From the "Credit where it's due" file.

If it's due. Goldy suggests that Rob McKenna might be due the benefit of the doubt...

Even though an overwhelming majority of constitutional scholars had weighed in that the mandate appeared to be constitutional, perhaps it is unfair to use this ruling to impugn McKenna’s legal acumen. Perhaps McKenna merely made the political calculation that the conservative majority on the court would ultimately prove be just as politically unprincipled as he is, and thus toss out the ACA regardless of clearly established precedent?

Politically unprincipled or legally inept?

Why choose one?

Quote of the day.

David Goldstein, cub reporter, talks to an anonymous 'Republican operative' about AG and gubernatorial wanna-be Rob McKenna and gets this...

"Attorney general is the politically easiest job in the world. He's been doing press conferences with McGruff the Crime Dog for the past seven years."

Clever, and not really harsh. If I came up with that one, I'd want credit. I wonder what our 'operative' is afraid of.

If you were wondering why unions would be (and you should be) afraid of Governor McKenna, Goldy's got the goods.

Map of the day.

I thought I got the maps out of my system last week, but this one from Goldy's first print piece as a Stranger columnist got picked up by Slog and I couldn't resist...



As usual, this one will click a bit bigger, but there's an even larger version here.

Heh™.

Goldy goes there...

Michael Vick’s fourth-quarter performance was so amazing, even my dog is becoming a reluctant fan.

You can take the boy out of Philly, but you can't take the Iggles out of the boy, I guess.

From the "Me neither" file.

Goldy...

I don’t know what’s more insulting, the suggestion that Reichert is brain-damaged, or the insistence that he’s not.

Me neither.

The truth.

Via Goldy...

The truth is, Rossi wrote the 2003-2005 state budget much in the same way that Dave Reichert caught the Green River Killer, in that he didn’t.

Yep, it's true.

From the "The more things change…" file.

Back in '04, a lot of Democratic precinct workers and other long time rank and file activists were shaking their heads at the call by a budding insurgency (we called 'em "Deaniacs" back in the day) to "take our party back!" Back from who, wondered the doorbellers and phonebankers who'd been waiting patiently - sometimes for decades - for their relief. Where've ya' been? E.J. Dionne says it’s the Republican's turn...

Ross notes that the state Republican convention endorsed Castle. These are not some shadowy party bosses, but, as he put it, “the grass-roots delegates who knock on the doors and pass out the literature and pound the pavements.”

Of course, some of the Dean insurgency was an illusion. Their differences with the Party, as both sides figured out in a fairly short time, were more about tactics and posture than ideology or positions. Dean's folks found out that most of the folks at those meetings hated the war, loved unions and supported civil rights and liberties with the same fervor as the insurgents. The Party regulars adopted the new tactics and technologies the newcomers brought with them. Governor Dean soon became Chairman Dean, winning the top job at the DNC with broad support from those same Party regulars and their national representatives.

The Republicans will, I suspect, find the outcome of their current insurgency will be far less rewarding. Turned out that the Deaniacs weren't maniacs, but some of the Tea Partiers are, apparently, mad as hatters.

What can the Republicans expect? There's a pretty big clue in Goldy's remembrance of Ellen Craswell.

As for me, Tea Party or mainstream, insurgent or establishment, I still say...

Quote of the day.

Via Goldy...

Dino Rossi on DISCLOSE:

"_"

What Goldy said...

Those who advocate for nonpartisan elections claim they are trying to remove partisanship from politics, when in fact all they’re really doing is removing valuable information from the voting public.

He says more here.

From the "Don't Panic" file.

Once again, Darryl does statistical analysis so I don't have to, which is a good thing since he knows how and I don't.

Hand wringing over Patty Murray's re-election campaign seems to becoming something of a cottage industry for pundits these days. Take the spin Goldy finds Publicola putting on the new Elway poll. While they're pushing the "Rossi gains ground" line, it turns out to be a very good poll for Patty. How good? That's where Darryl comes in…

If we normalize this poll (i.e. look only at the 352 who had an opinion) Murray is at 54% to Rossi’s 46%. As usual, I’ll approximate the probable outcome of a hypothetical election held today using Monte Carlo simulations. A million simulated elections of 405 voters at the percentages observed gives Murray 853,011 wins to Rossi’s 138,593 wins. The results suggest that if the election was held now, Murray would win with a probability of 86% and Rossi would wins with a probability of 14%. Here is the distribution of results from the simulated elections:

This, of course, presumes that Rossi gets through the primary. Given the Washington State Republicans historical affection for extreme candidates, that may be likely but it's not assured.

