June 28, 2006
Mrs. Gregoire, globetrotter

Today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports on Mrs. Gregoire's1 frequent foreign travels:

Since taking office in January 2004 [sic], [Mrs.] Gregoire has traveled to France, Germany, England, China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Canada to promote Washington state. Though some critics say she should spend more time at home, Gregoire insists her trips are necessary for such a trade-dependent state.
Yes, all of these overseas junkets are an unnecessary regal extravagance, but at least it gets Mrs. Gregoire out of Olympia. Look at this way: would you rather have her spending more time at home where she'd only be focused on making government even bigger?

1 The haughty, French-named Massachusetts-style Democrat, who by the way is already receiving donations from Massachusetts for her 2008 election campaign.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 28, 2006 10:46 AM | Email This
Comments
1. The more time she spends at home, the more people will realize how bad she is for this state. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better.

Posted by: Palouse on June 28, 2006 10:56 AM
2. Has Dino Rossi announced that he will run for governonr in 2008?

Posted by: Libertarian on June 28, 2006 11:40 AM
3. One more reason the P-I is losing readership... they can't even get simple facts straight. Gregoire took office in January 2005, not 2004. How can she be in office in January, when she wasn't even elected (and I use that term loosely) until November later that year?

Posted by: Mike H on June 28, 2006 11:53 AM
4. in the private sector, we would be ordered to severly curtail foreign travel to save on budgets; we used teleconferencing and other alternative (cheaper) means; while i think promoting our state is good, why do we have trade groups and chambers of commerce doing the same? trips are only perks for politicians, their families and hangers-on; i think they are not necessary nor priorities; fix your own yard first; besides, let THEM come HERE if they like us so much as trading partners;

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 28, 2006 12:02 PM
5. The PDC statement regarding donations to Ms. Gregoire's 2008 campaign begin with the name "French, Robert" -- how ironic!

Posted by: Marilyn on June 28, 2006 12:02 PM
6. Stefan,
This is one of those times where I must disagree. Travel is an important part of the job of governor. Whether the person who holds that title is the legal and/or legitimate winner of the votes is irrelevant. He/she has an obligation to push the State nationally and internationally.
It is also a time for him/her to step away from partisan politics and get on with the business of the State. Imports, exports, tariffs, out- sourcing, off-sets...this is the language of foreign travel. Not advocacy for emmission standards.
Of course, that doesn't mean there won't be waste and abuse of the opportunities to travel. It always happens, particualrly when the tax payers are footing the bill. But sadly, I suspect that the real waste here is that so few of the governor's staff are up to the task.

Posted by: Diogenes on June 28, 2006 12:18 PM
7. My preference would be to give her four years off for extensive international travel starting January 2009.

Posted by: Steve Beren on June 28, 2006 12:19 PM
8. What a fluffy, misleading article. (Seems to be the speciality of the PI!) She is quoted talking about "how much" the Chinese delagation spent while they were here but they don't include figures to indicate whether it was any increase over previous years...the reporter gives numbers on Washington export totals but they are for 2004 which (as has already been pointed out) was PRIOR to the Queen's ascension to the throne in 2005. How about some numbers to show actual contracts that were signed specifically due to a trip which she took? And to say that the trips only cost $10,000 and $18,000 is ridiculous! That may be the amount for HER plane ticket/hotel room but I seem to recall that she had around 50 people with her on the little junket down under. Common sense alone should cause one to question those numbers! Maybe someone needs to inform the reporter that his job is not to just regurgitate whatever he is told but to actually investigate if the numbers are correct and try reporting on that! Yet again, the MSM drops the ball and still can't figure out why no one wants to read their silly papers anymore....

Posted by: suzihomemaker on June 28, 2006 02:14 PM
9. "Would you rather have her spending more time at home where she'd only be focused on making government bigger?"

Don't worry, she has plenty of people back here taking care of that for her.

Posted by: stu on June 28, 2006 02:44 PM
10. I wonder how we, the people, can measure the cost effectiveness of those trips? Can we see any benefits from them, or not? If there is no benefit, then either the trip was a waste of money, or the person who took the trip wasn't successful in their 'mission.'
On another note, I looked at the link Stefan has to the Gregoire campaign contributions from Massachusetts, and I was bit disturbed. I strongly dislike the notion of people from other states--Repub or Dem--being able to contribute to the candidate of their choice in other states. If Gregoire doesn't represent them (and they don't have to pay WA taxes), they shouldn't be able to give money to her.

Posted by: pseudotsuga on June 28, 2006 03:06 PM
11. she rises in the polls when she's gone and doing nothing but boon doggling.

A chimpanzee holding a plane ticket and a passport does less damage to washington than one holding a tax cannon.

Posted by: Andy on June 28, 2006 03:58 PM
12. I like how it says "election campaign" in the footnote...not re-election. :)

Posted by: Palouse on June 28, 2006 04:26 PM
13. How many of the donor on the list voted for the coronation of the queen?

Posted by: ken on June 28, 2006 05:24 PM
14. What is the Queen's latest approval rating ? I heard a rumor that it was actually over 50% (in the same survey that showed Cantwell and McGavick in a virtual tie). That seems hard to believe and that that part of the survey was somehow skewed. Besides, that is not consistent with her mid-30's ratings that have prevailed ever since she was selected as Gov.

Posted by: KS on June 28, 2006 06:09 PM
15. Well with all of her massive tax increases she should be able to globe trot all over this world on the washington state taxpayers dollars. Must be nice!

Is she flying first class?

What is the average cost of the her rooms?

What is the average daily food bill?

Are we paying for her family's travel also?

