The upshot is that it was a column bouncing off the Obama-Geithner-Dodd AIG debacle. Lou was using it as an opportunity to brag about how great the Columbian is at uncovering waste in certain segments of local government (I, for one, can't WAIT for their expose' on the massive and complete waste of the 10's of millions in down-the-tube CRC expenditures... but then, I actually DO expect to live forever... which is how long everyone is going to have to wait before this newspaper actually gives a critical look at anyone or anything THEY want.) while they let those they support completely off the hook and under the radar.
Lou's efforts, complete with links to all the EXCEPTIONAL work this newspaper has done ferreting out wastes of, relatively speaking, the chump change of a whole $173,000 plus a few other dollars for some retreat; deliberately ignores the much bigger picture... in size, of, say, the- planet-Earth-to-the-Sun bigger picture.
Big whoop.
We are facing an ASTRONOMICAL, INCONCEIVABLE waste of BILLIONS of dollars here locally, a project that has already consumed TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS in waste... and Lou remains silent.
Why?
Because unfathomable waste in the name of a COMPLETE vaporization of BILLIONS on a project that the Columbian supports is perfectly OK.
So, when he's nailed over his continuing failure to address that waste or the massive opposition to this project... not to mention the "symbolism" of ignoring the people of this community and what WE want... what's his response?
Of COURSE Lou doesn't want to talk about the bridge.I was kind of hoping that all stories, comments, columns and photos wouldn't end
up back in an I-5 conversation... but we'll continue to move forward. ;-)
Why would he possibly be responsive to the questions from someone who will have to pay the thousands in tolls over the years just to go to work... that LOU won't have to pay?
I really DO wonder how supportive the many clowns in government and business in our community would be if they had to pay the tolls they intend to ram down our throats.
Would Lou be so all fired up for this steaming pile if $1200 or more a year was coming out of HIS pocket... just to go to work?
So... he was asked that question. What did he do?
He ignored it.
And that, it appears, is an answer unto itself.
But his phrase just leaped off the page at me:
by No I-5 Bridge : 3/21/09 1:01pm - Report Abuse
Lou wrote in his article: "Still, when times are tough, we all should be sensitive to what the heck we are doing. Especially when you're spending my money. Taxpayers' money."
There's a certain rank hypocrisy about this phrase, Lou. You're hot and bothered when they spend YOUR money.
But when you do everything you can to get them to spend MY money?
Not so much.
Email Print Local News
Press talk: Symbolism counts in tough times
Friday, March 20 11:48 p.m.
BY LOU BRANCACCIO
COLUMBIAN EDITOR
This entire AIG thing is quite the mess. Sick, really.
I think AIG stands for Always Into Greed or something like that. Anyway it's some sort of big insurance company and it is somehow connected to this entire bank, housing, economic collapse that's making all of us, well, as mentioned, sick.
Everyone is pointing fingers at everyone else, and our political leaders are trying to out-outrage the next guy — in between trying to blame the other guy.
Some of these folks throw around million-dollar bonuses like it's chump change.
But don't get me wrong. I don't have the "Hey, no one should be making a million bucks" thing going on. Frankly, I plead guilty to million-dollar envy. Or even a small fraction of that.
In this country, everyone should have the opportunity to succeed, and if that success is defined by being rich, more power to you. America: What a country!
Still, when times are tough, we all should be sensitive to what the heck we are doing. Especially when you're spending my money. Taxpayers' money.
So The Columbian has been doing stories pretty regularly on how bureaucrats are spending our money.
When the Battle Ground school board planned a resort retreat, we were on it. When the district hired a $100,000 communications guy, we did a story on it.
Heck, we looked into those governments that still were supplying bottled water to employees — at taxpayers' expense.
We've also looked at some training the Evergreen School District did in Denver that had a $73,000 price tag....
Yet, you and your newspaper support sucking $72,000,000 or more per year out of our local economy to pay for a bridge and light rail that YOU will not HAVE to use every day to go to work. WHat about THAT "symbolism?"
So, in that regard, you're quite right. You and those others behind this massive and complete w a s t e of money have shown that you really don't give a damn how it plays east of I-5 or north of 39th.
So, I find this column somewhat hypocritical when you keep urging the wasteful spending of BILLIONS and the economic damage caused by $10's of millions taken away from our working families every year for tolls that YOU and the vast majority of OTHER bridge/light rail supporters will not have to pay to get to and from work.
Of course, you and the other supporters could always join the tens of thousands of us you've set out to screw. What say you start another editorial crusade... you know, one that will require any public figure using their office or their business to pay a year's worth of tolls, every year, forever. You know, like those of us you're ramming the tolls down our throats? Like that?
Whatdaya say, Lou? You gonna have $1200 or more taken out of YOUR pay every year like you're demanding to take it out of MINE? How about you, Royce? Steve? Jim? The entirety of the Ctrans board?
So, in that regard, you're quite right. You and those others behind this massive and complete w a s t e of money have shown that you really don't give a damn how it plays east of I-5 or north of 39th.
So, I find this column somewhat hypocritical when you keep urging the wasteful spending of BILLIONS and the economic damage caused by $10's of millions taken away from our working families every year for tolls that YOU and the vast majority of OTHER bridge/light rail supporters will not have to pay to get to and from work.
Of course, you and the other supporters could always join the tens of thousands of us you've set out to screw. What say you start another editorial crusade... you know, one that will require any public figure using their office or their business to pay a year's worth of tolls, every year, forever. You know, like those of us you're ramming the tolls down our throats? Like that?
Whatdaya say, Lou? You gonna have $1200 or more taken out of YOUR pay every year like you're demanding to take it out of MINE? How about you, Royce? Steve? Jim? The entirety of the Ctrans board?
Your central thesis I believe is correct. It is hard to wrap one's mind around the arguments and data in vast tomes like The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith or Das Kapital by Karl Marx, but particular micro examples, symbols, metaphors or even whole allegories like Gulliver's Travels, can take the mind quickly from a micro example to realization of a macro crises and some of the reasons for them. And no I did not take your piece as a defense of Obama at all. Your point, is that in rhetoric, it is not so much the dollar amount involved that makes a given example appear so egregious and thus its use as an example so effective, but the nature of the example--as perhaps a microcosm or a broader macrocosm--itself. The conventional definition of "chutzpah" for example, is killing one's parents and then pleading mercy on the court on the grounds that one is an orphan. These AIG execs might give chutzpah a whole new meaning. The points being made about Congress and both parties are correct. This is is but one of many examples of the unbridled greed celebrated by the conventional textbooks in economics as well as the character Gordon Gekko in Wall Street that the Republicans celebrated and facilitated, aided and abetted by all sorts of triangulating Dems, at work, and this is what greed really produces. Now, as for suggestions? How about taking a look locally at some of our most favored politicians, local institutions and personalities, and do the 5 Ws of journalism on them and their own AIG-like behaviors? And finally Lou, how is the narrow, parochial and totally unsupported Columbian endorsement of Baird earmarks, because they bring home some alleged local pork, and yet represent anti-Constitutional forms of appropriations, any different than the behavior of the AIG execs who put narrow, parochial and selfish interests above the common good or even the U.S. Constitution itself?
I was kind of hoping that all stories, comments, columns and photos wouldn't end up back in an I-5 conversation... but we'll continue to move forward. ;-)
You're right about the symbolism, Lou. That's why the seeming small donation (or investment, as some say) by the city of Vancouver to help build a private development on the waterfront has raised so much stink. Or why wasteful (or righteous, as some say) earmarks are nothing more than just spending without oversight (like the bridge for Microsoft up in Redmond). Or how promises for ample time to review legislation and lack of lobbyists in the White House are symbolic, since our new President seems unwilling to keep his promises for less than a month. Or how about the symbolism of our pledge of allegiance, destroyed by P.C. action groups and atheists, turning into something new under the "Change" by a group running under the assistance of the DNC, called Organizing for America (OFA), which asks you to pledge support for Obama, not the office. Worshiping false idols.
Symbolism is critical. And it runs both ways. But we cannot pick and choose what makes a good news story. AIG get bonuses, politicians get pork. I don't see a lot of difference.
Symbolism is critical. And it runs both ways. But we cannot pick and choose what makes a good news story. AIG get bonuses, politicians get pork. I don't see a lot of difference.
"I was kind of hoping that all stories, comments, columns and photos wouldn't end up back in an I-5 conversation..."
