I spent the day yesterday at the Vermont Tiger symposium. It was a great event that brought together representatives from all sectors involved in re-shaping the Vermont economy for the future, along with people who have experience getting things done in their own neck of the woods. This is the kind of thing that could really spawn amazing results in Vermont.
Yet, there are those who refuse to come to the table and instead seek to marginalize Vermont Tiger’s events as partisan. This is not only a pathetic ploy for their own partisan gain, but it is also highly detrimental to Vermont’s economic future.
I hope that those individuals will be the ones who are marginalized and that the discussions will continue and action will follow.
Let’s be clear about the definition of partisan. To be partisan is to be concerned with the power of a specific political party. That is not what Vermont Tiger is.
Vermont Tiger is only concerned with Vermont’s economic future, which is dismal at best, unless we change course.
Here is an illustration of what the symposium was all about, from Candace Page of the Burlington Free Press.
Successful economic development in the 21st century is built around high-quality universities in places where interest groups can put aside their differences to focus on making the right public and private investments, two national high-tech leaders said at a conference Monday.
“We can bake more bread, or fight over the crumbs,” Carl Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group told a group of about 80 Vermont businesspeople. He ascribed his region’s high-tech success in large part to the presence of government-supported, world-class universities and a strong community college system.
How partisan.
We can either bake more bread, or we can fight over the crumbs. Or we can bake more bread, while some of you complain about how partisan bread-baking is.
I have no doubt that you will still show up for the crumbs, but wouldn’t you like to be a part of the baking?
February 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Honestly Charity, they needed to advertise a bit better..they were definitely missing a number of folks who are doing a lot to support growth of businesses in VT and not just because of their politics, but because Tiger has no clue what is going on in some corners of these sectors. With that said, what are folks saying about Vt Tiger? I definitely don’t agree with everything they post, but damn, they are one of the few groups actually doing something to support growth of the VT economy…the other one would be VT3.0…
February 3rd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
There is always more advertising that can be done for any event, but this was fairly well advertised. I knew about it because I subscribe to their e-newsletter and blog feed, but I saw it mentioned elsewhere. It was in the Free Press business calendar and got some other local press also. If you have suggestions about who should be invited to the next one, I am sure they would welcome that feedback.
It was brought up at the start of the symposium that some legislators backed out of coming citing that this was a partisan event. Also, the blog Green Mountain Daily has been hammering the idea that Tiger is a partisan site for some time now. And when Cathy Resmer posted on Blurt that she was going, one comment said it should be called a “Republican economic symposium.” (That short list was not all-inclusive.)
February 3rd, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Vermont Tiger is a partisan website. That issue was sorted out well over a year ago, if my memory serves me correct. The “Tigers” (and their supporters…like you Charity…they really like you over there BTW) will always claim the reverse, but what was written on this topic on their own website over a year ago speaks for itself. What speaks volumes for me is how many obscenely-obviously partisan websites on the Right tend to try and (falsely) claim that they are “non-partisan”. It’s really quite funny…as they are fooling no one.
“To be partisan is to be concerned with the power of a specific political party.”
And that Party, when it comes to the “Tigers”, is the GOP, which they have shilled for in the past (and I’m sure are still doing that to this day) along with just about every “conservative” viewpoint that there is out there today.
What the “Tigers” don’t understand is that VT will never be “Silicon Valley”. It doesn’t want to be Silicon Valley. There are waaay too many people in VT that are opposed to just about any real economic progress that the state might be able to make, and there are way too many people that shill for ANY possible economic activity (like Vermont Tiger) to the exlcusion of all else.
VT’s economy is & has been a complete joke for some time IMO. As far as I can tell, Vermont Tiger has little to no influence on what really goes on in VT anyways.
“the blog Green Mountain Daily has been hammering the idea that Tiger is a partisan site for some time now.”
Hmmmm, when I used to post there (I haven’t been to GMD since last summer or the “Tiger” since last spring)…they used laugh at that kind of talk. Maybe things have changed since then…the guy who pretty much “runs” GMD is pretty much a Democratic shill anyways IMO…with a few exceptions…
February 3rd, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Don’t know what you’re talking about Mister Genius. “Laugh(ing)” at the idea that VT Tiger is partisan? Wow. That’s just…. bizarre.
As for being a “Democratic shill,” one of the differences between GMD and VT is that I make no bones about being a Democratic Party activist. I’m a former County Chair and Party staffer, so I wouldn’t be fooling anybody.
