Most folks agree that a replacement I-5 bridge over the Columbia River has to happen, but environmeddlists worry about "potential unintended consequences". They fear that a new bridge might encourage sprawl. Or maybe it'll increase "greenhouse gas emissions". Or maybe something else really, really bad will happen.
Into the fray leaps Metro "councilor", bicycle advocate, and perennially power-hungry gadfly Rex Burpholder, who in a Friday yak at Portland City Club made it abundantly clear that if he's not happy with the bridge, it ain't gonna happen.
“If you don’t agree [with our concerns], we won’t help you get it,” Burkholder said of the project’s principle partners, the Oregon and Washington departments of transportation.
Note to the Trib: the bridge would run somewhere around $4.2 billion - not $4.2 million.
In any case, it's clearly way past time for self-important little snots like Burp Holder to be removed from governmental offices.
An hysterical guy named Joe, writing over at Salon, states bluntly that
Anti-science conservatives must be stopped
Americans must not allow global warming deniers to block the policies needed to avert catastrophic climate change. Our future is at stake.
The way this guy foams at the mouth makes me glad that my rabies vaccination's up-to-date. This is the latest example of a demented religious fundamentalist, waving AlGore's bible "Earth In The Lurch" while beet-facedly exhorting the faithful to cast out the unbelievers, the heathen, those who have forsaken the Path.
And of course, he's completely wrong.
Conservatives in general are not anti-science; they are anti-masquerade. We're opposed to those who claim science as a mantle by which government expansion, restrictions to human freedom, and the systematic robbing of people of their resources - both financial and real - may somehow be justified.
We recognize that cycles of warmth and of cooling are systemic in the sense that all planets in our solar system are influenced by solar cycles of activity and quiescence, and we reject the unproven and increasingly untenable hypothesis that atmospheric carbon dioxide, generated by human activity, can exert any significant effect upon such natural cycles. We further reject the corrolary hypothesis that human activity is capable of modifying the effects of such natural cycles.
If anything, conservatives are far more interested in viewing the sciences from a dispassionate perspective, which is how sciences progress. It is not conservatives that one sees, shouting spittle-laden invective and demanding that the "unbelievers" be put to the torch.
Quite the contrary: the terror is uniformly derived from the Left. Intolerance is a uniquely Leftist phenomenon, which is all the more amusing because these same individuals self-identify as "progressive". If anything, they are incredibly regressive, as they demonstrate on a daily basis.
It's just like those games where you guide a claw toward a plush toy in a glass box, only instead of stuffed animals, you are going for live lobsters. It costs $2 per try, and if you snag a lobster, the kitchen will fix it right up for you.
And PETA doesn't like them one little bit. Apparently never having seen the setup, veep Tracy Reiman nonetheless characterised the tanks as "filthy", and "making an abusive game out of their capture".
Of course, they go on to claim that since there's no humane way to kill lobsters, we shouldn't eat them at all.
They live, after all, for that left-est of Leftist ideals: the right to decide what you may or may not do.
At least they didn't trot out some bizarre global warming link.
The PETA nutballs are now launching attacks against folks who eat meat. Full disclosure: I'm a member of People Eating Tasty Animals, not of the U.K.-based animal "rights" nutball organization.
Animal rights protesters have launched a series of angry campaigns against A-list carnivores. They are shifting their focus from celebrities who wear fur to others who encourage the "exploitation" of animals by eating them.
The Peta attacks are seen as a sign of the radicalisation of some vegetarian groups. They claim eating meat causes environmental destruction, damages human health and contributes to global hunger, as well as inflicting suffering on billions of animals.
But what about the plants, who scream in agony as they're cut? What about the birdies and the insects who live in the fields and are maimed and killed by the billions as the harvesters proceed? What about the pollution caused by the infernal, diesel-burning machines? Vegetarians are killing the planet!
Marcos Arevalo, who supervises the Corvallis DMV office, estimates traffic is down 40 percent from last year. Half, if not most, of the customers who once packed the branch were Latino, he said.
"I don't know where they went," Arevalo said.
You can understand why this might be a hard thing for Oregon bureaucrats to wrap their heads around. After years of handing out identification to anything that got through the door, they've become accultured to that sort of thing. Now that folks have to prove that they're here legally, why, dang. Most of the latinos have gone away. If this sort of thing keeps up, DMV may find that they're able to save some cash by just printing things in English.
Of course, The Oregoniancan't be bothered to report facts; they continue to insist upon presenting opinion in the guise of "news". And they wonder why they're losing subscriptions and advertisers.
Estimates of the undocumented population in Oregon range from 120,000 to 175,000. It's not clear whether they're moving out, driving without a license or riding with licensed drivers, said Aeryca Steinbauer of the immigrant rights group, Causa.
Let's get a few things straight: they aren't "undocumented" - they're illegal aliens. CAUSA isn't an "immigrant rights group" - they're advocates of illegal invasion.