Maybe because they are related to the issue at hand. Let's spend countless dollars, tax the citizens excessively, tax them again with both tolls and subsidized light rail, and then spend additional money to add nice artistic features like water and wind turbines, artwork, tiled pedestrian walkways. How is that not symbolic of waste?
Maybe because they are related to the issue at hand. Let's spend countless dollars, tax the citizens excessively, tax them again with both tolls and subsidized light rail, and then spend additional money to add nice artistic features like water and wind turbines, artwork, tiled pedestrian walkways. How is that not symbolic of waste?
Lou, I appreciate your position in avoiding uncomfortable discussions. But you insist on addressing literal drops in the bucket, primarily for your paper's self-aggrandizement.
All of the expenses you're patting yourself on the back for exposing COMBINED wouldn't pay for one WEEK'S worth of consultants and other leeches on the CRC rip off.
You concern yourself over thousands here locally when unwanted and unneeded BILLIONS are at stake here and you do absolutely nothing about that.
The problem is that the unbelievable massive w a s t e of money you support and the many negative impacts of that support dwarf everything you've written here in importance and impact.
I bring up this issue in an effort to do the one thing you refuse to do, and that is to hold you and those who support this colossal w a s t e of money accountable as you act against the wishes of those who live here and who will actually be given no choice about paying the bills you're forcing down our throats.
I find it much more than odd that you're willing to address the "symbolism" of these, relatively speaking, parking ticket expenses while you not only turn a blind eye to the serial murderer expenses you advocate, but then fail to address the issue when directly confronted.
There's a word for that, Lou. And that word is "cowardice."
All of the expenses you're patting yourself on the back for exposing COMBINED wouldn't pay for one WEEK'S worth of consultants and other leeches on the CRC rip off.
You concern yourself over thousands here locally when unwanted and unneeded BILLIONS are at stake here and you do absolutely nothing about that.
The problem is that the unbelievable massive w a s t e of money you support and the many negative impacts of that support dwarf everything you've written here in importance and impact.
I bring up this issue in an effort to do the one thing you refuse to do, and that is to hold you and those who support this colossal w a s t e of money accountable as you act against the wishes of those who live here and who will actually be given no choice about paying the bills you're forcing down our throats.
I find it much more than odd that you're willing to address the "symbolism" of these, relatively speaking, parking ticket expenses while you not only turn a blind eye to the serial murderer expenses you advocate, but then fail to address the issue when directly confronted.
There's a word for that, Lou. And that word is "cowardice."
by R Frog : 3/21/09 12:37pm - Report Abuse
@I-5: I was just going to say "elitist", but sometimes it's hard to differentiate the two.
by No I-5 Bridge : 3/21/09 1:01pm - Report Abuse
"Still, when times are tough, we all should be sensitive to what the heck we are doing. Especially when you're spending my money. Taxpayers' money."
There's a certain rank hypocrisy about this phrase, Lou. You're hot and bothered when they spend YOUR money.
But when you do everything you can to get them to spend MY money?
Not so much.
I was initially upset at the AIG bonus issue, until I heard that the bonuses were not for doing a 'good job', but rather were 'retention bonuses', it got me to thinking. A retention bonus is meant to keep contract employees around and aren't conditional on their future personal 'performance' or the overall 'success' of a company. I though immediately of the military's 'reenlistment bonus' contract and wondered if we lost a war if the public would want our service people to payback their promised bonus. Same issue, differing perspectives.
It isn't always what it looks like on the surface, and I can see why it could be a legal battle if the AIG employees stand on principle. Had I ever risen to a level of commanding a retention bonus similar to the 73 AIG employees (an average of appx $136,000 each), people would be hard pressed to get me to pay it back just because the company overall took a dump.
I do note that a Senator did try to raise the issue of the AIG bonuses before the bailout was rushed through. He was ignored. Having only three days to digest an 1,100 page proposal before getting a bum's rush to vote just shows how insane our legislators mode of operation has become. So much for government transparency.
In my opinion Obama has turned our country into chaos in short order by his squared-chin bullying toward a rush to judgment. I don't know of many who voted for him who are still mindlessly chanting 'Obama, Obama, Obama' or 'yes we can'.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Remember, PG 13 is the limit.