Two perspectives on 1033: the Columbian and The Seattle Times... the liars, and those who are actually journalists.

.
As we all know by now, the fringe-left rag this community is cursed with has come out against and, in fact, has actively campaigned again, I-1033, the initiative designed to rein in out-of-control government spending at every level from the state on down.

Of course our local paper's main concern is government; "people" rarely figure into their radar screen, as illustrated by the bizarre headline they used to shill their efforts against 1033:

"In our view: ‘No' on I-1033
Eyman's latest initiative might sound good, but governments would be denied recovery"

That this is a fringe-left government shilling waste of wood pulp is confirmed with this headline.

Is the focus on the fiscal blood-letting we've suffered in this state, with a 33% increase in this state's budget with more tax increases to come?

"GOVERNMENTS" would be "denied recovery."

Why is their focus on "government," and not on the PEOPLE?

Obviously, there's no accounting for self-imposed, ritual financial suicide.

That said, the endorsement of the "no" position appears to have been taken, word for word, from the scum trying to scare us into voting against this badly needed initiative by a campaign that has out spent the "Yes" side something on the order of 86 to 1 for their campaign.

Our despicable rag has run several quotes from state and local government employees that fear pay cuts and some such when 1033 passes. They've run, essentially, nothing from the tens of thousands of us who actually support this thing. In fact, they went so far as to quote some blithering idiot who said we would DIE if this thing passes.

What a surprise.

But taking it a step further, like the rest of the scum campaigning against 1033, the Columbian has re-printed the Colorado lie:

But it's the same kind of scheme that backfired in Colorado when a one-size-fits-all formula was passed by voters in 1992. In the next few years, the quality of public schools and health care plummeted. Health insurance problems also mushroomed, and numerous other public crises arose.

In 2005, Colorado voters decided to stop their suffering. They repealed the law.

Why this rag feels to engage in such lazy, leftist lying is just beyond me.

Here's the TRUTH from a frequently journalistic newspaper, unlike the crap pile we're stuck with:

Similarities don't add up in Colorado comparison

Opponents of Tim Eyman's Initiative 1033 say you only need to look at Colorado's Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) to see what could happen here if the measure is approved. But I-1033 and the Colorado law have major differences, and there is no consensus on whether TABOR has been a success or a failure in Colorado.

By Andrew Garber
Seattle Times staff reporter

Opponents of Tim Eyman'sInitiative 1033 say you need only look at Colorado's Taxpayer Bill of Rights tosee what would happen here if 1033 were approved.

Colorado voters passed a constitutional amendment in 1992 with a provision requiring state and local governments to limit revenue increases to population and inflation, and send any excess money back to taxpayers. But that's about the only thing the two measures have in common.

In fact, the Colorado law, known as TABOR,and I-1033 have more differences than similarities.

And there is no apparent consensus on whether TABOR has been a success or a failure in Colorado.

Much MORE truth here:

So... who do we believe? Note the complete absence of ANY alternative from our local version of Pravda?

A newspaper like the Seattle Times that actually did the work and who's analysis puts the lie to morons squeaking about how 1033 is Colorado's TABOR in sheep's clothing?

Or a fringe-left rag that seems to have looked no farther than the "No on I-1033's" web site of lies, copied it and pasted it in their own newspaper? A newspaper with columnists who lie (Yeah, I mean YOU, Laird) and who take positions using fake polls while they do everything they can to shut the people up while they're trying to ram a horrifically expensive, unneeded and unwanted project that THEY will not have to pay for down our collective throats.

Gee. That's a toughy.

Hopefully, those from our local despicable rag reading this (and I know you do) will correct their list of lies they use to oppose this effort...because, after all, the truth is out now... and in this case, the truth is that this rag's concern only extends to feeding government so they can try and get more and BIGGER tax breaks from the government teat their collective mouth is glue to with rivets.
.