HorsesAss.Org

A heartfelt thanks to the 74 readers who have donated $4,335 to our second annual HA Pledge Week. But while that already surpasses last year’s $4,044 total we’re still far short of our 150 donor/$6,000 goal, six days into the drive.

If I’m at all disappointed it is with the total number of donations, still less than half this year’s target and 32 shy of last year’s total of 106 contributions. It is only through the extraordinary generosity of the donors thus far — averaging almost $59 per contribution — that Pledge Week hasn’t proven to be a bust. I suppose I shouldn’t be picky, but I had hoped for a broader base of readers to show their support.

But there’s still time. Last year a flood of $5, $10 and $20 donations helped put us over the top, and I’m hoping you ride to the rescue this year as well. Please show your support for local progressive media and help me take HA to the next level. Please give today.

From the TNT’s Political Buzz:

It seems Sheriff Dave has changed his Web site, which for months touted a rating showing him being the second most effective House member from Washington state during his first term. But according to the Democrats, sometime earlier this month that reference was dropped from his Web site. Reichert is now listed by congress.org as the least effective Washington state member and 401st out of the 439 House members.

No doubt House Republican leaders had high hopes for the silver haired Sheriff when he first came into Congress, gifting him plum committee assignments that bumped up his rookie year ratings. But in the three years hence he’s proven the biggest local bust since Brian Bosworth, trailing fellow WA Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers by a wide margin, along with 32 (out of 40) other members of his class.

The TNT points out that “the party in control sets the agenda, which affects the ratings,” and that’s good perspective, but so is the fact that when you compare apples to apples, Reichert now ranks only 171st out of 200 fellow House Republicans. Of course, that’s still better than 29 other GOP House members, some of whom aren’t even retired, indicted, behind bars or dead.

Why Reichert would choose to highlight his downward spiral, I don’t know. I suppose that explains the sudden web site edit.

Talk about domestic terrorism, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals want to develop test tube meat:

[PETA] said it would announce plans Monday for a $1 million prize to the “first person to come up with a method to produce commercially viable quantities of in vitro meat at competitive prices by 2012.”

The idea of getting the next Chicken McNugget out of a test tube is not new. For several years, scientists have worked to develop technologies to grow tissue cultures that could be consumed like meat without the expense of land or feed and the disease potential of real meat. An international symposium on the topic was held this month in Norway. The tissue, once grown, could be shaped and given texture with the kinds of additives and structural agents that are now used to give products such as soy burgers a more meaty texture.

Huh.  I’ve always assumed that’s exactly how they already make Chicken McNuggets.

Seven months ago, the last time my 92-year-old grandmother had dinner at my house before she died, I organized all of the women in my family for a photo of “Four generations of women for Hillary Clinton.” In the photo we included the baby tee shirt that my now 15-year-old had worn when “we” volunteered for Bill Clinton’s first presidential run and our prized autographed photo of my infant daughter being held by President Clinton. Hillary was to be our first woman president, and my now adolescent daughters and I agreed with their cousins and aunts and grandmothers and great-grandmother that it was finally time.

Over the last few weeks in Pennsylvania my ambivalence about who I would vote for in the primary has been met by uniform surprise, “but you…. I thought you…aren’t you.” Yes, I am an upper middle class educated professional woman registered Democrat. My first political memory is going door to door for George McGovern with my mother. I have proudly self-identified as a feminist since age 12, and I have never wavered in my support for both Clintons. But, despite her intelligence and her eloquence, Hillary isn’t the candidate I wanted her to be, and if she can’t convince me, how can she possibly win a general election.

I don’t actually fault Hillary, because as all successful feminists of her generation who struggled to break the glass ceiling—and isn’t this the ultimate glass ceiling—she has absolutely mastered the rules of a man’s world. Unfortunately, the game is changing, and the old rules are no longer good enough. I wanted the first woman president to be better than the men who preceded her and not simply to be better at their politics. I wanted Hillary to rise above the fray, to inspire and to unite, and to humanize, and to finally be the one to change both how we campaigned and how we governed. While I owe Hillary a great debt for paving the way for the next generation of women politicians, I believe that our first woman president will not come from her generation. The price she and her peers had to pay for playing by the rules, as they existed, was too high. The first generation feminists didn’t realize that woman shouldn’t simply strive to succeed at the old rules, but they needed to change the rules themselves.

Barack Obama’s speech on race in Philadelphia was probably my turning point. Although young and relatively inexperienced, Senator Obama is behaving like the elder statesman that I wanted Hillary to be. He strives to unite, to inspire and shockingly for a politician, he tells the complicated truth about issues like race, that other politicians avoid. I am immensely grateful to the Clintons for their years of service for the causes I believe in, and I hope that Senator Clinton and former President Clinton continue to use their stage to change the world. I wish the Clintons well and like many of their friends and allies I hope they don’t think I am betraying them, but I am voting for Barack Obama in the Pennsylvania primary.

