Might Today’s City Council and Progressives Caused World War Two to be Lost?

by lewwaters

Kaiser 2Listening to the rhetoric coming from the far leftists demanding the proposed oil terminal at the Port of Vancouver to be scrapped, the ominous feeling came over me that if these people, including the four and possibly more current Vancouver City Council Members who have said they oppose it, were around in the 1940’s, World War Two might have been lost.

It is not as much of a stretch as it may sound. Much of their expressed opposition centers around the assumption of a pristine river and river front, fears of pollution to the river and the soil, assumed dangers of the product to workers and those living near the port and more.

In my estimation, fears raised and blown out of proportion to promote their BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything thanks John Laird) attitude to force the world to conform to their views.

For those that might not remember due to youth or not learning history, Vancouver played an instrumental role in winning World War Two as it became a major shipyard, turning out liberty ships, tank-landing ships, escort aircraft carriers, attack transports, troop ships, cargo vessels and even two 14,000-ton dry docks.

Can you imagine today, the city council and Progressives demanding no shipyard along the Columbia River and how the war effort could have faltered? Not to mention how such a major undertaking ballooned the Vancouver, Clark County economy as the modest population 18,000 at the beginning of the war blossomed to over 100,000, people working either in the shipyard or supporting it outside in some manner.

I know, you’re likely thinking that was a different time with different circumstances, but is it really all that much different, other than attitudes from that small group with a loud voice?

Yes, the war on Terror is winding down as we abandon the efforts worldwide, but terrorism remains, even admitted to as one commenter mentioned an oil terminal would make Vancouver a major target for terrorists at the March 24, 2014 City Council meeting.

But, we are in a crisis in that we have an unacceptable long term unemployment rate, a faltering economy and that state faces a severe shortage of revenue due to that.

Democrats and Progressives seem to feel the perpetual extension of unemployment benefits is the answer, but that only increases the burden on those fortunate enough to still be working as well as employers struggling to remain in business.

The shot in the arm needed is a growth in good, family wage jobs for the middle class. The very sort of jobs that would be created with the oil terminal, not the concrete jungle development of high end condominiums and retail Democrats & Progressives prefer to be constructed on the river front that would bring only minimum wage jobs for the middle class.

Unwittingly, Matt Landon, a very vocal activist for Vancouver Action Network, a group that in my opinion borders on eco-terrorism, admitted to such in a comment left under an op-ed on March 23, 2014 Local View: Job-creation aspect lost in oil terminal debate.

In part Landon said,

“Barry Cain’s downtown development is slated to employ over 5,000 people and house 5,000 residents and create buildings that will exist for the foreseeable future.”

“The Tesoro-Savage oil terminal is proposed to employ 250 temporary construction workers and then employ 120 people for the 10 year lease or until the Bakken is pumped dry, whichever comes first?”

“Can anyone else do the math? If not here are the numbers.”

“Downtown development employees”

“$7.25 an hour equals $15,080 a year times 5,000 employees equals $75,400,000 per year combined income.”

“Railroad employees”

“$50,000 a year times 120 employees equals $6,000,000 per year combined income.”

First off, the waterfront project creating 5,000 jobs is not just wishful thinking, it is delusional. But even if it did, how much public assistance would those 5,000 require? And, what revenues could they be paying to counter how much they would be depending on?

The oil terminal, on the other hand, would see an increase in rail employees and workers, likely union workers to maintain and work the port in transferring the oil all earning union wages, as well as an increase outside the port of businesses cropping up locally to feed those workers, give them more shopping for themselves and their families as well as creating or purchasing the clothes and tools they would need.

Landon is clever in inserting “until the Bakken is pumped dry,” trying to give the impression that it is a short term process soon ending. In fact, several have cried just the same for years now in their effort to end the use of fossil fuels.

But, the American Enterprise Institute conducted their own analysis, resulting in Bakken oil boom in North Dakota might last for 100 years.

As advancements are made in drilling techniques, might it go on even longer?

We are also being warned by these people of the dangers inherent in such an oil terminal, even the possibility of a train derailment. While the likelihood is slim, given the slow speeds trains travel here and the level grade, there is always a degree of danger in just about everything we humans do.

Just crossing the street can result in being run over, but we still cross them. We have a major airport across the river with aircraft flying over our city in approach every day. We even saw a major airplane crash once across the river and in a neighborhood.

Do these ne’er–do–wells demand the airport be closed or aircraft diverted to not fly over the city? No.

Many were advocates of forcing light rail on the community, ignoring that many have died as a result of being hit by light rail.

But what really strikes me with these people and their cries of dangers, other than how are they able to leave their homes at any time, none have ever raised any concerned with the grain elevator at the port, even though several have caught fire and exploded across the world, grain dust being highly volatile.

If they are really concerned with an oil fire, why do they not also worry about a grain dust fire?

Had these same people, with dire warnings of a 10.0 earthquake causing major pollution with an oil terminal, ignoring such a strong earthquake would likely leave little standing or living in the region, been around in the 1940’s, might they have blocked the very effort seen that contributed to defeated a barbaric enemy and freeing millions of people?

Bottom line is, we need jobs, good paying jobs and get the middle class back to work, not force them onto perpetual government dependence.

An oil terminal at our port would contribute much in achieving that goal.

The hyperbole and fearmongering being used, along with threats “to shut down the entire oil by rail industry and cost the oil and rail companies billions of dollars” means fewer jobs, less revenue and a greatly decreased living standard for all.

It is time for people of all political stripes to push back on these fringe activists. Tell them “ENOUGH!”

You need jobs, you need to work and earn a decent living and it is they standing in your way.

6 Comments to “Might Today’s City Council and Progressives Caused World War Two to be Lost?”

  1. The motivation is to discourage use of nasty dirty old-style fossil fuels due to the false meme of global warming. The revolution in oil and natural gas recovery techniques has changed the equation. As Saudi Arabia’s oil production declines, the U.S. production has increased significantly — placing us as the next global energy giant.

    While oil pipelines are more efficient (and safer, from a spill standpoint), the oil producers in the middle of the country have found that the flexibility of rail service gives them more options to get the best price for their oil.

    Of course, it is the height of stupidity to not have an oil terminal at the Port of Vancouver. After all, it could be put in Portland, or Vancouver, BC or another port in the Puget Sound area, though that would move the carriage to another rail carrier.

    The increase in rail carrier jobs should not be sneered at. Rail road jobs pay very well (I should know, I worked for one for twenty-plus years).

  2. As a member of the neighborhood (Rockwood) who had the McDonnell Douglas DC-8 drop on our laps, this is one time I have to speak up. If you haven’t experienced it, you’d best hope you don’t ever have to.

    Yes, I’m a registered Republican and yes, I vote Repub when I see the person is fit enough to take the position intended and yes, I support good jobs for our community but this time, I have to say I am in some agreement with the folks on the far left when it comes to jobs for the community and whether or not we should approve expansion of the port with increased shipments of crude oil. Now hear me out before you all start jumping down my throat.

    Shall we mention the folks of Oso Washington for example??? A definite tragedy and loss of live caused by natural proportions (which I most definitely send my heartfelt condolences to the families and what it is they are suffering as Mt. St. Helens on May 18th of 1980 comes freshly in my mind)…or is it??? Could this tragedy have been averted. I’d say so. If you go back and look at the pictures before the most recent slide, you will see that it was Oso’s local economy hard at work on that hill. Bear in mind…this hillside has a reputation of collapse, yet the local economic leaders allowed a neighborhood to be constructed in the lion’s path. The top was obviously a replant by logging operations…something highly regarding in that community by those seeking more jobs.

    So now you will ask me…”What the hell does that have to do with jobs in Vancouver???” Well my fellow bloggers, it has EVERYTHING to do with Oso. You figure how that oil is collected and what is happening TO the land surrounding it. You figure how easily a rail box train can derail and spill their shipment…along the Columbia River, dumping the tank’s contents into tribal waters. You figure how easily ANY ship can collide with a barge (as the recent one has in the south, along with Exxon Valdez and countless other shipping disasters), sending hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude oil into our river, killing the local economy in the fishing industry. You figure the tank in the port in recent days which spilled thousands of gallons of oil into the ground beneath it and what the long lasting aftereffects will do the immediate environment.

    As far as the far left scare tactics of a 10.0 earthquake…that’s just utter nonsense. Human error is a greater threat than any natural disaster.

    Nobody has to agree with me…but it is my opinion and I’m sticking to it. I cannot put my support in expansion at the port for crude oil shipments…not at the potential expense of economic and our ecology.

  3. Friend…seriously…

    It’s not Global Warming that’s the issue. That my fellow blogger is a cyclical matter. The correct term is Global Climate Change and yes, it is very real. Don’t know if we can do anything about it, but it should concern all of us.

    By the way, have you ever checked out the history of EPA reports on Portland’s tank farms??? Do we really need Vancouver to be a follower of Portland???

    FYI: Just a few examples of safety risks which could happen to Columbia River waterways, even cutting out pleasure boating and fishing as well as the Vancouver-based sternwheeler and trips up the C-River –


    Or how about the oil pipeline safety you mention…how safe did you say they are???


  4. Well Goldenoldie, I guess it’s back to horse-drawn ploughs then? Everything we do has a risk. Sure there is a risk of a spill – there always will be. Just do the best you can to mitigate the risk and go on.

  5. There is no comparison, the terminal is the right choice, for ongoing investment and long term viability of the Port and the City. The other notion was dependant on light rail feeding retirees to Portland. Which other than the short term temporary job creation, would not significantly affect the local economy in any but negative way

  6. Craig, your melodramatic “horse-drawn plough” comment made me chuckle. There’s a lot more potential for growth at the port than with oil terminal expansion. Have you by any chance taken into consideration just where that oil is headed??? Do you honestly think it’s for the betterment of fuel needs here in the USA??? What about the issues of fracking in order to extract the crude oil? At what price is that on the environment?

    Now if the shipped oil were to be utilized here in our county, that might be a different story (as long as it isn’t through fracking) but you know as well as I do just who the moneymakers are and just who will benefit…and it certainly won’t be the people of Clark County.

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: