Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Car and Auto Forums > Autos General > Re: Cell phone ...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 7 of 40 Topic 5015 of 5196
Post > Topic >>

Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving

by Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Feb 28, 2008 at 02:10 PM

Martin Edwards wrote:
> Bolwerk wrote:
>> Jack May wrote:
>>> "Bolwerk" <bolwerk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:13sb6mlp11mb923@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Miles Bader wrote:
>>>>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>>>>>> Pat who? wrote:
>>>>>>> Bike riders complaining about car drivers is also particulary
>>>>>>> hypocritical.[...]
>>>>>> That statement makes no sense at all.
>>>>> Very little of what Pat has said on this thread has made any
sense...
>>>> Pat is Conklin Lite.  More intellectually honest perhaps, but still 
>>>> has a kneejerk dislike for cities.  Which makes you wonder why he 
>>>> trolls transit and urban planning groups.
>>>
>>> Gee since most people now live in the suburbs, I guess most people 
>>> don't like large cities either. 
>>
>> So what?  I don't really care what most people like.  I just find it 
>> odd that trolls feel the need to come in here and berate people who 
>> aren't even harming anyone.
> 
> As I have asked before, why are they here?  There are plenty of carhead 
> groups.

I understand the carhead thing.  They're probably just brainwashed by 
advertising or ideology.  Jack is a particularly extreme example of 
both, probably.

But why are the anti-city trolls here?  This is being posted to an URBAN 
planning group and to an URBAN transit group.  I see no reason for Pat 
and Conklin to even take an interest.
 




 40 Posts in Topic:
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Miles Bader <miles@[EM  2008-02-27 21:49:48 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-02-27 12:15:08 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
"Jack May" <  2008-02-27 16:22:47 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Eric Vey <junker@[EMAI  2008-02-27 21:56:52 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-02-28 01:09:54 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-02-28 08:35:54 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-02-28 14:10:29 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
"Jack May" <  2008-03-01 20:19:42 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-03-02 15:19:48 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
"Amy Blankenship&quo  2008-03-02 10:22:41 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-03 14:40:42 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Nobody <jock@[EMAIL PR  2008-03-07 01:48:00 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Pat <groups@[EMAIL PRO  2008-03-05 16:46:18 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-05 20:19:42 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Eric Vey <junker@[EMAI  2008-03-05 21:23:26 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-05 23:28:26 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-03-06 08:16:48 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-06 08:29:35 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-03-06 08:15:31 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Eric Vey <junker@[EMAI  2008-03-06 03:46:05 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-06 08:31:16 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Pat <groups@[EMAIL PRO  2008-03-06 10:22:40 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Pat <groups@[EMAIL PRO  2008-03-06 10:25:40 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-06 14:03:42 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Pat <groups@[EMAIL PRO  2008-03-06 12:37:46 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-08 01:34:36 
Re: Cell phone driving = drunk driving
Miles Bader <miles@[EM  2008-03-03 10:19:05 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Miles Bader <miles.bad  2008-03-05 12:15:00 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Eric Vey <junker@[EMAI  2008-03-05 02:06:31 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-05 11:30:52 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
"George Conklin"  2008-03-05 16:11:04 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
James Robinson <wascan  2008-03-05 22:10:15 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
"George Conklin"  2008-03-05 19:15:22 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
James Robinson <wascan  2008-03-06 00:24:22 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-03-06 08:08:18 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-05 20:22:16 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-03-06 08:09:22 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Martin Edwards <big_ma  2008-03-06 08:07:01 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Bolwerk <bolwerk@[EMAI  2008-03-09 15:06:31 
Re: High population density is good for bikes
Miles Bader <miles@[EM  2008-03-06 10:05:22 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Sun Nov 23 8:47:31 CST 2008.