Bush transforms into avid mountain biker

[landotter]

[email protected] wrote:
> What a bunch of sniveling whiners! You've got a president who is a
> cycling fan, and all you can do is trash him. No wonder the general
> public doesn't like cyclists. With people like you riding bikes,
> cycling will NEVER become a mainstream activity. Face it: Nobody with
> any self-respect identifies with pussies like you.

I bet this makes your studly Republican **** feel huge:
http://tinyurl.com/ymt2m4

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Ken C. M." <[email protected]> writes:

>>> Versus road bikers?
>>
>> Y'mean like cycle-tourists? Which reminds me -- how long
>> and how far does a ride have to be, to qualify as a "tour"?
>>
>> To put it another way -- when a rider is past having a
>> competitive edge to hone with training rides, and not even
>> involved in official competitive cycling (including
>> randonneuring/audax,) and goes for a just-for-the-heck-of-it
>> road ride anyway -- is he or she not essentially cycle-touring?
>> If so, why do some folks try to disguise it as, or bother to
>> go through the motions of making it a "training ride"?
>>
>>
> Good point. I am beyond ever being competitive age. But I went for a
> Thanksgiving 45 miler, a just for the heck of it ride, got lost, sort
> of, and had a good time doing it. I just rode.

I'm inclined to call a ride such as you describe, a tour.
Or at least an excursion. I believe such a ride is every
bit as much a valid undertaking and accomplishment as any
"training ride".

And I don't see where it says a tour has to be fraught
with extreme baggage-carrying, or distance, or duration.
I think it's more a matter of adventure and curiosity.
One doesn't necessarily have to get outfitted by
Abercrombie & Fitch for that.

Getting "sort of lost" is a great way to discover stuff,
like the diner that makes the best fries-&-gravy in the
world, or shortcuts from hither to yon.

So in my book, you can consider yourself a cycle-tourist
(if you want a label at all.)

> and didn't and wouldn't
> call it a training ride.

That's part of the beauty of being cycloputer-free ;-)


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

 

[landotter]

I have no idea what you're referring to without any reference. Please
quote next time.

BTW, if you use Google instead of a newsreader, it shows quotes as
clicky "expandables", thus the temptation to not trim.

I'm top posting this time, just to see if that's also an irritant.


Pat in TX wrote:
> Guys, please learn to trim the message. It's a beating to scroll all the way
> through a long message I've read 7 times only to see a one sentence remark.
> ...
>
> Pat in TX

 

[Ken C. M.]

Tom Keats wrote:

>>> To put it another way -- when a rider is past having a
>>> competitive edge to hone with training rides, and not even
>>> involved in official competitive cycling (including
>>> randonneuring/audax,) and goes for a just-for-the-heck-of-it
>>> road ride anyway -- is he or she not essentially cycle-touring?
>>> If so, why do some folks try to disguise it as, or bother to
>>> go through the motions of making it a "training ride"?
>>>
>>>
>> Good point. I am beyond ever being competitive age. But I went for a
>> Thanksgiving 45 miler, a just for the heck of it ride, got lost, sort
>> of, and had a good time doing it. I just rode.
>
> I'm inclined to call a ride such as you describe, a tour.
> Or at least an excursion. I believe such a ride is every
> bit as much a valid undertaking and accomplishment as any
> "training ride".
>
That might be a good label to put on it. The as ridden on such a ride
does /look/ like a touring bike i.e. handlebar bag and seat wedge bag.

> And I don't see where it says a tour has to be fraught
> with extreme baggage-carrying, or distance, or duration.
> I think it's more a matter of adventure and curiosity.
> One doesn't necessarily have to get outfitted by
> Abercrombie & Fitch for that.
>
> Getting "sort of lost" is a great way to discover stuff,
> like the diner that makes the best fries-&-gravy in the
> world, or shortcuts from hither to yon.
>
> So in my book, you can consider yourself a cycle-tourist
> (if you want a label at all.)
>
>> and didn't and wouldn't
>> call it a training ride.
>
> That's part of the beauty of being cycloputer-free ;-)

Well I now have a computer on that bike, but it's now reading off the
rear wheel and is mounted on the seat tube. It's very difficult to read
while riding. Probably pretty dangerous too. The only thing I think I am
going to change is the shoe and pedal system. I am going to purchase
some mtb shoes and recessed cleats / pedals probably something along the
lines of spd or maybe crank brothers pedals. I figure it will make
walking around a bit easier when /off/ the bike while on an excursion.

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

landotter wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > What a bunch of sniveling whiners! You've got a president who is a
> > cycling fan, and all you can do is trash him. No wonder the general
> > public doesn't like cyclists. With people like you riding bikes,
> > cycling will NEVER become a mainstream activity. Face it: Nobody with
> > any self-respect identifies with pussies like you.
>
> I bet this makes your studly Republican **** feel huge:
> http://tinyurl.com/ymt2m4

But think about how the Iraqi children are benefiting:
<http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2005/01/19/international/19iraq.ready.html>.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

 

[landotter]

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> landotter wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > > What a bunch of sniveling whiners! You've got a president who is a
> > > cycling fan, and all you can do is trash him. No wonder the general
> > > public doesn't like cyclists. With people like you riding bikes,
> > > cycling will NEVER become a mainstream activity. Face it: Nobody with
> > > any self-respect identifies with pussies like you.
> >
> > I bet this makes your studly Republican **** feel huge:
> > http://tinyurl.com/ymt2m4
>
> But think about how the Iraqi children are benefiting:
> <http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2005/01/19/international/19iraq.ready.html>.
>
Yes, you're right, seeing her parents violently killed will give her an
independence that a loving childhood could never offer!

 

[Rudolf Schmidt]

"landotter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I bet this makes your studly Republican **** feel huge:
> http://tinyurl.com/ymt2m4

I'm not a Republican, but I like this one.

http://clarityandresolve.com/alMasri.jpg

 

[landotter]

Rudolf Schmidt wrote:
> "landotter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > I bet this makes your studly Republican **** feel huge:
> > http://tinyurl.com/ymt2m4
>
> I'm not a Republican, but I like this one.
>
> http://clarityandresolve.com/alMasri.jpg

Not a fan of the basteward, but as we all know, it's a big game of
whack a mole with those guys. I, for one, am still wondering why we
don't put the one on trial that we captured. Ya know, Khalid Shaikh
Mohammed, the mastermind behind 9/11, the guy that was caught over
three years ago. But instead, we invade Mexico to fight gingivitis so
to speak.

/me throws hands in air in a kvetching motion

 

[Bill]

Rudolf Schmidt wrote:
> "landotter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> I bet this makes your studly Republican **** feel huge:
>> http://tinyurl.com/ymt2m4
>
> I'm not a Republican, but I like this one.
>
> http://clarityandresolve.com/alMasri.jpg
>
>
I would have liked it paired with one with Bush in the crosshairs.
Bill Baka