Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 03/2004

« AG investigating city's trash collector | Main | Star Market closing leaves Winter Hill hungry »

January 25, 2008



Excellent news. I can't wait for IKEA to open. Of course if Somerville is going to let IKEA open then they should get something out of it, like jobs for residents in East Somerville. Sounds like a win win.

Read between the lines....

"Somerville residents will have the first opportunity to APPLY".
Sounds like the wording is very meaning ful.


The progressives should be people will not have to drive 50 mile roundtrips to get to IKEA in Stoughton. This is clearly better for the environment.

Solh Zendeh

"The progressives should be people will not have to drive 50 mile roundtrips to get to IKEA in Stoughton. This is clearly better for the environment."

HA! Oh man, glad this site still has the comedians.

Maybe when we re-do union we can put in a kmart (sorry, "big K"!) and walgreens and ohhhhh, a bernie and phyl's. Just think of all the gas saved going to your local corner bigbox-store.

And all those great jobs created too! Why, little Timmy will finally be able to eat all the hostess fruit pies he wants when mom starts bringing home minimum wage.

Little Timmy


I guess that's better than little Timmy eating nothing.

Also, what makes you think that the person working at these stores will buy twinkies for their children? Isn't that a bit of stereotyping? that a hate crime?

Not everyone can be a brain surgeon like you.

Solh Zendeh

I didn't say twinkies.

Reading is Fundamental.

Big Brother

I haven't seen any comments from you for some time. I was hoping it was because you died, but apparently that isn't the case.

Your comments were rude and spiteful and that's why people on this site look down their noses at you, Ron, and the rest of the Progressive intelligentsia. Don't hate poor people, and definitely don't attack their children... they're born into their situations and stuck their until they have their chance. You're no friend of poor people, you only support your special interests. Your posts are disgraceful and they reflect poorly upon you and your upbringing. You frequently lash out at people in a most disturbing manner. It's suggestive of a mental impairment. Show us your better side.

Also, you capitalized "Reading is Fundamental" but failed to do so on virtually all of the proper nouns in either of your posts, e.g. "Twinkies," "Union," "K-Mart," "Hostess," "Bernie and Phyll's," and so on.

Apparently it's not that fundamental.


Hey Big Brother

Have we been reading posts from the same Sohl? I question whether the stuff above really was Sohl anyway as he's usually grammatically correct, pleasant and obsessed with peak oil.


good for jobs if they hire us! stop and shop just took their own from medford and malden mostly.

and who can afford scandinavan furniture in somerville? get real man!!!

they want to do this but close our movie theatre.... it did pretty good... why?

that looks pretty dreary now....

and except for kmart, can we all REALLY afford all those other stores?


"and who can afford scandinavan furniture in somerville? get real man!!!"

Steve, have you ever been to IKEA??? It is actually very affordable compared to regular furniture stores. It is the kind of place where students and those just out of college get their furniture.

Ron Newman

Ikea didn't close the movie theatre and neither did the city. The property isn't owned by Federal Realty or Ikea.

Solh Zendeh

Oh man, sorry I can't make a joke. Where is the rule that says I have to always be more respectful and more grammatical than the people that post anonymously.

I have strong negative feelings about the process that has resulted in our dedicating one of this cities most valuable assets to ANOTHER strip mall/big box emporium.

Peak oil *is* coming, and it's going to be very hard on us. If you want to challenge me on the facts - like JAR has - I welcome it. Take 5 minutes and read about peak oil. Take another 5 to think about what it means for our way of life.

If you haven't taken those 10 minutes, why are you wasting my time saying I'm for some "special interests". That is just complete baloney.

Solh Zendeh

One further thought:

I think there is a big difference between generally venting about a subject in an obnoxious way (which I did), and personally attacking someone ANONYMOUSLY which I *never* do.

Fool on the Hill

Reading IS Fundamental. Name calling is a petty response of those who don't have the capacity to think or the courage to engage in honest dialog. And Little Timmy and his Big Brother persona have thoughtfully illustrated both principles for us.

Big Brother attempts to demonize Solh by calling him a (shudder) "progressive," and then slanders him with a lot of small-minded cliches. Any thoughtful reader of Sohl's posts would conclude that he is not a progressive, but a libertarian.

I think that "progressive" was a term adopted by liberal and radicals to give them cover from the attacks of deep thinkers like Timmy and his Big Brother. But as they illustrate, among the non thinkers, it's just a term to call anyone who threatens them.

Big Brother

You apparently don't know what a cliché is, because I didn't use any. For your education, a cliché is a “trite, stereotyped expression; a sentence or phrase, usually expressing a popular or common thought or idea, that has lost originality, ingenuity, and impact by long overuse.” (See Like when you said "Name calling is a petty response of those who don't have the capacity to think or the courage to engage in honest dialog." That's a cliché.

The term "Progressive" was not invented by me and Solh himself doesn't dispute that he is a Progressive. If he doesn't take issue with it why should you?

If anybody here is feeling threatened by others it's you and as a result you respond with the "petty response" of calling Timmy and I "deep thinkers." You're another fraud with a thesaurus and the name Fool on the Hill is apropos.


You kids shouldn't play so rough. Somebody's gonna start cryin'.


Solh, you are just a "progressive" jackass, like Ron. Don't get me wrong, however. I love to be sodomized, by truck drivers, but at least I don't advertise it! I hope one day, you guys will come over to my place for some hot fun.


Solh, you are just a "progressive" jackass, like Ron. Don't get me wrong, however. I love to be sodomized, by truck drivers, but at least I don't advertise it! I hope one day, you guys will come over to my place for some hot fun.

Posted by: Imux | January 26, 2008 at 07:59 PM

Another asshat pretending to be me. I have to assume it's Election or Ron making his/her return.


Some illegal immigrant pickle polisher is messing with my username. I have not posted any of the messages in this thread. Is it you, Ron? Or that bitch of Election. You libaloons are pissing me off, badly, now, ruining my great reputation on this site. I'm gonna have you all deported!

Ron Newman

The only comment I have posted in this thread is the one with my name under it.


Some illegal immigrant pickle polisher is messing with my username. I have not posted any of the messages in this thread. Is it you, Ron? Or that bitch of Election. You libaloons are pissing me off, badly, now, ruining my great reputation on this site. I'm gonna have you all deported!

Posted by: Imux | January 26, 2008 at 08:34 PM

Same asshat playing games.

To: Solh Zendeh

Twinkie Zendehful,

I found the perfect decricption of your ilk;

"Because of the fragility of a Leftist's ego, anything that threatens it is intolerable and provokes rage. So most Leftist blogs can be summarized in one sentence: "How DARE anybody question what I believe!". Rage and abuse substitute for an appeal to facts and reason."

I see when confronted with reality you must try to protect you little ego with little thought.

As seen below:


I guess that's better than little Timmy eating nothing.

Also, what makes you think that the person working at these stores will buy twinkies for their children? Isn't that a bit of stereotyping? that a hate crime?

Not everyone can be a brain surgeon like you.

Posted by: Little Timmy | January 25, 2008 at 03:21 PM

I didn't say twinkies.

Reading is Fundamental.

Posted by: Solh Zendeh | January 25, 2008 at 04:08 PM"

What a smallminded little turd you are. Go back to the slimy rock you crawled from under.

Another carpetbagger that knows whats best for us....ughhhhh!

Solh Zendeh

Sometimes you just have to laugh.

Crazy people of the board: what *I* did was post a rant about a specific situation that was frustrating to me. In that rant I stated that certain ANONYMOUS posters on this board are comedians. I also corrected a subsequent post which was factually, if insignificantly, incorrect, and ended with what me and my buddies use as a good natured insult. Reading Is Fundamental (RIF) was a program from our childhood.

I'm sorry I didn't fall all over myself to protest that I'm not a "progressive" - whatever that is. For the record, I'm not a "smallminded little turd" or a "brain surgeon".

Anyway, I see that none of the hypocrites that insult me and others anonymously could be bothered to take FIVE MINUTES to read, understand and possibly dispute the facts of peak oil and what it means for our way of life.

The CEO of Shell understands it - he is radically shifting the focus of his corporation because of it. Dick Cheney understands it - we are planting a flag deep in Iraq because of it. What makes you so smart that you don't need to bother to understand it.

PS To: "To: Solh Zendeh" - man, you really love twinkies. Hey, that's cool - don't ask don't tell.


