day added to the 250/day that were occurring during the embargo.
You could not be more wrong. Did you read the study? The number they came up with is the number above the arbitrary mortality baseline that they came up with, which was 5 deaths/1000 people/year. The problem is, Iraq hasn’t achieved that “baseline” in decades. Every single year since the Iran-Iraq war, including Kuwait, Desert Storm, sanctions, and the current war in Iraq, the mortality rate has been closer to 16 than 5. They haven’t came close to 5 since before the Iran-Iraq war.
Michael
“I don’t think you mentioned such a large margin of error until I brought it up.”
Really, Michael? Did you mention the CI before I did in post 88?
Michael @ 94
“However, the surveys were sometimes hindered because the roads were blocked when they tried to get to a particular village, so that village was either left off completely, or what they judged to be a similar (but more accessible) village was substituted.”
Nope. You have that wrong. They designed the study with paired clusters in order to minimize excess travel. This was done before interviews were started, and still yielded substantively random representation. They did not avoid areas during the study because of dangerous situations. In fact, the principle investigator wanted to scrub the interviews in the Falluja cluster because it was too dangerous, but the field workers insisted they could do the interviews, and then did so. (Ironically, those data were later excluded as being an outlier).
About 1/2 of one percent of households refused to participate in the survey, but this did not materially affect results. As the authors point out in the paper, the estimates are conservative in the way decisions were made (particularly eliminating Falluja from the analyses).
Michael @ 95
“You could not be more wrong. Did you read the study? The number they came up with is the number above the arbitrary mortality baseline that they came up with, which was 5 deaths/1000 people/year.”
I have read the study, and you are incorrect. They did not use an arbitrary mortality baseline. The 5/1000/yr was empirically determined from the survey (i.e. based on actual deaths).
From the results:
The point is, the mortality rates during and after the invasion are IN EXCESS OF any effects from the economic embargo from Jan 1, 2002, to March 18, 2003.
After gloating for awhile….
would you CLOWNS mind discussing exactly who and how you plan on holding WSDOT and your elected officials accountable for all the Anti-912 promises and rhetoric???
I think we all agree there must be clear accountability for ALL GasTax money….the 91/2 cents, Nickel and other GasTax money.
Accountability is not simply taking what WSDOT says and printing it as Gospel….i.e. just because WSDOT sets certain timelines does not mean those are reasonable. Any idiot can say I’ll make my bank deposit sometime this month….and when they do it 2 days before the end of the month, it is not worthy of applause.
I would hope at least one of you CLOWNS could put on a more Cynical hat and question those in power and hold them accountable.
I know…I’m dreaming!!!!
When it’s clear WSDOT cannot deliver what it promised, Y’ALL will just demand higher taxes!
@98 29 deaths per 1000 livebirths
Odd, Unicef estimated the prewar infant mortality rate to be 107 deaths per 1000 livebirths.
I have a question for you. Arbil has a higher population than Salah ad Din and Karbala. Why were 3 clusters taken from Karbala, 3 taken from Salah an Din, and 0 taken from Arbil? Is it possible that Arbil had a low death rate and would have upset the point they were trying to make? Yes, we know that Karbala is a particularly violent place, why count 3 clusters from there, while counting 0 clusters from more populated places?
Michael @ 100
“I have a question for you…why were 3 clusters taken from Karbala, 3 taken from Salah an Din, and 0 taken from Arbil? Is it possible that Arbil had a low death rate and would have upset the point they were trying to make? Yes, we know that Karbala is a particularly violent place, why count 3 clusters from there, while counting 0 clusters from more populated places? “
The idea was to randomly select locations with equal probability. The country was initially divided up into clusters of approximately 739,000 people (see Table 1 in the study for details). Study clusters were then randomly selected from the initial list.
Umm, Karbala has 1,047,000 people with 3 clusters. Salah ad Din has 1,099,000 people with 3 clusters. Sulaymaniya has 1,100,000 people with 3 clusters. Missan has 685,000 people with 3 clusters. Clearly a cluster does not represent approximately 739,000 people. I think it is more than a concidence that Arbil has 1,100,000 people and 0 clusters.
Ah, I see, Arbil is a US friendly Kurdish city in northern Iraq. They probably have suffered few casualties during the war. We wouldn’t want to include them in the statistics and bring the average down, would we??