Thursday, March 09, 2006

Open Forum

The legislative Democrats are pushing their transportation package, which will cost about $5 billion. Democrats held a rally with some of the people who they apparently think would benefit most: other Democrats, business leaders and labor unions.

The creation of new state agencies is moving forward, apparently. Please refer all inquires to the Department of Department Creation. Be warned: they're busy.

Lastly, the proposal for the Broadwater natural gas terminal slated to be built in Long Island Sound doesn't take into account public costs, including the cost of security. There's been a lot of opposition to the terminal, but I have the feeling it'll probably get built anyway.

What else is going on?

30 comments:

Anonymous said...

The former spokesman for the Taliban is enrolled at Yale.. and now you wonder how Bush got in?

Anonymous said...

Genghis - I sure hope you are wrong about the Broadwater LNG project being built despite opposition. However, Connecticut and New York, do not have anywhere near as much say in approval of the project as we deserve. That is because the Bush energy bill passed in 2005, with the support of people like Rob Simmons and Joe Lieberman. The energy bill gave full authority over LNG projects to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. (FERC)

Of course, now that they are on the campaign trail, Simmons and Lieberman can’t find enough ways to denounce Broadwater. Too bad most environmentalists don’t seem ready to call BS on their hypocrisy.

For that matter, it’s too bad that most of the groups opposing Broadwater seem more interested in the NIMBY arguments against it rather than pointing out that it’s not needed to meet energy needs in the state or the region. The assumption that “of course” we need to bring in more foreign fossil fuels is dangerous for our security and our economy.

curiousinthe19th said...

I keep hearing rumors about Bob Farr. Apparently, he planned to run for re-election, and if he won, have Rell appoint him a judge before he would take the oath. I guess this helps him avoid a revolving door problem.

But Rell refused to play along, telling him that if he didn't want to be a rep anymore, he shouldn't run.

So anyone else hear about this?

red october said...

the market will be there because LNG is cheaper than other fuels. And the LNG will be for now coming from Bolivia, which as everybody knows is as friendly to the US as Tony Blair's UK and the sultan of Dubai.

Anonymous said...

I can see Rell screwing over Bob Farr since she has had no problems screwing over the R's as a whole. So she simply wants to let the seat go D, and then MAYBE put Farr on the bench? There is a better shot of holding the seat in a special election in the Peoples Republic of West Hartford than in the general. Gosh, maybe Jodi is the bad press of putting Farr on the bench wil drop her approval rating to 80%....after the election has occurred. Jodi - start taking care of your own!

red october said...

In G.C.s link on the spend spend, spend transportation package is this "Among them were Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy and former House Speaker Moira Lyons, a Stamford Democrat and key architect of the state Transportation Strategy Board's plan." Great, Moira Lyons, the poster girl who uckfayed the spending on transportation with Rowland in the first place and then formed the TSB to divert attention from the uckfayin', is behind the bill.

Fooey. wish I hadn't clicked on the link. the only jobs will be the construction trade sna dthe only profitable companies will be the road builders and designers. Sound familiar to you UCONN 200 fans?

red october said...

And while I'm getting ticked off, I should point a finger at Danno Malloyo who got all kinds of tax breaks from Hartford thanks to Moira for companies in Stamford to build big tall buildings so folks from the suburbs could crowd the Merritt and the CT Tpke with their suv's and Audis morning noon and night.

Idiots leading idiots. Spend away!!!

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

I for one am shocked - shocked - that anyone might suspect the Democratic leadership of the General Assembly would rally union hacks, fellow Democrats (if that's not redundant) and beloved former leaders such as Moira Lyons in support of an absurdly expensive, utterly unaffordable and ridiculously overblown transportation plan. The very thought that this is political opportunism at its rankest is ... why ... it's inconthieveable!

TrueBlueCT said...

Anon9:54am--

Why don't you cure your ignorance about Sayed Hashemi? Instead of listening to the right-wing mouthpieces, you might try a little googling. It might interest you to know that he was cleared by our American government, and offered a job by the Karzai administration.

Here is an in-depth article about Sayed from the NY Times.

"In February 2004, [Hashemi] got a call from his old boss, the former foreign minister Mullah Muttawakil. He had been released from the American prison at Bagram Air Base and was now under house arrest in Kabul. He asked if Rahmatullah would like to return to Kabul and clear his name with the American authorities. Yes, he would, he said, and a week later in Kabul, Rahmatullah saw Muttawakil for the first time in two years....

An American woman who identified herself only as Michelle showed up at the house, along with a man who smiled a lot but didn't give his name. They all had tea together. Rahmatullah had been nervous about getting an adversarial debriefer. Somebody could put whatever he felt like in his file, and he would be on a transport to Guantánamo Bay with his head in a sack. He was thankful that Michelle seemed thoughtful and not arrogant at all....

Michelle and the man returned for a second interview a few days later. Rahmatullah had no idea how much time or how many interviews it would take to "clear" his name... After 40 days, Michelle appeared for the third time. "You can go," she said.

The Karzai administration invited Rahmatullah to work for the government, but with the Northern Alliance now controlling the Afghan military, he feared for his safety in Kabul..."

Anonymous said...

True Blue CT- All of sudden it's "our government". Wake up you fool. The very government that you denounce, the very government you criticize over border security and allowing an Arab company to take over port operations at the six largest ports in the United States. The very government that you criticize over human rights and prisoner abuse at Abu Graib and Bagram Air Base. Now all of a sudden "our government" says its ok for the spokesman of a government that didn't allow women to show their faces in public to take classes at Yale. And I'm ignorant? It's abhorrent. At least show consistency in your arguments and then someone will take you seriously.

TrueBlueCT said...

Yeah, it's my America, and my American government. (But that embarassment of a President is all yours.)

Hashemi is a fine young man, and it's great for America that he is studying at Yale. I only hope that at some point he feels Afghanistan is safe enough to return to, so that he can help bridge the culture gap between our countries.

And yes, you are ignorant when it comes to Hashimi. But that's what happens when you get your information from FoxNews and Bill O'Reilly.

Anonymous said...

"Hashemi is a fine young man"-

At a speech for the Atlantic Council, Mr. Rahmatullah was confronted by a woman in the audience who lifted the burkha she was wearing and chastised him for the Taliban's infamous treatment of women. "You have imprisoned the women--it's a horror, let me tell you," she cried. Mr. Rahmatullah responded with a sneer: "I'm really sorry to your husband. He might have a very difficult time with you."

People like you make me sick.

captain obvious said...

Red October said, "And while I'm getting ticked off, I should point a finger at Danno Malloyo who got all kinds of tax breaks from Hartford thanks to Moira for companies in Stamford to build big tall buildings so folks from the suburbs could crowd the Merritt and the CT Tpke with their suv's and Audis morning noon and night."

Congrats, you are what is wrong with our once-great state. You are actually blaming the transportation crisis on a mayor who brought too many jobs into his city. "Waaaa Stamford is creating jobs and the people who have those jobs drive cars and create traffic! Therefore I hate mayors of cities who create jobs!!!"

How about our state develops a comprehensive transportation plan that doesn't involve cutting jobs to ease traffic?

It's like I'm taking crazy pills.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone see the Transportation Public Hearing on tv yesterday?

Moira was drunk (again), or heavily medicated -- and the hearing was in the am.

Keep referring to the propsed rail line from New Haven to SpringDALE. At the end, could be heard 'Where is my fucking pocketbook'.

What a disaster....

Anonymous said...

I want to know what it is like for True Blue Democrat, I am registered D and i am sick to my stomach. I can't belive people here are defending the a former Taliban spokesman...i don't care the kind of man you say he is, does Yale let Nazi's in?,
Or better yet how can you defend a former Taliban spokesman, and at the very mention of John Rowland you lunch in to rants about him being evil. I am truely scared for the future of the Democratic Party, where is JFK when you need him.

Free Speech is Patriotic said...

Yes, my guess is, Yale would admit someone who was a member of the Nazi party if he satisfied the other requirements for admission.

To be a true believer in free speech, you have to believe that even speech you find offensive must be free.

For instance, I am a total nut for flags. For years, my whole house looked like a freaking Betsy Ross memorial. I want to dismember anyone I see treating the flag with disrespect. But I wholeheartedly oppose any measure to ban flag-burning. Why? Because the reason our beautiful flag has such deep meaning is that it stands for the freedom to do even that which 99.9% of Americans find nauseating. Freedom of speech is only meaningful when it permits speech that would otherwise be quashed. Freedom to say what others don't mind you saying is no freedom at all.

Furthermore, I believe that when you let people with offensive ideas -- like Nazis, or Muslim extremists, or homophobes -- speak their minds freely, they will be seen for what they are. When people actually hear these creeps say the horrible things they say, most are offended and disgusted, and turn away from those beliefs.

Yale is, and always has been, a free marketplace of ideas. Some of those ideas are complete and utter crap. Some are brilliant. Some are offensive. But they all add something to the debate, even if only as evidence of why one side in that debate is dead wrong. If you believe in America, and in our Constitution, and in true freedom, you must believe in true free speech. Even when it makes you cringe.

disgruntled_republican said...

True Blue-

Once again, you want it both ways. Nobody says you have to like the President but you cant say it is your country and then in the same breath say it is not your President. I was not a fan of Clinton but he was still my President because he held the office in which I beleive in. To say he is not your President is to say you do not beleive in the office and thus you do not beleive in the country either.

Anonymous said...

amazing, you have turned two political parties resposible for the deaths of 1000's of people into a simple point of view or opinion, i guess that is how democrats explain away years of racism within your party, like the founder fathers of the KKK being Dems
Hey sorry Robert Byrd was racist but he is still Demorcat...

Free Speech is fine as long as the speech doesn't result in the direct injury of another American, the Fire rule, if you yell fire in a crowded movie theater it is not considered free speech because you are directly resposible for injuries that result from panic.

someone can be racist or a homophobe, and speak thier minds, but when they take arms to force those beliefs on others they are terrorist...so Nazi and taliban are not a free speach issue.

Anonymous said...

I love the fact the Dems want to raise gas prices 20 cents a gallon and runs trains to Danielson and buses to New Britain...and after this prodigious sum of money is spent the cause of the alleged "cul-de-sac"-- I-95 through Fairfield County---will still be only six lanes.

At least the Big Dig eliminated congestion, but the futility of CT politicians on transportation issues is priceless.

and re: energy. After the $200M Enron/CRRA dedacle one would think Dick Blumenthal of all people would want to keep state authorities as far away from the energy business as humanly possible...but wisdom might impede his stampede to the TV cameras

TrueBlueCT said...

You guys crack me up.

Hashemi was brought up in a totally effed environment. Yes, he was misguided in his youth, and he has admitted as much.

But when both the State Department, and the Karzai administration give him full clearance, I, for one, am not going to hold anything against him, -- provided that he wants to learn, and change.

How best to influence Afghanistan for the better, than to help educate its youth, including a former Taliban person?

You guys know this is the truth. Why the fake outrage?

red october said...

OK Captain Obvious, Malloy, through Rowlandnomics, brought jobs in to Stamford at the expense of Bridgeport and created a transportation crisis that the incremental income and sales tax all those people with jobs won't even begin to pay for.

If you have a house and income big enough for two kids will you make ten babies?

Anonymous said...

Don't bother to answer that question captian Obvious because i know what it is. Gaammpy will pay for the babies and even watch them just as the state taxpayer paid for all the jobs malloy created on their backs. captain Obvious is probably afraid of losing his DECD job.

Anonymous said...

red october.

the jobs in Stamford would have gone to Tarrytown or Paramus if they weren't in Stamford

Stick to submarines

red october said...

subsidizing the private sector does not work my American friend. You may have gained in Stamford but you lost 150,000 jobs and you have a traffic mess concentrated in one spot not to mention all the schools that had to be built in Fairfield County to support all those workers. I don't do the soubmarine thing anymore. Take a course in economices and don't specialize in Rowlandnomics and Lennism my American friend. You might find the CT yankees could compete in the world to make a real product and not just trade on the world economy money flow.

Anonymous said...

I suspect political officer Putin has seized control of the boat

"build schools for all the workers"
bad?

"lose 150,000 jobs" bad?

so we should have more jobs and fewer schoolchildren?

Are you suggesting everyone in Heritage Village go back to work?

BTW re "free market" the businesses in Stamford would not have located anywhere else in CT. I presume then the response is we don't want them. That sorta of economic strategy is working well in VT, which is following your principles of becoming a haven for the aged and socially concious

redcoat said...

And if they had located nowhere else in CT then we who already live, work and run businesses here would not be subsidizing them through the higher taxes of recent years and other businesses looking for a low cost stae might have located here or at least existing ones could have considered expanding instead of losing 150,00 existing jobs to create a few new ones. I bet you that used car salesmen can smell you from a mile away. Don't pass up this deal there will never be another Dodge Dart.

Anonymous said...

redcoat, as noted that strategy is working wonders for VT

wonder what all your friends will be doing after some southern governor bribes Sikorsky to move

red october said...

I have no idea what redcoat and anonymous are bantering back and forth about on Sikorsy. I hadn't heard Sikorsky or the Teamsters were looking for tax breaks from Rell or the Stratford deegation.
It's a contract dispute and business strategy situation. And why Rell is offering to mediate when the federal government already has avenues for that perplexes me.

Keep me out of this please.

Anonymous said...

red october, congrats, Ramius resumed control of the ship with that post.

I still expect southern governors to exploit the labor dispute at Sikorsky and nothing CT pols can offer will offset the benefits of going where the union can't organize effectively

redcoat said...

I am not anti-union any more than I am a defector like red ocotber up there and I woouldn't suggest national healthcare for you Americans like we have in Britain either. CT is an expensive place to do business and the head of UTC has publicly said within the last few months that he would never locate a plant in CT today. To blame CT's woes solely on organized labor is dumb because you can chase them all away and Rowlandnomics, as it has been put, will still rule the day. It's the only thing you people seem to know.