The Seattle Post-Intelligencer now recognizes that competition exists from alternative media
"We have a very direct and very vigorous editorial competition with The Seattle Times," McCumber said. "But today, what we're really competing with is a huge range of media that's out there, competing for people's time and interest."Is the P-I competing by engaging in more investigative reporting and hard-hitting analysis? Not exactly. The P-I is merely in a struggle to follow in the horseproduct-caked shoes of Seattle's favorite left-wing fiction blog, hitting hard on a fabricated non-issue that is of interest only to the lunatic fringe. Victor Ganzi, call your office. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 22, 2005 12:51 PM | Email This
This is just left rhetoric designed to put pressure on Irons. If Irons loses, it won't be because he's not the better candidate, but because there are a lot of lock-step, mindless Democrats who will vote for Sims regardless of how much evidence emerges that he's just another corrupt politician.
The fools that write this stuff are the same people that think they are winning hearts and minds with Cindy Sheehan.
Posted by: Jeff B. on August 22, 2005 01:49 PM
We can sit back and get the answers I need- why the emergency legislation and why can't we reduce construction costs by 20% as a goal.
Posted by: swatter on August 22, 2005 02:30 PM"We are pleased to announce that the emergency deckchair rearrangement has been successfully completed, and now it's smooth sailing from here on in"....
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 22, 2005 03:32 PMOK if he truly believes this, did he in fact sign I-912 so this "major tax increase" could "go to a vote of the people".
I want an answer from him or his people on this and won't give up until I get one.
If he did sign it then I'll believe this press release and will probably still vote for him despite this evidence of poor judgement. If he didn't then it's just a song and dance to duck the issue and I'll be sitting this one out. We got tax to the max already, don't need someone else with that mentality.
Anyway ain't no one but Sims ever gonna win an election in King County until control of the election office is administered from outside the County or we eventually get an elected Auditor.
Posted by: Finney on August 22, 2005 03:37 PMThere are two principles here...one is that tax increases like this should go to the people (a policy question) and the other is that he supports the tax (a personal preference.)
Still not clear? Think in these terms..."While I do not personally support abortion, I recognize a woman's right to choose."
Posted by: South County on August 22, 2005 04:13 PMAnway... a "non-issue?" So Stefan, you don't think King County voters deserve to know where Dave Irons stands on an initiative that would have a huge impact on the executive's ability to address our county's critical transportation needs?
Posted by: David Goldstein on August 22, 2005 06:25 PMI don't think your analogy holds. There is a gaping chasm of difference between holding an ideological view while advocating people's right to vote about it verses holding a n ideological view but voring yourself agianst that view.
In dave Iron's example, he actually has more integrity by saying he supports something, but rahter than believing he should force that view down our throats and then trying to prevent us from responding by assinging it as an emergency, he instead states what he beleives is right from his understanding nad then presenting that case to the voters to let them decide if they agree. How much more honest do you want a politician to get? "I'm your represntative, and I'll let you know what I think, but I'll only do it if you agree and vote on it." If you want an idealogue who doesn't listen to the people, then DON'T vote for Irons. *sigh*
Contrast that with some New England politician who SAYS he believes abortion is mrally reprehensible but will work hard AGAINST the will of the people to isure that that very reprehensible act is protected at every level, in every instance. That is the measure of the LACK of integrity. In this case, he is violating his own stated conscience AND trying to force that "violated" belief onto others.
Posted by: Eyago on August 22, 2005 08:04 PM
There is no way to build a case that..."While I do not personally support abortion, I recognize a woman's right to choose," is a principled position. It's the opposite of a principled position.
I want the P-I to explain why they can swallow one, but choke on the other. I know the answer, but they will sound very foolish trying to justify it.
The P-I is so far to the left they seem to be talking in tongues. You see individual words on the page that you recognize but put together it's just gibberish.
I haven't been able to finish reading a Times editorial in years. It feels like 5 pound weights are attached to your eyelids. You are sucked into a world of such stifling banality you almost start looking around for the hemlock.
And don't get me started on those whining, snivelling ads the Times has been running about how there is only 5 major media chains left and that one might gobble up the poor (or is that broke)little Seattle Times.
Hallelujah! If only it would happen!
Very well put.
Now what the Left has left is Horsesass. What a toilet. Suits them.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on August 23, 2005 08:56 AMYour litle "PR stunt" only confirms the liberal bias in teh media. Thanks.
Posted by: pbj on August 23, 2005 10:04 AMIrons still hasn’t addressed why he plans to vote against I-912. Is he so cowardly that he can’t stand behind his vote with an explanation of why, however little he thinks of the transportation package, he thinks less of the initiative that would kill it? Is he afraid that by actually having to explain his vote he would have to phase his position in such a way that explicitly comes out against the arguments I-912 proponents are making?
The fact is he IS explicitly doing so, whether he wants to speak the words or not. David Irons knows we need the money and that the alternatives are not out there. He realizes that our infrastructure is in dire need of attention and that the funds are not there to address these needs. He realizes that despite the shortcomings of the legislation, the transportation package is the result of bipartisan negotiating and represents the interests of as many people as possible. He realizes that despite what people may feel about unrelated events, such as the Governor election outcome, voting for I-912 is not how we should be communicating “messages” to the legislature.
Posted by: Daniel K on August 23, 2005 01:01 PMThe only people who care about this non-issue are those who like both Ron Sims and the gas tax and are desperately looking for cheap stunts to change the subject of the County Executive away from Ron Sims' innumerable failures.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on August 23, 2005 01:09 PM