Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, December 11, 2012
Olympia Rodney Tom Leads a Majority of Two
Posted by Goldy on Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Before the newspaper editorial boards cum all over themselves with orgasmic joy at the prospect of bipartisanship in Olympia, lets just be clear that this "bipartisan majority coalition caucus" the Senate Republicans announced yesterday is total bullshit. There's nothing bipartisan about it. And it's unlikely to play out according to the Republican script.
"At this point nobody has agreed to accept it," deposed Senate majority leader Ed Murray told me this morning about his fellow Democratic senators. Republicans have offered Democrats control of six minor committees, while retaining the most powerful committees for themselves. But to accept this unilateral committee structure would simply serve to reinforce the fiction of bipartisanship, making the Democratic caucus the Washington Generals of state politics.
So would the Dems really turn down these table scraps, leaving Republicans in complete control of the Senate?
"Personally, I think our members would have more influence in a 24-member minority," says Murray, whose experience with power-sharing in the House has left him deeply skeptical of such arrangements. "We want the Senate to be a functional body," Murray says. "Parliamentary bodies work best when somebody is in control, and when the minority has the leverage to influence the majority."
Even when that "somebody" is a Republican? "I don’t want to belong to a body that can’t govern," insists Murray.
And that's exactly what we're about to get. The irony is that as "majority" leader, Tom now leads a majority of two. That may be enough to swing control of the Senate from D to R, but it's not enough to make Tom an actual leader. Republicans may be glad to have the committee chairs that come with Tom's defection, but that doesn't mean he's earned their respect. And having now douched both parties, his lack of loyalty leaves Tom with neither the trust nor the moral authority necessary to persuade caucus members to cast difficult votes.
Wielding power is often much more difficult than seizing it.
"We're going to have unstable majorities for some time to come," warns Murray, "and we need to assure that the majority can govern." Well, you can't get much less stable than the fictional majority that Tom, Sheldon, and the Republican caucus have fabricated.
Murray says he's willing to continue to negotiate, but he doesn't sound hopeful of achieving a functional power-sharing agreement. So for all the Republican talk about bipartisanship, it's just that: Talk. Republicans now control the state Senate. And that makes Tom and Sheldon Republicans. Something I think a lot of Democratic voters will remember when the two are up for reelection in 2014.
1
Luckily, the minority (D's) can ignore the majority (R's) due to the 2/3 insanity from Kommisar Tim Eyman.
2
Keep talking to yourselves, "progressives." Fact is, you lost. Inslee campaigned with a promise not to propose tax increases. He was clearly counting on a Democratic-controlled Legislature to "force" him into it. But that's not going to happen now, which means you can forget your tax dreams.
Stop acting so surprised. Sheldon and Tom are doing the same thing they did earlier in the year when the Democrats refused to act their age and pass a budget. Ed Murray can kick and scream and stamp his little feet as much as he wants, and so can all the politicians in Olympia who can't stomach the idea of living within their means. But that's not going to change anything.
You want to keep whining? Fine, go for it. I, for one, will keep laughing!
Stop acting so surprised. Sheldon and Tom are doing the same thing they did earlier in the year when the Democrats refused to act their age and pass a budget. Ed Murray can kick and scream and stamp his little feet as much as he wants, and so can all the politicians in Olympia who can't stomach the idea of living within their means. But that's not going to change anything.
You want to keep whining? Fine, go for it. I, for one, will keep laughing!
3
I agree, better to just force the republicans to be responsible inevitable failure of this coup.
I'm in Tom's district. I will vote for a republican for the first time in 20 years if I have to, just to see him gone.
I'm in Tom's district. I will vote for a republican for the first time in 20 years if I have to, just to see him gone.
4
#1, the two-thirds applies to taxes. A Republican state senate won't be passing any tax increases.
6
Goldy you clearly saw this coming a long time ago! No wonder Murray wants to come back to Seattle! Yeech, talk about dysfunctional state government.
