Steve Neighbors, Chairman of the Snohomish County Republican party has penned a very good article responding to the various arguments against I-912. Steve is a successful businessman, deeply concerned with the state of transportation in the state, and was originally in favor of the gas tax, so he has a unique perspective on the subject. He also describes the background of the passage of the bill itself, in the final hours of the final day of the legislative session.
UPDATE: The one argument that the article doesn't directly address is the "if 912 passes then the Viaduct will collapse" argument. I tackle that one here.
Cross posted at The Flag of the World.
Posted by Timothy Goddard at October 25, 2005 08:23 PM | Email ThisIt's interesting that this poke in the eye was a 2005 session buzzer beater. There was so much political confusion in the last Legislative session due to the illegitimate Queen being declared the “winner”. Now we all can see that she’s a real tax maven. Strange way the legislature works, trading votes and political pet deeds across party lines in order to make the most insignificant changes to us little people. All those Republican legislators who voted in favor of the bill are about to have their deals with the Queen broke by the vote of the people. Too bad, so sad, politics not so “as usual”.
Now if we can just topple the Queen from her thrown and roll back the State GMA as well as all these other ridiculous wasteful pet projects we’ll finally be getting somewhere. These people really know how to waste time and money.
It features some somber looking guy sporting a hard hat and claiming to be an "engineer" (choo-choo or sanitation?!) who warns us that the next earthquake could bring down the Alaskan Way Viaduct, the 520 bridge, even I-405!
We can't let this happen to our roads! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
What an unmitigated crock!
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 25, 2005 09:24 PMEmergency clause, implying an immediate, well, emergency. However, some "emergency" construction won't even start for another 5-8 years. It's all about "safety", hence the emergency clause. If it was about congestion relief, there wouldn't be the need for an emergency declaration.
There are five plans on the site for the viaduct. Which one are we buying? All of those plans replace the seawall and make improvements to Alaskan Way (repaving, widening) - Seattle specific responsibilities (the viaduct is at least highway 99). All of these plans require an RTID for completion - if the RTID doesn't pass, then the funds could be "reallocated"
100 million for critter overpasses. I'm sure they'll be happy for their congestion relief.
8%-30%+ in mitigation fees. 30% of 8.5 billion is 2.5 billion - 1-2 billion potential in mitigation fees?
Sales tax on construction materials. Let's say 6.5% of 4 billion dollars - 260 million "laundered" into the general fund - gee, that's almost three more critter overpass projects.
So, 1.3 to 2.3 billion may not make it to roads anyway. If you add in the rail and bus money, we'll probably be lucky to see even half of the 8.5 billion actually be applied to roads.
Before the nickel package, where was the 23 cents a gallon going? Why weren't tired bridges being repaired? Why weren't bottlenecks being eliminated?
DOT - Account for all of this before we give you a blank check.
Yes on 912.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 25, 2005 10:11 PMGot a kick out of your post! Suggest that the "engineer" is un-civil, as opposed to a civil engineer.
Posted by: Fed Up on October 25, 2005 10:31 PMThe anti-912 media blitz has begun!
I hope once the people see the truth behind the anti's BS..they get.....MAD! Angry enough to demand answers from their liberal legislatures about their bogus *emergency* clause! Angry enough to say NO MORE to this insane tax grab by Gregoire and associates!
People just aren't as stupid as they used to be....
YES ON 912.
I've listened to the anti I-912 ideas, and Neighbors debunks them pretty darn well.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 25, 2005 10:55 PMIf roads are so incredibly important (and they ARE), why do politicians make us raise taxes for it when it's such a basic thing that citizens can't ever buy individually themselves? Why aren't roads a 1st-priority expenditure coming from existing taxes? Why are roads seen as so low-priority that they can only be fixed/improved with MORE taxes????? Yet, other money is being wasted-- I mean--spent on far less important things like giving three large vehicles to mrs. Gregoire? That implies that roads AREN'T important, since politicians aren't making them a basic obvious priority budget item. If I were in charge, it would be.
Posted by: Michele on October 25, 2005 10:59 PMPolice and Fire protection. Why is so much of their funding coming from levies? Why don't we fully fund emergency/protection services first from the general fund and have levies for social programs? If a levy fails every now and then - no big deal if "art" is delayed. Very big deal if Medic 1 is delayed....
If bridges and viaducts are so near collapse, fund their repair or retrofit first and delay the "nonessential". When 912 passes, the state will still have 3.5 billion coming in from the non gas tax tax increases. Prioritize that money towards safety repairs and retrofit. Delay light rail.
Prioritize. Eliminate waste. Fully fund projects through completion.
YES ON 912.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 25, 2005 11:20 PMIf, as he says, the biggest problem we face is congestion, I want all you smart guys to tell me how passing this initiative is going to relieve congestion.
It isn't. It isn't going to do a damn thing. We can't relieve congestion with just the nickel package.
Pass 912 if it makes you feel better. All it will do is delay the inevitable. Sooner or later, we're going to fix these roads and bridges, and each and every one of you are going to pay for it, just as I am.
But hey, I did what Neighbors said to do. I voted my "conscious" today. I voted NO. And tomorrow a big "Safety First, NO 912" sign goes up in my yard, right next to my Ron Sims sign.
Posted by: Ivan on October 26, 2005 12:05 AMOn I-912, the issue for me is the effectiveness and honesty with which the GasTax is being spent. I view it as DISHONEST..starting with the Chicken Little BS about the Alaskan Way Viaduct. It's BS. Safety First??? What safety and at what cost???
As for the Sims Sign too....it just corroborates again what you have proven over & over...you are mentaly challenged. What has Sims done to relieve traffic congestion in KingCo? What has Sims done to keep KingCo affordable....raise taxes and fees at every turn???? Sims blows the SWA, CAO issues. Sims lifelong bureaucratic bullies are so entrenched....it's time for them to go.
And then of course Ivan, there is Sims Erection Dept. Logan is incompetent and corrupt....a bad combination. He serves at Sims request.
Did you know Ivan that:
If Sims wins==========Logan keeps his $125,000/yr. job.
If Sims loses====Logan is FIRED!!
If Davis Irons wins=====Logan is FIRED!!!!
Good enough for me!
Did you know some other Auditors may be asking Logan to recuse himself from this election because his job is clearly on the line depending upon the result????
Should Logan take a leave of absence knowing his job is on the line???
DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Of course Logan should NOT be in charge of counting ballots when his job is on the line!!
To do anything else is irresponsible IF they truly feel it is a priority. And they could a) remove the tax on materials for construction projects b) Charge toll to pay for the viaduct c) Stop frittering the money away on less important projects and fix the viaduct.
But the viaduct is falling excuse is just that. They cannot even say what it is they intend to build. Sounds like a monorail style debacle to me.
Posted by: pbj on October 26, 2005 01:40 AMThe Sellwood Bridge in Portland needs to be replaced and has been closed to buses, large trucks and fire fighting vehicles, however it still handles 30,000 vehicles a day. The Sellwood Bridge has a Federal rating of 2 out of 100.
QUESTION: What is the rating for the Seattle Viaduct?
Posted by: Janet on October 26, 2005 02:47 AM"by Goldy, 10/26/2005, 12:25 AM
Washington Defense is holding a demonstration this morning, 10 AM, at the 1st Ave. S on ramp of the Alaska Way Viaduct, to warn drivers of the imminent danger, and demand that WSDOT post permanent hazard signs along the length of the structure. Yard signs will be made available to those who attend.
This is not the well financed “official” No on I-912 campaign, but rather an independent, grassroots effort, that nonetheless has managed to raise enough money to print yard signs. Just another example of the growing opposition to I-912."
Here is my response to this LEFTIST PINHEAD:
Gimmee a break!
Wouldn’t it be ironic if the Big One hit while this rally is being held and you insufferable LEFTIST PINHEADS survived standing on the AWV while watching thousands of substandard Seattle buildings collapsing all around you???
When you idiots are done with your charade at the AWV, why don’t you run around Seattle and have a protest at every substandard building??? That would keep you busy for weeks!!
You LEFTIST PINHEADS are a crack-up!
Why in the hell wouldn’t you hold ALL buildings the public enters to the exact same earthquake standard you are trying to ram with the AWV????
If your building collapses on top of you….you don’t need the f***ing AWV!!!
The reason you don’t force the same standard on buildings in Seattle is many are owned by LEFTIST PINHEADS!!
Insincere and hypocritical again Goldy…at least you are consistent!
By the way, did you write this thread AFTER Drinking Liberally?
Goldstein is a self-proclaimed "exoert" on everything. Goldstein knows very little about a lot of things....but practically nothing about anything!
Your neighbors are letting their dogs crap on your lawn too.
Sticks and stones, you know. Ron Sims and I send you a big wet kiss.
Posted by: Ivan on October 26, 2005 07:39 AMivan, you're nothing but a third-tier political hack. No one gives a hoot about what you think.
You've made your point (you're a leftist toilet-drinker), now do us all a favor and
bugger off!
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 26, 2005 07:43 AMIf you have noticed, I do not engage in personal attacks on this blog, nor do I call names. I leave that to smart guys like you.
Posted by: Ivan on October 26, 2005 08:27 AM(I've also noticed that they are roughly equivalent!)
Fact remains that no one here cares what you say…you "speak" to yourself alone…..
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 26, 2005 08:43 AMThe Alaskan Way Viaduct is the spitting image of the Cypress Structure, which included that famous section of freeway in Oakland that collapsed in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The rest of the Cypress Structure had to be condemned and torn down even though it hadn't collapsed, as did the identically-engineered Embarcadero Freeway on the opposite side of the Bay in San Francisco.
So trying to argue that the Alaskan Way Viaduct doesn't need to be replaced is something akin to whistling past the graveyard. The AWV was built using an engineering design that has proven to fail, and fail catastrophically, under stresses that we are quite likely to see at some point here in Seattle. Let's be honest: 7.0 earthquakes are uncommon, but not unheard of.
So I, for one, welcome any plan that proposes to replace the Viaduct, although I do not favor the ultra-expensive tunnel solution, for reasons of fiscal responsibility. The gas tax currently on the books is a reasonable method of paying for these improvements, especially when you realize that the gax tax is a user fee that is not indexed to inflation, and thus needs to be periodically increased over time just to keep up with price increases in the economy as a whole.
Arguing that we should cut "waste, fraud, and abuse" first before increasing the gas tax is a nice theoretical position, but unfortunately we live in the real world where there is always going to be a certain amount of inefficiency in government, and delaying a vital project like the replacement of the Viaduct because you disagree with part of the funding mechanism is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, which is no way to run a railroad, so to speak.
Me, I'm just happy that the Democrats, who generally hate roads and development, are willing to fund any projects that might make driving safer and easier. Don't look a gift transportation bill in the mouth, in other words.
Posted by: HT on October 26, 2005 09:14 AMHey Ivan, I have a piece of oceanfront property for sale in Arizona...you should buy it. Ask your neighbors I'm sure they'll tell you it's a good investment, I'll tell you where to send the money.
Posted by: dl on October 26, 2005 09:17 AMI think the emergency is is getting priorities right with the first 28 cents rather than adding another 9.5 cents.
Posted by: fred on October 26, 2005 09:28 AMLast I checked, the gas tax had nothing in it for the I-90 bridge.
Posted by: Mike H on October 26, 2005 09:58 AM"The Alaskan Way Viaduct is the spitting image of the Cypress Structure..."
Wrong! It may appear like the Cypress structure, but the engineering is different.
"The AWV was built using an engineering design that has proven to fail, and fail catastrophically, under stresses that we are quite likely to see at some point here in Seattle."
Wrong! In the Nisqually quake, only one of the 26 sections of the AWV suffered any damage, and that damage was only cosmetic.
Let me say this clearly and unequivocally: Any quake that would take down the existing AWV will take down any likely replacement that your government would build! (unless they replace it with flat, grade level road!)
"Arguing that we should cut "waste, fraud, and abuse" first before increasing the gas tax is a nice theoretical position, but unfortunately we live in the real world where there is always going to be a certain amount of inefficiency in government..."
That's like the rapist saying to his victim, "It's gonna happen one way or the other, so you may as well lie back and enjoy it" Does that disgust you? GOOD! It should!
"Me, I'm just happy that the Democrats, who generally hate roads and development, are willing to fund any projects that might make driving safer and easier."
If they ever propose such a thing, let us know - they haven't yet!
"Don't look a gift transportation bill in the mouth, in other words."
I'm (almost) speechless at that one.....I was tempted to use the one about promising not to do something in someone else's mouth.....ah, what the heck! You may be willing to lie back and take it, but the rest of us aren't. Just like Stefan has unearthed a pervasive "culture of corruption" within King County and the elections department, We have seen Doug McDonald revealed as a fraud, applying band aids to the WSDOT and whispering sweet nothings into the ears of anyone gullible enough to accept it.
Vote YES on I-912!
HT...we have known for years that Alaskan Way viaduct needs overhauled or replaced, have you lived here long? In fact, you would be hard pressed to find a local resident that disagrees. Yet, local money has been frivoled away for years on less important items, with little or no attempt to prioratize...and now we are supposed to believe it is an emergency and sign a blank check for a project lacking a definate plan? If I-912 fails, you will loose all recourse to demand a financially responsible viaduct plan. Remember you are proposing to give an enormous, unspecified amount of money to a city known for expensive boondogles, inefficiencies, and major cost over-runs. Just one example, when the King Dome was demolished it had been in successful operation for 20 years, yet more was still owed on it than what it had cost to construct.
How about this HT...the average starter home in King County is about $400,000. You send me $500,000 and I will buy you a new home (if the cost goes higher, I will just draft (tax) it out of your bank account). I make no guarantees as to the location or if it meets your current and future needs...but it will be yours for the next 30 or 40 years. If you won't purchase a house like this, why would you buy a viaduct in this manner? These people have not earned our trust, quite the opposite in fact.
Posted by: dl on October 26, 2005 10:23 AM01. I said the AWV was the "spitting image", not that it was identical to the other two structures. If you have read the UW's technical report on the subject, you will find that all three structures shared common elements of pre-1971 seismic engineering, with some minor variations. Furthermore, even with the minor engineering differences factored in, the AWV is still predicted to fail in a design-level earthquake with results identical to the situation in Oakland (i.e. collapse of the roadway). Whether it does so because of failing hinges or lap splices is pretty much a distinction without a difference. On balance, therefore, my point is not "wrong", as you incorrectly stated.
02. The Nisqually quake was not the most severe test to which the AWV has been subjected. Depth and distance from the epicenter made that quake less severe for the AWV than the 1965 quake, which was still not near design level. The UW report clearly states that, had the 1965 quake lasted a bit longer (as it would have had it been a 7.0 instead of a 6.5), the AWV would have experienced far greater damage. Again, the study uneqivocally states that the AWV will suffer catastrophic structural failure in the event of a design-level earthquake. Your statement that I was wrong is thus, in itself...wrong!
03. As for your point that any double-deck structure is doomed to collapse in that location, it may well be that ultimately we wind up with a ground-level replacement (as they did in Oakland and SF). However, since the problems stem from old engineering designs combined with the liquefaction problem, deeper foundations and a better design can definitely solve that problem for the current standard of a 10% in 50 years-level event. Whether they choose to do so or go with a ground-level solution is a cost-benefit calculation that will have to be made.
04. Your response on the waste fraud and abuse section is just silly. The rape analogy is completely over the top rhetorically. In any case, holding up progress in a needed area just because another problem isn't solved first is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Campaign against "waste, fraud, and abuse" if you want; I'll even support you, but don't hold up fixing the Viaduct until these traditional bugaboos are gone because those are not directly related issues and we've probably got less than 500 years to go so we're kind of in a hurry here.
05. Your statement that the Democrats haven't agreed to any projects that would make driving easier and safer is false on the face of it and thus does not merit a response except to say that you are, once again, wrong in your assertions. The Viaduct, the 520 bridge, and numerous other specified projects all meet the criteria for "safer and eaiser", and were approved with the support of Democrats.
