# Biden and Amtrak



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 23, 2008)

I've been revved up for days at the prospect of Joe Biden as a veep. I think he's great. Talks too much maybe, but knows what he's talking about.

Does anybody know where he stands on Amtrak and other transportation? Nothing about it on his website.

Republicans beware. Joe Biden will tell America, chapter and verse, why Republicans suck out loud. He has a formidable arsenal of facts. John McCain hates facts, cuz he knows they can only work against him. "But I'm a war hero!" No you're not. You got shot down early in the war and sat it out in Hanoi. 361 other A-4s were downed, and you don't hear those pilots claiming that's a reason to vote for them to be president. A major crock.

And since when is being a POW a qualification for the Oval Office? Some kinda special wisdom that nobody else knows?

Come to think of it, I don't know McCain's Amtrak position either.


----------



## Spokker (Aug 23, 2008)

http://trains4america.wordpress.com/2007/0...rtation-issues/



> You are looking at Mr. Transportation,” he said in response to a question about using an electrified rail system like Europe’s. “I am the reason Amtrak keeps moving.”


It would seem that Biden is big on trains and I'm not sure that attacking McCain's POW experience is productive.

Also, Biden rides Amtrak in the Northeast Corridor regularly.



> MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask you about another tough issue for both of you: Amtrak. The president wants...
> SEN. BIDEN: It's not tough for me.
> 
> MR. RUSSERT: You take Amtrak every day back and forth to work.
> ...


----------



## AlanB (Aug 23, 2008)

Yes, if Joe get's any say in White House policy, I've no doubt that he'll push big time for Amtrak. He rides it so frequently that it's said that he knows the names of many of the crew members and will personally great them upon boarding the train. Joe Biden will most certainly be pushing for all types of mass transit funding, not just Amtrak.

The real question is, just how much influence and say will he have in the White House assuming that they are elected? And of course, what will they be able to push through Congress?


----------



## the_traveler (Aug 23, 2008)

Personally, I think pushing it through Congress is the least of the worries. How many times has a bill been passed by Congress for $xxx and the President has stated (even before the vote  ) that he would veto it, and propose a $-0- (or otherwise low $) bill for Amtrak? :huh:


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Republicans beware. Joe Biden will tell America, chapter and verse, why Republicans suck out loud. He has a formidable arsenal of facts. John McCain hates facts, cuz he knows they can only work against him. "But I'm a war hero!" No you're not. You got shot down early in the war and sat it out in Hanoi. 361 other A-4s were downed, and you don't hear those pilots claiming that's a reason to vote for them to be president. A major crock.
> And since when is being a POW a qualification for the Oval Office? Some kinda special wisdom that nobody else knows?



Since when is being an attorney a qualification for prez...since when is being an actor a qualification for governor..or in my case a veterinarian? That's a dumb sentiment, Whooz. You're just mad because you worked on the d*mned planes and didn't get the glory of flying them. Leaders come from all walks of life. Since when does being the husband of a ketchup and pickle queen make you a good candidate (kerry)? Let me be really politically incorrect: when does being black or a woman make you a good candidate?

None of the vocations or physical traits makes it special. Being an intelligent leader and a person of good judgment, wisdom and character does. But face the fact that the President is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces and for that both Clintons sucked and McCain would excel. Obama would have no clue. He worked out in a gym on his "photo op trip to Iraq". Any candidate faces a host of problems including our position in the world and our situations at home. One of those situations is making Americans aware that some problems are of their own making (housing and energy) and nothing can save them except making them (us) look in the mirror and accept responsibility for our own actions. There is no sugar daddy for the American people.


----------



## had8ley (Aug 23, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> I've been revved up for days at the prospect of Joe Biden as a veep. I think he's great. Talks too much maybe, but knows what he's talking about.
> Does anybody know where he stands on Amtrak and other transportation? Nothing about it on his website.
> 
> Republicans beware. Joe Biden will tell America, chapter and verse, why Republicans suck out loud. He has a formidable arsenal of facts. John McCain hates facts, cuz he knows they can only work against him. "But I'm a war hero!" No you're not. You got shot down early in the war and sat it out in Hanoi. 361 other A-4s were downed, and you don't hear those pilots claiming that's a reason to vote for them to be president. A major crock.
> ...


Gee Patrick~ something we agree on. I don't think Mr. McCain is any friend of Amtrak's. I rate him slightly less hostile than Ronald Reagan who would have loved to scrap Amtrak much like the Pacific Electric lines that it's now taking billions to re-build.


----------



## Steve Manfred (Aug 23, 2008)

According to Joe Biden's wikipedia entry, his younger son Hunter actually serves on the board of directors for Amtrak.


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Aug 23, 2008)

The Obama website has a welcome page for Senator Biden that allows you to send a welcome message I have no idea who will end up reading them if anyone but it seems like an interesting way to share your thoughts to the campaign

http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/welcomejoe

who knows maybe it will make a difference but again no way to know if they ever get read


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 23, 2008)

Guest said:


> Since when is being an attorney a qualification for prez...since when is being an actor a qualification for governor..or in my case a veterinarian?


The average attorney probably has a better understanding of what implication laws actually have than the average American. Given the impact the President has on what laws are made, that understanding probably does have some real value in improving that person's judgement and wisdom.



Guest said:


> None of the vocations or physical traits makes it special. Being an intelligent leader and a person of good judgment, wisdom and character does.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 23, 2008)

> SEN. BIDEN: This is absolutely bizarre that we continue to subsidize highways beyond the gasoline tax, airlines, and we don't subsidize, we don't want to subsidize a national rail system that has environmental impact. Do you know what it would take? It would take us $71 billion to be able to go and take--if you took Amtrak out of the Northeast Corridor from Washington to Boston, to build enough highway on 95 to go up and back. This is the ultimate being penny-wise and a pound-foolish.


I don't quite understand this. Is he saying that if Priuses and gasoline grew on trees, and we decided to kill all the Amtrak NEC trains and just had to build enough new roads to carry single occupancy vehicles with the same number of people Amtrak is carrying, that we'd be spending $71 billion on those roads?


----------



## GAT (Aug 23, 2008)

I think there are only two ways that Amtrak will become more than a minor pimple on the agenda of anybody who becomes our next president. Given all the other priorities, it will happen only if our leaders have the wisdom to recognize that Amtrak should be an indispensible element in an overall energy policy or as part of the policy for rebuilding our nation's transportaion infrastructure. Otherwise, my guess is you won't hear a peep out of the government about Amtrak in the first four years of the next administration.

And please, folks, this is an Amtrak discussion forum; can we please leave Rep/Dem shilling out of our deliberations?  We get more than enough of that in all the rest of the media. B) Thanks.


----------



## the_traveler (Aug 23, 2008)

George said:


> And please, folks, this is an Amtrak discussion forum; can we please leave Rep/Dem shilling out of our deliberations?  We get more than enough of that in all the rest of the media. B) Thanks.


I agree!

All I have to say is that Obama/Biden have stated something publically concerning Amtrak and/or mass transit, and McCain/??? havve said :huh:


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2008)

Oh, but I disagree.


----------



## transit54 (Aug 23, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> George said:
> 
> 
> > And please, folks, this is an Amtrak discussion forum; can we please leave Rep/Dem shilling out of our deliberations?  We get more than enough of that in all the rest of the media. B) Thanks.
> ...


Obama's statement on transportation, which includes Amtrak, is here: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/Fact...nsportation.pdf

McCain doesn't have anything visible about transportation on his site. I know that Obama has, on many occasions, spoken about the increased need for funding mass transit. The only thing I've heard from McCain is surrounding the whole fuel prices issue, but nothing about transit or trains. Doesn't mean he hasn't said anything, though. McCain is on record as being a massive Amtrak opponent, though.

As for Biden, I know he's a big Amtrak supporter but can't offer any public statements offhand. Some research indicates some very positive views, however:

http://usliberals.about.com/od/environment...mtrakBudget.htm

I also found an interesting article on his son, who sits on the Amtrak board:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0207/2672.html


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Aug 23, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Does anybody know where he stands on Amtrak and other transportation? Nothing about it on his website.


Here's a blog from an Acela rider that shared a seat with Biden and struck up a conversation about Amtrak.

Link


----------



## Rail Freak (Aug 23, 2008)

George said:


> I think there are only two ways that Amtrak will become more than a minor pimple on the agenda of anybody who becomes our next president. Given all the other priorities, it will happen only if our leaders have the wisdom to recognize that Amtrak should be an indispensible element in an overall energy policy or as part of the policy for rebuilding our nation's transportaion infrastructure. Otherwise, my guess is you won't hear a peep out of the government about Amtrak in the first four years of the next administration.
> And please, folks, this is an Amtrak discussion forum; can we please leave Rep/Dem shilling out of our deliberations?  We get more than enough of that in all the rest of the media. B) Thanks.




& I approve of that message!


----------



## wayman (Aug 23, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Yes, if Joe get's any say in White House policy, I've no doubt that he'll push big time for Amtrak. He rides it so frequently that it's said that he knows the names of many of the crew members and will personally great them upon boarding the train. Joe Biden will most certainly be pushing for all types of mass transit funding, not just Amtrak.
> The real question is, just how much influence and say will he have in the White House assuming that they are elected? And of course, what will they be able to push through Congress?


You called it, Alan: I'm watching Obama's speech right now, and Obama just called Biden "a man of character, who knows the name of every conductor on that Amtrak train to Wilmington" 

And that was the third time Obama mentioned Amtrak in this introductory speech, discussing Biden's career and commitment to family.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Aug 23, 2008)

The Amtrak Candidate.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 23, 2008)

had8ley said:


> Gee Patrick~ something we agree on. I don't think Mr. McCain is any friend of Amtrak's. I rate him slightly less hostile than Ronald Reagan who would have loved to scrap Amtrak much like the Pacific Electric lines that it's now taking billions to re-build.


Care to start a pool on McCain's veep selection? A buck says Mitt Romney. Oops, I forgot: Jay's not a betting man.


----------



## Jim In Va. Lost His ID (Aug 23, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Yes, if Joe get's any say in White House policy, I've no doubt that he'll push big time for Amtrak. He rides it so frequently that it's said that he knows the names of many of the crew members and will personally great them upon boarding the train. Joe Biden will most certainly be pushing for all types of mass transit funding, not just Amtrak.
> The real question is, just how much influence and say will he have in the White House assuming that they are elected? And of course, what will they be able to push through Congress?


Joe is DEFINITELY Mr. Amtrak. I ride Acela between DC and NY two or three times per week, and I've seen him on board a guzzilion times. Not only does he know the crew members' names, but once a year he has a Christmas party where he hosts them. True story. He is a huge rail advocate.

Jim In Va. (though posting as a guest because I can't seem to get my ID to work...and I don't want to change my profile)


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 23, 2008)

Another Biden question: DelawarIAN, or DelawarITE? This is an old dilemma, first posed in an episode of the old sitcom "Taxi."


----------



## JimInVa (Aug 23, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Another Biden question: DelawarIAN, or DelawarITE? This is an old dilemma, first posed in an episode of the old sitcom "Taxi."


And here I was all excited that I had an answer for your first question...


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 23, 2008)

Guest said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > Republicans beware. Joe Biden will tell America, chapter and verse, why Republicans suck out loud. He has a formidable arsenal of facts. John McCain hates facts, cuz he knows they can only work against him. "But I'm a war hero!" No you're not. You got shot down early in the war and sat it out in Hanoi. 361 other A-4s were downed, and you don't hear those pilots claiming that's a reason to vote for them to be president. A major crock.
> ...


Whooz will probably disagree with my arguing his point, but:

McCain makes a huge deal about his being a war hero. People consistently cite it as a reason to elect this man. He rides on it. It is no more right to suggest I am capable of running for president because I can break tooth picks with my toes (I can) then to suggest the same for being a POW. McCain has a lot of things going for him. He's honest, direct, fair, and he's certainly not dumb. Pushing Amtrak issues aside, we could do a lot worse than having John McCain be president.

I think Obama is a better man for the job at the moment. Maybe in other times, I'd have thrown more support behind McCain. I dunno. But McCain's economic policies are about as far removed from what we need as the prehensile abilities of my toes is from the necessary qualification for president.

As for discussing politics in this forum, I think we could either delete a ton of posts about politics over the course of the next 6 months, because all roads lead there at the moment, especially all railroads. Or we could give in and let people debate, so long as they don't get to name calling. Obviously which of the two is the decision of people other than me, and I don't envy them it, but were I making it, I'd opt for the second.


----------



## wayman (Aug 23, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Another Biden question: DelawarIAN, or DelawarITE? This is an old dilemma, first posed in an episode of the old sitcom "Taxi."


Well, with regard to Biden the answer is arguably "Pennsylvanian"--even the Obama campaign has called him "Pennsylvania's third senator" 

But the answer to your (and Taxi's) question is "DelawarEAN". This is called a "demonym", and here and here are two sites which give this answer (as well as the demonyms for other states and cities in the US).


----------



## AlanB (Aug 23, 2008)

Jim In Va. Lost His ID said:


> Jim In Va. (though posting as a guest because I can't seem to get my ID to work...and I don't want to change my profile)


Jim,

I've sent you an email to your Yahoo account on record. If for some reason you no longer have that account, then let me know and I'll let you know how to contact me to see if we can't fix this issue.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 23, 2008)

wayman said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > Another Biden question: DelawarIAN, or DelawarITE? This is an old dilemma, first posed in an episode of the old sitcom "Taxi."
> ...


