Our Sponsors:
Trending Stories
- Simple rules for staying sane in Seattle
- Seattle neighborhoods fight needed land use reform, density
- Morning Fizz: 'I'm Appalled'
- Monday Jolt: Community Council coup and McKenna misstep
- Wednesday Jolt: 'Seattle Times' wins fight against density; everybody (except Brett Phillips) wins key endorsement
- Morning Fizz: Some outstanding questions about the report
- Jolt: Parking Garages and Charter Schools
- Morning Fizz: $7 million committed to the charters cause?
- Tuesday's Scan: Costco? Who says we're from Costco?
- Is Washington becoming 'happy with crappy?'
Our Members
Many thanks to
Carol Kowalski
and
Marc Vassallo
some of our many supporters.
ALL MEMBERS »Most Commented
- Seattle neighborhoods fight needed land use reform, density (62)
- Jolt: Parking Garages and Charter Schools (47)
- Wednesday Jolt: 'Seattle Times' wins fight against density; everybody (except Brett Phillips) wins key endorsement (26)
- Morning Fizz: $7 million committed to the charters cause? (21)
- Morning Fizz: In hope of reaching a consensus (29)
- Monday Jolt: Community Council coup and McKenna misstep (20)
- Morning Fizz: Some outstanding questions about the report (23)
- Is Washington becoming 'happy with crappy?' (16)
- Simple rules for staying sane in Seattle (13)
- Tuesday's Scan: Costco? Who says we're from Costco? (11)
Follow Us »
Follow us on Twitter. |
Like us on Facebook. |
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds. |
Get our Daily Email Newsletter. |
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
ruleoflaw's comments
Posted Tue, Feb 9, 8:44 a.m.
Hugh Spitzer is correct. Eyman knows 960/1053 are unconstitutional and he just doesn't care. It's all the better for him in any case. If the court struck it down, he'd have to stop running the same thing over and over again, which would force him to find some more complicated ...
MORE