Tuesday, February 22, 2011

The Grand Junction, the Bad Guys, and Decent Human Beings

1. “Bad guys” is not effective language.
2. Flier proven correct.
3. Sources of condemnation of state not reliable.
4. MassDOT contrasted to Cambridge Pols.
5. Summary.

Some thoughts on the last week or so.

1. “Bad guys” is not effective language.

I got the following response on facebook after reporting of ongoing attempts to destroy the banks of the Charles River by the bad guys with regard to the small vehicle highway they are trying to create by destroying the banks of the Charles, along with the environment and animal habitat:


Maybe calling people you disagree with "bad guys" is not the most effective approach. Just a thought.


It is not a matter of “disagree”ing. It is a matter of people lying about which side they are on and proceeding all too consistently in the opposite direction from their lovely words.

The bad guys own politics in Cambridge so extensively that they have well intentioned people apologizing for standing up for what the bad guys claim to stand for. You might embarrass the bad guys by proving them liars.

Normal behavior by people who sound like the Cambridge Pols is the kind of behavior that the Boston Conservation Commission indulged in when the BCC ordered a playground draining into the Boston Harbor to use poisons only to get new grass started but prohibited them afterwards.

Asking for this sort of thing in Cambridge is done with an apology because the wink and the nod is normal. If you ask for properly and meaningfully environmental behavior, you might be offending somebody.

The Boston Conservation Commission favorably to my pointing out the drainage problem in spite of the fact that I live nowhere near the project and, in fact, do not even live in Boston.

2. Flier proven correct.

Thursday night at the DOT presentation on the Grand Junction, I distributed a flier from Friends of the White Geese that I had previously distributed at a city council discussion of the commuter rail plans for the Grand Junction. The flier was very deliberately targeted at the Cambridge Pols and did not attack the state.

I had Cambridge types ask why I was not attacking the state. I was not attacking the state because I had not seen anything with my own eyes which amounted to misbehavior by the state.

3. Sources of condemnation of state not reliable.

The one really strong condemnation of state action by a non City Council person came from one person talking at the city council meeting. He claim that he was quoting what amounted to pretty negative words on the part of the state. But as for that guy:

A. He has a bad record,
B. He emphasized to me his displeasure at my standing up to destructive behavior by him and his friends
(1). They proposed two big buildings and a plaza between the big buildings to replace the Lechmere Station facility which is being abandoned in the Green Line extension project.
(2). Their pitch amounted to: Don’t look at the big buildings, look at the plaza between the buildings, we are proposing open space.
(3). This is stereotypical Cambridge Pol. The alternative IS open space for the entire Lechmere Station parcel, so they proposed two buildings and call their project open space because they did not propose to cover every single square foot of the lot.
C. That guy thinks the Cambridge Pols are good guys.

I would think that that person is a victim. The knaves would never be so blunt. But victim or not, in Cambridge victim/knave is irrelevant, unless the victim shows some sort of semblance of realizing that he/she is a victim of a very nasty con.

And I can go on and on about this normal situation in the very abnormal City of Cambridge.

This person, plus members of the Cambridge City Council are my only sources for thinking negative things about the Department of Transportation (MassDOT) with regard to the Grand Junction.

4. MassDOT contrasted to Cambridge Pols.

My public comments to the MassDOT representatives at the Thursday meeting started: What I am hearing from you now is quite a bit different from what I have been hearing before.

In front of and by the City Council, the pitch is that commuter rail on the Grand Junction is a done deal. The right kind of people want it. I have seen this pitch repeatedly in the past. So my flier emphasized that the Cambridge Pols are losing in their transportation outrages and that their Grand Junction fight looks like an end around after a major loss.

The standard pitch from the Cambridge Pols is: “You can’t win. You can’t win. You can’t win. But I am your friend and have I got a deal for you.”

The MassDOT people very clearly said on Thursday evening that they are at a very preliminary stage and are only looking into possibilities of running Framingham/Worcester trains to North Station by the Grand Junction. Meaningful proposals, if any, would be presented later. They were repeatedly very reasonable. And they are not the Cambridge Pols.

The Cambridge Pols fought to keep Memorial Drive in the hands of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, proven REALLY bad guys. The Cambridge Pols fought to keep Memorial Drive away from MassDOT.

Cambridge City Councilors, according to the admission at the City Council meeting by perhaps one of the worst, are playing their usual lying through fake definitions. Cambridge City Councilors (exact number to be determined) “oppose” commuter rail. “Oppose” under their secret definition (i.e. lie) translates into they support for the commuter rail with stops in Cambridge.

The bad guys have suffered a major defeat with the legislature funding Yawkee Station to the tune of $20 million.

The bad guys can lose and frequently do.

The biggest mistake in dealing with the bad guys, the Cambridge Pols or whatever they call themselves this week, is to be so silly as to call them anything other than bad guys, or to be so silly as to think they / their secret friends can’t lose. The Cambridge Pols are highly skillful with a knife in the back. Over the years, in my experience, a knife in the back has been their most successful weapon.

5. Summary.

Nevertheless, regardless of who is the bad guy, even if the DOT people are commendable individuals, they have a job to do. And the Cambridge Pols have a long record of conning people into working against their own best interests.

The DOT people possibly could be persuaded by people who have been told they have to get what they can get. Con artists are running telling people they have lost, and have the Cambridge Pols got a deal for them.

The proposal for Commuter Rail on the Grand Junction is dangerous to the environment and to its animals. It is destructive to Cambridge and to Framingham/Worcester.

Additionally, the Cambridge Pols’ Grand Junction plans are about a Century behind times from the point of view of transportation planning with all those at grade crossings.

More than a century. I remember the Brockton station was reopened in the late 90's after being abandoned in the 50's. Right next to the station is a rail overpass which I think was built in the 1890's to keep trains and other transportation apart.

But the Cambridge pols want transportation for Cambridge which was rejected in the 19th Century, and they are running around yelling “You can’t win. You can’t win. You can’t win. But have we got a deal for you.”

Remember, however, many of the people on the wrong side brag about having 19th Century planners as their ideals.

Commuter Rail on the Grand Junction should be defeated.

And the Cambridge Pols should be stomped.