commented on What Seattle Mayor Ed Murray Can Do About the Metro Funding Mess
"...make sure lawmakers outside of Seattle know that when they vote to bring needless suffering to the citizens of Seattle, they vote to end their careers."
And how exactly will they know that? Will they know it when they see the Stranger whine about the absolute purity of representation in deep-blue Seattle districts? Will that cause suburban moderates to quake with fear?
There is one way - only one - to get the attention of suburban moderates: fund their opponents in elections. Period. And use that money to make strong arguments.
Who's got that money? The same group of idiot political allies that lost the Senate majority in 2012 because they wanted to squabble over litmus tests in deep-blue Seattle districts instead of doing actual work and pumping serious money into the surrounding communities. Let's be clear: The Stranger was (and still is) the useful idiot for that strategy. Cheer for Seattle, scorn King County, lose more power. Repeat.
You want to blame somebody? Don't blame Carlyle. Don't even blame Murray, in spite of his increasingly obvious wimpiness. Blame those political funders. Hold them accountable, because their actions (and inaction) decide elections.
I dream of the day when someone at The Stranger develops enough political sophistication to figure this out, and writes something enlightening and sharp about the people who give the money instead of the people who get it. Hold those entities accountable. Ask them why they're so committed to losing and wait for the sound of crickets.
commented on Another Unique Slice of Capitol Hill Lost to Apartment Development Boom
Did you share this news with Dominic? He loves apartments. If you'd consulted with him first, you would have learned how much you hate the poor, and how you don't understand what it means to live in a city, and how phrases like "unique slice" and "neighborhood character" are really racist dog whistles.
commented on Yet Another Democrat Defects to GOP
Tea Party logic from Dominic. When your team loses people, the obvious answer is imposing more ideological purity. Good luck with that.
The post ignores obvious realities. Don't want the burbs on your team? Oh, OK. Can you add? You know, count the number of seats from Seattle and the number of seats from everywhere else?
Let's just see whether those progressive funders (you know who you are) pump a truckload of money into Rodney Tom's race. I'm guessing they won't, because they'd rather piss away money in deep blue Seattle districts and squabble about who's really progressive. The strategy worked so well in 2012 that the Dems blew the Senate majority.
commented on Members of the City's Music Commission Call the Mayor's Firing of James Keblas Disrespectful, Offensive, Insulting
Above all, this episode reveals the petty side of Ed Murray. It's disappointing to see it emerge so quickly. He reached down to a relatively obscure city office that was working well, replaced a leader who didn't need replacing and angered the film community for no good reason, while offering nothing but mealy-mouthed explanation.
Let's put aside the niceness and competence of Becker. Keblas is/was equally nice and competent. This is bullshit chiefly because Murray actually felt the need to do this, to make an asshole control-freak move in a teensy setting with no legitimate cause. What would have happened had he retained Keblas? A small city sub-agency would have kept working well. Murray either couldn't or wouldn't see that. The former suggests blindness. The latter implies venality. Both tell us a great deal about him.
commented on Ta-Nehisi Coates on Jordan Davis
@21, I agree that Dunn was not convicted of killing the boy. My initial point was that he is being punished – significantly, as in a virtual life sentence - for his actions. Anna's post simply ignores that fact, leaving the entirely false impression that Dunn is walking away. He is not.
Whether Dunn should have been directly convicted of killing the boy is a slightly different question. Of course he should have been - but merely wanting this case to match the Zimmerman case doesn't make it match. From my standpoint, prosecutors gambled when they tried for first-degree murder. That's a high bar. Why the jury couldn't find a basis for second-degree murder or manslaughter is the bigger mystery.
commented on Ta-Nehisi Coates on Jordan Davis
@17, the leap from the legal distinctions to an accusation of indifference and no conscience is weak and self-serving. Let's put your suggestion more clearly: to disagree with you is more than just disagreement. It's tantamount to moral failure. Keep singing in the echo chamber.