Posted on 05/20/2010 7:25:39 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yesterday, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce challenged the city of Los Angeles and its mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, to put their money where their mouths are by ending their purchases of electrical power generated in Arizona. In a letter exclusively provided to Hot Air, Pierce questioned how a city-wide boycott of Arizona would work while LA continues to light the city with Arizona electrons. In response, Villaraigosa bravely … ducked the question entirely:
Mayor Villaraigosa is in Washington D.C., meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, but his deputy chief of staff issued the following statement: “The mayor stands strongly behind the city council and he will not respond to threats from the state that has isolated itself from an America that values freedom, liberty and basic civil rights.”
But Pierce wasn’t threatening anything. The ACC doesn’t have the authority to cut Los Angeles off from Arizona power, although it has enough influence with utilities in the state to have them rethinking their sales policy. Let’s remind everyone exactly what Pierce said:
I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.
If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.
In other words, if LA wants to make a big PR splash with a “boycott,” then make it a real boycott. Don’t just talk tough, Mayor Villaraigosa — act tough, or be quiet. When the going gets tough in LA, apparently the tough … cry about getting threatened.
Andrew Malcolm also has some fun with the story:
So, the choice is clear. If L.A.’s Democrat pols follow through and stop buying turquoise jewelry and bolo ties from Arizona, the next-door Republican neighbors will arrange some uncomfortable brownouts during the coming warm days.
Yeah, it’s starting to look like the collective courage of LA’s political leadership amounts to little more than the bolo-tie and turquoise jewelry variety.
Let’s take a poll. What will LA do to actually boycott Arizona?
Addendum: My thanks to Andrew and NBC Los Angeles for actually crediting Hot Air with the story. Not every news outlet was as careful.
Screw him.
I hope Arizona turns their lights off.
Maybe LA could buy its power from Mexico! /s
perfect! I agree!
LA should put it’s illegal immigrants on treadmills to power the city.
In for a penny, in for a pound, Angelenos!
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Oh, they didn’t mean they were going to boycott the good stuff, just travel to our hotels (where a LOT of the illegals are employed). Good job there Antonio, eliminate the jobs of your brothers and sisters.
It’s time for an economic Civil War prior to going Galt.
Arizona should use this to get back the money that the LA boycott would cause. Simply raise the power rates to LA.
So now they're against threats. LOL!
That would light up half of America.
Arizona should announce a new program where they will reclocate businesses from any boycotting city to AZ, provide free electricity for 5 years, and free flights there on AZ airlines. And every person on welfare or finishing a prison sentence in AZ, legal or not, will get a one-way airline ticket to the boycotting city of their choice, first class.
Last night, Fox News, in the person of Shep Smith, was reporting that Mr. Pierce “threatened” to cut off LA’s electricity. Mr. Smith then smirkingly reported that he “doesn’t have the power” to do such a thing. It was obvious that whoever had written that particular “news” story had NOT actually read Mr. Pierce’s letter.
This morning, the Fox News morning crew, with the exception of one of the interchangeable guys whose name I can’t remember, was pretty much repeating the same BS.
In both cases, I had to change the channel before my head exploded.
Are they idiots? Do they have poor reading comprehension skills? Do they just read whatever is put in front of them without questioning? If so, who is WRITING their drivel?
Does anyone know the answers to these questions?
I think SoCal’s Metropolitan Water District also purchases large amounts of water from AZ sources.
Cost-wise it would end up saving the state’s taxpayers millions. One would think illegals and ne’er-do-wells would love being in a place where welfare benefits are overly generous, sanctuary from crime is touted as a “right,” and abiding by the law is optional. Let THOSE places deal with the reality and the cost of sustaining the burden of the down-trodden they purport to advocate.
Partly. They rewrite each other. So if AP (the usual suspect) distorts facts, so do most other newsrooms because they base their reporting on what AP (and other wire services) provide them.
Shep Smith has been particularly egregious IMO. He's so full of himself he now regularly editorializes, substituting his own opinions for verified facts.
There's also what I call the "meme factor" or "bandwagon effect." Once someone actually prints or broadcasts a wildly incorrect story it's taken by others to be "factual," especially if they agree with it, even if they suspect it's not. That happens all the time right here on Free Republic.
damn fruitcake for sure!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.