Posted on 06/18/2010 2:39:45 AM PDT by Scanian
President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.
That's a Harvard University study's estimate of the per-gallon price of the president's global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.
So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?
Good question, because such measures wouldn't do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.
The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's now-famous words, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste -- and what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
If you've ever read Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals (aka The Obama Bible)" you would understand Willies behavior.
What do you expect? Willie is a socialist.
Throw that crook out!
Not to mention that for most short-to-mid distance trips the bus is faster, and much more flexible.
Buses are OK for college students looking for a cheap way to get home for semester break. Or for senile citizens needing low budget transportation to the bingo casinos where they can squander their SS checks more slowly. But those buses have very cramped seating, and the on-board restroom is appalling.
Amtrak passenger accommodations are MUCH more spacious and enjoyable in every way imaginable. Not only for standard coach seating and luggage, but with all the other amenities available: dining/lounge cars, sleeping cars, upgraded seating options, etc. etc.
Passengers can get up an walk around just to stretch their legs.... Not be packed in like sardines on some bus or airline.
Willie, buses are cheaper, faster and MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT PER PASSENGER MILE than trains.
The case you just made for trains over buses applies to airplanes over trains. Except, of course, for the fact that airplanes are MUCH faster than trains and lower cost!
When I can drive - or take the bus - from Seattle to the next big town (Vancouver, BC, Portland, OR or Spokane, WA) for less money and in less time than the train, then the train is simply not a viable option. Period.
It’s slower.
It’s more expensive.
It’s less flexible (schedule and route).
It’s not as energy efficient.
Those are the facts. Provably so.
Choose a route in the US that’s between 200 and 500 miles. Any route. Show me the cost, scheduling flexibility, and duration of transit on the train. Then I’ll show you the lower cost, higher scheduling flexibility, and shorter duration via other options.
Sound like a viable challenge?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.