The point of distinction is that I wouldn’t want to. I’m right up front with it (check the “about” page). I even post with my real name, Mr “Guy.”
VT Tiger, on the other hand, has incorporated as some sort of nonprofit – presumably not a PAC – so they have to pretend to be non-specifically partisan, even though everyone knows full well that they are. Their choice, but I don’t think its an entirely honest one.
February 3rd, 2009 at 7:14 pm
“That issue was sorted out well over a year ago, if my memory serves me correct.”
What do you mean “sorted out”? By whom?
Can either of you give any examples of Tiger being partisan?
The difference between being partisan and being ideological is that an ideologue will work with any one from any party who will further his agenda.
A partisan on the other hand, will forsake his own agenda in order to get his party into power (presumably hoping his agenda will make it though at that point, I guess). An example of this is the Progressive smack-downs that happen over at GMD. They have a partisan goal – get progressive left Democrats elected, not just anyone with a progressive agenda.
This is an important distinction in terms of actions. Tiger is clearly ideologically slanted – the make no pretense to be otherwise. Geoff Norman made it clear yesterday that they are fiscal conservatives. (Which of course we all know.)
But Vermont Tiger is not shilling for the GOP.
I think of them as the opposite of GMD, not just in terms of ideology, but in that they would (I think) support anyone who is willing to work to further their agenda.
You know, Odum, you progressives would have a lot more rich people to tax if the Tiger folks got the economic development they want. You do have common interests.
February 3rd, 2009 at 8:04 pm
We only have common interests in as much as everybody has common interests like “peace on Earth.” Your implictation is that if one is interested in a healthy economy, a laissez faire approach and supply-sider absolutism is somehow unquestionable and the only “serious” way to go. This despite the fact that most economists disagree completely. It may not be true that everyone is a Keynesian in a recession as bad as this one, but those that still spout the kind of ideological absolutism that Tiger does are pretty much the ideologues, and ideologues that exclusively populate the Republican Party.
While I share their broadly spoken goals, I’d like to promote policies that can acheive them. Also, I do not share their more particular goals, as they are openly scornful of providing any sort of social safety net. Capitalism works on a curve, and there will always be those on the bottom end of the curve as the human capital flow responds to the ebbs and flows of the traditional capital flow. Most people believe that Government should affirmatively take up that slack in human capital, at least to some degree.
You know I feel this way, as I know you don’t. And we both know that Tiger doesn’t. Which makes this whole “why don’t you join with us as we share your goals” thing feel a bit disingenuous. If there are occasions when agendas meet, so be it, but I doubt it.
And that’s because Tiger is a hard right GOP site. They are relentlessly critical of all things Democrat, and relentlessly promotional of all things Republican. The exception is when somebody like Jeb Spaulding takes a hard right view, and they can very quickly shore up their cred with the IRS with a one-shot pat on the back – but they would never support his candidacy for anything. Other issues? They are deeply scornful of any kind of regulation – especially environmental rules. Have been nasty towards unions. Have been scornful of the church state divide, public education, virtually any government program they can think of, their posters are frequently active in their Republican committees or institutions, etc, etc, etc…
I mean, why deny it? Is it something to be ashamed of?
And – of course – you still don’t get the Progressive-Democrat thing at GMD. First of all, we’re of several minds over there. For my part, as I’ve said over and over, I think its a hardwired two party system, so an insurgent leftist party is a ticket to nowhere. If the Progs ever did replace the Dems as the dominant “left” party, I’d get up and move right over there and complain about the insurgent Dems. It’s that simple. Other Front Pagers feel differently.
I’m restating all this here against my better judgment. I know you’ve read all this before, so I’m uncertain why you’re choosing to draw me out on such a wide-ranging list of our fundamental ideological differences.
February 3rd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
“they used laugh at that kind of talk.”
As in…”LOL…yeah, sure you guys at Vermont Tiger are non-partisan…sure…”
“I even post with my real name, Mr ‘Guy.’”
Still have that same ole thin-skin eh Odum…what a surprise…
“VT Tiger, on the other hand, has incorporated as some sort of nonprofit – presumably not a PAC – so they have to pretend to be non-specifically partisan, even though everyone knows full well that they are. Their choice, but I don’t think its an entirely honest one.”
Exactly, the moniker “non-partisan” is purely so they can raise money in a slightly different manner. There are several Right-wing websites that try this dishonest tactic.
“What do you mean ’sorted out’? By whom?”
Well, if my memory serves me correctly…by me in my many “interactions” with them on their own website (see below).
“Can either of you give any examples of Tiger being partisan?”
Sure:
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....nship.html
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....-a-pa.html
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....at-we.html
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....-to-t.html
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....-oyez.html
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....educa.html
“An example of this is the Progressive smack-downs that happen over at GMD. They have a partisan goal”
Well, this might be true, but I’ve never understood why GMD felt the need to shill for Dems at the expense of Progs that were for the exact same goals in some cases. The whole Dem vs. Progs thing perplexes me still to this day, even after that 7Days forum at the end of last year. Its completely & totally counterproductive IMO.
“Geoff Norman made it clear yesterday that they are fiscal conservatives”
…which is why they never talk about the HUGE expense of the War in Iraq…ugh…
“But Vermont Tiger is not shilling for the GOP.”
They have done this on a routine basis for many years now…please…
The one thing that the “Tigers” should get credit for is putting on these dog-and-pony-show “forums” in the first place. They are putting their money where their mouths are (when their foots aren’t occupying that space I guess). It’s a tad more productive than having hamburgers & hotdogs on a beach somewhere…
“And that’s because Tiger is a hard right GOP site. They are relentlessly critical of all things Democrat, and relentlessly promotional of all things Republican.”
Exactly.
“Have been nasty towards unions.”
Most definitely.
“Is it something to be ashamed of?”
That’s always been my point with them as well. The “Tiger” is hiding from what they really are…only they know for sure why that is though I guess…
February 3rd, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Odum, your comments prove my broader point, which is that the critics of Vermont Tiger, those who refuse to even find out what the symposium actually was and instead made their own assumptions, really have no clue what it was in fact about.
I do not want to address all of this here because I am going to be doing several (I hope) posts on topics discussed there and do not want to do double work, but I will give one example. The first speaker talked at length about what they did in Silicon Valley to help people in the community, specifically in the areas of affordable housing and improving education. Are these not issues that matter to you?
You guys both are commenting from a position of ignorance and it is quite frustrating. If you don’t want to understand what VT Tiger is trying to do and how people of different partisan leanings can come together for common goals, then whatever.
I think this thing is going to take off because they are one of the only visible groups trying to tackle these tough economic issues. They had high profile speakers and they now have grant money funding their group, so there will be more events in the near future.
That’s all I am going to say in the comments. I should have more posts about this in the next couple of days.
Mr. Guy – Are you serious? Your first link makes my point exactly. They are NOT partisan (in the political party sense of the word). It’s not an example that they are partisan.
February 3rd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
“I think this thing is going to take off because they are one of the only visible groups trying to tackle these tough economic issues.”
I’m sure that’s what they said after the last forum that they had…and the one before that…and so on & so on… As I’ve said before, the “Tigers” are fooling no one, and they don’t IMHO appear to be effectively moving their Right-wing agenda very well here in VT.
“Mr. Guy – Are you serious? Your first link makes my point exactly. They are NOT partisan (in the political party sense of the word). It’s not an example that they are partisan.”
LOL…of course, if you just believe everything that Jon Harrison (who got booted from the “Tiger” last I had heard after making an entire posting, that got deleted eventually, about what turned out to be an extreme-libertarian position on sterilization) had to say, then sure…you’re going to continue to take the laughable position that you started at…that the “Tiger” is non-partisan.
Allow me to quote myself from that first link:
“Partisan: ‘a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance.’
What party is VT Tiger a partisan for…pretty much the GOP. I don’t think it’s ever *endorsed* anyone per se, but read the posts here for God’s sake. One of them recently tried to connect Gov. Jimmy D. to George S. Patton! What faction or cause is it a partisan for…the ‘conservative’ one in this country. What person is it a partisan for…well, I haven’t found one yet (see above)…it’s only a year old though…give it time.
What blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance does it adhere to…pretty much the idea that the free market can solve all problems. The emperor has no clothes, period.
Give me a break…this is a partisan website. There are plenty of them in VT on all sides. Here are some ‘conservative’ ones that I am very familiar with:
http://shesright.org/
http://www.alphecca.com/
Do I agree with the editors of these sites routinely? No, but I respect them (and you BTW Mr. Harrison) because they are up front with what their views and biases are.
Knowing what someone’s biases are is *essential* to being able to process what they have to say I think. Trying to pussyfoot around and not acknowledge the obvious biases that someone or something has is really an annoyance to me personally. I’m sorry, but it is…deal with it, or not, whatever.
This website’s mission statement is so vaguely worded that it could mean just about anything to anyone. Is it pro-environment? Hardly I think…just look at what’s been written here in regards to the environment.
Yes, not only am I clearly a liberal Democrat…I have *stated so here in the past*. I’m not hiding from my biases at all. I can’t remember the last time I voted for a Republican, but it has happened (don’t tell anyone I said that!). Does the Democratic party have all the answers? Obviously not.
‘But I believe all who contribute posts would happily embrace any Democrat or Republican who supports policies that promote growth and prosperity here in Vermont.’
Gee whiz…and I like puppies and rainbows too. What *kind* of growth and prosperity do you want here? That’s the real challenge…”
AND
“Let’s review a few politicians that I doubt VT Tiger will be supporting anytime soon, based just on what’s been written here in the last month:
Ralph Nader
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....d-gro.html
Al Gore
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....eople.html
Anthony Pollina
http://www.vermonttiger.com/co.....-fair.html
Now, before all you conspiracy nuts on the Internets jump to conclusions about what all these political figures have in common…they have nothing in common! I mean nothing except that they’re all white guys, with dark hair, and they happen to be Democrats, Progressives, and generally *liberal-minded*…but that’s it!
”
After MUCH berating from me on the “Tiger” website, even that moron Curtis Hier eventually admitted that he was involved in the GOP…like it wasn’t so completely obvious from the start…please…
February 4th, 2009 at 8:04 am
“You guys both are commenting from a position of ignorance”
Sorry, but I think I probably know more about their speakers than you do. Did you know, for example, that “the first speaker” as you called him is known as a prominent supporter of Smart Growth principles nationally? Still, the fact that he was a contributor to the likes of McCain and Cornyn suggest that he was “safe” for the GOP-focused Tiger to invite, as he wasn’t going to deviate from their primary goal (although he also supported Barbara Boxer… all over the map, that one)
If that’s the best you got, though, you’re either doing the conservative-stealth-trip yourself, or you’re in denial.
February 4th, 2009 at 8:20 am
“all over the map, that one”
Bingo! My point exactly. He understands that the goal of furthering his agenda was mission one and he understands that you need to bring in players from all sides to make that happen.
You just discard whatever doesn’t fit your view (right-wing, right-wing, GOP shill!!). Could it be possible that there is common ground to be found and that Vermont Tiger is willing to find it, if it means strengthening Vermont’s economy?
I guess it is pointless to try to open your eyes. Your mission is clearly to establish a government that does not need to compromise with the other side. News flash: There are too many of us, just as there are too many of you to not ever compromise. You are the one in denial.
February 4th, 2009 at 9:22 am
yawn.
“Pointless” indeed, if all you’ve got is “I just don’t underSTAND why you don’t see things my way!!”
As I said, if there’s agreement on an issue or two, so be it. In fact I think there has been on a couple occasions.
But that’s a long leap from throwing in with VT Tiger’s greater purpose, as you would seem to accept no less than.
This has gotten tedious.
February 4th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Yeah. Come together to find common ground = see things my way. Remind me why I thought this conversation was pointless.
February 4th, 2009 at 10:39 am
So you’ll be paying the fee and going to the American Atheists Convention, then? Check http://atheists.org/blog/index.....n-reminder.
I mean, you might not agree with everything they say, but there is common ground, no? Of their three stated goals at the link, one is a “complete separation of church and state” which may not be you, but the other two are “civil rights for nonbelievers” and “issues of First Amendment public policy.”
So when did you get your tickets… I mean, you do want to go, don’t you? Wouldn’t want to be accused of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-doism, would you?
Not unless you’re against finding common ground, right?
February 4th, 2009 at 10:55 am
I have no interest in those issues at all. Are you saying that you have no interest in “Surviving and Prospering in the Global Economy”? Because that was the topic of the symposium.
February 4th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Are you saying you have no interest in civil rights? That you have no interest in the first amendment? In freedom of speech? In freedom of religion? Freedom of association? Really? No interest?
Hunh.
February 4th, 2009 at 11:24 am
The issues you listed were: complete separation of church and state, civil rights for nonbelievers, and issues of First Amendment public policy.
Freedom of religion was not on there, so I am not sure why you bring that up, other than that you know it is an issue I do care about.
No, those are not issues that I care about. I do not see a need for any separation of church and state beyond what we have. I do not see an issue with civil rights for nonbelievers. I do not have an interest in First Amendment public policy. It is not an area, as it is being discussed in this context, that I have much interest in.
If there were church/state issues locally or civil rights violations locally, I would be more than happy to be involved, expecially if it involved Christians wronging non-believers. In that case, it would be important for the atheists to come together with Christians who supported their cause and fight for the common cause of defending the Constitution. I would be more than willing to be a part of that because I do think it is important to defend the Constitution in that regard.
What was your point again?
This would be like me expecting you to fly to the CATO Institute’s annual convention, or something. Apples to oranges.
The symposium was Vermont politicians and business people, and others, discussing Vermont’s economy.
One of the panelists is the head of the Boys and Girls Club, who talked about the problem of the benefits cliff. One is the President of UVM. One is from Community Capital of Vermont, which serves people who cannot get bank loans. One of the panels was moderated by Mark Johnson.
So right-wing!!
February 4th, 2009 at 11:25 am
….that was a conversation….need to go to GMD to see what you guys have posted on economic development in VT…just because you’re left-wing doesn’t mean you can’t grow good companies, for goodness sakes, take a look at Chroma, Paul is a socialist….or I could just stick with Vt3.0…now there is a pretty decent compromise and I’m glad that Cathy was there on Monday.
Charity – looking forward to your posts on the symposium, but here’s a small list of folks who could have made an impact on the discussions and added a nice VT taste to the conference rather than the list of “we did it this way” folks: VVN, VBSR, Fresh Tracks, North Country Angels, Brook Ventures (and any number of VC’s who have 2nd homes in Vt, but live in the Boston area) Vt Business Roundtable, VSJF, Vt Tech Council, VMEC, VtSDA, CEDO ….etc, etc. What about the home grown companies who are still hiring, growing, innovating (and also sustainable and care about their workers and impact on this world)
Sad to see the words: getting things done” on top of a list that includes members of the current VT administration….and as for the legislators afraid to come…shame on them… Blah…back to work…much more fun!
February 4th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Cairn Cross from Fresh Tracks was a panelist last year.
I am sure they will have future events with different focuses. Yes, this one was focused on how others did things.
There was a guy on the panel who was a big advocate of home grown businesses. His point was that individually, their demise does not make the impact of an IBM layoff, but together, they are a driving force for the VT economy.
ACK! I need to post this, not talk about it in the comments!
February 4th, 2009 at 11:41 am
I said:
“That you have no interest in the first amendment? In freedom of speech? In freedom of religion?”
You said:
“Freedom of religion was not on there, so I am not sure why you bring that up”
The founding fathers said:
“Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
I chuckled.
Sorry. Apples to apples.
Kerry: we cover a range of stuff. I’m usually into the electoral scene, but here are some front page pieces of late:
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3868
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3941
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3939
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3876
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3844
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3837
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3818
And for kicks, here’s a discussion of an example of VT Tiger playing GOP partisan hack fairly brazenly:
http://www.greenmountaindaily......aryId=3798
Now if you all will excuse me, I have to go to work as my morning off is over. Last word is all yours…
February 4th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
“Apples to apples.”
Sorry, no. Here the apples vs. oranges would be working on local issues locally vs. attending a national narrowly ideological convention far away.
You are still comparing apples to oranges.
I might add, talking down to me and obfuscating the issue does not make you right.
I know that freedom of religion is in the first amendment. I did not get the impression they were talking about protecting freedom of religion.
February 4th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
To some, baking bread IS partisan. They cite statistics that prove the Bread Gap is bad and getting worse – there are more people these days with three, even four loaves of bread AT ONE TIME. This is tewwible, tewwible. These bakers should have the bread ripped, hot and steaming, from their greedy hands and it should be given (with the appropriate press coverage) to the one-loafers. Wonder if that’s how the term “loafer” got started? I really AM tewwible.
February 4th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
“There was a guy on the panel who was a big advocate of home grown businesses. His point was that individually, their demise does not make the impact of an IBM layoff, but together, they are a driving force for the VT economy.”
…yup, and why not bring in the folks who actually provide the support for these companies here in VT (see list above..and include the VtSBA)…Emily is one, and does a great job with limited resources.
As for the speakers, they are just not applicable to VT, Tiger needs to follow the trend above and look at the home grown technology companies (VCET, VtSDA would be great places to start), value-added agriculture (rebuilding of Hardwick anyone?), and new models for companies that can be grown, supported and maintained in small rural states…not the Silicon Valley model…that’s where our companies go when we use that model…LOL.
A
s for nanoscience, VPT knows more about nano in VT than Tiger obviously does (http://www.vpt.org/programs/em.....sodes.html – see the first season, episode 1), why not bring in one of these experts (one of them actually has two start-up companies based off if his technologies and works closely with other VT companies). We don’t need someone from NY to tell us about this stuff!
As usual Bill has it right.. http://www.vpr.net/episode/45281/ ..although he needs to add the biomedical (biotech, medical device, research instrumentation and software) industry to that list
Again, it’s a shame that folks didn’t attend because it was VT Tiger, but Tiger needs to look at what is right in front of its face and showcase that.
Thanks Odem – blah, reading about the tricks that the admin is playing to get these “cuts” through would even piss Charity off, but back to the topic, I think the democratic leadership needs to look in front of their faces too…this state cannot survive on tourism and road building…invest in jobs and companies that are invested in the future…they are here, they are hiring still, and let’s help them grow!
OK – I’m done for now…if either group ever needs help finding these folks, just let me know. “Slut” that I am, I’m happy to work with any group if it promotes good, solid, sustainable, VT tech-based companies and economic growth.
February 5th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
“they are just not applicable to VT”
Exactly, but that’s the whole point…the “Tigers” want to radically change VT into something that it’s not & never will be, but that doesn’t appear to really matter to them…
“We don’t need someone from NY to tell us about this stuff!”
We do if “we” want to turn VT into something like NY (in terms of it’s “business climate”).
“I think the democratic leadership needs to look in front of their faces too…this state cannot survive on tourism and road building…invest in jobs and companies that are invested in the future…”
Exactly, there has been basically zero real leadership on issues related to the real, viable future of VT’s “economy” from pretty much all sides as far as I can tell.
February 5th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
“the “Tigers” want to radically change VT into something that it’s not & never will be”
What is that? Seriously. Answer that question. What are you guys afraid that the Tigers want to change VT into?
All I heard discussed at the symposium was about creating more jobs, with a lot of emphasis on improving education, supporting small businesses, forming public/private partnerships in order to get things done that cannot be done by either entity without the other, how to bring people in from different sides to accomplish goals, and other topics like that.
Yeah, there was a guy there from Silicon Valley. He didn’t talk about how to turn VT into Silicon Valley, though. I still need to post about what he talked about, I know, but it was about how to work together for the good of our communities – not how to make VT the new SV.
As for the guy from NY, he was not there to tell us how to turn VT into NY, he was there to talk about the unbelievably freaking cool nanotech stuff they do over there and how they formed a public/private partnership to totally revolutionize their economy and become a leader in a fast-growing field of science.
So I ask again, in case you forgot the question: what are you afraid will happen, exactly?
February 5th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
“What are you guys afraid that the Tigers want to change VT into?”
I’m not “afraid” of anything, really. As I’ve said before, I don’t see any evidence that the “Tiger’s” message of pro-business, pro-GOP at all costs is having much (if any) effect on the VT landscape. The “Tigers” are literally a bunch of people that shill for the nuclear industry (I once read laughingly that they thought the two most important businesses in VT were IBM & VT Yankee) & Wal-Mart and that shill against pretty much all forms of alternative energy (wind, hydro, solar) & almost anything that comes from the Dem/Prog side of the fence.
This is a website that *literally* shilled for the addition of an IHOP to the Rutland area (in what might have even been a wetland area if I remember correctly) in order to “boost” their economy. This is a region of VT that can’t even sustain a Gap or a decent movie theater…an IHOP is really not going to turn anything around in Rutland (and I LOVE pancakes).
“Yeah, there was a guy there from Silicon Valley.”
Of *course* there was a guy from Silicon Valley…there’s been several guys from Silicon Valley that have spoken at these “forums”. VT Tiger gets a good amount of monetary support from some apparent big-whigs out that way, and they have even had some of them pen “blog entries” for them on occasion. It’s called being nice to your donors…nothing more, nothing less…