So the puss face old farts running the Boston Common say that’s no place for an Olympic event and they aren’t having it. They say it’s a place where no one should pay for anything. Or something like that.
Excuse me? Ahhh, I remember paying good money to see concerts on the Common. In fact they called them “Concerts on the Common”. They didn’t call them “Free Concerts on the Common”. That’s because they weren’t. Some concert promoter paid the city money. They fenced up an area, built a stage and sold tickets. Just like the Olympics are asking to do.
So don’t get all uppity on me about the Common being some sacred ground. Bring back the days of the three card monte  games, Hari Krishnas, and mentally ill old ladies feeding the pigeons while loudly wishing cancer upon anyone who shood them away.
On and you know what Lizzi baby? As far as the Common goes you will do what you are told. You understand that, right? The Olympics will pay you rent, construct the venue, run the event, tear the venue down, and return the piece of shit land in the awsome location to the unlandscaped-semi-grassed-user-friendly-piece of turf it is.
The “Common”. Get it Elizabeth? Really girl come back to earth.
Actually you don’t have to because I am sure Mayor Walsh has already started rolling the wheels to get you the F out of here. You needlessly stuck your head out of a rabbit hole.
kirth says
It really shouldn’t be a surprise that this invective-laden diatribe is also far from truthful. Example:
Just how are they going to do that, after having removed 50 mature trees? There’s more, but why bother?
I see that our troll laureate has decided that the Olympics is his new favorite issue for stirring the shit on BMG. He’s attacking it with the same regard for the truth as his epic DeMoulas fiasco. Now watch this space as he brings on his third-rate Don Rickles imitation.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
n/t
kirth says
I don’t think you know what that word means.
Hints:
1) It’s a noun, not an adjective.
2) I’m writing these comments using a computer.
pogo says
…is a perfectly good reason why the Common and Public Gardens should not be used as a venue.
The Common was essentially cut in half, with towering walls creating a giant obstacle course that created two separate and unequal Commons. A bad idea that they’ve never repeated in 30 years and a very good reason why it should never be repeated.
pogo says
…of the Concert on the Common debacle, pretending that it was a positive experience for people and using as a justification to try it again for the Olympics.
A short experiment tried 30 yrs ago with miserable results and you regurgitate that for the Olympics…who is the putz here.
pogo says
…are you going to let Ernie engage in personal attacks? I certainly have thick enough skin to handle him. But when Ernie kept dodging my questions in the Bulger trial, comments that I aimed at his cowardly behavior were deemed “personal attacks” and they were removed by the editors…I expect Ernie to be treated like everyone else around here. Given his behavior, it is clear that he is given more room to throw insults at people–hell, it you held him to an equal standing as everyone else, every other comment of his would be deleted.
SomervilleTom says
According to informed sources here.
Christopher says
He is reasonable given the moniker, though we know Peter Porcupine is a woman, but what really makes no sense his Ernie’s sexism to the point of mysogyny at times if Ernie is a woman.
SomervilleTom says
I rely on several comments like this from judy-merideth.
petr says
… some time ago, the poster known as EBIII specifically denied that there was enough information out there to determine the gender of the poster known as EBIII. As in, “how do you know I’m a he?”… sort of passive aggressively denying being male without definitively asserting being female. My feeling, however, is that it’s an attempt to confuse in order to swaddle even further into the protective blanket of anonymity.
But EBIII gives the game away with his rather distinctive vacillation between rank sexism and gasping awe at the power of women: it’s a deeply, perhaps even painfully, conflicted attitude towards females that he displays that pretty obviously precludes a certain perspective, and so I’m fairly convinced that EBIII is male.
SomervilleTom says
I have the distinct impression that EBIII is known, personally, by the editors and by judy-meredith. I make the perhaps rash assumption that the comments about the gender of EBIII therefore come from first-hand knowledge.
I, frankly, don’t care that much either way.
Christopher says
…the editors swore up and down they do not know EBIII.
methuenprogressive says
Literally, unbelievable.
judy-meredith says
I was wrong to hint that I knew EBIII’s gender. I have no idea if the correct pronoun to use referring to EBIII is she, he or they, and I don’t care that much either,as long as they continue to be funny and provocative and prompt some interesting discussion.
SomervilleTom says
I apologize for getting your name wrong so many times. I do try to be careful about such things, and I appreciate you calling it to my attention.
I did not intend to be rude, and I will make every effort to spell your name correctly from now on.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
just don’t do it again.
SomervilleTom says
EBIII IS judy-meredith.
I get it now. đŸ™‚
methuenprogressive says
Why should Bob, David or Charlie start enforcing rules?
kirth says
I bet they allow fakernie to continue because there is no real person named Ernie Boch the 3rd, so technically, he’s not breaking that rule. If they bothered to address the rest of his rule-breaking, they’d probably have similar reasons for their lenience. Just because it looks to lots of us that he gets a pass for bad behavior that we thought was supposed to be banned, the mods like him because they think he’s funny or something. I don’t happen to agree, but there you go.
methuenprogressive says
As is if the sockpuppet belongs to a member of the in-crowd, the sockpuppet gets a pass.
kirth says
That would certainly explain much of the mystery.
rcmauro says
Isn’t this just a repeat of every local issue for the past 400 years, with one bunch of people wanting things “just like they have always been forever” and the other bunch wanting to plop some giant monstrosity down in the middle of everything?
I always thought this volleyball-on-the-Common thing was a transparent attempt to make the Beacon Hill and Back Bay crowd pony up some dough to make it go away. I say, spruce up the Common for the tourists (it is looking a little seedy) and put the volleyball in Holyoke.
I do admit that the people who picture the Common back in the days of Sargent and Hassam are a bit out of touch with what it’s really like today. (You all know this pic, but be sure to check out the cool horse-drawn streetcars! Can the MBTA bring them back?)
Link (at the MFA)
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
It’s The Common. The trees are the only thing to protected.
To me the Public Gardens are the beautiful front lawn which no one can play on. The Common is backyard that the whole neighborhood plays on.
shillelaghlaw says
If we let John Fish and his friends have their party on the Common, where will the junkies shoot up? Where will they spread their blankets to lie on in their strung-out repose? The Olympics will ruin all that.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
I’ll have yo get back to you on that one but I was thinking that stone and brick waste land behind the Lindermann Center.
farnkoff says
Trying to stop the IOCC One-percenters from walling off the common to play polo or whatever is elitist?
Hey, the Boston Common preservation society folks may indeed be mainly Brahmin elitists, but at least they’re our elitists.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
I really don’t see their point in objecting to this other than seeing their names in the paper.
Bob Neer says
Of course the Olympics should be allowed to build a venue there if the event is approved by the people of Boston in a referendum. If there is no referendum because organizers are too scared of a No vote, or if there is a referendum and the people vote No, the issue will be moot because either there won’t be a Games or if the powers that be try to stage them anyway people will be so upset about other issues an event on the Common will be the least of their concerns.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
So you are saying referendum or no referendum?
When do we have it and what does it say? Precisiely?
Should we have a referendum everytime they have an event on public property. The Phantom Gourmet B-BQ feast on the Plaxa/ The North End Feasts?
I’m trying to seperate uses of public property for private events in return for rent. Tha;s what the Olympics are as far as the city is concerned regarding footing the bill for venues.
Then it’s just regular game day in Boston only on steroids. Marathon, World Series, B,C. Football, Dental convention, Tall Ships, Stanly Cup, Harvard Graduation, Head of the Charles, Shriners convention, and Fouth of July all happeneing same time for several days.
We can do that.
ryepower12 says
Do you think having beach volleyball is like just putting in a big sand box or something? Or putting down a few ice sculptures?
There’s something very, very different when it comes to the Olympics in terms of scale, cost and access, compared to any other event that’s ever staged on the Commons.
rickterp says
This looks WAY different from a Concert on the Common, you must admit.