The Big Zero simply cannot bring themselves to print truth rather than propaganda. And most people recognize that fact. It's why The Zero bleeds subscribers at double the national average. This results in fewer ad buys, because the eyeballs aren't there. They're so "politically correct" that they really don't understand why their paper's going under.
Death by a thousand paper cuts, that is. It's been mentioned before that due largely to their dogmatic insistence upon presenting opinion as fact, the newspaper industry is in deep trouble. Their main source of revenue is ads, and as subscription rates drop, newspapers can't bring the numbers of eyeballs that advertisers are looking for. And as ad content declines, subscribers have even less reason to renew. It's a vicious cycle, and one that is entirely a result Leftist ideology. This is probably why Leftists hate capitalism - the market gets to decide winning and losing strategies.
When Leftists control the "journalism" schools, and when Leftist publishers hire the graduates on, the result is essentially predetermined. It's a lesson that Google has apparently not yet learned:
It looks like Google has officially joined the Barack Obama campaign and decided that its contribution would be to shut down any blog on the Google owned Blogspot.com blogging system that has an anti-Obama message.
That characterization seems unduly harsh, in view of the fact that at this time Google appears to have locked down only seven anti-Obama channels. However, all are members of Just Say No Deal blogroll, which actually has a large number of bloggers from blogspot.com who appear to be anti-Obama. It'll be interesting to follow this story along, if only to see whether or not the purge continues.
Google has accused the bloggers on the seven sites presently locked down of "spam blogging", as they note in their missive to one blogger:
Your blog, at http://comealongway.blogspot.com/, has been identified as a potential spam blog. You will not be able to publish posts to your blog until we review your site and confirm that it is not a spam blog.
If, as appears to be the situation in this case involving Google, the intention is to shut down blogs on their blogspot.com operation for the apparent crime of involvement in a blogroll effort, it's worth noting that bloggers of other stripes - such as those associated with the Conservative Majority Project and COBRA - may find themselves subject to similar scrutiny. While it seems like a silly thing for them to do, the fact remains that as Blogger is a free service provided by Google, they can certainly implement any restrictions in regard to terms of service that they wish.
The above is not to be taken as an implication that Google is now engaged in an all-out political war; no evidence exists as yet by which to determine the nature of their inquiries. It is interesting, however, to note that they acted pre-emptively by blocking blog-holder access to speech while they "review the site". That seems a bit harsh. One would think that they might be able to conduct a "review" without impeding access. Clearly, there was a conscious decision at Google to do otherwise.
This blog began at Blogspot, but was relocated to a commercial site quite some time ago due to concerns over content ownership and other issues that appeared unresolved at the free site. In retrospect, it seems that the move was prescient.
In light of Google's recent actions, it seems reasonable to suggest that current holders of Blogspot sites carefully review the latest terms of service documentation.
The Wall Street Journalcovers what few elsewhere in the media have noted (likely because the rest are so engrossed in decrying the SCOTUS ruling regarding the 2nd Amendment):
In addition to their landmark gun rights ruling, the same five Justices took another whack at Congress's attempts to limit political speech via campaign-finance limits. John McCain, call your office.
Perhaps more tellingly, the piece ends by describing the pitfalls of seeking adulation from liberals:
As for Mr. McCain, we assume his campaign-finance travails this year have been educational. He became a media fave by embracing fund-raising limits as a cause, only to watch as the media now drops him for Barack Obama, who refuses to adhere to the same limits and so will vastly outspend the Republican in the fall. Such are the rewards of pursuing liberal admiration.
The question now is whether McCain, having fallen into the media box-trap, has learned anything from the experience.
By some accounts, the First Black President In The History Of America is more than a trifle miffed with that uppity Obama guy, which doesn't bode well for the Party Of Unity. You almost get the feeling that behind that placid Barney the Demosaur exterior lurks a tendency to rend and devour. It's rather an unsettling image, coming from the folks who are only here to save you from yourself.
As increasing numbers of folks in the Portland area flatlands employ a combination of bicycles and transit to get around, conflictsare becoming more commonplace.
According to TriMet, the number of commuters who take their bikes onto the MAX has exploded. But there's a problem: the trains have limited space for bikes.
So this week, at the 185th station in Beaverton, TriMet security guards kicked cyclists off bike crowded trains and would not let any board unless there were empty bike hangers.
TriMet says it's a matter of safety. But cyclists say they're frustrated by the crack-down and the lack of bike-space.
Presumably, bicyclists would be willing to pay for additional, bicycle-only, light-rail cars? Hmmm...didn't think so. Bicyclists should have everything given to them. Because they're special.
Meanwhile, in an exciting development, a route has been selectedfor the roughly $1.4 billion, six and one-half mile light-rail line linking downtown Portland and Milwaukie. No word on how many miles of road could be built for that amount of cash. But hey, why worry? It's not your money:
Money for the project will come from the Federal Highway Transit Administration, lottery-backed bonds and local contributions from Metro, TriMet, Clackamas County, Portland and Milwaukie.