Look at who's a mindreader

First, read my Wednesday post and decide whether I am "[Insisting] on Misrepresenting Congressional Candidate's Position on PRT", as Ken Avidor 'insists' on claiming.

I have corresponded with Ms. Winograd, and what she told me is, "Until I know a lot more about the PRT, I'm afraid I'm going to have to decline to support it."
That is a far cry from Ken Avidor's extreme claims, such as 'PRT is a right wing scam' as well as being 'impossible.' In fact, Ms. Winograd's position is perfectly reasonable, because I don't want people to support PRT either until they know 'more' about it! Just like I don't want them to oppose it until knowing more about it.

Ken is claiming to know what's in my head! The headlines he has written for the relevant blog posts are:

1. "PRT Promoter David Gow Spreads More Misinformation"

2. "PRT Promoter David Gow Insists on Misrepresenting Congressional Candidate's Position on PRT"

He's claiming I have the intention of misleading. Takes one to know one, Ken!

Dear readers, tell me if this is unreasonable: I get a Google Alert on PRT; it links me to a webpage that quotes Winograd praising the 1970s "Boeing" PRT (Morgantown), citing it as an example of how we should be putting aerospace workers to work. Isn't it then reasonable to assume she would support PRT today? Of course it is. But not if you're conspiracy-minded Ken Avidor.

I'll conclude my Winograd-related remarks by wishing her luck in the primary, we need fewer blue dogs and more true progressives in Congress.

Let's move on to the main part of the discussion: Ken Avidor's latest postings provide us material for another installment of--

What We Learned

What we learned this time is that Ken Avidor is so desperate to recover from the drubbing he took at Democratic Underground that he reverts to pattern -- he goes looking for another thing he can distort, in order to divert attention from his defeat. I won't just claim this, I'll provide evidence.

For example, after this defeat at Daily Kos, he constructed the "PRT = torture" lie.

After he failed to prove that only right wingers want PRT, he claimed persecution by a PRT company.

This time he decided to go after my list of pro-PRT people and organizations at Get On Board!PRT.

My mention of Winograd's documentable praise for "Boeing" PRT is notable because she is the only one on the list not making a specific, affirmative endorsement of the current generation of PRT technologies.

That Ken is picking on my listing of Winograd shows how desperate he is for cheap 'victories.' How about the others on the list, Ken?

• Are you going to claim World Wildlife Fund's pro-PRT video doesn't mean they support PRT?
  
• That the California Democratic Party didn't mean to put PRT in its 2004 platform?
  
• That Congressman Hinchey was talking about something else when he said government should focus on PRT?
  
• That Joan Bokaer's participation in the Podcar City II conference doesn't mean she's for PRT?
  
• That when Debbie Cook wrote"large-scale ramp-up of PodCars can significantly mitigate the impacts of climate change and peak oil, transforming ground transport from polluting fuels to clean solar energy," she didn't really mean it?

Want a good laugh? Imagine Avidor writing to everyone on the list, trying to grill them about PRT!

I hope you get a lot of comfort out of cheap 'victories,' Ken. They're the only kind you're going to get.

Also today: A grant is not an earmark, Ken! (and why is he surprised the Winona "PRT lab" is about economic development? It's what the city's Nov. 2009 pdf was all about!)

In the news: Minnesota Republican senate candidate Paul Ibisch is not on board with Winona PRT plan!
(and Democrat Steve Murphy of Red Wing "welcomes funding for PRT development in Winona or elsewhere.")Ken Avidor's biggest meme is wrong again

gPRT Imagine! - "Dear Rep. Hinchey: Why do you support Michele Bachmann? Sincerely, Ken Avidor."

Tattoo You...

...Ken!

Yesterday: "Democrats are divided..."

gPRT No Kleenex?

The One-Armed Man

Or, "How Does It Feel?"

Editor's note: We continue beta-testing the change to one of the oldest editorial policies of "PRT is a Joke" IS A JOKE. For a limited time, The Name of the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist will be shown -- although special formatting will be used.

Now that Ken Avidor has had a few days to let things sink in, I now provide for him the following answer to the musical question, "Why Is PRT Promoter David Gow Tweeting About Anonymous Comments on a Crime Story?"

