Ruh-roh! Looks like somebody just played a round of "How now brown cow?" with the mayor.

Josh, your qualifier "Look, I’m not for a rebuild..." says a lot. We can snicker all we want at the mayor getting his karmic comeuppance, but this turn of events seems to be pushing us to the worst possible outcome -- another viaduct. Can someone identify a practical political strategy now to prevent that?

Ah, sweet irony. Delicious.

I wouldn't mind a tunnel if it could be done for anything remotely close to a reasonable price. But this tunnel idea has "Big Dig" written all over it. It is far less financially viable that the monorail Nickels killed.

A deadline for a viable finance plan. What a concept, eh Mayor? Wonder where they got that idea?

The no rebuild option is stupid! First, the rebuild option would out those 110,000 trips a day on the streets of Seattle. What do you think that will do to the pedestrian environment? And your irony about the Monorail is also stupid! Tehee-hee isn't that funny that the Mayor's getting screwed the sane way he screwed the Monorail -- only trouble is that it's Seattle that's getting screwed here. Hope you enjoy your laugh as we end up with a damn rebuilt big freeway going through the middle of the Waterfront again. -- this time without the nice view.

Oh, c'mon now, Josh. Let's put that bourgeois liberal education of yours, and those cucumber sharp political insights, to work:

Do you really think that Mary Lou-Who Dickerson -- one of the simpiest D's in all of Oly -- really has the wherewithal or clout to float this bill, which essentially beyotch-slaps Ed Murray (and Nickels) in the process?

You do? Really? You're even more thick-headed than I thought.

I challenge you to tell me what action of any substance Dickerson has EVER spearheaded? She obviously is a proxy for the real might behind this battle. C'mon think now: Who wields the real power for House Dems? Whose been the biggest in-party thorn in Murray's side in recent memory? I'll give you a hint: His name rhymes with Chank Fropp.

If you weren't so nearsighted, you might be dangerous. Instead, your gullibility forces us readers to cut through the bullshit on our own.

Dogday-
Do you have anything more substantial to say about this particular amendment? It doesn’t matter what role Dickerson actually played, and after re-reading Josh’s posts, I don’t think he’s necessarily singling her out beyond stating that she was the sponsor. The fact remains that the amendment may have strong support in the House, but faces more of an up-hill battle in the Senate.

And the ironic parallel to the death of the Monorail is certainly worth noting.

Tee-hee!
Josh thinks it's a riot that our region faces a crisis over the Viaduct and there is no agreement on a solution.
Tee-hee!
Josh did such a great job on the Monorail.
Badass? Try dumbass.

Yeah, we all got the joke Josh - but it seemed a little too Shadenfreud-ish to share in - esp for those of us who don't want another viaduct built.

You know, it looks like finances are killing every big transit project around Seattle - people will pay $2 billion for poorly designed half measures, but they won't pay $9 billion for the real thing.

Maybe instead of spending your time making inappropriate jokes, you should start looking into why big transit projects cost so much around here - whose pockets are getting lined?

I remember awhile back seeing a comparison of the cost of our upcoming light rail line with the costs of similar lines around the country - and we came in among the highest cost per miles around.

Only New Jersey was in our league - and if you've ever watched the Sopranos, you know why transit projects cost so much there...

My point, Who Cares (aka Josh), is that JF's political insights obviously aren't keen enough to really understand how our state's political dealings work, let alone to suggest tinkerings with the proposal in question. So when he's offering up tips to Dickerson -- who, without behind-the-scenes help from the party's hammer, could in NO WAY have gottten the overwhelming support needed to drive this effort -- for adding amendments here and there, he's simply way off base (no to mention revealing his vast ignorance of WA politics); particularly when the battle here may really have more to do with prior history between Chopp-Murray.

Is that substantial enough for you, WC, or do you need your understanding of the city-state transportation funding dynamic that all of us Seattleites are now beholden to erroneously spoon-fed to you by an obviously blind to the process clod who purports to know more than he obviously does?

xoxo,
Dog Poop!

PS: A word of advice to Mr. Jost Feit Club: Shit-can the telegraphing of what is or isn't "ironic" in your reportage, please. I mean, Gosh oh gee-willikers, I know us slack-jawed Seattle yocals are mere simpletons compared to you intellectually gigantic East coast transplant types, but even half-wits like us can infer irony once in a possum's age without having it banged over our empty little heads. YEEHAW!

trust me, josh doesn't have tits like these. I just have a secret crush on him.

i still don't think that the point of josh's post was to give dickerson props (which is what you seemed to hone in on), and so i thought that your posting was lame, given the substantial debate we could be having on this amendment.

hone in on props to dickerson?
jeezus. you're even thicker than he is. re-read my last post, toots...

since it's a secret crush, i have no personal knowledge as to how thick he is. but i did misread your second post to say "props" instead of "tips." so sorry.

regardless, in both of my posts, i was focusing on your 1st post, which focuses on dickerson's role in the amendment process, and how josh has misunderstood and mis-stated that role. once and for all, as much as you seemed to enjoyed mocking other people's lack of savvy regarding the olympia process, there's more interesting things to discuss here. like the likelihood of it passing through both the house & senate, especially given the players in the senate.

Why did this become all about Josh? Stay focused!

There is no reason why this city shouldn't have rapid transit. There are forces big and small against it. Let's think about the ramifications of that and how we can improve the situation, okay?

I agree with some of what Josh is saying, but not with the "no bonds longer than 30 years". That's stupid, and it's what killed the monorail.

The Sydney Harbour Bridge is one of the great landmarks of the world and took 60 years to pay off. It was worth it. Their even more famous Opera House was very nearly scuttled in mid-construction by short-sighted cost concerns. Fortunately it was finished, though without the original architect or many of his beautiful interior touches. But they built it. It's value to Sydney is incalculable; it's what MADE Sydney.

The tunnel option is not going to "make" Seattle, thoughb its value to the city is indeed "incalculable" -- in the negative direction. I don't advocate building it or acquiring debt for it. But debt in itself is not a bad thing IF YOU GET VALUE BACK.

catalogood

catalogood

catalogood

Look now

Look now

worldpharmacy

worldpharmacy

http://diazepam-mfoj.blogspot.com

Best in the best

Best in the best

Look now