[Vision2020] Moscow's Muscular Megalod Embrace
Saundra Lund
v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm
Sat May 28 11:52:14 PDT 2011
Carl wrote:
"And also, Paul, I think you oversimplify the issue with the idea that
virtually all the opposition comes from people who oppose "big oil". If it
was a convoy of gigantic vehicles carrying the purest of Grandma Sunbeam's
Finest Humanely Raised Tofu and Sprouts, the "14 feet wide, 210 feet long,
and 30 feet high" factor, not to mention the sheer weight that causes some
concern for a few residents. And the noise. As one who lives a block away
from the route through town, I will be interested in the noise factor. Be
it a convoy of oil or tofu."
And, let's not forget it's not "just" a mega-load but also the accompanying
convoy of vehicles, an inconvenient fact some want to ignore.
Carl, thanks for your comments, which I agree with & which is why I found
Council Member Dan Carscallen's comments offensive. During the 5/16/2011
discussion following Steed's Resolution introduction (that was subsequently
downgraded to a motion), Carscallen made a not subtle implication that
some/many/most/all of us who express local concerns are "less honest" than
those who speak out against the mega-loads because they are vocally against
the "Kearl oil sands" development.
Really, Mr. Carscallen? Because I contact my state & federal legislators to
express my views on the bigger picture but also share local concerns worthy
of consideration by our city council, I'm "less honest"?
For those interested in hearing Carscallen's comments directly rather than
relying on my inexpert interpretation, you're in luck J Simply go to:
http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/cityclerk/minutes.aspx
Click on the Video link for the 5/16/2011 council meeting. Then, just drag
the "Seek to Time" bar immediately below the video forward to about 2:25:27
(I find it easier to cue up to specific times in full screen mode).
And, I don't know if Carscallen thinks we're dumb or what, but he brought up
(at about 2:24:56) an example of having seen 200 feet of trucks (three chip
trucks stacked up, to be specific) make it through Moscow just fine at a
regular the speed limit. As any intelligent person knows, driving a single
210 foot vehicle is a far, far different thing than driving three separate
66 foot (or whatever) vehicles. <shaking my head> Did those chip trucks
require that our beautiful trees be "professionally" butchered or removed
altogether? I thought not, but then concerns for local issues like our
trees, storm water drains, noise, etc. make me "less honest." Huh . . .
good to know, yes?
Note: I know Tom does a great service by putting up the meetings in
segments on You Tube, but since I tend to watch the meetings live & make
notes of the time from the meetings, it's easier for me to direct people
there than go through the various segments to find the specifics I'm looking
for.
Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
~ Edmund Burke
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Carl Westberg
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 10:37 AM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Muscular Megalod Embrace
And also, Paul, I think you oversimplify the issue with the idea that
virtually all the opposition comes from people who oppose "big oil". If it
was a convoy of gigantic vehicles carrying the purest of Grandma Sunbeam's
Finest Humanely Raised Tofu and Sprouts, the "14 feet wide, 210 feet long,
and 30 feet high" factor, not to mention the sheer weight that causes some
concern for a few residents. And the noise. As one who lives a block away
from the route through town, I will be interested in the noise factor. Be
it a convoy of oil or tofu.
_____
From: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 09:04:03 -0700
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Muscular Megalod Embrace
Paul,
A couple of thoughts here.
First, I think the big problem with the way the council handled this. It
appears to me the council shut off public input when Steed introduced his
motion, that was not on for a vote that day.
Do you see a problem with city representatives ignoring public input at
their meeting?
Second, clearly there's more than your way of framing issues, and many of us
disagree with your approach. I understand what you are saying, but I
disagree that those should be the only concern. I think it results in
narrowing issues entirely too much.
Sunil
_____
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 08:34:31 -0700
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: starbliss at gmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Muscular Megalod Embrace
First, this is all opinion based on what I've read here. I don't feel
particularly inclined to try to figure out exactly where and how I formed.
Feel free to disagree with them.
I think that this issue should be about the technical details of moving a
large load across local highways. I don't think it should be used as an
opportunity to inconvenience a corporation people here disagree with. I
think that some people here are doing so merely because the opportunity to
do so has presented itself.
That's what (I think) Dan Carscallen was trying to say when he mentioned
that a large megaload from a corporation that is well liked on this list
(like one making eco-friendly items) would not have the troubles that this
particular company is having.
I see this as an abuse of power because people (here on the list and in the
papers) have made this into an issue based on what this corporation does and
not whether or not they are following the regulations regarding the moving
of large loads along our highways. Thus, it doesn't matter how evil they
are or how many people they screw over on a daily basis. Thus "too many
people" refers to the number of people on this list who are treating this as
an oil company or an environmental issue. I'll let you count them.
This is all just my opinion, feel free to disagree. Do you understand the
point I'm trying to make?
Paul
_____
From: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com>
To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
Cc: Ron Force <rforce2003 at yahoo.com>; "vision2020 at moscow.com"
<vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Muscular Megalod Embrace
Please clarify and defend the basis for the following assertion, with
a definition of "too many people." Does not democracy allow as many
people as want to to "stick it to" any corporation they believe is
abusing its power, as long as they "stick it to" them lawfully? What
is the number you define as "too many" regarding these "people?"
Furthermore, explain how the aforementioned "too many people" are
engaging in an "abuse of power," as you phrased it, which would imply,
I think it is reasonable, that the operations of "big oil" as
referenced are being critically or unlawfully impaired by this
alledged "abuse of power," by "too many people?"
Do I need to quote the recent mega profits, or the millions spend on
lobbying the US Congress to promote their agenda, or the high gas and
diesel prices, connected to the operations of the "big oil"
corporation that you allege is being subjected to an "abuse of power"
by "too many people?"
Who has more power that they are abusing, the "big oil" corporation,
or Idaho citizens who are objecting to their highways and streets
being converted into industrial corridors with potentially long term
and unknown impacts, serving the profits of one of the most powerful
corporations ever to exist on Earth?
I trust you have followed the backroom "deals" with some in power in
Idaho government that appear to have been struck without consulting
the public or local government regarding these developments? And that
the mega-load machinery could have been manufactured in North America,
though this might have been more expensive? Why should Idaho or
Montana citizens suffer negative impacts to serve the profit agenda of
ExxonMobil?
Where is the "abuse of power?"
Economist Milton Friedman, one of the primary architects of modern
corporate captialism, wrote in "Capitalism and Freedom," (
http://www.umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf ) "...there is one and
only one social responsibility of business- to use its resources and
engage in activities designed to increase its profits as long as it
stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open
and free competition without deception or fraud."
OK. ExxonMobil's "one and only social responsibility" is to increase
its profits. But anyone who thinks there is no deception or fraud
involved with Exxon/Mobil only has to trace the history of this
corporation's funding of junk fraudulent climate science, to
deliberately deceive the public regarding anthropogenic climate
change, to understand the corruption and abuse of power involved:
Union of Concerned Scientists
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/ExxonMobil-GlobalWarming-tobacco.ht
ml
January 3, 2007
Scientists' Report Documents ExxonMobil's Tobacco-like Disinformation
Campaign on Global Warming Science
Oil Company Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, Create
Confusion
"ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes of
global warming just as tobacco companies denied their product caused
lung cancer," said Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists'
Director of Strategy & Policy. "A modest but effective investment has
allowed the oil giant to fuel doubt about global warming to delay
government action just as Big Tobacco did for over 40 years."
Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to
"Manufacture Uncertainty" on Climate Change
---------------------------------
It is within the scope of the public in a democracy to decide if there
is deception or fraud or exploitation involved in a corporation using
public assets to promote its profits. And those questioning whether
or not ExxonMobil is abusing its power to impose a burdon on the
citizens of Idaho or Montana or Canada, or all humans on our planet,
given the implications of tar sands development for climate change, in
the pursuit of its profit, are pursuing their rights as citizens in a
democracy.
And you assert this is an "abuse of power?"
WTF!
------------------------------------------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
On 5/25/11, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I see too many people that see this as an opportunity to stick it to big
> oil, since they have the opportunity to do so at this moment in time. I
> think that's an abuse of power, myself.
_______________________________
> From: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com>
> To: Ron Force <rforce2003 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "vision2020 at moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Muscular Megalod Embrace
>
> There is a significant number in the Moscow area who are ideologically
> pro-business/pro-corporate thus friendly to big oil's needs, those who
> might have supported Palin's "drill baby drill" mantra in the 2008
> presidential race, who view obstacles to the tar sands development as
> an impediment to lowering high gas and diesel prices and improving the
> US economy in general, who think the opposition to the mega-loads is
> really more about a progressive antipathy to big captialist economic
> power and supporting an environmental agenda, rather than damage to or
> blocking streets or highways, who therefore are "friends" of the city
> council members who rolled out the welcome mat for the mega-loads.
>
> This point of view was in part expressed by Moscow councilperson
> Carscallen May 17, 2011, Moscow-Pullman Daily News:
> http://finance.comcast.net/stocks/news_body.html?ID_OSI=85595
<http://finance.comcast.net/stocks/news_body.html?ID_OSI=85595&ID_NEWS=19077
4448> &ID_NEWS=190774448
>
> "I wonder if there would be as much discussion about these loads if
> they were 24-foot-wide, 210-feet-long, and 30-foot-high solar panels
> or wind turbine blades," Carscallen said. "I have seen people that are
> honest that the Kearl Oil Sands are the reason they're against it."
> ------------------------
> I think it possible the local political "enemies" of this action by
> the council might not be greater in number than the "friends" of this
> action, though the enemies might be more publicly vocal in oppostion;
> therefore I question that the council's action is "a matter that earns
> politicians enemies but few friends" as the Trillhaase editorial
> quoted below states.
> ------------------------------------------
> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
>
> On 5/25/11, Ron Force <rforce2003 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Moscow's megaload embrace gets muscular
>> * May 25th, 2011By Marty Trillhaase of the Tribune
>
>> > Which makes their eagerness to embrace a matter that earns
>> politicians enemies but few friends curious. The last thing you'd expect
>> from either Krauss and Carscallen is precisely the vote they cast.
>> Go figure. - M.T.
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
======================================================= List services made
available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse
since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
======================================================= List services made
available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse
since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110528/12e032c4/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list