For some on the left, the idea that anyone could every oppose them on principle is just too much to handle. Many seem to prefer to blame “big money” outsiders for opposing them due to sheer greed and nefarious intent. That is of course the role of the Koch Brothers for many on the left these days including the folks at StreetsBlogUSA where a post recently claimed “Koch Brothers Tentacles Reach Out to Squelch Albuquerque Bus Rapid Transit.”
True, the Rio Grande Foundation hosted transportation expert Randal O’Toole who is employed by the Cato Institute, a think tank in which the Kochs have played a significant role, but in the world of conspiracies, it is hard to see how the Koch Brothers would benefit from opposing a bus system in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Even more strange is the fact that the article states, “Even members of Urban ABQ (a local pro-transit group) have some concerns about the proposal, Majewski said. But they think the pros and cons should be discussed in an atmosphere that’s not tainted by O’Toole’s brand of propaganda.” So, it’s okay to oppose or bring up concerns, just not the kind O’Toole would bring up?
The good news is that, yet again, our enemies recognize the effectiveness of the Rio Grande Foundation. According to the article, “Despite the cartoonishness of O’Toole’s arguments, he and “Gussing” (a terrible mis-spelling of my name) are dominating the debate right now, says Dan Majewski of Urban ABQ, which represents downtown residents. A group of business owners along the corridor concerned with the removal of parking spaces and the disruption caused by construction are now aligning with the Rio Grande Foundation.”
It’s really funny because it is the government and the well-heeled development community that have been able to push this massive deformation of Central/Route 66 through the heart of Albuquerque to this point with little debate and no public votes on the plan’s merits while a small New Mexico think tank and a completely grassroots group of businesses located along the path of the planned project are fighting back.
Click the picture below to oppose this costly project.
And see the “scary” costumes that a liberal near you may be wearing on Halloween.
What impressed me is O’Toole’s point that the development credited to mass transit in other cities is subsidized by government bonds and tax credits. So if development is the objective, why not just subsidize the development in the first place and forget about the mass transit?
It’s also telling that the proponents of the project fall into three categories: developers who will benefit from subsidies, politicians, and urban planners who believe everyone should live in European cities.
Paul: “Enemies?” Really? Instead of “People who disagree with us” or “Political Opponents” or “People with different ideas” or “People with a different perspective?” Wow! I’m sad to read that you feel that way. I’ve been clear that I disagree with statements you’ve made. i think you get some things wrong. Does that make me your “enemy?” I hope not. You’re better than that. For the record, I don’t consider you an “enemy.”
If you make good arguments even though I may disagree with them, that is “people from a different perspective” or whatever. If you attack us for inviting someone to speak in New Mexico for the simple reason of who pays their salaries without examining and offering a few pros and cons on our ideas, I consider those folks “political enemies.” Clearly, the StreetsBlog was of the latter.
With your permission, I’m going to place myself in your first category and say “Thank you.” Please let me know if that is an incorrect assumption.