I figure he'll make it, though. My totally non-scientific gut feeling is that Patty's going to hold Rossi to the low 40s at best and deliver the third strike that knocks him out of the political picture hereabouts.

I've known Patty since she really was that mom in tennis shoes who cared enough about how the schools she sent her kids to were run that she went door to door and asked her neighbors for a chance to be one of the people running them. I voted for her in that election. She won. I've been voting for her every since, for the State Senate and now the US Senate. One thing I've learned along the way is that she's the best active politician in this state.

It helps that she's in it, as she always has been, for all the right reasons. Even among people who may disagree with her on some issues, she's going to own the trust issue in this election, and that's a very big deal in times like these.

My confidence in her prospects, then, is based a combination of confidence that Patty will run a smart and aggressive campaign and a trust in her basic integrity that's rooted in having watched her throughout her career in public office. Senator Murray, and when she's on the floor or in caucus, she's every bit Senator Murray, is, back her on the ground where folks live, still Patty.

If this sounds like an endorsement, well, of course. That endorsement's been a standing one since 1983.

Dino's Greatest Hits...

Hat tip to Goldy for Upper Left's very first video link.

Words to live by.

Goldy…

Politics is an adversarial process. Deal with it.

Quotable...

Harry Reid...

It is about people. It’s about life and death in America. It’s a question of morality, of right and wrong. It’s about human suffering. And given the chance to relieve this suffering, we must take it.

Matt Yglesias...

It’s fine not to be satisfied with this legislation, but it’s perverse not to be happy about it.

jnfr...

I am a leftist too...And I am very happy that the Senate has passed a health care bill.

Goldy...

You want Obama to fail? Reject health care reform. You want the Democrats to lose a ton of seats in 2010? Reject health care reform. You want to stop insurance companies from denying you coverage due to pre-existing conditions, or dropping your coverage once you get sick? Well, even the sucky Senate bill does that.

Jonathan Chait...

What has emerged from that machinery is not merely “better than nothing” or “a good start.” It is the most significant American legislative triumph in at least four decades. Why can so few people see that?

From the "Since you asked…" file.

Goldy wonders...

So could it be that the type of public podium-rattling many of us progressives demand, just isn’t a good fit to Cantwell’s wonkish personality, or to the brand of quiet, insider leadership she seems to prefer? And do we make a mistake by assuming she’s less progressive than she really is?

Since you asked, yes.

I've known Maria for twenty five years now, and I'd say her personality and political style is more informed by her Indiana upbringing than her ideology. The bottom line with Maria, the reason I'm an unqualified fan despite occasional disagreement, is that I've always found her to have a bedrock integrity - she may not be doing what I think is the right thing on some issue, but she's doing it for what she thinks are the right reasons for her constituents and her country, and under those reasons you'll find a solidly liberal foundation.

Sometimes she turns out to be right when I was wrong, too.

I'm in.

Goldy's got a deal for the leg…

So here’s the deal. Put a sales tax and excise tax increase on the June ballot, and folks like me will give you our support… but only if you also put on the November ballot a measure that would repeal the June increase, and replace the revenue with a tax on incomes over $200,000 a year.

According to the Economic Opportunity Institute, a “high income tax” of 3% on incomes between $200,000 and $999,999, and 5% on incomes over $1 million, would raise about $2.58 billion per biennium, yet fall on only 4% of WA households. I’m guessing that’s slightly more than the June measure would be expected to raise.

Sounds good to me. A sales and excise tax jncrease isn't a good idea for all the reasons that Washington's revenue system is awful, biting particularly hard those who've already been bitten hardest by a slow economy and rotten job market.

Still, this is one of those times when something actually must be done lest the cuts in state spending move from painful to crippling.

So, OK, let's do it if you give us a chance to fix it.

Best cat blogging...

...ever.

Another edition of…

…what Goldy said.