Friday, June 07, 2013

As the funeral for the CRC Scam begins, Mike Briggs loses all touch with reality.

It's bizarre reading Mike Briggs' trip about the CRC Scam.

Even faced with reality, he continues to push his lies and distortions as if they genuinely reflected reality.  His points have been disproven repeatedly.  He doesn't care... it';s like he's in an alternative universe.

Here's his latest garbage from the article:
Speakers focus on CRC's impact on Thompson Metal Fab (with videos)

The company, east of Interstate 5 Bridge, is 'our Boeing,' legislator says .

Jeffrey Gibbons · Top Commenter
So while all of these wheels within wheels turn we still do not even have solid numbers as to how much CRC will cost us in the end. No final design. No investment grade study. No clue as to how much the tolls will end up being or if it will just be the I-5 that is tolled. No numbers on "mitigation". The list goes on and on...

All the while the CRC backers are clamoring for our State Senators to approve $450 million and give approval to the project. Are we nuts here? Until we get more coherent and reliable numbers nobody in their right mind should advocate approval of this project.

  • Roger Neilson · Top Commenter · Works at Mostly in and for US Army
    There are some who don't care how much it costs; they figure the people driving and paying tolls will bear that burden.

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    People who drive, who use the new I-5 bridge will help pay for it. Yep. You are right. But it will be ALL the people who use-- no matter where the come from nor where they are going to.

    The State of Washington does not have the funds to pay for it. The Federal Govt. is in the same boat..........BUT- the bridge needs replacing now.

    It's just reality.

    Pay now, and choke down LRT, or pay one heck of a lot more- with no mass transit, in the future. It's all right there. It ain't that difficult.

    And all the while, the bridge gets older, the traffic backs up more, and we just wait....

    for a truck or barge to bring it all down or

    the earth starts moving really hard-

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    Stick your head in the sand, or wait...
Of course, Briggs' babble here overlooks a couple of facts:

1.  Nobody asked us.

2.  The bridge we have now is paid for.

3.  The bridge we have now is safe: otherwise, it would have been closed.

4.  The replacement bridge scam is entirely the result of the loot rail extortion that people do not want.

Of course, Briggs lies when he stupidly says:
"The State of Washington does not have the funds to pay for it. The Federal Govt. is in the same boat..........BUT- the bridge needs replacing now"
Lat year alone, the federal government wasted $2.2 billion on the Obama scam... I mean, Obama phones.

So, first, the fed is NOT "in the same boat."  This exercise in social engineering is designed to force people out of their cars.  Otherwise, they could pay for all of this in a second.

And, of course, the self-imposed delusion that "the bridge needs replacing now" is an already proven lie.
 
Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
Ron- what part of Oregon's complete non-interested stance in a third bridge option is escaping you? (Without Oregon's buy-in- there will NOT be any 3rd bridge). The End.
Mike, what part of it's better to build the right project we actually need than the WRONG project you and the rest of the CRC Scammers WANT is escaping YOU?

Briggs goes on to lie:
.

Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
Here is a little wake up call for you Mr. Ley, Jeffrey and Mr. Bell... Oregon does not need a third bridge. Washington apparently thinks it does. Pretty simple economics here guys.

Oregon, (you know the entity that HAS to agree with your demands), they don't want a third bridge. But... they will work with you on a new I-5 bridge to replace the old one..."IF" you go along with LRT.

And the Feds, (you know, the ones with the lion's share of the money you will need)- they will Also go along with a new I-5 bridge, if you go along with the mass transit option you all picked back in 2008- and that was Light Rail.

And your personal ideas about the State of Oregon Mr. Ley- keep flying those planes cuz I don't think the Oregon Legislature is going to be hiring you anytime soon.

Do any of you really think you can simply make an entire State do as you wish?

But- if you wish to wait the six years Mr. Ley has dreamed up or much longer (now here, please remember how long this last effort took...) you may get your chance.

