Soon the whole coast of maine will be finally be safe from even the rotten fishing boats that litter the elites' views, peace, and tranqulllity while sipping wine on thier million dollar back porchs over looking the Maine cost line.

"Really Bibby, now we have gotten rid of those nasty developers on Sears Isle who wanted to create jobs that pay better than cleaning our toliets at our summer cottage, so can we pleasssssssssssse stop those tasteless rust bucket tour boats that come by about martini time and blocks my views of the harbor seals too? And how are we on the petition to change the name of Sears Island lest our friends think we summer near Sears And Roebucks? And make sure you drop off the old summer wear from Beans we bought last season as we want to help out the local economy you know."

Fred, if you knew the economic situations of the people who have been fighting for the preservation of the largest unihabited island on the US Atlantic coast, you would not have written what you did.

Ding-Dong, you're wrong.

Is there any other coastal area on the mid-coast that could host a deep-water port besides Sears Island?

Sears Island needs a Wal-Mart and a McDonalds.

sears island needs a casino, a resort, and a cargo port!!! That combined should bring a s#$tload of jobs to the area!!!!

You know, living in this area, I see an awful lot of people who could use some real hope. They are workers - not complicated necessarily - but folks who would really welcome jobs that provide what so many of us already take for granted. Solidity. Stability. Health insurance. Respect. What is so wrong about giving this county something to be proud of and potentially giving this state something that could be used to generate revenue and even more trickle down jobs??? I live on the coast - always have - and I appreciate the beauty and the unique topography that we are accustomed to but I don't believe that anyone who cares (truly) about all of that would think that this deal is bunk. Perhaps it is because I don't have a house that will be imperiled by the iron boats out on the horizon while I barbeque but, I don't think so.

It is hilarious to read here you guys applauding Baldacci's executive order that enables this project to go ahead without proper permission. Most of the time he is treated on here like a retarded monkey but when he does something you think you'll you are happy as clams.

As for the island becoming a port that would supply "jobs, healthcare etc" to the area... WHAT ON EARTH DO YOU THINK OBAMA is talking about? Creating jobs while building infrastructure?

Everyone (except the NIMBY's) seem to be on the same page, but in different degrees of denial and bitterness about the past.

I don't think a deep water port will do too very much to stimulate the economy overall, but hey, what do I know. People need jobs in Maine. That much is true. It would be nice if there were more tech and "brainy" jobs in development, but I suppose one should take what one gets.

As for a casino on Sears Island; we know how well the Slots thing is going in Bangor. A CASINO??

Ugh.

Cargo port - resort... now there's some real thinkin'!

Troll.

"lady" slipper, that is a blatant lie. You disgust me. The anti-discrimination laws protect all of us. Obama is a Constitutional scholar. He would never stipulate that a contract go to one race or another.

Actually, I think a Nuclear Power Plant would improve the SkyLine on Sears Island

Would Maine be a good place to move in a new large base and transfer the closed military bases personnel and equipment to. Or is that not an option.

Ive never quite understood why Navy would want to go inland instead of Maine.I think closing the Bases was good ,but enlarging them near the borders makes sense. And would revive the areas if upgraded and planted in with housing ,trees, sewers,water facilities and soleil and wind power stations,

Just how badly off are you, ladyslipper? Are you on the streets? Do you or your kids go to bed hungry? First you were going on about what you consider the hoity toity upper class making decisions for you. Now it's blacks taking your highway flagger or steam-roller operator! You know as well as I do that government contracts, no matter what the program, out to the lowest and most practical bidders.

In other words, if some highway or bridge improvement project is happening in Maine, and you want a job there, you'll probably get it regardless of the color of your skin. White, Redneck *OR* Black.

UMM... THE ABOVE SHOULD HAVE READ:

"Now it's blacks taking your highway flagger or steam-roller operator JOBS!"

Anne: I did hear this on radio news the other day. But I rejected it as garbage as i only caught part of it. It appears I was wrong. I just did a search and the following is what I found.......

Robert Reich tells House panel stimulus package should emphasize 'social return' over worker skill....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: January 22, 2009

12:17 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Here are some quotes from the stimulus bill Congressional hearings.........

"I have nothing against white male construction workers," Reich said. "I'm just saying there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. "

.......... Robert Riech

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., appeared to agree, suggesting federal money be directed to specific groups of people.

The federal government, he said, must "remove the discretion" about where the funds go, or what projects would be involved, even to the point of eliminating any input from governors or state legislatures.

For Anne's benefit. Those are NOT my comments..... I did not write them. I took them from a web story.... That said that..... I had never before read a story from Worldnetdaily...So I checked them out. It looks like a very conservative newssource. Which would make the whole thing suspect to me had i not heard something similar on the car radio news.....on Friday. The above wasnt a convincing source for me .....therefore another source.

The following from The Phoenix Business Journal - story by Mike Sunnucks

Economist and former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich worries about too much of the Obama stimulus going to white males in the construction sector.

“If there aren’t enough skilled professionals to do the jobs involving new technologies, the stimulus will just increase the wages of the professionals who already have the right skills rather than generate many new jobs in these fields. And if construction jobs go mainly to white males who already dominate the construction trades, many people who need jobs the most -- women, minorities, and the poor and long-term unemployed -- will be shut out,” Reich said on his economic blog.

For Anne, this is me writing again...... There appears to be something to laddyslippers' comment....... and I would comment that apparently anti-discrimination laws only protect some of the people some of the tme... It all depends on the circumstance.

"Lady" slipper, you go ahead and believe that crap if it makes you feel like a big shot. You remind me of what someone else more clever than me said here a day or two ago: now that Obama is president, suddenly at the forefront of you mind are equal rights and ending the war. It's just laughable.

Uh... cut the racist crap... please... It about money being taken from one group and given to another. Even if that group is better less suited for the job...

not better..less suited

I am so sick of your conservative BS.

Here we go: CONSERVATIVE MEDIA FIGURES FALSELY SUGGEST THAT REICH PROPOSED EXCLUDING WHITE MALES FROM STIMULUS PACKAGE http://mediamatters.org/items/200901230015?f=h_latest

Oh I know, you'll say pshaw, media matters is so left wing, blah, blah, blah.

Anne... No one here said white males would be excluded, at least I didnt.... Rangel (D-NY) "suggesting federal money be directed to specific groups of people." Sounds PREFERENTIAL to me... and more than a tad discriminatory.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., ....must "remove the discretion" about where the funds go, or what projects would be involved, even to the point of eliminating any input from governors or state legislatures."

That sounds a bit dictatorial as the projects generally from federal funds are directed to the States for the use on projects at there direction. This makes it a centralized economy run from Washington and thats not a plan that historically has worked very well.

Robert Riech said and I quote...stated that the jobs created should not "simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers." Reich continued: "I have nothing against white male construction workers. I'm just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. And therefore, in my remarks I have suggested to you, and I'm certainly happy to talk about it more, ways in which the money can be -- criteria can be set so that the money does go to others: the long-term unemployed, minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals."