— Goldy’s Sister

In Seattle, we’re home to the Discovery Institute, a conservative think thank dedicated to the task of changing the definition of science. They’re hyping the new Ben Stein anti-Darwin film, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”. The film is getting awful reviews.

While I oppose the sneaky introduction of creationism into the classroom, I have not seen an energetic and accessible response by the science community.

Until now.

Ken Miller basically rips Intelligent Design apart in a 2 hour long exposé of the claims of intelligent design and the tactics that creationists employ to get it shoehorned into the American school system.

Miller is funny, urbane, and respectful. He’s the author of science textbooks, and testifies in front of school boards across the country. At every one of these engagements, he always manages to eat the lunch of the Discovery Institute guys. The video is nearly two hours long, so allow it time to load. It’s worth it.
[Read more…]

Less than two days left in our annual pledge week and we’ve raised a respectable amount of money, though we’re still far short of our 150 donor/$6,000 target. A huge thanks to the 67 of you who have donated $3,690 thus far.

The righty trolls in the comment threads like to accuse me of being a deadbeat, derisively pointing to this fund drive as proof positive. But what I really am is an entrepreneur, if with an admittedly shaky business plan: asking you to choose to help pay for a service you obviously find valuable. Prove me right, and them wrong; please give today.

Artist rendering of construction of Rossi’s waterfront tunnel

There has been much debate amongst political insiders this week over whether Dino Rossi’s transportation “plan” was a smart political move. Oh, everybody agrees it is dumb policy — a head-up-its-ass, roads-only acceleration of a WSDOT wish list funded by pixie dust and prevarication — but there are some on both sides of the aisle who argue that local voters are indeed gullible enough to believe that enunciating such a plan somehow reflects on Rossi’s ability to achieve it. Me… I’m not so sure.

See, the problem with transportation planning in the Puget Sound region and Washington state, is that we’re just too goddamn, small “d” democratic to give any public official the moral or legal authority to get things done. Robert Moses himself could descend from Mt. Sinai with a comprehensive transportation plan etched in stone by the hand of God, and it would quickly crumble to dust amidst political squabbling, obstructionist ballot measures, picketing polar bears, and our state taxpayers’ profound unwillingness to actually pay for the infrastructure and services we want. Neither our statutory framework nor our political ethos easily accommodates the kind of forceful leadership required to enact, you know… plans.

Hence, a skeptical response from our state’s opinion makers might have been expected even had Rossi’s numbers actually added up. Which they don’t. Prompting even the Seattle Times to politely trash Rossi’s proposal in a Sunday editorial that bandies about the words “mushy,” “baffling,” “troublesome,” and “misleading,” while charging that the candidate “cha-cha’s around the question of what other things the state would do without.”

It is hard to imagine the political advantage to be gained from a “plan” on which even the rhetorical cosmeticians at the Blethen Family Newsletter can’t manage to slather a little political lipstick. And how could they while describing three of Rossi’s major proposals as a “financial sinkhole,” “a waste of money” and, well… a political fantasy?

He relies on tolls less than Gregoire but only because he reaches into a currently untappable fund, Sound Transit’s pot of gold. For Rossi to accomplish his goals, he would need a Republican Legislature.

Rossi wouldn’t just need a Republican legislature to divert Sound Transit’s Eastside light rail dollars to roads, he’d need the cooperation of the Sound Transit board, plus a vote of the people. And he’s not likely to get any of those of three, anymore than he’ll get Seattle voters to approve a waterfront tunnel or residents of the Montlake neighborhood to acquiesce to bulldozing an eight-lane 520 through the Arboretum.

I suppose, technically, it’s still a “plan” — it’s just a plan for failure. The question editorialists should be asking of Rossi is, does he really not understand how politically unrealistic his proposals are… or does he just not care?

My latest Mutinyblogging post is up. It’s about the recent experiment by BBC reporter Nicky Taylor to get stoned every night for a month and why it turned into such an utter disaster for her.

Previous posts in the Mutinyblogging series can be found here:
Mutinyblogging Pours the First Drink
Seattle vs. Jakarta: The Monorail Challenge – Part 11
The Mutiny
Rising Up Against Captain Santa Claus

Moblogic examines the outsourcing of the government:

(This along with some eighty other media clips from the past week in politics are posted here at Hominid Views.)

It’s been pointed out to me that I haven’t been writing as much, and of course that’s true, as I’ve kinda been immersed in coding these days. Recently, I’ve been banging my head against the wall trying to implement a basic Rich Text comment editor, but I’ve given up. If you’re a WordPress jockey who can give me Rich Text comments while automatically stripping out all but the most basic HTML and CSS, I could use your help, but in the meanwhile everybody will just have to get by with the formatting buttons I’ve added to the comment form.

