This morning I went to a campaign rally in downtown Kirkland. Governor Gregoire came to my suburb to sign environmental bills, or, as I would say, "environmental" bills. Nearly everyone there (perhaps 150 people all together) was a Democratic official, or an activist who usually supports Democrats. The audience gave Gregoire a standing ovation when she started her speech, and they gave similar support to all the other Democratic officials. (A single Republican official, Toby Nixon, was there as well.)
The symbolism was not perfect; Gregoire arrived with County Executive Ron Sims in a chauffeur driven hybrid, but left in a Lincoln town car, which does not, unless I am badly mistaken, come in a hybrid version.
I'll have more to say about the rally later, after I have had a chance to look through all my pictures, but I can't wait to pass along this thought from Gregoire. Our governor, having just signed a bill that will raise gas taxes by nine cents a gallon, thinks that gas prices are too high. I was trying to behave, but I could not keep from laughing after that. That statement was doubly funny at this bill signing, since most environmentalists think that gas prices are too low, not too high.
The president of the Sierra Club, Larry Fahn, was at the rally — which may show just how worried Democratic allies are about Gregoire's chances of staying in office. (For what it is worth, Fahn looks like the kind of B movie villain who wants to throw someone off their ranch, which now that I think about it, is probably exactly what he wants to do.)
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
Posted by Jim Miller at May 06, 2005 01:26 PM | Email Thiss'pose though that it's probably not too early for her to be thinking of this coming November...
here's your symbolism for you...CG being more interested in updating her Rollodex than the voter rolls...keep those cards and letters comin' (and checks).
Posted by: scott158 on May 6, 2005 01:38 PMHey, if you can't win the governor's office through the lawsuit, maybe you can engineer a popular uprising regarding Gregoire's choice of footwear. No, wait, better idea: Don't even bother with actual appearance, use photoshop to try to make the enemy look bad. Oh, that's right, that's already one of your tactics.....
Well, I'm out of ideas. I'm sure you can continue to figure out more and better attacks on personal appearance (real and photoshopped) on your own. In the meantime, the rest of us will just have to focus on the actual issues, and governing the state amidst all of our very real problems.
Posted by: Bluebeard on May 6, 2005 02:24 PMY A W N. How's that for substantive analysis of the former AG?
Rossi said it would be business as usual. But it's actually much worse.
Bend over, here comes the flush your toilet tax courtesy of our favorite environmental extremists with small amounts of data and big emotional sign waggers.
Posted by: Andy on May 6, 2005 02:35 PMHmmm Bluebeard... and who has been in power in WA State the past 20+ years and had plenty of time to prevent our real problems?
Nice of you to drop by and post with a fake email address.
Posted by: Gianni on May 6, 2005 02:38 PMGood to hear from you again. You admit that the state has 'very real problems'.
Who caused these? What party has been in the Governor's mansion for the past 20 years? Would it not be that party's fault?
The Republicans have been powerless in this state for decades. Certainly they did not have the power to cause these 'very real problems', right?
Who was the Attorney General for the past 8 years, during which time presumably many of these 'very real problems' were created or exacerbated?
Posted by: Larry on May 6, 2005 02:55 PM
That was apparent from your first post.
you can lead a horse to water.......
Posted by: scott158 on May 6, 2005 03:22 PMThe critical problems that Washington is having are the same as the ones that face just about every state in the nation.
Would any of you folks like to point out a state that's not had to deal with budget deficits in the last 5 years, due to its magnificent Republican control? The highways in other states are in fantastic shape too, aren't they? Oh yes, and especially so in the Republican states. And the educational systems in Repub states are all top-notch, and don't cost too much, right?
Sure, Washington has the same problems as Republican-controlled states, but in Washington it's because of our Democratic governors (and sometimes Democratic, sometimes Republican legislatures). Give me a break.
Now that we've disposed of another fallacious argument by y'all, let's go to the reason for my post. Anybody wanna jump on board and criticize the way SP keeps stooping to attacks on personal appearance? No? Well, silly me, I got my hopes up.
Oh, and South County, let me save you the effort of making another clever joke like your last one. Here's what we can expect in South County's next post: "Bluebeard said 'silly me.' See, he's SILLY! He admits it!" Gee, that kind of humor/argument is about as lame as attacking a person's appearance, don't you think?
with apologies to Dorothy Parker
Posted by: Not a Yank on May 6, 2005 03:31 PMI am a proud and lucky product of public schools, actually. I come from a lower-income family, but federal loans and grants made it possible for me to get a great college education at one of the top colleges in the country (because I'm modest, I won't say THE top one -- ha ha).
But to you SPers, I suppose those public schools and federal educational grants and loans are just more evidence of the red tide of "socialism," eh? Let's get the government out of funding education, right?!
I don't think an attack on my intelligence is warranted, but then, I shouldn't expect better from people who think you win political arguments by attacking a person's appearance.
Posted by: Bluebeard on May 6, 2005 03:37 PMWashington's budget problem is that Dumocrats can not say no to spendings.
Posted by: Not a Yank on May 6, 2005 03:44 PMI would love to know what you think when you read the words "budget cut" or "program cutback". Dollars to donuts you equate a reduction in the rate of increase in spending with a reduction in real spending.
Posted by: Not a Yank on May 6, 2005 03:49 PMFinal comment, were I you would proud of attending a "top school" but I would be ashamed that I had my way paid by others who knew me not.
I went to a not so top school. Neither the Crown nor my neighbors paid for me to attend that school. I paid for it through my own efforts.
Perhaps if you had earned the money to pay your way through school, you would not be so disdainful of those who earn money and seek to keep what they have earned.
You are an educated parasite.
"The critical problems that Washington is having are the same as the ones that face just about every state in the nation."
Agreed. I donn't believe anyone here would disagree with you.
The difference lies in the manner in which you address those problems.
Posted by: Ken Muller on May 6, 2005 04:12 PMFtr, my family was poor and bluecollar. I personally paid for 85% of my education, with the majority of the balance from my parents and a scholarship. There were minor student loans that would now not pay one quarter's tuition. Paid off, btw. It can be done. And that was for two degrees. Public schools all the way, and thus subsidised...but I can't help that part.
The real issue is about automatic leftist/socialist solutions to real world situations...and the refusal to consider reasonable alternatives and to acknowledge problems encountered.
The answer is rarely more money. It's more reasonable policy.
I didn't say you were dumb. I said you were wrong. The difference isn't that subtle.
Posted by: scott158 on May 6, 2005 04:30 PMIf you went to one of the top colleges in the country, then you didn't go to college in Washington. I wonder in which other state you chose to attend college?
You believe that Washington has very real problems; you know that the problems were not fixed, some of them not even addressed, during the terms of Governor Locke and Attorney General Gregoire; you believe that Governor Gregoire can help fix these problems.
The definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
You mention budget deficits, highways, and education. I challenge you to show up here after Gregoire is out of office and prove to us how the deficits, highways, and education in this state have improved. I don't think they will. Time will tell.
Posted by: Larry on May 6, 2005 04:33 PM
...somehow I just don't think that the scale of irritation will be balanced with him...ever.
but the notion of forced retirement is appealing. Having it an unfunded retirement by official sanction would be a bonus.
Posted by: scott158 on May 6, 2005 04:38 PMThat said, the quip about Fahn's looks was meant to set up my allusion to the damage done to rural areas by some policies favored by the Sierra Club, and by environmental extremists generally. If you are not familiar with rural areas, that idea may be unfamiliar. Many people in those areas would think Fahn a villain, so it is amusing to see that he looks like one.
And, even in this brief post, I did mean to raise what I think is an important question: Is the price of gas too low or too high? Gregoire told this group, which included many environmentalists, that it was too high. (Politely they didn't disagree publicly, though many hold the opposit position.)
And this argument came from a politician who has worked hard in the last month to raise the price of gas. Some -- though apparently not our anonymous commenter -- might find that combination a little strange.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that little attack on my intelligence and the public schools.
But when I call him on it, does Scott158 admit any fault. Nah. Instead he says "BB, how hypersensitive of you. It's nothing about intelligence. Why do you exhibit the classic leftist diversion?"
Uh, Scott, saying someone gets "confused" between "ideas" and "excuses" because he's "a product of public schools" is what, a compliment to intelligence?
So much for personal responsibility, eh, Scott? You could at least own up to what you said.
Well you accomplished one thing, Scottie. You just made South County's juvenile attack seem better by comparison than yours. Well, no, now you're tied.
Posted by: Bluebeard on May 6, 2005 07:53 PMYour posts demonstrate my original point…your emphasis bounces back and forth between the official lib party line and incessant quibbling.
Since you are so fond of quoting me, then I will also. I particularly like this little gem, which you conveniently overlooked: “The real issue is about automatic leftist/socialist solutions to real world situations...and the refusal to consider reasonable alternatives and to acknowledge problems encountered.” And then I closed with this: “I didn't say you were dumb. I said you were wrong.” Maybe if I repeat is often enough, it’ll sink in. This organic need to quibble is a more recent revelation, or I would have mentioned it as well.
I’ve often noticed that people who tend to not listen/read what their opponents actually say rarely comprehend the heart of the argument, and thus are not skilled at debate. You want me to apologize or own up to responsibility? What for? I nailed the situation with uncanny accuracy.
Btw, I know multiple rocket scientists. You’re not one of them.
Oh yeah, and this…”an attack???????” Really! Making fun of the way you made what I presumed to be a lame joke is an attack? Think so? Obviously you’ve never been stuck in a relationship with a borderline. I hardly know what to suggest. Perhaps some aloe vera.
Posted by: scott158 on May 7, 2005 03:05 AM