OT: Obama engages in "risky" behavior

[Eric Vey]

You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
least one of the trolls here.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_joins_neighbors_for_a_lake_shore_bicy cle_ride/

[Eric Vey]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> Eric Vey wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>>>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post &
>>>> Fox News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust that
>>>> liberal media to report anything right.
>>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen /anything/
>>> about "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>>
>>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>>>
>>>
>> http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>>
>> There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox show,
>> but a modem connection may not work very well with it.
>
> Sigh. I never said they never ran it, just that I never saw it. Things
> that cause a "Huge Stir" tend to...I dunno...CAUSE A HUGE STIR! (For
> example, Scooter Libby not remembering who didn't tell him something; THAT
> caused an {unjustified} huge stir.)
>
> HTH!
>
>

Nothing makes you happy. Not 115 articles in newspapers. Not video. And
when you get wall-to-wall coverage, you then say it's not "justified."
Face it. Your mind is made up and it pointless to show you more links.
It just confuses you.

[Bill Sornson]

Eric Vey wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post &
>>> Fox News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust that
>>> liberal media to report anything right.
>>
>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen /anything/
>> about "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>
>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>>
>>
>
> http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>
> There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox show,
> but a modem connection may not work very well with it.

Sigh. I never said they never ran it, just that I never saw it. Things
that cause a "Huge Stir" tend to...I dunno...CAUSE A HUGE STIR! (For
example, Scooter Libby not remembering who didn't tell him something; THAT
caused an {unjustified} huge stir.)

HTH!

[Hank]

On Jun 9, 10:02*am, Eric Vey <jun...@ericvey.com> wrote:
> You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
> least one of the trolls here.
>
> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_jo...

His seat is too low, and he needs more air in the rear tire.

I'll still vote for him.

[andresmuro@aol.com]

On Jun 9, 11:02 am, Eric Vey <jun...@ericvey.com> wrote:
> You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
> least one of the trolls here.
>
> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_jo...

I think that he is conveying the usage of bicycles as a form of
alternative transportation. This is reprehensible considering that we
need to promote gas consumption instead to help our American oil men
be economically successful. Much of the talk about foreign policy has
to do with exporting our way of life to other countries. This includes
dependence on private gas consuming vehicles rather than public
transportation or human powered transportation. Bicycling should be
limited to a sport to be done on weekends in special outfits and in
locations that we drive to. The picture portraying Obama as a commuter
using the bicycle for practical purposes is an affront against our
identity culture and moral fabric.

[still just me]

On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:02:54 -0400, Eric Vey <junker@ericvey.com>
wrote:

>You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
>least one of the trolls here.
>
>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_joins_neighbors_for_a_lake_shore_bicy cle_ride/


Geez, that's almost a Dukakis in a tank type photo. Dukakis stills
wins for now, but Obama still has time to beat him.

[Eric Vey]

Eric Vey wrote:
> You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
> least one of the trolls here.
>
> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_joins_neighbors_for_a_lake_shore_bicy cle_ride/
>

.. . .

He paused to mention his much-photographed bike ride with one of his
daughters last Sunday. “There was no setup,” Mr. Obama promised. “I was
not trying to pander to this crowd.”

When one bicycle enthusiast yelled out, “Thanks for wearing a helmet!”
Mr. Obama suggested that before donning the helmet, he remembered one of
the cardinal rules of politics: never allow yourself to be photographed
wearing nerdy headgear.

“I had an internal debate,” he said. “Because I knew that the A.P. was
going to take a picture, and they were trying to portray it like Dukakis
wearing that tank helmet. But I wanted to make sure that the children
who saw that picture knew that even the Democratic nominee for president
wears a helmet when he goes biking. (Hearty applause.)

“Now, obviously the rest of my apparel was apparently not up to snuff,
because I got a hard time from all sorts of blogs,” he said, “Who said I
looked like Urkel.”

After Mr. Obama finished his speech, he took three questions: one on
nuclear power, one on his urban agenda, and one on conflict in the
Middle East.

Then, after giving thanks to the donors, he shook some hands and posed
for pictures.