And by "for him," of course I mean 'for everyone on the internet'; I do not want to be accused of thinking my blogging is private.

Here is Ken's complaint:

The easy answer is I am mentioned in a recent City Pages article about a fugitive from justice, a former Green Party candidate for Ward 10 and a former friend of mine. I am quoted in the article saying clearly that Knapp should be brought to justice and that I had no knowledge of the crimes Knapp is accused of committing.

Here is a list of Mr. Gow's recent tweets about me... four out of five mention myself and the fugitive, Mark Knapp and link to the article :



David Gow's latest tweet says the following:

More comment in City Pages' #MarkKnapp story http://is.gd/5rtfq #Ken Avidor

There are two new comment(s) to the article. The first states the following:

So where's the photo of Knapp so we citizens can help capture him? Maybe Ken Avidor could could submit a perp sketch. Oh wait - after looking at his Petters trial sketches, that wouldn't help.

Well, there's a screenshot of Mark Knapp's old campaign website with a photo of him in that article.

The other anonymous comment Mr. Gow tweeted about says the following:

I never did trust that Ken Avidor. Cynicism is the easiest out. Interesting that the federal marshalls are visiting him. he just spent several weeks sitting next to his FBI buddies in federal court. Go figure. he is not one to trust

It is true that I sat next to the FBI during much of the trial, because that was the best place to sketch the witnesses. During opening and closing arguments, I sat far to the left side of the gallery to get a profile of the attorneys.

As for describing the FBI as my "buddies"... I have sent three Freedom of Information requests to the FBI for the audio and video exhibits shown in open court at the trial of Gary Dean Zimmermann.... and all three requests were rejected because the FBI said I needed a waiver from Zimmermann, which he refused to give me.

Do I support Federal investigations into economic crimes such as Ponzi schemes, bribery and identity theft? You bet I do. Do I think the investigations, trials and convictions of Gary Dean Zimmermann and Tom Petters were fair and just? Absolutely. Until Mark Knapp is apprehended, we will not know whether he is guilty of the crimes for which he has been charged. However, Mark Knapp's flight from justice is a crime. In order to apprehend Knapp, law enforcement came to my home and others... I don't have a problem with that. The Feds are working really hard to investigate and prosecute white collar crime... and they deserve our support. They have my support.

Do the PRT guys support the Fed's effort to investigate and prosecute economic crimes? [all ellipses in original]

Doesn't this seem a trifle bit much, a little too desperate to explain things to casual readers unfamiliar with the history? And therein lies the purpose of my tweeting about Mark Knapp's past ties to Ken Avidor: How does it feel, Ken? How does it feel there might be even the slightest, nuanced hint of the mere possibility of your name being guilt-by-associated with a disreputable person?

Because that's what Ken Avidor has been doing to PRT supporters for years. Even if all you do is say something non-committal about PRT, you might wake up the next day to find yourself in Ken Avidor's Pod Squad with Mark Olson (R-domestic violence), "Gary Dean Zimmermann" (GP-illegal gratuities), and the politically disreputable Michele Bachmann (R-Crazytown). (Think I'm exaggerating? Ask Julie Risser.^{1 2 3})

And now the clog is on the other foot. All I am doing is stating indisputable, objective facts -- that Mark Knapp is a PRT-hater, that he is a fugitive, that he is an ex-friend of Avidor, that he and Avidor used to co-author a blog, and that said blog has been taken down -- and look at how gymnastically Ken Avidor falls all over himself to distance himself from Knapp.

Think hard the next time you consider smearing anyone, Ken.

PS- Put the Green Party Gone Bad blog back up, Ken! What are you afraid of? Doesn't the work stand on its own?

gPRT The commenter's perp sketch joke also went right over Ken's head

What We Learned - What do you expect from a Luddite?

Editor's note: We continue beta-testing the change to one of the oldest editorial policies of "PRT is a Joke" IS A JOKE. For a limited time, The Name of the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist will be shown -- although special formatting will be used.

Everyone knows how Twitter works, right? It's a microblog service -- like any other blog you can have, except the posts are a maximum of 140 characters at a time. So what is this PRT Moondoggie post all about???

It's all delusional. Delusional!

• "Several PRT websites"
Two. I administer two serious PRT websites, Get On Board PRT and GetThereFast, and they are not devoted to Ken Avidor. It's not all about you, Ken .

• "several attack blogs aimed at me"
This is just spin by someone who knows his propaganda does not stand up under the light of debunking.

• I think my "activity on Twitter is private"
Laughable! If I thought my tweets were private, to whom was I telling all those Avidor-based one-liners (which are comedy gold, by the way)?
Or pick another tweet topic: #inews9k, the as-it-happens, Twitter version of my almost-weekly blog feature, "iNews 9000 Turbo wi-fi headline translator." It used to be on my blog Wiseline Institute and Center For The Secular Humorism, but for almost 2 years it's been running at Ragebot.
Here's the thing: at the end of each week I cull the best of my on-Twitter #inews and post them on Ragebot -- with an invitation to readers to read all the #inews ON TWITTER!--

I'm driving visitors to my Twitter feed, whether they Follow me or not. Ken Avidor: why would I make such an open invitation if I thought my tweets are private? The blog you're reading right now has the same invitation in the sidebar!

Where would anyone get such an idea, that tweets are private? It has the feel of an ego-driven notion. Therefore, my theory is that Ken Avidor is merely projecting -- that he himself thought tweets are private, and only learned the truth recently, and now he's going to show off his high-tech knowledge. He is, after all, the 'expert' who thought "LIM" is a PRT company.

• "furiously tweeting that he was being sarcastic"
He posted this as 'evidence':

Another example of Ken Avidor not reading what he clips (or absence of a sense of humor) -- those are the jokes, Ken! Those are one-liners! Thus the #badumbum hashtag! And you didn't even include the tweet with the "DOPE" pic!

Ken also urges the following:

David Gow (Blogger ID- Mr_Grant) is very much the public face of Personal Rapid Transit on the internet. I hope Governor Pawlenty, MnDOT Commissioner Tom Sorel and elected officials take a good look at PRT promoters like David Gow before they waste additional time or money on PRT.

Thank you, Ken! Thank you for associating PRT with me, a smart, liberal blogger, world-class satirist, and environmentalist! Of course, Gov. Pawlenty is a Resmuglican, so maybe Avidor's Palin-style questioning of my associations would make The Gov oppose rider-oriented, energy smart PRT on partisan political grounds.

Did I just blow your strategy, Ken?

Of course, that plan closes the barn door too late. If I am already "the public face of PRT on the internet," then Commissioner Sorel (and maybe new PRT Director Thakur) already know about me. And went ahead with the PRT initiative anyway.

And they did so even though they must have known about Ken Avidor and all his anti-PRT propaganda -- because he is very much the public face of opposition to PRT on the internet.

I'm afraid you lose again, Ken, no matter how you slice it.

Oh why not: "Audacity of the Dope"!

I nearly forgot: Ken, what did you mean by:

"Polish PRT?"

Ken Avidor (@Daily Kos)
read the PRTJJ coverage

gPRT

Shiny PRT?

(Updated) Regarding incidents at Streetsblog LA and Daily Kos

Editor's note: We continue beta-testing the change to one of the oldest editorial policies of "PRT is a Joke" IS A JOKE. For a limited time, The Name of the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist will be shown -- although special formatting will be used.

Time for another installment of: What We Learned!

1. Multi-cartoonist Kena Wei (Ken Avidor) didn't know the difference between policy and advocacy -- until I told him. I say it here:

"advocacy of any transportation technology, by anyone, does not determine how a government would use it in the real world. Advocacy outlines the stakes, but does not decide, public policy."

and it comes out here:

"Nothing but rail" is not my "position".

But, it doesn't matter what my "position" is.

It's up to citizens and public officials to decide what transportation is right for their community.

2. Ken doesn't know the difference between advocacy and engineering.

If the PRT guys were really intent on creating their "revolution in sustainable transport", they would put more time into proving it could work instead of arguing at transportation forums and blogs or putting out tons of hype and CGI videos on the web... just do it already. [ellipsis in original]

PRT engineers don't have time to blog and go to transportation forums in the USA. They are doing "it" -- at Heathrow, Uppsala and Masdar. And Ken is not cheering them on every step of the way.

3. He likes how "straw man" sounds, but may not know what one is.

Wow... that big heap of straw men keeps getting bigger and bigger. [ellipsis in original]

Whenever anyone tries to inject some reality into a discussion about PRT, the handful of PRT true believers attack the messengers

Asking him to explain things he wrote are straw men??? And Ken has attacked so many messengers, there's a Wanted poster of him at every UPS Store in America.

4. Ken thinks he is clairvoyant.

And the argument that a city can be served better by PRT than conventional transit could be tested with a peer-reviewed computer model... but, the PRT guys won't do that because such a model would prove that real world circumstances (vandalism, weather etc.) would make a complex system such as PRT infeasible in an urban area. [ellipsis in original]

In order to know this, wouldn't Ken had to have already run such a model himself? That's rhetorical.


5. You be the judge! Here are remarks Ken made about a number of PRT systems, in context.

Zoom

Now take the poll!


Seriously: if Ken Avidor meant "Polish PRT?" as an innocent comment, why is he evading giving any explanation?

History: What Ken once said about a different place in the world -- "Strange place Dubai... lot's [sic] of weird stuff happens there" [ellipsis in original] (sneering at a plan for an indoor ski slope -- that was actually built!)

Plus, he got Dubai mixed up with Abu Dhabi.

gPRT

Extremism in the defense of LRT is his vice

Editor's note: We continue beta-testing the change to one of the oldest editorial policies of "PRT is a Joke" IS A JOKE. For a limited time, The Name of the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist will be shown -- although special formatting will be used.

I think we need to isolate on one of the products of the last Daily Kos komment kerfuffle, because it reveals how extreme Ken Avidor is in his opposition to PRT.

Technically, the extremism concerns his attacks on PRT supporters. Remember, for him it's all about the right-wing conspiracy: if you're for PRT, then you're against LRT and just like Michele Bachmann.

Avidor's latest attack on Emory Bundy is the revelation. He's trotted out Bundy's name lots of times, but I don't think Ken had researched Bundy's history in much depth. After I dropped the news that Bundy had served as Allard Lowenstein's chief of staff, it took Avidor exactly seven hours to come up with a response.

It was also in that threadlet that I informed Avidor of what Eleanor Roosevelt wrote about Bundy, saying he (and Lowenstein and others on the 1959 Africa mission) "showed great courage."

Ken Avidor's reaction? To ignore the Lowenstein/Roosevelt aspect, and practice more guilt-by-association by posting a screenshot from a video -- Bundy, with the word "Republican" in the background.

Think about the litmus test. For Avidor, support for light rail is such an important indicator of political affiliation that it trumps Bundy's comradeship with Lowenstein. Light rail even trumps Eleanor Roosevelt.

I'll close by noting Avidor's re-use of the James Howard Kunstler YouTuber in the threadlet. Think Kenny-boy likes Kunstler because he's an objective, neutral social critic? Or maybe he just likes Kunstler's taste in art. Look familiar?



Previously: What We Learned



gPRT

Post mortem - What We Learned

Editor's note: Today we begin beta-testing a change to one of the oldest editorial policies of "PRT is a Joke" IS A JOKE. For a limited time, The Name of the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist will be shown -- although special formatting will be used.

When a comment thread like the recent, bifurcated threads at Daily Kos and Viropop are concluded, I like to go back and read through it to summarize What We Learned.

So what did we learn about Ken Avidor, the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist, this time?

1. I put forward, twice, the proposition that the approach he takes in opposing PRT is to claim that all PRT supporters believe the same thing.

"What Ken is doing is attempting to establish a stereotype... 'People who fervently advocate PRT don't advocate light rail'... What Avidor is claiming is about as imaginative as 'Battlestar Galactica fans don't like Star Trek.' On a superficial level this would seem a convenient and easy way to pigeonhole people. But if you give it just a little critical thought of course it's not true, even though you can find a few people who fit the stereotype."

"Your thesis is that all PRT supporters believe what RP4409 believes. The video does not show that. The video just shows that you found a guy who fits your stereotype."

2. KEN DOES NOT DENY HE IS APPLYING A STEREOTYPE. In fact his response does exactly that.

"What did the guy in the video say about LRT?
What did the guy say about PRT?
What did his brochure show?
BUSTED!!!"

He's saying the words of the guy and his brochure prove his thesis ("busted"), that all "PRT promoters are anti-Light Rail Transit (LRT)" (and right-wingers like Michele Bachmann).

3. Then in a followup in the Viropop branch of the discussion, just to make sure we understand, he posts another video, and writes "busted" about that one too. In my reply, I post videos from the World Wildlife Fund and sustainability activist Joan Bokaer, and ask him if they are "busted" too. I am asking Why are you ignoring things that don't fit your right-wing anti-light rail stereotype?

4. He confirms that he ignores them, by ignoring them! He posts three videos from his talking points.

There you have it. CONFIRMATION that Ken Avidor's strategy is to stereotype all PRT supporters as anti-light rail and right-wing, and ignore evidence to the contrary.

Updates

Followup, in which I open up a big ol' can of Eleanor Roosevelt on his ass: Ken Avidor hurls more mud, and hits: Allard K. Lowenstein's chief of staff (Emory Bundy, "a well-known hater of PRT").

Sad: If you Google a sheffer lang, the current #1 listing is Ken Avidor's "obit" for Lang. Here's a passage:

If anything characterized his career it was pure hatred of transit. He described buses as "no see ums" because to him, they were always empty. His style was confrontational, macho, take no prisoners. An aide to a St. Paul city councilmember said that every time she heard him talk she wanted to go home and shoot herself. Source

I- I'm having trouble smelling the memorial wreath.

Late late on June 2: He just can't discuss it anymore ("Whatever" #19)


gPRT

See him invent a new form of prejudice

Lately this little anti-anti-PRT war has been heating up, and the last couple days I've gotten really excited about it. Not only has Daily Kos been the scene of a whopping 50+ comment thread of funny, but yesterday Kenmore hinted at yet more hilarity to come:

I can always tell when something really embarrassing has occurred for the PRT guys when Mr. Gow tries to distract me with his silly comment spam.

Stay tuned.

by K*n A***** on Mon May 04, 2009 at 09:45:43 AM PDT

I had no idea what he could be fantasizing about. And today we found out: the Masdar PRT "is a joke" because torture occurs in Abu Dhabi.:

It turns out the PRT system is a joke... but what do expect from a country where a prominent royal family member tortures people [ellipsis in original]
Source

You can read for yourself* the really excellent comments by environmentalists who tore Kenwood a new asshole, so I won't do a recap here.

I do want to highlight a particularly distasteful -- yet amusing -- gaffe by Kennel Ration:

Don't believe greenwashing hype... there is no way that Masdar can be "sustainable"... it's in a desert. [ellipses in original]
Source

He's saying people of desert nations can't live in sustainable conditions. As I wrote in response, "the Mideast had desert cities long before Western colonialism, by their very existence they were sustainable."

Wow. You can't have a sustainable city "in a desert." What do you call that kind of prejudice: "Biome-centric"?

Update: we have achieved today's "whatever"!

Read the whole shebang at Daily Kos.

* I did, it was great to start the day with a big laff. Be sure not to miss:

• He gets Dubai mixed up with Abu Dhabi/Masdar
• Maybe to him they all look alike? Thermidor confuses Sheikh Issa ("BOOO! HISS!!!") bin Zayed Al Nahyan with Sheikh Mohammed ("YAY!!!") bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

gPRT
Ken Avidor OF ARABIA!

Underwhelming response

Here it is, April 14, 2009, and the comment areas on all my blogs remain distinctly non-flamey. This despite the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist's March 5, 2009 long-winded call to his followers to man the barricades:

I invite our readers to go to Gow's many blogs and ask him questions about Bachmann and PRT. Source

For those of you playing along at home, the 100% lack of response to this marching order serves to confirm either of two alternate theories:

1) no one reads Kenjob
2) no one who reads him is paying attention.

What was it all about? Let's look at the operative passage in his post:

I invite David Gow to explain in the comments why PRT promoters thought it was a good idea back in 2005 to have Bachmann, Olson and Zimmermann promoting PRT and why Gow and his cohort ATE have all that crap on the web about me...
. . .
For example... [ellipsis in original] what is this PhotoShopped image of me as George Bush with Bachman's face on the seal from one of "Mr_Grant's" blogs supposed to mean?
Source*

Huh? As I recall he was right there (figuratively) when all that rigorous debunking and top-flight funny was being written! Was that not he, clomping Fudd-like through the cyberspace forest in search of 'Pewsonal Wabbit Twansit' ^{1, 2}?

Oh, he remembers all right, no one could be living that far out of the moment. That leaves one explanation: TICK-TOCK!! Here comes PRT Cottontail hopping down the guideway, in the form of the ULTra and 2getThere projects, and Kiln Ovendoor is bailing.

Rodiva doesn't have the courage of his convictions. By pretending not to know that he was the impetus for "all that crap," he's signaling a desire to revise history-- as in, "Anti-PRT? Moi?" But his is a futile hope, since (1) I would never remove any analysis, satire or graphics because his readership attacked me, and (2) his readership obviously doesn't care.

Here's the truly pathetic thing: He's not even acting like a real "skeptic." If I were an anti-PRT foamer like the Propagandist (or even a normal skeptic), the existence of operational PRT systems would do nothing to shake my questioning of the technology.

PRT projects are human-engineered projects, with sizable system integration requirements. A real skeptic would realize there is risk of failure in any such endeavor, sit back, and wait for the error reports to come in.

In the past Kenwood has mounted the most obsessive of propaganda campaigns against PRT, and hasn't been afraid to go on record claiming truth of even the most transparent falsehoods. He has had no compunction calling PRT supporters a multitude of offensive names.

But with respect to politics, why can't he take a position on one of the easiest questions of all?

At the Dump Bachmann blog, Labridor's "blogging" lets others do the hard work, regurgitating reportage by other bloggers and the news media. Little or none of it are his own opinions -- that would require command of facts and cogent analysis, and he's shown himself capable of neither.

Last month he noted that Rep. Michele Bachmann had another "eruption" during a radio interview -- but which I call tantamount to a call to armed insurrection.

Now, Bachmann is easy pickings. The more she acts as a GOP-approved talking head, the more chances she has to be stupid in public. And she does. She's the de facto leader of the Kongressional Kinda Krazy Kaucus, so it's Insert Foot almost every time she opens her mouth.

Yes, should be easy pickings. Yet all Kennel Ration can do is politely ask "Should Bachmann Be Censured for Her Recent Remarks?" and "I hope reporters ask Bachmann... whether her recent remarks should also be censured."

"Should"?
"Hope"?
"Whether?"

Come on Kenmore, it's a blog -- take a position already! This is the easy stuff! Here, let me show you: Yes! Michele Bachmann should be censured! Do it! Do it now!

There. Jeez.


Read the funny

* Since we're on the subject, here is my comment on Bachmann, Olson and Zimmermann getting their cooties on PRT: even broken clocks are right twice a day.

gPRTThere is no Ken Avidor Easter Egg in this post

Against it before he was for it

Now he's an urban planner.

The city of Alameda (Kenwood claims he lives there) is working with the developer SunCal to redevelop Alameda Point, the site of the former Alameda Naval Air Station. Good idea? That's for the community to decide.

The Point is a sprawling 770 acre brownfield at the west end of Alameda's island.

One version of SunCal's proposal, option "B," was designed by reknowned planner Peter Calthorpe. The concept calls for 6,000 homes on 700 acres of the Point. This translates to 13,056 people on just over 1 square mile, nearly the density of San Francisco (16,634). Alameda's current density is on the order of 2500-ish per sq mi.

Calthorpe has designed it to have a PRT network, and SunCal wants to connect it to BART in Oakland. Therefore, Kenmore hates the "B" plan.

Kennel Ration says PRT is being put forward to get around environmental regulations that limit density, instead of offering "real solutions" for transit:

Is PRT also an Environmental Regulation-Busting Tool?[*]
. . .
PRT is being used to bamboozle citizens in Alameda into scrapping Measure A, a ballot initiative aimed to regulate development...

...The 1972 ballot initiative regulates lot size and forbids construction of housing units that would accommodate more than two families. The developer has put forward two potential options, both of which would require a ballot initiative, likely in 2009, that would waive Measure A at least at Alameda Point.

