Michelle Bachmann, Joe Arpaio, and Ted Stevens

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-08-2008, 02:42 PM

The fact that these people were reelected is a travesty.

Michelle Bachmann believes there's only one way to be American, and that's to be a Republican who drives a car on an enourmous highway and hates mass transit. She wants to be the next Tom Delay....or the next Joe McCarthy.

Joe Arpaio thinks it's an "honor" to be compared to the head of the Ku Klux Klan and is so paranoid over illegal immigration (and legal immigration apparently) that he makes it a crime to not be white in his county, raids city halls, and forces prisoners to attend Christian services.

Ted Stevens, better known as Tubular Nets, was of course involved in a huge scandal, yet got reelected because of it.

These were the other problems this year. But oh well, you can't expect everything to go perfectly in any given election year. -CSM

Speed · 11-08-2008, 03:46 PM

O_O

*Hugs Obama Plushie*

Laika Come Home · 11-08-2008, 04:51 PM

The fact Michelle Bachmann doesn't support public transit doesn't really affect me. In the era of cars, do we really need trains? Besides, they're very bad for the environment.

The things she said about Obama were inexcusable, however.

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-08-2008, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laika Come Home

The fact Michelle Bachmann doesn't support public transit doesn't really affect me. In the era of cars, do we really need trains? Besides, they're very bad for the environment.

Yes, we DO need trains. We need mass transit. Relying on cars, and especially forcing people to adopt a car culture and urban sprawl, is very, very bad. And cars are FAR worse for the environment than trains. A good train will run on electricity, not gasoline, will run at speeds generally at 70 mph (for commuter trains) and 150-250 mph (for long distance trains). And to get from place to place, a good subway or light rail system is needed along with transit oriented development as supposed to subdivisions with McMansions. -CSM

Laika Come Home · 11-08-2008, 06:08 PM

Urban sprawl is very, very bad. However, it's time to move on from slow, unreliable trains and embrace hybrid/ethanol/water vapor/electric cars that are sure to get us from Point A to Point B on time.

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-08-2008, 08:41 PM

^Yes, we need to get rid of slow, unreliable trains. But we need to replace them with fast reliable trains, such as this:

And to get us to the grocery store or get us to run errands, we need to WALK to the store, or take something like this:

I just showed you the great rail system Spain set up as recently as a few years ago. Their trains are known for their on-time performance and speed. In the case of the Barcelona Subway, which is the last pic, they have countdown clocks telling you how many minutes and seconds until the next train.

Now, I'm not asking for Shikansens (they're waaaay too advanced for a starter high speed system), but we can do what Spain is doing relatively easily. They, too, are in an economic crisis. -CSM

***CaptHayfever*** · 11-09-2008, 12:04 AM

Why is it that in discussions about transit, there's always one "we have personal cars, who needs anything else" guy & one "we should never use personal cars for anything" guy, even when neither one of them is being a jerk?

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-09-2008, 12:49 AM

^You know I've lived in St. Louis for a long time, and a lot of places required you to own an automobile to get to. That's not fair. With transit, the car is still an option, but at least you have multiple options. Multiple options is fair. -CSM

Laika Come Home · 11-09-2008, 08:01 AM

I agree that fast trains would be beneficial to public transportation, but after all the problems Amtrak has had running their trains lately, people might not be willing to believe that trains are a better type of transportation.

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-09-2008, 09:16 AM

^That's why it's not possible for Amtrak to do it. Amtrak has to run a national rail system. This country is too big for that. What should happen is that the trains should be run by multi-state transportation agencies. Those are shown to work.

Also, part of the reason of all the funding problems is that about 90 percent of transportation funds get used for new road construction, which is more expensive than rail construction. One mile of high speed rail costs $1 million to build, where as one mile of new expressway costs around $20 million dollars to build per lane of traffic. -CSM

Laika Come Home · 11-09-2008, 10:48 AM

Cities probably aren't going to spend money on train systems in a time of economic crisis.

***Cosmonautical*** · 11-09-2008, 10:48 AM

Yeah, the US really needs to get with the times and adopt multiple rail systems to accomodate not only rising fuel prices but its enormous population. It's not reasonable to expect every citizen to drive their own personal vehicle, especially if they seat 4 or more.

Laika Come Home · 11-09-2008, 10:53 AM

The US is dealing with a broken economy, two wars, a transition between two presidents, terrorism, international conflicts, poverty, and unemployment right now. Do you honestly think the government should waste money on trains?

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-09-2008, 11:18 AM

^An economic crisis is the best time to build new infrastructure. It creates jobs and brings people and money to the state. You clearly forgot what FDR did to stop the economy from falling further: he built a TON of infrastructure. Now, I'm not saying the New Deal saved the Depression, but it certainly stopped it from getting worse. -CSM

I am nobody · 11-09-2008, 11:50 AM

^^Erm... Trains don't build themselves. Building stuff creates jobs, therefore helping to solve two-three of the problems you listed. (economy, poverty and unemployment)

And the system would eventually pay for itself, anyway.

Panfan · 11-09-2008, 12:42 PM

Public transit >>>> cars.

When we were in D.C., if we took our car around the city, we'd just keep getting lost. The subway was much easier to get around with.

In Detroit, there is quite a bit of traffic, and it's cold outside, and I need to get from Cobo Arena to Greektown to Ford Field. I'm not walking this large distance in the cold, and if we drive, it'll have too much traffic. If I hop on the People Mover, it'll just take a few minutes.

Building better transit will create jobs. Plus, it'll put a little more money in peoples' pockets as getting on a train is much cheaper than driving and paying for gas.

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-09-2008, 12:42 PM

Plus, I should mention that out of 31 transit initiatives this year, 23 passed, including some very major ones, such as a high speed rail line in California, major investments in Los Angeles' subway and light rail systems, a new DMU line in Marin County, a steel on steel rail system in Hawaii, an expansion of Albequerque's commuter rail line, and major expansions to Seattle's light rail and commuter rail systems. -CSM

LinkManDX · 11-09-2008, 01:27 PM

Thirdly, I'd like to mention that anyone who drives in Manhattan is stupid. The subway system is amazing, along with proliferated taxis. If every city had a similar system, it would boost the economy and provide a revenue stream.

Metal Man · 11-09-2008, 01:36 PM

Laika is just afraid the evil train boogeymen will get him if trains are built!

Personally, I helped vote in a new bullet train so I can get from point A to point B really, really fast. The trains in our area are pretty good, too... especially for people without cars, like me.

**Crazyswordsman** · 11-09-2008, 01:50 PM

^^They're actually expanding the subway system. They're building a few stations under Second Avenue right now (badly needed) and an extension of a line to the Javits Center (not really needed, but could provide impetus to build a light rail or BRT line on the far west side, which is lacking mass transit of ANY kind south of 72nd Street.

The NYC Subway is definitely one of the "big eight" subway systems of the world (along with Chicago, London, Paris, Moscow, Madrid, Berlin, and Tokyo). The main problem is that it's very outdated, although the MTA is doing a good job modernizing it. They should also look to expansion projects in the outer boroughs, particularly around Bushwick and a link between Jamaica and Flushing.

And there are reports in downtown Denver that buildings near the light rail system they have are filling up VERY quickly, while the buildings that aren't near a light rail are vacant and in decay.

The statistics show that people want high quality transit, and it's people like Michelle Bachmann who are the barrier.

As for high speed rail, there is no way there could ever be a national system. However, there are six parts of the country that could benefit from a high speed system:

The Northeast (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, DC, and possibly Quebec and Virginia)

The Midwest (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, and possibly Kentucky and Ontario)

Florida

Texas

California, and possibly Nevada and Arizona

Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia

-CSM

11-08-2008, 02:42 PM	#1
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	Michelle Bachmann, Joe Arpaio, and Ted Stevens The fact that these people were reelected is a travesty. Michelle Bachmann believes there's only one way to be American, and that's to be a Republican who drives a car on an enourmous highway and hates mass transit. She wants to be the next Tom Delay....or the next Joe McCarthy. Joe Arpaio thinks it's an "honor" to be compared to the head of the Ku Klux Klan and is so paranoid over illegal immigration (and legal immigration apparently) that he makes it a crime to not be white in his county, raids city halls, and forces prisoners to attend Christian services. Ted Stevens, better known as Tubular Nets, was of course involved in a huge scandal, yet got reelected because of it. These were the other problems this year. But oh well, you can't expect everything to go perfectly in any given election year. -CSM

11-08-2008, 03:46 PM	#2
Speed Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: If there's a bright center to the universe I'm on the planet it's farthest from Gender: Posts: 3,747 Thanks: 1,598 Thanked 320 Times in 224 Posts Blog Entries: 1	O_O Hugs Obama Plushie

11-08-2008, 04:51 PM	#3
Laika Come Home Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Gender: Posts: 615 Thanks: 214 Thanked 77 Times in 45 Posts Blog Entries: 1	The fact Michelle Bachmann doesn't support public transit doesn't really affect me. In the era of cars, do we really need trains? Besides, they're very bad for the environment. The things she said about Obama were inexcusable, however.

11-08-2008, 06:08 PM	#5
Laika Come Home Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Gender: Posts: 615 Thanks: 214 Thanked 77 Times in 45 Posts Blog Entries: 1	Urban sprawl is very, very bad. However, it's time to move on from slow, unreliable trains and embrace hybrid/ethanol/water vapor/electric cars that are sure to get us from Point A to Point B on time.

11-08-2008, 08:41 PM	#6
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^Yes, we need to get rid of slow, unreliable trains. But we need to replace them with fast reliable trains, such as this: And to get us to the grocery store or get us to run errands, we need to WALK to the store, or take something like this: I just showed you the great rail system Spain set up as recently as a few years ago. Their trains are known for their on-time performance and speed. In the case of the Barcelona Subway, which is the last pic, they have countdown clocks telling you how many minutes and seconds until the next train. Now, I'm not asking for Shikansens (they're waaaay too advanced for a starter high speed system), but we can do what Spain is doing relatively easily. They, too, are in an economic crisis. -CSM

11-09-2008, 12:04 AM	#7
*CaptHayfever* Smash SuperMod Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: (n) - the place where I am Gender: Posts: 27,661 Thanks: 1,991 Thanked 2,486 Times in 1,513 Posts	Why is it that in discussions about transit, there's always one "we have personal cars, who needs anything else" guy & one "we should never use personal cars for anything" guy, even when neither one of them is being a jerk? And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

11-09-2008, 12:49 AM	#8
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^You know I've lived in St. Louis for a long time, and a lot of places required you to own an automobile to get to. That's not fair. With transit, the car is still an option, but at least you have multiple options. Multiple options is fair. -CSM

11-09-2008, 08:01 AM	#9
Laika Come Home Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Gender: Posts: 615 Thanks: 214 Thanked 77 Times in 45 Posts Blog Entries: 1	I agree that fast trains would be beneficial to public transportation, but after all the problems Amtrak has had running their trains lately, people might not be willing to believe that trains are a better type of transportation.

11-09-2008, 09:16 AM	#10
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^That's why it's not possible for Amtrak to do it. Amtrak has to run a national rail system. This country is too big for that. What should happen is that the trains should be run by multi-state transportation agencies. Those are shown to work. Also, part of the reason of all the funding problems is that about 90 percent of transportation funds get used for new road construction, which is more expensive than rail construction. One mile of high speed rail costs $1 million to build, where as one mile of new expressway costs around $20 million dollars to build per lane of traffic. -CSM

11-09-2008, 10:48 AM	#11
Laika Come Home Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Gender: Posts: 615 Thanks: 214 Thanked 77 Times in 45 Posts Blog Entries: 1	Cities probably aren't going to spend money on train systems in a time of economic crisis.

