Why doesn't Metro install standard railroad signals?

The NTSB is recommending that Metro install a "real time backup" system to ensure safety. My question is, why doesn't Metro install typical visual railroad signals to provide this backup? Why were signals not installed in the first place to serve this purpose? For potential nitpickers, Metro does not have signals. The "signals" you see at stations exist for switches. They are not to indicate if the section of track ahead is clear.

Metro is consulting with software companies and engineering firms to design some sort of (likely) complicated computerized backup for the computer system that failed in the first place. I understand there could be some complications due to the reduced train headways during rush hour, but surely this is not an impossible task. Signal technology has been around just about as long as railroads have been around. There's plenty of "off the shelf" solutions that would at least let operators know if the track ahead of them is clear. Make them foolproof and ensure they are tested regularly. Instruct operators to stop the train if they pass through a red signal.

Recently I saw the original Taking of Pelham 1,2,3. This, a movie made more than three decades ago, featured a New York City Subway system that didn't allow trains to pass a red signal.

Why re-invent the wheel? I'm sorry your 1970's era experiment at automated train operation failed, but why not spend a little bit of money to outfit the railroad with proven technology. Railway signals don't need to be invented, they already exist.

So, Internet-land, tell me why this wouldn't work. Tell me why it's a good idea to not have a secondary signaling system with VISUAL signals to tell operators if the track is clear.

DC Council passes new street vending regulations

So I came across this story over at WJLA's web site, with the headline "D.C. Street Vendors Protest Planned Regulations." I see the word "protest" and "regulations" and think there might be something interesting here. There probably is, but you'd have absolutely no idea what the actual story is based on the text of the article. We've got another example of a news article that tells us absolutely nothing useful. The piece starts off with:

WASHINGTON - The D.C. Council passed legislation Tuesday to more closely regulate D.C. street vendors, dozens of whom gathered outside the Wilson building to protest the bill.

"If you come up there -- everybody knows me," said Gibril Mansaray, a vendor who has sold hot dogs and ice cream outside Howard University for decades.

He worries the new rules will deny him his long-held and coveted spot.

So what exactly does it mean to "more closely regulate" street vendors? Well, you won't know by reading the article. And if you turn to Google, you won't find much more information either. I know, maybe try the DC Council's web site? Good luck with that one.

From what I can piece together, looking through the sordid history of street vending regulations, is a story something like this:

Until 1998, street vending was operated with very little oversight and vendors worked on a first-come, first-serve, "I've got dibs" system. This had problems, as there were no regulations (and also no revenue from tax or license fees). In 1998 the Council passed legislation that directed the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) and the District Department of Transportation to coordinate in the creation of licensing for vendors. There was also a moratorium implemented on new vendors.

In 2006, the moratorium was lifted, and DCRA and DDOT were put in charge of regulating via temporary/emergency legislation. After the 1998 "crackdown," DC has been vastly underserved by street vending. All sorts of very strict regulations existed that required carts to be a certain size (limited options to mostly just hot dogs) and that they must be parked parallel to the sidewalk, be at least 300 feet from any churches, so on and so forth.

This Washington Post piece from 2008 lays out the problems facing anyone who tries to "innovate" in street vending:

The problem was that in January 2007, when the city started issuing new licenses to the 600 operators hoping to snag one, the old regulations for street carts were still in place. It wasn't supposed to be that way, Williams says. The agency had hoped to finish its study, present its findings to the council, and get all the necessary approvals and regulations in place before issuing new licenses. But the council was impatient to jump-start the city's moribund street scene, which had dwindled to an estimated 600 licensed vendors from the thousands who lined the streets in the 1990s.

The council's decision to lift the moratorium did give Washingtonians some new flavors on the sidewalks, including Korean barbecue at the Little Yellow Cart at 14th and L streets NW and Delle & Campbell's Middle Eastern bites at their original spot at 14th and G streets NW. But it also left vendors -- at least those outside the demonstration zone -- to contend with the city's antiquated regulations.

Vendors still must store their carts in a depot overnight and conform to all the fussy sidewalk regulations. And they still have to design their carts to be no more than seven feet long and 4 1/2 feet wide. "You can only do hot dogs with that [size] unless you're very innovative," says Gabe Klein, co-founder of On the Fly.

So why did I include this huge block of text? So you'd be sure to see that last quote. Gabe Klein, the co-founder of On the Fly, is now the Director of DDOT.

The temporary legislation which has been floating around for years now gives DDOT and DCRA the power to create the regulations regarding the size, design and location of street vending carts. The "Vending Regulation Act of 2009" which was passed by the DC Council would make this power permanent. (Note, because the DC Council's web site is terrible, I am unable to link to the text of the Act. However, that link provides a summary.)

Who would like to bet that Klein is going to relax the regulations, hopefully opening up street vending to all sorts of new designs and options? I'd imagine that's a pretty safe bet.

And who would be threatened by the prospect of a wave of new and innovative street vending? The existing street vendors. Who staged a protest. Finally, it all makes sense.

But you wouldn't have known that from reading the WJLA article. Or even from a quick Google search. Of course, it's not even as simple as this (long) blog post makes it out to be, but TV/Internet news can't really be bothered to do any analysis. It took me maybe a half hour to dig up and piece together what I have so far on this story.

Here's how I imagine the "writing" process at ABC7: a news crew gets video footage of protest. They collect quotes from protestors and get a reaction quote from some Councilmembers. They write up a story about the protest. Perhaps they do an Internet search for vending regulations, but come up with little. So they run the story without really explaining what it is about.

So again, way to go "Internet" division of ABC 7. Kudos, however, for at least covering the story.

NTSB issues safety advisory, WMATA admits sensors still broken

The National Transportation Safety Board issued an "urgent safety recommendation" Monday, calling for redundancy in Metro's safety and control system. The NTSB believes that WMATA's current safety system is inadequate, as it's possible for trains to 'disappear' from the monitoring system. It should be noted that the NTSB continues to investigate the June crash that killed nine people.

"While the NTSB is still in the very early stages of its investigation into this tragic accident here in our nation's capital," said Acting Chairman Mark V. Rosenker, "we have concerns about the failure of WMATA's train control system to prevent this collision." Rosenker continued, "By calling upon WMATA to take swift action to upgrade the safety redundancy of its system and by urging FTA to alert other transit agencies of the hazards of single point failures such as the one experienced by WMATA, we hope to prevent something similar from happening again."

The NTSB memo is nothing new, it's been known for weeks now that a track sensor was working improperly and caused the lead train to disappear from the system. The second train, running in automatic mode, did not detect there was a train ahead of it. As such, it did not slow down until the operator spotted the train and hit the emergency brake. Sadly, there was not enough time to stop the train before the collision.

It's also rumored that a similar failure had occurred previously in the tunnel between Rosslyn and Foggy Bottom, but operators were able to stop in time.

We also know that the BART system in California uses a system similar to that of Metro, and they added a secondary layer of protection.

At issue isn't whether or not the system was designed to be safe, or if in theory the system is safe. The problem is that the system was never designed with failure in mind. When designing a system that must be extremely reliable, it's important to factor in that things will fail. Accidents will happen, and they generally are never a simple matter of the wing falling off an airplane or a wheel coming off a train. It's a series of small failures that cascade into something far worse than any individual failure. Why did no one ever consider "what would happen if a sensor failed, and the train disappeared?" Was the answer to that simply, "well, then the operator will see a train ahead of them?"

WMATA has come out with a response to the NTSB, essentially saying that they can't immediately comply with this recommendation:

It is important to know that there are currently no systems available commercially that could provide the Metro system with the kind of alerts that the NTSB has recommended, and that such a system must be invented.

Also:

As a result, we will be developing a new system that will be specifically tailored to Metro. Metro is in the process of contacting vendors who have the expertise needed to help us develop this service, and we are preparing cost estimates on this application.

So it's going to be expensive, and it's going to take a long time to develop.

But the real hidden gem in all of this was the following from the WMATA press release:

In spite of the issuance of this recommendation, the NTSB still has not determined the root cause of the accident. Every component of that circuit has been replaced, but the problem still persists. (Emphasis mine)

So if I understand, the track sensors that malfunctioned have been replaced, yet they are still failing. So, it was not really a failure of a sensor, but rather a failure of the entire system. A failure that is still unexplained. That means that at any given time, the train you are on could be on a collision course with a stopped train, and you're hoping against hope the operator sees it in time.

So let me ask the questions, again.

