Quote:
Well, I talked to the "Transportation Coordinator" here at work. She agrees with me and during the planning meetings with other companies participating and the government sponsor department, the companies argued allowing motorcycles count as alternative transportation, but the government agency just would not have any of that crazy talk or listen to reason. The companies all decided that the government agency in charge is flat out anti-motorcycle because they are threatened by the freedom that motorcycles represent and the very thought of freedom goes completely against their social communist ideals.
Soren
MAN Soren, after readin' THAT, if I didn't know how far Beverton Oregon was from Tucson Arizona, I'D SWEAR you've been hangin' around with a certain other fellow BA.com member who will remain nameless here, dude!!!
COME ON! Like I said earlier in this thing, I'd BETCHA their reasoning has more to do with the idea that motorcycles ARE inherently more dangerous than most any form of transportation and NOT BECAUSE this group has...what was that again Kevin...err...I MEAN SOREN...any "social communist ideas"!!!
(oh..and I forgot...even YOU admitted in your original posting here that the average motorcycle is "dirtier", exhaust emissions-wise, than most modern cars, which IS TRUE, BTW...and so THAT could be yet another reason for this agency's views about this)
Last edited by Dwight; 07/03/2008 1:11 AM.
Yep! Just like a good Single Malt Scotch, you might call me "an acquired taste" TOO.(among the many OTHER things you may care to call me, of course)
| 
