Goldy

Leviticus 18:17
Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.

Discuss.

Missed the mellifluous sounds of my whiny high-pitched nasal voice? Then you’ll want to tune in to the premier episode of my new podcast: The Other Washington!

Each episode, co-host Paul Constant and I and the rest of the troublemakers at Civic Skunkworks will take you on a deep dive into a single issue, exploring the nexus between policy and politics from a uniquely Washington State perspective. Our first topic? The $15 minimum wage, of course! How did $15 go from “insane” idea to political reality, and what does this teach us about the rest of the progressive agenda? Tune in and find out.

Huge thanks to our producer, Tina Nole of Larj Media, for making us sound like more than just a couple of opinionated assholes crowding around a mic. We’re still learning by doing, and I expect the podcast to evolve over time, but if you agree with me that it’s a damn good start, then please go to iTunes (or wherever you get your podcasts) and leave us a good review. (Or if you hate it, just leave a nasty comment in this thread.)

Leviticus 11:5
And the rock badger, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is unclean to you.

Discuss.

I suppose, good on the Seattle Times editorial board for pushing legislators to solve Washington’s education funding crisis sooner than later: “State must start working harder to find an education-funding fix.” But considering the decades-long role our state’s editorial boards have played in obstructing funding reforms, I have a hard time taking them seriously when they offer weak sauce prevarication this:

Fixing a financing problem built for decades will be complicated, require a massive shift in property taxes and probably should include a new revenue source, such as a capital-gains tax. These are tough, but necessary, political tasks. The court set a deadline of 2018.

Okay. First of all, let’s be absolutely clear that the “massive shift in property taxes” that they’re talking about—the property tax levy swap—produces no net new revenue for our public schools. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. It helps address the equity issue, yes, but it merely shifts funds from local levies to the state levy. So the editors should really look up the words “swap” and “shift” in the dictionary before misleading readers that this “shift” represents a funding solution (unless, of course, misleading readers is their intent).

Second, fixing the financing problem will “probably” require a new revenue source? Really? Just “probably?” Um, how the fuck else do you suppose we’re going to close the “eye-watering” funding gap that even the editors acknowledge to be “about $3.5 billion?” Glad to see them on board with a capital gains tax, but the estimated $800 million it might raise would still only get us less than a quarter of the way to the McCleary mandate; modifying the need for new revenue with a big fat “probably” isn’t likely to help lead us the rest of the way there. I mean, if the editors (or Republicans, for that matter) have any realistic suggestions for slicing $3 billion or so from elsewhere in the budget, let’s hear it. No? That’s what I thought. So enough with the “probably” already.

This isn’t my opinion folks. It’s math. There’s simply no way to meet McLeary without billions of dollars in new revenue. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Quite frankly, if our state’s editorial boards want to play a serious role in solving this very serious crisis, then they’re going to have to start talking about it seriously. And that means leveling with their readers that we need to raise about $3.5 billion in new revenue. Whether that means a substantial increase in our perversely regressive state sales tax and/or an expansion in the sales tax to services (or even food) and/or a hike in our state property tax levy without slashing local levies in return and/or the repeal of billions of dollars of tax “preferences” (exemptions, loopholes, whatever) and/or a spanking new capital gains tax — or the serious and sensible alternative: a modern, sustainable, and less regressive tax structure that taxes income like almost every other goddamn state — well, the voters will ultimately have the final say on the specifics. But we’ll never get to that point until our state’s so-called “opinion leaders” start having a serious conversation about the facts, however painful and unpopular they might be.

This is an opportunity for our editorial boards to reclaim some relevance by helping to lead our state toward a serious and sustainable education funding solution. And it may be the last opportunity they have.

Revelation 9:7-10
The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. They had what looked like gold crowns on their heads, and their faces looked like human faces. They had hair like women’s hair and teeth like the teeth of a lion. They wore armor made of iron, and their wings roared like an army of chariots rushing into battle. They had tails that stung like scorpions, and for five months they had the power to torment people.

Discuss.

As expected by just about everybody with even a cursory understanding of the law (you know, everybody but Tim), King County Superior Court Judge William L. Downing ruled today that Initiative 1366 is unconstitutional on grounds that… well… really… it’s hard to find a ground on which I-1366 isn’t unconstitutional.

Initiative I-1366 would have slashed the state sales tax by a penny starting in April (at a cost of about $1.4 billion a year), unless the legislature put a 2/3 supermajority for tax increases constitutional amendment on the November ballot. But Downing tossed it out in its entirety, ruling that I-1366 “exceeds the scope of the initiative power,” that it “violates art XXIII the Washington constitution in usurping the role of the legislature by proposing precise terms for a constitutional amendment,” that it “abridges the plenary powers of the 2016 legislature by tying its hands in an impermissible way,” and, of course, that it violates the “single subject” clause of Article II, section 19 by including “three separate subjects and purposes [that] cannot be said to possess a rational unity.”

