Comments on: Maes says bike share threatens ‘personal freedoms’

By: Kelly

Kelly — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:25:05 +0000

I agree with Brian – this article really tells us nothing… and yet (as always) people are quick to judge and start name calling. What a childish world we live in. Maes obviously feels/thinks this for a reason (Maes says Denver’s B-Cycle program is “bigger than it looks on the surface.”) I would like to take a closer look at this Denver’s B-Cycle program. Don’t automatically assume you are dealing with a “crazy man”…. everything should be questioned with a “why” anymore —- I recommend educating yourself on this program before you make judgement.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:17:18 +0000

Somehow we’ve gone thru the wormhole into a Monty Python universe.

By: RGM_M

RGM_M — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:16:46 +0000

Is this guy for real? I can’t believe that he thinks this is even a valid argument. I agree with Matt, there are many other postitive factors that come out of a program like this. Right-wing, tunnel vision at its finest. Have no doubt, I will not support him and will spread the word about his remarks.

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:32:15 +0000

On the other hand, if more people ride bikes, it will result in fewer vehicles on the road, resulting in less road maintenance, which will reduce the size of government and help reduce the deficit!

There, now maybe that’s language even a dimwit Republican can understand.

By: es

es — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 21:48:16 +0000

um, what? did I read that right?

By: Vicki Gramm

Vicki Gramm — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:17:48 +0000

Uhhh, seriously?? All I got on that one!

By: M

Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:17:02 +0000

Context? Is anyone asking about context? That is a snippet lifted from a rally and I would love to see the entire sentence at least! Maybe even the whole paragraph.

I wish news organizations would quite going for the “gotchas” on all of the candidates. Lets examine the issues please.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:16:38 +0000

This article is VERY lacking in details. This might as well just be the headline if there isn’t enough information to understand WHY Maes is claiming what he’s claiming. What “personal freedoms” are being threatened? It is a longtime tactic of the democratic party to “lump” things into bills that no one would oppose at surface level so they can ridicule anyone who doesn’t support the WHOLE bill. (i.e. a bill for highway repair funding with 60percent of the funds going to gay rights or save the baby seals and give up Miranda rights in airports…)

“Oh, give me a break! Not EVERYTHING in this world has an ulterior motive. Geez.” not everything is simple and forthright either.

By: Commentator Bob

Commentator Bob — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:00:52 +0000

On a related note, Maes said that if elected, he would immediately require that aluminum foil hats are listed as mandatory attire in the state’s public school system.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:32:09 +0000

Foolish conclusion from Maes, who is grasping at straws to gain any support he can from the fractured right-wing base. Has he ever thought that maybe there’s more to these initiatives than global warming? How about health, obesity, mental well-being (many studies show that people living in cities with long drive-times are less happy and less healthy), and economics? I hope people can see how shallow of a thinker Mr. Maes really is.