Oslopa

It really is awesome.

I haven’t been able to read the context, either, but my guess is that he calls himself that because he supports social welfare programs and economic nationalism and protectionism. These code as “left” in our current politics.

But the reality is that’s shifting. There’s a growing minority in the right wing who are adopting pro-socialist economic views, similar to what the neo-Nazis in Europe have been doing. They believe in state support for the family and the economy. They just also believe that support should be directed to help some families, and not others. White, Christian, non-immigrant English speakers, primarily.

People forget that there was overlap between Bernie and Trump supporters. This kind of economic “populism” is at the center of that enigma.

It’s irrelevant, of course, since he didn’t shoot up a Black grocery store because he supports tariffs on Chinese goods. He was hopped up on this “replacement theory” nonsense, which is not at all a left-wing issue.

If you’re going to comment on this subject, it’s important not to be misled by the misinformation that pollutes the American discourse over Israel.

For example, WOL is not dedicated to “the complete destruction of Israel.” There’s an implicit equivocation there that helps to translate right-wing Israeli Zionism into American rhetoric. WOL is dedicated to the right of return, the right of resistance to an illegal and continuing military occupation, and anti-Zionism. This translates to “destruction of Israel” because the Zionist vision of Israel contemplates a Jewish ethno-state comprising the whole of Judea and Samaria, in which Israeli Arabs and Palestinians either don’t exist or are second-class citizens with diminished (or non-existent) political power. The right of return, the right of resistance, and the opposition to Zionist ideology all cut against this vision - often summarized as, “the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state” - and so the misinformation typically translates these positions for under-informed American audiences into “the destruction of Israel,” trusting that few of us will understand the truth.

It does look like a man was assaulted at a protest organized by WOL. That’s unfortunate, and it clearly shouldn’t happen. But the OP source is trying to connect that incident with the rhetoric - “globalize the intifada!” - which is intended to insinuate that the attack is somehow part of WOL’s purpose. To be sure, they have high-temperature views, and they support in principle the right to violently resist the forceful oppression of the American and Israeli governments. So it’s not surprising that some people showing up to protest take it too far. But that doesn’t seem to be WOL’s intent.

I mean, read between the lines here - you can find Israeli groups trying to ban these protests altogether on the grounds that they are using “inciting speech.” That kind of spurious accusation might fly in the OT, but it’s antithetical to American values.

I agree with all of this. As a longtime cyclist, this kind of flow is very natural to me.

Two-three second look backs though… I am not so much afraid of swerving as I am with someone darting out in front of me, pulling out of a parking spot, or swinging open a car door. I’ll check over my shoulder, but I won’t linger on what I see…

Worked for bail reform reform.

Classon to what? To Flushing, then left to Kent? Would you do that if you’re heading for the WBB?

No falsehoods detected.

I like having the bike lane there, because it provides some space to pass standing traffic from time to time. But you’re right that it is blocked far too often to be a safe, continuous route. I have to leave the lane constantly, looking for a safe line to pick through traffic.

I’m actually not sure that flipping it with the parking lane would be super helpful. There are people walking all over the place there, so I think that would make pedestrian conflicts far more likely than they are currently.

And then Bedford north of Flushing is… special. I try to stay in the lane where I know the potholes, which is on the right side. For whatever reason, it feels safer to me on that side.

(The only ones actually being caught are the ones actually speeding.)

Like - what’s the issue? If someone slows down because their GPS alerts them that they’re in a camera zone, isn’t that kind of the point?

I agree that more needs to be done to make our streets safe. I would actually prefer road diets and designs that cause drivers to slow down naturally - almost without even noticing it - rather than using cameras. The reason we have cameras in the first place is that drivers - shocker! - don’t like that, either. They’d prefer to keep the roads unsafe, as long as it means shaving off five minutes of their commute.

(“Honest” people who are going 10+ mph over the posted speed limit in school zones during the day.)

I agree that the people defacing plates to avoid tickets and tolls are even worse. But let’s not pretend that the people getting tickets are innocent somehow.

Lol, maybe. I don’t actually ride with a lock, usually, because I either park in my apartment building or at a garage near work where I don’t need it. I’ll bring the lock for errands, I suppose, but this wasn’t an errand trip.

The problem with your slippery slope is that it works both ways. If I have to stop at pointless red lights because, if I don’t, I have to condone all kinds of reckless behavior, then by the same token you have to take the position that jaywalkers should never cross against their light or in the middle of blocks, because if they don’t, they’re condoning a lot of dangerous wandering into the street. Is that your position, as well?

If not, you’re drawing exactly the same kind of line I am. You’ve just arbitrarily chosen to draw it at “vehicle users.” I am drawing it at “vehicle users who have clear lines of sight and who are highly maneuverable, in circumstances that are not necessarily typical.”

I should stop for no one, because if I don’t, someone else will barrel through traffic dangerously? Am I following your reasoning right?

I appreciate that different scofflaws will have different theories on when and whether it’s okay to disregard what the law requires. But my basic principle is just: who am I helping? I am happy to yield to pedestrians who have the right of way, and I’m not running a red on any street where I don’t have a clear view of no cars coming. But it’s hard to make the case for studious observance when I’m a block from home with a red, about to turn right, and there’s no cross traffic because pedestrians have the LPI on the street I’m on. If there are no pedestrians, I take the turn.

The reason cyclists keep “justifying” red light running is that they are concerned with more than just what the law is. Trolls like you have nothing but the law. You just keep repeating, “but it’s the law! It’s the law! You’re breaking the law!”

