Comments on Sonics Initiative. Election Cheat Sheet

So, are you saying you were for it before you were agin' it? Or that the Times was for it before they were agin' it?

Someone's flip-flopping ...

Will,
Cute. And I was waiting for someone to point that out.
So, if you're actually being serious, here's the obvious response.

1) I exlpain my flip flop...that is: I fully say why I support the initiative. (Seattle Times on McGavick...not so much...except to say he has good leadership skills.

2) I own up to it... that is: I'm the one who brought my previous opinion to your attention. (Seattle Times on all the editorials they wrote that contradict their McGavick endorsement...Silent.

3) No one on the Stranger ed board has a family/financial interest in the Sonics initiative. That's not the case with the Seattle Times' McGavick endorsement, which seemed to adhere to Frank Blethen's estate tax repeal crusade.

If you weren't being serious... I say: "Hold me closer tiny dancer. Count the headlights on the highway."

Here's my issue with I-91: how do you enforce it? And do the proprietors of said initiative attempt to retroactively enforce it? If so, could it force the other two teams out of Seattle as well?

Actually, enforcement is easy. You let people like me sue them. It's in the text of I-91.

And we should be so blessed. I'd love to see the Seahawks move to Mercer Island.

i'm sorry josh. i like you but i-91 just pisses me off.
imagine if boston never had the celtics or the red sox. the teams add so much to the experience of the people who live in the city and in the whole region around it.
to me, i-91 is equivalent to saying that the city can't build a public park unless the park will turn a profit.
i am amazed that so many liberals are supporting such an extremely right-wing stance.