Obama Looking Out for Little Guy or Business as Usual?

(Ziggy at one time touted that all coal companies should be like Arch)

No, that is not quite what Ziggy said.

Try again.

ohio county wrote:

So now you guys are attacking him because he is a combat veteran go figure.

Who attacked him? Be specific. Who, assuming "you guys" means rightwingers, attacked this guy at all much less for being a combat veteran?

"..Much of what that guy wrote has nothing to do with mountaintop mining. It's lovely that WVA gave the Union so many soldiers, and that his uncles were miners (regrettably having lost their lives), and that he served in 'Nam. Bully.

If mountain top mining is threatening this guy's family, and we need to do away with the coal industry and ruin WVA's economy, well, that's one thing, but don't give me this shinola about having served in 'Nam. Thanks for your service, Cletus, but it's besides the point. If mining is to be stopped, then let it be stopped on the merits of stopping it, not on some story of proud generations long past.."

Tempted though I am to claim you did not identify the speaker, that's pretty mild for an "attack". You might not know this but SheikBen, despite having two names, is but one person. Yes, that's true. That would mean that he would qualify as exactly "you guy" as opposed to "you guys". You have a habit of painting everybody with the same brush. I suppose it saves time but it is disingenuous on its face.

ziggy wrote:

(Ziggy at one time touted that all coal companies should be like Arch)

No, that is not quite what Ziggy said.

Try again.

I don't need to try anything. My memory is perfectly fine.

You try again. And while you're at it, perhaps you can explain what this guy serving in Nam has to do with anything.

You said Massey called HIS enemies...but there's a few problems with your statement.

First, you never answered my question as to whether Massey was calling all enemies communist, ect or if it was only the Gazette and B) no one has identified who the mine belongs to but for some reason it's conveniently credited to Massey even though Arch Coal (of whom you sang praises) is the largest MT mining company in the state.

Jimmy,

I'd like to point out that when Sherm, or anyone, refers to "you guys" and puts me in the company of the Sheik I consider it an honor despite our areas of disagreement. Mike, much like yourself, is a man of intelligence, honesty and integrity. This lady is quite flattered when "lumped in" with such fine gentlemen.

Did you see "blindfolded and walked into cactus yesterday"? He had me at "blindfolded".

Well OC for someone who expresses such disdain for lawyers you sure seem to parse my posts awful close.

Not that I mind, I need to choose my words better sometimes.

I just get excited and type faster than I can think.

I have made the correction.

The Sheik's words are now his and his alone.

No harm, no foul.

btw howbout them 'eers?

And the big Orange?

OC and Steph, you make me blush. I am the one to be honored by being "lumped in" with the lot of you.

As for Sherm, well, I'm going to assume that he missed my point entirely.

It was difficult to miss.

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy,

Yes, the merits of MTR (or the demerits of it) are completely unrelated to whether or not it's opponents are greeniacs or commies.

Just like they are completely unrelated to this guy's service in 'Nam.

Just because "the other side is doing it" does not mean that this piece of propaganda gets a pass. If MTR is wrong (and threatening this guy's family), I don't care if he's a vet or an Enron retiree. It's completely beside the question and only obscures the real matter."

No, you are wrong. When the discussion is in an atmosphere where the side with the economic and political power sets out to demonize the opposition with unfounded and irrelevant aspersions about its opponent's patriotism and politics and religion- to demean their critics' reputation for good citizenship- then it is quite proper for those so demonized and others similiarly situated to point out the bogus accusations of their accusers, and to defend their own citizenship credentials.

I don't know, really, if MTR is "wrong." I really like the mountains and I also like the lights on.

Styling it as having mountains versus having light is a simplistically false dichotomy.

Less than 2 percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. comes from MTR coal. And MTR is not the only way to get coal. But it is a cheap way to get coal- because it further externalizes the costs of energy by throwing a disproportionate share of those costs onto the people of the communities where MTR takes place and onto larger environments, including those downstream and downwind of MTR operations.

And with MTR, the communities are not only poorer in quality of life, they are poorer in economics and by actual numbers of jobs- because it takes but a fraction of the numbers of employees to mine X number of tons of coal by MTR than by underground mining.

And the big Orange?

I wish I could stay up that late. I'm as tired as Jonny Flynn. I'll just have to read about it tomorrow morning. I doubt they have a chance but I doubted they had a chance to beat Pitt...

Ziggy,

I don't see why someone would have to defend themselves to Obama from right-wing attacks, if even they exist.

I also have not set up a false dichotomy between the environment and energy; I merely implied that there are different interests involved all around.

I'll say once again, dear Zig, if MTR is endangering people, the moral or social quality of those endangered people should be irrelevant. Irrelevant to the right and to the left. If it is wrong because it endangers lives then it's just simply wrong. If it is not endangering lives then there is duplicity afoot.

If, however, the statements are being overblown, then THAT is not forgiven by someone's otherwise noble character, either.

well sheik lots of things go over my head I am sure.

But you guys are smarter and younger.

And just because it goes over my head dont make it right.

So you guys just pat yourselves on the back and poke fun.

Everybody needs someone to look down on...

If, however, the statements are being overblown, then THAT is not forgiven by someone's otherwise noble character, either.

True. So are you suggesting that Bo Webb is overblowing the situation and conditions under which he lives?

Zig,

I don't know. Maybe he's even understating the conditions.

However, if conditions are as bad as he is suggesting, the "backstory" of his life and the lives of his uncles should really be irrelevant. If things are as bad as he says they are, then I would not wish it on ANYONE, whether a vet or a draft dodger, a 'godless commie' or a country preacher.

The "quality" of the victims, if indeed they are victims, should simply not be a consideration here.

SheikBen wrote:Sod,

Much of what that guy wrote has nothing to do with mountaintop mining. It's lovely that WVA gave the Union so many soldiers, and that his uncles were miners (regrettably having lost their lives), and that he served in 'Nam. Bully.

How much is "Much"?

Somehow you don't like what he said in two out of 20 paragraphs. That's not "much". So if, at worst, what he said in those two paragraphs is, in your opinion, irrelevant, that does not negate nor detract from the other 18 paragraphs.

His uncles lost their lives in the extraction of coal. In the context of West Virginia history, I think that is relevant when addressing the continuing miseries of coal.

sodbuster wrote:
The mountain above me, once a thriving forest, has been blasted into a pile of rock and mud rubble. Two years ago, it was covered with rich black topsoil and abounded with hardwood trees, rhododendrons, ferns and flowers. The understory thrived with herbs such as ginseng, black cohosh, yellow root and many other medicinal plants. Black bears, deer, wild turkey, hawks, owls and thousands of [other] birds lived here. The mountain contained sparkling streams teeming with aquatic life and fish.

And there is at least 160 linear miles of I-79 that can be described the same way.

And I don't know how many hundred linear miles of US 19, I-77, I-70, I-68, I-64, Corridor H, etc. that can be described the same way.

And I don't know how many hundred square miles of commercial and industrial sites that can be described the same way.

And I don't know how many hundred square miles of US Corps of Engineering lakes and water impoundment property that can be described the same way. Do any of you have any frigging idea in the world ..... how many thousands of people were forced to vacate their homes and property when the Corps constructed the Burnsville, Sutton and Summersville Dams/Lakes?

So one has to ask why are there so many more that are so pissy faced and irate about coal mining and not likewise about all the above mentioned?

In actuality it is asinine and utterly stupid for anyone to be demanding that the population should be allowed to increase and not be held in check …… while at the same time demanding that energy production be halted that is necessary to support the increase in population.

Of course, West Virginians aren't really noted for having "both oars in the water at the same time".



.

ziggy wrote:

SheikBen wrote:Sod,

Much of what that guy wrote has nothing to do with mountaintop mining. It's lovely that WVA gave the Union so many soldiers, and that his uncles were miners (regrettably having lost their lives), and that he served in 'Nam. Bully.

How much is "Much"?

Somehow you don't like what he said in two out of 20 paragraphs. That's not "much". So if, at worst, what he said in those two paragraphs is, in your opinion, irrelevant, that does not negate nor detract from the other 18 paragraphs.

His uncles lost their lives in the extraction of coal. In the context of West Virginia history, I think that is relevant when addressing the continuing miseries of coal.

His uncles did not lose their lives with MTR; in fact, it's just the opposite. The salient point you made earlier that MTR involves less employment is the appropriate one, here. Speaking of past "coal miseries" is unfortunate, in that every industry has had problems, particularly in the manufacturing sector. As someone who is very disappointed with our nation sending out manufacturing most everywhere else but here (and in the process, giving away our independence), I do not like the idea of past troubles precluding present activity.. Any miner having died of black lung is a tragedy, but it is a tragedy that does not speak to MTR.

I am increasingly convinced that nuclear power is the answer, but I know of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island (although both were certainly overblown). Heck, Zig, we had a wind turbine fly off and darn near chop someone in two over here in Illinois. Every industry has a history. Volkswagen was started by Hitler. If a practice like MTR is wrong, then let it be wrong. If it is right, then coal's checkered past is irrelevant. If it is wrong, then coal's checkered past is irrelevant. And it is surely irrelevant that Lincoln had something lovely to say and Bo served in Vietnam. I don't like that emotions are appealed to here above the moral. If it is as he is saying, then there is a moral reason to stop what is happening. When he appeals to something else, whether it be his ancestors, his uncles, his military service, or that he is a Sagittarius, I think less of his argument, which should stand alone by itself. That he adds the emotional tells me that he feels the need to overplay his hand, and I should like to know why.

That he adds the emotional tells me that he feels the need to overplay his hand, and I should like to know why.

That he "adds the emotional"?

He would not have had the ambition to write about MTR in the first place had the effects of MTR not provoked his emotions.

It is not "overplay" unless what he says about himself and his uncles is untrue. In the context of the hell he and his neighbors live, it is all relevant. Though not on the scale Bo Webb and his neighbors have, I have lived the hellish horrors of strip mining. Apparently you haven't.

And there is at least 160 linear miles of I-79 that can be described the same way.

And I don't know how many hundred linear miles of US 19, I-77, I-70, I-68, I-64, Corridor H, etc. that can be described the same way.

And I don't know how many hundred square miles of commercial and industrial sites that can be described the same way.

And I don't know how many hundred square miles of US Corps of Engineering lakes and water impoundment property that can be described the same way. Do any of you have any frigging idea in the world ..... how many thousands of people were forced to vacate their homes and property when the Corps constructed the Burnsville, Sutton and Summersville Dams/Lakes?

So one has to ask why are there so many more that are so pissy faced and irate about coal mining and not likewise about all the above mentioned?

Only one of the many differences between MTR destructions and highway constructions and Corps of Engineers lake constructions is that the Department of Highways and the Corps of Engineers buys the property under which the roads lie and lakes lie, and buys easements for the areas to be flooded in highwater events. So nearby property owners are compensated sufficiently so that they can move away and live elsewhere. And those whose property are not directly affected almost always see an increase in their property values as lakes and roads bring increased demand for their adjacent properties.

And adequate drainage under and around lakes and highways are an integral part of their constructions.

The MTR coal companies don't do any of that. They simply tear up the land, leaving it one bug mess. And so the rainwater sheets off it in tidal waves of floodwaters. And the nearby homeowners have to endure the miseries Bo Webb writes about- without compensation- and without the prospect of increased property values once the demolition destruction is ended. Most of the properties nearby to MTR sites become virtually worthless

Comparing the carefully planned construction of roads and lakes to the destruction of MTR is like comparing brain surgery at the hands of an able surgeon to a beheading at the hands of terrorists.

ziggy wrote: They simply tear up the land, leaving it one bug mess. And so the rainwater sheets off it in tidal waves of floodwaters. And the nearby homeowners have to endure the miseries Bo Webb writes about- without compensation- and without the prospect of increased property values once the demolition destruction is ended. Most of the properties nearby to MTR sites become virtually worthless.

What a bunch of HORSESHIT that was.

Only ignorant uneducated idiots and those who hate coal mining blame rain water flooding on coal mining operations.

The only reason those properties in the southern coalfields have any value at all is because of the coal mining operations.