If jobs dont go to high skilled people as Mr Riech would like... would you travel over a bridge constructed by people that weren't highly skilled?

The issue at hand appears to be massive redistribution of wealth and historically this causes conflict, resistance,inflation and in certain places economic collapse.... Check out Zimbabwe when they took the farms from the previous owners and gave to less skilled farmers. A country that exported food , now has widespread starvation.

ladyslipper, it's nice to see you so concerned about racism when white people suddenly aren't guaranteed being first in line. You forget that racism played a HUGE part in that situation, so now that someone, (not even someone who is part of the Obama cabinet) suggests fair hiring practices, you, Rush, Hannity, (a confirmed fascist), and Malkin scream foul. I guess we should stick with the status quo and make sure that women and minorities are kept at the end of the line where they are the last hired and the first fired and are paid less for equal work. Being inclusive doesn't mean excluding anyone, all it means is that EVERYONE is included. From the Media Matters article, "Reich said then and has repeatedly stated that he favors a stimulus plan that 'includ[es] women and minorities, and the long-term unemployed' in ADDITION to skilled professionals and white male construction workers, NOT one that is limited to women and minorities." Go ahead and feed on the racist bile that Hannity, Limbaugh and Malkin spew. These "conservative" commentators are liars who are attempting to exploit differences for their own personal gain, nothing more, and when misinformed people like you become violent, they'll distance themselves from everything they've said and done, leaving you holding the bag.

BCB here is the quote..." Reich continued: "I have nothing against white male construction workers. I'm just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. And therefore, in my remarks I have suggested to you, and I'm certainly happy to talk about it more, ways in which the money can be -- criteria can be set so that the money does go to others: the long-term unemployed, minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals."

he didn't say in ADDITION to...

Looks like the facts scared some folks off.

anne of lies your'e the one full horses$$t as always.

Fine. All of you who want to foment a race war over this, have at it. And have fun. You are the real Americans.

bthanson you're a horse's ass.

Anne, You are the one who pointed out that the anti-discrimination laws were for everyone..No contract would go to someone based on race. Your words.... not mine. .... If those anti-discrimination laws worked like you said maybe that would be the case, instead we are faced with a possiblility of preferential distribution of $1.000,000,000,000.00 dollars. A distribution that possibly the Governors and legislatures of the States have NO say. A distribution of cash not based on a skill set for a specific project but on some other arbitrary criteria. This is, potentially, a calamity waiting to happen.

Vichet I really don't care what you have to say anymore. There are too many people posting here who attempt to make a racist argument no matter what the subject is. You know, "potentially a calamity waiting to happen" isn't policy, as you and others here suggest. And I'm confused. Was one of the beatitudes "Blessed are they who sow the seeds of racial hatred, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven"? Because with all the religious fundamentalism and racial hatred being posted on these blogs it has become difficult to separate the fundies from the racists. How soon you seem to have forgotten the billion-dollar, no-bid contracts that went to Cheney's white-owned companies to service the troops and re-build Iraq and New Orleans, courtesy of his good bud W. Maybe it was instances like these that inspired Robert Reich's comments.

It is difficult for you to differentiate between racists and others because that is how you see the world. If someone doesnt agree with you then they must be racist. I have seen some pretty horrid things said here but not all mention of race is "racist"...... And you even fall back to attacks on Cheney to legitimize your weak arguement that just last evening said wouldnt be possible because President Obama is a "Constitutional scholar." You change sides fairly quickly when you suddenly realize that it is possible. What a hypocrite.

"lady" slipper, don't bother to address me because I do not converse with trolls. Fine vichet, I'm a hypocrite, you're a racist. That's just fine. As I said before, I no longer care what you have to say. You can go on and continue to justify your hateful argument without me.

Now THE MAN is keeping Whitey down now.

See what I mean?

Everything cmes down to name calling with you doesn't it?

No Steveydee thats not what i am saying....

Vichet are you for real? Right, you didn't engage in any name-calling. I will not help you to continue to try to justify this hateful argument. What Robert Reich said isn't policy. Period. Yet you persist in trying to foment the notion that we all heard running up to the election, that Obama the Socialist will "spread the wealth" by giving it all to the poor, who just happen to be black and brown. Fine, go ahead and spread the lies, it doesn't make any difference. You and your racist friends will all go the way of the dinosaurs. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.

Its not YET policy.... Riechs comments were made in front of a Congressional panel deciding such things... Of course its not yet policy. I didnt say it was. But it well could be when the Stimulus package passes. Rangel who was on the committee is one of the people making those decisions. Why is it when you dont think its possible... it is against the "anti-discrimination laws" but when it is possible, everyone that opposes it is a racist? There are no lies here. I quoted people and gave sources. Those two, Riech and Rangel, in my opinion are advocating a redistribution of wealth. One trillion dollars is not chump change. Do you get the concept of how much money that is. If a dollar was one second ...a trillion of them would take us back over 30,000 years ago.

Thank you Anne. I completely agree with you

Vichet, Ladyslipper wrote "it is stipulated (in his economic stimulus pkg) that those contracts will not go to 'white' contractors." Then you wrote "I rejected it as garbage as i only caught part of it. It appears I was wrong..." It sounds to me like you were saying ladyslipper was correct in his assertion. Sounds to me like you were saying you were wrong about it not being policy.

Thank you, fearless.

No Anne....What I rejected and could not believe were the early news reports. I went and looked it up. (you said Laddyslipper lied about the plan) If you look at my comments you will see I never agreed with the Whites need not apply comments. I got multiple sources about the news story and drew my own conclusions .If you look at my points earlier in the thread...my biggest concern is that the Federal Government will control the economy. It is a redistribution of wealth (potentially). Not only that, but the notion that the States, Governors and legislators, will have no say on what the money is spent on. (Rangel said that) It sounds to me that with a trillion dollar price tag (1/13th of the GDP) controlled and distributed by Washington on money borrowed from China and the Oil countries sounds a great deal like a Centralized Government Run Economy to me. It has not worked in other countries and would not work here. Calamity would ensue. Thats the heart of my arguement.

I love that people not only believe everything they read/hear, but can also twist it so that it says what they want it to say.

"I have nothing against white male construction workers. I'm just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well." AS WELL. Get over it people. We have a bi-racial president. Are you going to sit around and bitch about that for the next four years, or are you going to be a part of this country and support our new president, as he is trying to adjust to a new, important and incredibly difficult job? He's not going to make sure black people get all of your money. And I think that what a lot of people aren't thinking about is that it takes more than just the President to make a law. So, calm down, don't worry about it, white people will have a say in it, too. Feel better now?

I said Ladyslipper lied and you disagreed with me. What am I missing here? Your argument is getting pretty mushy.

