Flexcar pimps its ride
While your article "Emission Control" [May 23] shed some light on the very strong differences of opinion between Councilmember Bill Peduto and others, it missed some very real facts about the Flexcar car-sharing program.
Now in 12 major metro areas around the country, with tens of thousands of members, Flexcar is a proven economic and environmentally friendly solution for individuals, businesses and governments. Our program has been proven by numerous independent studies to reduce overall car ownership and use, while increasing public-transit use. It is even recommended by Al Gore's ClimateCrisis.net.
Flexcar can be used in addition to, or as an alternative for, both public and private fleets -- helping governments reach emission-reduction goals while reducing overall fleet costs and resulting in savings for taxpayers. Cities that have used Flexcar have reduced their fleets and taken cars off the road.
We look forward to working with city leaders from all perspectives who share these goals.
-- Mark D. Norman
CEO, Flexcar
You call this progress(ive)?
For the first time in almost 40 years, I didn't vote in the May primary. I saw no one to vote for and little to vote against, though I do regret not voting against Onorato. To my mind, the folks running in this election were no different from the lapdogs around former Mayor Tom Murphy that made this city the most per-capita-in-debt city in the U.S. -- with nothing to show for the millions wasted on consultants, developers and the bloated corporate elite. But after reading City Paper's feature story, "A Fistful of Voters" [May 30], I feel like I've missed an historic change in Pittsburgh politics.
The CP tells me that a "progressive" block of candidates staged a coup against the Democratic establishment: the "winding down of the Democratic Party," as one pundit put it. If this were true, it would be a great thing. But why should I believe it? Few issues are mentioned in the article apart from "fiscal responsibility" and "transparency." Of course the people that gave us Lazarus, stadium deals, a dilapidated convention center, a casino and grandiose Downtown development schemes didn't do it behind our backs: They just did it. Nor did they steal the money. They gave it to their cronies. Now the money's gone and our "progressives" want to manage our poverty. I don't recall their voices rising when these deals were struck.
Perhaps people have forgotten that Murphy ran against the old guard, too. Like this group, he rocked the Democratic Party. And like this group, we never figured out what kind of independent he was, other than a fan of every hare-brained development scheme and a courtier to corporate power.
I did enjoy all the gossip about petty affronts and campaign dirt, though I would have preferred a question or two about the public-transportation crisis, the ALCOSAN fiasco, the tax giveaways to PNC, or the neglect of neighborhoods. But that wouldn't be Pittsburgh politics, would it?
-- Greg Godels, Point Breeze
Let's avoid watching like a Hawk
Re: "Homophobic Material Nixed from Kennywood Show" [May 30]: Good grief! Are you serious? As a mother teaching my own children morals and diversity, I find Mary Hawk's behavior quite appalling. I've seen the very show she protested. Her self-perception as a righteous advocate for what amounted to a humorous skit is really rather pathetic. My "gay" friends who viewed the show didn't even take offense to it!
Mary Hawk sounds a little more like a pesky gossip who took off on some delusional crusade. Does anyone even recognize the fact that she acted out the very definition of gossip? She overtly and decidedly ranted her misinformed perception to her friends ... and they called Kennywood on hearsay? Shame on them! What do we tell our children when they behave as such?
When you think about it, Kennywood really only received one phone call regarding the matter; the rest were merely an extension of her big misguided gossipy mouth. What's really wrong with this picture, folks? A woman took offense at what she interpreted as being discriminatory and demeaning to homosexuals ... and she told two friends, and so on and so on. Has she not seen Pirates of the Caribbean and Johnny Depp's swagger, limp wrist, slurred speech and effeminate overtones?
If we were to abide by Mary Hawk's interpretation, "carefree gay drunkards" everywhere should be offended! The fact that Kennywood removed the "offensive parts" so quickly simply means that Kennywood has more tolerance than merely appeasing all folks regardless of their sexual orientation. They even go so far as to accommodate the gossipy Mary Hawks of the world.
Sigh. ... I suppose the right thing to do is to teach my children that even a delirious pedant like Mary Hawk needs our understanding tolerance as much as Muslims, homosexuals, Christians and straight people do.
-- Janice Milliner, Buena Vista
