March 25, 2010

"It’s far from clear to me that public money should be used to build two office towers."

"If the market does not support these buildings, why should government step in?"


Eric said...

Normally I'd agree - this should all be done with private money. But on a national level the symbolism is important - I don't know what they have planned, but these new towers should be a floor higher than the old ones and the place should be renamed "The Galactic Trade Center".

tim maguire said...

Ummm...the site is owned and the new buildings will be owned by a public agency--the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

Is Jonathan Bowles seriously questioning why Port Authority should be paying for its own buildings?

rhhardin said...

Sell it to the Indians for $24 and let them build a casino.

Anonymous said...

Yet another example of Typical New York Incompetence.* Let's assume that eight and a half years ago other terrorists had flown jetliners into (say) the Mall of America, Epcot Center and the MGM Grand. I absolutely, 100% guarantee that the sites would have been fully rebuilt years ago. Heck, even the federal government managed to rebuild the heavily damaged Pentagon in one year. But because Ground Zero is in New York, it's still basically a hole in the ground and will stay that way for years and years to come.

* = my favorite example is connecting the 63rd Street subway tunnel to the Queens Boulevard mainline; seven years to dig 1,500 feet of tunnel.


Lem said...

The Washington Times reports that last year $13 billion in tax dollars was spent to pamper "public servants" on trips that double as vacation junkets.


Unlike the junkets (which are likely to increase under Obama) with these bldgs maybe there is a chance we will get our money back..

veni vidi vici said...

With the financial industry about to pull up stakes and relocate, likely to all the empty first-class office space in Dubai, following enactment of the next round of "comprehensive" regulations of Wall Street that Pelosi was cackling about the other day with her band of fat stooges (Steny, this means you. And what kind of name is Steny Hoyer, anyway? Are you the fucking Hostess Ho-Ho Man or something?), there probably isn't much cause to build a bunch of high-rise office tower space in downtown Manhattan anymore.

Want a tall building? Have the government build a tall radio/broadcast tower a la the CN Tower or that big thing in Dusseldorf. Tons more suit-and-tie financial office space in NYC? In the current/forthcoming regulatory environment? Are you kidding?

wv: "consm" -- the recessionized-spelling of the thing Americans do better than most.

Trooper York said...

Unfortunately the time for rebuilding the towers has passed.

This has become another Bloomberg real estate boondoggle like the Ratner development in Brooklyn and the failed attempt at a West Side staduim.

They just announced that they are cancelling about 70 bus lines in the city including one that stops in front of my store.

Old people and working people who depend on these buses will have to walk or squeeze into a subway that is many blocks away from the bus line.

As much as it pains me to admit it I have to agree that public monies should not support this in any way. If a private developer can not finance it all on his own, then it should stand as a continuing reminder of what happened just the way it is.

Bender said...

Yes, it is past time to build.

And not only there, but a huge office building on the water over the U.S.S. Arizona, and a big office complex over the cornfield and bloody lane at Antietam, and some condos over the field of Pickett's charge, and, since the Arlington County Board is in bed with developers, pushing hyper-density "smart growth" all over the place, construct a bunch of 20-story mixed use buildings over that plot of land just south of Rosslyn.

A building over every grave!

Cedarford said...

I vote for another 20 years of WTC Pit Mournathons.

Tributes to "The Heroes". The Singing Cop shows up and gets another 2500.00 honorarium in taxpayer money for another 2 minutes of operetic bellowing. The names of the Specialest Victims Ever are read out in a tedious dirge that goes on forever - as everyone tries to be courtious to the Noble Victim Families and not betray the "naming of the dead" in a country that has had 20,800,000 people die since 9/11 has gone on too long and bores us to tears.

Truth is that if America wasn't broken - even back in 2001 - institutionally paralyzed, we could have told Giuliani, all the lawyers, and the Cult of Victimhood folks to shut up about "The Sacred Ground" and rebuild.
It took 1 year to build the Empire State Building over 70 years ago.

We had the will to rebuild 8 years ago. Now that will, (and goodwill towards the financiers of NYC) is completely disappated.

And these days, with the collapse both Republicans and Dems had a hand in? As well as the Free Trade lovers, Globalists, and Freedom From Gov't Regulation!! lovers caused?

NYC office space is already in oversupply.

There is a screaming demand for new office space - but in Shanghai for companies that actually make things - and in DC for the huge expansion in Fed Gov't size George Bush and Barack Obama are behind.

Trooper York said...

I remember when the Twin Towers were first built. No one wanted to rent in it because they were afraid of it and it was too expensive. And that was in the seventies.

So they just put New York State offices like the Sales Tax Department and the Department of Taxation and Finance in many of the offices on the upper floors. I took many a trip to the top of the Towers for Sales Tax Audits.

It doesn't make any sense to rebuild it to just fill it up with governmental offices.

Trooper York said...

I will say that the contempt and hatred that so many feel towards New York and the people that we lost is nothing new to many of us.

We wear your contempt as a badge of honor.

wombat said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Trooper York said...

Most of the people who died were working people. Clerks, office workers, bus boys, waiters, and fireman.

Relatively few financial titans of Wall St.

But you can revel in your hatred of them all the same.

They don't need a momument for many of us to remember them.

Cedarford said...

Flexo - "And not only there, but a huge office building on the water over the U.S.S. Arizona, and a big office complex over the cornfield and bloody lane at Antietam, and some condos over the field of Pickett's charge, and, since the Arlington County..."

If people globally bought into that "sacred soil of the Precious Victims" crap - half the cities in Europe would not have been rebuilt, as well as Asian places like Yokohama, Kobe, Hiroshima.

And anywhere a plane smacked down would become a non-developable Monument of some 400 acres of "park-like mourning facilities for all eternity, complete with "forests of solitude" for the Victims Families"????

Instead, if "9/11 Victim's Family Advocates" had raged similarly after WWII, all the city cores would be would be rubble, monuments to the noble dead, reflecting pools that symbolized tears for the KIA in various wars.

Tourists would come in and see the Pits of Germany and Russia and Poland that used to be city buildings - now "holy sites". Any that could stomach the mindlessness of it and sheer boredom would come to hear the names of 30,000 dead people read off in London, or 160,000 in Tokyo-Yokohama.

And of the 20.8 million other people in America that died after the morning of 9/11 besides the "Most Special Victims Ever"?

Do we make all our ERs "Sacred Soil" and shut them down for a day or two to read off "the magical names of remembrance"?

And would any sidewalk or spare lot where Lakeesha shot Juwan-Ramallag 'cause he dissed her also be "sacred soil" forver?

wombat said...

Too bad we didn't rebuild and rebuild quick and higher. Maudlin memorial mentality won us nothing but more (symbology) battle and delays. Privately-funded imposing corporate structures that house vital business and working people would've been the best rejoinder to the 9/11 attack on the American spirit. Weep, but not over a permanent cavity.

Ann Althouse said...

Sorry, I had to delete some comments.

wombat said...

Yes, too bad, Ann. Ad hominem and personal destruction is a one-way game for some of you here.

David said...

Trooper says: "So they just put New York State offices like the Sales Tax Department and the Department of Taxation and Finance in many of the offices on the upper floors. I took many a trip to the top of the Towers for Sales Tax Audits."

Correctomundo. Government leasing is a form of financing.

These buildings could not possibly be financed privately right now. Lenders are fearful, rents are not rising, the future of NYC as the premier financial center is in doubt (partly because of misguided regulation and rising taxes), the internet is enabling decentralization, etc., etc.

Trooper is also right that the time for rebuilding the towers has passed. Now it has become the worst example of using the dead of 9/11 for crass private and political purposes. This dishonors the dead, who (right again Trooper) mostly were not fat cats but just ordinary Joes trying to live a life.

Now we will tax the ordinary Joes for private and political gain. Sad.

Anonymous said...

Is there to be no criticism of billionaire New York moneymen getting billion-dollar taxpayer handouts?

Just want to understand what the ground rules are here?

Cedarford said...

Trooper, NYC frankly exhausted the national goodwill. By not doing anything for 7 years but engage in Mournathons, demand tens of billions from the rest of the country as "victims", and embark on a cycle of typical "Manhattan is the Center of the Universe navel-gazing".

The Trade Towers were centers of Gov't, Globalization, and High Finance. Had AQ been smarter, they would have said the Pentagon, Capital Hill, and the financial heart of Globalism were as valid a set of targets after AQ declared war on us in 1997 as the military, Baa'ath Party HQs, and financial centers Bush II bombed in Iraq.

No doubt there were candy machine attendents killed or injured in the Pentagon, and a host of non-combatants killed when Bush bombed Baghdad's financial exchanges.

But they were war targets.

About the only real claim that the WTC buildings were not valid war targets rests in the claim that AQ is barred from making war by Western Law, if not Islamic Law - because AQ is not a nation-state.

