Bike Lane Logic

As Monty Python says...and now for something completely different!

As I was driving back from The City tonight, I noticed the sidewalks along the main drag...that are never used. And the bike path that is hardly ever used...and thought of all the wasted money, just because some DOT engineers came up with a concept called 'urban profiles'. The way this works is that if a road is of a certain size, in a certain place, it must have a median, curb and gutter, bikepath and sidewalks on each side.

Think about the crisis we have in infrastructure and you begin to appreciate what a crime it is, really, that scarce public funds get spent on an 'ideal' road profile that, apart from the road surface itself, doesn't get used! Not only is the money spent wastefully installing these unused/little used appurtenances, but then they have to be maintained...in perpetuity. If we could just curb wasteful actions like these, and tailor and right-size the infrastructure, then we could address REAL needs...not wants, or desires, that drain the public treasury.

Another way to highlight how unquestioned assumptions like this drive and drain our resources is to think of it this way:

We mandate that bicycles, which, when I was a kid, drove on sidewalks, must drive on the road (with or without bikelanes, in this case, we will assume, with), with the flow of traffic. Meanwhile, there is a perfectly good (and much safer) underused sidewalk a few feet away. Think about this! Would any of you agree that we should, to save money, eliminate sidewalks as an improvement and mandate that the pedestrians walk in the BIKE LANE, along with the bikes?! I doubt it! Madness, you say! But...

All a bike rider is...is a pedestrian on a bike! Sharing the roadway with up to 10 ton trucks, travelling up to 45 mph in most urban sections. The bike rider even must go with the flow, so he can't see what is going on behind him.

Wouldn't it make more sense (silly me, as if that would make a difference to an urban transportation planner!) for BIKES and PEOPLE to share the much, much safer sidewalk? After all, they are about the same size, close to the same weight...and the bikes and people can walk in any direction they like, as long as it is safe. Which it would be!

Think of the savings, eliminating all those unnecessary and INTRINSICALLY DANGEROUS bike paths. We are talking major capital improvement bucks... and saving on YEARS of maintenance. Billions, over time. BILLIONS.

And what kind of society says that 1,000 pound motorcycles (and those are BIG ones!) can share the roadway with those 10 ton trucks? Why not stick the bicycles out there too! All a motorcycle is is a BIG moped---a motorized bike. And worse, if the motorcycle owner buys a minimal insurance policy, he doesn't have to wear a helmet!But oftentimes, bicyclists do! CRAZY.

And then there are the laws that allow 6 year old children- FIRST GRADERS, for crying out loud- to operate 500 lb. 4-wheelers, no helmet required, no parental supervision required...off road! Uneven surfaces! Trees! Ditches! If that isn't a form of parental neglect, at the least, I don't know what is.

Why is common sense so...uncommon!

The unquestioned, un-rational assumptions cost lives and money. Blood and treasure. We grow livid at a few thousand combat deaths among our military who are trained for , and expect to be, in hazardous situations, where their lives are at risk.

But, we don't even think about 50,000 traffic deaths a year...most totally avoidable if only a seat belt was worn, or the driver was sober.

Crazy. And we don't even question these assumptions.

CRAZY...just scratches the surface on our institutional lunacy.

M.C.

"Judicial DeMeanor"

Sotomayor Samba II
Judge Sotomayor is widely quoted as having said that the judgement of a "wise Latina woman" is superior to that of (old) white males (and presumably old, white females, too); her judgement in the Connecticut fire department test case was unanimously overturned by the USSC; and a number of Senators have said directly, or directly, that she is lying to the Senate, under oath, about previously statements and actions (and lost is that she was member of an all women's club until AFTER her nomination was made). As one Senator remarked (I couldn't believe he would actually say this, out loud---hooray! It's exactly what I was thinking!)---'What do you think would happen to me, as a white male, if I said and did the things you did?'. Sotomayor's rejoinder was that she could understand how he felt about all that (ah, empathy!), but...you had to consider the context (what does THAT mean?).

However, Senator Arlen Specter clarified all that for us, by telling us what is THE really, really important quality that this nominee brings to the table- she has a 'judicial demeanor'!

So THAT is what it takes to become a Supreme. It's all about 'attitude'!

And the "Lapdog Republicans" are rolling over as fast as they can, announcing they won't hold up the hearings, announcing as early as they can they will vote yes, etc.

Honestly, I am not sure what kind of judge she will make. BUT, she has a history of making the kind of comments and allusions that would sink any white male/female candidate for ANY position at the federal level. The fact that this history of comments, allusions and associations (The Belizean Grove, La Raza, etc) is being given such short shrift means that, ironically, she is being given a pass, most likely BECAUSE she is a 'minority' candidate. Racism and sexism being given a pass for these reasons---isn't that racism in and of itself?