I noted numerous references to Scranton, PA, which is apparently Biden's hometown. That brings up another, more current, sitcom, "The Office."

EDIT: As the national economic powerhouse I think California is entitled to a third senator. And if we don't get one we'll secede.


----------



## Acela150 (Aug 23, 2008)

Many travelers that travel on the same train everyday know the crew members and the LSA's! I've seen it about 10 times.


----------



## AlanB (Aug 23, 2008)

Acela150 said:


> Many travelers that travel on the same train everyday know the crew members and the LSA's! I've seen it about 10 times.


Quite true. In fact I know a few Acela crew members by name myself.

However I'd bet that Joe Biden is the only member of Congress that knows the names of several Amtrak workers.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 23, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> As the national economic powerhouse I think California is entitled to a third senator. *And if we don't get one we'll secede.*


*Great idea!* Then Arnold can be the President of the United State of Calee-four-nya! :lol:

Hey wait a minute.... that would made my son an... Alien! Yikes! :unsure:


----------



## D.P. Roberts (Aug 23, 2008)

Guest said:


> But face the fact that the President is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces and for that both Clintons sucked and McCain would excel.



Of course, McCain can only excel in those areas of the job that might not involve computers, since he doesn't own one and doesn't use them (although his wife does).

I'm still trying to get my mind around the idea of a presidential candidate who has never sent an e-mail or viewed a web page, and wouldn't know how to do so even if he wanted to.

I guess he wouldn't have a lot to say on the issue of getting WiFi on trains. Or identity theft, or Internet loans & the mortgage crisis, or any of the other myriad issues involving computers that Americans are facing today. Then again, I guess most elderly people don't know how to use computers.

And on an unrelated note, I just realized that the promo NBC has been playing (over and over again) during the Olympics for the premiere of the TV show "Chuck" was filmed at LAUS!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 24, 2008)

Guest said:


> Since when is being an attorney a qualification for prez...since when is being an actor a qualification for governor..or in my case a veterinarian? That's a dumb sentiment, Whooz. You're just mad because you worked on the d*mned planes and didn't get the glory of flying them. Leaders come from all walks of life. Since when does being the husband of a ketchup and pickle queen make you a good candidate (kerry)? Let me be really politically incorrect: when does being black or a woman make you a good candidate?
> None of the vocations or physical traits makes it special. Being an intelligent leader and a person of good judgment, wisdom and character does. But face the fact that the President is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces and for that both Clintons sucked and McCain would excel. Obama would have no clue. He worked out in a gym on his "photo op trip to Iraq". Any candidate faces a host of problems including our position in the world and our situations at home. One of those situations is making Americans aware that some problems are of their own making (housing and energy) and nothing can save them except making them (us) look in the mirror and accept responsibility for our own actions. There is no sugar daddy for the American people.


WELL PUT! I'd also add to the association of pickle with Kerry... "how does the ability to act like Polly the Parrot and consistantly repeat 'another 8 years of Bush'" make you you a good candidate? And when does "chosing the equilivant of a baby sitter as VP when the Russian invasion of Georgia makes you realize your shortcomings" make you a good candidate?

Also, I know that we all want to see adequate funding for Amtrak, but in line with what you're saying, how does being right on a single issue make you a good candidate? Yea, yea, I know that Obama's right about more than one issue, but is he worth all the danger signs that are out there (your judgement and motives are judged by the company you keep) and the risks of his inexperience - now more evident than ever! I personally don't think so, but each has to decide for themselves.

I can only hope people will think with open eyes before voting come November rather than blindly hoping on the ambiguity of unlikely or at least questionable promises! Remember the adage of fool me once? When it comes to the future of our country, being fooled once may well rule out any chance of being fooled a second time!


----------



## sechs (Aug 24, 2008)

I was surprised to learn (via CNN) that Joe Biden is the poorest member of the U.S. senate. He apparently had a negative net worth in his last filing.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 24, 2008)

D.P. Roberts said:


> Of course, McCain can only excel in those areas of the job that might not involve computers, since he doesn't own one and doesn't use them (although his wife does). *I'm still trying to get my mind around the idea of a presidential candidate who has never sent an e-mail or viewed a web page*, and wouldn't know how to do so even if he wanted to. I guess he wouldn't have a lot to say on the issue of getting WiFi on trains. Or identity theft, or Internet loans & the mortgage crisis, or any of the other myriad issues involving computers that Americans are facing today. Then again, *I guess most elderly people don't know how to use computers*.
> And on an unrelated note, I just realized that the promo NBC has been playing (over and over again) during the Olympics for the premiere of the TV show "Chuck" was filmed at LAUS!


OMG, how did we ever survive the first 200 years of our country with presidents not having computers! Not knowing how to use a computer is irrevelant to the ability to run the country and understand the issues just as much as knowing how doesn't mean one's qualified.

I'd also like to note that being within a year of Social Security means that I am a rookie in the elderly club. And although many elderly people don't know how to use a computer, there are a lot more than you'd realize that do! I am an elderly person that has planned, designed and implemented websites and with one fairly complex site have won numerous national awards for my work.

One thing us elderly people do know is how the advent of the computer and the internet has both helped society while at the same time make the world a more dangerous place... and the same can be said about cell phones too! And yes, I have a cell phone!

Perhaps when my rookie membership in the elderly club advances, I will no longer know how to use the computer! But until then, I do!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 24, 2008)

sechs said:


> I was surprised to learn (via CNN) that Joe Biden is the poorest member of the U.S. senate. He apparently had a negative net worth in his last filing.


If that's true it both does and does not speak well of him! But then again this comes from CNN, so who know for sure if it's true or not - at least at this time!


----------



## oldtimer (Aug 24, 2008)

Joe Biden knows more than just crew members names on Amtrak. He knows both labor and management representatives for Amtrak by their first names, he knows the dispatchers, he knows the the workers on the shop floor. He does support Amtrak as a nationwide rail system.

Now for the presidential candidates: (trying to be objective and non-provacative as possible)

Obama: My US Senator, very responsive to my many letters and e-mails on behalf of Amtrak and Metra funding and all railroad issues. The responses seemed to be direct and well thought out not just some canned response. I am of the belief that someone reads them and has been authorized to speak for the Senator. Very supportive on all my issues, also supportive of Illinois' 403b funding while serving in Springfield.

McCain: He has made many public statements against Amtrak funding. It is rumoured that Cindy and a son were on the Sunset Limited that was derailed in an American terrorist attack. not muck publicity outside of rail buffs as it only had one fatality and that was an employee.

I personally want Joe on Amtrak's side so I can keep on rollin' down the rails.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 24, 2008)

Yea or nay, Democrat or Republican, I think it's pretty damn cool that so many people are interested and engaged in the political process this time around.


----------



## Montanan (Aug 24, 2008)

Both Biden and Obama have expressed support for Amtrak in particular and more-progressive American transportation policies in general. McCain, on the other hand, has repeatedly called for Amtrak's abolition -- I think it's safe to say that he's among the Senate's most anti-Amtrak members. For those of us who would like to see Amtrak not only survive but prosper, the distinction could not be more clear cut.


----------



## MrFSS (Aug 24, 2008)

Montanan said:


> Both Biden and Obama have expressed support for Amtrak in particular and more-progressive American transportation policies in general. McCain, on the other hand, has repeatedly called for Amtrak's abolition -- I think it's safe to say that he's among the Senate's most anti-Amtrak members. For those of us who would like to see Amtrak not only survive but prosper, the distinction could not be more clear cut.


For many, including myself the problem becomes this. I will just pick some numbers as an example.

Suppose candidates A and B each have a definite position on 20 different things that I'm interested in and will influence my vote.

Candidate A has positions I like on 18 of the 20 things, one of which *isn't* Amtrak, while candidate B has positions I like on only 4 of the 20 things I'm interested in, one of which *is* Amtrak and Transportation. Do I vote for A as he has many more other than Amtrak things I agree with, or vote for B because he does have the Amtrak position I'm interested in? But I don't like the other 16 positions B has.

I have asked this question to a lot of fiends and family and it is tough to know the answer.

Any situational ethics professors out there???


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 24, 2008)

MrFSS said:


> For many, including myself the problem becomes this. I will just pick some numbers as an example.
> Suppose candidates A and B each have a definite position on 20 different things that I'm interested in and will influence my vote.
> 
> Candidate A has positions I like on 18 of the 20 things, one of which *isn't* Amtrak, while candidate B has positions I like on only 4 of the 20 things I'm interested in, one of which *is* Amtrak and Transportation. Do I vote for A as he has many more other than Amtrak things I agree with, or vote for B because he does have the Amtrak position I'm interested in? But I don't like the other 16 positions B has.
> ...


I think you're right in your thought process. The only thing I would add to that is that the priority of issues needs to be factored in. As an example what's more important, national security vs. transportation or supporting and protecting wage earners vs. forced supporting of unworthy entitlements? Considerations like these examples need to be made and it's very important that we think clearly, freely and with an open mind, then make those decisions. If those decisions are not made in such a manner, then one's vote is uninformed and it could very well lead to undesirable consequences for us as individuals and as a country!


----------



## MrFSS (Aug 24, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> > For many, including myself the problem becomes this. I will just pick some numbers as an example.
> ...


Thanks for that thought and I agree completely with what you say. I discuss Amtrak with folks who don't even know how to spell it moreover know anything about it and they could care less that Obama is pro and McCain con on the subject. They look at me like I'm crazy (that's another topic for another day) when I even bring Amtrak up as something to consider in the mix of considerations.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 24, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> it's very important that we think clearly, freely and with an open mind


John McCain will receive a fair trial before we hang him.


----------



## Montanan (Aug 24, 2008)

Well, of course we need to weigh the candidates' positions on a wide variety of issues before deciding how to cast our votes. It's easy for me this time, though, since the pro-Amtrak folks have the more rational views on virtually all of the other issues, as well.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Aug 24, 2008)

No matter how you feel, I rather base a candidates position on his daily commute,and his still favoring Amtrak,than to base my vote on a Candidate who thinks, based on his stock porfolio, even if its laden with foreign and oil stocks.

Can we hang Bush at same time, they don't hang well in singles, they do better in bunches.


----------



## Guest_Yerry_* (Aug 24, 2008)

I don't think that improving a few train rides a year is going to improve my life anywhere as much as , say, banning my employer from offering me health insurance at a grossly inflated price because I'm not "healthy and wealthy". Which one of the two candidates will make my life better? At this point, I don't know.

I'm somewhat puzzled that it took so long for someone to realize (or post) that Joe Biden is definitely pro-Amtrak and transit. For years, almost all Amtrak-friendly arguments came out attached with Joe's name on them. Everything from funding authorizations, NECIP, and even the 7600-series coaches.

I fond it odd defending someone I'll most likely not be voting for, but where's all this "McCain the War Veteran" stuff coming from that's supposedly coming from Mccain himself? I do an enormous amount of reading and news watching, but I've come across several accounts of his POW experience and the camera footage of him in in jet, fully engulfed in flames-- all done by someone else-- and one short account of his own in Hanoi. I also recall a LOT of McCain standing up to Bush, both of them, which doesn't mesh with a supposed "95% approval vote".

In all fairness, I just heard a really, really weird one (not approved by anyone!) about Obama being friends with the Weathermen Underground that bombed the Capitol. Huh? Gotta love election ads!

Also, the comment about "sitting out the war" just HAS to be a "Chik remark' [a claim that is so far off the mark that nobody believes it's possible to be anyone's a real belief; named after those "Chik" religious tracts]. Of all the wars the US has been involved in where American soldiers have been captured, the country where they had the highest survival rate was **** Germany (military POW camps, not the infamous concentration camps)-- and it goes rapidly downhill from there.


----------



## wayman (Aug 24, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> I fond it odd defending someone I'll most likely not be voting for, but where's all this "McCain the War Veteran" stuff coming from that's supposedly coming from Mccain himself? I do an enormous amount of reading and news watching, but I've come across several accounts of his POW experience and the camera footage of him in in jet, fully engulfed in flames-- all done by someone else-- and one short account of his own in Hanoi.


It's quotes like this that people are referring to, coming straight from McCain's own advisors and spokesfolks:



> Nicolle Wallace, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain, said on Sunday night that Mr. McCain had not heard the broadcast of the [Rick Warren questions, first asked of Obama] event while in his motorcade and heard none of the questions.
> “The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,” Ms. Wallace said.


What does this have to do with his being "a former prisoner of war"? Nothing; it's just something they try to attach to his name at any opportunity. It was also quite notably and blatantly done by his campaign spokesfolks a month or two ago during the discussion of environmental policy and oil drilling. It's like the Obama campaign saying "The insinuation that Barack Obama, a minority raised in poverty on food stamps, did suchandsuch..."--it's a complete non-sequitur. (In fairness, I worry that we may see a lot of "Joe Biden, whose wife was tragically killed by a drunk driver, ..." epithets straight from the Obama campaign in the coming months.)

(source, NY Times)



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> I also recall a LOT of McCain standing up to Bush, both of them, which doesn't mesh with a supposed "95% approval vote".


What you recall is largely from five-to-eight years ago, though the McCain campaign would have you believe it was much more recent. His approval votes have agreed 95% in 2007 and 100% in 2008, while Bush's national approval rating has dropped below 30%.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 24, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> Which one of the two candidates will make my life better?


Obama/Biden. A no brainer. There was a senator from Mississippi - for the life of me I can't recall his name at the moment - who was heavily pro-Amtrak. But he was so wrong on so many other things that I never woulda voted for the guy, had I been a Mississippi resident.


----------



## Montanan (Aug 24, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest_Yerry_* said:
> 
> 
> > Which one of the two candidates will make my life better?
> ...


You're thinking of Trent Lott. **shudder**


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 24, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > it's very important that we think clearly, freely and with an open mind
> ...


If McCain is hung, I think that's Cindy's business and more information we need to know... even if he is running for President! :lol:


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 24, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest_Yerry_* said:
> 
> 
> > Which one of the two candidates will make my life better?
> ...


Boy, I'm not touching this one with a 10 foot pole... even if you did leave yourself really wide open!!! Aaaaag... it's so-so tempting!


----------



## the_traveler (Aug 24, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> but where's all this "McCain the War Veteran" stuff coming from that's supposedly coming from Mccain himself?


From McCain himself! 

Example: During the Saddleback talk, I remember McCain answering a question. Then he told a story about a time he "was a *Prisoner of War* on Christmas day, and the guard ..."


----------



## RailFanLNK (Aug 24, 2008)

Barack Obama goes somewhere and 200,000 people show up to see him. (Berlin) McCain wants to look as though 200,000 folks have shown up to see him, so he puts himself in the middle of Sturgis SD and bungles getting his wife into a beauty pageant that usually ends up being quite kinky. Barack plays basketball on a military base in Iraq and McCain (soon to be 72 years of age) can only dream of running up and down the court and can only dream of going to a PC and seeing what all of us here are talking about since he doesn't have a clue on how to operate a PC nor does he know how many houses he owns. I wonder if he knows how many airplanes he owns?  If I go to Cornhusker football games every fall along with Chiefs games and have season tickets to both venues, I probably REALLY support these teams, so equate that to Biden riding a train everyday to and from work, he's probably pro-rail and not an advocate against it.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 25, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> OMG, how did we ever survive the first 200 years of our country with presidents not having computers!


Because for the first 200 years, the world didn't operate on computers, and therefore, knowing how they worked was irrelevant. This is similar in concept to asking how important knowing how to read and write is for a leader. I mean, let me tell you, only the past 10-15,000 years have our leaders known how to read and write. They didn't for a million years before that! I mean how important could that be? Yeesh.



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> I fond it odd defending someone I'll most likely not be voting for, but where's all this "McCain the War Veteran" stuff coming from that's supposedly coming from Mccain himself?


Thats the big problem with all of you people. You find it odd to defend someone you aren't voting for. I've defended McCain before, to you people, to my parents, to my friends, to my girlfriend. I will never vote for this man unless something really really weird is proven about Obama. But the fact of the matter is, being of my opinions or not, the man is not a devil. I wish a few of you would stop painting unneeded horns and pointed tails and fangs on the man. So he doesn't support Amtrak. So he doesn't have many modern perspectives. So he supports some misguided ideas. So don't bleedin' vote for the man. I sure won't. But please, don't demonize him. He's not evil.



sky12065 said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > Guest_Yerry_* said:
> ...


That is a ridiculous comment. I will debunk it with a even more ridiculous counter. Lets say that Biden or Obama is Whooz's best friend and they promised him a $200k/yr no-work job. I'm not saying that is the case, but I have just created a hypothetical situation where and elected Obama would clearly benefit Whooz, and you can't even dispute it.

McCain being elected will benefit some people. Obama being elected will benefit some people. The question for you is, are you going to be of both groups, one group, or neither group? If so, which one? And this is assuming you are selfish, which since you are a pro-capitalistic American, I'm going to assume you are. Personally, I'd vote for someone who wouldn't benefit me if I thought it was for the good of the world.


----------



## sechs (Aug 25, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> sechs said:
> 
> 
> > I was surprised to learn (via CNN) that Joe Biden is the poorest member of the U.S. senate. He apparently had a negative net worth in his last filing.
> ...


It seems that this tidbit was picked-up as an AP story, so there's something to it.


----------



## D.P. Roberts (Aug 25, 2008)

You'd think McCain would be pro-Amtrak, since he qualified for the senior discount - _ten years_ ago.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> I fond it odd defending someone I'll most likely not be voting for, but where's all this "McCain the War Veteran" stuff coming from that's supposedly coming from Mccain himself? I do an enormous amount of reading and news watching, but I've come across several accounts of his POW experience and the camera footage of him in in jet, fully engulfed in flames-- all done by someone else-- and one short account of his own in Hanoi. I also recall a LOT of McCain standing up to Bush, both of them, which doesn't mesh with a supposed "95% approval vote".


Here's another:

Biden:



> "Your kitchen table's like mine," Biden said. "You sit there at night, after you put the kids to bed, and you talk. You talk about what you need. You talk about how much you're worried about being able to pay the bills. But ladies and gentlemen, that's not a worry John McCain has to worry about. It's a pretty hard experience -- he'll have to figure out which of the seven kitchen tables to sit at."



McCain's retort:



> I am grateful for the fact that I have a wonderful life," McCain said. "I spent some years without a kitchen table, without a chair, and I know what it's like to be blessed by the opportunities of this great nation...So the fact is that we have homes, and I'm grateful for it.


So yes, the answer to pretty much everything is "but I was a POW!"

I'm glad to see Biden as the VP pick for a lot of reasons, his staunch Amtrak support is just the icing on the cake.

(D.P. Roberts, that's hilarious - did you create it/may I use it?)


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Montanan said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > Guest_Yerry_* said:
> ...


That's the guy. Thanks, and I share your shudder.


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

...and how many of you on here responding have served in a war zone for the US military? Within that category, how many of you have had the opportunity to serve the US military as a POW? It's an elite job description. Requirements are the ability to endure enormous amounts of suffering while bringing respect to the flag that put you in that situation. Sometimes these are contradictory requirements and it requires some high personal standards and a brilliant set of skills to endure that I rarely detect on this board. Leadership skills. Hello, yes!! Let's back up a minute and do a little history lesson for you keyboard junkies. Vietnam wasn't a war that young men and women were thrilled to fight. Some ran to Canada, some spent their tours trying to escape their duties with mind altering drugs. Many (probably most) served admirably and are still dealing with its demons. Whooz appears to have drawn the grace card known as "in between wars", just as I would have had I been a man. McCain didn't. War sucks but sometimes it's necessary. You face your mortality at a very young age. How many of you had a will at age 18 because of the possibility of losing your life in a war zone? You may give up some of the usually more productive years of your life (as McCain did) and as many of the over 30,435 (OIF) 2,257 (OEF) injured as reported in the Army Times 8/4/08 have done Killed total 4,116 and 555. Missing or possibly captured, 1. Do you even know who he is? With this group the answer has to be NO. Yet, you can find the number on a sleeper car with no difficulty. Priorities, guys, priorities.

If McCain now has 7 tables to eat at, so be it. Quit whining, show some initiative and earn enough so that you can have 7 tables, if it is 7 tables that you want. The opportunity is in front of you by virtue of the providence of being a citizen in this country. I've pondered the "what if I'd been born in Africa" thought.

Until you have (POW experience) you will never know what it takes to have the resolve and discipline to make it through difficult times. He faced the possibility of dying in a foreign land, caged, without any family around him and having his body land where it would never be found.... except that the US has such a respect for this service that we are still finding and bringing our Vietnam soldiers home _to this day_. It's a d*mned shame that you guys (with maybe one exception) don't have the same respect for the self-sacrifice that this required. But, that's a reflection on you, not McCain.

Railroads are good but as the ****s discovered, they can be used for evil purposes. So, guys, get it in perspective. Get the right guy in the office and then use the power of the pen to get Amtrak permanently funded.

Make sure that you vote for a President that can lead in war if it once again becomes necessary. From a military wife, PLEASE, do not put someone in that office who cuts the number of military members serving. The burden is too great on the remaining and Pres. Bill Clinton (not Bush) is directly responsibile for that idiocy while making sure that parents had to explain "o*al s*x" to their children long before it was time because it was an inescapable part of his life and character. For pete's sake, if that's what the man needed, Hillary should have been bright enough to figure it out.

As far as computer skills.. guys, guys, guys. You have no clue how stupid YOU sound when you think it's a prerequisite to run for Pres. You all appear to have the TIME to mess with this machine and that's all it is. A machine, a tool. In time, it will be as antiquated as a telephone. It is far more important in life to have good relationships than it is to have computer skills. This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.


----------



## WICT106 (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.


That computer language would not happen to be FORTRAN, would it ? I've had training on the AS/400, where we used to have to deal with subfile programming, Data Description Source, and some things that looked a lot like "Assembler."


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > OMG, how did we ever survive the first 200 years of our country with presidents not having computers!
> ...


I feel that using terms like "Yeesh" and "ridiculous" are at the fringe of bashing my posts and making your remarks personal and this is not the first time this has happened on this forum. I am NOT going to engage you or participate in its continuation. Besides, that is against the rules of this forum isn't it? 

The only comment I will make though is regarding your last sentence... what you stated is "EXACTLY WHY I WILL BE VOTING FOR MCCAIN!" I want what's best for the WORLD, the whole world and not just what's best for the views and agendas of secular-progressive liberals and the Democratic Party!


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

WICT106 said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.
> ...


Yes, that's it. I went to a university that had upper degrees in engineering (to service the nearby NASA installation) before it had undergraduate degrees in business and IIRC, Fortran was more of a science code than a business code- yet business grads had to take a programming course for the BSBA.

For some humor, my honors class involved analyzing a business to solve it's problems. Two advanced degree engineers had opened a store-front selling personal computers (there were about 3 brands on the market at the time). All of our research indicated that they would be as common as telephones in the not so distant future. This was about 1981. The store owners' (very future-oriented in a future-oriented city) problem was that they didn't know how to market these things or handle potential customers (lack of people skills). They ended up closing. Brilliant idea. Highly-educated market. No people skills. No sales.

Writing this brought back the frustration I felt when the 5 or so inches of punch cards fell to the floor as I was feeding them into a machine.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

WICT106 said:


> That computer language would not happen to be FORTRAN, would it ? I've had training on the AS/400, where we used to have to deal with subfile programming, Data Description Source, and some things that looked a lot like "Assembler."


I know some of you will know this, but for the young'ns that don't, Fortran stands for "Formula Translation" and Cobol stands for "Common Business Language!" Class dismissed! :lol:


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> sucks but sometimes it's necessary.


I fully recognize and agree that war is sometimes necessary. However, the current conflict in Iraq is war by choice, wholly UNnecessary, and initiated under false pretenses. And while Joe Biden voted for it, he was also among the first to recognize his hideous mistake. McCain is still thumping the dead drum of "Victory."


----------



## Anthony (Aug 25, 2008)

This thread is deviating from the original theme of Biden and Amtrak. Let's keep things on topic and shy away from unrelated political references. I'm referring to the string of posts dating back from yesterday - not only to those posts from today. Thanks.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Anthony said:


> This thread is deviating from the original theme of Biden and Amtrak. Let's keep things on topic and shy away from unrelated political references. I'm referring to the string of posts dating back from yesterday - not only to those posts from today. Thanks.


Hey Anthony, as forum founder, do you care to stick your neck out and venture a Biden and Amtrak opinion?


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > sucks but sometimes it's necessary.
> ...


I don't think 10 years of many UN resolutions against Iraq hardly qualifies being labeled as "false pretenses!" That is the primary reason why Bush acted once 9-11 occured and it was realized somthing needed to be done following Clinton's failure to do anything! The "weapons of mass destructions" was simply a supporting factor that Democrats later used for political advantage. In the beginning it was fully believed by not only the president but most all of congress too.

In my opinion Bush's low rating is now so low because too many other nations had no balls to support us and do anything about Sadam's continual thumbing of his nose at us, the UN and the world. The other problem is because Democrats efficiently exploited the naturally unpopularity of war to fool the American people into believeing that Bush lied to us. And they say that you can't fool most of the people, most of the time? If it weren't for those points I've made the war would have reached the success it is just now experiencing long ago and most troops would now be back home and Bush's ratings would - to the shagrin of the Dems - be sky high and congress would not be controlled by the democrats! And quoting what was said in another post "that's a no-brainer" weither you agree with me or not!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

Anthony said:


> This thread is deviating from the original theme of Biden and Amtrak. Let's keep things on topic and shy away from unrelated political references. I'm referring to the string of posts dating back from yesterday - not only to those posts from today. Thanks.


Read this message following my last response. I'm suprised something wasn't said long before it was. Thank you! Now maybe I can get some sleep :blink: instead of defending... aah, never mind!


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> ...and how many of you on here responding have served in a war zone for the US military? Within that category, how many of you have had the opportunity to serve the US military as a POW? It's an elite job description. Requirements are the ability to endure enormous amounts of suffering while bringing respect to the flag that put you in that situation. Sometimes these are contradictory requirements and it requires some high personal standards and a brilliant set of skills to endure that I rarely detect on this board. Leadership skills. Hello, yes!! Let's back up a minute and do a little history lesson for you keyboard junkies. Vietnam wasn't a war that young men and women were thrilled to fight. Some ran to Canada, some spent their tours trying to escape their duties with mind altering drugs. Many (probably most) served admirably and are still dealing with its demons. Whooz appears to have drawn the grace card known as "in between wars", just as I would have had I been a man. McCain didn't. War sucks but sometimes it's necessary. You face your mortality at a very young age. How many of you had a will at age 18 because of the possibility of losing your life in a war zone? You may give up some of the usually more productive years of your life (as McCain did) and as many of the over 30,435 (OIF) 2,257 (OEF) injured as reported in the Army Times 8/4/08 have done Killed total 4,116 and 555. Missing or possibly captured, 1. Do you even know who he is? With this group the answer has to be NO. Yet, you can find the number on a sleeper car with no difficulty. Priorities, guys, priorities.
> If McCain now has 7 tables to eat at, so be it. Quit whining, show some initiative and earn enough so that you can have 7 tables, if it is 7 tables that you want. The opportunity is in front of you by virtue of the providence of being a citizen in this country. I've pondered the "what if I'd been born in Africa" thought.
> 
> Until you have (POW experience) you will never know what it takes to have the resolve and discipline to make it through difficult times. He faced the possibility of dying in a foreign land, caged, without any family around him and having his body land where it would never be found.... except that the US has such a respect for this service that we are still finding and bringing our Vietnam soldiers home _to this day_. It's a d*mned shame that you guys (with maybe one exception) don't have the same respect for the self-sacrifice that this required. But, that's a reflection on you, not McCain.


What McCain has done for his country is admirable. The man is a hero, an honest, fair, reasonable, decent fellow. Being a war vet can do nothing but add to his ability to run our nation. But the thing is, its not enough reason. A president is not just the head of our military. He is the head of our country, the man who must make tough decisions for everyone's benefit. McCain has limited knowledge of economics, very limited connection with the people of our country currently going through a recession, and he is not a negotiator, a maverick of the senate. In this time and place, the war is an issue. But Jodie, its not the only one. I don't think he can handle many of the others.



Guest said:


> Railroads are good but as the ****s discovered, they can be used for evil purposes. So, guys, get it in perspective. Get the right guy in the office and then use the power of the pen to get Amtrak permanently funded.


If my only problem with McCain was his position on Amtrak, he'd have my vote. There might be a few people on this board who are single minded enough to argue with that position, but I doubt it. If they do, they are probably currently active employees of Amtrak, and I don't blame 'em.



Guest said:


> Make sure that you vote for a President that can lead in war if it once again becomes necessary. From a military wife, PLEASE, do not put someone in that office who cuts the number of military members serving.


I think that an ability to lead in a war is important, and personally I think Obama might be able to in the event that he has to. But personally, I think he'd be better than McCain at the more important issue of avoiding a war in the first place.



Guest said:


> The burden is too great on the remaining and Pres. Bill Clinton (not Bush) is directly responsibile for that idiocy while making sure that parents had to explain "o*al s*x" to their children long before it was time because it was an inescapable part of his life and character. For pete's sake, if that's what the man needed, Hillary should have been bright enough to figure it out.


His sexual preferences, and his relationship with his wife, are almost as irrelevant in this argument as my aforementioned prehensile toes.



Guest said:


> As far as computer skills.. guys, guys, guys. You have no clue how stupid YOU sound when you think it's a prerequisite to run for Pres. You all appear to have the TIME to mess with this machine and that's all it is. A machine, a tool. In time, it will be as antiquated as a telephone. It is far more important in life to have good relationships than it is to have computer skills. This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.


Tell me, would you trust building your house to a carpenter that didn't know how to use a hammer? Being president of the united states means you have to take advantage of all things, and the computer is too important a tool to not have to do your job. People who are familiar with computers think differently.

Before computers, if I was reading or writing something and though of a piece of information I could use, I'd make a mental note to look it up next time I happened to go to the library. As often as not, I'd forget. Now if I want to use information, say to quote Amtrak's ridership for 2007, I'd hit "Command-T" to open up a new tab, mid sentence, and type into the Google bar "Amtrak 2007 ridership", click on the first link on the list and quote you the number, 25,847,531.

A president likely to look up information, any information, that he doesn't happen to know exactly, this second... tell me, is that not a useful feature in a leader?

Anthony: Same as Sky.


----------



## Anthony (Aug 25, 2008)

Patrick - as forum founder, I must stay neutral and bipartisan, so I will not venture any personal political opinions on the forum.  :lol:


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > sucks but sometimes it's necessary.
> ...


Whooz, the "wholy unnecessary" is strictly your opinion, not necessarily a fact. Those who govern us have to base their judgments on fact _as those facts are presented to them_, act, and then take responsiblity for those actions. I maintain (and we've gone over this point before) that the intelligence was faulty or that the American people will never know exactly what was put in front of Bush. What was the man told that would make him say, "good job Brownie"?

Never underestimate the military leaders' desire for war. Service in a war zone brings promotions. War brings monies to hurting small towns across America by employing citizens whose jobs have gone to other countries. Don't underestimate this. Think for a moment. You're a chicken factory worker (or a hog farmer) in a small town. The company also hires illegals. Your part-time (normally) job with the Guard pays several times as much as you earn in the regular job. Your family needs some medical care. The chicken factory doesn't cover your health. Another Mexican will take your job while you're away. It's in a right-to-work state so there's no union protection (why do you THINK so many car production plants are going South?). When you go on active duty your family gets caught up on medical care (no joke- I'm a witness to this). You get to keep the bill collector at bay for awhile. The babies you create at the beginning of the tour get delivered on military money. And, if you're to believe the military, you get to have one heck of an adventure.

What wasn't faulty was that we were attacked on our own soil and our citizens/service members had been attacked repeatedly through several administrations, including Clinton's. His response, reduce the military strength. Must be the air in the Ivy Leagues? If you stomp my foot more than once, I'm going to deck you and this Christian's going after you. End of conversation. I have no qualms shooting someone who's wants to kill me. That's the only thing some countries and extremist violent cults understand. Clinton couldn't get his job description clear in his head. I DO NOT want a "leader", ever again, who governs by the direction of the wind (polls)- Clinton types. If the polls (and someone with scientific polling experience-feel free to jump in) show someone as being unpopular, I don't care. It's not a popularity contest. I am definitely hoping for some excellent diplomacy experience within the potential team. Neither would I want a team picked in order to meet equal opportunity goals.... but I still have a litmus test issue.

FWIW, color of skin is an insignificant issue.


----------



## Sam Damon (Aug 25, 2008)

Here's the thing, sports fans.

Some of Amtrak's biggest cuts occurred under the *Carter* administration. Those cuts IMO, really crippled the national system, leaving us fewer options on the table that we need NOW.

25 years ago, the policy-makers and bean-counters only saw numbers needing cutting.

I would prefer having a national intercity railroad passenger train system being perceived as something both political parties agree upon, and fully believe those on this forum need to work towards. Remember: 218+51+1 votes are needed to make any federal spending happen. Positioning the national intercity railroad passenger train system in terms of a single political party is a mistake that passenger train advocates cannot afford to make.

That's why I think that it's nice that Senator Biden rides Amtrak, but don't expect any miracles if he and his running mate are elected to office.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Aug 25, 2008)

So now the conservatives say that being in the "war" and POW stuff is "what a man is made of" blah, blah, blah....but "W" got where he got by beating 3 Viet Nam vets and 2 that were decorated Viet Nam vets and he was sippin' Champagne on the Sunset Limited from 1971-1974 as he went back and forth from Texas to Alabama in the National Guard. (had to put some Amtrak reference in there) The man never speaks of HIS military experiences because he had none. But that was ok then, but now....the pedigree has to be "military and POW" funny how things can change in 4 years. And how sad things have changed in 8 years. :huh:


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Anthony said:


> Patrick - as forum founder, I must stay neutral and bipartisan, so I will not venture any personal political opinions on the forum.  :lol:


Fair enough, Mr. Rizos, and I think we share the common goal of getting people talking, even if it's sometimes off topic.

BTW, I happen to know that Anthony is a major Commie. JOKE!


----------



## Anthony (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Anthony said:
> 
> 
> > Patrick - as forum founder, I must stay neutral and bipartisan, so I will not venture any personal political opinions on the forum.  :lol:
> ...


Agreed there.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

RailFanLNK said:


> And how sad things have changed in 8 years. :huh:


Especially the last 4. Remember who took control of congress an led this congress into the poorest record of performance in history? Hint - it wasn't the president!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

RailFanLNK said:


> So now the conservatives say that being in the "war" and POW stuff is "what a man is made of" blah, blah, blah....but "W" got where he got by beating 3 Viet Nam vets and 2 that were decorated Viet Nam vets and he was sippin' Champagne on the Sunset Limited from 1971-1974 as he went back and forth from Texas to Alabama in the National Guard. (had to put some Amtrak reference in there) The man never speaks of HIS military experiences because he had none. But that was ok then, but now....the pedigree has to be "military and POW" funny how things can change in 4 years. And how sad things have changed in 8 years. :huh:


Being a moderate conservative I have to say that McCain's war record has little to do with my support for him except for giving him better qualifications in the area of foreign policy. His having much longer congressional experience in that area than Obama also factors into the equasion!


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> Hint - it wasn't the president!


Quite correct. Obstructionist Republicans in Congress are to blame. Further, the president couldn't seem to locate his veto pen until Democrats achieved majority (2006, not 4 years ago), and despite GOP obstructionism managed to get a few bills to his desk.

Let's not forget that killing Amtrak seems to be a central Republican goal. What's wrong with those guys? They also don't give up on oil drilling. Mindless.


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

_"Tell me, would you trust building your house to a carpenter that didn't know how to use a hammer? Being president of the united states means you have to take advantage of all things, and the computer is too important a tool to not have to do your job. People who are familiar with computers think differently."_

GML, I'm a CPA with a long life around numbers, computers (before you were born!) and solving problems (apparently a lot better problem solver than those that answered the original posts :lol: ). I frequently ask some of the computer junky accountants what they would do if the electricity went off. I AM positive that some would freeze because they don't know the basics. The output stinks, yet they think it's a masterpiece of fine accounting because they've mastered the program. They can't recognize an appropriately- prepared, simple Cost of Goods schedule. I then have to teach them the fundamentals by constantly correcting their work (using the same computer programs) AND remind them again and again, it's just a tool. Don't focus on the tool. Focus on the product and the end user. BTW, it's not just the newbie grads who do this, it can be those who are mired in "appearances". It may enhance your life or it may not. I learned to be a bookkeeper as a young teenager on something called a Burrough's bookkeeping machine and was taught by an elderly lady who thought it was the cat's meow (sounds a little like you!). You could anchor a small ship with its weight. (Ask one of the elders in your community about it, I'm sure someone is familiar with it.) It, too, was just a tool. It doubled as a work out machine. In our times, the technology will continue to change. Expect it. But think of it only as a tool for a purpose. I'm looking forward to the next wave.

Trust me, the computer as it sits in front of you will soon be a dinosaur. Live your life as though it is (unless its workings are your source of income). Let's back up a little. The candidate doesn't have to know all about computers or even use one. He just needs to know their significance. His focus should be a lot larger than single issues.

On the sox-outside-of-marriage (OOM) issue. In my house that stuff (OOM) by my spouse would be a very real issue that would threaten the future and cause distrust issues. If Clinton wanted to tie Hillary to a bedpost _and_ she was in agreement, THAT would be between them. Don't forget the perjury. Nothing in her body language indicated that she was in agreement with his actions and I doubt that their marriage VOWS (look that one up) allowed this. The lack of trustworthiness is a reflection of his character and a person's character is part of the qualification for the Office of the Presidency. John Edwards, IMO, needs to get an occupation digging ditches. That low-life is so outta public life because of this subject. Would YOU trust him? All we need now is that Washington woman named Fanny something or other and her fountain dipping beau, Wilbur something or other to liven things up.

And. Just as garbage in produces garbage out, I would never rely on a Google search for anything serious. Entertaining, yes. For example, it astounds me that anyone would take an investment blog seriously unless a credentialed reputation were on the line. Make sure that you always check the credentials of your sources. I surely do not want my President relying on Google for his advice (although it sounds like what some of his advisors may have been doing). I want the geeks, the ones who've spent their whole lives engaged in the subject and putting their reputations on the line who have something to lose when they're wrong, under his wing.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > sucks but sometimes it's necessary.
> ...


We are involved in war weither anyone likes it or not and sure as you-know-what we need a president that will thump ANY drum of victory and not advocate the agony of an embarrasing defeat!



Guest said:


> Whooz, the "wholy unnecessary" is strictly your opinion, not necessarily a fact. Those who govern us have to base their judgments on fact _as those facts are presented to them_, act, and then take responsiblity for those actions. I maintain (and we've gone over this point before) that the intelligence was faulty or that the American people will never know exactly what was put in front of Bush. What was the man told that would make him say, "good job Brownie"?
> Never underestimate the military leaders' desire for war. Service in a war zone brings promotions. War brings monies to hurting small towns across America by employing citizens whose jobs have gone to other countries. Don't underestimate this. Think for a moment. You're a chicken factory worker (or a hog farmer) in a small town. The company also hires illegals. Your part-time (normally) job with the Guard pays several times as much as you earn in the regular job. Your family needs some medical care. The chicken factory doesn't cover your health. Another Mexican will take your job while you're away. It's in a right-to-work state so there's no union protection (why do you THINK so many car production plants are going South?). When you go on active duty your family gets caught up on medical care (no joke- I'm a witness to this). You get to keep the bill collector at bay for awhile. The babies you create at the beginning of the tour get delivered on military money. And, if you're to believe the military, you get to have one heck of an adventure.
> 
> What wasn't faulty was that we were attacked on our own soil and our citizens/service members had been attacked repeatedly through several administrations, including Clinton's. His response, reduce the military strength. Must be the air in the Ivy Leagues? If you stomp my foot more than once, I'm going to deck you and this Christian's going after you. End of conversation. I have no qualms shooting someone who's wants to kill me. That's the only thing some countries and extremist violent cults understand. Clinton couldn't get his job description clear in his head. I DO NOT want a "leader", ever again, who governs by the direction of the wind (polls)- Clinton types. If the polls (and someone with scientific polling experience-feel free to jump in) show someone as being unpopular, I don't care. It's not a popularity contest. I am definitely hoping for some excellent diplomacy experience within the potential team. Neither would I want a team picked in order to meet equal opportunity goals.... but I still have a litmus test issue.
> ...


Another excellent post! We should put you up for president! But then again the left wing bloggers h34r: would probably just bash you to death! (Not on this forum of course  )


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

RailFanLNK said:


> So now the conservatives say that being in the "war" and POW stuff is "what a man is made of" blah, blah, blah....but "W" got where he got by beating 3 Viet Nam vets and 2 that were decorated Viet Nam vets and he was sippin' Champagne on the Sunset Limited from 1971-1974 as he went back and forth from Texas to Alabama in the National Guard. (had to put some Amtrak reference in there) The man never speaks of HIS military experiences because he had none. But that was ok then, but now....the pedigree has to be "military and POW" funny how things can change in 4 years. And how sad things have changed in 8 years. :huh:



Railrookie, It was a norm at the time to join the Guard as Bush did. It was held in higher esteem than running to Canada or shoving drugs up your nose. You still went to basic. You still did some service. IIRC, it just put your number more towards the end. Railrookie, let's hear all about your service and your personal sacrifices.


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

> Another excellent post! We should put you up for president! But then again the left wing bloggers h34r: would probably just bash you to death! (Not on this forum of course  )



I AM trying to get one of my Sacramento friends to start running in California. Whooz, get your Canadian passport ready. She's rougher than I am and thinks the place has gone to the dogs.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> Whooz, get your Canadian passport ready.


I'm not going anywhere. I love America, and am disappointed to see it being run into the ground by Republicans who are more interested in further enriching the wealthy than providing transportation infrastructure for the rest of us. And should McCain prevail, I'm not the kind of hysterical clown who would threaten to move to Canada. Better to stay right here and keep arguing for change.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 25, 2008)

Sam Damon said:


> 25 years ago, the policy-makers and bean-counters only saw numbers needing cutting.


The number that needs to be cut is the number of automobiles that are on the roads because there are no good alternatives available.


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Whooz, get your Canadian passport ready.
> ...


Whooz, how did you get poor?


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > Hint - it wasn't the president!
> ...


{BUZZZZ} WRONG! It's Democrats and not "those what's wrong with them guys." Things can get done when people are willing to make reasonable comprimise like happened more frequently when the Republicans were in charge. It seems like Liberal Democrats just don't know the meaning of comprimise until they are overwhelmingly pressured by public opinion like apparently is now happening to Nancy Polozzi with energy polocies or more specifically the off shore drilling issue.

Republicans and the president will and should be applauded for blocking one-sided solutions when bad bills are being shoved or back-doored through especially when under the cover of another popular issue. Democrats should do the same when Republicans control congress and have done so successfully in the past... and why? Because Republicans do comprimise more and tend to tow the party line less - not completely but less so!


----------



## PaulM (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> It is far more important in life to have good relationships than it is to have computer skills. This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.


Ah, the good ol' days of Fortran and the IBM 1620. Don't forget how you had to bribe the computer operator to run your program.

I would add that in addition to "relationships", one needs the ability to think; i.e., use all the data extracted by someone else from computers and come up with the right answer. I'm sure Obama doesn't know PHP from ASP either.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> Whooz, how did you get poor?


Wasn't easy.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> _"Tell me, would you trust building your house to a carpenter that didn't know how to use a hammer? Being president of the united states means you have to take advantage of all things, and the computer is too important a tool to not have to do your job. People who are familiar with computers think differently."_
> GML, I'm a CPA with a long life around numbers, computers (before you were born!) and solving problems (apparently a lot better problem solver than those that answered the original posts :lol: ). I frequently ask some of the computer junky accountants what they would do if the electricity went off. I AM positive that some would freeze because they don't know the basics. The output stinks, yet they think it's a masterpiece of fine accounting because they've mastered the program. They can't recognize an appropriately- prepared, simple Cost of Goods schedule. I then have to teach them the fundamentals by constantly correcting their work (using the same computer programs) AND remind them again and again, it's just a tool. Don't focus on the tool. Focus on the product and the end user. BTW, it's not just the newbie grads who do this, it can be those who are mired in "appearances". It may enhance your life or it may not. I learned to be a bookkeeper as a young teenager on something called a Burrough's bookkeeping machine and was taught by an elderly lady who thought it was the cat's meow (sounds a little like you!). You could anchor a small ship with its weight. (Ask one of the elders in your community about it, I'm sure someone is familiar with it.) It, too, was just a tool. It doubled as a work out machine. In our times, the technology will continue to change. Expect it. But think of it only as a tool for a purpose. I'm looking forward to the next wave.
> 
> Trust me, the computer as it sits in front of you will soon be a dinosaur. Live your life as though it is (unless its workings are your source of income). Let's back up a little. The candidate doesn't have to know all about computers or even use one. He just needs to know their significance. His focus should be a lot larger than single issues.
> ...


WOW! I'm becoming a fan of yours! Just a note about Google and blogs... I never-ever go to blogs either liberal or conservative. I strive to listen to media that give both sides of an issue. I believe that it's because of blogs and the internet that Obama has even come even close to reaching 50% in political polls. They're too popular with the our youth that are still inexperienced in life. Without those blogs (and flow with the wind liberal media) I really believe that Hillary would have been made the presumptive nomination for the Democrats. As for Google, I rarely look up political information and when I do it's only to try and determine if a political email is truth or fiction. As much as I would like to forward some of those against Obama, I don't want to be a part of further spreadings untruths about him.


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

PaulM said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > It is far more important in life to have good relationships than it is to have computer skills. This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.
> ...


Boy, what a trip down memory lane. You're right. That was the person behind the air-conditioned glass with the room-sized computers scurrying reels (remember the first discs- more like luncheon platters) around. Let's not forget that computer screens came in one version. No graphics. No font style choices. Color? Hah! Nothing entertaining. You didn't spend hours hanging around a computer. There was little fun to be had doing so.

I think the most important thing I learned in "higher" education was the ability to think and one professor reminded us: "We're not here to teach you skills, we're here to teach you to think." We were told this was what defined a university.

My apologies to the proof readers here who cringe at my grammar.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> > Another excellent post! We should put you up for president! But then again the left wing bloggers h34r: would probably just bash you to death! (Not on this forum of course  )
> 
> 
> I AM trying to get one of my Sacramento friends to start running in California. Whooz, get your Canadian passport ready. She's rougher than I am and thinks the place has gone to the dogs.


Quite understandible with Calee-for-nya (Arnold joke) being overwhelmed with illegals, law ignoring mayors and liberal judges trying to re-write the consititution instead of making judgements based on it and changing history in spite of it. My son lives in LA and I fear that someday he'll be a citizen of another country - not by choice!

This reminds me that I have to get my passport soon in case a few on this forum come chasing after me and I have to quickly head up the Adirondack Northway (I-87) to Canada. LOL Just kidding but I do live within two miles of the Northway.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Aug 25, 2008)

Why are you people blowing bandwidth talking to walls? I've never seen one of these forum political debates convince anyone to change their mind. If you want an audience to rant to about your political beliefs, start a political blog site. At least move this thread to a off-topic non-Amtrak forum.

Sheesh, get a life people.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

PaulM said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > It is far more important in life to have good relationships than it is to have computer skills. This comes from someone whose first programming experience was putting COBOL (and the language that starts with an F, -forgotten it now), codes on punch cards, getting the cards in line, getting myself in line, feeding them into a card reader, getting a printout on green-lined side-punched paper and wondering which card got out of order and having to repeat the process. What you have in front of you will at some near future point seem as odd as the punch cards I used.
> ...


I was a computer operator performing many of the processes "Guest" described early in my career and I must say this to you PaulM...

I didn't know I could have made money through bribes?


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> Why are you people blowing bandwidth talking to walls? I've never seen one of these forum political debates convince anyone to change their mind. If you want an audience to rant to about your political beliefs, start a political blog site. At least move this thread to a off-topic non-Amtrak forum.
> Sheesh, get a life people.


Dude, we're just talking. It's like TV: If you don't like the program, change the channel.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> Why are you people blowing bandwidth talking to walls? I've never seen one of these forum political debates convince anyone to change their mind. If you want an audience to rant to about your political beliefs, start a political blog site. At least move this thread to a off-topic non-Amtrak forum.
> Sheesh, get a life people.


"USE IT OR LOSE IT" - It say's that on your sig. doesn't it? Do those words not also apply to "freedom of speech"? If I am not interested in hearing about freight trains, should I dare suggest that such discussion cease even if when a connection to Amtrak is mentioned? :huh:

If you're not interest in the content of this thread, why not just stop following it instead of suggesting to others what they should or should not be discussing? Oh, and one more thing... I think that most everybody on this forum has a life!


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Whooz, get your Canadian passport ready.
> ...


Good for you - I'm pleased to make your acquaintance, and am glad that they are people like you in this world.


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 25, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> PetalumaLoco said:
> 
> 
> > Why are you people blowing bandwidth talking to walls? I've never seen one of these forum political debates convince anyone to change their mind. If you want an audience to rant to about your political beliefs, start a political blog site. At least move this thread to a off-topic non-Amtrak forum.
> ...


 A second thing we agree upon! (Even though we disagree politically.)


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> PetalumaLoco said:
> 
> 
> > Why are you people blowing bandwidth talking to walls? I've never seen one of these forum political debates convince anyone to change their mind. If you want an audience to rant to about your political beliefs, start a political blog site. At least move this thread to a off-topic non-Amtrak forum.
> ...


Exactly!


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 25, 2008)

Sam Damon said:


> Here's the thing, sports fans.
> Some of Amtrak's biggest cuts occurred under the *Carter* administration. Those cuts IMO, really crippled the national system, leaving us fewer options on the table that we need NOW.
> 
> 25 years ago, the policy-makers and bean-counters only saw numbers needing cutting.
> ...


I agree that Democrats and Republicans have by and large been equal opportunity mis-treaters of train travel and Amtrak - but I think Biden looks like a bright exception.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> PetalumaLoco said:
> 
> 
> > Why are you people blowing bandwidth talking to walls? I've never seen one of these forum political debates convince anyone to change their mind. If you want an audience to rant to about your political beliefs, start a political blog site. At least move this thread to a off-topic non-Amtrak forum.
> ...


WOW! We agreed on something, matter of fact two things! What you stated above and in response to another post, I'm not going anywhere if Obama wins either. I love America too!

I think I'll have a glass of wine tonight and celebrate! I'm having Lambrusco; how about you?


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

PaulLev said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > PetalumaLoco said:
> ...


I don't recall the first thing we agreed on! Anyway, we can disagree politically all we want, but to me all signs are that things are swinging in McCains direction, especially with around 20% of Hillary's supporters vowing to vote for McCain! I also just heard about those supporters at the convention in Denver may well implode the proceedings over the issue... and although it wouldn't suprise me if they were to pathetically try, they can't blame that on Bush! LOL


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> I'm having Lambrusco


Think I'd rather have a LamBREWSKI.


----------



## Guest (Aug 25, 2008)

PaulLev said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > Guest said:
> ...


Whooz is easy to raz and generally a good sport. His state is already the recipient of my area's former representative, the welter weight champion and chief of doofus behaviour, Cynthia McKinney. I'm wanting to hear what he has to say after making her acquaintance as she is running for Pres on the Green Party ticket to replace Ralph Nader.


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 25, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > PetalumaLoco said:
> ...


I'll be sipping chablis tonight - as I applaud Michelle Obama's speech at the convention... 

And, come to think of it, one of the best glasses of wine I ever had was looking out the window, as Lake Shore Limited rolled up the Hudson, lit up by the sunset...


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> Whooz is easy to raz and generally a good sport.


That's RAZZ, and I'll consider it a compliment (I think from Jody).

As for McKinney and Nader, not going there at all.

But some cool music here (WAY off topic): The Hollyfelds

Riding the Southwest Chief later this week to hear this band at Denver. Check out "Empress of Wyoming."


