UPDATED: CRC Proponents, Lazy C Not Letting a Good Crisis Go To Waste

by lewwaters

UPDATE: Not shown on the front page of the May 24 Columbian addressing the “collapse,” but admitted in a separate but smaller article online, North Wash. I-5 bridge collapse caused by oversize load. While this is being used to inflame the CRC debate and hammer opponents, not one thing in the CRC plans would have prevented such an accident from happening. And in fact, given the inadequate river clearance of the current design, such an accident is more likely to happen if a ship or barge struck the lower level trying to pass underneath.

Skagit Bridge CollapseSad news to hear of the I-5 Bridge over the Skagit River up in Skagit County collapsing this evening. We pray that early reports of only minor injuries hold up and that no one lost their life.

A bridge collapse is never good news and must be taken seriously, given that we depend on these bridges to travel to and fro.

But, knee-jerk reactions to further a political agenda or justify bankrupting middle class taxpayers must be stood up to and not allowed to sway emotions to vote to increase taxes where they are not needed.

Within minutes of the news of the bridge collapsing the Lazy C had their article up, complete with their spin of information used to justify coercing opponents of the Columbia River Crossing light rail project to cave and cease our opposition, lest it happen here, as they have tried to claim is imminent unless we accept Portland’s financially failing light rail into our community.

We read emotionally charged claims such as, “The Skagit River bridge was given a sufficiency rating of 57.4 out of 100.”

“By comparison, the southbound Interstate Bridge has a sufficiency rating of 49 out of 100 and the northbound has a rating of 18.5 out of 100 as of May 2011. Both spans of the Interstate Bridge are rated as functionally obsolete.”

Reading that sounds rather ominous for our bridge, considering it rates lower in sufficiency that the one that just collapsed. But, the Lazy C fails to say what the term “sufficiency rating” actually means.

From WSDOT bridge ratings we read, “The sufficiency rating doesn’t necessarily indicate a bridge’s ability to carry traffic loads. It helps determine which bridges may need repair or replacement, not potential for collapse.”

Of course, truth means little to those desiring to bury our middle class in higher taxes to accept Portland folly of light rail. You can see that evidenced by comments from regular proponents of the project such as Cheryl Walter Golliher, “Is this what we are waiting for? Build that new bridge NOW!”

Michael R. Newton, “It is time for anti-CRC folks to WAKE UP!”

Tyler Mayfield, “I hope everyone is ok. Hopefully Vancouver learns from this. I’m curious if WSDOT gave this bridge 60 years of life as well.”

Fran Hammond, “Hey, Madore and Jaime H Beutler – can you hear us NOW?”

Michelle Malkin posted comments on her facebook page from Twitchy automatically laying blame at the feet of the Republican Party, ignoring that Democrats have had complete control of Washington State for well over a decade now.

None of these people nor the Lazy C have any clue whatsoever why it collapsed, but following the admonition of uber-leftist Rahm Emanuel to “never let a good crisis go to waste,” they immediately before even asking if anybody was injured, begin affixing blame and using it to indicate another project they want is approved, even though the replacement design is inferior.

They may admit it later on, reluctantly of course.

While no official cause has been given, a KING 5 report contains a plausible reason that undoubtedly will play a large role in the collapse. Video witness report at KING 5

They report, “Multiple witnesses reported seeing a large semi-truck with an oversized load cross the bridge and hit it before the bridge collapsed.”

“I saw it. I was less than 50 feet away from the truck when it hit it,” said Dale Ogden, witness. “I had just passed it in the fast lane southbound and it was an oversized load.”

Apparently, being “functionally obsolete” and the “sufficiency rating” reported have little if anything to do with the collapse as well as the Republican Party.

But that will not count with proponents of the CRC who will undoubtedly ignore this little fact to further their agenda of forcing Clark County to accept an inferior bridge design, lose jobs, bankrupt the middle class to pay for it and drag Portland’s light rail into our community.

Bridge collapses are serious matters.

But agenda driven spin misrepresenting the why to further an agenda is nothing more than knee-jerk to coerce people by emotions, not facts or considerations of their safety.

Don’t let yourselves be fooled over this. Join me in praying those who were on the bridge when it collapsed are going to be okay and when confronted by proponents of the CRC, push them back with the truth and facts.

They hate that.

UPDATE: Rep. Jim Moeller, staunch proponent made the following comment, either ignorant of the bridge being struck by a truck or not caring and pushing his baby, Portland’s light rail off onto us.

“This reporter just called and asked if this bridge collapse changes the debate on the CRC. First, I had not heard of the collapse before his call as I had just gotten off work late and went directly to the store. I hope and pray everyone is alright – that WOULD be a miracle! However, I believe this collapse only intensifies the debate in Olympia on the I-5 bridges safety which has always been a primary issue, particularly the much older northbound span. The critics voices will say they want a new bridge – but their actions say they really don’t want a new bridge. They will say we can build a “cheaper” bridge – a total myth. They will point to a number of what they consider “problems” but never address the core issues with a VIABLE alternatives that have not already been explored and discarded by their peers. No, I hope and prey no one was seriously hurt but the need is there even more now to BUILD THAT BRIDGE!”

Nothing proposed by Moeller and other proponents will prevent a collapse in the event of being struck and structurally damaged. But, facts play no role in the light rail agenda.


Rhona Sen Hoss of Washington for CRC is quoted in the Lazy C’s dishonest effort to advance the CRC saying, “It is extremely tragic and very unforeseen. That’s why we need to build a bridge. We need to advance the CRC, so that something like that will never, ever, happen to our citizens and families here in our region.”

Unmentioned is how Portland’s light rail, the driving factor for the CRC will prevent a semi-truck carrying an oversized load from striking the bridge again.

And this quote was added AFTER the Lazy C included eyewitness accounts of the truck striking the bridge structure. An earlier adding of the quote on the truck has been moved further down in the article, after concerns over the I-5 Bridge in SW Washington somehow collapsing are mentioned. Such trickery is why I label them the Lazy C and others refer to them as the Democratian.

Sad that the media locally engages in more hyperbole than blogs.

5 Comments to “UPDATED: CRC Proponents, Lazy C Not Letting a Good Crisis Go To Waste”

  1. Precisely. Why would they ever let facts get in the way of the chance to blame the GOP for everything?

  2. Based on the comments of the CRC Scammers, it’s clear they’re a group of blithering idiots.

    A truck hitting part of the superstructure of the bridge is the reason it fell.

    Not age. Not light rail. Not tolls. Not an earthquake.

    The Skagit River bridge provides zero need or justification to rape the commuters of Clark County and the taxpayers of this state, but that won’;t stop the kool aid drinking swine from telling us it does.

  3. ThePsychotic Morons Don’ give a Damn what really happened, after all they are Psychotic Morons.

  4. I doubt a semi truck would strike the new bridge and bring it down – more likely a barge striking the new closer together piers.

  5. Glad to hear nobody was killed.

    If you take a look at the collapsed portion of the bridge, the foundation piers remain standing. This was a structural issue on the steel truss mechanisms…nothing to do with the foundation.

    One talking point error by those who claim the “old bridge” is outdated and was built in 1917. It was reconstructed in 1959.


    What the pro-loo rail crossing folks need to take into consideration is simple. A barge could do a lot more damage to structural integrity on the new bridge, especially if there isn’t enough clearance for it to pass through safely…and we have a lot of barge traffic on the C-River.

    Another consideration on I-5 bridges. The current crossing has 136.2′ vertical clearance below the bridge. The proposed conceptual bridge has 116′. What would happen to river traffic if water levels continued to rise…especially during flood years?

    Just some rambling thoughts.

Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: