I would suggest that you look up the laws concerning public access to mug shots of adult criminals charged with crimes.
Wind power in whatever form it takes will be less invasive and destructive than the decades of industrial dumping and hydro power were to our 'quality of life' If I don't want to look at a wind farm, I can face the other direction and still get a fantastic view. If I wanted to get away from the toxic rivers I remember when I was growing up, I'd have to drive hours, and chances are, I'd just end up near another toxic river.
Those 'temporary' jobs you are so down on would still be better jobs than living at the mercy of Wal Mart, or trying to get a living wage working at one of the casinos some people seem so hot to open up. One wind project finishes, the workers go on to the next one. Other workers get long term jobs maintaining the facility for DECADES. Or we open up our state and start installing enough solar power to make a dent, and people have jobs for years installing them on every house.
Right now, the 'way of life' you say is being destroyed involves buying expensive oil from out of state or out of the country. It involves reversing the flow of old pipelines and sucking in toxic tar sands oil from Canada that those lines were never meant to hold. It involves dealing with damage to our trees, wildlife, and buildings from acid rain coming down from the smoke emitted from the power plants west of us that we buy our power from. When a wind farm has a problem they repair the windmill. When an oil pipeline has a problem, the entire town it was flowing underneath is destroyed. I know which option I'd pick.
You're pissed at 'Big Wind' well I'm pissed at big oil or big hydro and have been for decades. I'll take the chance and get used to the look of windmills on the horizon. They can't look any worse than the swath of high tension lines coming down from Canada or east from New Hampshire.
Not that this has anything to do with the article you're commenting on really.
As the other response said, underground lines have their own set of problems. Big Cities can afford to do it because they have significant other infrastructure underground already, and a much higher population density per mile of line added.
Lewiston Auburn are a couple of towns that can barely afford to keep the streets plowed in winter lately. Really think there's enough money to put all the power underground and not end up having it mean significantly higher costs for the customers?