Obama plans to be engaged in urban affairs/"White House Office on Urban Policy" (Chicago: fit in, houses)

[At1WithNature]

Originally Posted by ajolotl

wow, this is a weird twist.

nobody else will bring you fresh ideas like those that I am bringing to the table. We'll see where this goes but one thing that i find both massively hilarious and incredibly sad at the same time is that the majority of the nation actually believes that "change" is coming to America simply because that was the key word in Obama's campaign for the past year and a half. Oh, there will be change but it won't be for the better if recent history is any indicator.

Ask yourself, are we as a nation better off today than we were in the past? the answer proves the direction that this country is heading. We'll see where it ends up but there is a major anvil dangling over this nation, swaying back and forth, ready to drop on us at any given time and that anvil is illegal immigration.

heck, Obama has illegal aliens in his family and it is disputed as to whether or not he was born in Egypt. And for those who don't know, due to our failed educational system, one must be born in this country to meet the criteria for President. Whether or whether not Obama was born in Egypt is a side matter because the point is illegal immigration (like Obama's relatives from Kenya).

Obama's legacy will consist of two major sticking points, guns in america and illegal immigration. i just hope and pray that Obama has the best interests of his citizens in mind when he makes those decisions, unlike ole Dubya who has his corporate buddies in mind when he makes his choices.

time will tell. but the last real leader this country had was JFK and we all know how that turned out. to me, Obama is the same as Bob Dole, George Bush, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore, George W. Bush, etc. You don't get to be 50% of the equation when it comes to the Presedential election unless you are part of the ilk, so to speak.

I hope Obama is different than all of the Presidents that I've seen in my lifetime. I hope he is an actual leader like JFK. I just hope he doesn't end up the same way JFK did.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

nobody else will bring you fresh ideas like those that I am bringing to the table.

Ummm...I think I can find all those ideas in the bottom of a dumpster - they were all beaten to death by Republican candidates and Fox News during the last few elections. Fresh?
How's this from 4 years ago? That guy was crushed in three elections and that ad is a good example of why. When a Republican can't win Hastert's old district it's over for these "fresh" ideas.

[At1WithNature]

Don't spam the thread Attrill with silly youtube links...lol...stay on topic please. pretty please with a cherry on top. This topic is regarding Obama and his plannings to further involve government in meddling in the affairs of the people who are really in power, the citizens of this country.

I've read your posts before and I know you have a lot to offer. Don't get lazy on us and require someone else's work to do the talking for you. let's hear it out. remember...cherry on top.

edit: my bad attrill, i didn't see your post in time. good point.

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

the post-automobile world

Yeah, we're definitely well within the realm of fantasy here...

Umm, like the Federal highway system? It's actually quite a bit more cost-efficient to let our interstates crumble and develop rail.

"Hunch", or is there anything to back this up?
I'd really like to see some sort of plan that outlines what it would take to develop a plan like this; the eminent domain plan that would be required to secure the needed properties, the reimbursement costs, the infrastructure costs, the maintenance costs, the operating costs, the expected income- really... If you have anything solid here other than some moronic left-tilted hatred of the automobile, I'm all ears. Until then, it's fantasy.

"Playing pretend" got us to the moon, and has been responsible for the lion's share of innovation in the last century. You're being condescending, not rational.

Quite to the contrary, going to the moon was an entirely do-able pursuit. The lions share of innovation comes from people who understand realistic constraints and operate within that framework. as opposed to motivational-poster mentality people who believe that "anything is possible" no mater how unrealistic it may be. You'll find that the people doing the innovating and actually achieving meaningful change aren't the ones with pie in their eyes.

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by jdiddy

Just because you were such an ass in this post.

Iraq earmarks $3 billion for Baghdad subway - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081117/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq_baghdad_subway - broken link)


But a Chicago to Nashville train, or any adequate regional transit, should forever remain a left-leaning fantasy.

LOL, I swear, sometimes, I wish forums had a posters IQ alongside their registration date and post count. The article in question references an 13 mile long subway system. That has absolutely no similarity with what's being proposed when child-minded types demand that 'society' build them a system so that they can hop on a train and take a non-stop trip from Chicago to Miami... It's like comparing a cup of water with a lake and saying "Well, water's water!"

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

I don't think gun conrol laws are particularly effective either. But there's no evidence that an Obama administration is attempting to repeal the second ammendment. At worst, we will have restrictions similar to what was in place during the Clinton Administration. And I'm assuming you kept your guns through the 90s, right?

Sorry for furthering the gun discussion in this thread, but no... The "restrictions" made by the Clinton administration were not "reasonable". Yes, they probably appeared "reasonable" to people who have an inherent aversion to firearms, don't own any and don't understand firearms as a result of their own personal experiences with them... but to everyone else, no, the Clinton Era bans were not "reasonable". They were the opposite of "reasonable". They were based on emotion and feeling rather than logic and understanding. The Clinton era bans are what you get when politicians who know nothing about guns- possessing a portfolio of knowledge about firearms gleaned entirely from television- try and write a real world gun law...

One cannot speak about their support of the "Second Amendment" out of one side of their mouths, but then propose to ban "certain types" of firearms out of the other.

[At1WithNature]

you don't have to apologize for furthering the gun discussion when that is exactly what Obama's plan includes when he speaks of "urban affairs" and creting a new department for it. Gun issues are a very, very relevant issue.

[jdiddy]

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

LOL, I swear, sometimes, I wish forums had a posters IQ alongside their registration date and post count. The article in question references an 13 mile long subway system. That has absolutely no similarity with what's being proposed when child-minded types demand that 'society' build them a system so that they can hop on a train and take a non-stop trip from Chicago to Miami... It's like comparing a cup of water with a lake and saying "Well, water's water!"

Relax, mensa. I know you fancy yourself as a rather unique bastion of brilliance, but arrogance doesn't equate to intelligence.

We don't have any adequate regional transit because we haven't made this a spending priority in decades. Those who do prioritize it magically find solutions to these problems. I notice, however, that you're forced to fall back on a strawman that no one has proposed in this thread.

We're not talking about Chicago to Miami. We're discussing a functioning regional transit system. And as someone mentioned earlier, there are serious signs in the airline industry that point to a future where this may not be the most efficient mode of transport for these shorter trips.

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

That has absolutely no similarity with what's being proposed when child-minded types demand that 'society' build them a system so that they can hop on a train and take a non-stop trip from Chicago to Miami

Where is the right that you should be able to hop in a wasteful single occupancy vehicle and have a system of perfectly paved roads to get you to the same destination? Is that system the dominant one because its what people truly want, or is it because no efficient alternatives exist?

[Lookout Kid]

PokerPlayer1, your arrogance and condescention is really uncalled for. For all of the comparisons to "child-like minds" you keep making, why is it that you are acting the most like an immature child in this discussion? *edited to remove the long tirade of cursing and insults that originally accompanied this post*

Do we need to go over the Federal Highway Administration's budget? It's HUGE. The initial capital outlay for the interstate highway system was massive, and the maintenance of this system is nearly impossible--and has been neglected. The real maintenance costs are much higher than what we have been budgeting. Additionally, our current transportation system is inefficient, dangerous, and locks us in to dependence on foreign oil. And then there's the requirement that every man, woman, and teenager owns and maintains an automobile. And of course, economic externalities like pollution, accidents, sprawl, etc. that are distributed throughout society. Some would argue that you can add the costs of many recent wars to this total... The costs of our current transportation system are STAGGERING.

The political will to create better rail infrastructure doesn't yet exist, but the post-automoblie world is coming if you like it or not. You want to talk about fantasy? Affordable fuel cell cars are fantasy. And the electric car may look great at first, but it simply re-locates energy production to the power plants and tranfers it to wheels on the pavement in a less efficient manner. "Peak Oil" theory is becoming more accepted--in that we are quickly approaching a world where oil demand is greater than the supply. We saw some of this ramp up this past year, but energy demand has dropped with the decrease in worldwide economic activity. Rail freight traffic has been BOOMING for the last five years because the trucking industry is becoming economically infeasible. And our government is being very short-sighted and setting us up for a tremendous fall with our dependence on oil--both foreign and domestic. Even with increased domestic production, oil prices will rise and fall with the international commodities markets. And the long-term outlook for oil is upward price pressure--which will translate into increased consumer prices for just about anything in an oil-dependent society like ours.

Rights-of-way? Most of them already exist. You may recall that we once had a comprehensive rail infrastructure in this nation. You know, the one that was built 150 years ago and that most cities and towns owe their existence to? I'm sure some eminent domain will be needed, but it won't be the bloodbath produced by the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s. In fact, highway traffic lanes could be converted to rail rights-of-way, which are much more compact and don't require the sight lines of multi-lane highways.

Look, we're not going to wake up tomorrow to a world where everyone jumps in a train in lieu of automobiles. But changes need to be made. And regional high-speed rail makes a lot of sense, even in today's world. But you can cling to your flat-earth ignorance for at least a few more decades if you like. History will eventually expose the folly of our failed transporation planning in the U.S., and the nations that thought ahead will prosper as well crash and burn. That's not the legacy I want to leave to MY children. You?