I will never understand the left...

How about just leave it at that and comment on the issues that you're qualified for? There are plenty "why we shouldn't try" posts for you to demonstrate your mossbacking expertise. What's become unacceptable is the right actually rationalizing that the left promoting green transportation is hurting them, and hurting them worse than their cars and SUVs hurt the left (actually everybody)!

Ned Ludd, if he existed, didn't give a rat's patootie about technology. Luddites were against technology taking jobs. It's a labor position, not a tech one. You're the Luddite! Isn't your argument that we're unfairly penalizing corporate America with our "progress"? "Your progress is costing me" is the core of Ludditism. If you want to go down that road, I suggest you and JK and Terry Parker keep your circle jerk to yourselves rather than puking all over the pages of Portland Transport blog and BO.

Rob- I think the man really just likes to bike.

So what. Before long it will be seen again for what it is: just another utopian vision that could only be achieved by increasingly totalitarian measures to force people to live in ways they'd prefer not to.

Your right to live the way you want ends when it infringes on my right to do the same, Rob. We can get into a lengthy discussion about global climate change, alternative energy, transportation infrastructure costs, etc...but I think you get the point.

I will never understand the left's fascination with 19th century transportation methods. Luddite?

I have a tough time grasping the right's looking down its nose at clean, efficient transportation when faced with an increasingly serious set of drastic problems.

C'est la vie, eh?

19th century transportation methods

I would really rather ride or drive a horse than drive a car. But the city won't allow me to keep one in the city limits.

"The wind of heaven is that which blows between a horse's ears". -Arabian Proverb

Sustainability starts with financial self-sustainability, not by poaching dollars from one mode of transport to pay for another. Therefore, if bicycling and constructing bicycle infrastructure is to become at all sustainable, paying for this specialized transportation infrastructure must look beyond the car by directly taxing the now freeloading pedal pushers with a bicycle tax. Legislators who are avid bicyclists, like Blumenauer, obviously have a conflict of interest when it comes to taxing themselves and their favorite sport. Like so many hardcore pedal pushers, they rant for more bicycle infrastructure as long as somebody other than the users pay for it. As legislators, they have become socialists with their attempts to ration motor vehicle travel by not increasing needed road capacity, and/or by applying excessive taxes and fees to motor vehicle travel indirectly giving elitists and affluent people a special privilege and benefit. This discourse is often rationalized by the mindset that by using some of the tax dollars collected to subsidize public transit and bicycle infrastructure some how rights the taking. In reality, such exploitation is offering a lesser or inferior benefit to many in the working class and people on fixed incomes who otherwise would prefer to drive, but are priced off the public roadways. The end result is the creation of a double standard, and even a form of discrimination. This calculated manipulation of lifestyles and transportation choices is the application social engineering. Specialized bicycle infrastructure needs to be paid for by the user bicyclists, and transit fares need to better reflect the actual fiscal costs of both constructing transit infrastructure and then operating the service.

Terry Parker: "The end result (of bicycling and constructing bicycle infrastructure) is the creation of a double standard, and even a form of discrimination."

Gosh, is that like when Firestone and a whole bunch of car/tire/asphalt enthusiasts bought up the Red Electric System in Los Angeles about 50 years ago, and then promptly destroyed all of the rolling stock and the rights-of-way....in favor of freeways, gridlock, and traffic jams? Were the interests of bicyclists fairly represented in that "free market" transaction? I know you libertarians and conservatives believe that irony is dead, but doesn't it strike you as just a bit humorous that the rights-of-way of most of the LRT lines down there are almost exactly the same as the old Red Electric system of yore??

Rob Kremer: ...(Bicycling and bike construction infrastructure) is just another utopian vision that could only be achieved by totalitarian measures....

Yes, I guess that's why Mr. Kremer and his allies in the govt. have tried to completely eliminate national Amtrak funding every time it's come up for renewal (admittedly, it's not the most efficient railway system in the world), and why they tacitly agree with the Bush adminstration blocking the state of CA's right to regulate air emissions in their state (we wouldn't want to be totalitarian or anything). On a more serious note, however, my "utopian vision" is to be able to breathe clean air, the supply of which appears to be shrinking with every passing year. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but Mr. Kremer's vision appears to be to privatize our water system, our school system, our road system, and anything else that is profitable. The last time I checked, human beings still take in oxygen and release carbon dioxide. I fail to see how Mr. Kremer's "vision" or economic system increases the supply of clean air. But I'm perfectly willing to amend the economic system, if Mr. Kremer and Mr. Parker are willing, to make more human life sustainable. Earl B.'s "manipulation" is a positive step in that direction, in my view. Not the final outcome.

