« Red County/OC Blog News Roundup -- May 15, 2007 | Main | Where's the Flag Day Love? »

May 15, 2007

Comments

killerjoe

but it's loretta.....How could anyone expect anything different.

tylerh

Jubal,

I'm confused. You work with PR, your text consistently tries to put Rep. Sanchez in a bad light, but you are using a photo where Loretta looks buff, and, dare I say it, hot.

Given that a picture is worth a thousand words-- and probably more on blog -- why the mixed message?

Bladerunner

Bravely blogged Jubal. And you crack back on Andrew Davey while you go off on a name-calling diatribe?

Of course your take is just more evidence that all the FTCA and their hired hands have been going through the motions with regard to CEQA compliance. The right wing lunatics who used to run the asylum called U.S. Congress, Inc.(see how petty those kind of characterizations sound?) exempted the 241 from California laws applicable to all other state road projects. Not so much in fear of that terrible gang in Sacramento outlawing a toll road(both Gray and Arnold love pouring concrete, free or no, and would have vetoed anything that would have ripped the decision making process out of the present structure)but to ensure that a California Judge, or California Appellete or Supreme Court would put a halt to the highway for failing to comply with CEQA. The legislative straw man you've created here isn't fooling anybody.

And by the way, the Red County chauvinism is getting stale. Not to mention its wrong. A good portion of the planned extension is in San Diego County, most of the negative environmental impact is in San Diego County and of course all of the Park that would be impacted is in San Diego County. Not to mention, it's a State Park, so all Californian's have a say on its protection.

Finally, if Loretta really wanted to kill this toll road she would have gone along with the Davis amendment to strip away the authority of the Navy and Marines to grant the easement for the roadway. Instead of conceding that point, giving her props, you chose to dissemble with your rant that gave off way more heat then light. Bad form lad.

redperegrine

'tam, check out the bicep!

Jarrine

Unless Loretta has qualified with that weapon, it's just another shallow photo op.

Art Pedroza

Jarrine,

At least Loretta did not shoot her friend! Have you forgotten Cheney's gaffe already?

Theodore Judah

BR, please familiarize yourself with AB1457. It is a Sacramento bill proposed to kill the 241 completion. Coastal Commission staff has also made it a top priority to stop this road. To say the politicians up in Sacramento don't have the long knives out for this road is naive at best.

I realize it might not be popular to say it, but the environmental regulatory process is overbearing and not designed to do what is best for the environment, but what is best for the environmentalists.

There was a great letter to the editor in the Register today that summed it up neatly. It said that this alternative was not selected by TCA alone but by several federal agencies including US Fish & Wildlife, EPA, US Army Corps of Engineers, Federal Highway Administration.

At the state level, TCA has worked with Caltrans, California Fish & Game, State Water Resources Control Board, Coastal Commission, and the list goes on.

The process has gone on for twenty years and there is no end in sight. All this for a 16-mile roadway connection.

For Loretta to say that we need just a little more bureacracy and government oversight to make this a better project is disingenuous. This amendment is all about killing the 241 completion.

And if you think Loretta should be applauded for not stripping the Marines of the right to control what happens on their property, you're crazy. I'm also not going to thank her for not robbing a bank. This idea of thanking people for not doing something that is obviously wrong has gotten way out of hand.

demmother

I was going to say... WOW! look at the guns on Loretta! (not the weapon silly boys)

Oh, I supported her vote on the toll road. You go Girl!!!

just...asking

don't we support local control? Is not control of California parkland a local state issue? Why would you let the Issa's and Calvert's make this a Federal issue? Local control in this case means California law should be followed! Lorretta stuck up for California, good job!

Jubal

And you crack back on Andrew Davey while you go off on a name-calling diatribe?

Please don't equate me to Davey. I showed why Sanchez's claims she is not trying to kill the 241 are dishonest. Andrew calls people names as if it is self-confirming evidence.

The right wing lunatics who used to run the asylum called U.S. Congress, Inc.(see how petty those kind of characterizations sound?)...

They weren't right-wing lunatics--- they were pork-barreling lunatics.

...exempted the 241 from California laws applicable to all other state road projects.

What laws? Read the language of the amendment Davis and Sanchez seek to strip out "...easement to construct, operate and maintain, notwithstanding any provision of state law to the contrary, a restricted access highway." It is a defensive measure to prevent out-of-county left-wing legislators from killing an OC transportation project. It's not about evading CEQA. If the TCA has been "going through the motions" of CEQA compliance all these years, why have the enviros lost every single lawsuit against the tollroad?

As for Arnold vetoing any anti-241 bills -- maybe you haven't been reading the news for the last year. Arnold's administration is, AT BEST, split over the toll road. His parks director and brother-in-law are die-hard opponents. So if you think Arnold is some kind of firewall against anti-241 legislation, I have a steelhead trout I caught in San Mateo Creek I can sell you.

A good portion of the planned extension is in San Diego County, most of the negative environmental impact is in San Diego County and of course all of the Park that would be impacted is in San Diego County. Not to mention, it's a State Park, so all Californian's have a say on its protection.

BR, the San Diego portions is Camp Pendleton, and no-one lives on that portion of Camp Pendleton. You have to drive 30 minutes south of the OC-SD border before you hit civilization.

It's a State Park, but it's federal land -- a state park we may not even have in a dozen or so years when the $1-lease runs out.

Please, please show me some concrete example -- as opposed to overheated hyperbole -- of how the park is being destroyed or "paved over."

Finally, if Loretta really wanted to kill this toll road she would have gone along with the Davis amendment to strip away the authority of the Navy and Marines to grant the easement for the roadway. Instead of conceding that point, giving her props, you chose to dissemble with your rant that gave off way more heat then light. Bad form lad.

But then Loretta wouldn't be able to use the cover of this "I'm just making the toll road comply with state law" spin, and wouldn't have a chance to continue playing the "I'm a Blue Dog Dem in OC, and a lefty Dem behind the Beltway" double game.

That was excellent spin, BR, but it doesn't obfuscate the fundamentals of what Loretta did: acted against a needed transportation project that commands popular support in OC and would mean good jobs for a number of her constituents in the construction trade. She voted against her county and her district, and she can't even be honest about it what she did.

Jubal, if you think the park would be only slightly impacted by the toll road, show some guts and publish a map on your blog of the park and the 241 route thru it. Ask your readers to look at the map and say how it looks to them. Will the impact be minor or will the road just (as the Register said) "skirt a portion of the park." Let's see what your readers say.

tylerh

Is this map still accurate?

Jubal

...show some guts...

OK, you gutsy anonymous commenter, you --

here ya go.

Bladerunner

You're reaching Jubal. Not your usual analytical self but given the argumentative box you've put yourself into, understandable. Listen to yourself---you're different then Andrew because you reveal the truth(I guess that justifies your name calling) and he just calls names. I'm sorry fella but that dog won't hunt---you might have tried to prove your claim but you're about as close to proving it as your comrades in D.C. are to finding those WMD's in Iraq. Andrew has put up a good deal of factual info and you just refuse to acknowledge anything .

Talk about spin, you never really came to grips with my point which pokes a hole though your Titanic argument--that Loretta helped kill the amendment that really would have killed the toll road--the easement. The blue dog--left Dem stuff may sell in the Limbaugh World, but in the real world where you have give and take and real analysis, your response was, well,so unlike you. You're actually quite good at making your points which is why your post was so unusual. Are you so blinded by partisan rage against Loretta that you can't acknowledge the obvious---she saved the 241's butt by killing the easement amendment? Are you worried that the comment will end up in a campaign piece? Brother....

Let's go back to this phony issue of this being an Orange County issue only. For the umpteenth time, the Park is in San Diego. If it was in Ladera Ranch your commission could line up for the groundbreaking ceremonies. The environmental problems are in San Diego. People who use the park are from all over the state. If Del Norte County wanted to put a tollway through the Redwoods State Park all Californian's have a stake. Same with San Onofre. The lease status is relevant to an extent but the Marines are far more concerned with the development pressures any roadway brings then a park which provides a buffer for development pressures. No way that Park is going down the tubes. Impact on the park by the 241? I think there is evidence that there would be--closing of campgrounds, possible closure of upper portion of park, runoff issues, effect on surf. And I understand that there is some mitigation that would ease some of these problems. But thats why we have a CEQA process and why there is litigation going on which hasn't been decided, contrary to your inference. Let the process continue but a better bet would be to reallign this outside the park or better yet, do a landf swap to increase the size of the park, provide greater mitigation, so that everyone except the people who don't like toll roads would be satisfied that this was the best deal that could be struck.

No onto the other phony argument---the worry about those folks in Sacramento(they're not left wing radicals, just pork barrell radicals). If FTCA truly does comply with all California laws as your spinmisters suggest it does and will, you've got no worries. They'll never get a bill banning the toll road through the legislature and if they did, Arnold would veto it. Now if you stick up your middle finger to the procedures and laws that exist to protect the environment--existing laws my friend--then who knows? But since we've been assured by the flacks that its a green tollroad and everything is going according to Hoyle, not a worry for you. Truth is that it is CEQA that is the thorn in your side and what the Issa amendment is all about(that and I'll concede the pork radical take). FTCA has gone through the process but the Issa Loophole Amendment allows the FTCA to tell a court who finds that the 241 violates CEQA--"tough titty--you lose, federal preemption--we really didn't mean it when we said we would comply with state envornmental laws. And we didnt mean it when we said we were for state's rights(I figured that in Bush v Gore but some still dream on).

And your response---the enviros have lost every single lawsuit against the concretos.
I don't know about that, but you'd better stay current because the Fourth District Court of Appeals in San Diego on Friday handed FTCA a spanking, saying that FTCA's efforts to change venue from San Diego to Red County were off base and ordered the Superior Court judge to set aside his order transferring the case to the OC. Why? Because the damage alleged to occur in the complaint occurs in San Diego County. Exactly what I was trying to tell you earlier. The litigation that Issa's amendment is designed to get around is alive and well.

Jubal--seriously, step back and think " Alternatives". What's so upsetting for y'all is that your ace in the hole was avoiding any court decision which was the far more likely scenario then the legislature doing anything--hell, they couldn't even get the bill out of committee. That's another fact which weakens the claim that the Issa bill was designed to protect against a wild legislature---it's a wild court deciding on CEQA that has got you folks scared.

Try negotiating instead of trashing.


Jubal

Andrew has put up a good deal of factual info and you just refuse to acknowledge anything.

BR, this is a typical Andrew "factual statement: "OK, we know the 241 is a huge waste of money..." or "We know the 241 will destroy San Onofre State Park."

I try to make my arguments forcefully and factually, but I don't claim infallibility or the ability to speak for all Orange Countians or all conservatives. I try to limit myself to speaking for myself.

Are you so blinded by partisan rage against Loretta that you can't acknowledge the obvious---she saved the 241's butt by killing the easement amendment?

My anger about Loretta's actions is about what she did, not which party she's a member of.

How is exposing the 241 to killer legislation from Sacramento "saving the 241"? If Loretta wanted to save the 241, she could have defeated the Davis Amendment. It was in her power to do so. She chose instead to make it vulnerable to lefty environmentalist state legislators.

No matter how much chaff you throw up, BR, Loretta didn't "save the 241 completion.

Are you worried that the comment will end up in a campaign piece?

??????????

For the umpteenth time, the Park is in San Diego.

But the road is an OC project, and the park is in Darrell Issa's district, not Susan Davis'.

if it was in Ladera Ranch your commission could line up for the groundbreaking ceremonies.

Again: ?????????????

If Del Norte County wanted to put a tollway through the Redwoods State Park all Californian's have a stake. Same with San Onofre.

No, not the same. Leaving aside the fact the state doesn't own San Onofre, the road doesn't touch the part of the park where 95% of the visitors go. It skirts the San Mateo campground (along which Cristianitos Road already runs). Virtually no-one uses the rest of the park. It's an agricultural operation, chain link fences, power line towers, accompanied by the sound of exploding USMC artillery shells in the distance. The enviros play of trying to convince the public this park is another Yellowstone. It's not. Please don't join in their propaganda game on this point.

The lease status is relevant to an extent but the Marines are far more concerned with the development pressures any roadway brings then a park which provides a buffer for development pressures

The Marines prefer this alignment. And the lease is very relevant because it's up, so it the $1 price the state leased it for. Assuming the Navy Department even renews the lease, do you think Calif. will get to renew it for a buck?

I think there is evidence that there would be--closing of campgrounds, possible closure of upper portion of park, runoff issues, effect on surf.

Why would the San Mateo campground close? It's next to a road as it is. Plus, the beach campgrounds are closer to the I-5 than the 241 route is to the San Mateo Campground. The run-off issues can and will be mitigated just like they are on any road project. And the surf argument is a red herring.

If FTCA truly does comply with all California laws as your spinmisters suggest it does and will, you've got no worries.

That's simply untrue. It doesn't matter how completely F/ETCA complies with CEQA -- and why do you continue to assert they are not in compliance? -- because that is not what Nava/Kuehl/Huffman care about. They don't want the 241 completed. Period. It's not about the process for them, for Surfrider, for the whole gang -- it's about the end, which is killing this project.

And Issa's amendment isn't about ignoring CEQA. If that were true, the TCA would have junked the CEQA process after 2001 and just started paving. It's applies to the construction, operation and maintenance of a toll road -- not the preceding regulatory process. It's to prevent to lefties in Sacramento from passing killer legislation even after the CEQA process is satisfied.

To be continued...

Bladerunner

Jubal, slowly now......the Davis Amendment Loretta supported says FTCA must comply with California environmental laws. You claim FTCA is complying with California laws so no problem. The amendment that would kill(as in a Sopranos hit)the 241 extension was the one that would prevent the Navy and marines from granting an easment. Loretta killed that amendment. Good form would have Jubal say
"LORETTA, I THINK YOU'RE WRONG FOR CARRYING THE SURFRIDERS WATER ON THE AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE FTCA 7 THE 241 TO COMPLY WITH CALIFORNIA LAWS BUT I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR DISSING THE SURFRIDERS BY OPPOSING THE RIVER STYX AMENDMENT THAT WOULD PREVENT THE NAVY AND MARINES FROM GRANTING AN EASEMENT."

Now, would that be so hard? I didn't think so which is why i asked if you were worried that if you wrote something nice about loretta she would put the quote in a campaign mailer(Didn't Mark Rosen do that once?).

The parks people are saying the campground would close. I trust them over you or the FTCA flacks on this one. And for that matter, on any environmental issue, at least until you have sucessfully completed a class in How to be A Teddy Roosevelt Republican.

Are you conceding that if the Del norte Transportation Authority decided to construct a toll or free road in the Redwoods State Park this would be a state issue that would justify State involvement including legislation by those not representing Del norte? What exactly exempts San onofre(San Diego County by the way) from outside "interference"? Is it that only 5% of the visitors attend the part of the park to be impacted by the road? What is the percentage figure that allows "outside interference" to kick in? Is it the chain link fence, the Marine bombs, what exactly is it that makes this an exception?

You're really grasping at straws when you try to say that CEQA isn't the target of Issa--CEQA covers exactly that--construction, operation and maintenance and the negative environmental consequences that need to be mitigated. This is a shell game you're playing.

But let's clear this up. Will you stipulate that the FTCA will fully comply with CEQA including obeying any state or federal court order that orders a halt to further operations because of failure to comply with CEQA and will do so without asserting the claim that the federal law precludes the state from preventing the prject from being completed? Put up or shut up.

Art Pedroza

Isn't this story more about the Trannies wanting to undermine Loretta so Van Tran can run against her? Give it up! She will move on when she decides to, and not a minute sooner.

That is not Loretta

There is no way that is Loretta, unless it was taken A LONG time ago. Jubal, can you confirm the picture is Loretta.

Jubal

According to the House Armed Services Committee webiste it is. Type "Loretta Sanchez" into Google Images. It's the third result.

I posted this picture last week and hardly anyone commented.

Karl Rove

Geez Jubal, you are taking quite a few hits from the liberal left enviro nutcases on this.

They will never be happy until every business in California has moved some where else, every person left here is living in tents and growing their own food in their garden on public housing land because they have no jobs or income, and the primary mode of transporation has been reduced to roller skates. But then what will they do when they realize that since there are no businesses to pay taxes, and no income for people to pay taxes on, that they no longer have their unfettered access to the public money trough?

To paraphrase Jack Nicholson..."they can't handle the truth"...

Keep it up.

Bladerunner

gee, thanks KR, I was wondering why all the fuss. It's Chinatown.

Steve Johns

No matter how you slice it the toll road would continue the urban sprawl and bad planing that has defined OC......There are traffic alternatives to repair the 5......wake up ---Thanks Loretta---

The comments to this entry are closed.


Categories