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

PaulLev said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > WhoozOn1st said:
> ...


A-salute to all regardless of which side of the issue you're on! BUT.... I wouldn't dare listen to Michelle's speech either before or after I have my Lambrusco. It could sour my wine! :wacko:


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 25, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> Riding the Southwest Chief later this week to hear this band at Denver. Check out "Empress of Wyoming."


I'm jealous! I just rode the SWC twice last month and swore it would be my last train ride because of my overal personal experience on this trip, but here I am getting jealous again already! Is it hopelessly in my blood and is there no cure for me? :huh: If anyone has an antidote, please share it with me... I'M DESPERATE!


----------



## AlanB (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> Boy, what a trip down memory lane. You're right. That was the person behind the air-conditioned glass with the room-sized computers scurrying reels (remember the first discs- more like luncheon platters) around. Let's not forget that computer screens came in one version. No graphics. No font style choices. Color? Hah! Nothing entertaining. You didn't spend hours hanging around a computer. There was little fun to be had doing so.


You have got to be kidding! :blink:

I spent hours hanging around just such a computer in college. It took me the better part of 6 months to finally crack and win one of the best, and first computer games ever written (in Fortran by the way, and I've still got a printout of the source code), Adventure. It ran on my college's Univac series 60/70 IIRC the number correctly. It was actually an RCA mainframe that was taken over by Univac when RCA got out of the mainframe business. I used to fight for one of the 16 terminals just to play that game.

And by the way, I never bribbed the sysop to run my cards. I dumped the cards after my first program and learned to use the few teletypes and terminals that were available. Of course I also knew how to run my own cards through the machine too, and in fact would sometimes cover for the student assigned to run the machine when he/she needed a restroom break.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 25, 2008)

Guest said:


> GML, I'm a CPA with a long life around numbers, computers (before you were born!) and solving problems (apparently a lot better problem solver than those that answered the original posts :lol: ). I frequently ask some of the computer junky accountants what they would do if the electricity went off. I AM positive that some would freeze because they don't know the basics. The output stinks, yet they think it's a masterpiece of fine accounting because they've mastered the program. They can't recognize an appropriately- prepared, simple Cost of Goods schedule. I then have to teach them the fundamentals by constantly correcting their work (using the same computer programs) AND remind them again and again, it's just a tool. Don't focus on the tool. Focus on the product and the end user. BTW, it's not just the newbie grads who do this, it can be those who are mired in "appearances". It may enhance your life or it may not. I learned to be a bookkeeper as a young teenager on something called a Burrough's bookkeeping machine and was taught by an elderly lady who thought it was the cat's meow (sounds a little like you!). You could anchor a small ship with its weight. (Ask one of the elders in your community about it, I'm sure someone is familiar with it.) It, too, was just a tool. It doubled as a work out machine. In our times, the technology will continue to change. Expect it. But think of it only as a tool for a purpose. I'm looking forward to the next wave.


You are talking to the only person who graduated my high school, I think, that still knew how to do long division after they started letting us use calculators. Using a computer is an important tool for advancing in this world, even a needed one. I am not advocating that people stop learning how to exist without them. Putting words in my mouth is a habbit of yours. Please kick it.



Guest said:


> Trust me, the computer as it sits in front of you will soon be a dinosaur. Live your life as though it is (unless its workings are your source of income). Let's back up a little. The candidate doesn't have to know all about computers or even use one. He just needs to know their significance. His focus should be a lot larger than single issues.


Ya know, George Washington was a great man. So was Abe Lincoln. Infact, Lincoln was probably the most intelligent man ever to run this country. I wouldn't vote for them now. They don't know enough about the world. They don't know how to get around todays world. Neither, it seems, does McCain.



Guest said:


> On the sox-outside-of-marriage (OOM) issue. In my house that stuff (OOM) by my spouse would be a very real issue that would threaten the future and cause distrust issues. If Clinton wanted to tie Hillary to a bedpost _and_ she was in agreement, THAT would be between them. Don't forget the perjury. Nothing in her body language indicated that she was in agreement with his actions and I doubt that their marriage VOWS (look that one up) allowed this. The lack of trustworthiness is a reflection of his character and a person's character is part of the qualification for the Office of the Presidency. John Edwards, IMO, needs to get an occupation digging ditches. That low-life is so outta public life because of this subject. Would YOU trust him? All we need now is that Washington woman named Fanny something or other and her fountain dipping beau, Wilbur something or other to liven things up.


Gee, I get to say it twice in one post. Stop putting words in my mouth. Cheating is not acceptable, is never acceptable, and frankly, I uphold the ten commandments here. The fact of the matter is, whether he cheats or not is entirely irrelevant to defense budget spending patterns. Thats all I said.



Guest said:


> And. Just as garbage in produces garbage out, I would never rely on a Google search for anything serious. Entertaining, yes. For example, it astounds me that anyone would take an investment blog seriously unless a credentialed reputation were on the line. Make sure that you always check the credentials of your sources. I surely do not want my President relying on Google for his advice (although it sounds like what some of his advisors may have been doing). I want the geeks, the ones who've spent their whole lives engaged in the subject and putting their reputations on the line who have something to lose when they're wrong, under his wing.


I don't rely on google for anything other than a search engine. It finds things, and its my job to determine its accuracy. Something I am generally good at doing, and the main reason I compare data from more than one source. You don't need to ramble on and on in lecture about things I already know, another annoying habit of yours.


----------



## Sam Damon (Aug 26, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Sam Damon said:
> 
> 
> > 25 years ago, the policy-makers and bean-counters only saw numbers needing cutting.
> ...


Good luck.

I've seen from the posts in this debate just what a lack of perspective many well-meaning people have. It is all too easy for us to forget just what sort of dynamic drove the creation of the US National Defense & Interstate Highway system in the first place.

The railroads were hated. Businessmen hated their monopoly on transportation. Rural folks hated the railroad monopoly on transportation. The ICC had Byzantine rules in place that made changing a freight or passenger tariff difficult at best. The unions involved with railroads fought technology. The railroad managers failed to realize they were in the transportation business. There were enough ex-GIs out there who had seen Hitler's _Autobahns_ to desire an American version. Out of all this came the present dependence of the USA on the automobile.

I would suggest to all participating in this debate to grasp this perspective, before plugging intercity passenger trains to our fellow citizens in the USA. Not everyone is enamored of taking trains anywhere on a daily basis, especially outside the coasts (Chicago is the glaring exception).

The bottom line is that to replace automobiles, you have to have people re-imagine what I would suggest was the more livable urban design of mid-20th century America.


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 26, 2008)

Sam Damon said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > Sam Damon said:
> ...


Your historical analysis is completely right - but that doesn't mean it still applies now, or will dictate our future.

I love my automobiles - I'm currently driving a Prius - but that doesn't mean I don't also love trains. I'd certainly rather take the train from NY to Washington or even Philadelphia, than drive. And, if I could get to Chicago in 12 hours by rail, I'd do that, as well, rather than fly.

Nowadays, the train is more likely to replace the plane for some kinds of travel, than the automobile, and that's a good place to start. Clearly, right after WWII, planes for domestic transportation were not yet in the picture in a major way.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 26, 2008)

I love my car. 'fact, I got two of them. A '95 Mercedes-Benz E300D Diesel and a '79 Mercedes-Benz 300SD Turbodiesel. I still say that rail is the future and sometimes you need persuade people to make changes for their own good.


----------



## D.P. Roberts (Aug 26, 2008)

Did anyone catch the closing ceremonies for the Olympics? When it came time for the British to introduce London's 1012 Olympic games, they brought in what they considered to be one of London's greatest symbols - the red double-decker bus. What American city would introduce itself with a form of public transportation? The _cultural_ objections most Americans have to public transportation are just as important - or more so - than the technological ones.

If we loved public transportation, we'd build trains and ride buses, and develop our cities around them. Instead, we love cars, and our country has been developed accordingly. As some people have said, we've been developing our country based on cars and cheap gas for the last 70-80 years - it may take another 70-80 years to undo that.


----------



## PaulLev (Aug 26, 2008)

D.P. Roberts said:


> Did anyone catch the closing ceremonies for the Olympics? When it came time for the British to introduce London's 1012 Olympic games, they brought in what they considered to be one of London's greatest symbols - the red double-decker bus. What American city would introduce itself with a form of public transportation? The _cultural_ objections most Americans have to public transportation are just as important - or more so - than the technological ones.
> If we loved public transportation, we'd build trains and ride buses, and develop our cities around them. Instead, we love cars, and our country has been developed accordingly. As some people have said, we've been developing our country based on cars and cheap gas for the last 70-80 years - it may take another 70-80 years to undo that.


Not undo - build upon and integrate.


----------



## Neil_M (Aug 26, 2008)

Not really my place to comment on another countries elections, but I will say this. To those who rave about "service" and "sacrifice" for your country, do you think that keep on sending your young men and women to die for a war that is at best morally dubious, at worst illegal and a war crime is a good thing? Iraq has dragged on longer than WW2, with no real end in sight.If people chose to make that service and sacrifice then surely it is the Governments responsibility to only use that when absolutely necessary and not to throw it away for cheap political purposes. The only glorious victory you can hope to achieve is to go home in dignity. Sometimes it is ok to admit you were wrong and you mad a mistake rather than keep on the same old, same old.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Aug 26, 2008)

The old lie: Dulce et decorum est, pro patria mori.


----------



## Guest (Aug 26, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > GML, I'm a CPA with a long life around numbers, computers (before you were born!) and solving problems (apparently a lot better problem solver than those that answered the original posts :lol: ). I frequently ask some of the computer junky accountants what they would do if the electricity went off. I AM positive that some would freeze because they don't know the basics. The output stinks, yet they think it's a masterpiece of fine accounting because they've mastered the program. They can't recognize an appropriately- prepared, simple Cost of Goods schedule. I then have to teach them the fundamentals by constantly correcting their work (using the same computer programs) AND remind them again and again, it's just a tool. Don't focus on the tool. Focus on the product and the end user. BTW, it's not just the newbie grads who do this, it can be those who are mired in "appearances". It may enhance your life or it may not. I learned to be a bookkeeper as a young teenager on something called a Burrough's bookkeeping machine and was taught by an elderly lady who thought it was the cat's meow (sounds a little like you!). You could anchor a small ship with its weight. (Ask one of the elders in your community about it, I'm sure someone is familiar with it.) It, too, was just a tool. It doubled as a work out machine. In our times, the technology will continue to change. Expect it. But think of it only as a tool for a purpose. I'm looking forward to the next wave.
> ...


Why don't you move past telling others how to post? (Again, the little back arrow in the upper left corner of your keyboard will give you a better day if this annoys you.)You have this annoying habit of telling others that they are silly and implying that they, not you, need to change. I don't know what you know or don't know (and like you, don't really care). You've so much stated that your goal in life is to keep stress at bay. You appear stressed in your writing. Telling others to change isn't going to help. Changing yourself will.

At your age you may be too young to understand the value of a strong and consistent character. A man of Mr. McCain's age and experience has a pretty good understanding of the world. God help us if his main strength were to be computers. He probably drives a car as well. Do you expect him to understand how it works?

I don't believe that you understand the character issue. You're too narrowly focused. Go back and read some of Washington and Lincoln's speeches. They met the challenges of their day just as McCain and Obama will now. I see in Mr. Obama a man that will get burned by the real world and the boundaries under which he will have to operate once he discovers them. I don't see a man that has been genuinely tested and proven his mettle.


----------



## Guest (Aug 26, 2008)

Neil_M said:


> Not really my place to comment on another countries elections, but I will say this. To those who rave about "service" and "sacrifice" for your country, do you think that keep on sending your young men and women to die for a war that is at best morally dubious, at worst illegal and a war crime is a good thing? Iraq has dragged on longer than WW2, with no real end in sight.If people chose to make that service and sacrifice then surely it is the Governments responsibility to only use that when absolutely necessary and not to throw it away for cheap political purposes. The only glorious victory you can hope to achieve is to go home in dignity. Sometimes it is ok to admit you were wrong and you mad a mistake rather than keep on the same old, same old.


Neil, I wish the war were as simple as you make it to be. But it isn't and there's no way to address (once again) your thoughts on this forum.


----------



## Guest (Aug 26, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Boy, what a trip down memory lane. You're right. That was the person behind the air-conditioned glass with the room-sized computers scurrying reels (remember the first discs- more like luncheon platters) around. Let's not forget that computer screens came in one version. No graphics. No font style choices. Color? Hah! Nothing entertaining. You didn't spend hours hanging around a computer. There was little fun to be had doing so.
> ...


..written like the geek that you are  ! Those system names sound familiar and the setup recognizable. The place gave me a headache and all I wanted was out of there. Business students were usually writing simple payroll or database programs.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 26, 2008)

Sam Damon said:


> There were enough ex-GIs out there who had seen Hitler's _Autobahns_ to desire an American version. Out of all this came the present dependence of the USA on the automobile.


But at this point, my understanding is that the airlines in Europe don't even bother to offer flights on routes where trains are available that take about three hours or less, and Europeans aren't nearly as bothered by gas prices as Americans because they typically don't need an automobile to get where they're going.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 26, 2008)

PaulLev said:


> I love my automobiles - I'm currently driving a Prius - but that doesn't mean I don't also love trains. I'd certainly rather take the train from NY to Washington or even Philadelphia, than drive. And, if I could get to Chicago in 12 hours by rail, I'd do that, as well, rather than fly.


Chicago to New York City is 790 highway miles. If we merely caught up with the 300 km/h technology the French have had for a few decades now, you could make that trip in under 5 hours. If we can get trains running at 300 MPH for nearly the whole trip, it should be doable in three hours. I suspect the capital investment per rider may end up being less at three hours than at twelve.


----------



## transit54 (Aug 26, 2008)

D.P. Roberts said:


> Did anyone catch the closing ceremonies for the Olympics? When it came time for the British to introduce London's 1012 Olympic games, they brought in what they considered to be one of London's greatest symbols - the red double-decker bus. What American city would introduce itself with a form of public transportation?


New York. Having grown up about an hour outside of the city, the subway is an inseparable part of the city for me, and I think for many others. But outside of New York, I can't think of any others. Of course, I consider NYC to be one of the very few cities in the US that "gets it" as far as transit is concerned. And their system has its flaws too, but so does every other. You have to remember that NYC is the only city in the entire world that runs its full rapid transit system 24 hours. Some cities have one or a handful of 24 hour lines, but New York is the only one that runs the full system constantly.


----------



## MrFSS (Aug 26, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> The old lie: Dulce et decorum est, pro patria mori.


Or, even better:

_Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori, sed dulcius pro patria vivere, et dulcissimum pro patria bibere. Ergo, bibamus pro salute patriae._


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 26, 2008)

Guest said:


> Neil_M said:
> 
> 
> > Not really my place to comment on another countries elections, but I will say this. To those who rave about "service" and "sacrifice" for your country, do you think that keep on sending your young men and women to die for a war that is at best morally dubious, at worst illegal and a war crime is a good thing? Iraq has dragged on longer than WW2, with no real end in sight.If people chose to make that service and sacrifice then surely it is the Governments responsibility to only use that when absolutely necessary and not to throw it away for cheap political purposes. The only glorious victory you can hope to achieve is to go home in dignity. Sometimes it is ok to admit you were wrong and you mad a mistake rather than keep on the same old, same old.
> ...


Guest, I wish there were more people that think like you do. I don't remember a single incident where I can disagree with you. I'm sure that there is probably at least one somewhere if I dig deep.

The reason that I say that "I wish there were more people that think like you" is because our country is being burdened by a growing imbalanced percentage of so-called well educated liberal thinking people. For many years now our universities have had a so-called creative thinkiing element built into their curriculums and that process has taken a slow road in morphing into a liberal, secular and progressive think tank of liberal thinking. Over time this has led to the creation of a lob-sided balance of educators to the favor of liberalism.

Today the balance is so out of wack and opposing points of view discouraged that students in many cases are intentionally getting a skewed view of life and it's issues and don't have much of a chance of learning all sides of life and issues that would permit them to decide on issues for themselves. In a way you can parallel this by saying that if you were born and educated in say Mexico, it's more unlikely than likely that you will be fluently bilingual in both spanish and english. The same goes for many of our youth with the college education they're getting today! I've even seen signs of it in my son who graduated cum Laude from the State University of New York. After some talks with him he has moved from slightly left to the center. I don't really care if he moves further to the right, but I'm at least happy that he can now think freely and clearly for himself on the issues and not solely on an ideology!

To see what I'm talking about here all one needs to do is look at that so-called University of Colorado x-professor Ward Churchill. He was so bad that the College had to reluctantly get rid of him; but he's only the tip of the iceburger and I don't expect in my lifetime that I will ever see an unbiased balance in our institutions of higher learning! All I can hope for is that the trend does reverse itself toward free thinking without bias in either direction.

When I was growing up I used to hear my father (now 87) who was not educated enough to read or write, comment about our next door neighbor. That neighbor was educated and became an engineer with General Electric and my father used to say that if he (my father) had to be as stupid as our neighbor, that he was glad that he never made it past the 1st grade! Although I don't fully agree with that statement, it did however show that there is more wisdom with the uneducated than one would think! At least he was wise enought to have raised me a lot better (of course I wouldn't say otherwise) than many a so-called college educated fathers have raised their offspring!

Now I'm sure that some resident liberal professor, educator or high school teacher (it happens in HS too) will want to chime in and educate us on our wayward thinking, but that's a burden that all us free and logical thinkers will need to endure from time to time. But we at least, still have the freedom to ignore if we chose!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 26, 2008)

Guest said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Guest said:
> ...


Geek? I guess that I wasn't a geek! When I was a computer operator back in ancient times (used a chizel and stone to process) I had nightmares during my first year. I had the large IBM tape drives coming at me in my sleep and would wake up in a sweat! We had about 16 of them and had to change the tapes every time we went down - which over 10 times a day wasn't unusual back then. So instead of a geek you can say I was freaked!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 26, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Chicago to New York City is 790 highway miles. If we merely caught up with the 300 km/h technology the French have had for a few decades now, you could make that trip in under 5 hours.


*LOOK OUT ELSIE!!!*


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 26, 2008)

MrFSS said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > The old lie: Dulce et decorum est, pro patria mori.
> ...


  yEA rIGHT and "E Pluribus Unum" too!!! I don't know what most of those words mean, but they look and sound appitizing!

I took french, not latin... and I can't speak french either! 8)


----------



## MrFSS (Aug 26, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> > WhoozOn1st said:
> ...


"It is sweet to die for the homeland, but it is sweeter to live for the homeland, and the sweetest to drink for it. Therefore, let us drink to the health of the homeland." It was a frequent 19th century students' toast.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 26, 2008)

MrFSS said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > MrFSS said:
> ...


Thank you for the interpertation. I guess that college priorities back in the 19 century are the same as they are today:


BEER

BEER

EVERYTHING ELSE!

______  ______


----------



## wayman (Aug 26, 2008)

Guest said:


> Railroads are good but as the ****s discovered, they can be used for evil purposes. So, guys, get it in perspective. Get the right guy in the office and then use the power of the pen to get Amtrak permanently funded.


Wow. I've been without internet for a few days until this morning, and read through the other politics thread on this forum before this one. I was already dismayed with the entire forum by that point, but as I already had tabs open for several other threads including this one I figured I'd skim through them. Big mistake, I guess.

I never thought I'd see a thread ON AN AMTRAK DISCUSSION BOARD hit Godwin's Law. ("As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving ****s or Hitler approaches one.")

Poster above, I'm not singling you out or blaming you specifically; I'm pretty much saddened by everyone, whose combined behavior built up to this--even the people whose arguments I agree with (of whom there are many).

Yes, there are many, many non-political threads here, and I could pretty easily ignore forum threads with anything political in the subject line. Henceforth, I will--don't take my inactivity as an indicator that I don't have opinions on the matter, but merely that I have no interest in discussing them here any further, or reading any more of y'alls. Everyone's entitled to their views, and regardless of whether I agree with them I defend your right to hold and express those views; but frankly, at this point I know all of your views, and reading them for a sixth time won't enrich my life.

What I'm really worried about is the LA Gathering: in-person conversations are rarely segregated with clearly-identifiable (and avoidable) subject lines, and a month before a major election, pretty much any conversation could devolve into a powder keg like this. Also, in-person gatherings don't really have "moderators" in the same way that the online forum does. I think many of us will find that political debate as we've seen here dampens or ruins a weekend we've looked forward to for months and put a lot of care and planning into. (Well, ok, maybe folks who were big into debate in high school or college would enjoy those powder kegs, but seriously, I think that would ruin the Gathering for a lot of us.)

Is this avoidable? I offer that an open question for everyone here to consider, as my final thought on this matter.

[if this thought has already been expressed and addressed by others, my apologies--I stopped reading this thread entirely with the post I quoted above, with several pages left unread.]


----------



## Neil_M (Aug 26, 2008)

Guest said:


> Neil_M said:
> 
> 
> > Not really my place to comment on another countries elections, but I will say this. To those who rave about "service" and "sacrifice" for your country, do you think that keep on sending your young men and women to die for a war that is at best morally dubious, at worst illegal and a war crime is a good thing? Iraq has dragged on longer than WW2, with no real end in sight.If people chose to make that service and sacrifice then surely it is the Governments responsibility to only use that when absolutely necessary and not to throw it away for cheap political purposes. The only glorious victory you can hope to achieve is to go home in dignity. Sometimes it is ok to admit you were wrong and you mad a mistake rather than keep on the same old, same old.
> ...


War is generally a few idiots not being able to back down and everyone else getting to do the dirty work.

The war in Iraq is very simple. Its based around lies, oil, mistruths and finishing off daddy's unfinished business.

How long do you consider it necessary to keep sending your young men and women to a grim death for no real reason and no real end in sight?

Do you need a President who wants to keep on giving people democracy at the point of a gun? Another 4 more years of endless deaths? Did you see those Germans cheering Mr Obama? What would they have done if GWB had turned up? Wouldn't it be nice for America to be liked again? Or are you happy for the 'land of the free' to be associated with orange jump suits, captivity without trial and illegal invasions of countries that might have oil and whose political system or leader don't fit the bill?

There are other ways to deal with people, and it is acceptable for other people to not want to be a satellite state of the US and you don't have to kill them for that. Other points of view are available (and acceptable).

If you wanted to be really way out, you could stop giving the military money for a month and spend it on something more positive instead! h34r:


----------



## VentureForth (Aug 26, 2008)

I wonder if there is anyway to know...

How many Democrats went to the Convention in Denver by train?


----------



## JayPea (Aug 26, 2008)

Religion and politicis are two subjects guaranteed to cause friction. I was, personally, absolutely disgusted with politics after the very divisive 2004 election. Especially by the bloggers who started their spiel on the "stupidity" of anyone who didn't vote their way. To me what's stupid is calling someone else stupid. If I want someone to at least consider my position on something, insulting them seems to me to be the LEAST effective way to accomplish this.

I, too, have my definite opinions on all things political, but, especially after the last election, for the most part keep them to myself. Gutless??? Perhaps. Spineless???? Maybe. I just don't care to be skewered just because of what I believe. Therefore, for the most part, I shut up.


----------



## AlanB (Aug 26, 2008)

Neil_M said:


> The war in Iraq is very simple. Its based around lies, oil, mistruths and finishing off daddy's unfinished business.


Ok, I've remained largely silent in this discussion so far, but I can't let that one pass unchallenged. Jr. is not finishing off Daddy's unfinished business. Daddy, unlike Jr., actually understood the rules of international policy. George Bush Sr. was asked by the UN to free a sovereign country, Kuwait, which had asked the UN for help after the illegal invasion of their country by Iraq. Bush Sr. responded with American troops in Desert Storm, and with the support of most of the world, including many Arab countries. In fact, Saudi Arabia allowed us to stage troops there to prepare for Desert Storm.

Bush Sr. did exactly what the UN asked us to do, free Kuwait. He got to the border of Iraq, and he stopped at that border because he knew that he had not been asked to invade Iraq or to deal with Saddam. Bush Sr. did the right thing under International law and the charter of the UN. He was pretty soundly criticized in this country and in fact I believe that it was one of two factors that cost him reelection to a second term. But again, I stress that he did the right thing!

George Bush Jr. however failed to learn from daddy. He stood up in front of the world and in effect told Saddam "You had better obey the UN and allow the search teams in or I'm going to do an end run around the UN (by not asking for permission that he knew he wouldn't get) and force you to comply with the UN's resolutions.” He went in without a UN mandate, without the support of the UN, without permission from the UN, without the support of 90% of the free world and of course without any support from the non-free world. The invasion of Iraq in a word was, illegal, under International law and the UN Charter that the US helped to draft.

Why Jr. failed to learn from Sr. may well be a source of debate for years to come, but he did.

And I'm not saying that Saddam wasn't a problem, the man was a tyrant and a murderer. I've no doubt that eventually we would have needed to go in. But the US can't be the world's policeman, if we're not going to follow the collective will of the world. The US can’t expect the rest of the world to obey the UN, if the US is going to thumb its nose at the UN.

So now, sadly, with each passing day good men and women in our armed services loose their lives in Iraq. These people are paying the ultimate sacrifice in a war that shouldn’t have happened, or at least it shouldn’t have happened in the manner that it did. I mourn that loss of life each day and have nothing but praise for those still over there fighting and making sacrifices in many different ways, not just with their lives.


----------



## transit54 (Aug 26, 2008)

Back to the original topic at hand - the Washington Post has a great piece on Biden and Amtrak today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8082603569.html

Including a quote which gave me a good laugh:

_Most often in recent years, Biden has taken the No. 2103, which leaves Wilmington at 7:35 a.m. and pulls into Union Station -- barring delays -- at 8:55 a.m. (Amtrak has become a recurring character in the hearings Biden participates in. "Gentlemen, I apologize," he told a Judiciary Committee hearing in 1996 when he showed up late. "One of those things that I keep telling my colleagues: If they fully funded Amtrak, I would not be late. [Pause.] And some suggest that's why they don't fully fund Amtrak.")_


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 27, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Neil_M said:
> 
> 
> > The war in Iraq is very simple. Its based around lies, oil, mistruths and finishing off daddy's unfinished business.
> ...


