I just couldn't believe they ran an editorial about believing victims the same day they stood behind endorsing joe fain a guy with a sexual assault allegation against him.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Like I said, their editorial section is a good example of why there are no good conservatives (except for the ones that get shot into orbit and left there to float and scream into the void until their air runs out)
The looming specter of Tim Eyman is never going to go away, is it?
At least it gives me the satisfaction of continually telling him no and metaphorically bopping him with a newspaper.
Also I voted. So many judges running unopposed.
We have a worse version of his bullshit on the ballot this time out. Flat out corporations put on a bill to prevent cities from putting sugar taxes on things ever. It's an assault on our democracy from corporate and it will probably pass because this state is ridiculous with taxes.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Oh I see the times went full right wing shill this time out endorsing Rossi because he can bring both sides to work together. Are you fucking kidding me times? Dino fucking Rossi the uniter?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Oh I see the times went full right wing shill this time out endorsing Rossi because he can bring both sides to work together. Are you fucking kidding me times? Dino fucking Rossi the uniter?
Well, everyone does hate him.
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Oh I see the times went full right wing shill this time out endorsing Rossi because he can bring both sides to work together. Are you fucking kidding me times? Dino fucking Rossi the uniter?
Like I said: their reporting is good stuff.
Their editorial section needs to be shot out of a cannon into space.
+1
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
I voted to raise everyone’s taxes especially Preacher
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Also Cliff Mass's arguments against the carbon tax are deeply weird. I'm wondering if the dude actually doesn't believe the science and just fakes it to avoid people yelling at him.
Also Cliff Mass's arguments against the carbon tax are deeply weird. I'm wondering if the dude actually doesn't believe the science and just fakes it to avoid people yelling at him.
The first thing I did when I read through that initiative (was curious about it and why the only signs I see around Lynnwood/Mill Creek are all against it) was look up Cliff Mass. Basically, from the sounds of things, yes...you pretty much nailed it.
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
Also Cliff Mass's arguments against the carbon tax are deeply weird. I'm wondering if the dude actually doesn't believe the science and just fakes it to avoid people yelling at him.
The first thing I did when I read through that initiative (was curious about it and why the only signs I see around Lynnwood/Mill Creek are all against it) was look up Cliff Mass. Basically, from the sounds of things, yes...you pretty much nailed it.
I think Cliff is deep at heart a "fiscal conservative", and consciously or subconsciously that is more important to him than climate change.
He also had some Deus ex machina story about how technology would solve the problem and it was more important to fix other shorter term issues instead.
Oh I see the times went full right wing shill this time out endorsing Rossi because he can bring both sides to work together. Are you fucking kidding me times? Dino fucking Rossi the uniter?
Like I said: their reporting is good stuff.
Their editorial section needs to be shot out of a cannon into space.
I have found most newspaper editorial sections, even ones of newspapers I like, are pretty trash. I think it's intentional too. Controversial poorly thought out comments in the editorial section get people annoyed, and thus talking about, said editorial section.
+1
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Cliff Mass is an idiot and a fossil fuel shill who spends most of his time denying his shillyness and obfuscating global warming's root problems. He's a lobbyist masquerading as an impartial weatherman.
Yeah he’s an idiot. They can’t even get the seven day forecast right, don’t listen to them on climate change.
The sad thing is, he's the only half-decent meteorologist that I've found in the entire PNW. I had no real sense of him as a political entity until a week or so ago, his blog was just the only spot I've found that could actually inform me whether the "massive incoming winter storm" was actually anything to be bothered about. It bums me out.
Yeah he’s an idiot. They can’t even get the seven day forecast right, don’t listen to them on climate change.
The sad thing is, he's the only half-decent meteorologist that I've found in the entire PNW. I had no real sense of him as a political entity until a week or so ago, his blog was just the only spot I've found that could actually inform me whether the "massive incoming winter storm" was actually anything to be bothered about. It bums me out.
Countless Republican politicians are medical doctors of some shade or another. Just because someone is good at a white collar profession doesn't mean they have a broad scope of intellectual awareness outside the bounds of their chosen vocation.
Countless Republican politicians are medical doctors of some shade or another. Just because someone is good at a white collar profession doesn't mean they have a broad scope of intellectual awareness outside the bounds of their chosen vocation.
More likely that they focused on study to achieve that to the exclusion of everything else.
Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
0
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
Is there somewhere that defines how the mental health check proposed by 1639 actually works? I've tried reading the text of the bill itself, and I can find where it says that law enforcement/courts can request mental health information, but I haven't seen anything the defines what would be disqualifying of gun ownership.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Is there somewhere that defines how the mental health check proposed by 1639 actually works? I've tried reading the text of the bill itself, and I can find where it says that law enforcement/courts can request mental health information, but I haven't seen anything the defines what would be disqualifying of gun ownership.
The main entry in the initiative language is:
"The entry of a civil commitment order based on mental health"
A quick googling for what constitutes a "civil commitment order" brings up this definition from Utah's Department of Human Services:
"Civil Commitment is a legal process through which an individual with symptoms of severe mental illness is court-ordered into treatment in a hospital (inpatient), or in the community (outpatient)."
So, basically, if a person has been committed to a mental hospital, they will be prohibited from (legally) owning a gun.
EDIT -
Ah...I was misunderstanding what you meant (and stopped reading at what the sections covering what the law is and what the initiative would change.
I get the feeling that the mental health checks would be to determine if somebody is suicidal or intends to do harm to others. Granted, they don't specify what would constitute a comprehensive background check...so, as it's currently, it's pretty dang vague.
Erlkönig on
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
0
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
Right, I was discussing it with a coworker, and his understanding was any mental health note in your medical record counted. Which could include a lot of stuff that maybe shouldn't be disqualifying? I still personally think that erring on the side of safety is likely the best.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Right, I was discussing it with a coworker, and his understanding was any mental health note in your medical record counted. Which could include a lot of stuff that maybe shouldn't be disqualifying? I still personally think that erring on the side of safety is likely the best.
I mean, mayyyyyybe? The last time I was in a psychiatrist's office was back in '99 when I was an undergrad and realized that my student health insurance included 10 psychiatrist sessions. Last year, I applied for (and received within 3 days of applying) my CPL (it was needed for my job). In the initiative write-up (in the "Revenue" section):
"Washington state law also requires mental health background checks for all CPLs and handgun sales, but not long gun sales."
1) I'm not sure what would be disqualifying outside of the "Predilection to cause harm to self or others" psych eval, and
2) It's my understanding that the initiative would just be extending the same checks already being made for CPLs and handgun sales to the sale of long guns.
Erlkönig on
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
I saw some news that apparently oil companies have spent $28 million on advertising against the Carbon Tax. It seems crazy to me for a home state bill to pull that much attention.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
I saw some news that apparently oil companies have spent $28 million on advertising against the Carbon Tax. It seems crazy to me for a home state bill to pull that much attention.
KUOW (The local NPR affiliate) just covered that story this morning. Downballot races are weird and have scary people running in them.
"Go down, kick ass, and set yourselves up as gods, that's our Prime Directive!"
Hail Hydra
+2
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
elected supreme court judges is an insane idea to begin with, we really need someone to organize an effort to amend the state constitution and get something more sensible
elected supreme court judges is an insane idea to begin with, we really need someone to organize an effort to amend the state constitution and get something more sensible
I dunno at the very least if our Supreme court sucks we can in theory vote them out, a feature I direly wish we could with the current SCOTUS.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
I actually think that appointed judges would be good since our state executive is borderline powerless right now and it would be nice if we could see some benefit to sending a Democrat to Olympia every term
I actually think that appointed judges would be good since our state executive is borderline powerless right now and it would be nice if we could see some benefit to sending a Democrat to Olympia every term
That works up until we woopsie a GOP person in office that gets to choose judges were stuck with long after voters fix the mistake.
LIke I get "judges shouldn't be political" argument but they also very much are and at least getting to vote on them lets us in theory do something about them.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
At least it gives me the satisfaction of continually telling him no and metaphorically bopping him with a newspaper.
Also I voted. So many judges running unopposed.
We have a worse version of his bullshit on the ballot this time out. Flat out corporations put on a bill to prevent cities from putting sugar taxes on things ever. It's an assault on our democracy from corporate and it will probably pass because this state is ridiculous with taxes.
pleasepaypreacher.net
pleasepaypreacher.net
Well, everyone does hate him.
Like I said: their reporting is good stuff.
Their editorial section needs to be shot out of a cannon into space.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Also Cliff Mass's arguments against the carbon tax are deeply weird. I'm wondering if the dude actually doesn't believe the science and just fakes it to avoid people yelling at him.
The first thing I did when I read through that initiative (was curious about it and why the only signs I see around Lynnwood/Mill Creek are all against it) was look up Cliff Mass. Basically, from the sounds of things, yes...you pretty much nailed it.
I think Cliff is deep at heart a "fiscal conservative", and consciously or subconsciously that is more important to him than climate change.
He also had some Deus ex machina story about how technology would solve the problem and it was more important to fix other shorter term issues instead.
I have found most newspaper editorial sections, even ones of newspapers I like, are pretty trash. I think it's intentional too. Controversial poorly thought out comments in the editorial section get people annoyed, and thus talking about, said editorial section.
pleasepaypreacher.net
pleasepaypreacher.net
Yeah he’s an idiot. They can’t even get the seven day forecast right, don’t listen to them on climate change.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
The sad thing is, he's the only half-decent meteorologist that I've found in the entire PNW. I had no real sense of him as a political entity until a week or so ago, his blog was just the only spot I've found that could actually inform me whether the "massive incoming winter storm" was actually anything to be bothered about. It bums me out.
Check out the bitchin vest
Countless Republican politicians are medical doctors of some shade or another. Just because someone is good at a white collar profession doesn't mean they have a broad scope of intellectual awareness outside the bounds of their chosen vocation.
At least she's letting you know nascar style who bought her out.
pleasepaypreacher.net
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
The main entry in the initiative language is:
"The entry of a civil commitment order based on mental health"
A quick googling for what constitutes a "civil commitment order" brings up this definition from Utah's Department of Human Services:
"Civil Commitment is a legal process through which an individual with symptoms of severe mental illness is court-ordered into treatment in a hospital (inpatient), or in the community (outpatient)."
So, basically, if a person has been committed to a mental hospital, they will be prohibited from (legally) owning a gun.
EDIT -
Ah...I was misunderstanding what you meant (and stopped reading at what the sections covering what the law is and what the initiative would change.
I get the feeling that the mental health checks would be to determine if somebody is suicidal or intends to do harm to others. Granted, they don't specify what would constitute a comprehensive background check...so, as it's currently, it's pretty dang vague.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
I mean, mayyyyyybe? The last time I was in a psychiatrist's office was back in '99 when I was an undergrad and realized that my student health insurance included 10 psychiatrist sessions. Last year, I applied for (and received within 3 days of applying) my CPL (it was needed for my job). In the initiative write-up (in the "Revenue" section):
"Washington state law also requires mental health background checks for all CPLs and handgun sales, but not long gun sales."
1) I'm not sure what would be disqualifying outside of the "Predilection to cause harm to self or others" psych eval, and
2) It's my understanding that the initiative would just be extending the same checks already being made for CPLs and handgun sales to the sale of long guns.
pleasepaypreacher.net
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
If it works it could spread.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Warn your friends.
http://www.nwnewsnetwork.org/post/deep-state-or-deep-sixed-washington-supreme-court-race-s-getting-buried
Well the times would probably endorse the guy
pleasepaypreacher.net
I dunno at the very least if our Supreme court sucks we can in theory vote them out, a feature I direly wish we could with the current SCOTUS.
pleasepaypreacher.net
That works up until we woopsie a GOP person in office that gets to choose judges were stuck with long after voters fix the mistake.
LIke I get "judges shouldn't be political" argument but they also very much are and at least getting to vote on them lets us in theory do something about them.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It makes more sense at the national level, because those candidates will receive more scrutiny.
We're doing it completely backwards.