Regular readers know that when we mention the Seattle Times, we’re usually mocking it. Recently, we even accused its editorial pages of being “a clown car of bad ideas.”
Because, well: There was that whole endorsing George W. Bush thing in 2000. And the paper’s holy war against the proposed state income tax last year. Plus the cheerleading for right-wing idiot Susan Hutchison in 2009. We could go on.
But on no subject has the conservative Seattle Times been more consistently out of touch with liberal Seattle than its hatred of pot. Take, for instance, the drumbeat of one-sided articles celebrating marijuana busts. Or, most memorably, the editorial board’s 2003 opposition to a city initiative designed to make pot possession the lowest enforcement priority. At the time, the Times warned voters that the initiative was “a dopey idea” that “broadens the reach to recreational marijuana.”
In other words: marijuana, bad.
The Seattle Times said it would be appropriate to discuss changing pot policy only “in the forum where this issue belongs: Congress. Not here.”
So you could’ve knocked our stoned, tax-and-spending asses over with a feather when the Times editorial board wrote on February 18: “MARIJUANA should be legalized, regulated and taxed.” And: “The push to repeal federal prohibition should come from the states, and it should begin with the state of Washington.”
Then—in one week—the paper published three more pro-pot editorials.
“I like to think that as an editorial page, we are open to changing our minds on issues, and this is one where the thinking of the board has changed,” editorial page editor Ryan Blethen, son of Seattle Times publisher Frank Blethen, explained in a phone interview. “It would be sad if it were just sticking with what our position always was. If that was true, we’d still be supporting a gold standard.”
This ability to slowly, eventually evolve on some issues doesn’t mean the Seattle Times editorials now carry a lot of weight. (After all, the newspaper’s opposition to that city pot initiative was worth fuck all—voters passed it by a 13-point margin.) But it is a marker of a change in conventional wisdom among a certain suburban conservative set. It’s also an announcement that Seattle’s last bastion of drug-war defense has fallen. (All the elected officials representing Seattle who could be reached by press time, from city council members to state legislators, said they supported legalizing marijuana.) In other words, negative political ramifications for wanting to legalize pot—a radical position only 13 years ago—are now nonexistent here. At every social and political stratum, wanting legal pot is Seattle’s new status quo. And the final proof is that the Seattle Times, the voice of the status quo, is publicly acknowledging this fact.
Alison Holcomb, director of the ACLU of Washington’s drug policy project, sees the newspaper’s shift like this: “We’ve moved beyond the point of all of us agreeing that prohibition is a failure to insisting that our legislatures actually craft a new solution.”
But not everyone is doing triumphant bong hits. Immediately after the first pot editorial came off the press, White House Office of National Drug Control Policy director Gil Kerlikowske (also the former Seattle police chief) contacted Ryan Blethen. Kerlikowske wanted to sit down personally with the paper’s full editorial board. “I drew the obvious conclusion,” said Bruce Ramsey, the Seattle Times editorial writer who wrote the first unbylined piece. “He didn’t like our editorial.”
Kerlikowske’s office wouldn’t respond to a request for comment, but Ramsey said the meeting is definitely happening, set for Friday, March 4—an apparent attempt by the federal government to pressure the state’s largest newspaper into opposing marijuana legalization.
Blethen isn’t backing down, however. Asked if the paper would buckle under federal pressure, he says, “I doubt it. We don’t have any plans to.” As for future pro-legalization editorials, Blethen says, “I’m guessing we will do more.”
In fact, the day before Kerlikowske arrives, the paper is hosting an online forum to talk about a bill in the state legislature introduced by state representative Mary Lou Dickerson (D-36) that would tax and regulate marijuana.
Blethen said his paper’s new position had been “percolating,” but the legalization bill in Olympia was the reason that he—and his father—came on board. “It was a good time, I thought, to step forward and take a stand on it and try to give some more momentum to her bill,” he said. “By next year, we will have built up enough pressure to get something done. This is the beginning of our involvement. But eventually we will get there, even if not this year.”
He also doesn’t see this as a liberal position. “It’s not just liberals who use marijuana,” said Blethen (who doesn’t smoke pot but says he knows people who do). “I would venture to guess that there are a lot of good conservatives who do it.” 
So when do we find out that the Blethens have a plan to get the pot selling franchise in this state? Sure, it’s a cynical statement, but their family history suggests ulterior motives. Altruism has never been a Blethen family value.
De-fund the Drug Czar! http://cdc.coop/drug_czar
Please sign this petition: http://www.fearlesscampaign.com/page/sig…
The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the director of which is commonly referred to as the Drug Czar, needlessly costs taxpayers $1.5 billion dollars every ten years, funding a failed war on drugs. It’s time we put an end to the waste and focused on paying down the debt and investing in America’s future.
Any “legalization” that is controlled by the State I hope has sections that allows growers to offer their strains to the public just like craft distillers do in RCW 66.24.145 Craft distillery — Sales and samples of spirits. (5) Distilling is an agricultural practice.
Ryan is cute with a beard!
The Seattle Times printed on Hemp paper! I’d love to see it happen.
Don Skakie
I’m confused – we have an anti-government, anti-regulations, anti-tax movement going around right now and this paper, The Seattle Times who have traditionally revolted against taxes and regulations supports this idea? Suddenly they have “changed their minds”?
So if they have changed their minds on the idea of taxes and regulations on marijuana does that mean they have changed their minds on other taxes and regulations they have railed against in the past?
Considering the voters in this state rejected all tax increases last November and they have clearly stated that “we don’t want a tax on soda or bottled water” why would they support a tax on marijuana? It’s taxes, and another government run program – how the hell would supporting something like this make any sense in this state?