Alan,

Your presentation is quite elequent, some of it I agree with, some I don't but I want to thank you for challenging the mistruths that have been propgated here. There are some points however that I too want to make, one of which is frequently ignored by opponents of the war, one of a frequently presented mistruth and the other that is never brought up that I'm aware of. They are:


There were 10 years and 17, yes 17 ignored resolutions passed by the UN. It was also very apparent to the world that the UN was a weak impotent body that was only good for pushing paper (a paper tiger if you will) and a body that would in all likelyhood never have acted even if there were as many as 100 resolutions. And why? Because there were nations, like Russia for instance, on the security council that would have never ever jeapordized the lucrative business arrangements they had with Iraq and many other nations that are not our friends. 
 
Now talking and negotiatin is first and foremost the way to go, but there also has to be a point that you have to do more than talk and keep issuing meaningless resolutions until the cows come home. Simply put, when is enough enough? 20 years? 50 years? 100 years? 
 
Look at it this way, if you (US) and a group of acquaintances (nations of the world) are walking down the street and the neighborhood bully (Iraq) who has been harrasing and hurting one of your aquaintances suddenly starts beating him mercylessly, would you and the other neighborhood aquaintences just stand around and do nothing to help defend that person because most of the other aquintences just stand there afraid to do anything, or would you have the courage to take the lead to try and help him even if no one or few follow to help? If you say of course you would jump in, then you are doing exactly what George W. Bush had the courage to do!
.

And forget about the weapons of mass destructions issue. It hasen't been proved that Bush had intellegence that differed from what the rest of the congress had when they decided to support Bush's actions! It's NOT A LIE when you find out after the fact that something was not as you thought it was no matter how much political opponants what you to believe otherwise! And don't even bring up that he made mistakes afterward! I'll answer that one right here up front... yes he did make mistakes, but he is only human like everyone else. He is after all our president and as such he is subject to criticisms - truthful criticisms. However, our president should alsos be supported by his country and not be undermined like he was for the sake of partisan politics.
.

This last item is something that makes me wonder why no one ever talks about it. Following Desert Storm's defeat of the Iraq army following the invasion into Kuwait, a no fly zone was established in the southern area of the country to protect Kuwait and possibly Saudi Arabia from future attacks. It wasn't long before Sadam starting thumbing his nose at and taunting the US who was officially the air guardian of the no fly zone. The violations kept getting more frequent and more daring and the previous president as best as I know did little about it. Then Comes George W, followed by 9-11 and way too many UN resolutions and you know the rest. So again I say, when is enough enough?

Now as someone previously told me, "I'm not going to change anyones mind," but I do believe that some people who do maintain an open mind and can change their opinions, and that there are some people who have made up their minds no matter what, and there are also some people who would like to see speach suppressed when facts and opinions that differ from their own are presented. (dont confuse this last statement with my previous request to close this topic. That request was made because it was becoming apparant that I was being singled out along with one other person because our political beliefs differered from the other two posters involved)

Again thank you for providing me a reason for expressing my thoughts especially No. 3!


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 27, 2008)

rnizlek said:


> Back to the original topic at hand - the Washington Post has a great piece on Biden and Amtrak today:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8082603569.html
> 
> Including a quote which gave me a good laugh:
> ...


That is funny! Knowing now how Biden supports Amtrak I just might have considered voting for him if he were the presidential candidate or even if he was VP with Hillary being the candidate. But with Senator Biden carring and unqualified nominee on his back... I DON'T THINK SO! The position is just too important to fill any Johnny Come Lately into it!


----------



## dan72 (Aug 27, 2008)

Sam Damon said:


> Here's the thing, sports fans.
> Some of Amtrak's biggest cuts occurred under the *Carter* administration. Those cuts IMO, really crippled the national system, leaving us fewer options on the table that we need NOW.
> 
> 25 years ago, the policy-makers and bean-counters only saw numbers needing cutting.
> ...


Here! Here!

And let's not forget the fact that Clinton/Gore promised the moon on passenger rail and gave us nada, nothing, zippo. In fact, cuts took place under the Clinton administration and that hideous self-sufficiency act was signed under his watch which started the 'glidepath' debacle that Amtrak is still paying for to this day.

Amtrak has had bi-partisan support in congress and to say one party supports it over another is simply ignoring facts and therefore does not lend itself to a truly honest debate.

I don't mean to be singling out Clinton/Gore here, but it is an example of when it comes to politicians, talk is cheap and I'll believe things when I see 'em.

Dan


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 27, 2008)

dan72 said:


> Sam Damon said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the thing, sports fans.
> ...


Double Here Here Dan!

Your words echo what I've previously indicated, that regardless of who is elected president, it will have little effect on how Amtrak is later treated. Lawmakers are motivated by their party's idology first, followed by self interests then cross party involvement last. For Amtrak funding to improve as it should it's going to take public pressure and a strong advocacy as well as more bi-partisan cooperation! Using the famous words of Spock, "Live long and prosper" Amtrak :excl:


----------



## dan72 (Aug 27, 2008)

One thing I wanted to add here concerning McCain's choice for VP. One person that is getting a lot of buzz right now is Tim Pawlenty, the governor here in MN. Although a pretty conservative guy, he has been a pretty consistent supporter for public transportation. If McCain were to get it, it could offset his stance on Amtrak -- maybe. Again, I'm not holding my breath as I would turn blue and pass out. 

Dan


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 27, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> 1)There were 10 years and 17, yes 17 ignored resolutions passed by the UN. It was also very apparent to the world that the UN was a weak impotent body that was only good for pushing paper (a paper tiger if you will) and a body that would in all likelyhood never have acted even if there were as many as 100 resolutions. And why? Because there were nations, like Russia for instance, on the security council that would have never ever jeapordized the lucrative business arrangements they had with Iraq and many other nations that are not our friends.
> Now talking and negotiatin is first and foremost the way to go, but there also has to be a point that you have to do more than talk and keep issuing meaningless resolutions until the cows come home. Simply put, when is enough enough? 20 years? 50 years? 100 years?
> 
> Look at it this way, if you (US) and a group of acquaintances (nations of the world) are walking down the street and the neighborhood bully (Iraq) who has been harrasing and hurting one of your aquaintances suddenly starts beating him mercylessly, would you and the other neighborhood aquaintences just stand around and do nothing to help defend that person because most of the other aquintences just stand there afraid to do anything, or would you have the courage to take the lead to try and help him even if no one or few follow to help? If you say of course you would jump in, then you are doing exactly what George W. Bush had the courage to do!


The point is, you can't have it both ways. Either everyone, including you, has to listen to the UN, or nobody does. "Mom says don't eat from the cookie jar! I SWEAR I WILL EAT ALL THE COOKIES IF YOU KEEP THIS UP!"



sky12065 said:


> 2) And forget about the weapons of mass destructions issue. It hasen't been proved that Bush had intellegence that differed from what the rest of the congress had when they decided to support Bush's actions! It's NOT A LIE when you find out after the fact that something was not as you thought it was no matter how much political opponants what you to believe otherwise! And don't even bring up that he made mistakes afterward! I'll answer that one right here up front... yes he did make mistakes, but he is only human like everyone else. He is after all our president and as such he is subject to criticisms - truthful criticisms. However, our president should alsos be supported by his country and not be undermined like he was for the sake of partisan politics.


There is lying. And then there is boldly going forth reading what you want to read. "I just drove here." You can read that to believe the person quoted is a car fanatic because they drive, etc. Or you can simply accept the fact that the person arrived in a vehicle that is operated by a person on a road. Which is all it actually says. Bush committed us to a war by reading and assuming a lot of things that simply turned out not to be accurate. That is not responsible of him, period.

Second, he claimed tons of WMDs and what not. He was wrong. He was flat out wrong. But did he say, to the nation, as this "courageous" man we elected, "My fellow Americans, one of the reasons we went into this war was because I believed something was there, and it wasn't. I'm sorry." I mean he could even have tacked on some downplay involving how much good we accomplished with it and I'd respect him more. I screw up. I do it quite often, actually. I always admit it, and if someone was hurt by it, I apologize. I expect no less of our leader.



sky12065 said:


> 3) This last item is something that makes me wonder why no one ever talks about it. Following Desert Storm's defeat of the Iraq army following the invasion into Kuwait, a no fly zone was established in the southern area of the country to protect Kuwait and possibly Saudi Arabia from future attacks. It wasn't long before Sadam starting thumbing his nose at and taunting the US who was officially the air guardian of the no fly zone. The violations kept getting more frequent and more daring and the previous president as best as I know did little about it. Then Comes George W, followed by 9-11 and way too many UN resolutions and you know the rest. So again I say, when is enough enough?


Saddam had just as much right to thumb his nose at the UN as we do. We aren't special. We aren't kindly. We aren't benevolent. We aren't humanitarians. We don't have a god given right to do what we want in the face of opposition any more than Hussein did. Crooks go free if our police don't follow the laws that govern how they should do their job. That is what we have decided to base our system on. On the unwavering belief of government of the people, for the people, by the people. And on the the inalienable human rights of any individual, including the right to not be tortured into self incrimination.

Hobbling system, I know. Quite often not fair for victims. All that. I know. Were I crowned king of the world, with unmitigated, absolute power, there would be some changes around here, let me tell you. I personally think they'd be for the good of all man kind. The main one is that if a lawyer chooses to defend someone, and they turn up guilty, they get punished the same as the guilty. But thats besides the point.

I'm not absolute dictator of the world, and neither is George W. Bush. He has rules he has to follow, inconvenient or not. The people's representatives, the congress of the United States, chose some time ago to belong as members of a world governing body, the United Nations. Last time I checked, they did not vote to secede from it. That means we are bound by the rules and regulations entailed in being a member of it, like it or not. Maybe its desirable to invade Iraq. Maybe its desirable for me to mug somebody and make some money. Doesn't mean I can do it, because it is illegal. (Not to mention wrong!)

Hypocrisy is the worst scourge of humanity, and anyone who perpetuates it on a grand scale deserves to be boiled in oil. Unfortunately, that is cruel and unusual, so I guess we'll just have to hang them.



sky12065 said:


> Now as someone previously told me, "I'm not going to change anyones mind," but I do believe that some people who do maintain an open mind and can change their opinions, and that there are some people who have made up their minds no matter what, and there are also some people who would like to see speach suppressed when facts and opinions that differ from their own are presented. (dont confuse this last statement with my previous request to close this topic. That request was made because it was becoming apparant that I was being singled out along with one other person because our political beliefs differered from the other two posters involved)
> Again thank you for providing me a reason for expressing my thoughts especially No. 3!


If you come up with something that is convincing, you'll convince me. Of that I promise you.



dan72 said:


> Here! Here!
> And let's not forget the fact that Clinton/Gore promised the moon on passenger rail and gave us nada, nothing, zippo. In fact, cuts took place under the Clinton administration and that hideous self-sufficiency act was signed under his watch which started the 'glidepath' debacle that Amtrak is still paying for to this day.
> 
> Amtrak has had bi-partisan support in congress and to say one party supports it over another is simply ignoring facts and therefore does not lend itself to a truly honest debate.
> ...


I dunno other people, but its not that McCain is a republican that bothers me. He could be a member of the HooberGoober policy and I'd feel the same way. McCain, with regard to Amtrak, has displayed quite a history of not supporting it, personally. Biden has, as has Obama. On this issue, as with most others, I go with the track record. I remember the kid who got elected in my school council by promising soda would be free. Yeah. Right.


----------



## Guest (Aug 27, 2008)

_I never thought I'd see a thread ON AN AMTRAK DISCUSSION BOARD hit Godwin's Law. As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving ****s or Hitler approaches one._

You say that as though mentioning an atrocity is a bad thing. Going back to earlier history it was common to pile up rocks at a special place so that those who passed it again would remember the events that occurred there and pass it down.

I don't know (or care, once again) who Godwin was and find Wiki an interesting and potentially very biased experience in collective _opinions_, but I do know H* survivors, personally. It SHOULD be referenced. It was quite possibly the most horrific event of the last century and yet there are many who want to silence those who refer to it as a real occurence and among us in _this country _ are people who believe in the supremacy of one race. It should be passed down to every generation as an occasion of what happens when assumptions are made and when people look the other way. And YES, those rails were used for evil purposes.


----------



## sky12065 (Aug 27, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > 1)There were 10 years and 17, yes 17 ignored resolutions passed by the UN. It was also very apparent to the world that the UN was a weak impotent body that was only good for pushing paper (a paper tiger if you will) and a body that would in all likelyhood never have acted even if there were as many as 100 resolutions. And why? Because there were nations, like Russia for instance, on the security council that would have never ever jeapordized the lucrative business arrangements they had with Iraq and many other nations that are not our friends.
> ...


I will respond to your responses by simply saying that I will let my words stand against yours. People are intellegent and can think for them selves and make their own conclusions. They need not respond openly to these issues, but think they should, think about what you have written and what I have written and be truthful to themselves in those conclusions! Thank you for your perspective and have a nice day.


----------



## Anthony (Aug 27, 2008)

I may become unpopular by doing this, but I am going to close this thread now. It has long outlived its usefulness and pertinence. Start a new thread on something else Amtrak-related, and hopefully it will not end up entirely overcome by politics that have nothing to do with Amtrak, its leadership, direction, or federal subsidies.


----------