06. How you can turn the old phrase "don't look a gift horse in the mouth" into a completely icky reference is beyond me, but it's your rhetorical problem, not mine.
dl: you correctly discern that that my parents did not know Kennewick man personally and that I am one of those darned immigrants. However, you incorrectly infer that this means I haven't been here for quite a long time, and that I do not yet own my own home. What it does mean, however, is that I have more experience with earthquakes than you ever will (you see, I know I already have you beaten in total Richter points, and since we live in the same area it's going to be impossible for you to catch up in the future). And that I would prefer to start an imperfect process of fixing the Viaduct now, rather than wait until some indefinite point in the future when the "perfect" plan will come along, perhaps after an earthquake that kills a couple of hundred people unnecessarily.
Posted by: HT on October 26, 2005 12:20 PMWhile everything you are running down is easily debatable, it is a waste of time.
NONE of what you say is relevant to the central discussion on this thread.
The tax increase at issue with I-912 is not TIED inextricably to ANY projects.
It MIGHT be used in some ways for one or another of many different transportation projects or none at all but the point is . . . no accountability exists. As is true for ALL liberal Democrats, Gregoire et al will spend the proceeds for purposes that it was never intended, and everyone including you knows it--you just don't care. If liberal Democrats CAN tax and spend the public unfairly, they WILL. There is nothing truthful you can ever say to overcome the fact and conclusion that they designed the gas tax increase in order so that they can deliberately misuse the funds.
Given the alacrity with which you argue in support of blind partisanship, I'm not surprised that you are cynical enough not to acknowledge this.
Every solution has to start someplace; once part of the funding is in place, everyone (state, feds, local) has an incentive to move forward to make something happen. Admittedly, this didn't work too well with the Monorail, but there's a big difference (I think) between a totally new project being run by some wacky group of enthusiasts, and the replacement of a critical part of the state highway system under the supervision of WSDOT.
Posted by: HT on October 26, 2005 01:20 PMGiven the alacrity with which you argue in support of blind partisanship, I'm not surprised that you are cynical enough not to acknowledge this.
I honestly don't know what you are talking about here. If you are trying to paraphrase something I have written, you have transformed it out of all recognition. The only comment I made that I think has any bearing on this subject at all is along the lines of "take the deal you can get", which is in fact the exact opposite of blind partisanship. But if you have something else in mind, please tell me.
Also, since WSDOT, the feds, and the City of Seattle are now in the planning phase of this project, with an anticipated start of construction in 2009, I'd say that they appear to be making a good faith effort to comply with the intent of the funding legislation. Enough so that the burden would seem to be on you to show that they wouldn't spend the money as intended, rather than on me to show that they would.
I don't think they're doing this to deliberately "misuse the funds". I think they're just plain stupid, and corrupt. Too dumb to run the scope of projects they plan efficiently and cost-effectively, and too corrupt to pass up an oportunity to pad pet projects and each other's wallets, in return for political life span and power.
If you hadn't plagiarized the UW report so extensively and actually taken a moment to pull your head out for a moment and take a look around, you would have noticed a couple of things.
01.1 You can play semantical "differences with a distinction" games all you want, but that doesn't change the facts. The AWV is significantly different in design than the Cypress structure. Yes, it can fail, but it wouldn't fail in the pancake fashion that the Cypress structure did.
02.1 I never claimed that the Nisqually quake was the most significant seismic event. I only mentioned it because it was the most recent (and therefore relative). Thank you for pointing out the 1965 quake. It furthers my point that the '65 quake resulted on zero damage to the viaduct. The AWV passed it most recent (structural) inspections, but failed in the liberals "style over substance" tests. Sure its ugly, but spend you own money if you want to spruce it up, not mine!
03.1 Those two elements point to the third premise (in which I am right, and you are whatever you are). Thank you for reaffirming my point! The existing structure can withstand another '65 quake, thanks to the retro-fits that have been done since the UW's 1995 study was published. Any quake sufficient in intensity to destroy the existing structure will surely destroy any replacement the current regime is likely to buy and build.