1. When was the first time Metro suspected trains could disappear from the system?

2. Are you sure about that answer, given that a train "disappeared" in 2005?

3. What was done to address this failure?

4. If the sensor was replaced and the failure is still occurring, can the system truly be considered safe?

In other news, there was a fatal accident at a Metro construction site in India. Following the accident, the head of their Metro, Elattuvalapil Sreedharan, submitted his resignation. He said he was accepting "full moral responsibility." He was later urged to reconsider, and his resignation was not accepted. However, he was quoted as saying:

“People should be prepared to take decisions and not pass on the buck,” he said. “We should be able to trust people in power, which means people in power should have a proven integrity.”

His gesture says a lot, and should serve as an example.

For those of you still wondering about the Catoe Watch--this is about accepting responsibility for a failure within an organization, even if that failure was not directly your fault. It shows that you are accountable for the actions of those who work below you, and that their failures are your failures, just as much as their successes are your successes.

Since we don't deserve the vote...

As the Marion Barry scandals continue, we will undoubtedly hear more about how this is why DC doesn't deserve voting rights. Clearly, the people of the District of Columbia are not ready for democracy, because they keep electing Marion Barry.

Let's follow this line of thinking and identify others who do not deserve voting rights simply because we don't approve of who they elect, or they elect people who have tainted reputations.

The State of Illinois

Elected Rod Blagojevich governor in 2002 and 2006 (later indicted for corruption)

Elected George Ryan governor in 1998

Elected Dan Rostenkowski to Congress, 1959-1995

Elected Richard J. Daley mayor from 1955-1976 and Richard M. Daley from 1989-Present

Elected Dan Walker governor from 1973-1977

Elected Otto Kerner governor from 1961-1968

The State of Alaska

Elected Ted Stevens to the U.S. Senate from 1968-2009

Elected Sarah Palin governor from 2006-Present

Elected Frank Murkowski to U.S. Senate and governor 1981-2006

The State of Ohio

Elected Jim Traficant to Congress, 1985-2002

Elected Buz Lukens to two terms in Congress

The State of Florida

Elected Katherine Harris as Secretary of State and to Congress, 1999-2007

Elected Mark Foley to Congress, 1995-2006

The City of Detroit, Michigan

Elected Kwame Kilpatrick, 2002-2008

The State of Idaho

Elected Larry Craig to the House and then Senate, 1981-2009

The State of Pennsylvania

Elected Joseph P. Kolter to Congress, 1969-1993

The State of Minnesota

Elected David Druenberger to the Senate, 1978-1995

The State of California

Elected Randy "Duke" Cunningham to Congress, 1991-2005

From the Jack Abramoff Scandal, the State of Texas (Ohio and Pennsylvania also included)

From the Keating Five, the States of Arizona and Michigan (and Ohio, again)

From Abscam, the States of New Jersey and South Carolina (Pennsylvania and Florida included)

The State of South Carolina, again, for electing Mark Sanford

The State of Nevada

Elected John Ensign to the House and Senate, 1995-Present

The United States of America

Elected George W. Bush president, 2001-2009.

Democracy isn't something 'earned' by passing a test of electing 'good' people. The right to self-governance isn't something that is bestowed upon us by a benevolent Congress. The right to govern ourselves, and either fail miserably or do a decent job, is inherent. If it wasn't we should all lose our right to vote because collectively, we've all made some pretty bad choices.

New bombshell: Barry involved in possible non-profit fraud

If anyone had questioned the City Paper's journalistic quality with their cover selection--this latest piece will certainly redeem the local newspaper. Mike DeBonis finds over $450,000 in city funds that were directed to non-profits under the control of Councilmember Marion Barry (D-Ward 8).

Sadly this is an instance where the real scandal, fraud, gets overshadowed by the sex scandal. Perhaps the entire July 4 sex scandal was a smokescreen for a hearing on non-profit funding to be held by Councilmember David Catania on Monday.

In the City Paper article, it is alleged (with significant documentation) that Barry's office funneled city funds into non-profits that were set up by Barry staffers and micromanaged by Barry and his staff. This violates all sorts of laws and ethics regulations. These non-profits, for the most part, seem to have been set up simply as a way to employ people Barry wanted to employ. It is very unclear what, if anything, these organizations do.

I suggest everyone go and read the entire article. It's not an easy read, and it's not exactly easy to follow. But it's important. This is not a joke, this is not a case of someone out to get Barry. This is a culture of corruption. It's not surprising and we all knew it was happening, but now there is a good deal of proof. Everyone jokes that the District government is a joke, but at some point the laughing has to stop and the clean-up needs to begin.

Implicated, at the least, in this story are the following people:

• Councilmember Marion Barry
• Brenda Richardson, from Barry's office
• Eric Goulet, Council Chair Vincent Gray's budget director
• Justin Constantino, Eric Goulet's deputy

This scheme, of Barry-controlled non-profits, appears to have been run by Richardson. Documents were allegedly forged, including incorporation documents. Eric Goulet and Justin Constantino were directed to sort this whole mess out. When they were told that Barry was directing the operations of some non-profits, they reportedly said they were "not hearing that."

Will we see any outrage? Is this too complicated for the average citizen to be outraged about? Not only does this stink because it is fraud, but it's terrible because this is a time when actual, real non-profits are struggling. The $450,000 paid out, and the almost $1 million earmarked for these bogus groups could be used by real organizations doing real things for the residents of not only Ward 8 but the rest of the District.

This all comes after Barry reportedly makes a private apology to the DC Council for the arrest-saga, while refusing to apologize to the public. He and his office also continue to refuse to comment on any of these funding irregularities.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars funneled to your own interest groups. City money. Taxpayer money. This, when the city can't bridge a budget gap and can't fund safety improvements for Metro. We need more people like Mike DeBonis to take a look at the rest of the District budget. Where else is money being lost to fraud, theft, and cronyism.

I hate to use this line of thinking, but it is true. If we're ever going to make the case that we deserve more voting rights, we have to get our house in order.

Washington City Paper takes on Barry, some sort of outrage ensues

The Washington City Paper is drawing some heat for its cover this week. As you can see, it has a photo of Marion Barry, and a quote from a voicemail obtained by the paper. While not quite as classic as "Bitch set me up," this is a good one.

Howard Kurtz at the Washington Post has a summary of the "controversy" in today's paper.

The City Paper has been fielding all sorts of angry calls and complaints, as well as charges of racism.

Was it a "provocative" cover, absolutely. Was it worse than things that show up on the New York Post? Not at all. This story has been dominating local news for the last week, and the City Paper has had excellent coverage. It's a sad fact that this story demands coverage in the first place, but it does. This cover grabs your attention and sells the story well. Job well done, in my mind. Would it be appropriate for the front page of the Post or the New York Times, absolutely not. But the City Paper is not either of those publications. It is an alternative weekly that can take risks that those other papers can't afford to.

From the Post article:

Before Barry's news conference yesterday, two women approached a group of reporters and demanded to know which one worked for the City Paper. They soon began shouting at City Paper's Jason Cherkis, waving a copy of the newspaper at him.

"This is a disgrace, and I want to know what the media is doing about this," said Tisa Mitchell, 37, of Northeast Washington. "This is racially motivated. It's ugly. . . . You wouldn't do this to a white politician."

As television cameras gathered around them, Mitchell said: "I don't like the graphic nature of the front page. Everyone has relationship issues, but it shouldn't be put on the front page."

Constance Woody, who lives in Ward 7, east of the Anacostia River, added that "if Barry were a white man, he would have never been presented like this. This is an outrage."

First off, these charges of racism are, in my mind, completely ridiculous. This was presented the way it was because it was Marion Barry. Secondly, does anyone really believe if there was a scandal of this nature involving a white member of the Council, it wouldn't demand attention? Especially if that member had the history Barry does? Come on. We all saw how the media gave Bill Clinton a pass on Monica Lewinsky just because he was white.

And by the way, the total of money Barry directed to his girlfriend is up to $60,000. DC Council chair Vincent Gray has enlisted an independent law firm to investigate.

In an interview yesterday with The Washington Post, Watts-Brighthaupt raised further questions about the contract when she said she was hired to study Barry's political life. That would appear to contradict the terms of the contract, which said she would consult on "poverty reduction strategies."

Yesterday, in his first remarks since the arrest, Barry, 73, refused to comment on the $5,000-a-month contract. Instead, he blasted the U.S. Park Police, saying they inappropriately arrested him.

"Poverty reductions strategies" for $5k/mo? Well, Barry was certainly working to reduce his girlfriend's poverty.

We'll see what this investigation digs up, but we'll probably hear that the investigation is racist as well. We're picking an historical landmark of the District of Columbia who has done nothing but love women and constituents for his entire career. Right?