This was my initial comment...Anne: I did hear this on radio news the other day. But I rejected it as garbage as i only caught part of it. It appears I was wrong. I just did a search and the following is what I found....... Insert MY research here.... All Of Riechs and Rangel comments as well as sources.....End Insert..... Then I said .....For Anne, this is me writing again...... There appears to be something to laddyslippers' comment....... and I would comment that apparently anti-discrimination laws only protect some of the people some of the time... It all depends on the circumstance....." Which was a response to your comment about her lieing about whethersuch a plan was even on the table. You said.... "The anti-discrimination laws protect all of us. Obama is a Constitutional scholar. He would never stipulate that a contract go to one race or another. " Both Rangel and Riech both have indicated thats not the case and could be a determining factor. Therefore my comments.... Please Re-Read my comments all the way through..... I went on to say my concerns were about the centralizd nature of money distribution. Take my words at face value... I do that with you. Give me the benefit of the doubt that you expect from other people when you write. Please dont assume I am a racist when I've done nothing more than disagree with your take on things.

No, vichet, it's not because you disagreed with me. It's because you agreed with ladyslipper. You do realize he is a troll, don't you? And if you don't think supporting and trying to advance a racist argument is racist, then we don't speak the same language.

Gosh.... I think you are the bigot... a closet racist one who protests to much. ... I did not agree with her ( I assume female)> I did not support her comment I made my own.... I.... I am stunned...,.,. I am talking to an MDI smurf who has paranoid fantasies about whose name is whose... wheter they are male or female (as if that matters) calls people racists if views arent the same. married to a guy who believes Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened. (maybe even was a willing participant.) You two are just plain nuts and I'm a fool for talking to you. The two of you belong with one another. Someone down there should enable the parental controls on your internet access. Its like you go through life open to only two pieces of information and base your entire philosophy of life around those two pieces... All other people are racists and Bush is bad. You divide people into two camps and point the differences. You are just plain dumb for not understanding when the facts are laid out for you and I am also for even taking the time to explain it to you.

Vichet, you're right, I am a bigot when it comes to racists. If you're saying you did not initially agree with ladyslipper, then I apologize. It certainly looks as if you did. What is a smurf? If you don't believe ladyslipper is the troll, read this and decide for yourself. Be sure to read all the way to the end: http://bangornews.com/detail/96257.html

A smurf in my venacular is a petty, small minded person, not well travelled, therefore has limited vision and experience. (Two weeks in western europe do not make you a worldly person). You need to get off the Island more. There are more than two sides/views to the world. Also it is possible you are blue.

Vichet it's telling that the few things you think you know about me you have gleaned from Bob's posts. You have an odd way of filtering information and jumping to conclusions.

Anne, that was certainly good for a laugh.. However, at the end of it all I could see when I tried to read ladyslippers posts was "blah blah blah." Except, of course, my favorite moment when she stated that Sarah Palin is now one of her heroines. Oh, ok, ladyslipper. I'm not questioning your intelligence now!

Thanks again. And for anyone with an interest, Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote an excellent piece yesterday about Conservatives against the Stimulus at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/opinion/26krugman.html?_r=1&hp

I didnt know smurfs could read.

Hi, I'm Vichet. I never engage in name-calling.

You sarted it.

started

Good one Vichet.

What time does papa smurf get home from work?

Ah, Vichet, where were you when Bush, with Obama's support, bailed out the almost entirely white financial sector. There is a constitutional difference between knowing who would be impacted by a particular choice of discretionary funds and saying, as the mindless Ladyslipper does, that Obama is saying: "No whites need apply." Don't sink to her level.

Highway projects disproportionately benefit males; Wall Street bailouts disproportionately benefit white preppy males; aiding urban schools disproportionately affects blacks. This is a function of who works in each sector of the economy. Deciding to help out any of these areas of the economy is not illegal or improper unless it were limited to a gender or racial group within that subsector.

Reich, who is not even part of the Obama administration, was simply reflecting the demographics of each industry. No one is saying that financial aid would be limited to black bankers, construction aid to female workers, or urban school aid to white teachers.

The only affirmative action program left standing, given Supreme Court precedent, is affirmative action for the sons and daughters of weathy alumni, like the affirmative action that got George W. Bush into Yale because his old man went there.

If ever an election showed that a black had to be twice as smart and hard-working as a white to succeed in this country it was the last one, in which McCain, who was near the bottom at Annapolis, was viewed as more qualified by 46% of the electorate than Obama, who made Harvard's Law Review (usually reserved for the top 10% of a class) and was elected president of the review.

Besides my grandfather, who fought in the Vietnam War, I don't really have any specific names to give you. My heroes are all of the people who are caring, can think with an open mind, embrace diversity, and realize that in this world we are all different, and the color of our skin, our sexual preference, or gender has nothing to do with how capable you are as a human being, or what rights you should have. I am a straight, white female. I, fortunately, have not had to face challenges of diversity in my life. But I understand that there are people that have, people who have had to struggle everyday because of who they are, and how they were born. And my heroes are the people who look past all of that, and see a person, instead of a color, or a "gay"

Hi Fausto,, How are you....? I was on the other side calling the bailout a mistake and irresponsible. I also opposed the last stimulus package last summer many now know was a waste of money. I am pleased to have intelligent conversation. I do have to finish my work... cook dinner for my kid...I will get back to you on the rest later this evening. cheers

Vichet, I opposed the Wall Street bailout because of the way it was structured. We should have invested the $850 billion spent in Iraq in this country on alternative energy, energy-efficient government buildings, better inner city education, light rail, and highways and bridges, as each has great potential for long term economic growth. We should spend the money now, as it will still set the framework for recovery.

You are misperceiving the issue I have raised by suggesting that Reich was talking about having unskilled workers build bridges. This fear of a "Centralized Government Run Economy" , to use your words and initial caps, is utter nonsense. Compare New England, which has always invested in infrastructure and education, with Mississippi, which long ago got drunk on the low tax mantra. Whose citizens are better educated, have healthier lives, and are more productive workers? Whose economy provides a higher standard of living? Obama is proposing something as old as Henry Clay's plan to spend government money on core needs that the private sector would never finance on its own. In Clay's days it was rails and canals, financed by the government, but built by private contractors. It was not until Lincoln that this became national policy: we began a trans-continental railroad in the middle of the Civil War and became a vastly more wealthy country because of that expense.

I presume you have been drinking some of that old demon Ron Reagan Rum. As his father depended on Roosevelt's WPA to keep his family above water and Reagan himself attended a state-supported college, his opposition to infrastructure development only arose after the state and federal governments had lifted him out of poverty and into success,

vichet, Papa Smurf is home. Too bad you have to attend to your responsibilities though, I was looking forward to a heated exchange with you. I guess I'll have to settle for that guy, what's his name? Oh yeah, ladyslipper.