8
I should think Rodney Tom is going to find himself in a pretty serious race next time, and I should think the Democrats aren't going to waste any time framing him as a turncoat, a liar, and an egoist. An accurate representation of the sort of slimy, Mitt Romney/Dino Rossi-esque politician that'll say whatever it takes to get elected, and then do whatever he wants to grab power and play legislative games once he's in. It's exactly why people are blaming the Republicans in Congress for the fiscal cliff stuff, and it's exactly the message the Democrats in Washington are going to paint Tom with. Loudly, firmly, and unceasingly. He should be afraid. Very, fucking, afraid.
9
Can't the Dems expel both Tom and Sheldon from the party? Better to fight like hell in the opposition and retain a shred of integrity, unlike those two scumbags.
10
I am truly enjoying the squeals of pain from Seattle's unbearably arrogant, hypocritical "progressives." God almighty, this is fun.
BTW what's Ed Murray gonna run on for mayor...leadership?
Thanks for the laugh.
BTW what's Ed Murray gonna run on for mayor...leadership?
Thanks for the laugh.
11
@2,
Remind us how Obama was going to lose the election. Keep making idiotic pronouncements, asshole. You won't be the one laughing in the end.
Remind us how Obama was going to lose the election. Keep making idiotic pronouncements, asshole. You won't be the one laughing in the end.
12
#8, why would it be so different next time? Tom did this last April. Presumably his constituents were aware he did it. Maybe, just maybe, his constituents like it that he's not a hipster "progressive" uber-liberal, D-TheStranger. I know, I know. It hurts so much when people elsewhere in Washington don't realize that you have their best interests at hear .. ha ha ha ha ha!
14
I'm pretty sure the voters of this great state, by 2/3s majority, voted against new taxes, and our Governor-elect ran on a no new taxes pledge, so time to get serious about living within our means and standing up to the state worker unions.
Or does Seattle's loony left have another plan for building their dream nanny state based on wishful thinking?
Or does Seattle's loony left have another plan for building their dream nanny state based on wishful thinking?
15
@7 Because when he did it last time, he became a Democrat and there are more of them in his district than Republicans. the district desired it - but not this time. That is why it won't work this time.
16
Not only that, #14, but I-1185 even won King County. Hey Stranger! Hey Goldy! Did you hear that? Not even King County trusts the "progressives" of Seattle with their hands anywhere near the till. We keep you around for the entertainment, kind of like PETA, but you're on a short leash.
17
@13 Give 'em enough rope.
When will Seattle's far left understand that they are a minority in this state when it comes to taxes and the role of state government wiping people's asses for them?
When will Seattle's far left understand that they are a minority in this state when it comes to taxes and the role of state government wiping people's asses for them?
18
Anybody at The Stranger attempting to line up interviews with Rodney Tom or Tim Sheldon? You know, ask them tough questions and get a response on the record? Seems only fair. Or is it more convenient to call them turncoat pigfuckers and leave it at that.
19
#18, if The Stranger ever did want to interview them, I think it's a fair guess that they just blew any chance of it.
20
@4 strange, and here I thought there was a multi-billion dollar hole in the budget due to the State Supreme Court requiring full funding of Education.
Keep imagining magic funding fairies with no taxes, that will work ... NOT.
Keep imagining magic funding fairies with no taxes, that will work ... NOT.
22
@21
Why would Mister G be crying over a victory for moderates? You know, the folks who helped I1185 win overwhelmingly? Years of joy perhaps!
Why would Mister G be crying over a victory for moderates? You know, the folks who helped I1185 win overwhelmingly? Years of joy perhaps!
23
@16: yes, 1185 won King Co.
Decipimur Specie Recti. Eyman has based his entire career on that phrase.
Decipimur Specie Recti. Eyman has based his entire career on that phrase.
24
Actually, #23, I'd say that decipimur specie recti pretty much defines everything that Seattle's phony "progressives" are about. It's always been about appearances for these people. As soon as no one's looking, they're just as stupid, arrogant, nasty, hypocritical, and corrupt as any wingnut wheat farmer in the Palouse.
25
One thing that'll be different in the next election is that the Democrats won't fund Tom's re-election campaign to the tune of 25,000, which is a nontrivial sum at this level of politics. If they're smart, they'll find someone in Medina who is just a bit to his left, and primary him.
That said, there are real concerns about making the Democratic Party too much like the GOP. We ought to have a wider range of views, and had Tom and Sheldon not betrayed the majority, I'd be for keeping them as members of a broader coalition of the type that American politics produces when functioning well. That said, Tom doesn't represent much of a center-left position in his party and isn't well placed to lead the Democrats to anything. He is, at best, a centrist who has decided to work with the Republicans for the time-being, and this isn't behavior that a party should accept from one of its own. Throw the rascals out.
Also, Mister G is far too obvious a troll. Come on, guys.
That said, there are real concerns about making the Democratic Party too much like the GOP. We ought to have a wider range of views, and had Tom and Sheldon not betrayed the majority, I'd be for keeping them as members of a broader coalition of the type that American politics produces when functioning well. That said, Tom doesn't represent much of a center-left position in his party and isn't well placed to lead the Democrats to anything. He is, at best, a centrist who has decided to work with the Republicans for the time-being, and this isn't behavior that a party should accept from one of its own. Throw the rascals out.
Also, Mister G is far too obvious a troll. Come on, guys.
26
Senator Murray has a good point. If the Republicans want to try their hand at governing with a one-vote Senate majority and a Governor whose vetos they can't come close to overriding, maybe the Ds should let them.
27
#25, now come on. Do you actually think that Tom will rise or fall on whether the butthurt Washington State Democratic Party does or does not give him $25K next time around? In Medina? Really? Are you actually that stupid, or are you just feeling a little puckish today?
28
#20, I see on the Seattle Bike Blog that the state has enough money to throw $1 million at some bike lanes. And the city of Seattle and King County have enough money to hand over $350 million to Chris Hansen and his bondholder friends. There's no money shortage in this state. Never was, never will be.
29
Well, it's not like any of this is really new. Whether it's because of DINOs or New Dems, the Democratic party pretty much always manages to succumb to the Republican play book. Until Dem party activists decide to finally address this recurring issue, one can think it is meant to be this way.
30
@24: since i live in Seattle and consider myself "progressive", whatever that means nowadays, i'd like you to name some of the people you're talking about. perhaps i am one of them.
and decipimur specie recti is not really about hypocrisy, which seems to be your issue.
in 1185's case, if you ask all the yes voters if their intent was to cripple the entire legislative process and prevent any reform of the regressive tax structure, i doubt they would agree in the same numbers. governor eyman preys on the illusion that there can be simple solutions to complex questions.
and decipimur specie recti is not really about hypocrisy, which seems to be your issue.
in 1185's case, if you ask all the yes voters if their intent was to cripple the entire legislative process and prevent any reform of the regressive tax structure, i doubt they would agree in the same numbers. governor eyman preys on the illusion that there can be simple solutions to complex questions.
31
@ 29, maybe a third party (from the LEFT as opposed the center, where the only successful third parties in American history have emerged) can be possible if progressives announce their intent to form a truly liberal party, seeing as how the Democrats are the only place for the just-right-of-center to go. Take advantage of the GOP's floundering.
I think a new center-right party is more likely to be created, because (again) successful third parties only arise in American when one of the major ones destroys itself, but hey, why not try to make history when the opportunity presents itself?
I think a new center-right party is more likely to be created, because (again) successful third parties only arise in American when one of the major ones destroys itself, but hey, why not try to make history when the opportunity presents itself?
32
@12: "#8, why would it be so different next time? Tom did this last April. Presumably his constituents were aware he did it. Maybe, just maybe, his constituents like it that he's not a hipster "progressive" uber-liberal, D-TheStranger. I know, I know. It hurts so much when people elsewhere in Washington don't realize that you have their best interests at hear .. ha ha ha ha ha! "
Senator Tom wasn't up for election this time around. His next time on the ballot is 2014.
He won't win that election.
Senator Tom wasn't up for election this time around. His next time on the ballot is 2014.
He won't win that election.