Can't spell Twitter without 'twit'

For those of you who only read the RSS feed, you wouldn't have noticed the Twitter box over on the right hand side of the site.

Yes, a few months ago, we created a why.i.hate.dc Twitter. Who knows how long this will last, but the fad seems to be growing and we'll run with it. After all, we live in DC where it's cool to put "Twitter Sk1llz" on your resume.

So yeah, feel free to follow us on Twitter.

Metro in more of a mess, no one is surprised

So the news keeps on getting worse for Metro. There have been two YouTube "incidents" this week, with video evidence of an operator texting as well as another operator apparently falling asleep. Both of these videos were made before the fatal crash, back when trains were still running on automatic mode.

A lot of bad press for WMATA, these latest incidents have been all over the national media. Sadly, the phrase "Metro Fail" has apparently become OK usage in national media headlines.

Metro has taken one positive step, finally making it a fireable offense to use a cell phone while operating a train or bus. According to General Manager John Catoe, "One strike and you're out. It's plain, simple and strong. Is it a tough policy? Absolutely. That's what I want."

Correction, John. That's what you want now that people are paying attention to WMATA, and it's becoming evident that operators aren't always paying attention. Why wasn't it what you wanted six months ago? A year ago? What about after the crash in Boston or the 25 dead in Los Angeles--both due to texting? Those weren't enough of a wake-up call? Oh, that's right, Metro doesn't pay attention to other transit systems.

This all at the same time as the District pulls the plug on $50 million in funding for Metro. So much for that dedicated funding stream. Of course the DC budget is in shambles, but by stopping the $50 million, $150 million in federal government matching funds would be lost. Well, except for the fact that the $150 million, while authorized, were not included in President Obama's budget.

Keeps getting better and better.

Metro operators union: "At least you're alive"

The Metro Red Line continues to suffer from overcrowded trains and stations, sixteen days after the fatal accident outside of Fort Totten Station. As a daily Red Line rider, I can say I need to add around 15-20 minutes extra to my commute. Each rush hour is similar to what I would expect for a baseball game or other special event, completely packed cars and completely full platforms. It's a mess, and it does test my patience a bit.

The Examiner reports today about the growing frustrations felt by Red Line riders. It's the typical "commuters are upset" piece we've seen elsewhere, but it does have an interesting quote from Jackie Jeter, the head of the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 689, which represents Metro train operators.

"I understand that you want to get to work a little sooner," she said, but "everybody should back off that. ... At least you're alive."

Well yes, I am glad that I am alive, and I am saddened by the loss of 8 passengers and the train operator. I also believe that safety has to be the number one priority of any transit system. However, there's got to be a better way to get your message across.

Perhaps a statement that says, "We understand the customers' frustrations, and we hope that management works to resolve this situation as soon as possible." Or if you want to be a little edgier than how about "Customers who are frustrated with the situation should urge their state and Federal governments to provide more funding for Metro. If funding is not secured, these delays and service interruptions will be permanent." That has a nice ring to it, much better than something that sounds a bit like "hush up because you could die any moment on the Red Line."

In other Metro-related news:

• A Metrorail operator was suspended for a week without pay after a rider recorded him operating a cell phone.
• Metro should take some time to research similar transit systems, especially BART in San Francisco. The failure John Catoe called a "freak occurrence" was well known to those running the Bay Area Rapid Transit system. From the WaPo: Metro spokeswoman Lisa Farbstein said that every transit system is unique and that it is difficult to know the "intricacies of everybody else's system and how they compare to ours." I'm sorry, shouldn't that be someone's job at Metro? There aren't that many transit systems in the United States, and there aren't that many that are so similar to Metro.
• The proprietor of Unsuck DC Metro, a site that frequently comments on WMATA, admits to having never ridden on a Metrobus.

I demand my consulting fees

Tim Craig at the Washington Post tracked down $10,000 in taxpayer money sent from Councilmember Marion Barry's office his alleged "stalkee," Donna Watts-Brighthaupt. Mike DeBonis at the CityPaper finds another $10K. Thit $20k is made up of various consulting fees, including $5k in computer consulting. It should be noted that all of these payments were made after the two became a couple.