To start, Fausto, you stole my thunder, but because you're a woman I'll be chivalrous and leave it at that, and fearless I couldn't have said it better. I got one of the biggest laughs in my life when I got to work this morning and told my co-workers that we'd all better panic because Obama was going to give our jobs to black people. One of my co-workers who grew up not too far from MDI told me the first time he saw a black person he was twelve years old. So I'm just wondering how the black people are going to get our jobs. Will they bus them in? Fausto was correct when she said the first batch of bailout money went to the people who needed it the least, the bankers who engineered this mess.

It's important to note that the Bush administration slipped in an auction clause that essentially allowed Paulson to dole out the money to his buddies with no strings attached. ladyslipper, why weren't you complaining about all the WHITE people getting the money then? What's really depressing is you go for the bait that Limbaugh and Hannity throw to you like a shark at a feeding frenzy. As usual, they point the finger at the people with the least amount of power in this country, minorities and women and the chronically unemployed while Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain spent 1.2 million dollars renovating his office and doled out four billion dollars in bonuses to his co-conspirators at Merrill. And he's just one of many. Citibank just used your bailout money to buy a 50 million dollar corporate jet. So go ahead, if you see any black people, (highly unlikely) don't tell them where you work, just be afraid, very afraid. That way you don't have to worry about the real thieves, the guys who just picked your pocket, and your children's pockets, and your grandchildren's pockets, while you were were out looking for crosses to burn.

boy-slipper, you're slipping. You don't even pay taxes. You're a college student attending a state-funded school, remember? I know, it's hard to keep track of all the lies.

Ladyslipper, it is Bush's fault, as he was running the government when the money was "gifted" to the banks. I have educated you before as to the role of CDOs (colland CDSs in this financial crisis. The government didn't force anyone to make loans. CDOs allowed the loan originator to sell the loan, well disguised in a package with 100s of loans, to unsuspecting buyers. CDSs allowed banks worldwide to place bets on loans in which they had no insurable interest.

Hi Fausto, Kid fed or nearly so... I opposed the bailout because the market needs to deal with these things. A business built on a bad model should fail and eventually be replaced by one that has a better business model. Government handouts and the accompanying mutual obligations that means set up a more artificial enviroment and that can lead to dire consequences that are not the topics of our discussion tonight.

As we speak, according to the US commerce website as of October '08 43 % of our economy is dependant on the US government. I am not sure that is what our founding fathers had in mind. The bailout and the new stimulus package will surely increase that percentage. Soon 50% of the economy will be supporting the other 50% of the economy... not healthy. I also think that the comments of Charles Rangel D-NY......must "remove the discretion" about where the funds go, or what projects would be involved, even to the point of eliminating any input from governors or state legislatures." It looks like he wants to control how the money is spent right down to the individual contractor selected. While this is not yet policy and wont be until a bill is passed it certainly looks like he would like that to happen. Robert Reich though not yet in the Obama administration was an economic advisor to the President during the campaign. They are joined at the metaphorical political hip. His trashing of the Clintons during the campaign assured his role. I would not be surprised to see him appointed as some sort of "Stimulus disbursement Czar" ..... or some such. At this point it may well serve the administration more to have him out beating the political pavement. I have to listen to a piano piece the kid wrote. Ill be back.

Fausto, It may surprise you to know that I am not opposed to all government. After all, to provide for the "common defense, promote the general welfare" is in in the preamble to the constitution. ... I have always considered roads and highways bridges and general communication lines as a government function. Really those things are one of the few true functions of government. If I recall correctly a PBS special on the Trans-continental railroad, it was built by private contractors in exchange for the land the railroad went through. Later the railroad sold the land to private citizens. An absolutely correct thing to do for the times. No government money was involved. Just the rights to the land. You are correct we became a more wealthy country because of it. Just as an aside are you aware of a possible private highway linking New Brunswick through Maine over the old Stud mill road to Dover then on to Quebec. Its a idea in development that only private enterprise could come up with that government wouldnt have the guts to do.

Fausto, A few quotes and the sources where he said them

"It seems to me that infrastructure spending is a very important and good way of stimulating the economy. The challenge will be to do it quickly, to find projects that can be done that will have a high social return, that also can be done with the greatest speed possible," ... Robert Reich January 9th 2009 at the Congressional Policy Steering Committee hearings

"I'd suggest that all contracts entered into with stimulus funds require contractors to provide at least 20 percent of jobs to the long-term unemployed and to people with incomes at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level." ... This from his blog dated January 08 2009.

Not illegal .... but sane?

Does this mean that if a contractor has a crew skilled and ready to go that company must lay off 20% of its existing people in order to hire less skilled people to do the work? Again I ask, would you cross a bridge made under those conditions? What about just plain fairness? Why should some people become unemployed in order to hire the unemployed or unemployable. Only someone without real world experience would come up with a plan like that.

Vichet, when you're done fawning over Fausto, is there something you would like to say to me?

ladyslipper, come on. The jig was up a long time ago.

Vichet, beware of statistics whose underlying methodology have not been revealed to you. The right has subsidized the military-industrial complex of which Eisenhower warned us in his farewell address. GE, Boeing, Blackwater, Halliburton, etc., have been kept alive by government money. Your concerns in earlier posts about Russian expansionism suggests that you don't mind sending borrowed money that way. Saul Alinsky once joked that socialism is when the other guy gets the money. The economies that are thriving in comparison to ours are those that realize that exports are the key to future prosperity. China has turned itself around with government-private partnerships, and Germany still has a trade balance in its favor the last time I looked. From a purely econometric standpoint, domestic spending has always produced more jobs over time than tax cuts or defense spending. No one is suggesting that unskilled workers design a bridge, but it doesn't take much to teach someone how to work alongside a paver. A preference for low income workers is race-neutral and makes up for the preferences that the wealthy have at every turn: better suburban schools, better connections with job prospects, etc. Vichet, elections have consequences and the majority rules in a democracy.

So much to say so little time... work you know...Oh... I do understand that to the victors go the spoils.. That is indeed the Democratic system. It is also the responsiblity of the losers to remind the victors of the errors of thier ways. Democrats were very good at this in the last election. It is a good balance dont you think and the way things are supposed to work.

Democrats saved capitalism from its unregulated excesses with the New Deal. That social safety net and network of regulation made the business downturns after WW II less severe than the wild swings in the 100 years before 1932. Reagan began dismantling the New Deal, Phil Graham pushed through changes in the financial regulatory system in 99 and 00 that Clinton foolishly chose not to veto, and Bush was hell-bent on changing Social Security forever until the public said: "enough". Keynes was right about the need for counter-cyclical government spending. What Obama is proposing is little different than the WPA, CCC, TVA, etc. History tells us that Roosevelt was on track to pulling us out of the recession until he listened to the budget balancers after his re-election. The deficit spending during WW II and massive support for the housing and education industries in the form of the GI Bill set up a surging middle class of which my parents were proud members. Raised as Republicans, they groused about the New Deal, all the while enjoying its benefits.

As to Lincoln only giving land to the RRs, that is incorrect. The government loaned the money by way of bonds that were ultimately repaid. TARP looks to similar loan repayment. Oh that Bush had demanded transparency.

My source for the rr money was PBS educational website on the issue.....If they are in error I was misinformed. Or possibly bonds were issued early and as the rr neared completion it was land only? They seemed very specific about land for rights and The RR had the right to sell the land to civilians.

The land was valuable enough and the RRs got the land on which the tracks were laid and quite a bit more to sell. Imagine if the contractors building the interstate highway system were given the right to sell the land at each exit. Government bonds also helped finance it, as I just confirmed at Wikipedia. That entry also references a per mile subsidy, although I am not sure whether that just reflects a pay-out of bond money. Public/private partnerships are at the heart of all successful nations. Bush was more inclined to kleptocracy, as the tales of the money poured into Iraqi reconstruction demonstrate.

Fausto, re the kleptocracy, I recently saw a Bush interview where he said all of his investments were in a "blind trust," which I gather is normal procedure for Presidents. There was a story recently that $2 trillion was missing from the US Treasury, having nothing to do with the TARP money. Maybe that's where that $2-trill is, in Bush's blind trust!

I know this thread has come a long way from its origin in reaction to a BDN editorial ballyhooing the supposedly solomonic wisdom of the select group of "stakeholders" whose clumsy dishonest work with respect to Sears Island was last week confirmed by a stroke of Gov. Baldacci's all-too-eager pen. But the discussion above about government handouts to 19th Century railroads offers a link back to the situation in present-day Maine.

Putting aside the horrific example of the rapacious and thus far unstoppable Plum Creek Real Estate Co., much of whose vast land wealth was deeded to it by the tax-paying citizens of this country back when Plum Creek was a railroad corporation, we have in Sears Island yet another example of the sheer unimaginative dishonesty of the people in Maine state government in their approach to economic planning.

In their scheme of things, about the only sector of the economy that matters is that represented by big corporate business. They all but ignore the embarrassing reality that the predominant sector of Maine’s economy is microbusinesses, defined as the lone self-employed individual on up to tiny enterprises with no more than five workers. While some of these alleged economic experts may occasionally blather on about the importance of tourism and other recreational pursuits -- a business sector almost entirely made up of microbusinesses but nonetheless long the state’s number one industry -- while some may even pay lip service to new buzzwords like “the creative economy,” in their actions these bureaucrats and politicians in Augusta are largely blind to the economic interests of what is by far the largest class of Maine workers.

In Sears Island, the largest totally wild island in public hands on the East Coast, we have a collision of interests in which the island’s rare yet easily accessible collection of diversified and inter-related ecosystems, both on land and immediately offshore, is threatened with extinction. But who cares about the lousy animals, birds, fish and trees. We’re talking about economics, right?

So, who stands to benefit? Not the thousands of fulltime fishermen down the bay who harvest lobster, finfish and shellfish for which the diluted salinity and eelgrass beds offshore from Sears Island are an important spawning and nursery ground.

Hancock County Sen. Dennis Damon must be eager to succeed Baldacci in the Blaine House, so adroit was he in shepherding the dirty deal on to Transportation Committee approval. This was over the reservations of many of the committee members that the so-called environmental voices chosen to participate in the planning initiative were not exactly above-board (the legislators got to see leaked emails in which Maine Sierra Club and Coastal Mountains Land Trust officials plotted how they might at the very least break the spirit of the agreement once they gained control of the 601 island acres through a conservation easement document that speaks of this as being “a gift” from the people of Maine).

But Sen. Damon is, or was, a third-generation fisherman himself, and he not only chairs the Transportation Committee, he also heads up the committee that reviews marine resource matters. Sorry, Damon’s real allegiance clearly lies closer to Shell Oil than to shellfish. It apparently never bothered Damon that nearly 14 years ago scientists at two federal resource agencies who were called upon to review another state-sponsored port scheme for the west side of Sears Island declared that never since environmental studies were first required had they seen a construction proposal in all of New England with such negative impacts to the marine environment.

The port scheme now under consideration would involve more than six times as much land area as was formerly proposed, as well as a marginal wharf nearly half a mile long. Damon was obviously unconcerned that the planning initiative never once considered these ramifications, never once asked residents of any community south of Searsport what they thought.

So, who stands to benefit? Not the tens of thousands employed up and down the coast at motels, restaurants, shops, bed-and-breakfast establishments and other tourism-related businesses. A totally wild Maine island with more than five miles of unimpeded shoreline, one that’s connected to the mainland by a causeway and you can drive a mile from busy Route 1 to reach, Sears Island has long been a destination for tourists. Despite the clamor of all manner of opportunist, the reality is Sears Island can’t be improved upon.

Certainly, an unspoiled wild island can’t be improved upon by the multi-million-dollar EcoWorld theme park that environmental quislings at the Maine Sierra Club and at several of the land trusts have signed onto, thereby giving green cover to the governor’s manipulations. And it would be hard to imagine what tourists would be much interested in visiting an island to which someone like the Sultan of Abu Dhabi has (most improbably) been lured to invest his oil wealth for a container port no one has ever bothered to demonstrate a need for.

But assuming the already delineated third of the island that’s on the chopping black is actually clearcut and leveled for such a stupid and worthless enterprise, it’s downright impossible to imagine what attraction EcoWorld next-door would then have with its “campus” of auditoriums, classrooms, government agency offices, roads and parking lots. Tourists could just as well stay home for that.

So, who stands to benefit? Well, of course there are the bureaucrats themselves who expect to go on cashing their state paychecks even as they betray not only the precious natural integrity of Sears Island but their true responsibilities to the people of Maine as well. And, of course, the same may be said in spades of the land trust employees who also took part in this farce.

But the biggest beneficiaries of all stand to be the investors who snapped up at fire sale prices the assets of the bankrupt Bangor and Aroostook Railroad a half dozen years ago. The B&A’s last president, reinstated as chief financial officer of what had been re-named the Montreal Maine and Atlantic Railroad, plaintively whined to the planning initiative group a couple years back that expansion onto Sears Island with a state-sponsored container port represented the only way investors in the faltering railroad could be expected to make a profit. It’s no accident that MMA CEO Robert Grindrod rarely missed a meeting of the committee assigned to divide up the island. DOT Commissioner David Cole could usually be seen sitting at Grindrod’s side.

So, in the final analysis, it all comes down to this: unimaginative, irresponsible and dishonest Maine politicians and bureaucrats in league with environmental organization careerists with selfish development plans of their own have hatched out a plan whereby all involved will continue to collect their paychecks and be able to falsely claim they’ve done something constructive. Some may even be able to give preferential treatment to friends and family members in seizing what few jobs result from all this skullduggery. The faux environmentalists who agreed to play ball with the governor on his terms will get 601 acres of wild public land from the people of Maine. The investors in the renamed Bangor and Aroostook Railroad will get an infusion of corporate welfare assistance from the people of Maine. The people of Maine, those living today and generations to come, will lose forever something really precious.