And the FACTS speak for themselves, to wit:

Assuming that nobody either moved into or away from West Virginia from 1950 until 2000, adding the natural increase to the 1950 population would result in a total of 2,605,345 people in 2000. That, however, hasn't happened.

The Fifties (1950-1960) (1950 population) + (natural increase) - (1960 population) -- yields a net migration loss of 437,260. The only two counties that experienced a gain in population from in-migration were Jackson and Wood. The counties that suffered the most proportionately from out-migration were McDowell, Logan, Webster, Fayette, and Clay.

The Sixties (1960-1970) Thus, West Virginia lost 262,469 people to out-migration. the counties that suffered the greatest losses were (again) McDowell, Webster, Logan, Clay, and Mingo.

The Seventies (1970-1980) West Virginia ended up with a net migration increase of 110,718 during this span. All but six counties (McDowell, Ohio, Kanawha, Hancock, Cabell, and Logan, in that order) gained population from in-migration during this time frame. .... (Hancock & Ohio loss was due to steel mills closing.)

The Eighties (1980-1990) Overall, West Virginia lost 210,712 people to out-migration. all but six counties lost people due to out-migration during this period. McDowell County continued to have the greatest proportional loss, followed by Wyoming, Logan, Boone, and Fayette counties.

The Nineties (1990-2000) A total of 14,867 people were added to the population, which jumped from 1,793,477 to 1,808,344. The five counties with the largest percentage decrease were McDowell, Mingo, Logan, Wyoming, and Wetzel.

West Virginia's birth rate is shrinking rapidly. The state averaged over 46,000 births per year in the 1950s, …. 33,600 in the sixties, … 29,000 in the seventies, under 25,000 in the eighties, and just 21,400 in the nineties. West Virginia has, in fact, actually experienced more resident deaths than births every year since 1997, the first state to have a natural decrease.

HSC - Statistical Brief - Number 8 - May 2002
http://www.wvdhhr.org/bph/oehp/hsc/briefs/eight/default.htm

The loss of coal mining jobs was the primary reason for the loss of population in those coal producing counties. And if current coal mining is prohibited the rest of the population will leave or will have to be given a "free ticket" to feed at the "public trough". No if, ands or buts about it.

If all that land in the southern coalfield counties was worth anything other than the worth of the coal that is buried underneath it ...... then tens of thousands of people would have been rushing there over the past 60 years to take advantage of it.

And I know it is a waste of my f'ing time posting FACTS because all the ignorant uneducated idiots and those who hate coal mining ignore any and all facts that are contrary to the HORSESHIT they love to spread around as fertilizer for nurturing their ignorance and hatred.



.

Ziggy,

You have inadvertantly made my point.

SamCogar wrote:What a bunch of HORSESHIT that was.

Only ignorant uneducated idiots and those who hate coal mining blame rain water flooding on coal mining operations.

The only reason those properties in the southern coalfields have any value at all is because of the coal mining operations.

Spoken like a true pimp for the coal whores.

The loss of coal mining jobs was the primary reason for the loss of population in those coal producing counties. And if current coal mining is prohibited the rest of the population will leave or will have to be given a "free ticket" to feed at the "public trough".

And it is those coal producing counties that have seen the biggest increases in strip mining the past 60 years. Coincidence? Hardly. Strip mining strips not only the land, it also "strips" the jobs you bemoan the loss of. Just as much coal is being mined as was 60 years ago in those counties- even more in a couple of them. But it's done on the cheap such that most of the people don't have jobs and move away, and those that can't afford to move away endure the miseries of MTR. Coal mined by MTR employs but a small fraction of the employees as coal mined by underground methods- but has a far more negative economic and environmental legacy compared to underground mining methods.

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy,

You have inadvertantly made my point.

I don't mind making someone else's "point", inadvertantly or otherwise, Mike. My purpose is not to beat your nor anyone else's "point" into the dust, but to make my own "point" the best I can. So if it turms out that we aren't really that far apart, that's OK too.

YADA, .... YADA, ... TADA

Same ole HORSESHIT, ....... it never changes coming from you.

Bout time to again tell tell us of those 600,000 unemployment claims.

.