04.1 Your premise is tantamount to "Dashing off wildly in all directions". Perhaps I should refer to you as "Chicken Little". There is nothing silly about getting a grip on accountability, insisting on efficiency, and driving out corruption. You base your premise on a faulty foundation - there is no credible need to immediately replace the AWV, and certainly none for spending outlandish amounts of cash as Mr. Nichols would have us do. There is an imperative to "stopping a runaway train" even if the trip isn't over.
05.1 Apparently you were too busy listening the sound of your own voice to hear that the AWV and 520 aren't funded by this gas tax increase. They just plan on "priming the pump" with more increases inevitable under their half-a$$ed misguided excuse for plans.
06.1 To accept your reference "don't look a gift horse in the mouth" is to take a complete departure from reality. It is so utterly outside rational thought, that any kind of irrational promise without intent to keep is analogous (the more extreme, the more apt).
So the quest remains the same - you want to waste my money on needless pork, and are willing to blindly accept whatever the current liberal dogma is in furtherance of that misguided agenda, and I am here to stop you. You're willing to accept a pig in a poke because it's been dipped in whatever crappy flavor the dems are pushing this year - I'm not. You're apparently content with the status quo - the rest of us aren't!
I join the ranks of those who criticize Republicans who spend more than they ought to, but I condemn liberals who spend for the sake of spending!
Vote YES on I-912
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 26, 2005 02:55 PMYou got part of it right. "[t]he passage of I-912 will mean that the Viaduct will not be fixed," that is, at least until it is a transportation priority. Currently it is not a priority no matter how much silly seismic hand wringing you'd like to engage in.
"Me, I'm just happy that the Democrats, who generally hate roads and development, are willing to fund any projects that might make driving safer and easier. Don't look a gift transportation bill in the mouth, in other words."
GIFT transportation bill !!! Some of the most profoundly idiotic words imaginable. Apparently your idea of someone giving you a gift would be my seizing your bank account, so I can pay off my new Porsche? Works for me stupid, please forward payment authorization to me e-mail address.
SOME small portion of the revenues from the gas tax hike might be used in SOME ways for one or another of many different transportation projects or none at all but the point is . . . no accountability exists. Just window dressing.
What good faith effort? You call it good faith to use tell the public that the revenues from the gas tax hike will go to specific projects when the measure itself says nothing of the kind? You call it good faith to use public funding to campaign against a people's initiative directly violating the spirit of campaign laws and flouting the will of the State’s citizens? You call it good faith to lie in that campaign by saying that if I-912 passes, the regions transportation projects will halt causing more traffic congestion, when the very people who touted the tax hike openly admitted to the public that the projects they loosely associated with it would do nothing to relieve congestion?
"WSDOT, the feds, and the City of Seattle are now in the planning phase of this project, with an anticipated start of construction in 2009." How is that good faith? The gas tax hike financed exactly $0 of your presumption of a "good faith start-up," but it is a completely separate issue from I-912. It is clear that you know nothing about publicly funded projects or you would never make such a naive statement.
Obviously you can say whatever you like, but my burden was met the day I voted for Dino Rossi.
Katomar,
It is a deliberate effort designed to keep our credit rating by paying past bills accumulated by Locke et al without cutting programs, or solving any problems. Gregoire is as corrupt as they get, and the people that follow her are blind as bats and nearly as smart. Look at this HT clown; he actually believes that this issue is about the Alaskan Way Viaduct project. Clients like him are what will make me a very rich man.
Because I am not interested in continuing the conversation with you, I am just going to correct a few of your more egregious errors for the benefit of the peanut gallery (if there is one).
First, citing a report is not "plagiarism".
Second, if you were honest, you would admit that the UW report clearly states that the decks of the AWV are highly likely to collapse in a design-level event. Anyone who wonders can simply Google, call up the report, and read it. The "retrofit" steps that have been taken since then are not significant; additional casual Googling show that reports from as late as 2003 rate the current structure's ability to withstand anything stronger than a Nisqually quake is "very poor". Also, a point that you seem not to understand is that neither the Nisqually quake nor the 1965 quake were design-level events; however, the Loma Prieta quake outside of SF WAS. Apparently you think it is reasonable to proceed on the assumption that Loma Prieta could never happen here, that the worst we will ever see is a 1965-level quake, which is wishful thinking at its worst.
Third, the mayor's name is spelled "Nickels".
amused by liberal red herrings: what is it with you people? Can't you even have a reasoned discussion without resorting to insults? "Politics is the art of the possible", and for pointing that out I get called "stupid" and a "clown"? I think your curmudgeonly worldview is far more naive than my willingness to countenance the normal give-and-take of politics. I wonder how your prospective clients would feel about your plan to exploit their stupidity and clown-like nature(s) to become "a very rich man". I'd say they wouldn't appreciate it much, or remain your clients for very long. Mine, by contrast, know that I understand their business problems, do my best to "do well by doing good", and have done so consistently for the last 27+ years.
Best I can figure, from watching the Snohomish County version of the anti-912 ads at home and the King County version at work, is that if we vote for 912, we can keep these Seattle ultra-libs trapped under the viaduct and they can never move to my neighborhood. Yippee!
Posted by: SnoCo Voter on October 26, 2005 04:19 PMThe lie that the No campaign uses that if i-912 passes all these would be cancelled is a lie!! Not a half truth, but an out and out lie!!!
I do not believe that our current Government, left to spend on what they want, will accomplish what is needed.....decreasing road congestion.
Posted by: Dengle on October 26, 2005 05:48 PMWhat a red herring by the "Morons for Goldstain's Ass" committee.
Posted by: Sailor Republica on October 26, 2005 06:03 PMWhat it is with “us people,” is that we know that politics is something much more than simply the “art of the possible", [sic] but how all of us get what we need. Your specific ignorance of the most essential political facts regarding this issue directly bears out my assertion that your statement: “[D]on't look a gift transportation bill in the mouth, in other words," is one of the most profoundly idiotic statements imaginable.
While “possible,” it is certainly not desirable for our region to continue paying extremely high taxes for schemes that produce no desirable outcomes. In this context, one thing no one denies is that the Alaskan Way Viaduct project will not be remotely funded by the gas tax at issue in (any substantial way.) I qualify my statement out of intellectual honesty because I recognize Christine Gregoire’s probable future political obfuscation placing a token portion of the tax revenues into that project.
The difference on this issue between me and you is that you refuse to acknowledge that the issues surrounding I-912 involve ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE TAXPAYER and that is why many voters should vote for I-912, and repudiate Gregoire and her minions. I want the straight stuff and that's why I voted for Dino Rossi.
Some of my clients get themselves into the type of trouble stupid clowns like you immerse yourself into because (like you) they refuse to accept reality. Funny you would use the word curmudgeonly. I am called that from time to time by some who refuse to accept reality on its own terms. Every time the term comes up it is bandied by someone whose naïveté permitted them to be availed of my services, because they became overtaken by the type of slick bull$hit you willingly accept.
You are deluded, but your delusions are amusing in that they fail to engage and contradict substance in favor of changing the subject. Your shallow arguments only display simple-minded liberal prejudices. Your clients (no matter what they pay) are definitely not getting their money’s worth.
You do, however, put me in mind of the old saying "Never mud-wrestle with a pig. You just get dirty, and the pig enjoys it."
P.S. Do you even know what [sic] means?
Your usage implies not.
1. You didn't "cite" the report, you moron, or cite from the report (you moron), you copied & pasted significant portions of it into your posts in a feeble attempt to portray yourself as someone who might possibly know something about something instead of looking like a complete moron. Mission status: abysmal failure.
2. http://depts.washington.edu/trac/bulkdisk/pdf/363.4.pdf#search='university%20Washington%20Seismic%20Report'. Let the "peanut gallery" as you would call them read the report for themselves and see exactly what you did. They will see that, although you grabbed a huge amount of information from the document, you failed in the simplest terms to show even the most basic understanding of what you were working with. Mission status: Abject abysmal failure.