wikiwiki Gosh, is that like when Firestone and a whole bunch of car/tire/asphalt enthusiasts bought up the Red Electric System in Los Angeles about 50 years ago, and then promptly destroyed all of the rolling stock and the rights-of-way....in favor of freeways, gridlock, and traffic jams? JK: Please quit repeating lines from children’s cartoons (Roger Rabbit) as if they were true. The truth is that streetcars were torn out because something better came along. (Progress you know-something many progressives hate.) That something was better because it cost less, was faster, more flexible: the motor bus. Later, something even better superceded the bus: the private car. It is faster, more convenient and uses less energy. Its only downside it that the Sierra Club doesn’t like it. refs:
1. Slater, Cliff, “General Motors and the Demise of Streetcars", Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 3 Summer, 1997. lava.net/cslater/TQOrigin.pdf 2. Bianco, Martha J. ,"Kennedy, 60 Minutes, and Roger Rabbit: Understanding Conspiracy-Theory Explanations of The Decline of Urban Mass Transit", Presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. January, 1999 3. See 1134.org/stan/ul/GM-et-al.html for more refs

wikiwiki Yes, I guess that's why Mr. Kremer and his allies in the govt. have tried to completely eliminate national Amtrak funding every time it's come up for renewal (admittedly, it's not the most efficient railway system in the world), JK: They are trying to eliminate a total failure that costs a lot of money. Do you realize that MAX, as crummy as it is, carries more people than Amtrac?

wikiwiki On a more serious note, however, my "utopian vision" is to be able to breathe clean air, the supply of which appears to be shrinking with every passing year. JK: Is there anything that you are right about? The air has been getting cleaner for years. Year after year. That is why the money grubbing multinational, multibillion dollar, enviro corporations like the Sierra Club are screaming louder every year - they have to keep fooling people to keep the dollars rolling in.

wikiwiki Earl B.'s "manipulation" is a positive step in that direction, in my view. Not the final outcome. JK: Earl is a hypocritical liar. For instance he drives a SUV here in Portland. see: portlandfacts.com/Earl/EarlInSUV.htm

Thanks JK

Carla Axtman Your right to live the way you want ends when it infringes on my right to do the same, Rob. JK: Yes, but your claimed infringement must be based on reality, not fantasy.

Carla Axtman We can get into a lengthy discussion about global climate change, alternative energy, transportation infrastructure costs, etc...but I think you get the point. JK: Which of these items are you claiming as justification to dictate to others: 1. global climate change - Haven’t you noticed it is just a little cooler lately - the solar cycle has turned to that typical of long cooling spells. The PDO has “flipped” to its cool phase which historically lasts 20-30 years. Global warming is nothing but a money grab by Al Gore and his Wall Street Buddies. No one has ever been able to even prove that CO2 actually can cause dangerous warming. If you disagree, just show me the peer reviewed proof.

2. alternative energy Let me know if you finally find one that is ready to power our society at a cost similar to today’s cost of energy. (Hint: only nuclear can do this and it is politically off the table because of the Luddites.)

3. transportation infrastructure costs That is one very good reason to build roads instead of light rail. To build low density instead of high density.

(I think we have all heard of those wonderful high density needle towers in B.C. The thing the planners forgot to tell us is that they cost a million or so for a 1000 sq ft condo. They are for millionaires, yet the planners tell us we need them here. Makes you suspect the planners want Portland to be only for the rich. )

(Remember hearing of all the great things planners did in Curitiba Brazil? The planners forgot to tell us that only happened because Brazil was under a military dictatorship. Does that give you a hint why we bring up the dictator bit occasionally when we try to bring local progressives back to reality?)

Thanks JK

I think we should subsidize the purchase of bikes and tax all vehicle users heavily.

The taxes on vehicles users can go to building green pyramids with solar panels on them and wind turbines at the top.

You people make me sick

Kaarlock AKA "billy" make the same absurd mistake about Luddites as did his soulmate Kremer. As someone else already pointed out, Ned Ludd and his followers were keen not to see themselves outsourced: thus their attacks on what they viewed as the immediate culprits, namely, the machines that were replacing humans. The word "sabotage" has a similar etymology from the French, a "sabot" being a wooden shoe. Arguably both the Luddites and the "saboteurs" would have more usefully focussed their anger on the folks who owned the machines that were reducing the peasants and poor workers to even greater penury.

The Luddites were a social movement of British textile artisans in the early nineteenth century who protested—often by destroying mechanized looms—against the changes produced by the Industrial Revolution, which they felt were leaving them without work.

Sabotage is a term of French origin coined during the railway strike of 1910, when workers destroyed the wooden shoes, or sabots, that held rails in place, thus impeding the morning commute.[citation needed] An alternate definition claims the word to be older by almost a century, the times of Industrial Revolution. It is said that powered looms could be damaged by angry or disgruntled workers throwing their wooden shoes or clogs (known in French as sabots, hence the term Sabotage) into the machinery, effectively clogging the machinery. This is often referenced as one of the first inklings of the Luddite Movement. However, this etymology is highly suspect and no wooden shoe sabotage is known to have been reported from the time of the word's origin.

Yo Kaarlock: I know someone who moved from Portland into one of those Vancouver, BC highrises with his family. He's far, far from a millionaire. Beats me what in the world you are blathering about.

As for Blumenauer and bicycle riding, why in the world do Kremer and Kaarlock get so bent out of shape about Bleumenauer riding a bike? It's good exercise. Commonly, in an urban setting, it takes little more time than motorized transit. It's cheap. NONE of those reasons has a damn thing to do with "green" whatever.

It beats the hell out of me why the Kremers and Kaarlocks of the world get their knickers in a knot about anyone who makes non-Kremerian, non-Kaarlockian choices. Sort of ironic, I would say, given that these pseudo-libertarians are always on the rampage about how progressives want to take away people's lifestyle choices.

I've ridden bicycles for a long time, not as a means of transportation but for fun and recreation. They're not a practical means of getting to and from work or for running errands to the local supermarket. They're miserable in bad weather; your clothes are a mess when you get to work, even if you have them in a backpack; they won't carry very much cargo. Plus, our infrastructure and urban development patterns make distances too far and bike paths too rare. I suppose that could all be fixed by building many thousands miles of bike paths, forcing everyone to move into crowded high-rise apartment buildings nearer to cities, and forcibly confiscating and destroying large numbers of motor vehicles. The reality is, even Khmer Rouge tactics in reverse couldn't get it done, as much as some people would like to try. We're going to have to live like we are now way into the future, until some truly revolutionary technology makes something else possible. Pedal power isn't it.

I've ridden bicycles for a long time, not as a means of transportation but for fun and recreation. They're not a practical means of getting to and from work or for running errands to the local supermarket. They're miserable in bad weather; your clothes are a mess when you get to work, even if you have them in a backpack; they won't carry very much cargo. Plus, our infrastructure and urban development patterns make distances too far and bike paths too rare. I suppose that could all be fixed by building many thousands miles of bike paths, forcing everyone to move into crowded high-rise apartment buildings nearer to cities, and forcibly confiscating and destroying large numbers of motor vehicles. The reality is, even Khmer Rouge tactics in reverse couldn't get it done, as much as some people would like to try. We're going to have to live like we are now way into the future, until some truly revolutionary technology makes something else possible. Pedal power isn't it.

joel dan walls: Kaarlock [sic] AKA "billy" make the same absurd mistake about Luddites as did his soulmate Kremer. . . . The Luddites were a social movement of British textile artisans in the early nineteenth century who protested—often by destroying mechanized looms—against the changes produced by the Industrial Revolution, JK: How is that different form the modern progressives that want to destroy our only viable sources of energy? The only difference that I see is that the Luddites wanted to preserve jobs while the progressives will destroy jobs.

joel dan walls: Yo Kaarlock: I know someone who moved from Portland into one of those Vancouver, BC highrises with his family. He's far, far from a millionaire. Beats me what in the world you are blathering about. JK What does that prove? Is the number I gave correct or not? What is the typical price, not some outlaying example?

joel dan walls: As for Blumenauer and bicycle riding, why in the world do Kremer and Kaarlock get so bent out of shape about Bleumenauer riding a bike? JK Again you miss the point. The point is that Earl is trying to FORCE people to ride bikes because cars are against his religon. And his is a hypocrite about it since he drives a SUV. see: portlandfacts.com/Earl/EarlInSUV.htm

Thanks JK

The non-facts are BACK.

The low cost of dirty coal power, of course...... if you conveniently ignore most of the costs, of course its cheap.

The subsidies of bikes and trains, of course..........if you overlook the massive subsidies for air travel and vehicular travel, of course it doesn't look fair does it?

