RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Is this the voice of conservatism?(11 posts)

Is this the voice of conservatism?torquer
Jul 29, 2003 1:19 PM
The link below is actually cycling-related; it is being discussed over in the General Discussion area, and it is even getting posters' knickers in a twist over at Velonews' forum.

http://www.illinoisleader.com/columnists/columnistsview.asp?c=6972

I bring it up here at Non-Cycling Discussions, however, because of the professed "conservative" stance of the source.

Is there anything conservative about this crap? I'm not looking for a defense of her particular opinion of cyclists, bike paths, etc. I'm just curious if there is some fundamental political principle at the root of this kind of thinking.

Or is the author just a jerk, and is it just as possible that someone with progressive political views could be so obtuse?

And how is it that www.nochildleftbehind.GOV is a sponsor of a patently partisan site?


FWIW, whenever a motorist tells me I belong on the bike path rather than the road, I respond with the recommendation that they belong on the bus, with a competent driver behind the wheel.
I think there is some, misguided, basisTJeanloz
Jul 29, 2003 1:30 PM
I would say that a generally conservative platform is that services rendered by the government should be commensurate with taxes paid. Her basic premise [which most of us have an issue with] is that cyclists don't pay to maintain the roads, so why should we be on them. If the premise were true, I might agree with her. For example, the Mt. Washington Auto road charges a toll for cars and does not allow bicycles. As much as I would like to ride up Mt. Washington on days other than race day, I am not allowed to, and I don't really have a problem with that.

That said, I think it's common courtesy that cyclists ride on a bike path or bike lane, if such lane or path directly parallels the roadway.
I wish everybody would just let this thing die.Spoke Wrench
Jul 29, 2003 3:22 PM
4,500 bicyclists from St. Louis riding a century? This isn't a woman who lets the truth get in the way of a good rant. There's no polite way to say this, she's stupid. Left alone, her editors and her readers will figure that out and she'll eventually lose her platform and just go away.

Send her a gazillion letters and emails and she can prove that real people are actually reading her column. Every email you send helps her to keep her job and get her next raise.
I agree, how many times do we have to see it? (nm)TJeanloz
Jul 30, 2003 4:55 AM
Mostly bunk, but ...Live Steam
Jul 29, 2003 4:18 PM
she has a point about the organizers of the event choosing poorly. Many of the participants must have been upset that the route did not have a shoulder to ride on. Also, I do find many that attend mass start events to be blatantly irreverent for the rules of the road. However the rest is pure nonsense. Her idiocy doesn't allow her to understand that each and every one of the participants in the event probably road to it in their car for which they paid the same taxes and usage fees. They are also probably local residents who pay local RE taxes and similar fees she enumerated. They are probably her neighbors and local parishioners too.

Spoke may have a point about ignoring such stupidity and not responding to it. To this very stupid and misinformed woman, all cycling is the same. I don't think this type of thinking is reserved for the conservative side of the coin either. I am sure there are "liberals" out there who hate riding behind us too :O) Our local paper, very liberal at it's core, prints similar rants about cycling on a somewhat regular basis - our club has been lobbying for bike lanes for years only to have some local, dim whit with a press pass write some misguided/misinformed piece about the parking spaces that would have to be sacrificed. For some strange reason they also feel the need to make insulting remarks about what we wear (probably because they would not be able to find spandex shorts big enough to fit their large, out of shape bodies :O) and they must all believe that we landed here from another planet as they almost always assume that we don't pay the same road usage fees/taxes and everything else they do. I say we burn the witch at the stake and make an example of her :O)
How do you know she's a witch? Does she weigh the same as a duck? :) NMjtolleson
Jul 29, 2003 5:56 PM
How do you know she's a witch? Does she weigh the same as a duck? :) NMLive Steam
Jul 29, 2003 6:11 PM
I obviously said it in jest. I am not sure where the duck comes in though. It may be over my head - I think!?
How do you know she's a witch? Does she weigh the same as a duck? :) NMjtolleson
Jul 29, 2003 6:24 PM
Mine was likewise in jest! It is a joke from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Sorry. I thought it was a cultural reference that would resonate.

"But she has gotta wart!..."
The other test for a witchMR_GRUMPY
Jul 29, 2003 7:20 PM
Just throw her into the water. If she sinks and dies, she was not a witch. If she floats, she must be made of wood. We all know the witches are made of wood.....Burn her..
(Steve Martin)
That is also Monty Pythonjtolleson
Jul 30, 2003 7:29 AM
one of the great comic bits in movie history to me!

"Who are you who is so wise in the ways of science?"
Ah, Bach! :O) nmLive Steam
Jul 30, 2003 12:09 PM