Solh, there's plenty of oil as long as the moonbats stay out of it and let us drill where we need. I think you may be freaking out over nothing. Also,by time time we run out I'll be sleeping on the wrong side of the grass, so why should I care?


Why should humans be worried about peak oil? As they say, "necessity is the mother of invention." If we were told today that all oil on the planey would run dry in exactly 18 months, the human race would work like gangbusters and have an alternative energy source in place by then. As there is no immediate threat to oil, attempts to develop alternative energy have been half-hearted and some have been killed...see "Who killed the electric car." Humans are great at adapting and adapt they will.

Big Brother

You were the first person to get upset when the third poster on this thread used the term "progressive" even though the post wasn't directed at you. It's not a leap to assume you are a Progressive. You responded with a less than funny "joke" (as you later called it) about lower income Americans.

Now you come back and criticize people about the fact that we haven't taken the time to read about peak oil. That may be due to the fact that we weren't talking about peak oil on this thread. No need to cover up your odd behavior by casting out a red herring. And really, there's no need to gay-bait other posters: "PS To: "To: Solh Zendeh" - man, you really love twinkies. Hey, that's cool - don't ask don't tell." That was disgraceful. Who do you think you are, Joe McCarthy?

Finally, there's nothing wrong with the use of pseudonyms on this site. Great authors and the founding fathers of this country all used pseudonyms in their writing. Do you think people respect you because you use your real name? Think again, my friend. For all I know, "Solh Zendeh" is a pseudonym. I've lived here for 38 years and I never heard of you outside of this site. To be fair, however, I don't care who you are and I'm not looking to meet you.

Fool on the Hill


I see now that any response to the person posting as Little Timmy and Big Brother is wasted effort. If and when he attempts to say something that is factual and not ad hominem, it may be useful to correct his misinformation. Until then, his own posts more eloquently discredit him than anything you could write.

Big Brother

Gee whiz Fool, you got me. I'm discredited.

Fire away with any misinformation that I've written. Don't come out with some holier-than-thou comment like you're so much smarter than the rest of us.

In the meantime, Mr. Zendeh's name is spelled S-O-L-H, not "Sohl" as you spelled it. Moron (That's an ad hominem attack).

You really are an idiot. (That's another one).


Yes, Fool, I see what you mean. Perceptive.


Fool on the Hill and Solh are douchebags.


I guess it's ok for you to discredit hard working women and men that work for stores that you find distasteful and of course you rant about "peak oil" to avoid your nasty little comments. Why don't you apologize to these hard working men and women before anyone answers your crazy little crusade about "peak oil"?

Using one of your quotes: "Name calling is a petty response of those who don't have the capacity to think or the courage to engage in honest dialog."

So stick your RIF jab where the sun don't shine and stop trying to be "above the fray", because little one you are the fray.

I'm sure you would have an orgasm if a Whole Foods supermarket moved into the city and sold overpriced products to fools like you. But have you thought about the neighborhood that surronds the closing Star Market? I bet the residents of the Mystic Housing development would be awfully pleased with your nonsensical ravings about strip malls and peak oil.

Get off of your high horse and come back down into the real world. Go write your government about peak oil and see what kind of response you get, or better yet why don't you hold some signs up at the corner of Temple Street and Broadway and see what kind of reception you get.

If you were any dumber we would have to water you twice a week!

Solh Zendeh

The above post was directed at Zendehful.


I am Zendeh, a member of Mehtu the Wise's elite royal guard. Be foolish enough to draw your weapon near the prince(Sciortino) and it will be the last move you make. Do not make eyes at Geewhiz, the prince's daughter, either. You are not worthy to gaze upon the like of her."

Solh Zendeh

This from a "progressives" website:

The real reason for the war in Iraq is concern over "Peak Oil."

The notion of "Peak Oil" seems to have been carefully seeded throughout the 'progressive' community, most prominently by Michael Ruppert, but by many others as well. Personally, I ain't buying it. It positively reeks of bullshit. What the "Peak Oil" promoters are essentially saying is: "I am outraged by the fact that Team Bush has waged a war of aggression motivated solely by the pursuit of oil ... but (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) it's a damn good thing that they did, because the world is quickly running out of oil and if we don't grab it now, we're going to be in big trouble, and soon."

Now don't get me wrong -- I really want the "Peak Oil" thing to be true. I can't really think of a better scenario, at this point, than the world running out of oil. The entire global fascist system (or GFS for short, which is kind of like the NWO, only different, since the NWO is usually pitched as some sort of global communist/socialist system), you see, runs on oil. The military machine can't operate without it. The global corporate infrastructure can't run without it. It is the life-blood of global capitalism. So there would be a certain poetic justice if those who had toiled so long to achieve their dream of world domination were to suddenly find themselves - on the eve of declaring game, set and match - unable to operate the empire they had created. We would then be forced, alas, to start over -- to rebuild and restructure.

It would be nice if that were true. It would save the American people, and the world's people, a lot of work. But I don't see it happening. And, yes, I am aware that 'experts,' with far more knowledge in the field than I, have warned of "Peak Oil." But I am also aware that if the right people consult with the right 'experts,' those 'experts' will say pretty much anything they are asked to say.

Solh Zendeh

Cabbie brought up peak oil. Thanks man, now look what you've done - everyone is pissed.

As I said, Dick Cheney (and, for that matter, the Pentagon) is fully aware of peak oil. They are making policy decisions that will affect the US and the world for generations as a direct response to it.

JPM: I just realized you are the one I made fun of in my first post. For what it's worth I apologize - you have resisted responding to me in a jerky way. I wish I had done you the same courtesy.

That said, if you want to be certain I'm not just talking out of my butt, please google "shell two energy futures" - the first link should be directly to the shell CEOs official post.

In it, he is talking around the peak oil issue. *Of course* the human race will figure out a way to get along with less and less oil (we'll never run out of course). The problem is that market solutions to basic infrastructure can be extremely chaotic (read: war, starvation etc). I'm a big fan of the market, but there are certain things you just don't want to bet the house on, and energy is simply too vital to world stability to simply count on "good old American gutting-it-out".

This relates to stuff like IKEA because that kind of store, compared to a dense collection of offices, retail and homes: is not energy efficient; does not provide good jobs; and absolutely requires large volumes of car and truck traffic. In short, if and when the global production of oil plateaus (peaks), that kind of store will have very little value to our city, and will represent a huge wasted investment. I feel that the cities attention should be focused on structuring our zoning to provide good jobs and services that do not require cars.

Or, we can just roll the dice... maybe we'll get lucky.


Yes Solh, I brought up Peak Oil. Please note I did so in the context of whether or not a comment on this site was really from you. Since it didn't mention Peak Oil I thought it may not be you. It was meant to be light-hearted. In no way was I trying to mock you for your belief in the importance of this issue. Fact is, those who are dismissive of this issue deserve our mockery. When out driving do you ignore the fuel gauge as it approaches "E"? Then why would we do so on a global level?

Solh Zendeh

Cabbie, yeah I was kidding. I'm glad you reminded me to bring up peak oil - I've been slacking!

I just want to quickly clarify one thing which you probably already know: peak oil occurs when we have about half of the oil left worldwide. So, we are really still at half a tank so-to-speak.

But your general point is exactly right: we're not paying attention to the signals the market is sending out. That is because there are a variety of price caps in place to disguise how expensive gasoline really is. Usually what happens with a price cap is shortages (gas lines).


Cabbie/Solh, can you give it a rest on the "peak oil" hyperbole? We ain't running out of oil anytime soon. Relax.


Imux - I'm as relaxed as you are dim. That is to say, plenty.

No hyperbole. There's a fixed amount of oil on the planet. We'll eventually use enough of it to hit "peak oil". From there our ability to produce oil declines. However our ability to consume oil continues to grow. You'd think someone who uses the term "free markets" a lot would grasp the ramifications. Further, to say we "ain't running out of oil anytime soon" maybe true. However, how many years in "soon"? Do we wait until we're running out "soon" to do something about it? Some of us think the time to develop new energy is now as this is going to take some time. We simply can't wait until catastrophe is happening "soon".


"I feel that the cities attention should be focused on structuring our zoning to provide good jobs and services that do not require cars.

Earth to Zendehful, name me one service orientated business that doesn't require some sort of transportation?


What do you think of maybe rehabilitating prisoners before they are released back into society? Like in California.

Prisons must focus on rehabilitation
Kathy Jett

The prison reforms signed into law last week by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger mark a fundamental shift in the mission of California's prison system. We are moving from just locking away prisoners in remote warehouses, where many simply learn to be better criminals, to a focus on rehabilitation programs that make our communities safer.

Why invest in rehabilitation? Some say that reforming offenders is simply being soft on crime. But consider this: More than 97 percent of the 172,000 inmates in our prisons will be eligible for parole, and nearly 60,000 inmates are scheduled to be released within three years. Without proper programs, approximately 70 percent of inmates will either violate their parole or commit new crimes. This cycle must end.

We already have laws in place to lock up habitual lawbreakers. The governor's and Legislature's reforms don't change these laws. But they do invest in rehabilitative programs that reduce the likelihood that prisoners will commit new crimes once they're released.

These reforms fund construction of 53,000 new prison and jail beds, all of which will be tied to rehabilitation services. These new beds will free up space in our dangerously overcrowded prisons and reduce early release in California's maxed-out local jails. Of these 53,000 new beds, 16,000 will be built in existing prisons so that inmates who are living in crowded gymnasiums and dayrooms can move into appropriate living quarters, where they can be properly and safely supervised.

Freeing up gyms and other spaces will allow substance abuse, anger management, educational and vocational training, and other rehabilitation programs to resume. In fact, 4,000 of the new beds will be devoted to drug treatment programs in prisons and aftercare facilities that reduce drug and alcohol addiction and the massive costs associated with drug-related crime.

If we help inmates better themselves while in prison, we greatly increase their chances for successfully re-entering outside life, getting jobs, paying taxes, and contributing to our communities. By treating substance abusers and addicts differently than more hardened and violent criminals, we can address some of the root causes of crime, while improving public safety.

These reforms fund the construction in communities of 16,000 new beds in secure re-entry facilities. Secure re-entry facilities don't bring offenders into our communities -- offenders are already here. Every inmate released from prison is returned directly to their county of last legal residence. The state will partner closely with local law enforcement and government to site these facilities, giving communities the chance to weigh in before any construction begins.

In addition to building new rehabilitation-focused centers, the governor's reforms will improve management at our state prisons and strengthen existing programs so that they're more effective.

The new prison system envisioned by the governor and the Legislature is not just more of the same. But in order for these important reforms to be successful, everyone -- prison management, local communities, elected officials and the public -- must understand that the old attitude of "lock 'em up and throw away the key" doesn't apply to the vast majority of offenders.

This plan amounts to a historic shift in our corrections system that will reduce recidivism and improve community safety by ensuring that offenders are prepared for life outside. By investing in prisoners' futures, we improve public safety for all.

Kathy Jett is the director of the Division of Addiction and Recovery Services for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

This article appeared on page B - 11 of the San Francisco Chronicle


Also, in Massachusetts:

Harshbarger quits prison panel, cites inaction on fixes
Points to Romney ambitions

By Michael Levenson, Globe Correspondent |

The chairman of a panel appointed by Governor Mitt Romney to reform the state's prison system has resigned in frustration, saying the governor has neglected the issue as he prepares a possible bid for president.

The chairman -- L. Scott Harshbarger, a former Democratic attorney general of Massachusetts -- said too little has been done since the jailhouse slaying of dismissed priest John J. Geoghan in August 2003. Geoghan's death triggered widespread calls for a sweeping review of state prisons, including an examination of prisoner assignments, after it was disclosed that low-risk offenders are sometimes housed alongside the state's most hardened criminals.

''I can feel it this fall: There has not been a sense of urgency," Harshbarger said by telephone yesterday. ''I don't see it in the executive. I don't see it in the Legislature. I don't see it in the agencies. I don't see the focus."

In a letter obtained by the Globe yesterday, Harshbarger informed the Romney administration that he would no longer serve as chairman of the Department of Correction Advisory Council, the panel appointed by Romney to oversee changes in the management, finances, and culture of state prisons and jails.

''The leadership at some point has to come from the governor, and it can't be delegated," said Harshbarger.

Eric Fehrnstrom, a spokesman from the governor, said that Romney ''thanks Scott Harshbarger for his service."

''He has been an important member of the team that has recommended changes in our correction system," Fehrnstrom said. ''While we have more work to do, we are pleased with the progress we have made so far."

Fehrnstrom declined to respond to a question on whether Romney is distracted by presidential ambitions.

