Some People Just Don’t Know When To Quit

By Loudoun Insider

The Andrea McGimsey summer recess publicity tour continues unabated, with a gushing editorial in the LTM that is generating some fierce debate in comments.  While many accuse the LTM of a rightward tilt with the arrival of Managing Editor Nicholas Graham and new partner Bill Dean, the Arundels who own it are firmly in the enviro Middleburg crowd and will presumably back McG to the bitter end.

Apparently McG sent out a siren call to the Loudoun Sustainibility email list for help, producing a few folks, including one that seems like the Earth Goddess herself or one of her county paid aides (remember, monitoring blogs is a defined work task for McGimsey aides!).  Here’s my message – every time you and your backers whip out some self promotional BS I’ll be there to set the record straight.  Hypocrites like this need to be exposed and sent packing.  Rather than a tireless advocate for the environment as alleged by the LTM editorial staff, she is a self promoting shill who is one of the worst things to happen to the local environmental movement.  She has single handedly soured many reasonable people on common sense environmental causes with her hypocritical methods.  She sure could dish it out when on the other side, but can’t handle it at all when exposed for doing the same corner cutting, selfish things.  You people want to keep escalating this?  Go right ahead.


Comments

  • Cato the Elder says:

    Damn LI, you’re a junkyard dog!

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Hypocrites really bug the shit out of me, especially those I battled on the same side with. The only lessons she apparently learned were how to get herself ahead and push her agenda through, the hell with standard process.

  • I’m loaded for bear, and Miller and McGimsey are the bears of 2011.
    Who want’s to make some money? A little higher, so I can see them.

  • sally says:

    “Who wants to make some money?” I can just imagine what would have happened to Steve Snow if he had said that to a group of homebuilders, as an employee of Deitze, at a symposium put on by Deitze, that the tax payers paid him to go to.

    But it is ok, for Andrea McG to be Exec Director of Climate Prosperity? to go to symposiums that her company organized, and to use taxpayers funds to pay for her travel and other expenses, to speak to groups trolling for green consulting business touting her role as not only a Supervisor in Loudoun but also her employment with Climate Prosperity? and to bid on projects at Dulles Airport?

    She and the (Loudoun Sustainable folks) know it is wrong, or all the data would not have been scrubbed so that much of it is now gone from the internet… and now her previous role as executive director is whitewashed over with a new press release announcing the “first” exec director, someone new….

    We want clean air, clean water and also clean politicians! not self promoters who are so desperate for $$s that they will use their public office to “make money” and taxpayer funds to troll for customers to consult…

  • Ashburn Watcher says:

    McG should consider herself the number one target of the people of Loudoun!Every Republican in the entire county (from ultra conservative to squishy moderate) and a whole lot of Independents and even some center-Democrats are ready to band together to spend the time/effort/resources to extinguish this dishonest, crazed, self-serving nut!

  • Sally, all those website cleanups don’t mean squat if the original is archived. The internet is FOREVER!!!! The original content has been easily squirreld away on so many harddrives, they cannot possibly get to them all.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Monk is right, it’s all archived and searchable. I’ve already found mention of her position (or old position).

  • sally says:

    A lot of it is gone. Why? Why the press release that LI notes, the first executive director, when the real first was Andrea McGimsey???

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    The one I’d like to see again is the MWAA solar bid.

  • Hillsboro says:

    I’ve gotta give Barbara props for the GWB/Yale comment. That was awesome!

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Thanks, Hillsboro.

    Goose, gander.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Barb, I saved a copy of that digitally and in print. The McG troll in the LTM comment thread was whipping out the conspiracy boogeyman on me, but that PDF did disappear right after I wrote about it, and the WaPo closed comments on that last article after you appeared, something I have never seen them do, unless a thread got really off track or totally inappropriate. Your comments were absolutely germane.

    I’ll definitely admit that I used to reflexively dismiss nearly anything Barbara Munsey said, but I have indeed come to respect her for her tenacity and memory. I will still disagree with her on many issues, but she is a force to be reckoned with. For instance, I once dismissed her contentions about McGimsey lying about being a paid operative and posing as a simple concerned citizen. Now I absolutely believe Barb on this front. There are schiesters on both sides of any issue, even my side, at any given time.