All the jobs that the clean energy economy is taking away, of course.......until you compare it to the absolute destruction of the economy and family wage jobs by the Republican free market, dirty energy economy.

All those choices of lifestyle given to the sprawling, concretized strip mall free market development mayhem, of course..... unless you want to get around by foot, bike, or transit, of course you do have the choice of the color of your SUV.

Ah yes,of course....... I forgot we had to ignore the hottest 10 years on record were in the last 12 years, and the sea level is rising much faster than predicted, and the Arctic Sea Ice is retreating much faster than predicted, and the mountain glaciers are disappearing before our eyes and before the environmental refugees can flee fast enough.

But , yes, of course it is encouraging to have all the non-facts collected to this blog like flypaper. Maybe it helps keep them from gumming up the real world.

jim: The low cost of dirty coal power, of course...... if you conveniently ignore most of the costs, of course its cheap. JK: OF course coal is dirty. We have more coal because of the green’s opposition to clean nu-clear power. Al Gore is especially guilty here during his VP term.

jim: The subsidies of bikes and trains, of course..........if you overlook the massive subsidies for air travel and vehicular travel, of course it doesn't look fair does it? JK: What massive subsidies? You really need to look beyond the money grubbing billion dollar multinational corporations like the Sierra Club to get your facts. Try these for subsidies:

Should We Try To Get The Prices Right?, DELUCCHI, ACCESS NUMBER 16 • SPRING 2000, page 12 estimates autos get 6.9 cents/mile subsidy while buses get 16.8 cents/mile subsidy and rail is several times as much! See: portlandfacts.com/Roads/Docs/Delucchi_Chart.htm

Federal Subsidies to Passenger Transportation, U.S. Department of Transportation Excerpt: Highway passenger transportation system paid significantly greater amounts of money to the federal government than their allocated costs. Transit received the largest amount of net federal subsidy See: portlandfacts.com/Roads/RoadSubsidy.htm

jim: All the jobs that the clean energy economy is taking away, of course JK: We don’t have a “clean energy economy” and won’t have in the near term unless we go for nuclear. There are no other viable options available now or in the near future. The greens have been lying about this for years they ignore the cost of solar and intermittent nature of both solar ands wind. They pretend that we can drill just about anywhere and get geothermal and that wave power is ready for primetime instead of just a lab curiosity.

jim: .......until you compare it to the absolute destruction of the economy and family wage jobs by the Republican free market, dirty energy economy. JK: Are you referring to the careless bank lending demanded by the democrats?

jim: All those choices of lifestyle given to the sprawling, concretized strip mall free market development mayhem, of course..... unless you want to get around by foot, bike, or transit, of course you do have the choice of the color of your SUV. JK: You appear to be under the illusion that a modern economy can function with 19th century transport.

jim: Ah yes,of course....... I forgot we had to ignore the hottest 10 years on record were in the last 12 years, and the sea level is rising much faster than predicted, and the Arctic Sea Ice is retreating much faster than predicted, and the mountain glaciers are disappearing before our eyes and before the environmental refugees can flee fast enough. JK: All of which are simply not true. 1. The warmest years are concentrated in the 1930s after Hansen was forced to fix his convenient error in the USHCN. You will note that this is widely considered to be the most accurate ground record and it shows 1998 TIED with 1934 for the warmest year since ground records were kept. Of course, several historic periods were warmer: Medieval, Roman, Minoan etc. Satellite data do not show nearly as much warming as ground records, which along with several other things strongly suggest that all of our ground temperature records are seriously flawed and probably grossly exaggerate the minor warming. 2. The sea level is NOT rising any faster than in past thousands of years. In fast the rate of rise has slowed. 3. The arctic has been ice free in the last few thousand years, so this is nothing new. (But this year has seen more ice.) The antarctic ice and the Greenland ice is growing. Why don’t you calm down until the Greenland ice uncovers the last of the Viking farms that are still under ice. 4. The cascade glaciers are NOT retreating when you look at all available data. If you use all available data, starting in the early 1900s, then you see a rise and fall - a natural cyclic function. If you start your graph in the 1950s then you see a down trend. Unfortunately the Washing State Climatologist showed such a deceptive graph as evidence of a glaciers disappearing. He lied. He got caught. See How one number touched off big climate-change fight at UW, Seattle Times, March 15, 2007 5. What environmental refugees? Please quit spreading Al Gore’s lies.

jim: But , yes, of course it is encouraging to have all the non-facts collected to this blog like flypaper. Maybe it helps keep them from gumming up the real world. JK: Yeh, you sure are a vast source of non-facts. Please educate yourself with some real data. You might want to start with the British court’s list of Al Gore’s lies (only those lies that went beyond the IPCC lies were counted): cpi.cam.ac.uk/gore/pdf/Al%20Gore%20ruling%20-%2010%20Oct.pdf

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT B e f o r e : MR JUSTICE BURTON ..... All these 9 'errors' that I now address are not put in the context of the evidence of Professor Carter and the Claimant's case, but by reference to the IPCC report and the evidence of Dr Stott.

