Harrigan Good Bye.

In today's (Sunday) edition of the Union Leader there is an announcement that columnist John Harrigan is writing his last column for the newspaper.

I'm entitled to my own opinion on this and I say "good." More often than not I find his writing style to be self-centered, one sided and whatever Harrigan says must be right and everyone else is wrong. I don't remember the name of his column, he often writes about folksy things like why a fox would want to cross a road in the dead of winter. And I'd guess being a long term resident of the great north woods he is likely correct in his assumptions and reasons as to why that fox really is crossing the road.

It's his other materials that are completely wrong. It's okay to write about societal policy benefits. But the analysis should include how it's paid for and why. I don't think John Harrigan does this at all.

For example, Mr. Harrigan is a supporter of rail as are alot of individuals including myself. And it's okay to support rail but it's not okay to make broad generalizations about "what could be" without backing these up with real evidence and facts to support your position.

Harrigan will make a statement about how effective rail is and how NH society would greatly benefit from expanded rail access; one time he did a whole article about "high-speed rail." Of course society would benefit.

But not once, not once have I ever seen John Harrigan discuss money and how some of his quality ideas would be paid for. Rail is impressive in it's potential but is costs millions of dollars to implement and these sums of money simply are not available in New Hampshire.

This is why I don't like his writing.