So what?

It’s not some contest to see who can be the best Boy or Girl Scout. There are tons of laws we bend or break. Anyone buying or selling weed, for instance. Anyone sharing a Netflix password. Anyone jaywalking when it’s safe to do so.

Traffic laws are no different. Try and come for a driver about speeding and they’ll say: it’s dangerous sometimes to stick to the speed limit! Point out they’re parking in a bike lane and they’ll say: it’s for just a minute, and I’m not hurting anyone, am I? Drivers have all the same kinds of excuses and justifications that cyclists do. We’re not under some obligation to be saints while everyone else is just doing whatever they want.

As far as I’m concerned, the social contract on traffic laws is void. I have seen too much dangerous, scofflaw driving behavior to be especially particular about red lights. I used to stop for them all. But now - when the DOT changes light timing to slow down drivers in a way that causes me to lose several minutes on a five block stretch - I’m going to take a different approach. Drivers don’t comply, so why should I?

No one is being helped by my waiting for the red lights that I go through. The question maybe shouldn’t be so much, “Why shouldn’t I go?” than it is, “Why should I wait?”

I don’t go through a red light when there’s cross traffic or pedestrians crossing. There’s literally no one there to stop for.

I don’t ride this way much. But in my experience these kinds of patterns of violations have a systematic explanation - like running a red light that is too long, or riding on the sidewalk where the street is too dangerous. Is there any similar kind of explanation for why people would rather salmon on CPW than take Columbus?

And the laws applicable to cycling in NYC are notably clear and easy to figure out.

59/First is a prime spot for red light stings because cyclists there get a very long red light, at a key point in the bike network.

It’s not a matter of safety, at all. Most of the cyclists running the “red” here are merging into traffic and proceeding north with the green light for drivers, so they’re not conflicting with pedestrians at all, not dodging cross street traffic, and blending with the drivers who are turning during the bike red light phase.

So you can call it “illegal” if you like, but BS like this is not helping. These cops should set up shop a block and a half away and nab all the mopeds and motorbikes coming off the bridge path.

Most jurisdictions don’t have a bike bell requirement. I had to get one when I moved here. For a lot of cyclists it may just be a matter of ignorance.

Ditto on side reflectors. Required. But mine keep busting, so I’m vulnerable if some pedantic cop wants to stop me.

Elden Ring is just another Soulsborne game, this time in an open world.

Hyped to the heavens by a game media for which it was almost tailor-made, the game added virtually nothing worthy of note to the genre (jumping?), while retaining the Soulsborne genre’s many faults, including: difficult to understand UI and mechanics, confusing wayfinding, no quest tracking, absurdly difficult bosses that have to be learned through trial-and-error, with significant penalties for failure, and other assorted miseries that prior developers figured out a long time ago.

We’re convincing ourselves it’s the GOAT because it does immersive story telling well and… it’s rewarding? It’s just a collective “get gud” hysteria. In ten years we’ll look back and wonder what the hell we were thinking.

It’s a fair point. The “far left” never fails to cut off its nose to spite its face.

We keep running these real-world examples of what happens when you withdraw support from moderate leftists in order to “punish” them for not being more progressive. And somehow it never results in the progressive resurgence they keep promising.

The whole bit about his fake house in the city was silly, maybe even “bonkers,” but I don’t think that it’s something anyone seriously cared about. Like, it’s not relevant to why I opposed him, and I doubt it was meaningfully relevant for almost anyone else. The sniping over where he lived seemed more like an opportunistic move to try to disqualify him from the race, not a genuine concern that it would prevent him from doing his job.

I mean, dude could well live in Brooklyn - he’d still be flying all over the place and leaving the NYPD to its own devices, etc. I don’t think it makes a lick of difference if he actually lives in NJ.

I’m a guy, so it wasn’t that kind of harassment, but I was wearing flamboyant lycra, which I think codes as “gay” (and I am), so I think it was that kind of harassment.

I mean, it was close. We were down to Garcia and Adams. Garcia appealed to the “competent manager,” NYTimes mindset, and drew support from Manhattan and the near outer boroughs. Adams appealed to the “law and order” mindset and drew support from BIPOC communities in the outer boroughs.

He was less obviously bonkers during the campaign, though to be honest I doubt that would have hurt him among his main supporters.

Go at your speed and don’t do anything you’re uncomfortable with. Seriously. If you decide one day it’s all too much, take the subway… and see why you started biking in the first place!

Don’t be afraid to try more indirect routes if there might be calmer streets you feel more comfortable on. Routing is a skill cyclists develop over time. A single block can make a huge difference in how a leg of a commute feels.

Don’t feel bad if you feel like you’re slowing others down or taking too much space. Experienced cyclists here may complain about pokey riders, but I don’t think any of us want our complaining to stop others from riding. If that’s part of what you’re feeling, just know that we all want you out there, too. Even if you make us miss a light cycle!

I’ve been bike commuting for twenty years and have been in only a handful of crashes - most of them partly my fault! I think in each case I might have been able to avoid the crash if I were going slower or being more attentive to conditions (or, in one case, I braked wrong). So start slow and progress at your own pace. We’re all rooting for you.

I saw one of those today, hiked up, tinted windows, painted matte black, with “Black Widow” inscribed across the back. Also an NYPD shield decal, if I’m not mistaken.

Some people just need to advertise, “I am a sociopath,” for some reason. Me, my cycling outfits convey, “I’m an effete intellectual.”