The 'Errors' 1. 'Error' 11: Sea level rise of up to 20 feet (7 metres) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland in the near future.

1. 'Error' 12: Low lying inhabited Pacific atolls are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming.

2. 'Error' 18: Shutting down of the "Ocean Conveyor".

3. 'Error' 3: Direct coincidence between rise in CO2 in the atmosphere and in temperature, by reference to two graphs.

4. 'Error' 14: The snows of Kilimanjaro.

5. 'Error' 16: Lake Chad etc

6. 'Error' 8: Hurricane Katrina.

7. 'Error' 15: Death of polar bears.

8. 'Error' 13: Coral reefs.

Thanks JK

Man, I haven't read this board in two weeks, I come back and it's the EXACT SAME DEBATE. The poster above got it right about the circle jerk; why are you strokin' them? They never give genuine facts to debate, the most important of which is that they think they will not outlive the chaos they cause. You can tell W shut down ELF. Most "terrorist" groups this President shuts down allow right wing terrorists to procede unimpeded. You're seeing it here. It's a crime to yell "fire" in a crowded auditorium when there isn't. Why isn't it a crime to try to get people to stay in their seats when there is? I'm sure JK thinks he has an angle on law and medicine too. If he gives you that speech, you could prefer legalalites. No surprise that lawyers, doctors and individual rights are more important than the planet. Society wants to control how you live? If society took this seriously, the issue would be that you live. Forunately the Civil War taught us that nothing is worth going to the extreme for. Slavery could have been ended through rational debate and letting the old farts die. That must be the case. It's the approach you are taking with this issue and, did you know, it's far more important?

BTW, JK isn't a pseudo-libertarian, he's a hard core Democrat! The moderate and left Dems long ago decided to regard Al Gore as of no consequence. JK can't post without mentioning him. How many Dems would say Al Gore is hugely influential? JK would.

Why don’t you calm down until the Greenland ice uncovers the last of the Viking farms that are still under ice. Proof. Climate lies never, never die. "Greenland" was a Nordic marketing fraud, just like "Vineland". You are using their conscious dissembling, a millenium later, to make the same point! Yeah, live and let live, it will eventually die out. Wanna bet?

JK: OF course coal is dirty. We have more coal because of the green’s opposition to clean nu-clear power. Al Gore is especially guilty here during his VP term. That Al is a very, important guy. We thought Cheney was the first Veep to take over energy policy from his office, but it was actually Al Gore. If you must drool, let your salivary glands of knowledge go to work on explaining to us how Gore misused that position and saddled us with worse energy policy and Cheney has not.

At least try to liven it up. Have a contest to see who can write a bot that most resembles JK. Should be trivial. Look for a hot word, paste his usual links. Who would read that? Why is this different? This is pointless. Since you like recycled crap, here's what I said two weeks ago. Guess I'll just come by once a month and stick it on their latest recap.

Posted by: Silver Rain | Dec 30, 2008 5:09:59 PM U know how at holiday dinner, there's someone home from college that has to keep at Grandpa George and Grandma Ada who will spend an infinite amount of time, trying to convince anyone that will argue with them that FDR was a communist? At some point the rest of the kinfolk wonder why the kid thinks he's gonna change their mind as much as why G & A have been on about it for 60 years. Actually, they've gotten used to G & A. Now it's the kid that's irritating.

Actually, I should go to Daily Kos if I want to see political blogging. I can get this at any High School debate on climate change.

Willie Smith wrote: I work for him and have seen nothing but proposals to give people options.

Willie, what has Earl done to help support and improve bus transportation, especially here in Portland?

I ride TriMet's 12 line and frankly residents of Cuba get BETTER service.

In fact in the last few months I have seriously considered buying a SECOND car for our household, because of the poor service on the 12 line.

TriMet doesn't care. I finally got a direct response from Fred Hansen which basically said he doesn't care. And I don't see any leadership from Earl, or any of the other ELECTED officials (since TriMet is headed by an appointed, not elected, board), including Metro, regarding improving our bus system.