The whole "Heroes and Victims & NYC im Mourning Forever" narrative America gulped down at the start of the post-9/11 time was pretty lame, IMO. And even while intense sorrow and grief and anger is appropriate...there is an expectation in every society, indeed in every workplace that a certain time of grief and dysfunctionalism is expected and is tolerated and accepted...that is on a reasonable schedule society and workplaces impose.

You might take an employee who loses a Mom be gone for a week. But not be so tolerant and understanding if the employee calls up at the end of week two insisting that they need another 3 months to "achieve an emotional acceptance".

By 2004, I think society got a little tired of NYC's self indulgence and endless demands for more Heroes and Victims money and NYC to get special consideration over all other cities.

wombat said...

Ann, exactly how is the following so offensive (in light of the outrageous postings here on a regular basis) in reference to the citation after it:

Christ. Making fun of names is byrd-lame/ barry manilow, franken or Olbermann sounding.


(veni vidi vici)
"to the next round of "comprehensive" regulations of Wall Street that Pelosi was cackling about the other day with her band of fat stooges (Steny, this means you. And what kind of name is Steny Hoyer, anyway? Are you the fucking Hostess Ho-Ho Man or something?), there probably isn't much cause to build a bunch of high-rise office tower space in downtown Manhattan anymore..."

That is my name, too, and free speech works BOTH WAYS, doesn't it? I'm not the constitutional lawyer nor the blog administrator, but there is absolutely NOTHING offensive in what I wrote, unless you're offended by my invoking a musician. Considering the vitriol expressed here against certain other musicians, I just don't get it. Nothing I wrote was mean or over the top.

Chip Ahoy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I understood this to be a free speech zone, where even controversial statements were especially protected (uncontroversial statements need no protection, do they?)

Chip Ahoy said...

Could we have an Althouse III, graveyard of deleted comments? A private quiet place where we could go to morn and marvel the bones and decaying corpses, itself ironically comment-free.

(quite changed to quiet ↑)

wombat said...

Exactly what is controversial about my taking exception to cheapshots at names? Is this Canada and veni's use of Ho-Ho for Steny is more civil than my objection?

I don't support Steny, just hate cheap.

wombat said...

I stand corrected. I objected to "fucking Hostess Ho-Ho man."

Jason (the commenter) said...

Does New York City need more office space right now, or debt? They could let it be a park until things improve, or sell the land to the highest bidder. Something that doesn't destroy the city in an attempt to save it.

Unknown said...

Frankly, I always thought they should just have a park there with a nice, simple plaque, not unlike the Arizona Memorial. New York can always use a break in the smog and I think office buildings are white elephants anymore. Fiber optic and wireless communication make them pretty much obsolete. Saves all that fuel commuting and you don't need to see everybody face to face.

ironrailsironweights said...

Yet another example of Typical New York Incompetence.

More like the environmental-governmental complex at work. Things are so complicated, nothing gets done unless the National Socialists want it, but I give you your point also.

Ann Althouse said...

Sorry, I had to delete some comments.

Never apologize, it's a sign of weakness. And that's not just a movie line; the PC crowd has been using forced apologies as a weapon to restrict free speech for about twenty years.

That you felt obliged to do so in just this post, in light of the foul mouths and fouler minds on display the last few days, you've done your bit for the First Amendment. If someone said some of the things about me or my wife that have been said about you, they would have been permanently barred.

Synova said...

But if it's private money there is less control over the towers and their existence as a memorial and symbol.

Now... maybe that would actually be a good thing as far as symbolism goes.

Anonymous said...

Oh fun fun fun! Comment drama! But, alas, I was too late to see it... was it something about a "fucking Hostess Ho-Ho man"?

Jason said...

It was never a free speech zone. Althouse even deleted one of my comments a couple of years ago.

Of course, she was an Obama supporter then, and therefore a fascist.

I'm Full of Soup said...

"Exhausted national goodwill"??!!

I didn't know you were in charge of that computation C-ford. Based on your comments on another thread, Cford wants more jobs here in America as long as none of the jobs goes to New Yorkers? Is that about right?

wombat said...

No one here can claim I said anything foul. Veni did the "fucking hostess Ho-Ho Man" thing. I objected to the cheapness, esp. b/c it referenced my name, and got deleted, using no bad language. The deletion is indefensible except on grounds Ann can do what she wants and play favorites.

Fine. The game is known and documented. It's crappy, but there you go

The Drill SGT said...

FTR, the Port authority is alread building the flagship 1 WTC building, so even without these buildings the site wont be empty. These are equivalent to old WTC 3-7

Cedarford said...
Trooper, NYC frankly exhausted the national goodwill. By not doing anything for 7 years but engage in Mournathons, demand tens of billions from the rest of the country as "victims",

I know a woman whose husband was the PM for the new 1WTC. He was a former engineer Colonel and then worked for the State Department building embassies. She tells horror stories of the difficulties her husband had dealing with the myriad of battling entities with their hands out, the trade unions being the worst. I joked to her that her husband must have thought that after 25 years in the Army and more building embassies that he knew how to deal with strange cultures and natives with unusal customs, UNTIL he got to NYC :)

veni vidi vici said...

@EIDOLON 9:26: "That is my name, too..."

Steny Hoyer is posting here under the handle "Eidolon"?

Who knew?

I didn't see your comment before its deletion, hombre, but if it's that important to you to say it, just find another administrator-acceptable manner in which to express the sentiment and post away!

Meanwhile, the whinging to the hostess about the injustice of deleting your comment is uninteresting to most of us here.

Carry on.

p.s. If Trooper was referring to me in any way re. the "hating on NYC" thing, that'd be off-base and missing the point of what I said. Since I know him to be one of the sharper regulars in this saloon, it's probably just me being oversensitive.

wv: "pessia" -- Sometimes it's enough to pessia off.

wombat said...

Hey, veni\\

you weren't making fun of Steny's first name when you said "fucking hostess Ho-Ho Man"

You know who I am and I know you.

My comment response was eminently civil and you and Ann know it.

The game/ drama has gotten tedious and far too destructive. Give it up.

veni vidi vici said...

Hoyer is pure ho-ho's, and that part of what I said had nothing to do with the peculiarity of his first name "Steny", which is that most rare bird of a name, in a league with contemporary first names like "Quentin" (that's my disclaimer to the guy posing as Mr. Hoyer on this thread).

Behold for yourself the glory of this Clyde-meets-Harvey of a man's jowelly ho-ho-ness, which is especially evident in the dumb smile and "o"-mouthed moments of confusion masquerading as seriousness:

wv: "mocof" -- Sort of what this series of comments is, from me to Mr. Hoyer.

Ann Althouse said...

NewHam said..."Is there to be no criticism of billionaire New York moneymen getting billion-dollar taxpayer handouts? Just want to understand what the ground rules are here?"

I couldn't understand what you were doing with your comments and in light of my confusion, there was some language that pushed me over the line to thinking this isn't something I want on my blog.

It's not that I'm excluding a point of view, it's the way you were saying whatever you were saying that got the deletion.

Scott said...

My office is in Jersey City, right across the Hudson River from where the World Trade Center was. I'm about two-thirds up a 28 floor building.

Almost ten years after the fact, people are still suffering post-traumatic stress. Nobody who has a memory of that day would ever want to work in a skyscraper on that site. It's guaranteed to be a white elephant from the word go.

veni vidi vici said...

Actually, I've never seen you on here before, unless you've previously used a different handle. I've been the same guy here for years now.

You're correct: I was the idiotic visage of our current House majority leader when I referred to him as the Hostess Ho-Ho Man. I'll stand by that.

As for the tiresomeness of the "game", which I take to mean your relentless whining post-deletion, yeah; that's another thing you're correct about.

Carry forward, into the night.


wv: "plara" -- That place in Plon Plith the Plind.

wombat said...


Again, my comment was like:

"Christ. Making fun of names is byrd-lame or barry manilow-like, Franken or Olbermann sounding."

Had Althouse not deleted such an offensive response to your "fucking Hostess Ho-Ho Man" Hoyer comment, then we'd have the precise offensive syllables, wouldn't we?

Ann Althouse said...

EIDOLON said..."Ann, exactly how is the following so offensive (in light of the outrageous postings here on a regular basis) in reference to the citation after it: Christ. Making fun of names is byrd-lame/ barry manilow, franken or Olbermann sounding."

I deleted a lot of stuff at once. Some of it was deleted because I thought it was responding to other stuff I deleted. It's quite possible that in this case, it got mixed in with other things that were just confusing me.

I'm not opposed to any particular content, but I was very close to undisplaying the entire thread here. I thought it had quickly descended into an incomprehensible mess, studded with some material that seemed anti-semitic.

veni vidi vici said...


"I was *making fun of*..."

As they say, "C'mon, get happy!"

wv: "nastroph" -- A winning episode of nastiness.

Ann Althouse said...

Seriously, I don't know why the subject of the WTC isn't getting a higher level of discussion. And the discussion of the comments and my comments policy and whether there is free speech here is not too productive.