Instead of offering a real solution to the transportation needs of the people who move into those additional 2,000 units, Suncal offers an imaginary, snake-oil solution - PRT... CLEVER!!! Source

In other words, he is complaining the Point "B" plan ought to be using light rail. Here's his contradictory logic: with light rail, plan "B" would still be 13,056 people per sq mi. Hold on -- is that density "regulation-busting," or isn't it? Note also that Lubridor misrepresented Measure A's purpose -- it is not primarily to protect the environment, but to keep density low (no more than 2 families per lot). The slogan of the Keep Measure A campaign is "No Overcrowding."

But if the regulations aren't busted, that low density is not cost effective for light rail. And if you don't have density, the alternative is sprawl somewhere else. Humidor is either supporting Measure A against Smart Growth and higher densities that help any mass transit work better, or is fine with busting regulations if it is light rail doing the busting.

He's against Smart Growth before he was for it! He was a NIMBY until he wasn't!

Thermidor always thinks light rail is the solution and ignores the urban planning context. Now, I'm not an urban planner either. But I've looked at enough MUPs to notice some realities at Alameda that would render conventional, large-vehicle transit problematic, although not impossible.

It has to do with distance and cost. The most direct route for a light rail connection to BART is to go north about 1200 yards, to the West Oakland BART station.

Except there's something in the way: the Oakland Inner Harbor. This is a 300 yard wide navigable waterway. An expensive high bridge would be needed to cross it, in order to allow ocean-going freighters and the San Francisco ferries to pass beneath.

The alternative would be to run the light rail line east through the built-up area of Alameda. Not only would this create a beneficial transit connection to and for the rest of the city, but it would also allow light rail to cross the Inner Harbor channel at its narrowest point in the Fruitvale Bridge area, and then on to the Fruitvale BART station. These would be good results.

The problem is that it's about 4.8 miles to Fruitvale Bridge, and through the heart of town. Do you think Alameda or SunCal have $250 millionish for such a disruptive project? Light rail in this situation would be a non-starter politically. No redevelopment, no "busting" of regulations -- no Smart Growth. "CLEVER!!!"

* Notice his longtime and frequent use of the question mark. It's a classic cheat used by ignoramuses and propagandists -- a question mark turns a smear into a question. They don't really answer the question, they just present distortions, so to the casual reader it appears the smear is the answer to the question. Plus, if fact-checkers catch them lying, propagandists can use the excuse 'I was only asking a question.'

Update (11/23): Developer chooses the 4,000 home option

He's green until he's not (2012)

gPRT
Someone's knockin' on my Ken Avidor, somebody's ringin' the bell

See his Right Wing connection, Part IV

Over at his other-other-other blog, Minneapolis Confidential, Ken Avidor the Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist is still practicing the politics of guilt by association. It seems Jeral Poskey, former Chairman of the Advanced Transit Association, has made a (gasp!) political contribution:

Jeral Poskey, former executive at Taxi 2000 and former head of the PRT-promoting Advanced Transit Association (ATRA) is a contributor to John McCain's campaign... [ellipses in original] Source

What does this have to do with Personal Rapid Transit technology? Nothing. Poskey is free to support whomever he chooses because, luckily, we still live in America where the Constitution is still (mostly) in effect. Any political preference he may be expressing with his dollars¹ has nothing to do with the feasibility or viability of a technology.

Of course, we have addressed this topic before. Paul Weyrich, a light rail supporter, is also the co-founder of the ultra-right wing Heritage Foundation. He's the one who once said:

I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections, quite candidly, goes up as voting populace goes down. Source (Crooks and Liars)

The double standard here is that the nominally Democratic Mr. Avidor never acknowledges Resmuglican cooties on light rail -- but he screams when there are connections to PRT (e.g., Slappy Olson and Smoochy Bachmann).

Remember, I don't care about anyone's campaign contributions. But by his blogging it is clear that Ken does -- notwithstanding his lack of comment regarding Weyrich.

So I don't care that Light Rail Now!² underwriter Richard Borkowski has contributed to Lyndon LaRouche to the tune of $3,725 since 2007. Borkowski's political views do not bear on the feasibility, viability or utility of light rail transit. But one would think Humidor would care, since right-wing cooties are supposed to taint whatever they touch, evidence supporting his claim that PRT is a right wing anti-transit pro-highway conspiracy.

What I do care about are issues such as astroturf outreach -- such as when the first page of narrative at the website for Light Rail Cincinnati (also a Light Rail Now! underwriter) is written by someone with a Parsons email address.

Part I | Part II | Part III | Part V

Related: Captain Whatever fades away again (see Comments)

gPRTKen Avidor is the burnt sienna in the Crayola box

1. Politically sophisticated people know that contributions are made for all sorts of reasons -- ideological agreement, as a favor, quid pro quos, losing a bet, etc.

2. A Texas organization with anti-PRT propaganda he is fond of quoting.

Just Perfect (Mock Journalist, Part IV)

The Minnesota anti-PRT propagandist's body of work finally bears some fruit. But as a debunking tool; probably not what he had in mind. Read on.

He's still doing his best (one assumes) to make video reports on the Uptake online channel. In the new one, he interviews Elwyn Tinklenberg (1/11/08), who is running as a Democrat for the Minnesota 6th congressional seat currently held by Smoochy Bachmann. I say "as a Democrat," because the last time he ran for Congress he was against gay marriage and pro-life.

And against gun control. Because what Democrats want is to go for a stroll in their quiet urban villages, armed. Wait-- not Democrats/urban village. Resmuglicans/Old West village.

It would be wrong to call this video an interview. It's more of a campaign ad -- Tinklenberg gives his stump speech, and when he pauses to take a breath Kenmore slips in a few words.

Kenwood loves ol' E.T. A little over two years ago, in the Seattle P-I Transit Forum, he sneered that I probably didn't like Tinklenberg because he supported the Twin Cities' Hiawatha light rail (see table). That was the time he wrote that a candidate gets his vote just by having a picture taken with a train.

Watching the interview, it appears Tinklenberg knows his questioner, criticizing Smoochy's support for PRT like he had spent the night before studying Labridor's webpage and blogs. I wouldn't be surprised if Tinklenberg exited the interview with his backside covered with Humidor's lipmarks.

It's interesting, though, because of this description in Tinklenberg's Wikipedia bio:

Elwyn Tinklenberg was the Minnesota state transportation commissioner under former Governor Jesse Ventura. In that role, Tinklenberg worked with Ventura to support aggressive construction of highways, particularly serving the northern suburbs of the Twin Cities, and a new light-rail system. Source

What??? The author of Roadkill Bill pitched softball questions to a member of the (aggressive) highway construction lobby? Worse still, suburban, sprawl-promoting highways! In Kenthorpe's universe, the highway lobby is supposed to be for PRT, surely that inconsistency alone must have counted for something.

What's more, in that same universe there's an interesting trail from Tinklenberg right to Bachmann. Turns out, Tinklenberg's transportation consulting firm is associated with SEH -- Short Elliott Hendrickson -- in an old controversy about no-bid contracts he obtained:

S.E.H. and the Tinklenberg Group will collaborate and put together a Public Involvement Plan whereby a newsletter or brochure will be sent to Albertville residents and specific business owners that would be assessed and affected by the proposed I-94 Project. In addition to the newsletter or brochure, the Albertville website can be used to convey project information. Several public information meetings will be held to inform the public. S.E.H and the Tinklenberg Group will put together a budget to accomplish this business. Source

Kenweed might love E.T., but he hates SEH. They were the engineering firm on the "35W Excess" project he opposed. They also used to be part of the group working with Taxi 2000 Corp. So, a connection from Tinklenberg, to SEH, to highways and PRT. You'd think that would set off alarm bells.

But there's more. Kenthorpe himself has done the work showing that Taxi 2000 uses a lobbyist named Edwin Cain, whose picture is on the wall of Bachmann's virtual office! Tinklenberg -> SEH -> Taxi 2000 -> Ed Cain -> Bachmann!

"Maybe he didn't know about Tinklenberg and SEH."

Yeah, I considered that. Except that he covered it himself in 2006.

And yet not one peep about it in the Uptake video. What could possibly cause him to ignore his own blogging on these issues?

Update (5/22/08): Nedken still promoting Tinklenberg

gPRT
What's so funny 'bout peace, love and Ken Avidor?