3. "Third, the mayor's name is spelled "Nickels"." The last, desperate defense of a losing argument is to point out your opponents spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Mission status: Pathetic, abysmal failure.
4. If you had a sense of humor, it probably shriveled up and died around the same time your testicles did.
Your posts clearly illustrate that you don't even know what you don't even know (but that doesn't stop you from shooting off your big mouth ;'}
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 26, 2005 09:04 PMNow I'm ringing the recess bell, however. So go play with amused over by the swingsets, and stop calling me names and making false accusations.
Posted by: HT on October 26, 2005 09:44 PM1. "The AWV was built using an engineering design that has proven to fail, and fail catastrophically, under stresses that we are quite likely to see at some point here in Seattle."
2. "Also, since WSDOT, the feds, and the City of Seattle are now in the planning phase of this project, with an anticipated start of construction in 2009, I'd say ..."
Do you see what's wrong with what you are saying? Do you have a crystal ball that says that AWV will not collapse until 2009? If it is such an unsafe structure, why doesn't the gov't decide on the design right now and run a separate referendum to raise the money just for this?
This gas tax legislation is literally dripping with the fat, and no one with a sane sense of logic can support it or approve of it. Passing I-912 simply forces the gov't to come up with a more acceptable tax package.
Posted by: C. Oh on October 26, 2005 11:23 PMFirst you fall back on the clintonian defense (I did not have plagiarism with that document!), which, as anyone can easily see, Is patently untrue.
Then you invoke the Cartman rule (Screw you guys! I'm going home!)
It wasn't enough that you didn't have a relevant argument to start with, you had to dig yourself in deep in a pathetic stab at intellectualism (boy, you sure showed us!) by quoting "liberally" (codephrase for stealing) information and passing it off as your own analysis. Give yourself a pat on the back there big guy…good job! You finish up with a barn burner of an insult (alligator!) (what?!)
OK, you nematode!
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 27, 2005 07:32 AMIf you are comfortable with your "rhetorical" reasoning and methods of expression (especially your last two comments) as contrasted to mine, I am.
The fact that differences between you and I could not be more pronounced provides me with great comfort.
GIFT transportation bill? O.K. genius.
You want something that is not forthcoming, the evidence clearly establishes that it is not forthcoming, so your response is to ignore the evidence.
Your transparent attempt at gaining authority by plagiarizing a study and then denying it when you got caught is clearly established, yet you nevertheless refute the facts. If you had admitted the truth (there for all to plainly observe), you might have at least acquired some measure of credibility, and sustained some basis for your silly thesis, but the facts demonstrate that in addition to being a clown you are a liar. Your exhibition of uncritical acceptance about the meaning of the U.W. data combined with ignorance of the fact that it is a pure political red herring is also clearly established by your own words. I'm pleased to see that you are sticking to them.
Your simple refusal to address the political realities proves my earlier assertion that the “alacrity with which you argue in support of blind partisanship,” is very well founded. That you responded, “ I honestly don't know what you are talking about here,” is instructive as well. No one will ever accuse you of being bright. Once again I reiterate, “I'm not surprised that you are cynical enough not to acknowledge any of my arguments,” instead simply changing the subject over and over and dodging concise logical arguments with inapt terms and unsupported inconsistencies.
I couldn’t possibly care less what you think of me.
I will very happily stand by both of our productions as dispositive expositions of the corresponding merits of our relative positions.
Thanks.
According to this site: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/65.html
it takes Washingtonians working until April 20th to cover their Tax burden... Thats the 8th worst in the country...
I guess we should stop buying crap we don't need, move closer to work and quit smoking cigars! wait... did I just say that!
Posted by: Carl on October 27, 2005 10:13 PMTim Goddard, Republican Party activist, is whining about the "big business" interests funding the anti-912 campaign.
How funny is that? It only takes a couple minutes to cross ref the top 25 contributors to the anti-912 campaign and the major donors of the State Republican Party. They match up quite nicely!
Is the State GOP on some kind of suicide mission lately, or is this hypocritical idiocy just a passing trend?
And these are supposed to be educated adults writing this stuff?
Posted by: LiberalRedneck on November 1, 2005 05:36 PM