Harshbarger, who was the Democratic nominee for governor in 1998, was named by Romney in October 2003 to lead the top-to-bottom review of the prisons and make recommendations after Geoghan's slaying. Geoghan, a convicted pedophile, had allegedly been beaten and strangled two months earlier by a fellow inmate, Joseph L. Druce, who was housed with Geoghan at the maximum security Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center in Shirley. Druce is awaiting trial on first-degree murder charges.

The 15-member panel then spent eight months visiting prisons, reviewing documents, holding public hearings, and interviewing inmates. In late June 2004, it recommended 18 major changes, including allowing prisoners who are preparing to reenter society to move to less secure settings, where they could receive job training and counseling for drug abuse and mental illness.

The panel also called for changes in prison guard contracts to strengthen the hands of managers, more money for inmate counseling, the appointment of an independent inspector general for prisons, new systems to review allegations of prisoner abuse, and changes to mandatory minimum sentences for some crimes. And, because the vast majority of inmates eventually reenter society, the panel also called on Romney to focus on ways to help them find jobs and stay away from crime upon release.

Standing outside the Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center on June 30 last year, Romney happily accepted the panel's report.

''This is a great leap forward," he said at the time. ''The Department of Correction needs correction."

Three months later, after an inmate was allegedly strangled by another inmate at Bridgewater State Hospital, Romney appointed Harshbarger to head a new panel, with most of the same members as the earlier group, to make sure the reforms were enacted. On Oct. 25 this year, the panel completed its final report. It has not been made public by the Romney administration, but a copy was obtained by the Globe. The report warns Romney that inaction on its recommendations could drive up the state's crime rate.

''Absent these changes, we cannot state with any certainty that the DOC's reform efforts will succeed, nor that crime caused by returning inmates will decline in the Commonwealth," the report states.

In the interview yesterday, Harshbarger said he was particularly concerned by Romney's lack of leadership on changing the way prisoners are assigned.

''That is one of our major action points that has not happened," Harshbarger said. ''There is a problem."

Between 1994 and 2004, the percentage of Massachusetts inmates in minimum security facilities dropped from 23 percent to 11 percent, while the percentage of inmates in maximum security facilities more than doubled, from 9 percent to 19 percent, according to the commission's final report. Prison reform advocates say guard unions oppose moving prisoners to less-secure settings, where fewer guards are needed.

The state's tough mandatory sentencing laws also make it harder to transfer some prisoners to less restrictive facilities. The report said these figures greatly exceed national averages and criticized the Department of Correction for failing to ''reverse the disturbing Massachusetts trend."

''At the executive level, they have other things they are focusing on," Harshbarger said.

Some prison reform advocates said they worry that Romney might be ignoring prison reform to avoid alienating conservative voters who are key in Republican presidential primaries. As he travels the country for a possible White House run, Romney frequently distances himself from Massachusetts' liberal reputation, calling himself a ''cattle rancher at a vegetarian convention."

''Certainly, the heartland of America wants to believe that tough on crime is a good idea, even though research indicates that smart on crime is a better idea," said Leslie Walker, executive director of Massachusetts Correctional Legal Services, which provides legal counsel to inmates. ''Tough on crime has gotten a lot of people elected for a very long time, and I don't think there's much doubt that he's going to play that card as well."

Yesterday, Harshbarger offered praise to the Correction Department for making several reforms. He said the agency has improved the way it handles complaints of prisoner abuse and grievances from guards. He said the agency has boosted the percentage of its budget that it spends on prisoner education from 3 percent to 12 percent. And it has begun to make changes in its mission statement to promote a more humane culture, he said.

''We feel very strongly that the DOC making a sincere effort to implement these reforms," he said.

Some of the remaining changes, however, need a push from the governor and action by the Legislature, Harshbarger said. They include creation of the inspector general post, sentencing reforms, and programs to help prisoners reenter society.

''It is not a question of being soft on crime," he said. ''It's a question of being tough but smart."

The former attorney general, who said he will support either Deval L. Patrick or Thomas F. Reilly, both Democrats, in next year's gubernatorial race, said he is thankful to Romney for appointing him to the panel. Until this fall, he said, he felt the governor was interested in making changes in the prison system.

But, he said, Romney appears to have lost interest in the issue, as he builds his national presence.

''The governor is focused on other things," he said.

