Rashida Tlaib: Moroun 'disregards federal processes'

[Detroitnerd]

Bshea would appear to be of the cadre of pro-Moroun folks that are all too willing to disregard Moroun's disingenousness while bringing all his critical thinking to bear on Moroun's perceived opponents.

[BShea]

Bshea would appear to be of the cadre of pro-Moroun folks that are all too willing to disregard Moroun's disingenousness while bringing all his critical thinking to bear on Moroun's perceived opponents.

Wrong. I've called 'em out in print, too. Had a story a few weeks ago on their proposed changes to their portion of the Gateway that could jeopardize the federal funding. Not something I think DIBC enjoyed reading.

Some of us can actually discuss the issue without the partisan blinders. Worries about illness and prostitution are no less valid in Delray, so for Tlaib to raise 'em in her Freep piece is odd. She opens herself up to the charges of hypocrisy that you can read above. And she does raise valid concerns ... but she fails to note those very same concerns have been raised about DRIC, which to me says this is a partisan political issue for her, and my "perception" of her as a Moroun opponent is a valid one, too.

There are other concerns about Moroun and DIBC that are valid, but that doesn't negate the value of the Ambassador Bridge.

[dexterferry]

bshea, your criticism of tlaib [[it's been going on for months now) is starting to seem partisan. and maybe I missed the part where it is wrong for a politician to be an opponent of a billionaire slumlord who has wreaked havoc in her district for decades. . .

you sure have great faith in a greedy monopolist, bshea. And I don't think it's an ad hominum attack to wonder where that faith came from when, as Detroitnerd pointed out, you seem so enjoy viciously employing those stellar critical thinking skills against Moroun's "opponent" FAR MORE than the man himself.

[BShea]

bshea, your criticism of tlaib [[it's been going on for months now) is starting to seem partisan. and maybe I missed the part where it is wrong for a politician to be an opponent of a billionaire slumlord who has wreaked havoc in her district for decades. . .

you sure have great faith in a greedy monopolist, bshea. And I don't think it's an ad hominum attack to wonder where that faith came from when, as Detroitnerd pointed out, you seem so enjoy viciously employing those stellar critical thinking skills against Moroun's "opponent" FAR MORE than the man himself.

Tlaib can do as she pleases, and I believe she fully believes she's serving her constituents, or at least some of them [[because more than a few support the DIBC and work for it). That's her job. But when she publishes hypocritical stuff, I'm going to call it out. And the DIBC doesn't make a habit of publishing hyperbolic letters in the big newspapers.

You have no idea where my faith lies. Whatever Moroun's alleged havoc-wreaking might be/been, there's a public value in the Ambassador Bridge. Tlaib thinks it's a "monstrosity" but she's very much in the minority in that [[although I'd guess you're in that foxhole with her). And I'm here to talk about the bridge projects.

Questioning politicians, especially when they raise the specter of cancer and prostitution in this context, is pretty normal, I'd say ... even more so when that politician conveniently leaves out facts. Sounds like playing the very game she accuses the other side of.

I'll wait here while you explain to me how concerns about dirty air and prostitutes are purely a DIBC problem and won't be a DRIC problem. Tlaib implied it, you're obviously related to her, work for her, campaigned for her, paved he driveway, or some nonsense [[because, obviously, you can question something only when you're a vested, partisan party to it, right?), so you can explain that one.

You know what this is akin to? George W. Bush. He's been highly praised in Africa and some circles for his significant committment to fighting AIDS in Africa. That's pretty much agreed upon. But the bridge discussion is like saying the funding to fight AIDS he mandated was bad because he did stuff elsewhere people didn't like. Some people are unable to seperate the issues, and that's a shame.

"Moroun is bad, so everything he does is bad." That about hit the nail on the head for this one?

[BShea]

Is that so? How do you feel about the claim, often bandied about, that the "replacement span" isn't intended to be used permanently, that it's going to be closed as soon as the work is finished on rehabilitating the first span? Do you accept that?

Who is bandying that about? I hadn't heard that, and on its face it sounds absurd. Why would they spend $1 billion on a new span to then close it?

Look at Delray for yourself. It's been utterly destroyed. It's hard to argue that there's even a viable neighborhood left there anymore.

I have. We wrote a lengthy story on it. We went in and talked to residents and business owners. Are you suggesting the best thing for the remaining residents is to remove them and close the businesses? There's going to be people living there after DRIC is built. And the worries about prostitution and bad air will be just as valid.

Now, if you were representing the district, which includes both, and you had a choice of having a new span in Mexicantown or in Delray, which do you think you would choose.

Trouble is, eventually you need both. It's not one or the other. Even the Morouns say that. Traffic will one day resume to previous levels. Moroun says his concern is having two bridges before traffic justifies it -- which is sound logic. So in the end, opposing a second span -- for either DIBC or DRIC -- is a dead-end position.

Nobody is saying that the bridge isn't important.

Except Tlaib, who told everyone the Ambassador Bridge is a monstrosity. And her Freep column goes after Moroun -- which is fine by me, she can target who she pleases -- but a main point of her arguement is the current construction there, and her criticism fails to target MDOT, as well. Gateway is a state project because 75 and 96 needed a new interchange with the bridge. That's a fact. His second span itself has almost zero impact because it's next to one already there. In any case, the second span has NO WHERE near the impact on a neighborhood as DRIC does.

The Gateway project affects a lot more people in Mexicantown than the second span itself. But not criticism from Tlaib on that, I see.

MDOT and the DRIC backers say Gateway had nothing to do with a second span, which is 100% pure bullshit because I have the MDOT documents that clearly spell out that it does.

I do agree with Tlaib and everyone else that DIBC needs to get trucks off the surface streets.

[Detroitnerd]

[quote=BShea;2306]Is that so? How do you feel about the claim, often bandied about, that the "replacement span" isn't intended to be used permanently, that it's going to be closed as soon as the work is finished on rehabilitating the first span? Do you accept that?

Who is bandying that about? I hadn't heard that, and on its face it sounds absurd. Why would they spend $1 billion on a new span to then close it?

Well, take a look at this story in that weekly rag. That's the argument they made with the DEQ. Does it strike you as a wee bit disingenuous?

http://metrotimes.com/archives/story.asp?id=9730

... Moroun and his minions are calling the new span an "enhancement" to the existing bridge. The "enhancement" is needed, the bridge company states in documents filed with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, because the existing Ambassador Bridge has to be closed for "evaluation and repair," and to determine whether the 77-year-old structure is "economically viable for future use." "Once the new structure is completed," the company told the DEQ, "the existing Ambassador Bridge will be taken out of service in order to evaluate and make repairs deemed necessary and economically feasible. Upon completion of the anticipated repairs, the existing bridge will be used to provide redundancy and backup support when necessary to ensure the free flow of traffic at all times."
So, there you have it. We don't really need a new bridge, except that we really do need a new bridge. Or, to put it another way, in Matty's view, we really do need a new bridge, we just don't need one that will provide his company with competition, and the public with an alternative to his monopoly.

These are the kinds of reasons people look at Moroun and say he can't be trusted.

Look at Delray for yourself. It's been utterly destroyed. It's hard to argue that there's even a viable neighborhood left there anymore.

I have. We wrote a lengthy story on it. We went in and talked to residents and business owners. Are you suggesting the best thing for the remaining residents is to remove them and close the businesses? There's going to be people living there after DRIC is built. And the worries about prostitution and bad air will be just as valid.

Haha. I'm not suggesting anything. If you really talked to residents in Delray and interview them, you've probably found that a great number of them believe that efforts to "remove them and close the businesses" have been the city's standard plan for decades, witholding city services and routing bus lines around it. It has gotten to the point where that neighborhood probably *shouldn't* be inhabitated. It's toxic, polluted and, as I said, increasingly vacant.

Now, if you were representing the district, which includes both, and you had a choice of having a new span in Mexicantown or in Delray, which do you think you would choose.