But 10 years, minimum, is a long, long time to wait in traffic or wait to see if the ground starts moving or a big truck decides to ram the bridge....

You really ought to look at the reality of this issue and work with that-
So many lies, so little time.

Briggs is one of those fringe-left whackers who would sell this community out by committing us to a project that our children's children will be paying off... long after that idiot is dead.

Oregon can be forced to take a third bridge much like Oregon is forcing Clackamas County to take loot rail.

Briggs, has, apparently never heard of this thing called "Congress."

Pass a bill requiring a 3rd Bridge... and Oregon would be forced to do it.  It's Congress' ballywick because it crosses a state line: thus, it's a federal issue, I-5 or no.

Another lie?
And the Feds, (you know, the ones with the lion's share of the money you will need)-
Of, course, with the fed providing $850 million out of the $5.5 BILLION or so this scam requires, that's HARDLY "the lion's share."  In fact, it's more like an American Standard kitten's share.

Next lie?
they will Also go along with a new I-5 bridge, if you go along with the mass transit option you all picked back in 2008- and that was Light Rail.
"We all" didn't pick spit.  The point is that loot rail is NOT required as a component of this bridge... Briggs knows this... but insists on continuing to lie about it.

And THIS moronic question?
Do any of you really think you can simply make an entire State do as you wish?
As much as Oregon wrongly believes they can do the same to us.

Since you asked.

And then this idiocy:
But 10 years, minimum, is a long, long time to wait in traffic or wait to see if the ground starts moving or a big truck decides to ram the bridge....
The bridge has been there since 1913 and has managed to avoid any of these phantom "truck hitting a bridge" fetishes he likes, and then, this moron fails to understand that the difference between the bridge we have now and the one he fantasizes over, besides light rail... is that now, people can sit in traffic occasionally for FREE, or they can pay the extortion known as a toll and THEN sit in traffic, because even the CRC admits that the new bridge will shave 1 minute off the commute.
You really ought to look at the reality of this issue and work with that-
And yet, he hypocritically fails to take his own advice.  How weird is that?

Jack Gale · Stevenson High School
Mr. Green, as I understand it, the feds did not specify light rail in their requirements for Federal money. They only specified rapid transit. Rapid bus transit would be much cheaper and much easier to be able to meet changing demographics.
Doing his imitation of lying scum once again, Briggs shows his ignorance of the Oregon Supreme Court decision that has clearly laid out that the entirety of this rip of is a loot rail scam.  So, when he stupidly babbles that  "ALL other options were discussed and vetted at length," he's either lying outright or ignorant.

NO OTHER OPTION WAS EVER VETTED.  NONE.

It was going to be in this location all along, because any other scam would have required a vote.  And it was ALWAYS about light rail.

And again, the idea that this extortion was "chosen?"  Chosen by WHO?  The people were never allowed any say on this... they've ignored us from the beginning... by policy.

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    Once the bridge is in place any thinking company would realize if it can, or cannot, place itself upriver of this bridge. And that is why we are now in the position to mitigate with this one, last, business that is impacted by the current bridge design. Other than the funding- this is the last hurtle to vault over for the people who desire a safe, effective, and NEW bridge to cross over the Columbia River.

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    The talk now, merely to stop mass transit coming to Clark County, is simply obstinance and bull-headed rhetoric ignoring the future and symbolizing an extreme polarizing political agenda. Mass transit is a good and quite necessary thing for any cities future.
Apparently, Briggs refuses to accept the fact that the state senate has killed this scam and it isn't GOING to be "built.''

The delusional world he lives in, where he doesn't give a damn about upriver commerce or construction... ever... combined with the stupidity of this lie:
Other than the funding- this is the last hurtle to vault over for the people who desire a safe, effective, and NEW bridge to cross over the Columbia River.
Provides a level of cluelessness that's the hallmark of the typical CRC Scammer.