.. . .

[Eric Vey]

Hank wrote:

> His seat is too low, and he needs more air in the rear tire.

Better talk to the Secret Service guys about how they can let him out
with a poochy tire. He's pulling a trailer, so he can't be all bad.

[Dan O]

On Jun 9, 10:44 am, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jun 9, 11:02 am, Eric Vey <jun...@ericvey.com> wrote:
>
> > You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
> > least one of the trolls here.
>
> >http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_jo...
>
> I think that he is conveying the usage of bicycles as a form of
> alternative transportation. This is reprehensible considering that we
> need to promote gas consumption instead to help our American oil men
> be economically successful. Much of the talk about foreign policy has
> to do with exporting our way of life to other countries. This includes
> dependence on private gas consuming vehicles rather than public
> transportation or human powered transportation. Bicycling should be
> limited to a sport to be done on weekends in special outfits and in
> locations that we drive to. The picture portraying Obama as a commuter
> using the bicycle for practical purposes is an affront against our
> identity culture and moral fabric.

And notice that he's swallowed the pro-helmet propaganda hook, line
and sinker, too ;-)

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:44:21 -0700 (PDT), "andresmuro@aol.com"
<andresmuro@aol.com> wrote:

>On Jun 9, 11:02 am, Eric Vey <jun...@ericvey.com> wrote:
>> You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
>> least one of the trolls here.
>>
>> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_jo...
>
> Bicycling should be
>limited to a sport to be done on weekends in special outfits and in
>locations that we drive to.
> The picture portraying Obama as a commuter
>using the bicycle for practical purposes is an affront against our
>identity culture and moral fabric.

Some guy in a sporty cycling bulletin board in NYC said Obama should
have gloves for protection. I don't think he'd joking - I think he
believes that's important for "safe" cycling.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 9, 6:21 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:44:21 -0700 (PDT), "andresm...@aol.com"
>
> <andresm...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Jun 9, 11:02 am, Eric Vey <jun...@ericvey.com> wrote:
> >> You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
> >> least one of the trolls here.
>
> >>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_jo...
>
> > Bicycling should be
> >limited to a sport to be done on weekends in special outfits and in
> >locations that we drive to.
> > The picture portraying Obama as a commuter
> >using the bicycle for practical purposes is an affront against our
> >identity culture and moral fabric.
>
> Some guy in a sporty cycling bulletin board in NYC said Obama should
> have gloves for protection. I don't think he'd joking - I think he
> believes that's important for "safe" cycling.

Well, of course! And he needs to change clothes too! For example,
for safe riding, you absolutely need some nice body armor:
http://tinyurl.com/4wlwz9

- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

"John Forrest Tomlinson" <usenetremove@jt10000.com> wrote in message
news:uvar44lkrdf8ogg6u5cm4n7ijtvg34rf2e@4ax.com...
>
> Some guy in a sporty cycling bulletin board in NYC said Obama should
> have gloves for protection. I don't think he'd joking - I think he
> believes that's important for "safe" cycling.

I certainly believe that gloves are a great deal more important than
helmets!

[Peter Cole]

still just me wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:02:54 -0400, Eric Vey <junker@ericvey.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You can clearly see a car in this photo! That car is too close for at
>> least one of the trolls here.
>>
>> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/08/obama_family_joins_neighbors_for_a_lake_shore_bicy cle_ride/
>
>
> Geez, that's almost a Dukakis in a tank type photo. Dukakis stills
> wins for now, but Obama still has time to beat him.

I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks? Obama was just out for a
ride with his kids. Should he have been dressed for the TdF? Perhaps he
should get style lessons from John Kerry?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-05-02-kerry-bike_x.htm

Or Bush?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4658327.stm


In the past election, Kerry was scoffed at for cycling and windsurfing.
That guy is one hell of an amateur athlete. He frequently rode in our
club's weekly ride, in the winter, no less. He just showed up and did
the 42 mile loop, easily keeping up with the "B" group (18-20 mph). No
muss, no fuss, he just blended in. I didn't even know he was on the ride
until someone pointed it out later. As for windsurfing, he does the
Falmouth to Nantucket course -- 35 miles of open ocean -- not for
weenies (I sail in that area).

Dukakis may have looked dumb in that tank photo,

http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0309/lm10.html

but I still think Bush wins the prize:

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushcodpiece.htm

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:32:32 GMT, Peter Cole <peter_cole@verizon.net>
wrote:

>Should he have been dressed for the TdF?

Some cyclists can't accept that people can just get on a bike and
ride, the same way we might step outside for a walk. On a
sporty-cycling bulletin board in my city someone said Obama should be
wearing gloves to protect in case of a fall.

[Tom Kunich]

"Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>
> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?

Obamites are trying to start anything controversial. As for me, I didn't see
anything wrong with Obama's riding gear. It may not be in my taste these
days but I suppose I rode the same way myself in the 50's.

[still just me]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:32:32 GMT, Peter Cole <peter_cole@verizon.net>
wrote:

> but I still think Bush wins the prize:
>
>http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushcodpiece.htm


That's no codpiece, that't the armor plated cup the president wears to
protect the Presidential jewels.

[Eric Vey]

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>
>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>
> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.

Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post & Fox
News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust that liberal
media to report anything right.

[Tom Kunich]

"Eric Vey" <junker@ericvey.com> wrote in message
news:g2tvnh$in0$1@news.datemas.de...
>
> He paused to mention his much-photographed bike ride

Another huge stir in the making - now it's MUCH-PHOTOGRAPHED!

[Bill Sornson]

Eric Vey wrote:
> Tom Kunich wrote:
>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>
>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>
>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>
> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post & Fox
> News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust that
> liberal media to report anything right.

Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen /anything/ about
"Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".

SOME HUGE STIR! LOL

[Bill Sornson]

Eric Vey wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>>>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>>>>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post &
>>>>> Fox News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust
>>>>> that liberal media to report anything right.
>>>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen
>>>> /anything/ about "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>>>
>>>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>>>
>>> There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox
>>> show, but a modem connection may not work very well with it.
>>
>> Sigh. I never said they never ran it, just that I never saw it. Things
>> that cause a "Huge Stir" tend to...I dunno...CAUSE A HUGE
>> STIR! (For example, Scooter Libby not remembering who didn't tell
>> him something; THAT caused an {unjustified} huge stir.)
>>
>> HTH!
>>
>>
>
> Nothing makes you happy. Not 115 articles in newspapers. Not video.
> And when you get wall-to-wall coverage, you then say it's not
> "justified." Face it. Your mind is made up and it pointless to show
> you more links. It just confuses you.

Your post confused me because it was so misleading. Now that I see who you
are, I won't expect accuracy or fairness; therefore, no more confusion!

Glad we cleared it up :)

[Tom Kunich]

"Eric Vey" <junker@ericvey.com> wrote in message
news:g2uat2$h5j$1@news.datemas.de...
>
> Nothing makes you happy. Not 115 articles in newspapers.

Less than one percent of the BIG newspapers carry the article and none of
the locals and you call that a HUGE STIR.

[Eric Vey]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> Eric Vey wrote:
>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post & Fox
>> News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust that
>> liberal media to report anything right.
>
> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen /anything/ about
> "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>
> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>
>

http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003

There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox show,
but a modem connection may not work very well with it.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:40:45 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
wrote:

>I watch Fox quite a bit,

Are we surprised?

[still just me]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:11:36 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
wrote:

> Scooter Libby not remembering who didn't tell him something; THAT
>caused an {unjustified} huge stir.)


He learned from the best. "I can't recall" Reagan was his mentor.

FYI - not remembering is one thing. Not remembering and obstructing
justice, that would be another.

[Tom Kunich]

"Eric Vey" <junker@ericvey.com> wrote in message
news:g2u937$dvp$1@news.datemas.de...
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>
>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen /anything/
>> about "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>
>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>
> http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>
> There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox show, but
> a modem connection may not work very well with it.

So you have to look for it - people that watch Fox all the time didn't see
it. And you call that a HUGE STIR. Somehow I'm not at all surprised.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:06:34 -0400, Eric Vey <junker@ericvey.com>
wrote:

>Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post & Fox
>>> News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust that
>>> liberal media to report anything right.
>>
>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen /anything/ about
>> "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>
>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>
>http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>
>There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox show,
>but a modem connection may not work very well with it.

That's a liberal website, so it's probably faked to look like Fox. Or
even if it's really from Fox, because the clip is on a liberal site
it's irrelevant.

[Eric Vey]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> Eric Vey wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>>>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>>>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>>>>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>>>>>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post &
>>>>>> Fox News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just can't trust
>>>>>> that liberal media to report anything right.
>>>>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen
>>>>> /anything/ about "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>>>>
>>>>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>>>>
>>>> There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox
>>>> show, but a modem connection may not work very well with it.
>>> Sigh. I never said they never ran it, just that I never saw it. Things
>>> that cause a "Huge Stir" tend to...I dunno...CAUSE A HUGE
>>> STIR! (For example, Scooter Libby not remembering who didn't tell
>>> him something; THAT caused an {unjustified} huge stir.)
>>>
>>> HTH!
>>>
>>>
>> Nothing makes you happy. Not 115 articles in newspapers. Not video.
>> And when you get wall-to-wall coverage, you then say it's not
>> "justified." Face it. Your mind is made up and it pointless to show
>> you more links. It just confuses you.
>
> Your post confused me because it was so misleading. Now that I see who you
> are, I won't expect accuracy or fairness; therefore, no more confusion!
>
> Glad we cleared it up :)
>
>

Since you say that you spend so much time watching Fox, it is
understandable that you would get 'fair and balanced' confused with the
real thing.

[Bill Sornson]

Eric Vey wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Peter Cole" <peter_cole@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:kVs4k.3029$n9.2287@trndny01...
>>>>>>>>> I don't get it. What's with the snotty remarks?
>>>>>>>> Obamites are trying to start anything controversial.
>>>>>>> Yeah. It's a well known fact that Rupert Murdoch's New York
>>>>>>> Post & Fox News are secretly controlled by Obamaites. Just
>>>>>>> can't trust that liberal media to report anything right.
>>>>>> Sigh. I watch Fox quite a bit, and still have never seen
>>>>>> /anything/ about "Barrack Takes a Bike Ride".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SOME HUGE STIR! LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100003
>>>>>
>>>>> There is an embedded video on this page with a clip from the Fox
>>>>> show, but a modem connection may not work very well with it.
>>>> Sigh. I never said they never ran it, just that I never saw it.
>>>> Things that cause a "Huge Stir" tend to...I dunno...CAUSE A HUGE
>>>> STIR! (For example, Scooter Libby not remembering who didn't tell
>>>> him something; THAT caused an {unjustified} huge stir.)
>>>>
>>>> HTH!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Nothing makes you happy. Not 115 articles in newspapers. Not video.
>>> And when you get wall-to-wall coverage, you then say it's not
>>> "justified." Face it. Your mind is made up and it pointless to show
>>> you more links. It just confuses you.
>>
>> Your post confused me because it was so misleading. Now that I see
>> who you are, I won't expect accuracy or fairness; therefore, no more
>> confusion! Glad we cleared it up :)
>>
>>
>
> Since you say that you spend so much time watching Fox,

I didn't say that. You're being inaccurate yet again. (What I wrote is
still above. HTH)

> it is understandable that you would get 'fair and balanced' confused with
> the real thing.

Since you love blogs and media, apparently, read some of the reports on
which cable news network provided the fairest coverage of the primaries.
Hell, ask Terry McAuliffe -- and how he got slammed for saying it. You
might even say it caused a (wait for it) HUGE STIR! LOL

[Bill Sornson]

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Eric Vey" <junker@ericvey.com> wrote in message
> news:g2uat2$h5j$1@news.datemas.de...
>>
>> Nothing makes you happy. Not 115 articles in newspapers.
>
> Less than one percent of the BIG newspapers carry the article and
> none of the locals and you call that a HUGE STIR.

'xactly.

[Eric Vey]

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Eric Vey" <junker@ericvey.com> wrote in message
> news:g2tvnh$in0$1@news.datemas.de...
>>
>> He paused to mention his much-photographed bike ride
>
> Another huge stir in the making - now it's MUCH-PHOTOGRAPHED!
>

It only takes one to become mildly famous. I spoke in public once where
an AP reporter was in attendance and photos were taken. I hear I was on
page B-1 through the whole state - above the fold. Years later people
would approach, tell me my name, and want to shake my hand for what I
said that day.

The Obama story came with 5 AP photos. You can see more of them here.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD9162UB80

and since you have shown you care, there has been more chatter about it.

Obama’s Helmet Moment
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/obamas-helmet-moment/

Barack Obama Wears a Helmet, Looks Like a D-Bag
http://blog.indecision2008.com/2008/06/13/barack-obama-wears-a-helmet-looks-like-a-d-bag/

Senator warns of 'Mike Dukakis' attacks
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1003771,CST-NWS-obama13.article

It really is about the bike
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/13/cycling.politicsandsport

Obama Pledges Funding for Cycling
http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/1460.html

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 13, 4:53 pm, Eric Vey <jun...@ericvey.com> wrote:
>
>
> The Obama story came with 5 AP photos. You can see more of them here.http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD9162UB80
>

One thing I will say for him: He's in synch with the typical
uninformed American "safety" ideas. That is - he's got the oh-so-
important headgear on; but in two of the five photos, he's riding on
the sidewalk, and (unless that's a one-way street) riding opposite the
flow of traffic.

At least one study found that last move was over 13 times as dangerous
as riding properly on the road.

Now if he does another ride with that low rear tire, wrong side of the
road, and no lights at night, he'll have Hillary's beer drinkers all
for him!

- Frank Krygowski

[Ecnerwal]

In article
<8974c3c4-006a-446a-a718-57cbd3a8661f@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:

> One thing I will say for him: He's in synch with the typical
> uninformed American "safety" ideas. That is - he's got the oh-so-
> important headgear on; but in two of the five photos, he's riding on
> the sidewalk, and (unless that's a one-way street) riding opposite the
> flow of traffic.

Around this town, with the exception of one busy pedestrian street where
bikes are prohibited, and a couple that actually have a reasonable bike
lane, the sidewalk is the place to be. One "bike lane" on a major road
goes from 24" down to about 6" and is hard up against a concrete wall -
not the greatest place to get yourself trapped, since it's also the
inside of a corner. I go off the sidewalk where there are pedestrians
actually using it.

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 13, 6:41 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
wrote:
> In article
> <8974c3c4-006a-446a-a718-57cbd3a86...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > One thing I will say for him: He's in synch with the typical
> > uninformed American "safety" ideas. That is - he's got the oh-so-
> > important headgear on; but in two of the five photos, he's riding on
> > the sidewalk, and (unless that's a one-way street) riding opposite the
> > flow of traffic.
>
> Around this town, with the exception of one busy pedestrian street where
> bikes are prohibited, and a couple that actually have a reasonable bike
> lane, the sidewalk is the place to be. One "bike lane" on a major road
> goes from 24" down to about 6" and is hard up against a concrete wall -
> not the greatest place to get yourself trapped, since it's also the
> inside of a corner. I go off the sidewalk where there are pedestrians
> actually using it.

When someone makes such a statement - in effect, "but the roads HERE
are really, really dangerous!!!!" - I'm usually very skeptical.

AFAIK, every study that's compared sidewalk riding with road riding
has found sidewalks to be several times as dangerous as roads. I
recall seeing ratios from 2.6 times to 13+ times as dangerous.

So where are you? Can you perhaps use Google Maps to show why your
area violates the usual physics? And are there no surviving road
riders?

- Frank Krygowski

[Eric Vey]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
Or
> even if it's really from Fox, because the clip is on a liberal site
> it's irrelevant.

Even if it were on a "conservative" website, it would be irrelevant.