Russians refuse to shake hands with Obama?

No! This is a typical example of Obama being VERY CLEVER. Remember when he kowtowed to the Saudi King---and then denied that we had seen that with our very eyes? (He did kowtow). Then there were the two cases wherein he allegedly is looking at the 'backside' of first one (16 year old) and then another (older) youth delegate and staffer, respectively, at the G8 Summit. In the first case, he actually was looking elsewhere (checking where he was going to step). In the second case, hard to say.

Now this. The right wing blogosphere just ignited upon seeing the MSNBC Andrea Mitchell video that seems to show a line of Russians refusing to shake Obama's hand, but shaking the Russian President's! Just one problem...not so! The edited video skips past Obama shaking hands with Russians to Obama introducing American staffers to President Medvedev.

Here is where he is so clever. If you look at how Obama is holding his hands, you can see that a case can be made (this is what my wife saw) that he is deliberately making it appear that he is being snubbed. You may be skeptical of this, but, I emphasize, there is no overstating the guile and wiliness of this individual. Look how he is 'hiding in plain sight" on the birth certificate issue!

There are two motives here. First, he is looking back over his shoulder to the Saudi incident, where he did exactly what is seen. By discrediting subsequent 'video veritas' moments, he casts doubt on THAT incident---subsequent events provide cover for preceding events.

And, more importantly---the 'right' (and a few on the 'left' and mainstreams media, too---especially in regard to the G8) jumped right on the bandwagon---and look foolish after the fact. Therefore, discrediting their FUTURE credibility. And intimidating them. After all, if what you see turns out to be not what you think it was, and the President is right, after all, every time...

I have said in the past that President Obama is not the "sharpest knife in the drawer". I withdraw that hasty assessment. This is one sharp dude. And the more dangerous for it.

Truth must be served, not just what we 'would like to see'. Every time a 'scandal' like this pops up, we who want to hold the President accountable must give it a second and third look before deciding whether we 'trust our lying eyes'! OUR future credibility depends on it. Putin may be have a black belt in judo; Obama is a master of political ju-jitsu. We must make strenuous efforts to ensure that he cannot gain leverage against the truth.

No, you won't read this or anything like it in the mainstream media and blogs- they have been both co-opted and embarrassed at the same time. Nullified, is more like it. Even Helen Thomas recently said that even Nixon never did 'anything like what Obama is doing'. (Query: Was she criticizing the President- or admiring him? Or both?).

Think about it. Think about why this blog is named SAMIZDAT Republic. Only the underground press can shine the light, even now. It will get worse---hopefully, it will eventually get better.

Let's pray so, and soon.

Veritas.

M.C.














http://www.bluegrasspundit.com/2009/07/russians-refuse-to-shake-hands-with.html

SARAH PALIN- A TRULY LIBERATED WOMAN

Sarah Palin is liberated by her Faith.

Sarah Palin is liberated by her personal strength of principled conviction.

Sarah Palin is liberated by her politics.

FAITH LIBERATION: Faith in God and trust in HIM, following THE Higher calling, first and foremost.

PRINCIPLED CONVICTION: She is convicted that her principles are true and should be born witness to by living them as well as talking about them. Her decision to love Trig as the unique person he is, and not to treat him as a disposable item, is but one example of that. Her willingness to quit the 'game' for a higher calling, is another. Putting family first (only after God, but also, as a responsibility before God) is poignant and the most recently visited example of this.

How can anyone say she has no empathy, as Purdum recently wrote?!

POLITICS: She lives in the belief that true Conservatism is the only path that will lead to a future for our country. Another aspect of her higher calling.. wherein she leads, does not follow the pack, but blazes her own trail. She sets the pace and the stage for a greater day for America.

And 'they' hate her for it. But their hate (Purdum, Dowd, others) does nothing to diminish her, or to invalidate her beliefs. And they hate that worst of all.

Which is why almost all the attacks are ad hominem---from Tina Fey to Maureen Dowd ("one nutty puppy"). It's ALL they can attack. And they hate that too.

She believes in the old principles of freedom of speech and freedom to live free! She is a successful mother, leader and woman. Her success, her courage show how poorly they live, and how far from any real principles they are.

And they hate her example of how a free woman lives, according to the Light that guides her, most of all. Because---the darkness cannot stand against the Light.

Stay tuned, there is more to come from this free spirited, truly liberated American original from the last frontier.

M.C.