Nice to see them stand up for something anyway, I suppose. They sure didn’t stand up against Satterberg’s decision not to prosecute Birk.
Oh, that’s right, neither did The Stranger really… Cienna ending by quoting someone calling Satterberg “dedicated and open-minded”, I think it was, in her meek piece where she couldn’t really seem to decide whether she believed her headline of “He’s Wrong”.
I guess you can say you’re better than The Times anyway, seems like that’s the main aspiration — and a very low one. Congratulations.
http://www.birkaction.com/satterberg.htm…
The only good conservative is a dead conservative
(jk 😉
Kerlikowske has always been a lying hypocrite. He say’s he wants to take attention away from prosecuting drug users and redirect it towards treatment or harm reduction strategies yet the money doesn’t lie. Nothing in the budget reflects any change in the federal stance. It’s always business as usual for federal drug control policy. Lock up non violent drug users, the majority of which are using cannabis. I’ve always suspected to much money is being made by the bloated police organizations prosecuting the “war on drugs” and the corrections departments housing the convicted. Many local law enforcement budgets are comprised entirely of cash and property seizures. Hillary Clinton spoke off the cuff last week and acknowledged that the end of drug prohibition was unlikely simply because to much money was being made!
As bad as the weekly is it would be nice to see the stranger at least try to compete with them in covering the mmj / cannabis advocacy movement in Washington state today. There is a cultural revolution that is being practically ignored by “alternative” media in the biggest city in the region.
Obviously the Stranger has to worry that the Times is going to steal it’s ad revenue.
Or will that impact the Weekly more?
Who cares about the possible motives of the Blethens and/or the supposed agenda of the Seattle Times and/or the imagined importance of The Stranger? I could give a rats’ ass about any and all.
Pot should be legal, taxed and regulated, after which jailed user and dealers of same should be granted instant pardons. Then we all can get on to the serious grown-up matters at hand: balancing the budget, reforming public education, bringing the troops home, etc.
Perhaps the Blethens want to invest in the cannabis industry?NEVER TRUST THE UPPER CLASS! . . . .NEVER!!!
I’m not sure if I understand the headline? The White House tries to bully the Seattle Times??
I went back and read the article and I didn’t get the feeling that they were trying to bully anyone?
Did I miss something?
No, you didn’t miss anything. I was also unclear as to how the headline matches the story!
@15, @16: You think the White House sends Kerlikowske for a 1-on-1 meeting with the Times’ editorial board just to say hi? The simple fact that the White House created such a meeting constitutes unusual pressure. Blethen appears to agree.
I mean, really–you can’t be that naive.
Oh, and welcome! It’s great that you both joined us…let’s see…oh! today. Hmmm. Well, welcome newbies who are certainly not affiliated with the Seattle Times!
I don’t think the White House “sent” him – he’s had a scheduled trip to speak at a SAMA Foundation event on March 4 since November. Sounds more like scheduling a meeting while he happens to be in town.
Yes, by all means, Curly-cow-ski, keep the Prohibition thingy a goin’. (And your Big Fat JOB!)
That sweet smell of Success is Right around the Corner!
It’sjustgottabee!
I dont think the white house sent him either. Its pretty odd and a coincidence in my opinion.
Sheila
The conservatives are usually the worst offenders….. Not always but, like Rush Limbaugh?
@8: You can disagree with someone about a particular issue and still think they are “dedicated and open-minded.” Not everyone who has a differing opinion is a terrible person, and your suggestion otherwise is petty and immature.
That kind of attitude is what prevents us from making any progress in politics. I think it’s worse on the right, but the left isn’t lacking in closed-mindedness, either. Just because someone doesn’t share your perspective doesn’t mean you’re helping your cause by demonizing them.
So…..this article is about a stern, high-pressure talkin’ to that Blethen anticipates getting? It hasn’t even happened? What if Kerlikowske is just looking for a doubles partner?
@23 nah, he was just in town for Emerald City Comicon and wanted his trip paid for.
what about the fact that we don’t tax drugs sold in this state? Other pharmaceuticals are not taxed, right? So how could we justify this? It would have to not be sold as a drug, … but as something like alcohol / cigarettes, … completely over the counter and sold by any outlet with a license. This would sure fork up the private sector trying to currently market itself along these lines, currently (aka medical marijuana providers)
@23, I know, right? I can’t get through one Comicon event season without some drug czar wanting to sleep on my couch and eat all my vacuum-packed salmon because “Oh my God, we can’t even get salmon this good in DC!” F***ing thugs. I totally feel Blethen’s pain.
@3 -actually the ONDCP funds all sort of community-based initiatives that focus on prevention, mainly through the Drug Free Communities grant program. These funds do a huge amount of the work in WA state that has been abandoned by law enforcement/schools/municipalities.
I am certainly not a fan of their interdiction strategies, but the ONDCP is one of very few sources of funding to do the sort of work everyone agrees is needed and helpful, prevention and intervention.
I think the constitution protects the freedom of expression and the White House is overstepping its authority.
@27 No, not “everyone agrees” the ONDCP is even capable of “needed and helpful, prevention and intervention.” Drug Free Communities? That is just the sort of hypocritical nonsense that Gerli is REQUIRED to spout.
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/abou…
Above is the full text of the ONDCP’s reauthorization. It includes requiring the director of the CIA to cooperate fully with the “Drug Czar” and requires ONDCP’s director to “take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance” … on schedule 1.
http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug…
Pete Guither has a great blog that examines this and loads of other war on (some) drug topix.