33
@12: King County subsidizes the rest of the state with our wealth. If Eastern Washington conservatives want to to promulgate the "live within your means" propaganda, let them start by taking no more money than they send to Olympia, and let them stop bitching when King County wants the state funding WE ARE PAYING FOR to come back to us in the form of transit projects, school district improvements, and the rest. Conservatives in Eastern Washington have a lot of nerve bitching about Seattle progressives and our priorities when it's revenue from our businesses that are keeping their damn lights on.
34
@12: Of course... really, I'm totally OK helping Eastern Washington keep their lights on. I'm a spread the wealth progressive who believes everyone ought to have access to essential services. I just absolutely loathe the hypocrisy of the outstretched hands paired with the bloviating, false-moralizing mouths.
36
#30, this was only the second Eyman initiative I voted for, and I've lived here a long time (more than two decades). I didn't vote to "cripple" anything. I voted to keep Washington State from turning into California. The entire platform of the Washington State Democratic Party has become the search for higher taxes, and that's just wrong.
I quite strongly support Obama on raising the top rate on the wealthiest, and I think WA State ought to have an income tax -- but only in return for a lower sales tax, and only if the rates are written into the state constitution, and only if the net effect is revenue neutral.
As for who the fake "progressives" are, look no further than McGinn and the city council, and all their various toadies and hangers-on. They constantly talk about sticking up for the worker bees, and then turn right around and do things that raise the cost of living while handing over gobs and gobs of cash to any billionaire who waddles their way with a suitcase full of cash. It's disgusting and hypocritical.
The entire "progressive" establishment here is a fucking joke, so at the state and local level I've started to hold my nose and vote with the Republicans. It really sucks to do it, but the way I see it around here, the "progressive" Democrats are so goddamned arrogant and dishonest that they need their little one-party nirvana to have a hole or three blasted at it.
I'd do a 180 overnight if I thought these people could be trusted. For me, the last straws were that attempt last year to jack up the car tabs by $60 a year to fund more city planners and Paul Allen's streetcars. Ever since then, I've been voting against every levy and for every tax limitation. The phony-ass "progressives" of Seattle need an ass kicking. I don't expect them to get it, but I'm not going to vote for this shit, anyway.
#34, I couldn't agree more. King County has 28% of the state's population but contributes 42% of the revenues. Eastern Washington does way, way too much whining. The only reason I've started to vote that way is because I see no other way to restrain the corrupt shitheads who run Seattle. All it would take to bring me back is some sanity on the part of the people who run this town. They are hell-bent to stick it to people who work for a living. It stinks, big time.
#35, I'm afraid that battle won't be ending any time soon.
More...
I quite strongly support Obama on raising the top rate on the wealthiest, and I think WA State ought to have an income tax -- but only in return for a lower sales tax, and only if the rates are written into the state constitution, and only if the net effect is revenue neutral.
As for who the fake "progressives" are, look no further than McGinn and the city council, and all their various toadies and hangers-on. They constantly talk about sticking up for the worker bees, and then turn right around and do things that raise the cost of living while handing over gobs and gobs of cash to any billionaire who waddles their way with a suitcase full of cash. It's disgusting and hypocritical.
The entire "progressive" establishment here is a fucking joke, so at the state and local level I've started to hold my nose and vote with the Republicans. It really sucks to do it, but the way I see it around here, the "progressive" Democrats are so goddamned arrogant and dishonest that they need their little one-party nirvana to have a hole or three blasted at it.
I'd do a 180 overnight if I thought these people could be trusted. For me, the last straws were that attempt last year to jack up the car tabs by $60 a year to fund more city planners and Paul Allen's streetcars. Ever since then, I've been voting against every levy and for every tax limitation. The phony-ass "progressives" of Seattle need an ass kicking. I don't expect them to get it, but I'm not going to vote for this shit, anyway.
#34, I couldn't agree more. King County has 28% of the state's population but contributes 42% of the revenues. Eastern Washington does way, way too much whining. The only reason I've started to vote that way is because I see no other way to restrain the corrupt shitheads who run Seattle. All it would take to bring me back is some sanity on the part of the people who run this town. They are hell-bent to stick it to people who work for a living. It stinks, big time.
#35, I'm afraid that battle won't be ending any time soon.