Posted by: GS on June 28, 2006 09:51 PM
16. This was a stupid article in the PI which should not possibly qualify as news.

No Governor dreams up these trips - the state's businesses and trade groups do, for one reason: they are good for business.

Rather than quote people who are always critical of the Governor, the PI might have made real news by finding a Republican or two who actually encouraged the Governor to go on a trip and complain about it.

But good luck trying to find anyone who would do that because the only reason these trips happen is because: they are good for business.

I know that might be hard for the BIAW and Mr.Guppy to believe - but niether knows squat about why business likes to take the Governor abroad and they have no business being quoted in newspapers on the subject except on the opinion pages.

Posted by: thor on June 29, 2006 06:43 AM
17. Is Christine's daughter in Australia one of those trade groups?

Posted by: Andy on June 29, 2006 08:18 AM
18. "Washington's export shipments of merchandise in 2005 totaled $37.9 billion. Washington ranked fourth among the 50 states in terms of 2005 exports."

I'd say the TWO trips she made to promote TRADE were worth it.

French-named? You mean the name she took from her wimpy, war veteran husband. Would you rather she went the route of keeping her maiden name?

And as for the donations, Rossi is accepting them from out of state as well. If you want to cherry pick a little more, you can notice Mr. Rossi's donations from CA and the NYC area, as well as Gov. Gregoire's from GA, TX, VA, NE, OK...

Stefan realizes tinfoil hats are useless- there are so many voices in his head already.

Posted by: Ben Diamond on June 29, 2006 11:25 PM
19. Of course all of the critical thinkers out there would be able to realize that it was ONLY the efforts of the Queen and not the industry trade representatives who have dealing on an international basis for DECADES that resulted in those trade numbers.

Yep all of those relationships being curried since the end of the WWII were really meaningless until the Queen and her court rolled into town. Since she didn't get the nod from the Judge until mid 2005, it is truely amazing her policies revolutionized Washingtons international trade numbers in under 6 months.

The world wouldn't have had near the demand for Washington Products abroad during an economic expansion without Christine's steady hand on the tiller, right? That is about the funniest thing I have heard in months.

Posted by: Huh? on June 30, 2006 08:30 AM
20. I can say one thing for certain- you have a very poorly developed sense of humor. Athough I'm always glad to entertain, unless you were laughing at your own comment, which may be more likely. I'm not sure where in your brilliant analysis you derived that I implied Christine Gregoire had invented trade. I meant exactly what I said- her trips promoting trade were worth it, especially in the context of such an export-dependent state. I guess for a numbskull such as yourself, promoting FURTHER trade would clarify that?

Posted by: Ben Diamond on June 30, 2006 05:26 PM
21. If you wish to be taken at your word, you must at least try to be clear. The plain implications of your statement "I'd say the TWO trips she made to promote TRADE were worth it." coming after ""Washington's export shipments of merchandise in 2005 totaled $37.9 billion. Washington ranked fourth among the 50 states in terms of 2005 exports." is that she had prime responsibility for both the ranking and the total. Nothing could be further from the truth.

You're only entertaining when you wear your panties on your head....

Posted by: alphabet soup on June 30, 2006 06:22 PM
22. So I am unclear, but have plain implications?

Washington state has billions of dollars of exports. Its governor made two trips abroud to promote trade relations. If a trip increases exports by even a fraction of a percent, it's worth it. That's my logic.

The Lunitarian thought process is something to behold...perhaps you should occupy your time stocking your bomb shelter.

Posted by: Ben Diamond on June 30, 2006 06:46 PM
23. No dimbulb...you are unclear but they are plain implications to normal people.

You wouldn't know logic if it crawled up your a$$ (again)

Posted by: alphabet soup on June 30, 2006 06:56 PM
24. You're insulting normal people far more than you're insulting me.

Posted by: Ben Diamond on June 30, 2006 07:15 PM
25. By pointing out your duplicitous language? Are you taht stupid?

Posted by: alphabet soup on June 30, 2006 07:28 PM
26. For it to be duplicitous, I would have to have been intentionally misleading, leading you to believe that Gov. Gregoire brought in billions in exports. I am not "taht stupid."

My point was nothing more than explicily stated- WA has huge amounts of exports, so visits to promote trade are worth the expense. Unpolished argument? Sure.

Someone managed to oxymoronically draw out a "plain implication" from "unclear" language and hyperbolically expand it.

In your opinion, that's the way "normal" people think.

Duplicitous? What word are you really searching for in that alphabet soup of yours?

Posted by: Ben Diamond on June 30, 2006 08:00 PM
27. Obviously no one except you attempts to "draw out a "plain implication" from "unclear" language..." and do anything with it. What you said was ambiguous and at least one person proved that ambiguity by asking what your meaning was. Your smarmy response was every bit as ambiguous as your original post.
I pointed out that if you want people to take you seriously you need to be clear. Your further responses show that you do not. Bully for you.
Henceforth I shall call you "double-speak" ;'}

Posted by: alphabet soup on June 30, 2006 08:18 PM
28. "If you wish to be taken at your word, you must at least try to be clear. The plain implications of your statement..."

alphabet soup

"Obviously no one except you attempts to "draw out a "plain implication" from "unclear" language..." and do anything with it."

alphabet soup


Your words, not mine. Doublespeak? "It's opposite day," perhaps?

Posted by: Ben Diamond on June 30, 2006 11:55 PM
29. Wow.

It took you three+ hours and that's all you could come up with? Now you've been down-graded to "dullard-boy"

Posted by: alphabet soup on July 1, 2006 07:30 AM
30. Washington State International Trade needs Chris Gregoire, like fish need bicycles.

Posted by: Huh? on July 1, 2006 07:32 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?