RRUserious
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 505
Last edited by a moderator:
Just what I thought, but I was waiting to see if anybody agreed. I think only a few more people would take Amtrak. That's why I said "a bit" in my previous post. Maybe this should go in "Non-Rail Transportation", but I'm not trying to do "armchair moderating" again. h34r:I'm thinking here, "The part that '......Helps Railroads'......." is where?
Nothing at all.What does this have to do with Amtrak or railroads?
+1. The TSA incident with spilling the ashes was in the news a week or two ago. While the post 9/11 era of security hassles at the airports have, by accounts, helped send some business to Amtrak, an accident by an insensitive or clumsy TSA employee has nothing to do with Amtrak or passenger rail.Nothing at all.What does this have to do with Amtrak or railroads?
I agree. The employee may be an ash-hole but it has nothing to do with Amtrak. It's not like the article even mentioned Amtrak.I'm thinking here, "The part that '......Helps Railroads'......." is where?
The fact that TSA screwed up again?
A bit of a stretch I posit.
Of course not. Amtrak doesn't compete with airlines for business! Government mistakes in airports don't help passengers decide against flying! Ridiculous!+1. The TSA incident with spilling the ashes was in the news a week or two ago. While the post 9/11 era of security hassles at the airports have, by accounts, helped send some business to Amtrak, an accident by an insensitive or clumsy TSA employee has nothing to do with Amtrak or passenger rail.Nothing at all.What does this have to do with Amtrak or railroads?
Enter your email address to join: