a Seattle law maker has proposed a bicycle tax on the basis that they are unhealthy and bad for the environment (because the elevated respiration of riders results in increased CO2 output).
If we get the government we deserve, then I guess we must all be raving idiots as well.
:smack:
Is policy trolling a thing now? Dude looks a little old to be reading 4chan though.
You can’t make this shit up. Why? Cause fiction has to make sense.
I’m saving that link for the next time my Seattle friends make fun of politics in California.
Hey, he’s right, as far as it goes. Bikes ARE bad for the environment. I mean, someone’s got to smelt metal for the frames and make rubber for the tires and so on. Goddam pollution machines, they are.
And people insisting on going places faster than a walk is bad for the environment. Why can’t people just stay where they are?
Don’t even get me started on how bad agriculture is for the environment.
Are we sure he’s not a Portlandia character?
Bike riding is clearly dangerous activity. You don’t need to wear a helmet and tight shorts to do safe activities.
I suspect he will be.
Plus there is all that flying particulate matter that enters the atmosphere when they get smeared by my humvee. What a mess, they should be abolished.
I’d lay odds this tax loving, teabagging waste of skin is also a AGW denier to boot, which makes his CO2 comment hypocritical as well as idiotic to the extreme.
And as a matter of fact, bikes do already pay for the roads dumbass. Next time check your state’s budget sources sometime.
I once read (no citation for something from 20 or 30 years ago - sorry) that one car driving down one block of one city street burns as much oxygen as all the people living on that street do in an entire day. So he’s dead wrong on taxing bikes before taxing cars.
OK, so I looked up a citation:
The worthless Santorum-douche issued a non-pology late yesterday.
If you are behind me when I’m riding my bike, CO2 isn’t the gas you need to worry about.
There are a few sports drinks that give me bad gas.
The first story got the headline wrong. He’s a state representative from Kalama, not Seattle. In Seattle, we make our representatives publicly make love to a bicycle as part of the primary process.
Actually, that was a proper apology:
Note the lack of qualifiers and weasel words. This is such a rarity, that it deserves recognition.
Leaving the pol with a Cat 69 tattoo. 
I agree, it was a decent apology.
While he does apologize, he seems to do so because it is what he calls a ‘non-issue’ all the while barely acknowledging that he was working from a massive straw-man argument backed by a force of sheer stupidity.
And he’s still making the same debunked ‘bikes don’t pay for roads’ claims.
I waiting for him to raise the issue about cows, cow farts and methane.
Yeah. I think he only (sort of) apologized because he got called on it and couldn’t get away with completely denying it. I like the way it is NOW a non-issue … Hmmmm.
This article has more of his statement. It goes a bit beyond the standard non-apology, but not far enough, in my opinion. He apologizes only for bringing up the subject, but in doing so he also tries to retroactively restate the point in such a way to cover up the error.
So, 5-out-of-10 for contrition, but full marks for creativity.