Trouble is, eventually you need both. It's not one or the other. Even the Morouns say that. Traffic will one day resume to previous levels. Moroun says his concern is having two bridges before traffic justifies it -- which is sound logic. So in the end, opposing a second span -- for either DIBC or DRIC -- is a dead-end position.

You are evading the question and obfuscating.

Nobody is saying that the bridge isn't important.

Except Tlaib, who told everyone the Ambassador Bridge is a monstrosity.

Haha. I'd say that monstrosities are pretty important too.

And her Freep column goes after Moroun -- which is fine by me, she can target who she pleases -- but a main point of her arguement is the current construction there, and her criticism fails to target MDOT, as well. Gateway is a state project because 75 and 96 needed a new interchange with the bridge. That's a fact. His second span itself has almost zero impact because it's next to one already there. In any case, the second span has NO WHERE near the impact on a neighborhood as DRIC does.

Don't like my argument about comparing Mexicantown to Delray? Feel you'd rather not address comparing a vibrant neighborhood with new businesses, well-anchored retail, local business organizations, nonprofits, renovations, new housing and marketplaces, a healthy immigrant stream with a neighborhood that's increasingly empty, polluted, with closing businesses, disappeared retail, few local organizations or nonprofits, few new residents? Well, avoid it and just try to bring up the Gateway Project or something else that will help you as you try to pin something on Tlaib.

What I'm saying [[again and, apparently, again) is that if you think a second span to the Ambassador has "has almost zero impact because it's next to one already there," [[Twice as many particulate emissions? Twice as many trucks?) and that "the second span has NO WHERE near the impact on a neighborhood as DRIC does," I think you're not looking at how depopulated, polluted and unpromising Delray is. Our city officials spent decades destroying that part of the city. I am not surprised that Tlaib would rather have a new crossing there than to have a twin crossing in Mexicantown. And I think you'd be in the minority in not apprehending why.

[Reality_Check]

How tiresome.

Regret starting this thread yesterday morning [[seems longer than that, doesn't it?)

Lesson learned. This clearly isn't the venue for reasoned, rational discussion of border crossing issues.

[ For the record, I see Bill's GWB/AIDS analogy as apt, much as I separate Nixon's fatal flaws from his game-changing China policy. Multi-dimensional views trump black-or-white rigidity. For further evidence, consider where all-right and all-wrong thinking by some Israeli and some Palestinian leaders has led to. . . .

Ooops, now I've gone and waved another red flag . . .]

[Detroitnerd]

"Wrong."

No, I think you still have the appearance of it, at least on this forum.

"I've called 'em out in print, too."

Is that so? How do you feel about the claim, often bandied about, that the "replacement span" isn't intended to be used permanently, that it's going to be closed as soon as the work is finished on rehabilitating the first span? Do you accept that?

"Some of us can actually discuss the issue without the partisan blinders."

Does it hurt your arm to pat yourself on the back like that all the time?

"Worries about illness and prostitution are no less valid in Delray, so for Tlaib to raise 'em in her Freep piece is odd."

Is it odd? Look at Delray for yourself. It's been utterly destroyed. It's hard to argue that there's even a viable neighborhood left there anymore. For decades, it has been a polluted, increasingly vacant, toxic-smelling neighborhood, with Zug Island, the water filtration plant, the refineries and now a foul-smelling composting plant. Now look at Mexicantown. It's a vibrant neighborhood in the middle of a comeback. Now, if you were representing the district, which includes both, and you had a choice of having a new span in Mexicantown or in Delray, which do you think you would choose. In your rush to find a partisan issue so you can accuse Tlaib of hypocrisy, I think you miss a valid distinction.

"There are other concerns about Moroun and DIBC that are valid, but that doesn't negate the value of the Ambassador Bridge"

Nobody is saying that the bridge isn't important. I think there is a very real debate going on here, and I feel that Tlaib is being sincere, at least way more sincere than Stamper and Moroun. As she should be: She's representing her constituents; the Ambassador crowd are naturally only interested in their own enterprise.