Uncle Ben Bernanke gives you access to CHEAP credit!

 

Hopefully, this is not our future weather here in Portland this weekend.

Pulitzer Prizes could be handed out to Web based commentary?

(I first found this at Greg Sandoval's article here: http://tinyurl.com/6blocd )

(You may find the original and full text of the press release here: http://tinyurl.com/6hwpkj )

Quoting the Pulitzer Press Release:

"New York, Dec. 8, 2008 – The Pulitzer Prizes in journalism, which honor the work of American newspapers appearing in print, have been expanded to include many text-based newspapers and news organizations that publish only on the Internet, the Pulitzer Prize Board announced today.

The Board also has decided to allow entries made up entirely of online content to be submitted in all 14 Pulitzer journalism categories.

While broadening the competition, the Board stressed that all entered material -- whether online or in print -- should come from United States newspapers or news organizations that publish at least weekly, that are "primarily dedicated to original news reporting and coverage of ongoing stories," and that "adhere to the highest journalistic principles.”

Consistent with its historic focus on daily and weekly newspapers, the Board will continue to exclude entries from printed magazines and broadcast media and their respective Web sites...."

So they're now allowing serious online context and content?

Interesting because with the floundering of newspapers locally, state wide and nationally, the web may finally have found a place amongst the more serious journalistic efforts of the Seattle Times, Post Intelligencer, Washington Post, Portland Oregonian and many other sources.

The newspapers have been fighting for market share against some amazingly formidable foes that can create a simple web blog from many different sources. (See Google.com for more information.) with only a click and a whimper.

Some online sources do not even cost a dime to post under but do have some minor clauses under their Acceptable User Policies. (No profanity, No adult material or pornography or advertising. See the web hosting site's policy for more information.)

So I hope in the future, the Pulitzer prizes will go to video, audio and many other forms of very valid of forms of journalism that may finally put a coffin in the paper form of news for once and for all.

Covering the Project Sponsorship council (live)

So I have began to wonder since the Columbia River Crossing Task Force folded this summer into a small, ten member "project sponsorship council meeting" with equal amounts of public and private interest, why it was not covered by the local news media or video taped for rebroadcast on the local cable televisions stations in Oregon or Washington?

And why it is that there is getting such minimal coverage of the Final DEIS process and study that could shape this region for a hundred years because of one bridge?

Am I personally missing some thing or has the media simply not cared to cover a four billion dollar project (or could be sharply higher..)

Ok, folks, I would like to see some coverage of this vital transit, commuter and freight connection between the Portland and Vancouver.

Or does Portland want the freight want to bypass this clogged artery, go through Longview-Kelso and over the Lewis and Clark Bridge to Highway 30, then come into Portland with a less clogged way?

Is the Port of Portland close to this major link between Clatskanie, Vernonia, Astoria and many other columbia river towns on the Oregon side?

Guys, its time to wake up and smell the roasting morning coffee. because if you do not put pressure on the media and find out what is going on with your bridges, it will be done for you.

Amanda Fritz is asking these questions

From Amanda's blog:

"* How does this proposed new bridge relate to other regional transportation needs?

* Do we really support allocating $4.2 billion in federal, state, regional and local money to this project, over the needs of Portland?

* How confident are we in the $4.2 billion estimate?

* Are there other more cost-effective alternatives?

* What about regular rail rather than light rail?

* Why require local traffic to use the Interstate highway rather than providing an arterial bridge connecting North Portland and Vancouver?

* How are six lanes each way on the bridge going to funnel down to three lanes on either side without causing accidents and congestion?

* In approving this bridge, is Portland saying we willing to destroy homes and businesses in North, Northeast, and Southwest Portland in the future, to widen I-5 through the city?

* Did you know that any one of six jurisdictions can veto this project?"

Now I do understand that there is some concerns and that have ben going on throughout the Columbia River Crossing process. (For which I have been following for nearly three years ping and pong from information sessions, supplemental DEIS sessions to the 40 member task force that was charged to whittle down thirty nine proposals down to four. And get those build options into the next study session with ten members.)