Scott said...

Incidentally, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is a self-sustaining regional development agency that receives no government revenue. There are a number of these quasi-governmental animals in this region.

wombat said...


At this point there can be no response to your kind of lucidity, nor to Althouse's offense to inoffensive language and sentiment.

Were I just the fabulous Titts more fabulously offending,,,

Cop out

I'm Full of Soup said...

Unless you live in NYC area, the tug of war over the WTC site just sounds like an intramural money grab by a few well-connected parties. The sanctity of the site seems to have been forgotten by these bigwigs so why should Joe Q. Public get excited.

wombat said...


B/c I said "Christ"??

Some of my best friends are or were Jews.


What's in the water here? I responded civilly to a slur ojn a surname. Veni can slur but I get delted for responding.

And that's anti-Semitic? Is Hoyer an Aryan name?

Scott said...

To the complainers: Setting up your own blog on blogspot is absolutely free. Why don't you go off and do it. Show us all how it's done.

veni vidi vici said...

Other than putting Manilow, Franken and Olbermann together in one comment, which risks causing an implosion of the space-time continuum, unless you spiked your sentiment with a Tourette's like ferocity of flaming epithetic invective, I'd have to agree with you that it doesn't seem particularly inappropriate.

I had a go once about some other "pubic figure"'s name on here awhile back and it drew a similar "that's so childish" comment from someone else, so your sentiment isn't exactly novel or particularly offensive.

But the Ho-Ho-ism of Steny Hoyer's entire "etre"? Yeah.

Like I said, though, I didn't see your comment in its first run before deletion and don't have an opinion either way about what you said, other than perhaps to respond with "nyah nyah nyeh nyah nyah!"

And if you don't find anything amusing in Steny Hoyer's name, please say it out loud a few times. It has a comical combination of vowel sounds, and could be the name of a Popeye cartoon character.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, Mr. Hoyer... I mean, Eidolon.

wv: "nonarb" -- The type of litigant that loves spending money.

J Lee said...

Over the 30-year life of the WTC, really it took until the last 10-12 years, when you finally had western access through the site to Battery Park City and the World Financial Center, that the Trade Center finally started both filling up its offices and becomming a less sterile place -- the original design basically cut the Vescey and West Street sides of the complex off from any contact with the surrounding streets via a 15-to-25 foot high wall, and the Liberty Street side was only marginally better.

Hopefully, whatever the Port Authority and Larry Silverstein finally decides to do integrates the new complex better into the neighborhood, and I think that is what they're going for. The problem, economically, is that because of the memorial site on the Twin Towers' footprint, the PA and Silverstein are basically is trying to recreate 16 acres of office space on what is now only eight acres of available land on the original site, plus the two acres gained from the former Deutsche Bank building site across Liberty Street.

That forces them to squeeze a lot of building into a lot less space to create something close to the same square footage on the available east half of the original site, and judging from the Times' story, we're liable to end up with the Great Wall of Church Street, depending on how much space they have for setbacks and/or a central plaza.

Scott said...

AJ, the problem with the site sanctity argument is that Larry Silverstein has a 99 year lease on the site. He is entitled to get a return on his investment.

Besides, the building was a symbol of vital capitalism in a free market. The best memorial would be to rebuild the site for its original purpose. If we just make it a graveyard or some granite obelisk, then we're declaring the terrorists to be the winners.

wombat said...

Wow, Ann

Many threads here devolve to incomprehensible messes and severe back and forth and you next to never delete non-foul and non-defaming comments.

Also, I was one of the commenters above who made a legit, I think, comment on the situation re the WTC site.

Many commenters know who each other are, despite the protestations. The manipulations are disingenous schtick.

veni vidi vici said...

The WTC site is over. I read an article a few months ago about the steak knives company with the "But Wait there's more" dude having relocated their headquarters into the now cheaper than hell office space on or near Wall Street.

If that's not NYC forfeiting the "global financial centre" game, please clue us all in. Like someone upthread said, anyone working in those high-rises in the 9/11 era was and likely still is somewhat scarred by the experience and as such, loath to dive back into a high-rise work lifestyle.

By the same token, once the big financial firms relocated every non-essential and redundant office/employee offsite to NJ or surrounding environs, the bloom was off the downtown Manhattan rose, likely at substantial office-lease savings to boot.

Now, if NYC wanted to build a gargantuan replica of Led Zeppelin's "The Object" from the cover of the Presence album on the WTC spot, they'd have chosen a most appropriate and "awesomely mysterious" (think of what those words mean in a non-cynical way) manner of marking the site and the memory of what happened and those who were lost there.

Too bad that'll never happen.

wv: "redgelme" -- What Neo said to Morpheus in the "LiquiGels" version of the Matrix.

Ann Althouse said...

@EIDOLON Deal with it. It's not all about you. I didn't say you wrote something that seemed anti-Semitic. There was something in there that bothered me, surrounded by a lot of confusing stuff that I chose to delete. Stop talking about it now or I will delete that. Get back to the subject of the post.

wombat said...

What bothered you, Ann? I wasn't the one who said "fucking Hostess Ho-Ho Man."

I won't bother to comment here, anymore. Established all that we need to know, anyway.

I wish you and Meade much love and life, for Amy and Barry and for me and my intended.

Thanks and bye!

Chip Ahoy said...

Unrelated to towers, and therefore off topic, Charles visits Afghanistan. The Prince told troops that he had "nothing but the most unbounded admiration" for them. If you overlook, of course, them having hung their own flag upside down. (third photo)

Anonymous said...

Yeah! That making fun of last names like that is so...


I just recalled that I'm Jewish.

I also think, for reasons that have nothing to do with Jewishness, that I might be related to NewHam.

To the topic at hand:

Nobody wants to office there. That's the bottom line. And Larry S., Mayor Michael B., and all the politicians in Washington are just singing their patriotic song, refusing to acknowledge that fact.

Jeremy said...

Trooper York said..."I will say that the contempt and hatred that so many feel towards New York and the people that we lost is nothing new to many of us. We wear your contempt as a badge of honor."

What "contempt and hatred" are you referring to?

I've never heard anything like that.

Chip Ahoy said...

That was contemplative hat, Ed.

Jeremy said...


The Chipper has a new pic!!!

And it's even COOLER than the others.


We want MORE PICS!!!

Chip Ahoy said...

Haha. My mother hates that pic. She says it looks like I'm hiding something. Here's what she object to.

Jeremy said...

Please Chipper...enough about mom.

Just post more pics of YOU.


Lem said...

I proventi delle attivita illecite vengono reinvestiti in numerose attivita legali, che si estendono in tutto il mondo.
La camorra ha investito nelle azioni per la ricostruzione delle Torri Gemelle a New York -

Gomorrah (2008)

Jeremy said...

Incolpandolo sugli italiani?

reader_iam said...


Chip Ahoy said...

Does camorra mean racket?

Lem said...

Jeremy la sua non mi, è stato in un film Gomorrah.

Lem said...

Camorra is the name of an illegal organization in Italy.. allegedly the deadliest.

At the end of the film they mentioned that the Camorra launders the proceeds from their illegal activities in investments like the reconstruction of the world trade center.

Chip Ahoy said...


bagoh20 said...

Every day this is feeling more and more like the Jimmy Carter era. Remember how we felt? Everything was beyond the reach of America suddenly. We were overextended, old, spent, incompetent, weak and ashamed. Then Ronald Reagan reminded us of who we really were and for the next 28 years we were America. Welcome back to 1977. Disco still sucks.

Fen said...

I understood this to be a free speech zone, where even controversial statements were especially protected

Not exactly.

See, if a leftist like Garage Mahal makes outrageous allegations about a conservative, its okay. Ann leaves it up.

But if you push back with something along the lines of:

"America has forgotten 9-11. So why bother? We'd rather spend that money on Viagra for pedophiles like Garage Mahal"

then it gets deleted.

Just like in the real world. People like Ann have no problem with uncivil speech, until a conservative pushes back.

Fen said...

Her censorship of racial slurs here is similar. You can use redneck, wetback, spic, etc. But you cant use the n-word. You can't even spell it out when describing how offensive it is.

Its instructive to see that even an intelligent free-speech advocate like Ann can be indoctrinated with PCBS.

reader_iam said...

Well, bagoh20, as to the first part of your thesis, it was one of those times when everyone, weary and therefore energized, wanted to nationalize symbolism while decrying the nationalization of symbolization, and when everyone agreed that apologies within the family--that is, domestically, amongst "we the people," here at home--were signs of weakness and therefore a thing that ought never be done.

bagoh20 said...

The presence of vulgarity or obnoxiousness, has zero correlation with good discussion of ideas. Hell, you can even keep your clothes on and do it. This is Ann's soap box, we're just borrowing it. I don't find it at all restrictive. Conversation always requires some boundaries. This is a private enterprise here.

veni vidi vici said...

"Welcome back to 1977. Disco still sucks."

Here's some of what's filling the clubs that would've been spinning disco back then, nowadays. It's aptly titled, "Flashback", but it definitely doesn't suck. It's sort of cool, actually:

Oh, and a random phrase to sum up the Hoyeresque discussion of earlier:

"Wanker Van Beethoven".

That is all.

wv: "yenryo" -- A dyslexic speech-impaired Phillippino taxi driver naming his favorite chocolate bar.

bagoh20 said...

"but it definitely doesn't suck. It's sort of cool, actually:"

We will have to agree to disagree on that.

Didn't really hate disco, can't say the same about Carter, even if I did vote for him. I never quite feel like I've apologized enough for that. Sorry.

William said...

The WTC was hit twice. Jihadi assholes rank the second hit as their great moment of glory. The next WTC should be constructed in the shape of a large bullseye, because that what it will be for a significant portion of the world's terrorists. You might say that that is a compelling reason to build it. But then you don't have to find the tenants or pay the insurance premiums. Better to make the site a park, a recessed, quiet place hiding among the skyscrapers.....There's a Thurber cartoon: a group of Wall Streeters are hurrying past the Trinity Church graveyard. The caption under them reads "Destinations". The WTC site is a place of ghosts and memories. Another tall building is not an effective use of the site.

Fen said...

Conversation always requires some boundaries.

Sure. But do you believe some pigs are more equal?

Because that appears to be Ann's view - some hateful speech is more equal than other hateful speech.

Her box, her rules. But lets not pretend its right.

reader_iam said...

TBC, whatever was posted earlier in this thread that was deleted, I missed.

Anonymous said...

"It's not that I'm excluding a point of view, it's the way you were saying whatever you were saying that got the deletion."

Here is what I was trying to say (I wasn't trying to "do" anything):

I don't believe it's a good use of taxpayer money to hand it to billionaire real estate developers and I certainly don't think that Repubulicans should be advancing the argument that we need to do this in order to enrich government unions.

That is precisely what Mayor Michael Bloomberg is doing: He is handing tax dollars to Larry Silverstein to build what will undoubetedly become a target of Islamic rage in the middle of Manhattan.

That's a stupid use of your and my tax dollars; the New York Fire and Police Departments are rich enough, frankly; and it's dangerous to build such highly visible targets in the middle of America's largest city.

I'm not sure what's so controversial about that stance. It's your blog and you are certainly free to censor your comment section however you wish.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

No comment on the post, but with a WV word of VortLeap, I had to jump in!

Issob Morocco said...

I believe in the ruling political class and bureaucracy hierarchy, this affliction is known as "Edifice Complex". A desire by such RPC's and Bureaucrats to leave behind a momento of their own perceived greatness upon the humble, stupid masses.

The Soviet Union architects took this malady to new lows with the minimalist, concrete laden structures of the 50's, 60's and 70's.

A.W. said...

i agree with eric's notion that its the symbolism that matters. But, bluntly, i have hated prettty much all of the designs for the new towers. So why not, you know, just use the old plans for the originals and put them up again, yes, with a little more attention paid to withstanding future attacks.

Well, either that, or we might erect a tower in the shape of a giant hand holding up its middle finger and point it toward wherever bin Laden was born.

Too many jims said...


You'd have to be stupid to not know what parts of your deleted comments were stated in a controversial manner. I don't think you are stupid because you were able to restate relatively cogently your position without the controversial provisions. I think you are feigning your incredulity.

traditionalguy said...

There needs to be a freeze on building in any occupied lands. This is Dutch land taken by military force and its name arrogantly changed from New Netherlands a mere 400 years ago. There is also a rumor that Jews have been allowed to settle there and purchase what should be Dutch only Lands. Obama the Destroyer and Hilary the enforcer need to use all of the might of the USA to rectify this situation now before it is seen as an example of ignoring Arab claims to retake Jerusalem. Elections have consequences.

Fen said...

Too Many Jims: You'd have to be stupid to not know what parts of your deleted comments were stated in a controversial manner.

Contraversial? Really? Did you faint?

Hey guys, free speech is protected unless you are "contraversial"...

Too many jims said...


NewHam said: "I'm not sure what's so controversial about that stance." Of course, the "stance" that he laid out excluded certain references he made in his prior comments that were deleted. I was merely saying that he'd have to be stupid to not understand why his deleted comments were controversial. Since, I don't think he is stupid, I think he is being disingenuous and claiming to be persecuted. I didn't suggest what I thought Prof. Althouse should have done with the comments.

