Dear John, I agree with what you have said about my post. But it seems that my point was lost. When the really "hot button" issues of collectivist vs libertarian politics, (left vs right) are commingled with the simple act of biking, strange and distasteful results occur. Possibly a woman such as was described today, might soon deliberately run over bikes rather than just darkly jesting about deliberateness. Why not separate politics from biking. Socialist issues could be commingled with----say, walking, running, swimming, baseball, football, sitting on the porch--------etc., etc., etc. Land coercion and climate have no more kinship with biking than those activities. But forcing polarizing issues on the bicycle helps only the psyches of the activist agitators. That was my point.
And in answer to you asking me to point fingers at groups, might I refer to the exchange I had with the contributor who wanted to purge those from his group who did not hold his views. He called it getting them "off the bus." Eric Westhagen John Rider wrote: > Eric, > > To what "organization" are you referring to in your last post? To what > "organization" do you believe that most of the people who post to this forum > belong? This Bikies email group is just a forum for people to discuss what > they each see as issues pertaining to bicycling. Some people who post to > this forum do believe that the issues of "land use and transportation" and > "climate change" do pertain to bicycling. Some, yourself included I would > presume, do not. > > Just curious, > John Rider > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Eric Westhagen > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 4:39 PM > To: B.C. Brown; BikiesSubmissions > Subject: Re: [Bikies] WSJ: Many comment on panel's growth proposal for Dane > County > > "B.C. Brown" wrote: > > > <<I think the coverage of land use and transportation is generally > > spotty and superficial in the local daily papers.>> > > > > ____________ > > Dear Ms Brown, > > Bikies is often advocating for "land use restriction", "man determined > global warming" , and other socialistic causes of our times in the name of > bicycle riding. To many who contribute here, the two are simply one. > Well, THEY ARE NOT. But where they are considered that way and yet only > mention the activity of bike riding, it is not surprising there develops > hostility against bike riders in general. Only today there has been shock > expressed in a number of "bikies" listings about the woman's flip, callus, > and derogatory remark about bike riders. > > Who knows why she was so down on bicyclists? But, I would be willing to bet > that she might have run into socialists, masquerading as "bicycle > advocates?" Otherwise, there is no rational reason for such an outburst > against the simple bicycle. > > Why deceive people? Call your organization a "socialist land use > federation?" > > Eric Westhagen > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
