Bob R. First, he argues twice in a row that "public policy should be directed at getting people into small cars, not transit." His words, not mine.
JK: I stand corrected. Make that "public policy, if we must have one on this subject at all, should be directed at getting people into small cars, not transit.”

Bob R. The number is incomplete, for reasons that I have expressed.
JK: Then I’m sure you will bludgen us all witht he correct version as soon as you can contact Sam. Actually I see you posted this at 10:15 - you’ve has lots of time to contact Sam’s office -what did they say?

Bob R. Even giving the statement the benefit of the doubt and taking it to have the meaning that YOU interpreted, the numbers just don't add up. At all.
JK: Just used a plain English interpretation of the statement as relayed by YOU.

Bob R. If you (or Terry for that matter) want to back away from the assertion now that your interpretation isn't holding up, that's fine, but don't act like you didn't loudly advocate that assertion less than 24 hours ago.
JK: What the hell are you talking about?

Bob R. Now JK believes that if transit goes away, everyone will be happy. Wow.
JK: I’m just guessing that we could save money and serve people better with a different system. One based on freedom and choice with government handouts ONLY for the needy, instead of 80% support for every transit user.

Thanks
JK