There's nothing effective about this new scam.  We'll be wasting something in the vicinity of $450 million just for mitigation, money that hasn't been identified... a massive, unnecessary expenditure of money for what amounts to... nothing.

Briggs' next lie: providing only a single definition for mass transit (and that definition is loot rail) when, in fact, bus services are ALSO "mass transit" show that Briggs is engaging in "simple obstinance[sic] and bull-headed rhetoric ignoring the future and symbolizing an extreme polarizing political agenda."

Odd how he sums himself up so well.

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    Mr. Ley, the State of Washington is not about to be held hostage by any debt the State of Oregon is involved with over TRIMET. There is zero to suggest it will and this is merely a scare tactic.

    And a cheaper bridge- uh, have you checked with Oregon yet? NO LRT no bridge. Why cannot you accept or understand this fact?

    As for tolls, get ready, you will be paying tolls no matter what new goes over that river.

    No one, except maybe stubborn people, want to wait 10 years for another shot at a bridge. Can you even fathom what the cost will be at that time???

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    Roger Neilson, any new bridge will be tolled Roger. Nothing now is going to prevent that. You better get used to that.
The state of Washington IS being held hostage by Briggs' loot rail scam.

The fact that the scum in Oregon share Briggs' moronic view that we have to have loot rail on this bridge doesn't justify it in any way.

"no LRT, No bridge?"

Fine.  We're swell with that.

Ten years or ten THOUSAND years, it's far better to do the RIGHT project than it is to pay billions for the wrong project.

Further, Brigg's babble that any new bridge will be tolled is, as far as it goes, correct.  But since there won't be a new bridge in the present location of the I-5 Bridge, that will provide commuters with a choice: go over the 3rd Bridge and pay a toll, or go over the I-5 Bridge and don't pay a toll.  (There, I hope I explained that at a level Briggs could understand.)


Roger Neilson · Top Commenter · Works at Mostly in and for US Army
The CRC project needs to die; it is little more than an overly expensive conduit for a limited capacity light rail system, and does virtually nothing to increase the rate of traffic flow across the river. This mitigation issue is just one more example of knowing dollars will leave our community if the CRC is built as planned - we've yet to get any hard details on how it will bring business and income into the County. If Clark County is going to grow at the rate projected, our elected officials MUST be fighting for more bridges.

  • Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
    Roger, c'mon on now. this line... is getting way too old to use anymore-
    "it is little more than an overly expensive conduit for a limited capacity light rail system".

    It simply is not a true statement.
Unlike Briggs,  Roger IS, in fact, telling the truth.  An old truth is still a truth.  Briggs unsupported statement that it "simply isn't true" is as moronic as most of his babble.

And then this rank idiocy:

Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
Light rail with the current lines is a good start. New lines, longer trains, will come into place. Not to mention that the existing WA line will be made longer to reach even more SW Washington people in the future. The future gents is not just wider lanes, more gasoline consumed. No. it is a better way to move people around. LRT is a start. It is the future. Simply sticking your head in the ground is no good. Gasoline powered cars is already decreasing and for good reason. New technology will also be generated to come up with additional ways to move people around. Old gas cars will fade out. Not wise to just keep making more concrete roadways for cars that will go away sooner or later. It is better to plan for the future now- than let it hit you over the head later.

Metro is not the enemy and neither is Portland. 60,000 people a day who work there= say so.
Briggs cavalierly talks about wasting additional billions on more scams that the people of Clark County will never accept.  In fact, once we become a charter county, that will likely be the end of light rail, period.

Well, Briggs, WE are not the enemy, either.  But you damned sure treat those of us wise enough to disagree with your stupidity as if we are.
 
Mike Briggs · Top Commenter · Freelance Writer at Freelance Writer
I believe I am right. Back in 2008 the die was cast. I do not see that changing now. No one wants to wait another 10 years to do this whole mess all over again. Everything points to this happening. It just depends on Olympia and the reality of the issue as it is now.