We have an aging, old, unreliable bus fleet. We have bus stops that, well, are something to be embarassed about. We have continually overcrowded buses (the 12 bus is frequently overcrowded outside of rush hour) and buses are required to pass up riders.

I have seen lots of Earl's pictures and speeches about the Streetcar and MAX, but NOTHING about the bus system - the public transit system that carries 65% of TriMet's riders, covers far more of Portland's geography and provides the bulk of the service.

What does Earl intend to do to make sure Portland gets - and spends - money that has been needed in despirately needed bus improvements owing up to TriMet's own disinvestment in the bus system in favor of development-oriented transit, rather than people-oriented transit?

Dan said: “I think we should subsidize the purchase of bikes and tax all vehicle users heavily” and then “You people make me sick”

Dan - If anybody is sick it is people like you that expect the government and the taxes other people pay to support your lifestyle, just like mommy and daddy did in your childhood. What you are suggesting is socialism. In today’s Oregonian, Governor Kulongoski’s spokesperson was quoted as saying “gas tax revenues are not sustainable”. One reason is that millions of gas tax roadway dollars are being poached, siphoned off, raided, lifted, etc, to pay for specialized bicycle infrastructure. Often such expenditures are buried, hidden, camouflaged and/or otherwise concealed in roadway budgets. These dollars need to be going to pay for roads and bridges, not to subsidize freeloading pedal pushers. Furthermore, if the motorist paid gas tax is not sustainable to pay for roads and bridges, then 1) there would be no money left over to subsidize bicycling, and 2) bicycling is even less sustainable because bicyclists are not directly taxed paying nothing, nada, zero towards the infrastructure they use. Sharing the road also requires sharing the financial responsibility. Sustainability starts with financial self-sustainability. Therefore, if bicyclists are not taxed to help pay for the roads in addition to paying for the specialized bicycle infrastructure they rant for, then bicyclists should get off the fringing road.

Kaarlock, damn, you're right after all. Earl Bluemenauer is a terrorist. His office made a robocall to me this morning threatening to have me deported if I don't sell my car and immediately start bicycling everywhere. SIGN ME UP WITH YOUR CHAPTER OF THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY IMMEDIATELY. (BTW do I get an antique, autographed copy of the complete works of Ayn Rand as a signing bonus? or just another stupid effing coffee mug?)

Have a contest to see who can write a bot that most resembles JK. Should be trivial. Look for a hot word, paste his usual links.

I don't think it's possible to come up with a better bot than this one, but the random Kaarlock essay generator does sound intriguing. The bot would have to be sure to include the trademark "thanks--JK" at the bottom of every posting. And the text has to include something about the superior rationality of pseudo-libertarians, a few insults aimed at Al Gore, and the usual collection of unattributed third-hand scientific "citations".

Winner gets the signed complete works of Ayn Rand that Kaarlock is going to send me for signing up with the One True Political Party.

You two made my miserable day! I particularly like the gifts.

This being in power is going to be a trip for the blog. Folks are piling on to such an extent I'm feeling, well, bad about saying anything negative...like, to the point it would affect what I say. Terry and JK provide a valuable reminder that one should ask themselves "what do I hope to accomplish" before posting. Yeah, it might be stranger than long, but I think we're in for one.

I want to thank all of you that attacked me above.

It just shows that my logic and facts are correct and you had no other choice except to stoop to ad hominian attacks (or to shut up.)

Too bad you can't start basing your actions on logic instead of emotion.

Thanks JK

Where is the Obama spirit in this discussion? When are we going to stop calling names and have intelligent talk about strategies and policies we can agree on.

Except for the Tim Carter post, this is a useless food fight.

Bicycles are nice, clean, fun in good weather. But they will never become our basic mode of transportation.

I favor abundant, cheap electricity. I was against Trojan, but now accept an urgent need for nuclear, assuming we can make it work as well as Europe does. (And maybe only for a transition period.) I believe we can do a lot more with hydro, especially with solar and wind-aided pump storage that pumps water back up to reservoirs. I would reserve coal for emergency use only. I believe every rooftop should be solar, and small-scale (and quiet) wind turbines should be everywhere possible. I don't much care what inspired the Luddites. I just don't want to make the same mistake again. Any response?

Any response? JK: Just one: Solar is a very costly to get electricity. Over ten times what we currently pay and only available a few days/year.

Thanks JK

<hr/>