radarrider: (Default)
[personal profile] radarrider
  • 15:05 One of the most heartwarming things you'll see today. An 8-month-old baby hears for the first time: bit.ly/dj4AG8 #
  • 16:38 notes that reducing travel times for non-HOV traffic is not a consideration in the design of this project: bit.ly/atsq8q #
  • 08:32 Regardless of what you think of the man and his policies, this is hilarious: bit.ly/dzwbxu #
  • 08:49 Carrie Fisher has gone through a lot. Doesn't mean she's not ignorant (see last two questions): bit.ly/9DtyAu #
Automatically ship
ped by LoudTwitter
Date: 2010-06-15 06:40 pm (UTC)

technoshaman: Tux (Default)
From: [personal profile] technoshaman
Well, no, they're not building additional GP lanes on 520. Doing so would simply put additional stress on the system - it's not like they'd be adding additional capacity on I-5 or I-405 to take the traffic coming off... I-5 in particular is over capacity as it is. The idea of this project is to encourage folks to do something OTHER than sit there all by their lonesomes in conveyances designed for four to six passengers, spewing pollution and wasting time. There are a bazillion ways to do this: Bus, vanpool (both of which, in Seattle, come with Guaranteed Ride Home - if you have an emergency and need to get back to your car across the water, you can do so for free, via city-provided taxi scrip), motorcycle, bicycle, and (if the darn thing actually works) eventually, light rail.

Actually, the reduction in travel times for non-HOV traffic will, for ten years or so, be a side effect: Starting in 2011, 520 will be a toll bridge, and folks will choose alternate routes in order to not spend the additional semolians getting across.

What I think is a shame is that HOV traffic isn't going to be toll-free. They do that in San Francisco... if you have three or more on the Golden Gate, you don't have to pay. (Which has resulted in an unofficial bus system... folks congregate at designated pickup points, other folks pick them up, go across toll-free, then drop them at their workplaces... it's all web-coordinated...)

But, no, srsly. No capacity left at the endpoints; no point in increasing capacity on that which connects them. One thus has to promote HOV, or start building camp-out facilities on the bridge...
Date: 2010-06-15 06:41 pm (UTC)

technoshaman: BMW Motorrad (beemer)
From: [personal profile] technoshaman
(of course, I do have an ulterior motive for promoting HOV-toll-free :)
Date: 2010-06-16 03:51 am (UTC)

draconis: Default icon (Default)
From: [personal profile] draconis
Carrie Fisher's last two questions... the fact that she wants to meet Obama and dislikes the Teabaggers means she's ignorant?

Date: 2010-06-17 04:33 am (UTC)

draconis: Default icon (Default)
From: [personal profile] draconis
> Not that she wants to meet Obama but she "loves him" and is "happy he exists." No mention of why, no
> mention of whether or not she agrees with his policies. Only adoration.

She was asked if there was anyone she'd like to meet that she hasn't. She wasn't asked about her thoughts on his policies, etc. The fact that she didn't discuss those topics didn't mean she doesn't have an opinion on them.

> She is also ignorant in that they do not refer to themselves as "teabaggers."

The exact quote:
Yup, and the fact that they chose to call themselves "teabaggers," [emphasis mine]

Chose. Past tense. No indications about what they call themselves now.

> I'm told that a few may have used that term not knowing its other meaning.

A few may have used that term? Considering that I can remember hearing TV spokesmen from (I believe) Fox News referring to "teabagging the White House," I strongly suspect it was more than a few.

> As you have repeated the insult with your use of the term "teabaggers" I think you owe me, my
> family, and the other good people who are members of that movement an apology.

Ummmm... no.

First, that is the most commonly-used term I've heard for that particular group of people. What is the "politically correct" term? Tea-partiers?

Second, while anyone can choose to take offense at just about anything, that is not the same thing as intentionally giving insult. I would hope you'd know me well enough by now to know that an off-hand comment like that had no intent of insult behind it. So while I am sorry that you, your family, and the other members of that movement might take offense at my use of that term... I'm afraid I find no cause for offering an apology for what I said.
Edited Date: 2010-06-17 04:45 am (UTC)


radarrider: (Default)

August 2010

123 4567
15 161718192021
29 3031    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 09:42 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios