In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
I don't know any of the particulars of the proposal you're discussing,
but I sure am an advocate of high speed rail, which we don't really have
anywhere in this country. High speed rail in Europe, though, is damned
nice. When I went to Geneva last year, I deliberately got off the plane
in London so I could travel under the English Channel to France and then
to Switzerland by train. It was fast, smooth and an enlightening
experience. On our trips to NY, we always prefer to take the "half-fast"
Acela, which gives you a taste, but little more, of what high-speed rail
could be like. Our trip last December to Florida was pleasant, but no
faster than driving there in our own car. The seemingly hundreds of
unprotected crossings, though, required the engineer to toot the horn a
zillion times along the way.

We need to stop blowing our nation's money on military adventurism, cut
the military by half, at least, and spend the money "saved" on
rebuilding our roads, passenger and freight railways, airports,
highways, bridges and tunnels. That kind of spending pays off for
everyone. Paying for soldiering these days is about the same as ****ing
down a bottomless hole.


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.

You are free to go and live in Europe if you enjoy their train system as
much as you claim to do so. A vast majority of the citizens of the US do
not want "high speed rail." High speed rail is not conducive to our way
of life. We are an automobile loving country because of the freedom to
travel when and where we want to. High speed rail does not help you get
from your house to your grandmothers house.

On 3/5/11 8:21 AM, BAR wrote:


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.


I'm sorry, but I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron. Go
play with Snotty and Herring.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/5/11 8:21 AM, BAR wrote:


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.


I'm sorry, but I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron. Go
play with Snotty and Herring.

You just don't like hearing the truth or views that are contrary to your
vision of how the world should be.

On 3/5/11 8:58 AM, BAR wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/5/11 8:21 AM, BAR wrote:


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.


I'm sorry, but I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron. Go
play with Snotty and Herring.

You just don't like hearing the truth or views that are contrary to your
vision of how the world should be.



Once again, I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron.

On 3/5/2011 10:06 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 3/5/11 8:58 AM, BAR wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/5/11 8:21 AM, BAR wrote:


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal
government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.


I'm sorry, but I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron. Go
play with Snotty and Herring.

You just don't like hearing the truth or views that are contrary to your
vision of how the world should be.



Once again, I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron.

You don't always get what you wish for, Eh, undereducated moron?

Harryk wrote:
On 3/5/11 8:58 AM, BAR wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/5/11 8:21 AM, BAR wrote:


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal
government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.


I'm sorry, but I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron. Go
play with Snotty and Herring.

You just don't like hearing the truth or views that are contrary to your
vision of how the world should be.



Once again, I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron.
This is a newsgroup, asshole. You post and you get replies. It would
be best for all if you you left again - for good this time.

On 3/5/2011 8:28 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 3/5/11 8:21 AM, BAR wrote:


Why not cut out entitlements at the federal level completely then the
federal government would be flush with cash. And, the federal government
would could concentrate on its constitutional mandate of providing for
the common defense.


I'm sorry, but I didn't ask for the opinion of an uneducated moron. Go
play with Snotty and Herring.

I must apologize for our friend who exercised his freedom of speech to
offer an opinion that differs from yours. Having said that, feel free to
go **** yourself.