Cirrus...I don't think anyone said that at all. That would be taking things out of context just as much as this article may have apparently. Never was it said that roads/car infrastructure should take 100% priority, and everything else should get money only if it is left over. That is silly and putting words in peoples mouths. That kind of paraphrasing only helps pit anti public transport and pro transport folks against eachother more in my opinion. Just sayin'. Both articles on this posted here may be skewed...but neither said that one or the other should get NO funding.
Maybe I misunderstood or something...but I digress...
Last edited by MNMike; Mar 2, 2012 at 7:09 PM.
|