Head West, Turn Right

The Joint Blog of the Conservative Northwest Blogging Alliance: Red State Points of View from a Blue State Point on the Compass.

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Who is Giving to Ron Sims?

Ron Sims is way out front in the fund raising race with David Irons for King County Executive. King County Executive Ron Sims has raised $506,554 through July 31, 2005 while Councilmember David Irons has raised $168,320 through June 30, 2005. This information is from the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission. It is always interesting to see who is giving to which candidates. The largest group of givers (321 donations) to Mr. Sims campaign is King County government employees. They gave approximately $51,000. The second largest group of givers was City of Seattle employees followed by Sound Transit employees. Below is a selected group of donors to Mr. Sims campaign.

Royer, Charles


Seattle Mariners




SEIU Local 519


SEIU Local 775


Trades Seattle Bldg & Construction


UA Local 32


UFCW Local 1001


UFCW Local 81


WA Machinists Council


WA State Council of County & City Employees


WA Teamsters Leg League


Intel Fed Prof & Tech Eng, Local 17


Puget Sound Energy


Rahr, Susan L


Wallace Robert C & Joan S


Ruckelshaus William D & Jill S


Cross posted at Island Republican.

When Will Voting Be Safe Again?

After a recent speaking engagement at the Downtown Seattle Republican's Club, King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng has found himself "tongue-tied". Maleng was kind enough to give lip-service to the standard Ron Sims and Dean Logan poppycock, but not actually bold enough to say IF, HOW or WHEN he would pursue election law violators. For more on Maleng's exact comments, and his bold new plan to take on car thieves, read the SoundPolitics (SP) transcript here.

Maleng has been a respectable public servant in King County for years. Why aren't his actions matching up with his record? Perhaps Ron Sims' reach extends further than we had imagined?!?

Don't think Maleng is off the hook just yet. The Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) is urging Maleng to pursue violators by enforcing the laws already on the books (read the press release). Stefan Sharkansky is also following this part of the elections fiasco very closely at SP.

All of this is happening as several individuals and organizations are promising to challenge illegally registered voters. Will the system be ready by 2006? I don't think anyone is claiming that by a long shot, but this just goes to further the electorate's concern about a "fixed" system.

Monday, August 22, 2005

TaDa!! It Was Senator Kate Brown (D) - Portland

Posted also at Jaybird's Nest

On August 5, 2005 I asked the question here [and on August 8th here], with respect to House Bill 3486 (Oregon's "Megan's Law", creating a state-wide web site to list predatory sex offenders), "who is it that opposed this bill?" I sent emails out to 4 separate Oregon state legislators, two prominent Republicans and two prominent Democrats. I asked them what happened to House Bill 3486, and I further specifically asked them who it was that was playing games with it. It was bottle-necked somewhere in the Senate, and it looked like it wasn't going to even get a vote, even though it had broad bi-partisan support. I wanted to know who was behind the logjam. I got two responses to my emails. The two Democrats are the ones who responded, and they told me that at the last minute, on the eve of adjournment, the bill was voted on and passed. Unanimously. But nobody, not the Democrats, and not the Republicans, nobody, told me who it was that was playing games with it, i.e., who it was that had stalled it in the Senate, making the brinksmanship necessary.

Thanks to Bill O'Reilly of "The O'Reilly Factor" on FOX News, now we know, or at least we have a strong clue. Turns out that State Senator Kate Brown, (D) - Portland, Chairperson of the Senate Rules Committee, had played games with, tabled, and ultimately killed a companion bill to Megan's Law, Oregon's version of "Jessica's law," which, if enacted, would've established mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders, particulary when the victim was a child. Yep, Kate Brown killed it.

Steve Doell, the head of Crime Victims United, and who was a guest on Bill O'Reilly's program Thursday night said that there were powerful people --people with influence-- who'd gotten to and held sway with Senator Brown. It has been said that Brown was against the bill because it treated family members and strangers the same. In other words, apparantly, Brown believes that a parent or uncle or other family member who rapes a child should get off easier than when a non-relative rapes a child. Wrap your mind around that. Try to feature why Brown, or anybody else, might think thataway. And when you're ruminating about it, bear in mind the component of "powerful people" getting to her and influencing her.

THe Oregon State Legislature official website provides a nice little bio of Senator Brown. A more sterotypical standard issue leftwinger would be hard to find.

Lars Larson intimated on his radio show that Brown has strong ties to the gay and lesbian community in Portland, that it's that community that comprises her support base. Larson says that the sex offender bills were opposed by factions within the gay community, and it was from within that faction within that community that the influence was brought to bear on an accomodating Kate Brown. Larson theorized about a "chickenhawk" who has legally adopted his boytoy. You get the picture. And it didn't seem that Larson was talking about a hypothetical chickenhawk with an adopted boytoy, but rather a real live case.

Whatever. Be all that as it may, and whatever her motives, it nevertheless appears that it was Senator Kate Brown who worked to oppose House Bill 3486, "Megan's Law," and she also opposed and managed to successfully kill "Jessica's Law," which would've provided tough mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders against children.

And I'm wondering what it is that Senator Brown has on her colleagues in the legislature from both sides of the aisle where nobody wants to finger her for who she is and what she does.

Monday, August 15, 2005

Regarding Portland and Trammell Crow

I decided to run Jim's numbers and they look OK to me. I did, however, find this. These are the summary minutes from the July 12, 2005 Portland Planning Commission. It states that the actual size of the 'affordable' unit is 514 square feet. After looking at other Alexan properties built by Trammell Crow across the country, I found that these may be the first 'affordable' units built into an Alexan community. On the other hand, they are significantly smaller than the smallest unit in other Alexan Communities. Additionally, they are among the most expensive smallest units in Alexan Communities.

OK, I got a little off topic, back to the math. Jim's point number one is just fine. Point 2 for the 'affordable' unit becomes $850 ÷ 514 sqft = $1.65 per sqft. This gives a difference of $.2593 between 'affordable' and penthouse.

Point 3 for the 'affordable' unit becomes $3037 ÷ 514 sqft = $5.91 per sqft, still more than three times the penthouse.

The 'lost rent' from point 4 for the 'affordable units' nearly doubles to $76770 per year. But how significant is that $76K to the entire project. If you listen to Trammell Crow in the PT article, every penny counts (as I laugh to myself and think that Trammell Crow wouldn't be pitching affordable if they couldn't make money doing it).

The above cited council minutes give us some clues. It tells us that
15,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space
will be included in the design. If we assume a square building all the way up, we know that there will be roughly 15,000 sqft per floor in this 22 story building. If we remove that square footage and that of the 'affordable units' we know there is just over 290K sqft left. Amazingly enough 13 penthouses will fit nearly perfectly in that 15K sqft.

So lets assume that only the top floor has penthouse. That leaves us with 275,378 sqft of space for the remaining 255 apartments, which is 1080 sqft per unit. I decided to pick an average rent of $1800 a month for those units (roughly equal to the $ per sqft cost of the 'affordable' units). With these numbers we can calculate yearly rents for the residential portion of the building.

48 affordable units x $850 per month = $40,800 per month = $489,600 per year
13 penthouse units x $2,200 per month = $28,600 per month = $343,200 per year
255 other units x $1,800 per month = $459,000 per month = $5,508,000 per year

Total yearly residential rent = $6,340,800 per year

At that rate, it would take Trammell Crow well past the 10 year abatement to begin to make a profit after taxes are figured in.

BUT I FORGOT SOMETHING DIDN'T I?!? There's that 15K sqft retail space. But it can't make that big of a difference, can it?

This is a study prepared by Economics Research Associates for the Portland Development Commission and Association for Portland Progress back in 2002. Among its findings, it states
Rents range from $12 to $20 NNN in the older buildings to $40 to $45 NNN in a few of the new well-located buildings.
Since this will, no doubt, be a "new well-located" community, I will assume the price per square foot for that 15K space to be $40 per sqft (again conservative due to taking the lower end and the fact this study is three years old).

So, 15K square feet x $40 per square foot = $600,000 per month = $7,200,000 per year

Add that to the $6,340,800 per year from residential space and we see that Trammell Crow will get $13,540,800 a year from this building.

Pretty sweet deal to me...

Is This In Spokane's Future?

A recent story in the Portland Tribune (here) has really got some people thinking about Portland's "smart growth," planning. Central to the entire SG scheme is of course Light Rail.

Spokane is of course thinking about running some Light Rail lines around town at anywhere from $25 to $50 million dollars per mile. A recent email to a Spokane County Councilman from the Coyote has not been responded to... hmmm....

So for the good citizens of Spokane we here at NWRepublican thought we would share some of the email discussions that the citizens of Portland are having concerning these boondoggles and how they can radically spin out of control. If any of our our readers have any contacts with the Spokane County Commissioners you might want to alert them to the future of Light Rail developmente, being played out right here on this site.

Portland email discussion starts now:

At 11:06 PM 8/14/05 , STEVE wrote:

Why should South Waterfront developers receive any property tax abatements?Trammel Crow and other land owners in South Waterfront have already been handed windfalls for their property.

With the public paying for streets, sewer and water, streetcars, and other infrastructure for the developers and zone changes which doubled building heights, sizes and values, Trammel Crow and the rest have already gotten far more than they deserve. Their prime, river front, high rise development is proving to be just that, as hot early condo sales reveal NO public subsidy was likely needed at all. Let alone a 10 year property tax abatement which will sever a future revenue stream of millions headed towards basic city services.Services which will be provided to this development even without their fair share of property taxes.

From the Portland Tribunehttp://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=31260 ---"DiChiara said that if the council does not approve the abatement, Trammell Crow will have no choice but to change the project to condominiums with no affordable units or sell the property to another developer. “It would stop as rental apartments. Our fallback is to build it as condos or sell it to someone else,” he said."----They already conned the city into providing infrastructure and sweeping zone changes for their development.

Now they threaten insolvency and no ability to provide any affordable housing without the abatement. Why? Because they are confident that line of BS will work. If all it takes to get the 10 year abatement is to throw out a canned threat why not?---"The Portland Development Commission and the Portland Planning Commission have approved the abatement. Council approval is the final step in the program. The abatement would keep approximately $60 million off property tax rolls for 10 years."---Good thing Portland didn't buy PGE or they would be demanding free power too.Steve

Jim Writes: -From: Jim
Here are some ways to look at the proposed Alexan abatement. (See math section below for details)
1. The abatement is enough to totally pay for a penthouse apartment for each “affordable” unit. (See 1 below)
2. The monthly rent for the “affordable” unit is only $0.14, per square foot, less than a penthouse apartment. (See 2 below)
3. The landlord’s actual income per square foot for those “affordable” units is about $6.33 per sq foot, over three times that of a penthouse unit. (See 3 below)
4. For giving up $39,318 in rent, the landlord gets a $1,200,000 abatement.(See 4 below)There is a name for the entity on the other side of this kind of deal: SUCKER!!Portland, the city that works.(Be sure to check my math & reading of the Tribune article)

---------------- Here is the math -------------
1. Per unit, per month abatement:$60 million off tax rolls x .021 = $1,260,000 in annual taxes abated.$1,260,000 in annual taxes abated ÷ 12 = 105,000 monthly taxes abated.There will be 48 “affordable” units:105,000 monthly taxes abated ÷ 48 units = $2187 per month per unitRent of a penthouse (See Tribune story): “largest of them, 1,150-square-foot penthouse apartments. . . rent for up to $2,200 per month”

2. Per square-foot costs of each type of unit:1,150 sqft Penthouse rents for “up to” $2,200 per month or $2,200 ÷ 1,150 sqft = $1.91 per sqft. 480 sqft “affordable” unit rents for up to $850 per month, or $850 ÷ 480 sqft = $1.77 per sqft.Difference between “affordable” and penthouse: $1.91-$1.77=$0.1422 per sqft.

3. Per square foot income to landlord:Since the abatement is an avoided expense, it is just like income: $850 rental income+$2187 abatement = $3037 per month income attributable to the “affordable” unit. This is $3037 ÷ 480 sqft = $6.33 per sqft -- over three times the income per square foot ($1.91, above) that a penthouse unit produces.

4. Lost rental income due to the “affordable” units:It appears that they are giving up about $.1422 per sq ft (see 2 above)48 units x 480 sqft x $.1422 per sqft = $3276 per month for ALL 48 units.Annually: $3276 x 12 = $39,318

RAS writes:

This is not supposed to make fiscal sense -- but rather isn't this how they keep the Portland Democrat machinery well oiled and purring along even without rapist Neil Goldschmidt at the helm? What is amusing lately is that the rest of the state appears to be finally catching on to what Portland is up to and is now denying them the extra taxes they need to provide this generous tax abatement largess to their "supporters." Having seen how upset the Demos were that their attempt to hijack and extend an expiring tax on bonds was thwarted by the Republican House, it will be interesting to see how they attempt to extend the huge "temporary" Multnomah County income tax which is scheduled to expire next year -- they promised faithfully -- just like they were going to fix the high cost of teacher medical benefits as part of the deal.
So long as PERS hangs over the entire fiscal structure of Oregon there will be this on-going drum beating for more taxes to fund these lavish union giveaway programs. Have the people finally caught on to what is going on? The Portlanders I know say adamately that they have finally had enough and won't be suckered again. We know the companies which have left or don't locate here have finally figured it out -- but ordinary citizens -- how long will they remember that photo in the Oregonian showing the two early-retired teachers sunning themselves poolside in Arizona, living the good life while the rest of us toil here in the rain to provide their means?

Rally in Bellevue

Rally for the President! Come support the President's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Roberts, and enjoy a *sunny* day with fellow conservative activists!

Saturday August 20th at 11:00 am PDT
Bellevue Downtown Park, 100th Avenue N.E.
Contact: Megan R. DeVere megandevere(at)yahoo(dot)com
Western Region Operations Director
Washington State College Republicans Federation
Phone: (Two-Zero-Six)-241-9545

Watch for the announcement on Northwest Afternoon, hopefully coming this week. If you want to be one of the interviewees, or help us out by sitting in the audience, contact Megan (see above).

We hope to see you there!

Friday, August 12, 2005

Seattle Department of Transportation – Where $800 Million is Nothing to Worry About

I listened to a luncheon speech on July 26 by Grace Crunican, Director of Seattle Department of Transportation. This speech was given at a Bellevue Rotary meeting and focused on the Alaskan Way Viaduct. Ms. Crunican was a good speaker and presented a number of interesting facts regarding regional transportation projects. She repeatedly referred to the “great” job the governor and state legislature did on passing a major transportation “funding” package. She commented often that the business community had to “get behind” the No on I-912, which would repeal the 9.5 cents gas tax increase.

While discussing the tunnel option including a great animated movie showing how traffic will move through the new tunnel, she did not present other options for the project. She discussed the problems with the sea wall, which will be replaced whether or not the viaduct is replaced and how the construction projects will impact traffic in the area. The Alaskan Way Viaduct handles 25% of the north- south traffic flow through downtown Seattle.

During the question and answer section, she was asked about funding and the cost difference between a tunnel and replacing the viaduct with a similar but updated structure. The cost for the tunnel option is $4.4 billion. The replacement project would be $3.0 billion. The current funding is $2.0 billion from the new gas tax, $500 million from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and $500 million from the Port. She stated that would leave $800 million of “local” funding to complete the project. How this adds up to an $800 million shortfall (it looks like $1.4 billion) is a mystery. To replace the existing viaduct as is would only be $3.0 billion for which there is current funding. But she stated the additional $800 million cost for the tunnel was not a major concern. And all these costs do not add any additional traffic capacity.

The numbers don’t add up - $800 million vs. $1.4 billion and only one option is being presented by the City of Seattle. The money is available to rebuild the viaduct and if Seattle wants a tunnel then Seattle should pay for it.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

What Lies Beneath... Or Not

(Cross-posted at Memento Moron)

Oregon's quarter came out this year, and I've finally had a chance to look at it, even spend it. I'm still disappointed.

Like most Oregonians surveyed, I wanted this design to be chosen:
Image hosted by Photobucket.com

But Governor Kulongoski went with this one:

He said this about the process of choosing a quarter design: "This is a unique opportunity for Oregon," said Edwards. "Our quarter will communicate to the nation and the world our values and Oregon´s natural beauty."

I think this one falls short.

I have to admit, in it's final minted form it's a rather pretty design:
Image hosted by Photobucket.com

But despite my love for Crater Lake, it really doesn't convey the significance of the Oregon Trail design. The Oregon Trail was the single most defining event in the history of this state, and indeed, one of the most important events in the history of the NATION. It's that significant.

The rationale behind Kulongoski's decision was at least in part a desire to avoid upsetting Native American groups. And while I understand that the colonization and settling of this continent by Europeans is a sore issue for First Peoples, pretending it didn't happen isn't going to make things any better for anyone. There's more to this state than pretty scenery. There's history here, there are stories to be told.

In a way, the image on the quarter itself suffers from the same lack of depth in portraying Crater Lake as it does in portraying the depth of this state. You see a shiny, flat surface to the lake. What it doesn't -- indeed what it CAN'T portray, is the fact that Crater Lake, at over 1,400 feet, is the deepest fresh water in North America. It's also some of the cleanest, clearest, bluest water anywhere in the world.

So come visit this state. When you do, go see Crater Lake -- it's worth the trip, and the quarter doesn't do it justice. The sight will take your breath away.

And while you're at it, see the rest of the state too. Take in all the beauty about which I've blogged. Visit Fort Clatsop, where Lewis and Clark spent their Pacific winter. Visit the Oregon Trail museums (we have 2), and the Brownsville Pioneer Museum. learn about our culture, our history, as well as our scenery. The quarter doesn't do them justice either.

Monday, August 08, 2005

Where Oregon Ranks

Like I posted on my blog here, I have no particular interest in the area of sex offenders, other than being just an regular plain old vanilla citizen, with a wife, two daughters, and a grandaughter, and armed with a little bit of information. Like the fact that sexual predators aren't rehabilitatable. Like the fact that they typically abuse upwards of 100 times before they are caught. We now know enough, psychologically, sociologically, and criminal justice-wise, to know that these guys have to be watched.

So those Oregon legislators who proudly preen about what a great job they did with this session they just wrapped up may want to think twice about all that preening. I did a little checking, and when it comes to which states have a website listing sex offenders on a state-wide basis, and which states don't have such a website, this is what I found. Check it out. See where Oregon comes in compared to all the other states and the District of Columbia.

I'm still waiting to see which Oregon legislator of the 4 legislators I sent emails to, which includes House Speaker Karen Minnis, will be the first to answer me and explain to me how House Bill 3486 got killed, why, and by whom. I haven't received any replies yet (other than this).

And the Oregon legislators are proud of the job they did this session where they allowed the bill that would have established an Oregon site to be killed?

Alabama: here
Alaska: here
Arizona: here
Arkansas: here
California: here
Colorado: here
Connecticut: here
Delaware: here
District of Columbia: here
Florida: here
Georgia: here
Hawaii: here
Idaho: here
Illinois: here
Indiana: here
Iowa: here
Kansas: here
Kentucky: here
Louisiana: here
Maine: here
Maryland: here
Massachusetts: here
Michigan: here
Minnesota: here
Mississippi: here
Missouri: here
Montana: here
Nebraska: here
Nevada: here
New Hampshire: here
New Jersey: here
New Mexico: here
New York: here
North Carolina: here
North Dakota: here
Ohio: here
Oklahoma: here
Oregon: ABSENT. Zero, zip, none, nada.
Pennsylvania: here
Rhode Island: here
South Carolina: here
South Dakota: here
Tennessee: here
Texas: here
Utah: here
Vermont: here
Virginia: here
Washington: here
West Virginia: here
Wisconsin: here
Wyoming: here

UPDATE - 8/08/05, 10:17pm

I received the following email today from State Senator Richard Devlin (D-Tualatin).

Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:32:05 -0700
Subject: RE: HB 3486

From: "Sen Devlin"
To: "Jay Bird"

Dear Jay,

Thank you for your email regarding HB 3486. I appreciate your taking the time to write. This bill passed the House on 6/27 on a vote of 58-0. On 8/4 I carried this bill on the Senate floor and it passed with a unanimous 30-0 vote. It now goes to the Governor.

Senator Richard Devlin


And in response to which I sent the following email to Senator Devlin:

Mon, 08 Aug 2005 21:48:18 -0700
From: "Jay Bird"
To: "Sen Devlin"
Subject: RE: HB 3486

Senator Devlin,

Thank you much for your information about HB 3486. And thank you also for your efforts in pushing it through the Senate. The last that I had heard was about 10 days ago when it was reported that the bill was stalled in committee or something to that effect, and it appeared at that time that it was going to not get a vote. What happened? How and why was it stalled? With those unanimous votes in both chambers, the brinksmanship and the necessity of heroic measures to save it just aren't understandable.

With your background in the criminal justice system I'm sure that you realize that this subject matter is too important to play games with. But it appears to me that there are some others in the legislature who don't realize that.



Senator Devlin deserves some credit for being the first Oregon legislator to respond to me --the only one so far-- of the four that I sent emails to. If his rendition of him taking the bill to the Senate Floor and getting it voted on is accurate, he deserves credit and kudos for that too. You've got to remember that the day he reports that he did that, Thursday, August 4, was the last day of the legislature. The bill was pushed through literally at the last minute. And media reports about what was happening in the legislature on that last day didn't mention that it was voted on.

So it now sits on Governor Ted's desk.

Peter Jennings Signs Off

No breaking news here, everyone knows that Peter Jennings died of lung cancer last night.

Over the last couple of years, as the MSM has seemed increasingly adversarial towards the President, up to and including the open hostility displayed by the likes of Helen Thomas, it struck me that, at least from my perception, Peter Jennings made the most admirable effort among the Big 3's anchors to separate his personal opinions from his presentation of the news. I had respect for him due to that.