Not until after the South seceded and the Civil War had begun could Congress pass an effective transcontinental plan, the Pacific Railroad Act of 1862. It called for two railroad companies to complete the transcontinental line. The railroad would be a "land-grant railroad," meaning that the government would give each company 6,400 acres of land and up to $48,000 for every mile of track it built. The money capitalized the project, and the railroads could use the land to entice settlers to the West, who in turn would need the railroads to haul freight. But Congress, afraid to fund a project that would never be completed, wrote a caveat into the act: the railroads had to complete the project by July 1,1876, or they would forfeit the land, money, and all of the constructed track.

The Union Pacific Railroad, a corporation formed for the venture, would build the eastern half of the line starting in Nebraska. The Central Pacific Railroad, owned by a group of California entrepreneurs including Collis Huntington and Leland Stanford, would build the western half.

....answers.com.... It appears PBS is wrong.

PeterTaber, that was an excellent post. It may take a referendum to stop Sears Island's development.

PeterTaber is awesome. BTW, Damon will never be able to garner enough support. ;-)

Ah, Ladyslipper, being called an idiot by someone who doesn't understand so much of the world is a badge of honor for anne_of_mdi and me. Anyone who reads these posts has long ago determined that your intellect is conspicuous by its absence.

Right on, Ladyslipper. Intellect-schmintellect, who the hell needs it!

You certainly don't.

I am glad that Peter Taber finally responded. Maybe we can get this thread back on the facts of Sears Island instead of being hijacked by a bunch of psuedo-intellects only interested in trying to impress other hacks who don't maintain the same brain drain that they do.

BTW, Fausto and Anne, thanks for your kind sentiments. Yes, I think a referendum is about the only route to protecting Sears Island from predators of all stripes. It's also a huge undertaking, particularly in view of how muddled the issue has become in the public mind.

The press has been worse than useless in all of this. At the BDN, the editorialists frequently fill in for the reporters. Apart from an AP account in the Lewiston Sun, I don't believe there's been any regular news mention so far of the governor's signing last Thursday of the executive order directing the DOT to market a container port on one third of Sears Island, at the same time turning Maine Coast Heritage Trust with its appalling EcoWorld theme park scheme loose on the remainder of the island. The trouble with daily newspaper editorialists reporting the news is they tend to get it wrong more frequently than regular reporters. They're also most inclined to put that special spin on the story that somehow reflects the interests of those with the wealth.

The editorial above is the product of some very confused thinking. It's essentially humbug (the polite 19th Century term for what is usually described in scatalogical terms today). It reeks of humbug! How does the story of wise King Solomon and the two professed mothers relate to Sears Island? The Biblical story opens with the assumption the reader understand that a baby divided is no baby. In fact, it's just about the ultimate horror, a small bloody corpse, something any real mother would probably give up her own life to keep her child from becoming. Division of Sears Island into actual industrial and pedagogic development zones would be as fatal to the island as Solomon's sword would have been to the disputed baby. The point of the parable is the real mother immediately recognized the consequences of insisting upon having her rightful portion of her baby. The child was, in fact, spared, not divided, and the true mother was recognized.

All the Orwellian assertions in the world about "both very important components" being saved doesn't change the reality that the last remaining wild island of this size in public hands on the East Coast stands to be irrevocably destroyed.

A word for the simple-minded, the kind of people the state evidently thinks most of us are: there are times when an issue is necessarily one of absolutes, when the world turns from grey to starkly black or white, when compromise may not be a good option. Virginity and pregnancy, for instance. No middle ground, either you are or you aint. So it is with something as important and as precious as Sears Island. The chosen representatives of environmental stewardship who colluded in the state's fraudulent planning exercise for the island had no right to fold in the disgraceful fashion they did. By their dithering and handwringing and failure to challenge the DOT's increasingly bolder demands, they demonstrated they were common palookas, only too willing to throw the fight in return for a pittance.

Peter Taber:

Words are my bread and butter. I am very well-paid for my services.

I've been doing this kind of work for years. It is for this reason that

I am easily capable of recognizing a hack when I see one.

Grade? C-minus. WAY too many words. HUGE axe to grind. That's

where the "hack" comes from.....

Sears Island is re-growth farmland. It was totally cleared and farmed

for many generations. It was hayed as recently as the early 1970s.

Do you really want to do this dance with me yet again? The only thing

with a referendum is that it would cost money and you would LOSE.

If Sears Island WERE wild, I'd be helping you erect the barricades, but

it AIN'T WILD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get off it, Petey. Noone's ever going to elect you to anything, either.....

OldBangor

Don't you have anything better to do, Old Bangor, you disagreeable old troll, than to be picking fights with your betters? By what right and standard of decency do you think it's okay to act familiarly and in an insulting manner towards someone you've never even met? Why on earth would you think I care what your sophomoric assessment of my writing ability might be? Am I really expected to believe that normally I'd have to pay big money for such services?

Now on the subject of Sears Island, again you show your ignorance and your inclination to be manipulative. I see you're fond of setting up straw men. I never said the island is a wilderness, which is apparently your understanding. What I have said repeatedly is that it is wild. There is a difference. I'm surprised a self-professed wordsmith like yourself wouldn't know the difference. Abandoned farmland does turn wild, you know.

Peter Taber Rocks!

Cheers from a former k2Bh'er. ;-)

"Words are my bread and butter." Su ego es muy gigantesco! It takes a whole lot of highly educated wordsmithing to write up an insurance policy!

OldBangor, have you thought of how much of Acadia National Park is old farm land? In the entire state of Maine there are but a few stands of old growth forest.

Ladyslipper, the Know Nothing wing of the Republican party is calling for you. Once you've read your history and understood the role that party played in your party's founding, get out there and work every day to get Palin as your nominee in 2012. We Democrats shudder at Obama having to run against her. Throw us anywhere but in that briar patch! Don't waste your time blogging, become a Palintologist!

Peter Taber:

You are not my better. I haven't been a sophomore

since 1971. I am neither ignorant nor manipulative.

You IMPLY that Sears Island is pristine through your

repeated use of the word "wild". You are angry and

dismissive and insulting to anyone who doen't share

your views which, I might add, are those of a tiny but

vocal minority. Oh, and I know a tantrum when I see

one!

Fausto: Very little of Acadia is/was farmland. Way too rocky!

BTW: I'm decended from the earliest settlers of Pretty

Marsh and Bartlett's Island.

anne_of: There's insurance in my family, but I myself

have never worked in that industry. Unlike you and BCB,

the older I get the less I know.

OldBangor

You might be old, and you might know less Old Bangor, but you are still not right.

:-D

OldBangor, you need to travel to Acadia, hike all of its trails and look for old farm roadbeds and crumbled stone walls. I have done so and imagined the sheep and goats which likely grazed on once clear-cut rocky hillsides, the cattle that fed on the less challenging terrain, and the cropland that was planted on a small part of the Park. I don't know the percentages, but the larger truth is this: more than 95% of Maine was cleared of old tree growth and hasn't been pure wilderness since then, but that didn't stop Baxter from buying much of that clear-cut land and creating a state park.

Sears Island has returned to the wild.

Eastport is a far more suitable port. We need to bring jobs to Washington County and create a modern rail link to Eastport. Given the depth of Eastport's waters and its proximity to Europe, this is the best long-term solution to shipping. Short-term thinkers like Baldacci and MDOT will never get this.

Fausto:

I expect I've spent far more time than you have on MDI.

The vast majority of farming there was of a subsistence

nature. The fatal flaw in your narrative is the use of the

word "imagined". When the park was assembled, any land

that was truly suitable for farming was too expensive to buy.

Even that farmland wasn't commercially viable. Whatever

tree removal that was done was to provide firewood.

YES! Eastport needs a good rail link, but who's going to PAY

for it? You? Searsport already has a rail link. There's only

a tiny interpretive difference between short-term thinking

and transitional, consequential thinking. I prefer the latter two.

I think you have a good mind, Fausto, but you at times make

leaps of logic that just aren't supported by your assumptions.

markko:

Not right? Do you mean incorrect or not "right in the head"?

In your own words, not someone else's, how am I not "Right"?

OldBangor

Talk about manipulative! There you go again with your straw men, Old Bangor. Now that you've apparently conceded I never said Sears Island is a wilderness, you go off on another tack and say I "imply" the island is "pristine."

A true wilderness is, I suppose, pristine. Although I do think we have an obligation to those yet unborn to work in that direction, I don't know how it would be even possible to make Sears Island truly pristine. First you'd have to undo the $22 million worth of monkey work the DOT did in the 1980s. Remove the mountain of gravel and asphalt that sits on top of the natural tidal causeway, remove the Stetson Hills Highway, restore -- I mean REALLY restore -- many acres of degraded and destroyed wetlands and intertidal area (something present-day scientists have yet to figure out how to do), remove the riprap pier stub on the west shore, remove the 300-foot cellphone and broadcast tower at the south end including all powerlines and other support facilities.

Then allow at least a few centuries to pass. That would be a start. That would be getting in the direction of pristine. Fausto has correctly pointed out to you that very little in Maine is old growth. That doesn't mean that everything that's left has no value except to be exploited for industrial and institutional development. Some public land is wild land. Sears Island is such a piece of public property. No one has said or implied it was either wildereness or pristine. Seeing as how Sears Island is the largest such wild island property on the East Coast that we the people have any say about (and obviously a small one at that), I think it's our business to consider leaving it alone.

Do you understand now, Old Bangor? Why are you acting so dense? Jeesh, talk about "leaps of logic that just aren't supported by your assumptions"!

Peter Taber:

Please define the word "wild" as you see it. For people

far-removed from Searsport who will never see Sears

Island it conjures up an image -- one that doesn't relate

to the reality. I suggest that the use of that word is, at the

very least, misleading. It is a useful word, however, for

fundraising purposes to support a (ahem) referendum.

Your laundry list of man-made island alterations only serves

to reinforce my point.

I AM familiar with pristine, though. My family and I have been

fortunate since 1960 to spend time at the Bradford Camps on

Munsungan Lake in northern Piscataquis County. Just to the

south is the Reed Pond preservation area, the largest piece

of old-growth forest in New England. It's managed by the

Nature Conservancy, I think, but still owned by the Wheatland

Heirs. You'd LOVE them Pete! They're a bunch of capitalists!

The forest might be dense, but THEY aren't.

You, Peter, are the victim of a FIXATION here. Many of your

fellow environmentalists worked hard to achieve this fair and

equitable compromise. Your rants only place you on the extreme

fringe. I am not dense, but YOU would appear to be Deluded!

And I mean that in the nicest way......

OldBangor

Wow, OldBangor, you are in serious need of an attitude adjustment. Your words are very disrespectful. And just out of curiosity, why is the formatting of your posts so unusual? Are you using an editor other than the "post a comment" one that we all use?

Hi, I'm OldBangor.

I would like you to believe that I am from old money.

I would also like you to believe that I know more than anyone does

about anything else. Ever.

My ancestors sailed to America on the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria.

Before that they lived in Old Bangor.

I have a PhD in Piling it High and Deep.

And, as I said before, I know everything.

You should feel honored if I deign to criticize your post.

You should be particularly careful about your spelling.

Sincerely,

OldBangor

anne_of_mdi:

Your post is completely out of line. Signing my screen name

to that is even MORE out of line. My suggestion to you, anne,

is to stop posting yourself if you have nothing of substance

to add. It's obvious to me that you are of the "if you can't

beat 'em, insult 'em" school. That post only makes you look like

what you ARE.

Oh, and I type at this width for a reason. First of all, it's easier

on the eyes to read. Second, it is a time-worn practice of writers

and editors. Too OLD to change, I guess.

You know, anne_of, I at one time thought you had a brain in your

head. Go figure!

OldBangor

Wow ladyslipper, I am really flattered by your saying that I "seem capable of great intelligence." NOT! Consider the source y'all.

OldBangor, you now admit that much of Acadia was subsistence farms in the 19th Century. Please tell Ladyslipper that rock walls in the wilds are a dead certain sign that the land was once farmed. The only reason one would choose "imagined" is that the actual type of farm can't be determined without reading local history. Most of Maine was subsistence farming until Civl War vets moved west, having seen what rich farmland was available to the south and west.

Compare the cost of building a port from scratch on Sears Island (plus a rail extension of about two miles) with building 19 miles of track to hook Eastport up with the nearest rail. I suggest the former is more expensive. A rail link to a deeper port with shorter shipping time to Europe would make Sears Island development unnecessary.

Having been critiqued by you for the length of my earlier posts, I am amused at your newfound verbosity.

Dear Mr. Old Bangor,

I apologize that I'm only now getting around to completing that assignment you gave me. I hope you won't mark me down too much on the final grade. You've already given me one C minus. I sure don't want to fail someone like you, someone from old money who I guess must have had the benefit of an expensive education and so sure must know a lot.

I thought I already knew what "wild" means but when someone with your erudition and wisdom suggests otherwise I've got to think in all humility, "Heck! I better look it up. Just to be sure, you know."

Here are some definitions for "wild" I found -- in fact, the first five definitions of the adjective that Merriam-Webster was able to provide:

* living in a state of nature and not ordinarily tame or domesticated

* growing or produced without human aid or care

* related to or resembling a corresponding cultivated or domesticated organism

* of or relating to wild organisms

* not inhabited or cultivated

Now I know it may all be rather like knowing what the definition of "is" is. I might need a highly paid word smith like yourself to help me see the true meaning of those definitions. Please help me break through the fog of confusion. As much as my simple mind is capable of wrapping itself around the concept it seems to me those definitions of "wild" more or less apply to Sears Island, particularly the last one.

