Gawd, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer should be embarrassed about this: they print an editorial today actually daring to bemoan Democratic King County Executive Ron Sims' horrid record of ineptitude and mismanagement, and THEN launch into a blind, backhanded slam against his Republican challenger, current county council member David Irons, without even mentioning Irons' NAME or WHY it is he is the lousy candidate they clearly are calling him. If you're gonna stay someone stinks, at least explain why. Here's the P-I:
Sims' job could have been in jeopardy if Republicans could have mounted an articulate, passably moderate candidate. Think (Dino) Rossi or an Eastside legislator such as Senate Minority Leader Bill Finkbeiner. It's almost always tough to unseat an amiable incumbent such as Sims, and it won't likely happen this year. State Republicans likely will be left to brood over what might have been.
So Irons isn't articulate, or passably moderate? I see, then - he must be a bit of a dullard and an exteremist, huh? (Phew, have they even MET with the guy?) Opinion Writing 101, P-I. Go beyond your three vague but barbed words on the mystery candidate's flaws. HOW and WHY do you conclude he is neither "articulate" nor "passably moderate" enough to get elected? And could you manage to say his, um, NAME? These things need to be addressed in the SAME editorial in which you so cavalierly dismiss Irons' candidacy. And for that matter, does King County government really need moderate reform, or sweeping changes? The answer is fairly evident.
For my part, I'll be voting for Irons and believe he'll do a damn good job. He's also clearly the strongest GOP candidate for King County Exec in several go-rounds. Nonetheless, I do think it's reasonable to ask whether his campaign is ready to really hit stride after Labor Day, and if he and his staffers are ready to really articulate some strong policies and criticisms of the incumbent. In addition to all the usual ground-level vote-getting strategies, he needs to show more passion, make some waves, and get more specific about his agenda. I want to hear a lot more than about an elected auditor to solve the county elections mess, but the additional election-reform agenda items from Irons, if there are many, aren't cutting through the info-clutter into the mainstream. While blogs such as Sound Politics matter, a lot, the MSM does too, at least for a few more years.
Posting stuff on the Irons campaign web site, sending out e-mails to Irons supporters and getting regular Irons quotes near the end of newspaper stories about Sims' latest flounderings isn't enough for the Irons campaign. A far more relevant and useful P-I editorial than the one today would have talked about the strengths and weaknesses of the Irons campaign so far, and what he needs to do to win. Then again, that's clearly not something the P-I editorial staff is interested in exploring intelligently, is it?
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at August 24, 2005 01:40 PM | Email ThisAnd Sims is charismatic?
Give me someone with common sense and has worked in the private sector for a living. Blue collar is preferred, but white collar is acceptable.
Posted by: swatter on August 24, 2005 03:16 PMIt is obvious that the editorial deliberately excluded any specific information about Sims's opponent, and threw in the witty insults gratis. That is Paul Berendt's modus operandi.
Yes, it was an editorial, but as an example of 'professional' journalists in action it was also very revealing of the vicious bias that is the social norm in a newspaper office.
Posted by: Hank Bradley on August 24, 2005 03:54 PMThe only real advantage of Sims over Irons that the P-I articulated is that Sims is "amiable" along with the implication that Irons is not "articulate". Granted that Sims is a better public speaker. But we're not electing a Storyteller-in-Chief. We're hiring someone we can trust to run the county.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on August 24, 2005 06:07 PMI'm reading this post and wondering to myself if Stefan had taken a writing class or something, and then I see your byline at the end. Oh.
Anyway, as well as discussing "the strengths and weaknesses of the Irons campaign", how about discussing the strength and weaknesses of Irons?
What exactly is it that qualifies him for the job?
Posted by: David Goldstein on August 24, 2005 06:11 PM"How about discussing the strength and weaknesses of Irons?" should rightly be directed the intellectually challenged Editors of the Seattle P-I, regardless of their abilities to deal with the question.
Sims has a record to run on, good and bad, and voters can easily judge his job performance. But what I've yet to read here, from Irons most vocal supporters, is exactly what qualifies him for the job.
What exactly makes you think he would be a good executive? Does he have experience running large organizations or bureaucracies? Has he put forth a particularly detailed or innovative agenda? Has he shown leadership by taking bold positions on controversial issues, and guiding people towards some kind of consensus?
What are Irons strengths? I really want to know, because quite frankly, I'm itching to attack his strengths, if only I could figure out what they were.
Posted by: David Goldstein on August 24, 2005 07:45 PMHell, they might even sell a few more papers if they did treat the election as a contest, sorta like sports.
Irons has discharged his King County Council duties well and honorably. That is sufficient for this voter, balancing his candidacy against the troubled record Sims has to run on.
Sim's savage attack on the property rights - civil rights, according to our Constitution - of rural property owners shows him to be better fit for General Secretary of a third-world Politburo than as King County Executive. Other failures include the botched computer system, the Sound Transit bait-and-switch election (and Sims's grasping refusal to provide public records to investigators of the murky Stadium deal) and the mismanagement of the last three King County elections show clearly that the public interest lies in ejecting him as soon as possible.
You may ask all your condescending questions of Sims himself, and he fails miserably. No point in going further.
Posted by: Hank Bradley on August 24, 2005 08:59 PMOh Yes! Yes Mr. Ron Sims WILL most definitely be unseated this year! And he is amiable only to his faithful fringe.
In the past few years, Ron Sims has effectively alienated his *moderate* voter base! When he invited Gay and Lesbian protestors to launch a lawsuit against the State (basically against the taxpayers)for the right to marry - he lost much support. (taxpayers don't like their local governments inviting special interest groups to dip into their hard earned dollars via litigation) When he launched an effort to take out the Spirit of Seattle Dinner Train - he lost more support! When he forged ahead with his oppressive CAO - and it was revealed that homeowers couldn't even cut their blackberry bushes without expensive permits and prior permission - he lost a huge chunk of his supporters! When it was revealed that Ron Sim's KC Department of Transportation was fudging traffic impact statements in order to push through severely dense Quadrant communities on the eastside - he lost a number of the faithful liberal elite...and - when he decided to move the homeless into the neighborhoods of families with children there - he lost most of the rest......
This leaves his faithful few fringe groups living on Capital Hill and Bell Town as his only means of support.....(Pssst Ron - they don't have any money - but they know how to break the law...)
Ron Sims is going to have to stuff that ballot box on steroids this time - to make up for his plunging approval rating! He may have marched with the Boeing's union last week - but they aren't going to march him back into another term.....
The PI must have received a nice payment for that bit of wishfull thinking (wink wink)! Unfortunately for Sims...just saying it's so - won't make it happen.
Posted by: Deborah on August 24, 2005 10:52 PMBut wait a minute ..... Deb told us Dino would definitely prevail in his 'revote' suit.
ummmm... I'm confused.....
(We sort of figured out you were confused a long time ago.... :)
Sorry my dear,
Not even your *best* spin is going to help Mr. Sims this time!
He's just out. That's not my prediction...that's just the ways things are....(Ask your friends...)
Posted by: Deborah on August 25, 2005 12:35 AMFor extra credit, feel free to support your claims that the people of King County are in favor of discrimination against gays and prefer the dinner train to a trail like the Burke-Gilman.
Posted by: Bruce on August 25, 2005 02:01 AMHe implies that Ron Sims is proposing to rip out the rail line on the East Side between Renton and Snohomish. That's not true either.
Posted by: Unkl Witz on August 25, 2005 08:02 AMEveryone recognizes that you come here so "that you can just make things up" whizzlestick. You also come here to lie openly and by obdurately insisting on the truth of your lies expect everyone to buy them at face value. The question is, do you have any notion about the truth at all after clouding your so-called mind with bullshit for so many years?
It is true. Sims did propose removing the rail line on the East Side between Renton and Snohomish.
I'd ask you to put money on it but liberals only make transactions with other people's money. Besides, to you, anything can be true or false according to how you feeeeel on any given day.
I don't mind hearing it at all. In fact, it is music to my ears, just as David Goldstein's comments are.
The idea that this is a "forum that has been most out in front at trying to tear down Ron Sims and replace him with David Irons . . . sets the tone.
Goldstein's assertion that talking candidly about Sims is "tearing him down" is as typically misleading as his contention that we should judge Sims on a record that is somehow both good and bad. While I will admit that Sims may have done some nominally good things, thus having some electoral "strengths" of his own, Goldstein mentions none of them because they are so extremely overshadowed by appearances (and the reality) of malfeasance, misfeasance, and corruption.
I hardly consider the fact that during Sims administration King County bought new trucks or gave County funds (the people’s money) to his favorite constituent citizen activist groups doing ”good things,” though I am itching to discuss these strengths, if only Goldstein could figure out what they are supposed to be.
It is particularly amusing to read Goldstein discuss anyone “tearing down” a candidate he cannot defend unless he can do so by attacking his adversary; especially while bemoaning in the same breath the fact that he has nothing to attack. Sad but true.
Posted by: Amused by liberal blowhards on August 25, 2005 10:23 AMHere are some easily found, and recent, articles on Ron Sims vision for the BNR rail line...
Also, clearing of blackberries DOES require a permit. Due to the intense lobbying efforts of Steve Hammond and David Irons, the county capitulated and waived the fee. But the CAO still requires that rural landowners obtain a permit if they want to legally pull weeds on their own property. Way to go, Whiz!
"The CAO mandates (just read the stupid thing)that you are limited to a few hundred sq. ft. of blackberry removal but you must first have a county "inspector" come out and review what you want to remove. he (or she) will then determine if you'll be allowed to and then how much the permit to do so will cost you."
That is patently not true.
Here's what else he said:
"If Sims is so hot for light rail, here's a line that parallels I-405 and would be perfect for a commuter rail but instead he wants to rip it out."
Sorry folks, but that's not true either.
Try something besides name calling and innuendo. You might just make a conservative out of me.
Posted by: Unkl Witz on August 25, 2005 11:58 AMIf by that you mean start making sense, there is no way...you are too far gone.
"There are none so liberal as those who will not see"
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 25, 2005 12:11 PMWhat does Sims’ priority is to use the corridor for a trail mean if not "ripping out (removing) the rail?"
"Sims and others “took action to secure earnest money for purchasing the 47 mile
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) eastside rail corridor. Sims recently announced
his intention to purchase the corridor and said his "priority is to use the corridor for
a trail, though there is room for mixed uses along the corridor.”
You said, He [Paladin] implies that Ron Sims is proposing to rip out the rail line on the East Side between Renton and Snohomish. That's not true . . ."
Who is making things up as they go along? You are obviously not required to agree with it, but what Paladin said about the rail line on the East Side was true.
Now how 'bout them blackberries?
Posted by: Unkl Witz on August 25, 2005 12:46 PMWhat are you proposing, that "mixed use" means a combination walking trail/light rail corridor?
While we’re at it, why not add a miniature golf course/alligator pit. Who is being disingenuous here?
It is implicit that a trail would require removal of the existing rails. Are you using drugs?
OK swizzlestick...It's unfortunate that you insist on listening to the little voices in your head, but at least you're entertaining...
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 25, 2005 01:21 PMI don't have to give a ringing endorsement of Irons. I can't vote for or against him anyway since I live in a different county. All I am saying is that Irons needs to do better than be the "anti-Sims" to take to election. Now, IF I could vote in the elction, I WOULD vote against Sims, just like many ohters. However, King is a liberal county and the moderate swing voters may need more than just "vote for me, I'm NOT Sims." Now, he does have experience on the council, is that enough to get him the Executive job? Dunno, but wihtout a compelling story about what he WILL do and can do, his campaign will have difficulties. This is not an attack on him, just a statement of my observations.
Posted by: Eyago on August 25, 2005 01:51 PMYou gotta appreciate the gall of someone like this swizzlestick character and the idiocy he represents. Swizzle says (nose in the air), ”Try something besides name calling and innuendo. You might just make a conservative out of me . . ." as though I should give a damn whether he wants to continue crapping in his own hat. Who the hell does he think he is?
I might argue with Deborah, or Scott, or even Eyago if I disagree with them because there is hope (integrity) of making sense there and learning something. Swizzle apparently thinks he is important enough based on arrogance alone that I should entreat him to use common sense by not pointing out his prevarications and cease calling him swizzlestick. I think “Swizzlestick” is an appropriate eponym of fitting circular and bibulous characteristics to apply superbly in his case. Wouldn’t you agree?
What is especially humorous is his insistence on literal precision from SPer’s, when he demands none whatever from himself. For swizzle, his prejudiced assumptions can be probative and dispositive, even though he hastens to add that he has "not seen a single quote in which Sims proposes to rip out (remove) the rails if there is an economic reason to retain them." This of course completely ignores the fact that there is absolutely no economic reason to turn the subject road bed into a trail, but what is more fun, it changes the subject by placing new stricter requirements on “Swizzle's evidence of truth.”
Obviously this arrogant asshole (swizzle, this is calling you names) thinks that we must quote Sims verbatim saying that he "proposes to rip out" rails in order to recognize the general statement as true. I wonder, need we also quote verbatim that Sims himself will not "personally rip out the rails by hand" for the statement to be true, or will it require a quote that he will have someone else "rip out the rails at his official behest?" Next, if we get such a quote, and should there arise some intervening “economic reason” to change the outcome of his proposals, is it no longer a true quote? Swizzle is a perfect liberal- full of negative niggling egocentric partisan nonsense that amounts to silly lies and a corresponding refusal to admit when he is wrong.
It is as though they believe that some discreet corollary universal imperative of technicality applies in the favor of a liberal that does not apply for the rest of us, where lies only amount to lies if liberals feel they don't believe them. In the real world and to most people, this is commonly called making stuff up as you go along. To people like this it proves he is right no matter what the facts indicate. It all just makes him look like a nitwit.
I'm glad he keeps coming around though –he’s funny.
Yep, wrap your little brain around it. Mixed use means just that, a combination walking trail/ rail corridor.
Check out a recent edition of "Trains" magazine for a review of the success, and pitfalls of "mixed use" rail corridors.
We have the width of ROW (100 ft) and the topography to make this work. Sorry you don't have the wisdom or vision to see how this would be a wonderful asset to our Eastside commuinities.
of course you've probably never been on the Burke-Gillman since it's closed to HUMMERS.
Posted by: Unkl Witz on August 25, 2005 08:55 PMEyago - the comment stands. Until I called you on it, where had anyone other than the stupid trolls suggested ABS?
Buying into the rhetoric of a POS like goldy is pathetic. You may not care for Irons, but you are wrong to insinuate to him such crappola, and it makes you look like you're pitching for the wrong team.
Swizzlestick - you are an idiot. It was Reagan Dunn and Julia Patterson who counter-proposed the mixed use (in a very non-specific fashion) idea of the BNSF line specifically to prevent tearing up the rails!
Pull your head out....
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 25, 2005 10:30 PMYou were expecting maybe a tollbooth? Thank you for that delightful bit of insight into your philosophy of life.
Posted by: Bruce on August 26, 2005 12:05 AMYou were expecting maybe a tollbooth? Thank you for that delightful bit of insight into your philosophy of life.
Posted by: Bruce on August 26, 2005 12:05 AMCheck out the ego freak Swizzlestick. Anyone can see clear through his bullshit, yet he actually thinks what he says makes sense. No one needs to review train magazines to observe the fact that any “mixed use” scenarios involving the use of the rails for trains of any kind along side pedestrians could never work on the East side. Among other things, the county could never find anyone to insure such a farce, and that is the reason why Sims et al are always vague about their intentions. This sort of silly nonsense is perfect boob bait for Swizzlestick and those like him, and his comparison of this to Burke Gillman illustrates how truly empty this "vision" really is.
This shameless nitwit is lying again as usual when he says that "We have the width of ROW (100 ft) and the topography to make this work." Anyone who has been through major portions of the road bed or ridden on the dinner train knows that this is not true either technically or literally. Next he’ll probably niggle about what “width of ROW,” means.
Among many other significant problems, there is a little difficulty associated with a trestle that rises over 100 feet in the air. I wonder if this jackass’s crystalline vision suggests that children ride their bicycles on the ties amidst coming and going commuter trains. As usual Swizzle simply makes up his own facts so he can pretend to win an idiotic point in support of an idiotic point of view. I would happily bet him big money on any of this but I could never collect.
The most interesting part of all of this is that this Swizzlestick Rich Kiker clown and his ilk buy into the idea that Ron Sims actually “means” to do something useful with the existing infrastructure. Sims consistent actions don’t mean anything to people like this; only his EXACT words in context when convenient to defend him, and their panglossian imputations of his purported and continually unrequited “good intentions.” Yeah, Sims will deliver a mixed use trail/train, you bet. Very amusing indeed.
Swizzlestick Kiker and Ron Sims deserve each other.
Posted by: Amused by liberal invincible arrogance on August 26, 2005 09:51 AMGee whiz.
Posted by: Amused by liberal morons on August 26, 2005 09:53 AMWhat’s the matter idiot, got your dumb ass kicked so you ran away?
Did he recently graduate from onanistic sensitivity training at the vegan liberal sectarian church
of "What's Happenin' Now" and "Rage at the Machine" convention, or is he just one of those sterling
citizens communing with the bozos that routinely sleeps on Seattle buses posting from the downtown library?
Hey Bruce, if you are the former, why not invite the latter over to your place for a sleepover and confab?
Either way... liberalism ... definitely a mental disorder.
Thanks for the demo Bruce.