Michael Levenson can be reached at [email protected].


Cabbie, you don't think people are actively investing in alternative energy supplies? I do a some investing (VC) and I can tell you that there are some exciting new technologies coming. We (humans) will have alternative energies to run our economies when the oil runs dry... trust me. Just relax and keep chasing those nickels.

Plus, as I said earlier... we'll all be sleeping on the wrong side of the grass when that day comes.


Dude! You threw the post in the wrong thread. It's ok... give me a minute to read through your drivel. A response will be forthcoming in the correct thread. Trust me.


Sorry about that.



This article appeared on page B - 11 of the San Francisco Chronicle Strike ONE! I wouldn't wipe my you-know-what with that liberal rag.


Hey To, I am a very fast reader, but your solution comes far after where the problem lies. The problem is you have far too many people willing to break the law. I'm all for rehab - as long as it's done inside prison walls. We have to build more of those pris... er... I mean rehab centers. It's all about the numbers.

Someone commits a crime - you have to put them somewhere. If you grew up here you would realize how many people are given a MILL-YUNNN chances and still piss on on every one of them. It usually takes a LOT of F'ing up before someone gets locked up. It ain't like someone is throwing a gum wrapper on the street and we lock them up.

Most people slide into criminal stuff because they don't do anything (no ambitions, dreams, goals) and then they get hooked on something (Oxy, Heroin, whatever). They aren't bad people, but guess what - they are now as they'll do anything for a buck/fix. Rehab? Sure. Just do it inside prison walls until they prove they are no longer a threat to society and/or themselves. And I mean really prove it - drug test them every friggin' day.

Build more prisons - it creates jobs too (relax...just kiddin' on this one!).

Solh Zendeh

One note of clarification. There is a post above attributed to me that was not posted by me. The one that starts "This from a "progressives" website:"

Me again. I NEVER SAID THE WORLD IS RUNNING OUT OF OIL. Sorry to shout, but I want to be ten thousand percent clear on this. We are in absolutely no danger whatsoever of running out of oil.

What is occurring right now is that the global production of oil (the number of barrels pumped out of the ground *per day*) has leveled off, and from all indications is not going to move upwards ever again. It will very slowly start to move down in fact. This is a different and more complex problem than "running out", which is why it's hard to explain why we need to be concerned right now.

I really encourage people to find out for themselves more about this issue, don't trust me or Imux or really anyone on this site.

I am not, not, not looking forward to the results of peak oil. It is not a good situation for America, and I think if we don't make some basic preparations our economy (and living standard) will take an enormous hit for the next 30-50 years.

"Zendehful" - there's something about that name that I like... got a good ring to it. Manly, honest, informed. Anyway, all business and living arrangements require transportation. Not all of them require disproportionate car traffic, low paying jobs, and very little property tax returned to the city. IKEA nails all three of those things, and we will look back in 10 years and shake our heads in disbelief at the wastefulness of dedicating a huge parcel of land so close to Boston to suburban-style shopping malls. If you want the suburbs - move there. Bringing them to the city makes zero sense.

Bill Shelton


You are right that IKEAs pay less in taxes than they consume in city services. And you're right that they are responsible for more pollution and greenhouse gas than any retailer on the planet.

But they offer the best jobs in the retail industry. Their wages are high (for that sector), benefits are excellent, there's upward mobility for those who want to learn and work hard, and it's a great corporate culture.


Who said anything at all that could be considered "discrediting hard working men and women?"

Also, it wasn't Solh who said, "Name calling is a petty response of those who don't have the capacity to think or the courage to engage in honest dialog." It was Fool on a Hill. Do you think that your name calling represents honest dialog? Or thought?

Are you the same person as Little Timmy and Big Brother?


It's great that IKEA pays well for the retail industry. Why can't we do what Cambridge has done and put in even better-paying jobs like those you'd find in office settings, biotech, etc. Why are we so obsessed with retail and condos? Neither is doing any of us any good, it seems.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Most Recent Photos

  • Danehy_Park_Family_Day
  • Bloco
  • 3517a
  • Web_toon_7_21_10
  • Prospect hill
  • Web_toon_7_14_10
  • 3224a
  • Art1(2)
  • Art5
  • Art10(2)
  • Union_square_flood
  • Flood_pic_(bridge_1)