37
"governor eyman preys on the illusion that there can be simple solutions to complex questions."
Calling voters stupid. Always a winning tactic of the far-left. Is it any wonder you poll so low in this state? Even Inslee threw you overboard with his no new taxes pledge.
"He won't win that election."
@32 The 48th went 60% for I-1185. Let me guess, you think a Seattle-style "progressive" could win? Thanks for the laugh.
"If Eastern Washington conservatives want to to promulgate the "live within your means" propaganda.…"
@33 Which is why, no doubt, King County supported the Eyman Intiative by 10 points. Or are King County voters stupid too?
"essential services."
That one always makes me laugh. You morons wouldn't know an essential service if it came up and wiped your ass…oh wait, as an able-bodied, white liberal with a useless college degree in Poetry Therapy, that probably is an "essential service" for you.
With all these cuts in "essential services", for 4 years now Seattle's left has claimed we'd be Mogadishu on the Sound by now. Yet, how come I don't see roving bands of Somalis in Technicals yet? I only Somali soccer moms in 5000lb Landcruisers weaving up and down MLK. Sorry, all is well in WA state.
"governor eyman preys on the illusion that there can be simple solutions to complex questions."
Calling voters stupid. Always a winning tactic of the far-left. Is it any wonder you poll so low in this state? Even Inslee threw you overboard with his no new taxes pledge.
"He won't win that election."
@32 The 48th went 60% for I-1185. Let me guess, you think a Seattle-style "progressive" could win? Thanks for the laugh.
"If Eastern Washington conservatives want to to promulgate the "live within your means" propaganda.…"
@33 Which is why, no doubt, King County supported the Eyman Intiative by 10 points. Or are King County voters stupid too?
"essential services."
That one always makes me laugh. You morons wouldn't know an essential service if it came up and wiped your ass…oh wait, as an able-bodied, white liberal with a useless college degree in Poetry Therapy, that probably is an "essential service" for you.
With all these cuts in "essential services", for 4 years now Seattle's left has claimed we'd be Mogadishu on the Sound by now. Yet, how come I don't see roving bands of Somalis in Technicals yet? I only Somali soccer moms in 5000lb Landcruisers weaving up and down MLK. Sorry, all is well in WA state.
40
People in Washington run on "prefers XXX party". No party can kick someone out, because they're not in.
Tom doesn't care about respect or credibility or whatever we moralists think he should. He's shown he's got the power to fuck up the process and that's his reward. Who cares what happens in 2014; he'll happily mess things up in 2013.
Chopp has got to really hold onto the House this year or we're truly screwed. He managed to do it last year and prevented a lot of carnage, but this is an even worse scenario.
Tom doesn't care about respect or credibility or whatever we moralists think he should. He's shown he's got the power to fuck up the process and that's his reward. Who cares what happens in 2014; he'll happily mess things up in 2013.
Chopp has got to really hold onto the House this year or we're truly screwed. He managed to do it last year and prevented a lot of carnage, but this is an even worse scenario.
41
@36 - "I quite strongly support Obama on raising the top rate on the wealthiest, and I think WA State ought to have an income tax -- but only in return for a lower sales tax, and only if the rates are written into the state constitution, and only if the net effect is revenue neutral. "
Progressives advocate a truly progressive taxation scheme, which means getting rid of most sale taxes and fees for an income tax (doh!). Not only you appear to not know who is a progressive but voting for Eyman's undemocratic and unconstitutional anti-taxation demagoguery is clearly not going to get you any closer to progressive taxation. In fact, the opposite is true since it amounts to furthering the legitimacy of his drown-government-in-a-bathtub religion.
Progressives advocate a truly progressive taxation scheme, which means getting rid of most sale taxes and fees for an income tax (doh!). Not only you appear to not know who is a progressive but voting for Eyman's undemocratic and unconstitutional anti-taxation demagoguery is clearly not going to get you any closer to progressive taxation. In fact, the opposite is true since it amounts to furthering the legitimacy of his drown-government-in-a-bathtub religion.
