Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Qaddafi? We Hadn't Seen Nothin... | Lindsay Lohan Gets Engagement ... »

Friday, September 1, 2006

Weekday

Posted by on September 1 at 8:30 AM

I’ll be on KUOW’s Weekday this morning starting at 10 a.m. (right after the “Cookin’ With Leftovers” segment!), and I’ll be talking with Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat about the news of the week, including, potentially: Iran, Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan, alcohol impact areas, the mayor’s club crackdown, Plan B, and Mike McGavick.

Details here.


CommentsRSS icon

Please tell us which candidate is Mike McGavick's closest competator in the primary, so we can screw with the Republicans.

I'm looking at my mail in ballot now, and I think it will be more fun to vote as a monkey-wrencher in the Republican primary.

Thanks.

Ask him to explain why a can of eight percent Olde English is disallowed while a bottle of eight percent Duvel is OK. Or a bottle of 20 percent Thunderbird is prohibited while a bottle of 20 percent Graham vintage port is not. See if he can explain it in any terms except price. Then see if he can explain a discrimination based on price in any way other than attacking the poor.

Speaking of primary ballots, PLEASE remember to vote all the way down your ballots this year.

The judicial races are incredibly important this year if you believe in equality, smart growth, and other important issues.

Look to The Stranger, SEAMEC, and your local Democratic groups for endorsements...

I haven't seen too many people on the street chugging Duvel or port. The rule is idiotic, (mainly because it's not going to work, it's just going to push drunks into other neighborhoods) but I can't say that I'm a fan of public drunks.

I'm not either. I'm just wondering why they're having such a hard time being honest about what it is they want. The ONLY thing that differentiates illegal booze from legal booze is price: cheap is not allowed. That's a class war, pure and simple. Remember, these are legal products, and most of their consumers are NOT street drunks. Why can't they go after the BEHAVIOR instead? It's dishonest and cowardly. It reeks worse than the bums they're trying to drive away. It's the least liberal-minded thing I've ever heard of; it frankly sounds like something George (or maybe Barbara) Bush would dream up.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).