Bill Sherman: Too Straight For Josh Feit.

or...beyond being a Dan Fan, are you merely parroting what your muse desires, or do you have valid, principled reasons for advocating against Mr. Pedersen?

Dan Savage: Immature self-centered sniping little bitch

The fact that he didn't do that, and apparently didn't set this sitch up so that he could do that makes me think he's not smart enough for the job.

This is why we (liberals, identity-politics fools) lose people - we're stuck playing two-dimensional checkers when everyone else out there is playing Old School Star Trek 3 Dimensional Chess.

Stupid ass bitches.

I'm beginning to understand why many professional politicians (e.g. Karl Rove) don't mind at all why so few citizens bother to vote.

Look, we got six good candidates for a seat. Trying to define oneself on just gay rights might work elsewhere, but not in the 43rd, which is known for being the ones that get the King County Dems to include questions on that issue for their questionnaire.

Face it, if you were a gay-basher, you would NEVER make it thru the 43rd primary - EVER.

So, instead, people want to hear what your stand on OTHER issues is.

Logical, no?

Let's hope Jamie studies up on the issues for the 43rd District Democrats Candidates Forum on July 18th at Town Hall (8th and Seneca) - people can ask questions of candidates directly at 6 pm and the official forum starts at 7:30 pm. Oh, and the price is sweet - FREE!

As for the candidates forum, if I'm in town I'll attend. But I probably won't ask questions—we get to have all the 43rd Ds in for interviews in our offices, and Jamie and I will canoodle then. And does anyone doubt that if showed up at the forum to "confront" Jamie the same people bitching about the few swipes I've taken at him on Slog would bitch at me for attempting to hijack the forum?

As for my posts, well, I don't see what's so bitchy about them. But maybe it's hard for me to see the bitchy trees here in my bitchy forest. Or is that the other way around? Anyway, my swipes at Pedersen—all two of them!—hardly amount to some sort of anti-Pedersen jihad. Let's see... I didn't like Pedersen volunteers' scripted rap, and I don't think the gay rights movement in Washington state will collapse if Pedersen isn't elected, and—gasp!—I said so. Some jihad!

At this point we may endorse Pedersen just to fuck with people.

Now... if we can get everyone else to write about Dan or Josh, it's a Stranger-palooza!

So let's get these two weasels on each other.

Dan? Josh? Who's the fairest one of all? Deploy your mirrors! It's a Narcissism circle jerk! You first, Dan.

[no such thing as bad press in a cool district like the 43rd, so long as lots of people vote]

But if you show at 6 when the candidates arrive, anyone can talk directly with the 6 candidates, so it's fair game.

I'll bring the whipped cream ...

But really, who the fuck cares what Dan says anyway. Make up your own mind you fucking idiots. Do your own independent research on the candidates if you live in this district.

Is it surprising that Pedersen played the gay card? Is it surprising that McIver played the black card against Pelz? Funny thing is I know lots gay people who don't feel the need to vote for gay candidates but voted for McIver b/c they thought we should have a black man on the Council. Go figure that logic.

As to Pedersen playing the gay card, I told the Seattle Times—but they didn't use it—that the gay card was legit. Pedersen has a right to appeal to the gay base in 43rd, and it's a card he should play. What I objected to—what my original Slog post was about—was Pedersen volunteers implying that he was the only pro-gay marriage candidate in the race. That isn't the case.

Also, I don't necessarily think the 43rd House seat is a gay seat. If that's how gay activists see it, they should say so.

excuse the gendered language.