[still just me]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:47:02 -0400, Eric Vey <junker@ericvey.com>
wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>Or
>> even if it's really from Fox, because the clip is on a liberal site
>> it's irrelevant.
>
>Even if it were on a "conservative" website, it would be irrelevant.

Once you've been brainwashed (re: Snorti & Tom; two peas in a pod) the
truth and the facts are no longer an issue. They're just things you
need to talk around.

[Ed Pirrero]

On Jun 13, 7:48 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 6:41 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
>
> Can you perhaps use Google Maps to show why your
> area violates the usual physics?

He already described his situation, Frank.

You do realize that all stats have margins of error, right? Maybe, if
you thought really hard about it, you'd be able to connect that
statement with the one to which you are replying.

Good luck.

E.P.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 14, 2:23 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 7:48 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 13, 6:41 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
>
> > Can you perhaps use Google Maps to show why your
> > area violates the usual physics?
>
> He already described his situation, Frank.

He said: "Around this town, with the exception of one busy pedestrian
street where
bikes are prohibited, and a couple that actually have a reasonable
bike lane, the sidewalk is the place to be." You may believe that
there's a town where the sidewalks are safer than all but three of the
streets, but I'm skeptical, based (once again) on every comparative
study I've ever read on the subject.

But I am a bit surprised that even you would rush to defend sidewalk
riding!

> You do realize that all stats have margins of error, right?

I thought that was obvious when I gave the _range_ of results for the
studies I'd remembered.

> Maybe, if
> you thought really hard about it, you'd be able to connect that
> statement with the one to which you are replying.

My request was for Ecnerwal to tell us or show us where he is. That
would allow us to evaluate whether his area really is some special
case; or whether Ecnerwal is an unusually fearful rider; or some
combination of the two. Most of us know the second possibility is far
more common than the first.

If you're not interested in this information, try the option of not
reading the thread. I'm sure you're familiar with ignorance being
bliss, Ed. (Of course, that's more true for some individuals than for
others.)

- Frank Krygowski

[Ed Pirrero]

On Jun 14, 4:19 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2:23 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 13, 7:48 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 13, 6:41 pm, Ecnerwal <LawrenceSM...@SOuthernVERmont.NyET>
>
> > > Can you perhaps use Google Maps to show why your
> > > area violates the usual physics?
>
> > He already described his situation, Frank.
>
> He said: "Around this town, with the exception of one busy pedestrian
> street where
> bikes are prohibited, and a couple that actually have a reasonable
> bike lane, the sidewalk is the place to be." You may believe ....

Try and stick to logic, Frank. Straw man arguments this early means
you're already backpedalling.

> But I am a bit surprised that even you would rush to defend sidewalk
> riding!

Of course, now you spend more electrons on yet another straw man.
Trying to imply, without qualification, that I would endorse or defend
sidewalk riding is a weak tactic.

> > You do realize that all stats have margins of error, right?
>
> I thought that was obvious when I gave the _range_ of results for the
> studies I'd remembered.

Then you do understand that risk is not monolithic for every locale.
Bravo.

> > Maybe, if
> > you thought really hard about it, you'd be able to connect that
> > statement with the one to which you are replying.
>
> My request was for Ecnerwal to tell us or show us where he is.

Yes, there was that component.

> That
> would allow us to evaluate whether his area really is some special
> case...

Of course, your evaluation over the internet would be a good
substitution for an experienced local's judgement.

LOL.

> If you're not interested in this information, try the option of not
> reading the thread.

That is one of the dumbest things to ever come from your keyboard,
Frank. But ad hominem arguments on the heels of straw men? Tsk, tsk,
Frank.

> I'm sure you're familiar with ignorance being
> bliss, Ed. (Of course, that's more true for some individuals than for
> others.)

I observe your writing in Usenet, Frank - I have seen exactly how
incredibly blissful you are.

E.P.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 15, 11:28 am, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I observe your writing in Usenet, Frank - I have seen exactly how
> incredibly blissful you are.

:-) Well, I was laughing as I read your reply. Thanks for that!

- Frank Krygowski