Replies

If it’s less ‘n a mile, I’d just walk. Even in a torrential downpour.

I’d rather hoof it several blocks in a slicker than stare at the taillights of a flock of fear-frozen morons.

I have a theory that automobile traffic is a barometer of the political climate of any given area. When the Liberal population gets to about 35-40% things start to cork up.

This happens for two principle reasons:

1. Liberals are fear-dominated beings, so they can’t drive fer sh-, er, squat. Death lurks at every lane change and intersection, and they know it. “Speed kills” is an Article of Faith for them; never mind that it defies the Laws of Physics. They hog the left lane, steeped in false piety, and glower at anyone who would deign to blow their self-righteous doors off. Doubt me? Drive Hwy 101 north through Marin and Sonoma counties.

2. Liberals are anti-development, so they consistently oppose the construction of the additional lane miles that would, otherwise, relieve traffic congestion. They invent “Carpool Lanes” and slate their hours of operation to exactly coincide with the hours of greatest traffic flux, such that A) the lanes will be unusable by most vehicles at the very times they are most needed, and B) the traffic-causing impact of the carpool lanes will be sufficiently masked by the normal traffic during commute hours that the lanes themselves will not be unduly blamed for the congestion.

Gee. You’d think I had some experience with these things, eh?

Three of the major arteries I take are STILL two lanes each direction. Plenty of room on the shoulders for another lane of traffic and still have room for a breakdown lane.

And yet, they'd still rather to "efficiency" studies on light rail rather than add another f$%&*ing lane.

Criminally insane. There can be no other viable explanation.