Someone must have told them the Trees are sucking up the CO2 for free ,LOL
I could only with that the Washington anti-gun initiative had suffered a similar fate....but it passed 60-40. Hopefully lawsuits (either state or federal) will cause it to be invalidated.
“Alas, even liberals in Washington don’t believe climate change is that big a threat.”
They believe it with their heart and their head, but not with their wallet.
“Huge Blow In Deep Blue Washington State”
Bill Clinton is already on the plane.
Jefferson, King (where Seattle is located), and tiny San Juan
Jefferson has Port Townsend which is home to many many trust fund babies, wannabe rich hippies, an very poor true believers who are mostly servants to the rest - often working in the local stores the rich bought as a hobby.
King is home to rue believers who never met a socialist Idea they did not love on first emotion.
San Juan (Islands mostly) is home to ultra wealthy environmentalist wackos who left Port Townsend for the good life and the views a few miles further north.
You know why there are so many windsurfers on the Columbia River?
Because Washington blows and Oregon sucks.
These freaking idiots do not even know trees need CO2 to produce oxygen. Arggh!
SO glad we left this idiot state years ago.
p
Goebbels is appropriate for Global Warming/Climate Change propaganda but this article actually addresses an unexpected defeat of that propaganda.
King County which contains the largest population of WA State is suffering because Seattle is suffering. Similar to San Francisco, Seattle has huge housing costs and a large growing, homeless population.
No way in Hell is Seattle going to go with any more damn taxes.
That’s why the proposal failed.
It’s a variation on the old gun line, “you can pry my steering wheel from cold dead hands”. Seattle is now L.A. north. I lived up there back in the 70’s and once again in the 90’s. The change I noticed was 24X7 traffic reporting by the 90’s. Even in the middle of the night, traffic is now a problem around the Sound.
And just what the hell do those dolts think giving the gubernment a thousand dollars a year will do to change the freakin climate?
We know it’s just a way to tax stupid people and give money to corrupt people.
How anyone believes that humans can affect the climate is beyond stupid.
It is a testament to the dumbing down of people via public school indoctrination.
The Soviets were right, they got the United States through decades of socialism in the schools.
“Please don’t feed your children to the public schools”
.
King County, the only place I know of where a Hobo has a right to urinate on the sidewalk before boarding a bus.
I didn't think Washington State had a reputation for la belle weather.
Well, that may be true. Put the libs and commies made gains in that initiative 1639 passed, which basically guts the Second Amendment to the Constitution. I would look to that to go to the Supreme Court of the United States. It is totally and completely unconstitutional.
The very idea suggests the question of whether it is time to divide the west coast into six states -
coastal West California deliniated as the populous California coastal counties alone, from Los Angeles up to but no further than San Francisco, and East California deliniated as the rest of the California counties;
and Western Oregon deliniated as the counties west of Wasco straight down to west of Klamath with Eastern Oregon deliniated as all the counties included from Wasco straight down to Klamath and the counties east of them;
and Western Washington deliniated as the counties of Whatcom, Skagit, San Juan, Island, Snohomish, King Pierce, Lewis, Skamania and the counties west of them, and Eastern Washington deliniated as all the present Washington state counties east of the aforementtioned ones.
The problem with these ideas are that while you get “your own” reprsentatives, it may not always change the net representatives a group now has in the U.S. congress, but just change them from a minority set of districts in their present state to a majority in the new state, but not necessarily “more” in the House of Representatives.
Then you have to factor how more states adds two additional Senators each, and THAT is the one area where the “new” states could gain representation in Washington D.C. The present Washington, Oregon and California senators would not likely see a change of political affiliation in the new states of western California, Oregon and Washington, while each of the new states cleaved from them would get their own two senators and there is where the political weight in Congress could tend to become greater with the “smaller” (less populous) states.
Is any of this practicle? Not likely in my opinion.