42
"getting rid of most sale taxes and fees for an income tax"
Luckily it's now legal to put your dreams in a pipe and smoke them because you'll never get the votes for that.
Luckily it's now legal to put your dreams in a pipe and smoke them because you'll never get the votes for that.
43
@31 - It all depends how one measures success. Left wing 3rd parties affected national politics even if they didn't get elected to higher office. But, I was actually suggesting that Democrats should wrench control of their own party away from corporatists rather than leave the party in droves. A new party on the center right would be the ideal moment for the left to tell new dems and co to take a hike.
44
#41, "undemocratic?" What kind of horseshit is that? You obviously don't like what Eyman has done, but his initiatives are definitely democratic. Christ on a crutch, what part of every single county in the state don't you understand?
As for progressive taxation, I'm for it in concept. That's why I support restoration of the Clinton-era tax rates at the federal level. It's also why I'd support a Washington State income tax with at least some progressivity, depending on the details.
But, as a general matter, we are taxed enough at the state level. The mix ought to change to some degree, but not the level. This state's Democratic Party refuses to get that message, which is why the voters in every single county have consistently voted for tax limitations.
The only exceptions are the various levies that Seattle taxpayers are such suckers for passing. I can see it for special projects, but when the proponents just lie about the projects (as with the failed $60 car tab increase), or the levy pays for operating costs (libraries, "families and education"), or it's for an outrageous boondoggle (the seawall, which will turn into the billion-dollar waterfront), then I say "no," at least with my vote.
I don't imagine my view will win too many levy votes, but at least we're holding back the tide -- for now -- at the state level. You get what you can get.
As for progressive taxation, I'm for it in concept. That's why I support restoration of the Clinton-era tax rates at the federal level. It's also why I'd support a Washington State income tax with at least some progressivity, depending on the details.
But, as a general matter, we are taxed enough at the state level. The mix ought to change to some degree, but not the level. This state's Democratic Party refuses to get that message, which is why the voters in every single county have consistently voted for tax limitations.
The only exceptions are the various levies that Seattle taxpayers are such suckers for passing. I can see it for special projects, but when the proponents just lie about the projects (as with the failed $60 car tab increase), or the levy pays for operating costs (libraries, "families and education"), or it's for an outrageous boondoggle (the seawall, which will turn into the billion-dollar waterfront), then I say "no," at least with my vote.
I don't imagine my view will win too many levy votes, but at least we're holding back the tide -- for now -- at the state level. You get what you can get.
45
p.s.: Same goes for the Pigfucker Revolt. Tom and Sheldon just made it damn near impossible for the "progressives" to play their games for another several years. At the very least, those of us who pay the bills around here can at least sit here and taunt you, for now. Which we will happily do. The more you whine, the more we'll laugh at you.
46
MisterG, it took you a long time before you started to write about your ideas. You come across as the type of person who'd rather wipe their butt in someone's face than actually talk to them.
47
@40 - "People in Washington run on "prefers XXX party". No party can kick someone out, because they're not in."
They are effectively "in" if the party doesn't field primary candidates it feels better advocate the party platform. Perhaps, now is the time for Democrats to open the search for candidates to represent these districts in the future?
They are effectively "in" if the party doesn't field primary candidates it feels better advocate the party platform. Perhaps, now is the time for Democrats to open the search for candidates to represent these districts in the future?
48
@44 - What part of requiring a 2/3 majority is not democratic by definition don't you understand? Democracy amounts to having equal say in the running of government, ie one person, one vote, which also applies to our elected representatives. How could handing over control of revenue generation to the minority ever be democratic? This is true no matter how many people voted for this rule and for whatever reason (as a matter of fact you'll note that consistently fewer than 2/3 of the voters are for it, which is quite ironic).
49
#46, it took a long time before someone asked. And, please, you're going to get all Miss Manners on me for my comments on a newspaper site that just called the two politicians "turncoat pigfuckers?"
If you're a "progressive," you can call anyone anything you want, because you're Good and they are Bad. But if one of the Bad isn't gracious, then he's Really Bad. So tell me: Just who the fuck do you think you're fooling?
