Stop putting words in my mouth!

Maybe if i was a vampire i would meet more of them, they seem very important.

I have noticed an odd thing about the "anti-bicycle" case: some people appear to consider bicycles and cyclists as "left wing". I guess they look at a bike as a car with the right-hand wheels cut off.

This bothers me for three reasons. First, the two people who introduced me to bicycle activism, to the idea that cyclists have legitimate interests that we can argue for, held more conservative views than just about anyone I have ever met. And second, the more I look at the basic principles of conservatism, the more the idea of giving the users of one single mode of transportation the ability to make essentially unlimited claims on a limited public resource, namely public space contradicts those principles. Finally, if we allow people in favour of devoting limitless resources to motorized traffic to hijack the conservative tradition, we make it much harder to challenge their arguments.

I believe that we should take every opportunity to assert that riding a bicycle, calling for appropriate facilities for cyclists, and requiring the respect due to cyclists, does not in any way contradict conservative values or principles. In fact, the calls for endless catering to the car amount to a demand for self indulgence at public expense, the antithesis of any real conservative principle.

Can somebody please give the correct account of the Jarvis St. lane removal? I was pretty sure that it started in 2007 with Council voting to remove the lane for the benefit of the community and that Bike Lanes were a $50k after thought.

If this is the case, why are so many in Media & Political circles being allowed to twist this story to support their self serving interest?

City Council decided way back to remove a lane for car travel. Originally it was to be replaced simply with larger sidewalk and boulevard, but last spring Council decided to reduce the size of the proposed sidewalk and put in bike lanes.

By the way, they're not removing a lane on Jarvis, they're increasing the number of lanes. It just so happens that cars won't be allowed to travel in two of them.

Speaking of truthiness: Good on Rossi, to simply invent things in his head about bike lanes being dangerous for cyclists and motorists and that it is somehow bad environmental planning. It's a tried and true political ploy to sound authoritative even if you don't have a single scrap of evidence to back you up.

Seeing cycling as a "left wing" concept is baffling to me as well and having the media pit us against common sense or stability is ridiculous.

Introducing more biking to the city will save on infrastructure spending, health costs and policing budgets - all increasing out of control much to the anger of citizens whether conservative or liberal.
Cycling by nature can be for rugged individualists or communal groups, it can be for fun or a commute for work - it really crosses all lines.

Mayor Bloomberg in New York is a smart businessman, yet at the forefront of great changes in cycling culture, he knows it's all a financial benefit to the city.

Seeing cycling as a "left wing" concept is baffling to me as well and having the media pit us against common sense or stability is ridiculous.

Introducing more biking to the city will save on infrastructure spending, health costs and policing budgets - all increasing out of control much to the anger of citizens whether conservative or liberal.
Cycling by nature can be for rugged individualists or communal groups, it can be for fun or a commute for work - it really crosses all lines.

Mayor Bloomberg in New York is a smart businessman, yet at the forefront of great changes in cycling culture, he knows it's all a financial benefit to the city.

Riding a bike is not a political act. It is a pleasant healthy activity and a great way to get around. Some people may consider cycling "left wing" but I'm not going to lose any sleep over uninformed opinions.

To put the "War on the Car" rhetoric in some perspective I share the following quote:

"Calling Bike Lanes a War on the Car is like calling Parks a War on Buildings"

- V. Dodge


if uninformed opinions did not frequently lead to bad public policy. In this case, I worry that identifying opposition with larger and relatively popular political positions may lead to people taking on opposition without thinking. If we want to protect our rights, we have to stay focussed on the facts.

I spoke to a few non cyclist friends last night on this subject. They are not anti-bike but without exception they all consider cyclists to be "left wing" They felt the Toronto bike lobby in was more "anti-car" than "pro-bike" which is understandable. A few also noted that the "CO2 moral superiority" exhibited by some was a tell tale signature of a left winger. (These are not my views so please do not shoot the messenger) Perhaps cycling advocates should stick to a pro-bike mantra without the anti-car rhetoric.

If political labels matter then the TCU would be wise to to remove this from their website. "Besides, we like unions. We also like weekends, vacations, benefits, minimum wage and lots of other nice things that unions have fought for." If the bike lobby publically declares they are Pro-union you can't really fault people for assuming they tilt left politically.

I guess this is a longwinded way of stating I agree with your opinion that we should focus on facts (and avoid the politics).

Silvio
Sailor, Cyclist , Retired Pilot