Seriously, Boehner is an idiot

#1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
70,249
Likes
41,335
#1
He goes off on the reporter for asking the question about Amtrak funding, calls it "dumb" and says the obvious problem was that the train was going twice the speed limit.

His idiocy is that the mechanism that everyone is talking about and which had not come on line yet there would have stopped the train from going that fast.

You can debate all you want about Amtrak being wasteful, inefficient, whether funding is adequate/inadequate. But it is undeniable that his reasoning on this particular event was just inexplicably moronic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2
#2
He goes off on the reporter for asking the question about Amtrak funding, calls it "dumb" and says the obvious problem was that the train was going twice the speed limit.

His idiocy is that the mechanism that everyone is talking about and which had not come on line yet there would have stopped the train from going that fast.

You can debate all you want about Amtrak being wasteful, inefficient, whether funding is adequate/inadequate. But it is undeniable that his reasoning on this particular event was just inexplicably moronic.

And this is wrong?
 
#6
#6
He goes off on the reporter for asking the question about Amtrak funding, calls it "dumb" and says the obvious problem was that the train was going twice the speed limit.

His idiocy is that the mechanism that everyone is talking about and which had not come on line yet there would have stopped the train from going that fast.

You can debate all you want about Amtrak being wasteful, inefficient, whether funding is adequate/inadequate. But it is undeniable that his reasoning on this particular event was just inexplicably moronic.
Know what else would have? A conductor. Oh wait they had one...

You can have all the automation in the world but you still need competent humans when all is said and done. Competent and Paying Attention..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
He goes off on the reporter for asking the question about Amtrak funding, calls it "dumb" and says the obvious problem was that the train was going twice the speed limit.

His idiocy is that the mechanism that everyone is talking about and which had not come on line yet there would have stopped the train from going that fast.

You can debate all you want about Amtrak being wasteful, inefficient, whether funding is adequate/inadequate. But it is undeniable that his reasoning on this particular event was just inexplicably moronic.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the train wrecked because it was going twice the speed that was required for that turn. Me thinks this thread is dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8
#8
How about we stop letting government run stuff? If railways had been privatized years ago, the technology would've been in place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#10
#10
One more thing, no amount of funding/infrastructure could've prevented this. The train was going 50+ mph over the limit in a curve. Do we need to put bumpers up like a bowling lane to prevent this stuff?
 
#12
#12
He goes off on the reporter for asking the question about Amtrak funding, calls it "dumb" and says the obvious problem was that the train was going twice the speed limit.

His idiocy is that the mechanism that everyone is talking about and which had not come on line yet there would have stopped the train from going that fast.

You can debate all you want about Amtrak being wasteful, inefficient, whether funding is adequate/inadequate. But it is undeniable that his reasoning on this particular event was just inexplicably moronic.

Are you kidding? The engineer is a leftist loon who wanted to crash the train. Amtrak has so much money that they pay writers to write a gay blog
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
You can have all the automation in the world but you still need competent humans when all is said and done. Competent and Paying Attention..

This is a very true statement. Unfortunately, the democrats will not let a good crisis go to waste. Expect more legislation and regulation to prevent the rash of trains speeding thru curves and crashing to be enacted any day now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14
#14
H

His idiocy is that the mechanism that everyone is talking about and which had not come on line yet there would have stopped the train from going that fast.

So, there is absolutely no problem with the funding for infrastructure, as the mechanism had be paid for. The problem is with the implementation of said infrastructure, as the purchased mechanism was not installed.

It seems that you are making Boehner's point while calling him an idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#18
#18
One more thing, no amount of funding/infrastructure could've prevented this. The train was going 50+ mph over the limit in a curve. Do we need to put bumpers up like a bowling lane to prevent this stuff?

NASCAR says "safer barriers".
 
#20
#20
The technology that was not put in place would have prevented it from going that fast. I'm not saying you can necessarily tie that to funding. But to call the question "dumb" in the first place is idiotic.

Obviously.

Orrrrrrrrrr......like Boehner is basically saying, should be able to rely on a competent operator not to be traveling twice the max speed for that turn and not have to rely on funding for a component that makes it idiotproof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
It's not a funding issue. It was an operator error.


Arguably, adequate funding would have had in place tech to prevent the error. That was the point of the question.

Rather than explain why that is not the case, Boehner called the question dumb and went on a rant. He's missing the obvious linkage that makes the question legit.

Not answering it, when it clearly was a reasonable question, makes him look like he is hiding something, or trying to distract from the issue of lower funding by the GOP. Again, there may be an argument to be made that there is no linkage. Make it. Don't be a moron and say the query itself is dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
Arguably, adequate funding would have had in place tech to prevent the error. That was the point of the question.

Rather than explain why that is not the case, Boehner called the question dumb and went on a rant. He's missing the obvious linkage that makes the question legit.

Not answering it, when it clearly was a reasonable question, makes him look like he is hiding something, or trying to distract from the issue of lower funding by the GOP. Again, there may be an argument to be made that there is no linkage. Make it. Don't be a moron and say the query itself is dumb.


So basically what you are doing with this thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#23
#23
The technology that was not put in place would have prevented it from going that fast. I'm not saying you can necessarily tie that to funding. But to call the question "dumb" in the first place is idiotic.

Obviously.

Oh, obviously.

Doesn't matter that the train was traveling too fast and this has already turned into a political poo flinging match where the GOP gets blamed. Doesn't matter the engineer was progressively increasing the speed of the train towards that turn.

It's the GOP fault since they cut funding.

No, it really was a stupid question. Instead of focusing on the root causes of the accident (excessive speed caused intentionally) the idiots in the press want to point fingers.

The only train wreck that could have been avoided was you starting this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#24
#24
The technology that was not put in place would have prevented it from going that fast. I'm not saying you can necessarily tie that to funding. But to call the question "dumb" in the first place is idiotic.

Obviously.
They could have bought a Rostra universal electronic cruise control for $172 off Amazon. The gay blogger probably makes at least that, unless he is paid in foreskins.
 

VN Store



Back
Top