In this excerpt from an even-longer monologue, Mr. Leventhal declares the suburbs to have been "a mistake." Your suburban lifestyle is "killing our planet." It's official, soccer moms - you are killing the planet! Renowned environmental scientist George Leventhal has declared it so!
Killing our planet!
Leventhal criticizes your belief that you can live away from the noise, crime and other unpleasantness one associates with cities. He chastises your desire to drive down "tree-lined parkways" when you could be surrounded by concrete and graffiti instead under his plan. Even the "quiet," "lush and verdant" environment you paid extra for in the suburbs fails to escape his condemnation. He compares suburban Montgomery County to Paris and New York City, two of the largest metropolises in the world. And he professes his confidence in a MCPS forecasting regime that brought us 6 classroom trailers outside of a brand new Wood Acres Elementary School just a few years after it opened.
Mansplaining
By the end, Leventhal is in full condescension mode, mocking his constituents for their opposition to urbanizing the suburbs, an attitude he displayed during the Westbard worksessions. It's quite a bizarre display, considering that Mr. Leventhal has chosen to run for office in the suburbs, and the majority of his constituents reside in suburban neighborhoods.
"We've got to change"
"What harm could it cause?" Leventhal asks of urbanizing the suburbs. Well, in the particular case of Westbard in Bethesda: How about buildings towering over single-family homes? The environmental impact of 3550 more people being stuffed into a 1.5 block area? Increased auto emissions of 2618 additional cars being added to already-congested River Road every rush hour? Loss of jobs and services, requiring even more auto emissions to be expended and "kill our planet?"
Or maybe higher crime, noise, illegal parking of overflow vehicles in adjacent neighborhoods, paid and permit parking, overcrowded classrooms, further decline in already-declining public schools (on his watch), worse traffic, and a continued budget deficit and unfunded infrastructure costs requiring tax increases on his constituents (the latter point having even been acknowledged by Leventhal himself during a Westbard worksession)?
Or maybe higher crime, noise, illegal parking of overflow vehicles in adjacent neighborhoods, paid and permit parking, overcrowded classrooms, further decline in already-declining public schools (on his watch), worse traffic, and a continued budget deficit and unfunded infrastructure costs requiring tax increases on his constituents (the latter point having even been acknowledged by Leventhal himself during a Westbard worksession)?
What harm indeed?
46 comments:
"Renowned environmental scientist"
Lol. And you're an expert in the topics you opine about?
"1.5 block area" again.
Nut alert. Talk about term limiting.
Can term limits be applied to candidates whom the voters rejected twice in a row?
I don't know about term limits, but Leventhal is clearly overstaying his welcome.
In the county staff primary, he'd be first voted out. :)
What is this "county staff primary"?
If county staff all voted, Leventhal would be first out.
The Post reported Leventhal is toxic and verbally abusive to staff.
This isn't new.
7:12: I'm as much of an expert as George Leventhal and David Alpert. What gives me - and my readers - an advantage over them, is that we exist in the world of fact-based arguments. No scientist has ever produced any evidence that Montgomery County suburban soccer moms are "killing our planet".
"Developers ARE people, my friend!" - Montgomery County Council
Hahaha! This video made me laugh, what a fool. I don't even know where to begin...
Good point about term limits. This is the kind of speech and thinking that evolves when you don't even have competitive Democratic primaries, much less two-party government or term limits. The next step after term limits is to remove party labels from County-level offices.
Thanks for finding that. What a tool.
And fifty years from now, some idiot politician will declare that in the 2010's we made a huge mistake by not changing what our vehicles use for fuel and instead changing everything else.
And by then people will be tired of living in filthy, crowded, crime-laden urban areas with limited sunshine and wind-tunnels for side streets & taking a filthy, crowded train or bus to a job in that same filthy, crowded crime-laden urban area. A socialist paradise?
Wait, what? Of course people who live in the middle of nowhere and drive 50+ miles a day are a burden to our infrastructure and environment. This is news to you, Dyer?
8:26: Can you tell us how the soccer moms of Westbard are "killing our planet",then? I assume you have facts to back this up.
@ 8:21 AM - We're already changing what our vehicles use for fuel, and using far less gasoline in cars that use it. Yes, it's possible to do two things at the same time. Unlike Robert Dyer, most of us can chew gum and walk at the same time.
Also, I don't get this talking point about "filthy, crime-ridden urban areas". Downtown Bethesda is clean and free of crime. Perhaps you're just dog-whistling again?
@7:30 that's a really good point I agree with term limits but also limits on unsuccessful runs for office as well.
8:46 and 7:30: news flash! You can't limit who can run for office just because you don't support them, welcome to America! But I do wish I didn't have to listen to Hillary Clinton scream or see her face on tv anymore too.
Humans in general are ruining the planet. Then there are the special nihilists that take it a step further by ignoring it and work to make things worst
I wonder if 8:46am knows that sitting members of our county and local municipality councils haven't won every election.