Waiting breathless with anticipation to hear the final word on the subject from you, I am your unworthy student,

Peter Taber

Ha! Ha! Ha!

Peter, Fausto and anne_of:

So much to respond to and clarify! Having a really busy

day today, but I WILL be BACK later on.

It ought to be great fun, so watch this space!

OldBangor

Ha! Ha! Ha!

Peter, Fausto and anne_of:

So much to respond to and clarify! Having a really busy

day today, but I WILL be BACK later on.

It ought to be great fun, so watch this space!

OldBangor

First things first:

anne_of:

You, dear lady, owe me an apology. I was brought

up to treat ALL people with respect and consideration.

Your post(s) of last night were beyond insulting, they

were intended to wound. I don't need an elaborate one,

but you KNOW that one is due.

Fausto:

Read my post, please. I did not "admit" that "most" of

Acadia National Park was subsistence farms. Heck! Until

the arrival of the artistes and rusticators post Civil War,

MDI was very sparsely populated, and the majority of the

people who resided thereupon lived by the sea! VERY

LITTLE of the park is former farms. There were hardly any

farms there to begin with! The farms that WERE productive

were outside of the area that now comprises the park.

Eastport needs to be done TOO with the old Downeast

MCRR line restored.19 miles to connect with Canadian rail?

Look at the map. The important link is to the west and south.

A more practical link for Searsport might be the 20-plus miles

to MCRR in Rockland.

In terms of "woids", I'm always terse. See that 18 or so pica

column width I keep? Well, I try, anyway.....

Oh, and there were rich farmers in Maine long before the

Civil War serving the Boston Market -- just not on MDI...

Glad to hear I've amused you. You're a tough audience.

More in a little bit for Petey on another post! He's holding his

breath, and I don't want him to suffocate!

Luv 'ya, Fausto...

OldBangor

Peter Taber:

Your assignment was to tell me what YOUR take

is/was on the word "wild", not from the dictionary.

You still haven't given me that.

More importantly, you have totally ignored the rest

of my points. Instead, you concentrate on a smirky,

sarcastic characterization of me as being an eilitist

snob. Am I proud of my ancestors? YES! Am I proud

of my education? YES! Am I proud of a few of the

things I've accomplished in life? Guilty As CHARGED!

One of the BEST things about the way I was brought

up, though, is that I was always taught to treat others

with respect and consideration regardless of their

origin, religion, background, race or gender.

YOU, on the other hand, seem to find it necessary to

TRASH anyone who dares to disagree with your views.

I can't think of a single thing to add to what I've said

already concerning Sears Island. All the points I've made

that you have either ridiculed or ignored speak for

themselves. Strawman? HA! Don't get me started! If you

KNEW what a strawman is, you'd know that it's your own

central tactic! SHEESH!

One Final Thing: Please! Stop feeding your horse amphetamines!

And watch that little vein in your temple!

OldBangor

OldBangor, I do not owe you an apology. You might have to scratch that fuzzy old head of yours for a while to try to figure out why. Here's a hint: you wrote, "I was brought up to treat ALL people with respect and consideration." That is a crock.

OldBangor, do you know the difference between "much" and "most"? I never said most of Acadia was farmland, yet you actually use quotation marks to suggest I did. Given Acadia's acreage and the presence of tell-tale stone walls, I can assure you that a significant portion of Acadia was clearcut and then likely grazed by sheep. I have never suggested that 51% of the Park was farmland of some sort. The essential point is this: re-growth farm land is worthy of protection, depending on its locale. There may be no larger undeveloped island on the entire Atlantic coast.

Do not claim to be a wordsmith and then confuse much with most.

Yes, Old Bangor, enough joking around. Words really are a serious matter. Meaning is in any case. "Much," "most," "wilderness," "wild," "pristine" -- there is a fairly narrow window of understanding among English speakers what these words mean. That's how we're able to communicate -- IF we really want to communicate rather than fool around.

You may slyly and most dishonestly substitute "most" for "much" in quoting others (ah, the penchant you have for setting up straw men!). You may pretend "wild" means "pristine" when it doesn't.

To answer your last silly demand, I thought I indicated to you what I think the meaning of "wild" is but if you still don't get it then I'll tell you directly: I was pleased to see the Marriam-Webster definitions I gave you confirm what my understanding is. Now, what was your point?

The railroads in Northern and Eastern Maine have struggled for years. The end of Potato harvests and decline of lumber products made the railroads decline inevitable. The Maine Central was gobbled up by a private entrepreneur who single handedly was able to destroy the once proud railroad. The Bangor & Aroostook ran an honest operation as long as it could but this kind of operation could not survive. During the late 90's railroads around the country realized transportation was evolving. A little further down south, the Norfolk Southern Railway (Who will soon be entering into the New England rail neighborhood) took action and established a strong intermodal (Containers from Ships to Trains to Cars) business. This initiative really solidified their future and the trend spread to the rest of the country. The St. Lawrence & Atlantic Railroad based out of Auburn, ME teamed up with a premier carrier the Canadian National to create an intermodal facility in Auburn. This facility later expanded in both size and on site custom operations. This is an example of a successful Container terminal in Maine with originating and terminating traffic. When the Iron Roads took over the proud Bangor & Aroostook in the mid 90's, they ultimately started a domino effect that destroyed a lot of the traffic base. The Railroad acquired the old Canadian Pacific line across Maine which ran some substantial traffic from St. John to Montreal. This route was 12 hours shorter than any other available route however the Iron Road screwed this up royally. Instead of reinvesting in the infrastructure of the railroad they invested in a sporty image and packed their own pockets with cash. Derailments and terrible service plagued the line for many years. Traffic began being re routed around Maine instead of through it. In the early years of the new millennium the railroad found itself broke. The Story of the Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railroad starts at this point but has origins way before this. In the late 80's a firm acquired rail lines in Wisconsin that were deemed unwanted and un profitable. From that time to the new century those rail lines re consolidated and became a very profitable railroad. This Railroad known as the Wisconsin Central (WC) was then sold into a larger railroad for a large amount of money. This success story links to the Montreal Maine and Atlantic (MMA) because the people who fixed the WC are now the ones working with the MMA. The Day the MMA started their largest customer shut down. They weathered this devastation and were able to get the line in the black. Although a lot of the traffic had been lost to routes that were geographically longer but were shorter run times. The MMA immediately began investing in the track structure and upgrading information systems. These upgrades were financed with Federal loans that the railroad is paying back. The railroad has done well in that it has not gone bankrupt but business declines and a dwindling economy have threatened the railroad again. The railroad however has turned to contract work to stay afloat and it is still fighting hard. If the MMA got this opportunity I can tell you they would not screw it up. They are working closely with the Canadian Pacific Railroad (Which reaches the Pacific Ocean, Chicago, New York City, and other key cities) and if they needed to run trains out of Sears Island tomorrow they could do it on time and fast. The MMA is looking for any way to get business and will fight to keep it.