Thursday, February 12, 2009

Replicating insanity

So the Governor announced yesterday to great fanfare that Oregon was going to get a whole bunch of the federal stimulus money that has been earmarked for "sustainability" projects.

He said we would wow the country, and "showcase to the world our expertise in green planning and green development."  Among the big ideas he has planned, according to The Funny Paper, is to "take the solar lighting project at the intersection of Interstate 5 and 205, and replicate it all around the state. 

Great idea! The electricity generated by that project costs about 60 cents per kilowatt hour. We pay PGE about 8 cents. By all means, lets show the world how smart we are by replicating this idiocy all over the place. 

Other laugh-out-loud lines in TFP today: the lead editorial supports the idea of putting a minor league baseball stadium in the Rose Quarter. It's needed to revitalize the embarrassing dead zone in the Quarter. The planners dreamed about a robust and vital retail and night-scene around the Rose Garden, but it never materialized.  Quote:

"That was nine years ago. Today, the place remains a dead zone - the most conspicuous failure of planning in a city that normally does the job well." 

Huh? What about Cascade Station? South Waterfront? The shameful state of the transportation system? If anything, the Rose Garden is a success when compared to these other hugely expensive planning failures. At least it is busy 42 nights a year - more than you can say for South Waterfront. And at least it was mostly done with private dollars.

The Funny Paper can't admit it, though, because it has been the biggest cheerleader for these disasters all along. You won't see much criticism of Portland planning, especially South Waterfront. Do I really have to point out again that Bob Caldwell's wife is the Commissar of Propaganda at OHSU? 


SUV suburbanite said...

The Rose Quarter is at the cross roads of two long established light rail lines, is close proximity to downtown, has a convention center next door, a shopping mall next door and every component our planners insist are advantageous to stimulate the desired Transit Oriented Development vision. Even "vision central", Metro's headquaters, is adjacent to the Quarter.

The fact that this area "remains a dead zone" is conclusive proof positive this model is a failure and a perpetual farce.

Never mind the other models of planner's fraud at Cascade Station and the Beaverton Round etc.

This pattern highlighted by the ultimate failure at the Rose Quarter should be recognized for what it is by every public official and media around.

Yet it appears their vision is not so good with their heads in dark places.

Silence Dogood said...

We're probably going to come out of the recession in a couple of quarters anyway.

Luckily for the Dems, the heavily back-ended Porkulus money and the New Prog regulatory agenda won't really start mucking up the economy and crowding out the private sector until later than that.

If Kulo plays it right, Bam will include Portland in his photo-op tour of Porkulus projects around the nation. This is where, before the mid-term election, Bam gloms credit for anything that can be made to appear positive. "Look at all the good things that are happening thanks to my economic recovery plan." He needs Potemkin Villages and Portland is #1 in the nation in that category.

Rahmbo has the calendar all mapped out.

If Kulo can put a little distance between himself and that "lying about the Neil Goldschmidt rape/affair" rap; he may stand a chance to go to D.C. after he's termed-out and "work" for Team Bam.

David Appell said...

Is it too much to ask for hyperlinks to your various claims about what newspapers do and don't say?

It isn't.

MAX Redline said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
R. L. said...

I have to agree with David. Links would be nice - although with the Oregonian not always possible since Oregonlive doesn't necessarily carry everything that is in the print edition.

However, where possible, it would be nice. Just a suggestion/request. :)

Rob Kremer said...

I usually do link to the articles I refer to. I was just in a hurry this morning.

That said, what's with the snarky tone? My "claims" about what the articles "say or don't say?" Sheesh!

Anonymous said...


Let me guess. You're convinced our central planning is the way to go and now you're an expert on that too?

According to sceince of course.

I'll bet you naively, but eagerly believed the City Of Portland lowered CO2 emissions as they claimed?

Here we go.

Clap on David.

Anonymous said...

On other blogs, I've been encountering the same type of responses as David's lately. "Show me a link" they complain.

Hey, there's this thing called a search engine. Use it!

MAX Redline said...

Is it too much to ask for hyperlinks to your various claims about what newspapers do and don't say?
It isn't.

David and R.L. are just lazy. It's amusing to see David, in particular - who's forever admonishing other folks to read this or to look up that - lodging such complaints.

Coming from a guy who routinely leaves posts on other peoples' blogs such as: I'm suggesting that you actually get your hands dirty working through some actual scientific papers, it's too funny!

The guy seems to think that The Oregonian is so difficult to locate that it's a responsibility of the blogger to take him by the hand and lead him to the article!

David continues to crack me up.

Anonymous said...


No, it's the responsibility of the writer to provide sources, not for the reader to look everything up.

I've actually spent quite a bit of time looking stuff up after claims made by right-wingers that don't seem to be true. And they usually aren't.

There's another thread here where Rob has been called out, with links to show that he's full of crap, and Rob is silent.

Hamilton Burger said...

Hey last anonymous poster. If you've "seen threads here where Rob has been called out, with links to show that he's full of crap," then why don't you link them? Or better yet, why don't you link the "specific claims made by right-wingers that don't seem to be true. And they usually aren't"?

I'll tell you why, Because you're full of it. Because that is how you play the little game of lie and obfuscate. Because you know deep down that what Rob says is true and this is your only recourse to combat the truth.

Come on Anonymous, lets get started with the links to back your claims up if your so link happy. I want specific links that show Rob is lying and show the conclusive proof. I also want the specific article links that disprove the "right-winger" claims. Get it done or shut up.