The Age-Hardened Burns: Part I Reader Feedback

Farily tightly reasoned (for Burns) comments on motorcycling image and controlling personality(ies).



Then . . some of most fatuous reasoning I've ever heard on "liberal" bias in the media. His exculpatory explanation of "smarter" people get degrees in journalism; therefore, get jobs in media because they are smarter, thus have a better grasp of the "facts" is nearly as ridiculous as Boehm's orginal comments.



Children, place nice together, and play nice in your particular sandbox. Anyone who belives PBS and NPR have a more reasonable lock on "truth" is waaaay out of his performance envelope. Anyone who believes the "liberal" cabal is a greater threat than general American stupdity is similarly reality challenged.



If Burns needs to maintain cognitive congruence about life decisions he made: cool.

But do it somewhere else.

You really don't know the difference between Conservative and Liberal, do you? I'll give you a quick example of your beloved "conservative" media.



During, following and since Dubya was elected, how many times have you seen mention of one of his daughters drinking or partying?



Now, how many times have you heard about Al "I invented the internet" Gore's son being busted for possession of marijuana, Wreckless driving, driving under the influence? I don't ever remember hearing Mr Rather utter a single peep about big Al's boy.



That's liberal bias. It's not as much what you report but what you choose leave out.

I'm a journalism major, a machinist, a 'liberal,' and a hooligan. It seems to me that the motorcycle community is currently in denial about the the whole issue of hooliganism (riding wheelies, pulling stoppies, smoking through the twisties at ungodly speed). Witness Cycle World Editor Edwards recent diatribe about the infamous LA Times article criticizing hooliganism. Edwards, like most of the mc press, subscribes to the idea that there are only a few bad apples out there, and the LA Times was just trying to sensationalize the issue by making all motorcyclists look like hooligans. Meanwhile, every issue of CW features the latest bad ass sport bike on the cover, front tire clawing at the sky. Am I going to cancel my subscription because Edwards is a hypocrite? Heck no. I'm gonna go ride and practice my wheelies. This I think is what Burns is getting at: There is something unique about riding a motorcycle that transcends labels such as "conservative" and "liberal," that unites all riders in the two-wheeled community. Remember, when wheelies are outlawed, only outlaws will have wheelies.



What?



Wheelies are already outlawed?



Oh. Never mind.

I could'a been a Contenda!!

I love modern bookstores because I still read Motorcyclist every month, but haven't actually bought the thing in a year. So I don't feel compelled to memorize each month's issue in order to get "my money's worth." So I enjoy it now much more than I did when I was paying for it. Sue me.

And why, after reading Boehm's editorials, do I get the feeling that his comment last month about their new web site ("...and unlike those other pet****s, our site is free!") and his John Birch-esque comments this month, were aimed *specifically* at Burns/MO?

It's like the Dueling Brandos with these two guys. Boehm says, "The Horror, the Horror." and Burns replies, "Stella!"

It's cute in that juvenile "He's touching me!!" way. Maybe they are siamese twin brothers separated at the gut?

They've both written articles that were instrumental in getting me on bikes (as well as the late Greg McQuide) and they've both written articles that have outlined some technique that saved my bootie. Notwithstanding that, watching them decide by force of arms what side the bread should be buttered on is emphatically *NOT*

what I signed up for. Right now, I'm subscribing for the archives.

Watching these two use valuable editorial space to trade barbs is like watching Oprah: you're horrified but your can't look away. MAybe we should get them together for Celebrity Boxing. It'd be like watching a Foreman/de la Hoya fight. In which fight, five bucks says Mills Lane gets sick of 'em both and lets a ravenous tiger into the ring. The outcome at that poi8nt is predictable. And by the sound of these other comments, that's what's going to happen to both of them and their magazines if they keep bickering like menstruating baboons.

"Could it be, then, that these "biased" journalists simply have a better grasp of the facts than the average reader? Also, by choosing to go into journalism instead of business or marketing, could it be that they tend more toward altruism than egoism?"



This is what I think of when I think of media bias. not liberal or conservative bias. not ideological or political bias. But bias based on pure, unadulterated arrogance, unmitigated gall.



The true media bias, as I perceive it, is the Fourth Estate's hubristic pattern of deeming their fellow men intellectually inferior. They have the temerity to tell us (occasionally) and to imply with the character of their yellow journalism (or at least, the yellow delivery of the news, more frequently) that we are incapable of understanding, so they will deign to translate for us.

The true bias in the media is the intellectual and moral superiority they arrogate unto themselves arbitrarily.

So there...Plbbbbhbhbhbhst!

Re: Hard to know what to say...

Speaking of societal costs, though. I don't want to pay for some guy's free (lifetime?) care after he french-kisses a phone poll at seventy per. But I gotta tell ya, Bro, I really think you're foolin' yourself there. I think that once a public entity (gov't) gets your money, they ain't givin' it back. If never another cyclist even got hurt on the road ever again, the group that appropriated that moeny from you in the first place would darn sure think up some other use for it, rather than return it to you.

that is the ridiculousness of the homeland security dep't thingy. 300 some-odd million is al it will take. Yeah, right. The history of our country is thus: every single time...ever...that a tax has been imposed, it has eventually been raised. NO tax, once instituted into law, has ever been repealed. NO presidentail tax break has ever survived the succeeding administration. So I have to say, I'd rather my money be used for vegetable cyclistson life support (the societal costs you mentioned), because at least that way, the gov't can't use that cash to do any furhter damage. they are going to confiscate my money one way or the other.

I'm an audio engineer. My job has given me a chance to listen to all sides of the political spectrum. I've worked for Mrs. Clinton and the NRA. Both prestented biased arguments in support of their position. Mrs. Clinton did stretch the bounds of decency a bit whem she told an audience of middle school students that "everyone in Yugoslavia got along fine until Slobodan Milosevich told them not to"

I realize that politicans as a class are prone to lie, but I wish they would have the decency to only prevaricate in the presence of adults.

I personally love a good argument. I look at it as a chance to learn. I constantly try to re-examine my beliefs, checking for flaws in reasoning. Kudos to Mr. Burns for starting a whopping good argument! I must point out that his remarks about the journalistic profession's alleged superiority are just a BIT self serving.

I'm new to motorcycling, but I've noticed a lot of hatred among Motocycle journalists. You seem to really dislike each other and have no qulams attacking one another in print. It adds a tabloid quality to your work.

I suggest a grudge match of some sort to settle things one and for all.