Yes, according to one session, this process could be killed by one of the five main principals. Metro, WashDOT, Federal highway or transit, or RTC on the Vancouver side.

But I don't think that any other agency would kill this process after the 100+ million dollars that has been spent on the study, the amount of participation by both side of the columbia river towns, counties, metropolitan planning organizations, transit agencies, tribes, environmental groups and many others who have worked tirelessly on behalf of their individual causes and concerns.

There is some hope from the columbia river crossing folks and associates that the federal government will take up a part of funding for this project to move it forward.

With a projected five billion dollar budget short fall on the Washington side (current year 2008-10 biennium) and at least two billion dollar short fall in the state of Oregon, does one think that tolls will basically be the main way this bridge will be paid for and built?

There are elements amongst the Washington state (Counties on this side) that are feeling they are getting tired of being sucked dry by the state of Oregon's progressive tax structure that give them no say in how it is spent or used.

With tolls, they feel they are being sacked even harder, because most of their jobs, employment or opportunities are on the Oregon side of the river. (Yes, there are some opportunities for Oregonians who might have a job, business or employment on this side of the river. But it tends to be 1 Oregonian vs. 10 Washingtonians going to jobs on the oregon side.)

The City of Vancouver's Mayor has a quote (paraphrased here) about "being the second biggest tax paying town in Oregon." (though we're in the state of Washington.)

Now how does this all work for the columbia river crossing? There is still much debate going on about the future of this crossing. Who is going to end up paying the full bill. Will it be taxpayers from Federal, state or local sources, tolls or may be some minimum grants?

The city of Vancouver hosts an updates on its website

For those who follow the Columbia River Crossing Project process rather religiously or semi-consciously (even during the project sponsorship sessions.)

You may want to have this on your refresh screen.

http://www.cityofvancouver.us/crc.asp

Missile defense systems

For more information and the article, please see this link:

http://tinyurl.com/58uw2a

"Anne Scott Tyson, Washington Post

...Friday's test was the 13th of its kind since 1999, part of a missile defense program that has cost approximately $100 billion, according to Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman.

The test cost about $120 million. The systems tested were similar to those the U.S. military deploys or will deploy in Japan and Poland, O'Reilly said.

"The geometry of a launch from North Korea to the U.S. is very similar to Kodiak off the coast of California," he said. The radars used to track the missile were the AN/TPY-2 radar located in Juneau, Alaska; a U.S. Navy Aegis BMD ship with SPY-1 radar; the Upgraded Early Warning Radar at Beale Air Force Base, Calif.; and the Sea-Based X-band radar."

(This is just a snippet of the full article.)

I thought this was a wonderful display of our new multi-billion dollar missile defense shield and a successful test. With more and more nations building rocket based systems, it will just be a matter of time before they try and aim some of those rockets on us or other nations around the world.

Some times being a person who is anti-nuclear, anti-military or anti-DOD does not seem to understand that we live in a world that is dangerous and some nations will take advantage of another nation just because it can with arms.

Also more and more nations are building weapons or missile weapon systems that can put nuclear weapons on top for an even deadlier strike.

The nuclear non-proliferation treaty which many nations are signed up is not going stop a smaller nation or a group of nations from trying to develop weapons that are just above the grade scale of Weapons of Mass Destruction Index. (my own personal index.)

It just above exposing masses of people to anthrax, VX or some other biological weapon but most biological weapons eventually due degrade. Whereas a Nuclear weapon (from my own knowledge) will have an effect for many, many generations to come. Not just decades or a century but even longer.

Now one can try to clean up a weapons area by placing fill or block off an area, create mythos, stories that might teach future generations of what happened.

But will this actually prevent a nation in the present from trying to develop measures or counter measures to this threat that will just kill more people in the future?

Look, this new defensive missile system will just start a new war-on-terror or cold war that lasted nearly fifty years as Russia and China are making their moves to protect themselves against our building of this system.

Was it not Russia who was sending bombers and emissaries to Venezuela or other South American countries that could be used as a future launchingpad against the United States in case we did respond.

How would you like offensive missiles and anti-ballastic defensive missile systems on your door?