  • Far Right Republican says:

    Monk, do you ever take a moment to think about how you come across? Because asinine is the word that comes to mind for me.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Well my goodness, thank you LI!

    Many many MORE thanks for preserving the MWAA PDF.

    Here’s another in the summer promo tour that we’ll no doubt be wallowing in the gush over soon:

    News Release
    Office of Public Information
    1 Harrison Street, SE, P.O. Box 7000, Mailstop #03, Leesburg, VA 20177-7000
    703/777-0113  Fax 703/771-5841
    For Immediate Release
    Contact: Najib Salehi, Energy Manager
    August 26, 2010
    703-737-8442
    Loudoun Selected to Participate in Virginia’s Green Community Challenge
    Loudoun County has been selected as one of four communities to participate in the pilot
    “Green Community Challenge,” a friendly competition among Virginia communities to develop
    specific environmental policies and implement practical actions that reduce greenhouse gas
    emissions and address local sustainability.

    This is another one of McG’s opportunity costs (I know I’m using that term technically incorrectly, but she IS a large collection of costs based on personal opportunities) that got passed through a few months back–let’s enter this contest!

    It is sponsored by ICLEI, whose current name has nothing to do with the acronym anymore, and appears to be a UN-sustainability endeavor that smells quite strongly of Maurice Strong (founded in Canada in the late 90s, currently headquartered in…Bonn, Germany. Ahem.)

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    I hope there are plenty of people at the Board meeting tonight. I have a stupid earache that won’t go away and can’t make it – someone give them an earful for me!

  • LL, there were a room FULL of folks. Staff should present facts…not opinions or any type of misleading figures. They got called on two things last night. When the statement was that “All agricultural stakeholders had been spoken to” one gentleman indicated that he was a larger Agricultural stakeholder, and no one had contacted him….
    And when they played it and announced that all the HOAs in Catoctin/Blue Ridge/County had been contacted…another gentleman interjected that as the President of one of the largest HOA in Catoctin, he hadn’t been contacted.
    There were numerous projections about the health of our streams, using the same busted information that Barbara and Lisa difused in a recent LTE.
    And a whole lot of driven crap that has no place involving staff. Staff needs to deal with the facts and the nuts and bolts of the policy….not pushing (and often altering information) the politics of it.

    In the end, the questions/responses at the end were 2 for, 20 against, and those against ran out of time as the meeting had to end at 9:30….

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    BPM: Excellent! Now the question is – does staff care about these input sessions or are they ignoring the responses? I am planning on being at Buckley’s meeting at the Cascades Library next Thursday…can’t wait to hear what she has to say.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    I’m curious as to why David Ward gets a pass on his increasing internet advocacy.

    If staff closely concerned with the project came online and said “see report here on ________________________, link @ lououn-dot-gov”, that would be one thing, but his behavior is becoming increasingly unprofessional.

    I can understand if personally he feels a bit papa-bear over Ms. Edmonds’ program/baby, but he’s getting outside the bonds of professional behavior and into advocacy.

    Most of the staff I dealt with in Planning were far more circumspect, so I find it shocking the further he goes.

  • Hillsboro says:

    I can understand staff’s defensiveness – that’s human nature. But I was completely taken aback by the level of their advocacy and obfuscation last night.
    .
    The power point slide illustrating that you could fit a pool and pool house into a space slightly smaller than 50′ x 50′ is intentionally misleading. I suppose one could build that if you started with a perfectly flat lot; avoided any additional disturbance by hauling buckets of dirt, gravel and cement through your house; and stored the excavated topsoil in a spare bedroom.

  • Elder Berry says:

    It’s getting accurate to say that too many Republicans are just determined to be against anything they don’t themselves propose, and they sure aren’t proposing much. Must be that Republicans who turned up are content to see water quality get worse and worse every year til the whole Bay is a stinking green slime pit and the Potomac grows two-headed poisonous flying purple vampire frogs. One guy who spoke seemed not to understand that approving the Bay Act rather than trying to write a whole new ordinance made sense because of how the Dillon rule worked, and he was one of the coherent ones. Seemed to me Monk that most of the people, not all but most who spoke at the meeting against the Chesapeake Bay Act raised issues or questions that had already been answered or refuted in the staff slide presentation, or they had no specific issue at all and they just wanted to generally vent. For example, standing there and stating that the legislation is an abomination is not enlightening to the rest of the audience or to staff, and adds nothing all to anyone’s understanding. That’s way, way overblown if what we are talking about is a few inspections and permits. Staff and several speakers reminded the audience that dozens of counties in VA have signed on to this, they have a track record of enforcing it, and there are no civic uprisings in any of them. Staff estimated with some confidence based on the experience of other counties that probably 80% of the area that was “possible RMA” would actually get waivers or would be studied and found to be exempt. I didn’t understand the level of arguing with staff. The lady who said we can never use percentges seemed to talk about everything but the act.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    elderberry, our Dillon Rule state has begun a process to determine TMDLs, and each locality’s share in reducing/mitigating same.

    This should be tabled until we see what we actually HAVE TO DO, and this, we do not have to do. In fact, in order to mandate us to adopt it, under the Dillon Rule enabling legislation would need to be passed first.

    That’s before we even get to the fact that the whole thing (including the new TMDLs) is primarily a paper exercise that has zero to do with actual water quality, i.e. compliance is based on what rules you ADOPT. Not what is enforced, or even what is tested.

    We obviously don’t fully enforce existing sediment rules. More rules will SURELY keep us out of that colorfully hyperbolic “slime pit”.

    As for flying frog monsters, you sound like Miller and the Flying Spaghetti Monster re Christmas displays.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Why doesn’t the county enforce existing sediments rules? Is it staff capacity?

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    “…………….whole Bay is a stinking green slime pit and the Potomac grows two-headed poisonous flying purple vampire frogs.”

    Talk about hyperbole! Aren’t you cute calling the kettle black, Mr. Pot? I can’t wait to see the funny little frog – I am fairly certain we can promote this as a LC tourist attraction.

  • BlackOut says:

    EB, that’s what I am talkin about:

    “Staff and several speakers reminded the audience that dozens of counties in VA have signed on to this, they have a track record of enforcing it, and there are no civic uprisings in any of them.”

    This whole thing stinks of politics, and a majority of the fumes are coming from the LCRC. Attacking and defeating it is a huge initiative for them. I question the motive.

    I just don’t see the problem with doing something for our water.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Well, if we boil this one down, it seems to me that some see this ordinance as a tool to control development or a tool to restrict the “freedom” to do whatever they want to do on their own land.

    That is the cost (not including the ancillary staff/enforcement/approvals arguments that you will hear).

    The benefit is something about water that doesn’t seem to be an issue because the stuff pours out of the tap just fine.

    It’s not all that hard to see why this thing is not all that popular and an easy political opportunity.

  • Leej says:

    This is very simple the REAL issue with the water is chemicals from farming and landscaping. Yet I heard this BOS has said that is a fed issue. Then our BOS needs to get off their butts and go to congress get some new laws passed.

    This do nothing tax raising BOS is looking for something to add to their tenure as it is nearing it’s end for anything to say they accomplished in their term.

    The McG private career furthering energy policy which is paid by our tax dollar (and yes fed grants are still paid for by our fed taxes that is you and me) and now this half cocked bay plan.

  • FedUp says:

    I have read the ordinance and I have seen the presentation. The presentation is very misleading and completely glosses over many of the details that would sway public opinion against the ordinance.

    I can understand hyperbole coming from activists on both sides of the issue, but the county staff is suppose to be unbiased and inform the public of all the details – good and bad. It’s pathetic.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Blackout, sorry – Cop-Out is just showing his true colors. Although he claims to be a moderate, every nanny-state, power grab, bureaucratic nightmare ordinance or bill he supports. “It’s for the water!”….”It’s for the children!”…..”It’s for the common good!”…Good Grief, it gets old.

    As usual Cop-Out blames it on the meany LCRC and their hatred for clean water! Personalize and demonize – typical tactics of the left (ding, ding, ding – your bat cave alarm is going off CO).

    Ed – The CPBO is a bunch of hooey. Ask – why now? What is the hurry? What about the timing, summer months, dead of August/Sept? Why the “re-education” of the public? Who is pushing this? It’s not about clean water, it is about power – and Cop-Out is all about centralized power – whether it be in LC or the federal government.

  • FedUp says:

    “I just don’t see the problem with doing something for our water.”

    What will it do for our water? Fairfax was one of the original localities in the CBPA enacted in 1988 and the county still has a long list of impaired streams. Has anyone mentioned that in these public meetings?

    5 years from now after the CBPO has done nothing to improve water quality, the county will take more drastic measures. The RPA will be expanded to include every swale in the county. All new development will be banned. Perhaps even houses in environmentally sensitive areas will be condemned and bulldozed.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I’ve been very busy work wise. I guess I should have created another Ches Bay thread, but continue on here in this one! Soeaking of not knowing when to quit – both sides will pummel this to death in the coming weeks.

  • sally says:

    Laura Edmonds was amazingly deceptive. Someone asked about the Ordinance saying a homeowner “shall” replace trees that die, and she just brushed it off, oh don’t worry about that– don’t worry about what the Ordinance actually says?

    She repeated the assertion that farmers would not have to plant the buffer unless they “developed” or subdivided their property, but she forgot to say that the Ordinance defines “development” as disturbing more than 2500 sq ft of land.

    She completely ignored the fact that the Ordinance makes any use of land with RPA non conforming, and she assured the farmers they could continue doing what they were doing, that they would just need to submit to a nutrient plan… if you are non conforming, then if you change or expand the use even slightly you lose your non conforming status, no mention of the perils of that (planting the buffer.) If you have a hundred acres, with 25 in the RPA and another 25 in Possible RPA, you are looking at not being able to use half your land, and expensive planting and mitigation.

    She said they had checked in Ffx Co, and the assessors office there said there were no impacts on value of land in the RPAs. First, Ffx. mapped their county first, so there was some certainty of what they would consider no disturb must plant buffers. Second, Fairfax is mostly built out, and all those buildings were grandfathered–we are 2/3 rural with large swaths of unbuilt land, where we are *hoping* we can build a rural economy (no chance with this Ordinance, no changes in use will be allowed, or cost prohibitive.)

    Currently we are exempt from the Chesapeake Bay Act and all the EPA scrutiny of the Bay (because everyone admits this is not about the health of theBay.) Our board wants to volunteer us for this…

    See what other farmers think about the EPA regulations for the Ches Bay:

    http://vafarmbureau.org/Pages/default.aspx

  • sally says:

    Farm Bureau video re: Ches Bay regs, “the real dirt”

  • sally says:

    opps forgot the video of “the real dirt” Farm Bureau statement on EPA regulation:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WrAwcPzHvE&feature=player_embedded#!

  • sally says:

    Another sad statement by a small farmer, over regulated, confused and scared of the EPA with respect to Ches Bay rules:

    “Quite frankly, the farmers are lost. They don’t exactly know where to turn. They want to know, ‘who has jurisdiction over what? How long can I leave manure in the field? Until I get arrested?’ Is that the answer?”

    http://www.bayjournal.com/article.cfm?article=3906

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I take back my “continue this discussion here” comment and made a new post above for Ches Bay issues – please continue that discussion there.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    here’s a report from my tinfoil hat:

    I see Dodd has succeeded in getting the top-down smart growth bill (now called the “Liveable Communities Act”, S.1619) out of the banking committee. (stumped that fellow before Feder with it years ago at a rally. He’d never heard of it, although he was campaigning for a federal office in Leesburg by talking about what he’d do for local zoning–the closest it got before this was when Jeffords switched sides)

    Maybe the relentless promo/defense/lobbying as “Loudoun officials” in the WaPo is designed to get ready for a new position in the office of the Liveability Czar that will no doubt be created if it passes?

  • Leej says:

    “”"”"office of the Liveability Czar”"”"”

    Barbara don’t give McG any ideas, you know she will try to create it and chair it and use her government position to financially help her self and friends with tax payer dollars just like she does in Loudoun. ;-)

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Lee, I think that’s what she has already been doing.

    If they pass a “Liveable Communities Act” at the federal level, and then in true Obama mode create a “Liveability Czar”, they’ll need a staff, won’t they?

    Gee and who has grant-funded sustainable credentials, AND spent a good chunk of August crawling around Capitol Hill lobbying for green grants to continue to support sustainability efforts?

    Call McConnell, Thune, Webb and Warner to say NO to S.1619.

    ASAP.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Sorry–Bethune.

    laptop! grr

Leave Comment