I disagree with SLOG's push for the SC to close down Washington schools. That's a serious overreach to shut 1,000,000 students out of schools. This is a strike of 5,000 employees in 2015. It's a numbers game and they aren't done negotiating. To wrap school shut down for the entire state with SEA strike is bad politics and will backfire.

The court is smart in law and politics. This state elects its justices. New Jersey governor appoints the SC members with legislature approval and the justices can stay put until age 70.

It helps to get out of Seattle and mingle with people who live all over this state face to face, rather than on social media. People don't come in only red and blue stereotypes.

@1: you're not understanding what the SC would shut the schools down for. it's not a specific strike; it's to force the legislature to do what they ordered it to do, and are contemptuously refusing to do.

The judges are conservative, adhering to the state constitution.

What's funny is that not doing what the ST Ed board wants must be liberal and activist in their eyes.

Geniuses with hangovers do not feel like geniuses.

Black men killing other black men like hotcakes? Perhaps another #BLM brunch protest is in order.

Agree with#4 over most important news piece. As for McCleary and SEA strike. I get there's a lot of posturing which goes on to win the public hearts and mind when there's a strike. I think it's better to separate the two discussions. Seattle voters are a generous bunch unlike other school districts with their school levy.

You know the court can rewrite the state budget if it really wants to use the nuclear option. Far better that than closing school doors to 1,000,000 students. But rewriting state budget, talk about the devil in the details, may well bring us full circle. I'm a secret optimist, but I think there will be some sort of compromise- closing tax loopholes, consolidating smaller school districts, some tax hike (probably not income tax) spread out and not just on property tax as too much on the ballot is relying on that. Property tax is what got us into this inequity funding mess anyway. (Levy equalization has soften the inequity in past budgets.)

Bah, didn't Lady Gaga already wear a meat dress to an awards ceremony? And apparently the point she was making was about DADT.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lady-gagas-m…

So a french fry pattern dress? Small potatoes.

If they were to actually fully fund the schools, what would happen to all of the other state programs? Wouldn't that be catastrophic to the least fortunate, and a disaster for the state's economy as a whole? How deep would the cuts to other state programs have to be?

Mind you, I'm all for fully funding schools, but it seems like we can't do that without creating a new revenue stream or draconian cuts to other services.

Personally, I think we need a state income tax. Enough of the rich getting a free ride.

@11 You're always welcome at any time to write a check to the state treasury to alleviate your guilt until the unlikely event a state income tax ever is passed and signed into law.

Just get the supreme court to impose an income tax for the sole purpose of education funding. It has been done elsewhere such as in Kansas City Mo. although the K.C. imposition was by a federal court but still upheld.

Oh Raindrip, do go soak your head. We as a society (meaning you, me, and everybody else) have an obligation to educate students. That costs money. The money has to come from somewhere, and we still need to provide services and programs that the citizens want. Your silly little fantasy world put forth by that idiot Reagan and his intellectual handlers doesn't hold up when the rubber hits the road. Even Reagan came to understand that, and he was halfway to dementia. What's your excuse?

@14: I'm not disagreeing that the state needs adequate tax revenue to fund education. We also tried a lottery, and that didn't help. Considering that your party has held the reigns of state government throughout multiple democratic governors, it's a shame that this has not yet been resolved. I'd even entertain notions that a state income tax would be viable provided its coupled with a reduction in sales tax, cap on property taxes, reduction in business taxes, tort reform, and a suspension of extortion taxes to the WSLCB for the privatization of liquor sales.

Um... Y'all? Whilst is not whimsical. It's standard English in Great Britain and many other English-speaking parts of the world. Presumably, the Egyptian minister of the interior had a British education.

Raindrip, I'm with you on the lottery. I don't know how they ever pitched that one as a benefit to education, but there's lots of gullible people in this world. Just look at the morons who rally for Trump.

As for the Democrats and their lack of leadership, I agree. But I didn't see the GOP trying to take a brave stand during that time. Mostly they were just advocating for the return of the McGuffy Reader, and similar nonsense. In any event, our stupid initiative process pretty much stifles any chance of innovation in our regressive tax base because the voters are idiots.

And I'm with you on the reduction in sales tax if we got an income tax - I think the state base should be no more than 4%, with additional added on by municipalities as they see fit, not to exceed 10%. (Maybe a higher tax for luxury items like expensive cars, yachts, private planes etc) But I can't get behind a cap on property taxes, tort reform or reduction in business taxes. That's just letting the rich off easy via another avenue.

And yes - repeal the insane WSLCB taxes. That's the one government agency that I would love to see shrunk to the size where it could be drowned in the bathtub.