Furthermore, I was greatly impressed with his candor regarding his illness and the smoking habit that caused it. Especially human and oddly touching was the fact that it was the impact of the 9/11 attacks that caused him to take it up again. No one will ever be the same who witnessed those events, and Jennings' death bears witness to their continued influence on us.

In the end, though I no longer have much regard for the news arms of the old major networks, Jennings always struck me as genuine and personable. His death is tragic and he is to be mourned.

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

Raise the B&O Tax Level for Small Businesses

Washington State has the honor of being the top state for creation of new businesses and infamous as the top state for business failures. Our population is extremely entrepreneurial. One item that causes a new small business to struggle is the state Business & Occupation tax. A new business must complete a Washington State Business & Occupation state form and pay taxes starting at $12,000 per calendar year. In addition to paying the tax, the entrepreneur must take the time to fill out the monthly forms. How can a business survive on such a small revenue amount?

Washington State needs to raise the minimum level for payment of B&O taxes from $12,000 per calendar year to at least $250,000. At this level, the business is still small and struggling, but it is at least more likely to survive. If Washington State raised the minimum amount to $250,000, this would exempt over 178,000 companies (70% of the companies who filed returns in 2003). The amount paid by these companies represent less than one percent (0.08%) of funds paid into the state general fund.

What a great way to support small businesses in the State of Washington!

Below is a summary of B&O taxes paid by all businesses in the State of Washington in the calendar year of 2003. The figures were provided by the Department of Revenue.

Size of Firm Based on Gross

# of Firms

Total Gross

Total Taxable

Total Tax due

Less than $250,000





Less than $500,000





Less than $750,000





All Firms





Total General Fund

11.3 billion

Please consider eliminating B&O taxes on companies with revenues less $250,000.

Cross posted at Island Republican www.islandrepublican.blogspot.com

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Not sure how I missed this one...

If the First and Fifth Amendments weren't already off the table at the Constitutional Death Pool, this from Reason would take care of it. Apparently, certain alleged gang members are being denied the right to move about their neighborhoods after 10pm, or associate with other alleged gang members. Even wearing certain clothing can get you arrested. All this is done by Civil Gang Injunction. Once served, the person must comply with all the rules of the injunction or be arrested. The police decided who is served based on things including wearing red or blue (does Red, White, and Blue qualify?) or being seen in a photo with another alleged member. No proof is required that you actually are a gang member.

Now I know these are gang members. They aren't exactly the cream of the crop. They may not be the nicest people. I'm sure most people would be very happy with them all off the street. But concocting crimes just to take certain people off the street is a very slippery slope.

Here in Seattle, they may decided that you qualify for a Civil Gang Injunction if you wear anything with the letters G, W, or B on it. Or if you are or have ever been seen around a likeness of an elephant.

Of course if Seattle had implemented one regarding dred-locks, Che T-Shirts, and Marijuana leaves back before WTO, we probably wouldn't have had any problems. Of course, some areas of Seattle would still be a ghost town...

Monday, August 01, 2005

It began in Gdansk

I was there 25 years ago when the first domino piece fell. I gagged on the gas. I didn't think we had a chance. I was wrong. I left. They are still there. I can only observe, be proud but humble. Who had more courage, I who left or they who stayed? Regardless, we all will be better for it. The new, the better, the domino theory.

Regulating Nyquil

Gosh, I hope that the meth cooks in Oregon aren't smart enough to figure out that they can go to Vancouver to buy their cold medicine.

I know I will be going over to White Salmon for mine.

Somehow I don't believe that the legislators in Salem really had a handle on this one, no matter how much they pat themselves on the back and tell each other how great they are.

What Would Teddy have Said Back THEN?

President Bush has appointed John Bolton as US Ambassador to the Unityed Nations using a recess nomination.

Of course, Senator Ted Kennedy (D - Johnny Walker) was critical of the move.

"It's a devious maneuver that evades the constitutional requirement of Senate consent and only further darkens the cloud over Mr. Bolton's credibility at the U.N," Kennedy said."

As my good friend Vulture Six pointed out to me, The Senator's own brother used just such a manuover to put Thurgood Marshall on the SCOTUS bench.

But that's different, right, Ted Old Chap?

Closing the Gap

Please welcome new Red Northwest Blogger, Jay Bird, out of Mosier, Oregon.

Watch it, Washingtonians, we're catching up!