If you're a "progressive," you can call anyone anything you want, because you're Good and they are Bad. But if one of the Bad isn't gracious, then he's Really Bad. So tell me: Just who the fuck do you think you're fooling?
50
#48, I'd rather see it in the state constitution to remove any legal uncertainty. I'd also like to see a requirement that any initiative requiring new or increased spending include a specific funding source. That said, when the voters repeatedly approve these initiatives, then Olympia should obey them. If the state supreme court tosses them out, then we the voters need to toss out the state supreme court.
In the meantime, though, unless Tom and Sheldon are just playing typical Seattle politics and holding out for a bribe of some sort, at least we'll have a couple of years of no new taxes. And, along with it, a couple of years of pitiful whining from the "progressives" here.
Did you ever read James Clavell's Shogun, by chance? I expect to be like the one Japanese warlord who meditates on the screams of the British sailor being boiled alive. The screams from Seattle's "progressives" will be pure, and beautiful. Maybe I'll fold some origami cranes while I'm at it.
In the meantime, though, unless Tom and Sheldon are just playing typical Seattle politics and holding out for a bribe of some sort, at least we'll have a couple of years of no new taxes. And, along with it, a couple of years of pitiful whining from the "progressives" here.
Did you ever read James Clavell's Shogun, by chance? I expect to be like the one Japanese warlord who meditates on the screams of the British sailor being boiled alive. The screams from Seattle's "progressives" will be pure, and beautiful. Maybe I'll fold some origami cranes while I'm at it.
52
#40, a followup. Is there some reason to think that seven Democrats are ready to peel off in the House? That would be pretty extraordinary. It'd send one hell of a message, that's for sure. Are the "progressives" really that shaky?
53
" fewer than 2/3 of the voters "
Yes, only 65%! What a crushing defeat! Clearly the good people of WA state want high taxes to build a proto-socialist state with free health care, day care, college, ass wiping. How can we deny homes for all, drug counseling for all, food for all, transportation for all, free contraceptives for all, free abortions, free dental care for all, free free pre and after school for all, free night basketball for all.
! anything i missed in your pipe dream?
Yes, only 65%! What a crushing defeat! Clearly the good people of WA state want high taxes to build a proto-socialist state with free health care, day care, college, ass wiping. How can we deny homes for all, drug counseling for all, food for all, transportation for all, free contraceptives for all, free abortions, free dental care for all, free free pre and after school for all, free night basketball for all.
! anything i missed in your pipe dream?
54
Well, #53, let us give the "progressives" their due. I believe in doing that, and there is one big issue in Washington State where they have a very persuasive argument: the outrageous leeching off of King County by the paragons of self-reliance in Eastern Washington.
I am absolutely no fan of the "progressive" whine machine in Seattle, but it is more than equally matched by the wingnut hypocrisy machine on the other side of the mountains. The next time I hear some asshole wheat farmer in the Palouse bitch about state taxes and spending, I'm going to tell him, "Fine, pay for your own goddamned schools and roads, then. And don't tell me about the apples, because I can get them from someone else if I have to."
I am absolutely no fan of the "progressive" whine machine in Seattle, but it is more than equally matched by the wingnut hypocrisy machine on the other side of the mountains. The next time I hear some asshole wheat farmer in the Palouse bitch about state taxes and spending, I'm going to tell him, "Fine, pay for your own goddamned schools and roads, then. And don't tell me about the apples, because I can get them from someone else if I have to."
55
@54 Hell, I'd be happy if south Seattle stopped leeching off north Seattle.
Where's our "equity" north of the Ship Canal?
Where's our "equity" north of the Ship Canal?
56
#55, we have more of a stake in keeping a lid on things in South Seattle than we do in sending a couple billion a year of tribute to those wheat farmers and apple growers just because they're so ... special.
57
@36, you voted for this Eyman initiative because you didn't want Washington turning into California? Sweet and spicy Jesus on a bed of jasmine rice! How fucking stupid are you? Have you no idea why California is as fucked up as it is?
58
@57 well California never reined in spending, we did. So yes, i don't want to be like CA, high taxes and high debt. Ill take the great state of Washington with modest taxes and just the right amount of government. You want the state to wipe your bottom, move to Cuba.
59
Or maybe we can be like Illinois and double the state income tax, watch debts balloon and still have liabilities totaling $271 billion, most pensions.
Nope. WA voters are smarter than that. Live within our means.
Nope. WA voters are smarter than that. Live within our means.
60
@57 clearly the problem with California is taxes aren't high enough!
"California residents paid 11.2 percent of their income in state and local taxes in 2010, the fourth highest tax burden of any state, according to an annual ranking by the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, D.C."
"California residents paid 11.2 percent of their income in state and local taxes in 2010, the fourth highest tax burden of any state, according to an annual ranking by the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, D.C."
61
Yeah, #57, I am stupid. And because I'm so stupid, I'll keep voting against the recommendations of smarter "progressives." Not just because of my stupid opinions, but maybe just for the spite of it. Now: Call me stupid some more. See how far that one gets you.
62
Whatever drivel spewed by the unregistered troll doesn't change that Washington has by far the most regressive taxation scheme in the nation: a minimum wage earner pays 17% of his income in state and local taxes (vs 3% for someone making one mil/yr). That is a greater percentage than Rmoney paid the year his tax rate had to be divulged to the public. The Tax Foundation is certainly not non-partisan as shown by its right-wing positions on taxation and the source of its funding that includes the Kochs. BUT, debunking all wingnuts' lies and distortions on the internet by citing simple facts would take a lifetime, which I haven't got.
63
Mister G, the reason you're stupid (In this particular case. Detailing all circumstances would take years) is because the reason California is in the situation it is currently in, is due entirely to laws like this one. With essentially no hope of ever increasing revenue, there is less money for even basic things. It is similar to your situation, in which your wife has six children and her only source of income is the pennies she makes off advertising from people watching her freakshow YouTube channel.
64
Perhaps these two very well off guys do not intend to run again, and therefore are going balls to the wall. I wouldn't be naive to think your political analysis is so brilliant as to not have been considered. I think these two are genuine in their efforts. Now you can call it misguided, but that's about it.
69
#68, what's the matter? Forget to take your Kumbaya pill today? I love it when you people start kicking and screaming and stamping your "progressive" little feet! You're so cute when you're all "aggro" and red in the face. But watch out! It's a stop light, and a bus!
70
By the way, has anyone ever told you that you're a turncoat pigfucker? In the nicest possible way!
71
Mister G...you're a reactionary little know nothing dick.
Just cut it out. Go back to eating Cheeto's and beating off to Jessica Alba pix...
...go on now, there's a nice little boy, let the big people talk.
Just cut it out. Go back to eating Cheeto's and beating off to Jessica Alba pix...
...go on now, there's a nice little boy, let the big people talk.
72
Oooooh, those are some drugs ya took today! Now tell us, just who here is doing all the reactionating? Ha ha ha ha ha, poor little you! Just wait for a couple of years when all those transit subsidies go away. Oh, the whining!
74
@72
now is that happening before or after Obama loses the election? I can't keep up with all this whining I'm suppose to be doing.
now is that happening before or after Obama loses the election? I can't keep up with all this whining I'm suppose to be doing.
76
Ah, what would this thread be without Christampa, my endlessly whining "progressive" stalker bitch?
77
Without me? It would be much dumber, that's for sure, with you dragging the averages down like you do.
78
Tom has proven over and over, he won't take influence or voting directions from either party. This doesn't make him a traitor, it makes him an idealist. He's not looking to betray constituents, he's trusting them trust him. He knows full well that this will be political suicide if his constituents don't agree, but he firmly believes that this is what the public wants and needs. So what if he's leveraging his power to get to the top. It's completely obvious that he wants to be there to force bipartisan ideals on the inefficient, party line politicians on both sides that will gladly pass enormous taxes onto the public while failing to pay their own share. He's not doing this for power or reelection. Open your eyes, it's clear.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
An I-5 Bridge Over the Skagit River Has Collapsed by Paul Constant
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me... by Dan Savage
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Have You Ever Heard of...? by Dan Savage
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (78) RSS