Did I faint? Absolutely not. I have had conversations with people who were or were perceived as anti-semites, racists and other nefarious thinkers before. Occasionally I agree with them on some limited points. That doesn't mean I am going to invite them into my house and have my neighbors think that I subscribe to their skewed views or perceived skewed views.

veni vidi vici said...

NewHam said: "I'm not sure what's so controversial about that stance."

Was it a wide stance?

From Inwood said...


I'm coming late to this thread & I did not see NewHam's original comment, now deleted, but it appears that Prof A has "deemed" it unacceptable! Works for Congress.

As to the substance of your latest post, I don't see any problem with building a new tower or two if that’s what the market will support. As for such tower(s) being a target, there's still the Empire State & Chrysler, for instance, right now, so I don't see your argument.

I do agree with Prof A's point on this thread about public money being spent on office buildings, & I'm glad that she published it.

Even the über hypocritical faux-compassionate NYT has no problem getting a big real estate tax break for its Home Office on 42nd St., thus burdening the rest of NYC taxpayers.

(Continued in next post.)

From Inwood said...

Funny thing about NYC Liberals and Real Estate.

A lawyer I knew was a bien pensant Liberal on every issue, except housing. Seems his family was Bigtime in Bronx housing & their Bigtime Article of Faith, hell, raison d’être, was that NYC was going to hell because of Rent Control, which, of course, was a pillar of NYC Liberalism. He saw no disconnect. And the biggest crime was a "landmark" designation, meaning how many landlords did it take to change an outside light bulb. This was “personal” & so here he was a 100% laissez-faire capitalist; he didn’t even want to hear about enlightened democratic capitalism!

And then there were

Leona Helmsley, the striving poor girl married to the über-rich Real Estate Mogul, who deducted costs of her $11 MM house in The Hamptons as a business expense to their corporations to avoid the taxes she publicly advocated as a good liberal, &

Eliot Spitzer, the scion of a NYC über real estate family who, based on my vast knowledge of psychology gleaned from Readers’ Digest, was trying to atone for his unearned good fortune by criminalizing capitalists. (Except Real Estate Moguls like his Pa; now, the psychology of living on the edge with naughty ladies….)

As for the financing of it all, intellectuals see NYC as a magnet for people like themselves. But they are either indifferent or personally tax adverse with respect to who pays for education & culture &, gasp, those banausic things like water & sewers, transportation &, yes, the Welfare State that New Yorkers hold up to the rest of the world as an example of how “we can do it all”. And such intelligent people having this aversion to vulgar reality has led to creative bookkeeping (a/k/a “cooking the books”), which every so often must be addressed (gets exposed). NYC maintains a perpetual uneasy tension between

laisser faire and state-run capitalism,

planning & unbridled construction,

master planning & great public showcases & the efforts of a “creative class” of artists, writers, thinkers, musicians, whatever, between individualism & the nanny state,

anarchy & safety,

freedom & licentiousness,

a project needed to bring the city kicking & screaming into the 21st Century &, NIMBY or BANANA, between a Disneyland city of the past & a living, breathing city, between common sense & we can have our cake & eat it.

When, after WWII, NYC manufacturing began to disappear & containerization made its unique natural harbor unimportant, Finance, recovered from the great Depression, took over.

But NYC had discovered its conscience regarding the poor, or felt it had, & began a welfare system beyond that of the rest of the country. To pay for all this, the necessary Hiways, mass transit, bridges, tunnels, etc & welfare at the same time, politicians became illusionists (the original & more appropriate word for magicians) &, as noted, cooked the books. Businesses fled but new opportunities in the IT area replaced them & NYC remained a magnet for immigrants. And it, almost alone of “old” US cities, has (subject to the 2010 Census final figures) maintained its population without annexing any suburbs after the 19th Century. And somehow it got its finances in order enough to stave off bankruptcy & elected a mayor who cleaned up the streets of dirt & crime. But, as I write this, its one industry, finance seems to have fallen off the cliff.

And since habits die hard, NYC apparently still feels it has to pay for new construction which has to produce jobs, no? Or is it just an illusion?

From Inwood said...

Trooper Y:

I read the final report of the NYC MTA & I wonder why they're going ahead with building the 2nd Ave Subway since they're crying poverty & cutting service.

I also note that they are cutting out the "W" service in Astoria & replacing it by running the "Q" beyond 57th St on the old "W" route. But the plan for the 2nd Ave Subway shows that the "Q" will go up 2nd Ave when construction is completed. Enron planning? Faux bookkeeping!