Congratulations, Tim, on winning the quadfecta of unconstitutionality!

No doubt Downing’s decision will be appealed—but also no doubt it will be upheld, and his quick ruling takes the distraction completely off the table for the current 60-day legislative session. As for Tim, I could watch his pained expression all day long. What a horse’s ass.

1 Samuel 5:6
But the hand of the LORD was heavy upon those of Ashdod, and He destroyed them and smote them with hemorrhoids.

Discuss.

Assuming I get my blown-out tire replaced in time (thanks, I-5 through Tacoma!), I’ll be at Drinking Liberally live tweeting the State of the Union. But afterwards I invite you to join me for what’s become a Seattle tradition these past few years: city council member Kshama Sawant’s annual Socialist response.

I’ve embedded the live stream above. And remember all you Bernie-come-latelies: we’ve been electing Socialists here in Seattle since before it was cool!

1 Samuel 20:30
“You stupid son of a whore!”

Discuss.

2 Samuel 13:10-15
And Tamar took the bread she had prepared and brought it to her brother Amnon in his bedroom. But when she took it to him to eat, he grabbed her and said, “Come to bed with me, my sister.”

“No, my brother!” she said to him. “Don’t force me! Such a thing should not be done in Israel! Don’t do this wicked thing. What about me? Where could I get rid of my disgrace? And what about you? You would be like one of the wicked fools in Israel. Please speak to the king; he will not keep me from being married to you.” But he refused to listen to her, and since he was stronger than she, he raped her.

Then Amnon hated her with intense hatred. In fact, he hated her more than he had loved her. Amnon said to her, “Get up and get out!”

Discuss.

Jeremiah 10:2-4

Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.

For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.

Discuss.

Every year I bravely wage the War on Christmas, and yet once again, despite my best efforts, it came just the same. Damn you, Bill O’Reilly!

Monday evening, returning to the US from our “vacation of a lifetime” to the Galapagos*, I was detained by Customs and Border Patrol agents at Miami International Airport.

I hadn’t flown internationally in 15 years, so I was unfamiliar with the reentry process. As instructed, my daughter and I used the automated kiosks provided for US citizens. We scanned our passports. We answered the questions honestly—”no” to everything that would warrant further inspection—and had our photos taken. (The touch-screen kiosk is actually pretty nifty; it automatically adjusted its height lower to take my daughter’s photo.) Katie’s reentry pass printed out with a slightly goofy surprised smile. Mine printed out with a big X printed across my face, and instructions to go see an agent… who promptly confiscated my passport and called an armed agent to escort me to a holding area. My passport had been “flagged,” I was told.

“How long will this take?” I asked the agent, mentioning that we had a connecting flight to catch.

“Could be five minutes; could be five hours,” he offered uncooperatively. “Could be five years,” he added with a slightly ominous tone.

Yikes.

While others were escorted into rooms for their interviews, my daughter and I sat and waited, making plans for her to continue to Seattle without me or our luggage if the process dragged out too long. After about 45 minutes, I was called to a counter, handed my passport, and instructed to take a left, head down a hallway, and then go through a gray door. It was only once I opened the door that I realized it was an exit. It would have been useful had they told me they were done with me, considering my daughter was still waiting in the sitting area around the front.

I retrieved my daughter, and after a bit of a search, our luggage (our flight information had scrolled off the monitor, and no airport personnel could tell us on what carousel it had arrived, so we had to sort through thousands of bags). The process leaving the baggage area was routine. At no time during my encounter with CBP was I questioned; at no time was my body or belongings searched. Fortunately, we had a three-hour layover, so we made our connecting flight.

But the question remains: Why the fuck was my passport flagged?

I suppose it could have something to do with this. Or this. Or maybe this, this, or this. But although I’ve been a brash and frequent critic of the security theater that has characterized the Orwellian-named Department of Homeland Security in the post-9/11 era, nothing I’ve said or written could reasonably be interpreted as an actual threat. Still, I’ve always entertained the possibility that my writing could leave me open to some sort of retaliation.

But assuming this incident was intentional rather than due to some weird glitch (and to be clear, there was nothing random or routine about my detainment), I’m guessing it probably had more to do with something like this. Or even more likely, this. And if it was, judging from their actual lack of interest in me or my belongings, I can only characterize this experience as an episode of official harassment.

Okay. Lesson learned: From this point forward I will always speak my mind clearly and forcefully—even recklessly—without any fear of the consequences. I’ll just never, ever book a return to the US again expecting to make a connecting flight.

Suck on that, DHS.

 

---

* And yes, it was a vacation of a lifetime.

 

Leviticus 3:17
So you and your descendants must never eat any fat or any blood, not even in the privacy of your own homes. This law will never change.

Discuss.