Welcome to politics!
8:45AM - "crowded, filthy, crime-laden" was the wording used 50 years ago as a talking point to explain why people wanted to move out to suburbs.
Sometimes, surprisingly, some of you people actually have a decent idea or comment. But then you throw in a slur to the blog host and lose all credibility.
This should come as no surprise that Dyer supports all forms of polluting our air, he's also probably on the "global warming isn't a reality" bandwagon too. This is exactly why the County should be focusing on sustainable and reliable public transportation rather than just building more roads and river crossings that will destroy public greenspace. #dyerhatestheenvironment
Let's get Metro fixed before talking about new transit projects.
Problems at the Bethesda station are frequent.
Blogger Robert Dyer said...
8:26: Can you tell us how the soccer moms of Westbard are "killing our planet",then? "I assume you have facts to back this up."
Lol. I though this was a fact-free blog? I haven't seen any.
Dyer doesn't provides facts either. He is trying to show he is worthy of being a council member too.
@8:58 because the blog host doesn't ever throw slurs or even had credibility to begin with.
"If you're not first, you're last" - Robert Dyer
8:45: Downtown Bethesda is "free of crime"? You need to read my crime reports more often.
Dyer - you are so far off base on this. It is a proven fact that suburban households consume far more resources per capita than to urban households. Energy, proven. Water, proven. Copper and steel (for electrical grids), proven. Pavement miles, proven. (if you want actual knowledge on this, check Geoffrey West and Louis Betancourt's impressive body of research on the subject at the Santa Fe Institute.)
Given the negative environmental impacts from how we produce and consume energy and other resources in today's society (which you can learn more about from the International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook publication, or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change summary reports), by definition that means the suburbs are killing our planet.
How about learning about an issue before publishing such uninformed and agenda driven vitriol?
9:14AM - my, oh, my, aren't you smug? Just jump in there with the libel.
10:17, you say the suburbs are killing the planet. But will urbanization make it better?
No.
Are people in this country, let alone this area, willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary?
No, they have proven they are not.
@ 9:14 AM - "This should come as no surprise that Dyer supports all forms of polluting our air, he's also probably on the 'global warming isn't a reality' bandwagon too."
He is most definitely on that bandwagon. I suggest that you peruse his archives, especially from 2010, for your horror and amusement.
http://robertdyer.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2010-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2011-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=50
@ 10:20 AM - You don't seem to know what the word "libel" actually means.
@10:28: Of course people in this country, and this area, prefer to live in urban settings. Why do you think property is so much more expensive in the city and in urban environments? It's the market telling you that people--by and large--prefer to live in cities. And yes, cities do solve these issues. Look at the research I cited. If you reduce the per capita energy, infrastructure, and resource intensity, then cities reduce the environmental impact populations have on the planet. That's how math works.
Does Dyer believe in global warming?
@10:58, from reading this blog, and based on Dyer (Aka Ed Rooney)'s stance on many environmental issues, I believe it's safe to say he does not believe in global warming. Like a total 1980's root beer Dumass!
10:40AM says @ 10:20 AM - You don't seem to know what the word "libel" actually means.
Hilarious. I'm more than familiar with defamation. Thanks for your concern.
I'll just spend the rest of the day laughing at this:
"Of course people in this country, and this area, prefer to live in urban settings. Why do you think property is so much more expensive in the city and in urban environments."
Can you explain why it's laughable to a 3rd party observer?
Dyer @ 10:10 AM - Exactly one homicide in downtown Bethesda in the last 25 years. That's pretty darned safe.
Question: Why do families move from DC to the suburbs once they have kids if it's so terrible?
11:48 - Sure. Stating that urban is preferred is misleading. If given the options of urban or rural, then yes, people prefer urban. But, if urban, suburban or rural are the choices, suburban in generally higher.
For instance, one national poll found that 26 percent of Americans described where they live as urban, 53 percent said suburban and 21 percent said rural.
The 2014 census estimate that 81 percent of the population is urban if “urban” is understood to include suburban areas.
So I laugh because it doesn't really mean anything.
Ok I get that you're saying. But then that would mean on the same basis Dyer's points don't mean much either, right?
this man is a monster who drives businesses out of montgomery....
The arrogance and condescension of George Leventhal and his simpleton thinking is appalling.
Pretty much.
The same old narrow, cracking, pothole filled 1950's roads and 1950's jammed schools with trailers parked behind them since the 1970's. Fix the infrastructure first! No socialistic Urbanization. Do your jobs for once or you're out! SaveWestbard will make sure of it.
The arrogance and condescension of Robert Dyer and his simpleton thinking is appalling.
See how that works both ways?
We're really impressed that you know how to replace words in a sentence.
We're not at all impressed that you don't see the hypocrisy of your and Robert's statements and perspectives.
Post a Comment