Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Leading GOP (and Tea Party) candidate for CO governor joins the fruit and nut brigade against transportation choices

The leading candidate for the GOP nomination for the Colorado governorship is speaking out against U.N. control of our cities. At issue is the ICLEI, the International Council for Local Environmental Issues, a UN group of mayors and cities for discussing and sharing ideas on sustainable development and good practice. Dan Maes is giving the mayor of Denver heat for instituting several initiatives to encourage bicycle riding including a new bike sharing program that is similar to the successful Velib system in Paris.

Maes, at the rally July 26, took aim at Denver's bike-sharing program, which he said was promoted by a group that puts the environment above citizens' rights.

The B-Cycle program places a network of about 400 red bikes for rent at stations around the city. It is funded by private donors and grants.

Maes said ICLEI is affiliated with the United Nations and is "signing up mayors across the country, and these mayors are signing on to this U.N. agreement to have their cities abide by this dream philosophy."

The program includes encouraging employers to install showers so more people will ride bikes to work and also creating parking spaces for fuel-efficient vehicles, he said.

Apparently sharing ideas with other cities and international cities in un-American. Apparently, spending some city tax dollars on programs for people who choose not to use cars and not to use the roads is tantamount to installing communism in America. Apparently if a UN organization hatches a good idea, and some of our cities decide to adopt it, we are signing over our rights to the UN. We are free Americans with choice and freedome and we have the right to drive automobiles. Other methods of transit, nope, those are outlawed by the constitution...or something...

"At first, I thought, 'Gosh, public transportation, what's wrong with that, and what's wrong with people parking their cars and riding their bikes? And what's wrong with incentives for green cars?' But if you do your homework and research, you realize ICLEI is part of a greater strategy to rein in American cities under a United Nations treaty," Maes said.

It has to be assumed that if a city decides not to use an idea hatched in this special UN organization, black helicopters will rein down and UN troops will suck our brains out with straws. They will enforce the non-treaty with the same super world power that stopped the genocide in Sudan and took nuclear weapons out of the hands of Iran and N. Korea.

While this appears to be a kooky argument, what must be taken seriously is how many politicians (usually on the right) look down upon any sort of transportation infrastructure that does not involve an internal combustion engine. The whole issue of transportation alternatives like bikes and rail is that they give us choices, where cars are only one choice and one that is expensive and marred by traffic. And since a bicyclist is still a tax payer, one should demand that tax money is not only spent to subsidize driving. If we stopped subsidizing car infrastructure and made the system pay-as-you-go, the other alternatives would look a lot more popular. Having the government pay for only one choice sounds a lot like the communism that paranoid crazies have been accusing of the Democrats.

The subsidies for motor vehicle travel are numerous and fully supported by conservative policies. This is, sadly, another area where somehow I am at odds with conservatives when the issue itself should transcend the conservative-liberal spectrum. With crazy arguments like the above, how can I be reasonably expected to listen to the other side?

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Karl Rove Still Master of Propaganda

Last night, Karl Rove, former Bush adviser and architect of the Bush years--and what a success those were--was heckled out of a book signing for his literary triumph. His response to the vibrant protests:

Rove, who defended his administration's stance on several controversial issues in heated exchanges with other critics, said the interruptions reflected the "totalitarianism of the left."

"They don't believe in dialogue. They don't believe in courtesy. They don't believe in First Amendment rights for anyone but themselves," he said.

Though ironic, this statement reflects what Rove has been doing all along with the Bush administration. Basically accusing his opposition of doing exactly what he is doing; it is so maddening because the counter argument is, "no I'm not, you are." It's a first strike of propaganda that was a basic principle dating years back, the bigger the lie the better. Rove is an excellent liar.

During the Bush years, protest was squashed at any public appearance by Bush. They were rare, but when the audiences were chosen, they were required to promise fealty to the conservative right and master Bush. Talk about a lack of first amendment rights; these were public speeches by our President.

Rove is a master at using an offensive strategy of outright bullshit that is so far from reality that it is almost impossible to formulate a response.