Speaking of hitting a wall, that’s exactly what the Pledge Drive has done over the past 24 hours. We had a great first three days, but as expected, donations slowed to a crawl as we headed into the weekend. 55 readers have now contributed $3,110, and I thank you all, but we’re falling far short of the pace we need to meet our $6,000/150 donor targets.

If I were a righty, I’d have some cushy think tank job or bullshit book deal to pay my bills and keep me blogging. But progressives, well… too often, we’re just expected to volunteer. But you know, I can’t eat passion, and for some reason my bank won’t take page views in lieu of dollars when paying my mortgage, so if you want me to be able to continue blogging full time — and continue developing the all new HA — I need your financial support. Maintaining HA is a helluva lot of work, and I do it for next to nothing. But I can’t afford to do it for absolutely nothing.

So please, show your appreciation by giving whatever you can. An average $40 donation from 150 readers will hit our target, but just five or ten bucks is always welcome. Thanks.

Lee:

I’m totally fine with building fences along the Aurora Bridge, but can we cut out the nonsense that it’s going to save the lives of the suicidal? Fencing off the Aurora Bridge will not save those lives for the same reason that fencing off the Mexican border will not stop illegal immigration.

Normally, Lee is a wellspring of wisdom, but he could not be more wrong. Suicide barriers and border fences serve altogether different functions, and the forces at play in each case have little in common.

When individuals decide to cross the United States’ southern border, they’re reacting to economic conditions. They know that in America they can earn in a day what they can earn in a month in their home countries. There are plenty of low wage jobs in America that will not be filled by Americas. (Or, more accurately, there are plenty of jobs Americans won’t do because the jobs pay so little.) Lee’s right about the U.S./Mexico fence: it’s poorly thought-out, and flies in the face of economic realities. That said…

Suicide isn’t a fungible thing. Ryan Thurston, founder of Seattle Friends, says that suicide is “a very impulsive act.” His group is advocating the installation of a suicide prevention barrier.

More from Thurston’s group:

Why build a suicide barrier — won’t they just go somewhere else?

No. This is a common misconception:

* Two suicide bridges in Washington D.C., the Taft and the Duke Ellington, are located a block away from each other. When officials erected a barrier on one bridge, suicides on the other bridge did not increase.
* Dr. Richard Seiden, a psychology professor at UC Berkeley, studied 515 individuals who were prevented from jumping from the Golden Gate Bridge. Ninety four percent of them went on to live normal and productive lives — a mere six percent attempted suicide again.
* The Memorial Bridge in Augusta, Maine was the sight of 14 suicides before officials erected a safety fence there. After installing the fence, suicides at the bridge fell to zero — and the suicide rate in the entire state did not increase.

We can reduce the number of suicides by installing a fence on the Aurora Bridge. We should, and not only for the benefit of the individuals who will be dissuaded from taking their own lives:

The neighborhood beneath the bridge used to be docks and warehouses, and the suicides went largely unnoticed. But during the technology boom of the past two decades, it morphed into a trendy area full of office buildings, shops and restaurants, and the bodies began to fall where people could see them.

“They end up in our parking lot,” said Katie Scharer, one of Edwards’ co-workers at Cutter & Buck, a sportswear company based in the Adobe complex. “Nobody’s ever totally used to it.”

Grief counselors regularly go to Cutter & Buck, paying a visit as recently as a month ago.

I can’t imagine how awful it must be to work in that area, knowing that at any time someone could fall to their death. If a fence can successfully prevent people from killing themselves, then it’s worth building.

UPDATE [Lee]: I’ve responded in the comments and will leave it at that as I’ll be signed off for the rest of the day, but I want to make it clear that I actually do support the fence for the fact that the jumpers are a huge concern for the businesses and residences below.

During a web chat Friday, Washington Post congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman was asked for his thoughts on the race for WA-08:

Seattle: A Congress question — do you think Washington’s 8th District Rep. Dave Reichert (R) is in a better or worse position to win a rematch against Darcy Burner (D)?

Jonathan Weisman: Worse, way worse. I never count out an incumbent, never. But Darcy Burner is a little more experienced this go-round and a lot lot richer. She’s been raising a ton of money and is getting a lot of help from Democratic Washington.

Darcy’s getting a lot of help from Democrats in both Washingtons… the kinda help Reichert can’t count on getting from Republicans this cycle.

As expected, NBA owners approved moving the Sonics from Seattle to Oklahoma City for the 2008-09 season.  I’ve got nothing really to add at the moment, I just liked the headline.