Craig tracks down the official conflict of interest policies for the DC Government, and this appears to fall into a ridiculous grey area:

According to the District's conflict of interest laws, no public official should use an "official position or public office to obtain private financial gain for the public official or any member of their household, or any business with which the public official or any member of their household is associated."

Members of the household are defined in the statute as spouses, parents, brothers and sisters and children, as well as their spouses. The law does not appear to address girlfriends.

"The issue becomes whether [Barry's] relationship would fall into any of those categories," said Cecily E. Collier-Montgomery, director of the Office of Campaign Finance. She declined to comment further because her office could be asked to investigate Barry's hiring of Watts-Brighthaupt.

Well, regardless of technicalities, it stinks. But that's obvious. Not to mention that while the policy doesn't mention girlfriends, it does mention spouses. That made me think about how, Marion "Gay marriage will start a civil war" Barry is still married. Yeah, they've been separated for seven years now, but haven't gotten a divorce. Stay classy, your honor.

Shit, he's so good at manipulating people that not only does he get elected Mayor after going to prison, and then gets elected to the DC Council... he gets people to give him organs. Yeah, remember that whole ordeal? About how he was too ill to pay his taxes?

From another excellent WaPo article:

"He was raised by three women, and so he truly understands women and he speaks to your need," said Kim Dickens, who donated a kidney to Barry last year. "And if there is no need, he will create the need for you to be with him. He knows how to get into your life."

Damn. Now I'm waiting for the "Ripped From the Headlines" episode of Law and Order: SVU based on this whole saga.

In other news, I'm still waiting on my consulting fees to be paid. As people from the Wilson Building read this blog, I feel I've provided them with quite a bit of consulting. Heck, if you hire me at the rates Barry paid his girlfriend, I'll tell you what not to do before you do it, which beats reading about it in the newspaper and on blogs. It's a win-win situation for everyone involved.

Hell, at this rate, maybe I should just run for the DC Council myself. I'd say most of the DC "blogosphere" is generally more qualified and would make better representatives than the current crop we've got in there. The bar has been set so infinitely low.

The anti-Anti Real World DC

So I've thus far refrained from comment on the whole Real World: DC ordeal. Honestly, out of all of the things that deserve hating upon in the DC area, this ranks near the bottom. A television show is being filmed in a house, and some camera crews are going to follow some people around. Big fucking deal.

If you read DC blogs (I assume you do, at this point), then you've probably heard about The Anti Real World DC. It's a collaborate blog effort that's been going on for a few weeks. I've been reading it occasionally, as it's gotten ubiquitous coverage as of late. I've avoided commenting on this, but there are a few things that really need to be said.

1. Get over it. The Real World is here, and they don't care about you. I'm sorry that there are roughly six less parking spots in your neighborhood than before. And maybe the house will be a little noisy for the duration of their stay. However, the producers of the Real World obtained all of the necessary permits and are here legally. Maybe they aren't playing by your so called rules, and attending your local ANC meetings. But if you've got a serious problem with this, take it up with the Government of the District of Columbia. I'm sorry the producers of the show didn't come to your house with a fruit basket to preemptively apologize for their presence.

2. I was with you, somewhat, but then you went after the appearance of the cast. Did you have legitimate concerns about the show, because I forgot the moment you discuss how a girl was wearing too much makeup. 1) who cares, and 2) she's being filmed, of course she'll have more makeup on than normal. Are you Perez Hilton or are you trying to make a real point? Because I don't know anymore. Your celebrity gawking and mocking is just more publicity for the show you supposedly despise and are up in arms about.

3. You actually meet some of the cast and "epically fail" in your mocking. So you're at the Big Hunt and some members of the cast come into the bar. What's that? You mock them for listening to Kanye West and Outkast? Further mocking for the Temptations? Wow, grasping for straws a bit there? You come face to face with one of the girls (is this the one with too much makeup?) and all you manage to say is that you don't hate her and that you want to buy her a drink. Because she's cute. Oh, okay. And then you go on and bash the Human Rights Campaign? All in one post? Jesus, how many more people do you want to alienate on your blog. Typical DC, I suppose. All talk, but when you had a chance to say "you aren't welcome here, in fact, I dedicate a lot of my spare time to mocking you" you didn't. No, you hit on her. And then you lamented that you went home alone. Please.

4. What's the point, and are you astroturfing for MTV? Yeah, that's right. I went there. Maybe someone smart at MTV realized that "local blogs" are popular, and that they could drum up publicity by creating an "Anti" Real World blog. If MTV isn't paying you to promote the show, they should start. Free advertising.

The Anti Real World DC is doing one thing, serving as the epitome of self-absorbed, self-important DC. I could really care less about the Real World filming in DC, but what I really hate are these people who get so riled up about something that is not worth getting riled up over. They sprinkle in little 'factoids' about how important they think they are (e.g. "Look at me! I'm important. I plan events! For a non-profit! I know how to make nice with the ANC") and how this is obviously the end of the world for them.

Look, you'll survive. Maybe I should have made a blog called "Anti Wrecking Ball Coming 10 ft. From My Window" back when the school next to where I lived was being torn down. No one asked me if that was O.K. That was a whole lot louder and a whole lot more a pain in the ass than some stupid television show. Or how about the "Anti Gang War down the Street from Where I Live," that's one I can get behind. Or maybe "Anti Marion Barry Embarrassing My City So I'll Never Get the Vote."

I know for a fact that you are loving every second of this, and without a doubt you will watch every damn episode that airs. So why don't you change your web site already and admit to the world you're happy they are here.

Bitch set me up, again

Over the weekend, former mayor and current Councilmember Marion "I voted for gay marriage before I voted against it" Barry was arrested by the U.S. Park Police. He was charged with stalking Donna Watts-Brighthaupt after a traffic stop in Anacostia Park.

Sunday was a busy news day, with a Barry press conference, which lashed out at the 'accuser,' making her out to be mentally unstable. Barry's spokesperson stopped short of explicitly saying "bitch set him up," but that was the general sentiment. Watts-Brighthaupt was the woman Barry purchased an expensive fur coat for at a fundraiser in April.

I have to give kudos to City Paper's Mike DeBonis for being all over this on a holiday weekend. WCP doesn't pay you enough, I'm sure. The latest news is DeBonis's interview with Watts.

After sifting through all of this nonsense, it appears that Barry and Watts are "sort of" dating. They "officially" dated for about six months, from late last year until early this year. The "relationship" included a trip to the DNC in Denver.

On Saturday, Watts was attending a screening of a CNN program at the Wilson Building. She attended with her children and her ex-husband. When Barry learned that the ex-husband would be present, he sent a memo demanding he be banned from the Wilson Building. Watts claims he was removed from the building and that she was embarrassed. This led to WAIT A MINUTE WHAT THE FUCK I DON'T GIVE TWO SHITS ABOUT THIS.

Yeah, that's right. I'm not even going to go through the rest of this ridiculous narrative. Yeah, I get it, he's a former mayor of DC. He was mayor when this city had absolutely no idea how to govern itself (it still doesn't), and he was caught on tape smoking crack. Yeah, we all know that part. Then he was elected again after going to prison. He failed to pay income tax, he was arrested on drug charges (later dismissed, you know, because the Park Police is "out to get him"), and he is on probation now. He's also collecting around $100k each year to serve as "Councilmember" for Ward 8.

Well you know what, I don't live in Ward 8, and I didn't live here when Barry was mayor. Here's the part where I'm going to give "props" to all of the change that has happened in DC since 1999. Just for a minute I'll stop hating all of the self-important assholes who move here and bitch and moan about things that aren't a big deal. You know why? Because as much as I hate all you gastro-pub loving, North Face wearing, funemployment douches, at least you wouldn't vote for Marion Barry.

So, all you hiptard, gentrifying asshats, here's a memo: Anacostia is the next Petworth, please move there and recall this idiot. Otherwise can we just blow up the damn bridge and "retrocede" Ward 8 to Prince George's County and call this a day.

This is beyond embarrassing. This makes Mark Sanford look like Jimmy Carter and Wasilla, AK look like Shangra-fuckin'-La.

Enough is enough. It's sad that a man who showed so much promise for the District of Columbia, a man who was a part of the civil rights movement, has become such a nationwide spectacle.

Holiday weekend is here, blog readers go on vacation

It's been a slow week around the blag-o-sphere, given that an estimated 30% of the city is on vacation right now. However, there's always news to report. So here's a few quick hits for anyone who still opens their browser or RSS reader over the holiday weekend.

A big story is that Metro has decided to run the Red Line at normal speed again. This comes just days after John Catoe said the line would run at 35 m.p.h. until the cause of the June crash was determined. The WaPo says Metro consulted with the NTSB, who signed off on the plan. Trains will still be operating at slower speeds through the Ft. Totten-Takoma section of track. The puzzling part is that Metro says the 35 m.p.h. speed limit may be resumed after the weekend. It's either safe or it's not, make up your mind.

In the realm of most people don't care, the Real World cast has begun moving into their house on S Street in Dupont Circle. A small gaggle of bloggers and gawkers greeted a few of the new cast members yesterday afternoon. A longer piece about this is in the works. Look for that on Monday.

Thought I was done with the Red Line crash? Thanks to LL Daily (kudos for updating on a holiday!) for pointing out this link, to Dave Statter talking about the media blackout after the crash. According to Statter, Mayor Fenty ordered all city officials stop cease releasing information about the crash until he could hold his own press conference later that evening. This is an interesting read if only to get a sense of the dynamics at play within the Fenty administration.

Finally, from the Follow Up on This in Six Months department--there's been some talk around the Airport Authority board of restoring the original name of National Airport to, well, National Airport. Supposedly the current (super) majority in Congress might be grumbling a bit about it. No word on if the plans call for the eventually renaming to Obama National Airport.

Enjoy the weekend folks. And remember, only you can prevent the epidemic of illegal fireworks. Remember, safety is everyone's responsibility.

Potentially terrible news: Metro knew of circuit problem?

This could very well turn out to be a huge story. WJLA-TV has two anonymous sources that say Metro knew about the circuit problems on the Red Line five days before the fatal crash. From the ABC7 piece:

WASHINGTON - Sources tell ABC 7 News there are significant new findings on what led to the breakdown on Metro last Monday.

Two sources who must remain anonymous because they are close to the investigation allege that Metro technicians knew about a serious circuit problem on the track five days before the deadly accident and that they allegedly reported the problem to supervisors days before nine people lost their lives.

On June 17, the sources say several technicians discovered a circuit near the accident scene, known as a weezie bond, was not working properly. Metro explains that particular circuit communicates train speed and distance between the tracks, trains, and the operations control center.

The sources explain there was bobbing in the circuit -- meaning it was intermittently dropping out and could possibly be unable to detect a train on the track.

Furthermore: "Sources say the technicians all claimed they notified supervisors and Metro's maintenance operations center about the circuit problem five days before that collision and that the information was entered into Metro's maintenance computer database."

WMATA Spokesperson Lisa Farbstein was caught off guard when asked about this, saying only: "I am not aware -- no one has shared with me. I wouldn't have access to those types of memos if there were -- I am not saying there were I just honestly don't know."

No, I'm not taking down the Catoe Watch anytime soon.

What did they know, and when did they know it?

DC Office of Tax and Revenue can't hold on to their money

Yesterday, Harriette Walters was sentenced to 17 years in prison for her role as ringleader in the largest embezzlement in the history of the city. Walters and 10 others have been convicted in the scheme that stole more than $48 million from the city government. Walters operation siphoned the money via fraudulent tax refund checks. Walters was a former manager at the Office of Tax and Revenue.

Today, the story breaks that OTR is sending out "mistaken" tax refund checks to people who owed taxes. WTOP has some details:

D.C.'s Office of Tax and Revenue has mistakenly sent refund checks to residents who actually owe taxes. In one case, a resident received a check for $2,886 -- the exact amount he owed.

The resident, who wishes to remain anonymous, received the check in early June and returned it with a letter alerting the chief financial officer to the error.

"The amount represents my total tax liability for 2008, which I have paid, not the amount due me in refund."

Natalie Wilson, a spokesperson for the Office of Tax and Revenue, says there was a "processing error" which is now being investigated.

"We don't believe this is widespread."

But D.C. Councilmember David Catania (I-At-Large) isn't so sure, considering one of the checks was sent to his home.

Now I'm not even sure what sort of "processing error" could result in a check being cut and sent out for the same amount of a tax bill that was already paid.

I've heard a good deal of stories about dealing with OTR, with tax payments being applied to the incorrect tax year, resulting in the IRS withholding federal refunds, etc. Not to mention it's a horrific experience attempting to speak to anyone from OTR about these matters. God help the poor person here who tried to return that check. I can only imagine how that will screw up their 2009 taxes.

I imagine Marion Barry received a hefty "mistake" check from OTR as well.