11-09-2008, 10:48 AM	#12
*Cosmonautical* Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I rub my tilde all over your asterisk Gender: Posts: 28,100 Thanks: 2,151 Thanked 5,338 Times in 2,433 Posts	Yeah, the US really needs to get with the times and adopt multiple rail systems to accomodate not only rising fuel prices but its enormous population. It's not reasonable to expect every citizen to drive their own personal vehicle, especially if they seat 4 or more.

11-09-2008, 10:53 AM	#13
Laika Come Home Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Gender: Posts: 615 Thanks: 214 Thanked 77 Times in 45 Posts Blog Entries: 1	The US is dealing with a broken economy, two wars, a transition between two presidents, terrorism, international conflicts, poverty, and unemployment right now. Do you honestly think the government should waste money on trains?

11-09-2008, 11:18 AM	#14
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^An economic crisis is the best time to build new infrastructure. It creates jobs and brings people and money to the state. You clearly forgot what FDR did to stop the economy from falling further: he built a TON of infrastructure. Now, I'm not saying the New Deal saved the Depression, but it certainly stopped it from getting worse. -CSM

11-09-2008, 11:50 AM	#15
I am nobody Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Over there. Gender: Posts: 5,515 Thanks: 309 Thanked 365 Times in 242 Posts Blog Entries: 7	^^Erm... Trains don't build themselves. Building stuff creates jobs, therefore helping to solve two-three of the problems you listed. (economy, poverty and unemployment) And the system would eventually pay for itself, anyway.

11-09-2008, 12:42 PM	#16
Panfan AND HE PRAYS Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Grayskull Gender: Posts: 18,806 Thanks: 1,405 Thanked 2,250 Times in 1,338 Posts Blog Entries: 15	Public transit >>>> cars. When we were in D.C., if we took our car around the city, we'd just keep getting lost. The subway was much easier to get around with. In Detroit, there is quite a bit of traffic, and it's cold outside, and I need to get from Cobo Arena to Greektown to Ford Field. I'm not walking this large distance in the cold, and if we drive, it'll have too much traffic. If I hop on the People Mover, it'll just take a few minutes. Building better transit will create jobs. Plus, it'll put a little more money in peoples' pockets as getting on a train is much cheaper than driving and paying for gas.

11-09-2008, 01:27 PM	#18
LinkManDX Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Because political usernames ftw Gender: Posts: 3,582 Thanks: 297 Thanked 266 Times in 156 Posts	Thirdly, I'd like to mention that anyone who drives in Manhattan is stupid. The subway system is amazing, along with proliferated taxis. If every city had a similar system, it would boost the economy and provide a revenue stream.

11-09-2008, 01:36 PM	#19
Metal Man Fairy-Slaying Maniac Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: 1592 Miles Away From Here Gender: Posts: 18,062 Thanks: 148 Thanked 683 Times in 482 Posts	Laika is just afraid the evil train boogeymen will get him if trains are built! Personally, I helped vote in a new bullet train so I can get from point A to point B really, really fast. The trains in our area are pretty good, too... especially for people without cars, like me.

11-09-2008, 01:50 PM	#20
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^^They're actually expanding the subway system. They're building a few stations under Second Avenue right now (badly needed) and an extension of a line to the Javits Center (not really needed, but could provide impetus to build a light rail or BRT line on the far west side, which is lacking mass transit of ANY kind south of 72nd Street. The NYC Subway is definitely one of the "big eight" subway systems of the world (along with Chicago, London, Paris, Moscow, Madrid, Berlin, and Tokyo). The main problem is that it's very outdated, although the MTA is doing a good job modernizing it. They should also look to expansion projects in the outer boroughs, particularly around Bushwick and a link between Jamaica and Flushing. And there are reports in downtown Denver that buildings near the light rail system they have are filling up VERY quickly, while the buildings that aren't near a light rail are vacant and in decay. The statistics show that people want high quality transit, and it's people like Michelle Bachmann who are the barrier. As for high speed rail, there is no way there could ever be a national system. However, there are six parts of the country that could benefit from a high speed system: The Northeast (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, DC, and possibly Quebec and Virginia) The Midwest (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, and possibly Kentucky and Ontario) Florida Texas California, and possibly Nevada and Arizona Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia -CSM