Comment 33979

By JonC (registered) | Posted September 21, 2009 at 16:14:57

So Really?, is your suggestion that this not be discussed, because that is stupid. Discuss that. Not calling shit shit gives the impression that it is an acceptable opinion. If his plan was to have us discuss/debate the interview was his plan to have people discuss/debate his initial letter. No, his initial point was to frighten car drivers into keeping the road to themselves. To have a debate, the opposing opinion needs to be expressed. In Scott's case, the opinion is bikes should get nothing. To be fair is was that cars shouldn't lose anything, which is the same as saying bikes shouldn't get anything. Unless he has a science fiction solution that involves bicycles traveling on something other than roads.

For reference, the cyclist versus driver debate is cranked up to 11 in Toronto http://www.thestar.com/article/695759 http://www.thestar.com/article/695234 http://www.thestar.com/article/698501 http://www.thestar.com/Article/697365 http://www.thestar.com/article/697368

and the save local media campaign was instituted by the stations to get government handouts and/or to have legislation changed so that they actually DON'T have to provide local coverage. The only time sensible Hamiltonians actually hate Torontonians is when the Argos are in town.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds