Central Corridor dead - or alive?

[Myself]

Bob ('s Alter Ego),

I'm completely flabbergasted that you and others find it completely acceptable to deny a very large and significant constiuency any representation in state government based on the majority control of the legislature. First, it is completly counter to the very concept of democrazy and the constitution of the united states. Second, it demonstrakes the complete lack of respect that you have for anyone with a different perspective and opinion than yourself. Lastly, the Governor won the election regarldess if he had the popular vote or not (which I honestly do not know and doubt you do either, but it doesn't really matter in any case). So, no, it's not a ridiculous point. It is a very valid point and you are simply a ridiculous jerk.

Regarding the Governor motives, I am simply reciting what the Governor has been quoted as saying in the paper so I don't claim to know his motives, only what he has stated publicly. You can call me arrogant for having the ability to read and recite if that helps you rationalize your self serving opinions.

Regarding the DFL working with the Governor "Alot". That is complete BS. The Governor (representing his significant constiuency) has publicly identified his priority to hold down taxes and spend within the states (already considerable) means. I would challenge you to show me ONE example where the DFL has made ANY effort to compromise with Pawlenty in this regard.

Regarding stubborness. Pawlenty's initial support for the central corridor project and his public pre-session press conference where he indicated that he would be willing to work with the DFL to raise the gas tax and better fund transportation IF they would be willing to make other tax/spend cuts to offset the tax. Most say that would not be possible and that is probably true, however, that position DID represent an offer to compromise and communicated a starting point for negotiations. Had the DFL been willing to negotiate, we could have probably gotten the tax/transportation funding increase AND offset at least a portion of the additional tax burden that it represents for the public. How did the DFL respond, they basically told him to get lost by crafting a bill that made no tax/spend consessions and pursing an override strategy by enticing the few GOP'ers they needed for the override with district incentives. Quite slimy, stubborn and in no way compromise or working with the Governor. Further, who was playing politics here, the individual that offered to negotiate and compromise, or the leaders that choose to ignore the offer and override?
Bob is a Jerk who rationalizes his and his party's adhorant behavior and complete lack of respect for much of the population of Minnesota (majority or not).

It's quite alright, I suspect that the public will address this issue in November anyway. There's a relative few jerk's out there like yourself and a considerably larger population of people who actually have the ability to conduct themselves as a respectfull adult. This was proved by recent poll numbers that put Pawlenty's approval rating in the 50's and the legislatures in the 30's.

[What]

Myself wrote:

Bob ('s Alter Ego),
Lastly, the Governor won the election regarldess if he had the popular vote or not (which I honestly do not know and doubt you do either, but it doesn't really matter in any case).

FYI - Pawlenty received only 46.7% of the vote.

[Myself]

What wrote:

<quoted text>
FYI - Pawlenty received only 46.7% of the vote.

So then 46.7% of the public doesn't deserve representation in state government?

Hmmm. I didn't that Democrazy worked that way.

[John C]

for all of you that keep on bringing up the operating cost of the Light Rail, when are you going to finally start paying your share of driving your private cars on the public roadways in this state. And if you think you are, you are totally brainless. Why the &^%$%&* am I being FORCED to pay for a private place of business that isn't going to benefit anyone other than the owners, their employees, and their fanatic fans, but something that is actually going to benefit the entire Twin Cities, and the state, is looked at as if it is too expensive. Yet we also continue to throw billions of dollars on yet more pavement that is just going to get us deeper in gridlock with no more open ground.

[What]

Myself wrote:

<quoted text>
So then 46.7% of the public doesn't deserve representation in state government?
Hmmm. I didn't that Democrazy worked that way.

Just stating a fact is all.

[bill m]

the reason we have poverty in this country is lazy people and a feeling of entitlement. Add to that liberals that reward that behavior.

[bobs_alter_ego]

Myself wrote:

<quoted text>
So then 46.7% of the public doesn't deserve representation in state government?
Hmmm. I didn't that Democrazy worked that way.

Like I said, the governor has every right to represent his interest and the interest of those who elected him. The legislature also has the right to override his veto and make decisions that benefit their constituents. Nobody did anything wrong in any of these cases, but what the governor did was unnecessary.

How am I the jerk? I'm not the one trying to make an entire political party look uncooperative. We have checks and balances for a reason and the DFL leg. used them to override a veto. Now the governor is mad. So what? 66% of the legislature is a big majority and they recognized the need to inject funding into transportation based on many non-partisan reports and studies. I don't understand how anything I've said makes me a jerk. I'm just stating that the governor is reacting poorly to being overridden and resorting to vengeful actions (he's done other things than just this to seek revenge). I think that's un-American. No legislature would budge to a governor if they had a veto-proof majority, even a Republican one. People can whine and throw out terms like "tax and spend liberals," but they were elected.

[Smokey the Bear]

John C wrote:

but something that is actually going to benefit the entire Twin Cities, and the state, is looked at as if it is too expensive.

Could you please explain to me how light-rail is going to benefit me? I live in southern MN, I don't go to the cities except may be a concert every few years. I would just really like to know how light-rail can benefit me. Thanks!

[Concerned in Twin Cities]

mixed wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe you're too stupid to apply for a loan to go to school and work multiple jobs to pay for living expenses while going. I have a Master's Degree now and think it is even more important to the area that we have a good university with an attractive campus and good transportation options. FYI: I worked evenings in St. Paul while going to the U and living near the campus.

No sweetie. I don't have to work. I'm independently wealthy.

[mixed]

Smokey the Bear wrote:

<quoted text>
Could you please explain to me how light-rail is going to benefit me? I live in southern MN, I don't go to the cities except may be a concert every few years. I would just really like to know how light-rail can benefit me. Thanks!

The Twin Cities are the economic hub for our state and generates the taxes that disproportionately build the roads you drive on and other services, education and bonding projects you may enjoy. A healthy and competitive Twin Cites helps the whole state. The light rail can bolster the University of Minnesota, increase business and personal tourism, make the area more inviting to those who might want to start or move businesses here etc. Cities like Denver with a light rail system and Seattle with a monorail system are competitors for jobs and capital with the Twin Cities. The Twin Cities can get competitive or fall further behind.

Note: This last week Republicans have stated that they are willing to talk about light rail in the budget negotiations, meaning that the veto was a political move to make light rail a bargaining chip.

[Franklin Adams]

mixed wrote:

<quoted text>
The Twin Cities are the economic hub for our state and generates the taxes that disproportionately build the roads you drive on and other services, education and bonding projects you may enjoy. A healthy and competitive Twin Cites helps the whole state. The light rail can bolster the University of Minnesota, increase business and personal tourism, make the area more inviting to those who might want to start or move businesses here etc. Cities like Denver with a light rail system and Seattle with a monorail system are competitors for jobs and capital with the Twin Cities. The Twin Cities can get competitive or fall further behind.
Note: This last week Republicans have stated that they are willing to talk about light rail in the budget negotiations, meaning that the veto was a political move to make light rail a bargaining chip.

Hmm. Intersting. Please elaborate on how LRT will:
1. Bolster the U of M
2. Increase business and personal tourism
3. Make the area more inviting for starting or moving business here.(not going to happen with MN tax rates, I moved my business out of state alread).

[Concerned in Twin Cities]

mixed wrote:

<quoted text>
The Twin Cities are the economic hub for our state and generates the taxes that disproportionately build the roads you drive on and other services, education and bonding projects you may enjoy. A healthy and competitive Twin Cites helps the whole state. The light rail can bolster the University of Minnesota, increase business and personal tourism, make the area more inviting to those who might want to start or move businesses here etc. Cities like Denver with a light rail system and Seattle with a monorail system are competitors for jobs and capital with the Twin Cities. The Twin Cities can get competitive or fall further behind.
Note: This last week Republicans have stated that they are willing to talk about light rail in the budget negotiations, meaning that the veto was a political move to make light rail a bargaining chip.

Those who want light rail might defend it in the same manner as you have. I've been around long enough to know that too many projects that were "supposed" to do all the same things you're talking about never lived up to the expectations and the taxpayer ended up paying through the nose to support it. Light rail can't support itself if no one rides it. Explain to me why every time I've seen light rail it's never carrying any passengers. I'm not willing to pay for a nice cushey ride for a college student who doesn't get that.

[Kates]

Franklin Adams wrote:

<quoted text>
Hmm. Intersting. Please elaborate on how LRT will:
1. Bolster the U of M
2. Increase business and personal tourism
3. Make the area more inviting for starting or moving business here.(not going to happen with MN tax rates, I moved my business out of state alread).

next our goverment will invest in ethonal and starve kids of food and then make us you those mandated mercury laden compact florescent light bulbs-wait we are already doing that.

[Kates]

The say the mercury is not a "grave danger" -that makes us all feel better.

I can handle it being dangerous not not gravely.

[Kates]

The U of M recently gave away 10,000 mercury laden compact florescent bulbs...they will end up in the trash someday....

sigh