Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
I guess you are confirming why anybody but the folks the Stranger is cheerleading passed on your manufactured event.
Baconcat, I assume that's you in the front row?
It's sort of interesting, especially coming from the loudest and most frequent of transportation finger waggers on political blogs in the Puget Sound. You'd expect some kind of consistency.
Right, because the hallmark of a rational thinker is to never, ever changing his/her mind.
Though it would groovy and appropriate for Seattle to build one of these on its waterfront.
You stop the tunnel then you get a viaduct replacement, possibly a chappaduct.
My "attack" was against the people the think that as if by magic the legislature would stop the tunnel and gift McGinn his beloved Surface option. That is the dumbest thing I have seen people believe a politician would be capable of doing.
McGinn's idea was/is flat fucking stupid, but plays well inside the bubble.
How is it going?
Not very good as the mayor is incapable of changing the state's mind, and has resorted to name calling and participating in tonights almost-event.
But he is fighting the good fight, because that is all he's got left. If he gave up now he would lose the support he has, ands has zero shot at gaining support from anybody that hasn't agreed with McGinn to this point.
He makes friends, enemies, and is now trapped by his own caustic rhetoric.
No matter what McGinn says tonight, or has said for 14 months, The tunnel will happen or not on its own. We will get to late January and the winning bidder will have a plan acceptable to the state or not.
He is in no position to make the best of it, and that was predictable to me prior to the election.
It wasn't the tunnel, it was the candidate. He's a buffoon.
And Fnarf - I Love it!!!!! Let's build two of them!!!!!
And bawk, bawk, bawk - c'mon.
State Highway, state decision.
I was against the tunnel two years ago, the state made a decision about its highway, time to move on to another fight. I am disappointed that the mayor is not going to be a useful actor in advocating for more buses. I had hoped that a year ago, he is making his decisions, time to move on to another fight.
Hopefully somebody will ask him for a plan fir his West Side Light Rail. It has been a year and a half since he started campaigning on that idea, still no plan.
How about that muni broadband?
Should we just forget about the other stuff he could actually have some decision making power over?
Is he done?
Tsk, tsk.
The tunnel is a stupid idea, perpetuated by stupid, elitist people who have something to gain from the construction and use of a tunnel. Repeat: it's a stupid idea, cooked up by stupid assholes who have figured out how to reap windfalls if it is built.
35
Jan Drago said that she would get this done before she left office. Mallahan evaluated the situation and saw it for what it was, something that would be decided before he could take office, and what would the mayor have to do after taking office. In January the issue will be (and has been) how to manage the risk of the project that would already be committed to by all levels of government.
This is in stark contrast to McGinn's managing by belief. He has ignored the fact that bills were passed, and the city council has been meeting on this issue for months. How long could he string his supporters along? Was he trying to make it past the date that ballots arrived in mail boxes? That has to be the "timing" of this decision that was most damaging to his campaign.
How many voters filled out their ballots on Saturday and dropped it in the mail this morning, now wishing they could get that ballot back.
The inevitability of this project was something McGinn was simply not honest about. His supporters, and media supporters can spin this as somehow bad for Mallahan, having McGinn be exposed earlier than he would have wished, as a guy that is willing to say anything, crafted by a guy who has spent a few years as a lobbyist/lawyer/advocate, mistakenly assumed as proven leadership.
He got paid for his lobby over the past few years. He has convinced plenty of people to support him in his efforts, and get paid for it. The difference here is that many people were paying him, and supporting him, on a position that was soft to begin with, and now he has abandoned.
He WAS going to stop the tunnel. I think he would still try to stop it by sandbagging the project at every turn. I could be wrong on that point, I could be right, and McGinn is in no position to convince me either way.
Posted by MrBaker on October 19, 2009 at 9:59 PM
http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives…
That looks a lot like what I posted above, as true today as it was 13 months ago.
Of course there are. But "all gutter all the time" is so convenient.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzhb3U2cO…
"I actually see it [tunnel] as the green alternative."
To confirm that this wasn't some misunderstanding or misstatement and he is an idiot he then said of the tunnel, "We’re trying to put in a transportation system that’s going to serve the urban center effectively and efficiently." Of course, the tunnel won't serve downtown and consequently it won't be used by transit. I guess by "transportation system" he meant highways and single-occupancy vehicles.
I am not a fan of the tunnel, or Conlin's politics around it. But c'mon, really? A 'cowardly piece of shit'? That's just lame.
Richard Conlin is a good man. He's done some really good things for Seattle.
We need to learn how to disagree with each other politically without personally destroying each other. You included Mr. Savage.
Personally, I think potty mouths are highly underrated.
What I don't accept is that McGinn, Dom, and fanboys like yourself see this issue as a holy war between good and evil. (The less thoughtful segments of the left and right can't seem to approach problems in any other way.) Some clear cut issues (e.g., gay marriage, DADT) do indeed call for single-minded activism. This particular issue does not, and frankly, the coverage here has sucked ass.
Your lack of respect for those who don't share your boundless enthusiasm for the surface option is alienating, and it's exactly why no one but the true believers showed up at this "town hall."
Best wishes,
Sean
You're trying to introduce facts to this discussion? How DARE you?
http://www.nkeconwatch.com/nk-uploads/ry…
They might complete it before Seattle is done debating the viaduct replacement.
Really? Because my Snohomish chickens all went Cluck Cluck Cluck.....RRRRRRRRRR........
@Fnarf
I'm in love!! We need one in every major city.
but, hey, let's cut the city boy some slack.
let him work on his English literacy before we expect him to be competent in a second language.
Had a chance to build elevated public transit that ran above traffic. Voted on it like 9 fuckin' times and opted for 1 single light rail that runs at street level as a part of traffic. Add to that street cars. lol streetcars.
Now need to replace the viaduct. Best options Seattle can come up with to argue over are do nothing (lol do nothing) and build an expensive tunnel that is going to be a pile of silt and corpses in your children's lifetime.
Stay smart, Seattle. I know you will.
Anyway, great meeting Dan. This is a bad project, not only because it's poorly thought through from a design and cost point of view, but because it doesn't serve nearly enough people for that cost. It's going to be the Big Dig all over again, except ours will be even more expensive in terms of the number of people served.
Thanks for doing all you can to wake people up.
Also, 300 people showed up, so there's that :)
On the flip side, if I so much as question the party line here, I'm dismissed as a Republican troll. (Funny - I always thought my love for big expensive tax-funded public projects made me a big pinko commie.)
Too bad none of you has the balls or the emotional maturity to engage in an actual debate about this issue. Who knows, you might even win it.
PS - to Seandr - I'm more than willing to have a sane and reasonable discussion/ debate with you. I'm no expert on transportation, but this tunnel plan doesn't make sense to me logistically or economically.
One more reason I hope he and Transportation chair Tom "I only read the first page" Rasmussen won't have a job come next election.
At least one councilmember beside O'Brien, and state representatives, should have shown up and LISTENED! This was a tar & feathers-, and pitchforks & torches-free event.