Wait- and it will be A LOT MORE MONEY in the future.
"I believe I am right."

Idiots frequently do.

No "die" was "cast" back in 2008.  And proof of that is that the senate is UNcasting it.

Hundreds of thousands want to wait ten years or ten million years to avoid this massive rip off of a colossal waste of billions for a project we do not want, do not need, and cannot afford.

Mike Briggs has political aspirations, I'm told.  I'm cataloging much of this so I can politically beat him to death with it, to make sure he doesn't get elected dog catcher.

His words will haunt him.  I'll make sure of it.

3 comments:

Jack said...

Briggs is a real nut case.Unfortunately for him and his fellow nut case shills, the project is already quite dead.Briggs is so delusional, it's hard to feel any sympathy for the poor fool.

Anonymous said...

From my understanding the auto compontent of the project is roughly 2.5 billion with interchanges and all. The rail component is 850 mil which is covered by feds and hence no long term debt for residents for this component. I also understand that much of interchange work can be deferred until money is available. Since most mitigation is covered except for 1 business i dont understand what the holdup is.

K.J. Hinton said...

OK, a decent series of questions:

1. The best estimates for the entire project so far are about $5.5 billion. Oregon, we're told, has capped their part of this project at $450 million. The fed's cut is the $850 million.

That's a total of $1.3 billion, meaning we, essentially, are on the hook for the next 40 plus years of ever-increasing tolls.

2. For the commuter, that means $5.5 billion to, according to the CRC, take one minute off the commute.

3. Since the entirety of this project, start to finish, is about getting light rail into Clark County, and the people of this county don't want light rail, that's really the only thing that matters.

I, for one, don't care if the bridge is "free," its a waste of billions no matter the source. But in this case, we're smacking each commuter with around a $2000 bill each year for that one minute reduction in the commute.

4. To date, $250 million have been pledged for mitigation, with at least $200 million more on the hook for TMF.

Where is THAT money supposed to come from?

5. Why are we going to waste $50 million on mitigation when the bridge we have now works, is paid for, and is high enough that no litigation is needed?

6. Downtown Vancouver and the region around Cascade Central will be closed off for almost 6 years.

7. Small business depending on the $100,000,000 in disposable income per year or so that will vaporize in Clark County will be decimated.

People will have to make a choice: movie? or tolls? Restaurant? Or tolls? Pizza? or tolls?

Tolls would have to win.

8. This is a PARTICULARLY bad time for government arrogance.

No other option besides the tank job we have now was ever considered; no other location, no other mode of transportation like BRT was ever considered... and no public comments ever resulted in any changes being made.

http://clarkcountypolitics.blogspot.com/2012/10/crc-memo-ever-wonder-why-weve-never.html

The fact is that all of this "improvement" is being rammed down our throat entirely for light rail and light rail alone... and all without asking.

9. The bridge we have now is both functional AND safe. As a result, there's no need to replace it. The only viable alternatives are first, a 3rd and then a 4th bridge... and all without light rail.

There may be other reasons... but these are a start. Those typically on the pro-CRC side lie repeatedly about issues of safety, freight mobility and congestion relief, when the truth of the matter is contained in this decision from the Oregon Supreme Court, which says, in a nutshell, that the decision was made to stuff loot rail into Clark County and that "a new bridge was the price they had to pay to get light rail into Vancouver."

http://clarkcountypolitics.blogspot.com/2012/11/so-why-arent-we-allowed-to-vote-on-crc.html

That's why we keep hearing this "no light rail, no bridge" idiocy.

If, as we're told, the I-5 Bridge is "unsafe," then why is it being held hostage to light rail?

When one side has to lie to get their project built, then chances are it shouldn't BE built.

And since those shilling this project have lied about so many aspects of it, for so long... and since we now know the truth about all of this... well, that's what the hold up is.

Thanks for stopping by.