Clarification on Scooters

In response to a few emails I've received resulting from my last post, I'd like to clarify the purpose of the post. It stemmed from the on-going discrimination the media has for American Bikers. So I'm gonna jump on my soapbox for a moment and vent.

I do not judge anyone on their ride. Many ride Vespas and the like. It is their preference for their two-wheeled pleasure, just as my Dyna is mine. Some prefer to tour the countryside in cages, but those of us who prefer the two-wheeled ride love it for a variety of reasons.

Each of us is unique in our preferences, and that includes our rides. Some like pink, some like chrome, and some like fast. To each his own.


I am sick to death of being "labeled" by the media as a "noise polluter", "rabble rouser", "drunk" and having a "death wish", simply because I ride a big cruiser. I enjoy my ride for many personal reasons, with fuel conservation being but one of those.

Ya, that's me, and I ride a big machine because I love the sound, the look, and the power. My pipes are after-market but are still within the limits of any noise ordinance. I have no desire to ride beyond the limits of the law.

What I ride doesn't mean I am a drunk, or a party animal, or have a "death wish". I hold an engineering position with a global company, have a family, and put my drawers on one leg at a time, same as anyone else.

Sure, there are always those few who cross the line. The "mean" drunk, who also happens to ride a motorcycle, wear leather and gets in a fight. Don't other mean drunks do that too? I'm a mother, and there are bad mothers out there. Does that make me one too? I lived in the Boston area for a time, and each year during sports playoffs, people died due to over-zealous fans, yet society tolerates sports fans as though it were a religion. Yet motorcyclists are lumped into one category and attacked from all directions; directly or indirectly.

In the article highlighted in my last post, the media seemed to take great delight in letting the public know of all these "energy conscious" individuals, who suddenly found the need to buy a two-wheeled conveyance, for whatever reason, and have become paragons of society by attempting to preserve energy. Excuse me? There are hundreds of thousands already out there doing that.

Yet, when a motorcyclist dies at the fault of an inattentive driver who violated their right-of-way, their death is blamed on not wearing a helmet, by the same reporters and online journalists who wrote this "feel-good" article.

We already deal with inaccurate statistics the government likes to use as reason for more regulation that etches away at our freedoms. Sadly, more untrained, unsafe, Moped riders will occupy the roadways because of the energy crisis, and many of them will die because our government refuses to acknowledge that the major cause of motorcycle deaths are those who drive cages and ignore simple driving laws.

Many journalists are now adding the terms "old, fat, balding, long beards, and/or long gray ponytails" to the description of "bikers". At 52 I may be labeled as "old" by some, but none of the other terms fit me, or many others. The media seems intent on stereotyping, and/or segregating out those who ride the larger more powerful machines as being a pariah of society. By labeling us this way, they take journalistic license in creating this "picture" for the rest of society who doesn't know any better.

In 40 years, if I live that long, that will be me in the cartoon, except I'll still be wearing my leathers, and piss on anyone who doesn't like it.

The American Biker IS a "Brotherhood". What they look like has nothing to do with anything. Riding free is just an extension of living free; being who you are, and not giving a rat's ass what others think. And once again, society (and the media) adds labels and descriptions because we aren't mainstream. I often feel as though the media would rather print, "another disgusting biker has been culled from this world", because many of their articles say the same in so many words.

Well, I know hundreds of bikers, and none of them are disgusting. They all have families and those who love them, and who they love. They hold positions of integrity in the working world, just as other non-riders do. With all the laws against hatred and bigotry in this country, it amazes me that our society allows this type of discrimination to continue and does not recognize it for what it is.

This "biker" is Richard Quigley, who successfully beat multitudes of court cases in his lifetime, all in the name of freedom. He had more integrity than anyone I know. HE would not stand for anyone taking away his freedom, or any other biker, and lived his life to that end.

I ride with clean-cut businessmen, long-haired, bearded, tattoo artists, women of all ages, mothers, daughters, sons and fathers. We ride in support of our troops, we ride to end the fight against breast cancer, and we ride for those of us who have fallen. I can't say the same for a good many other people in this world.

Does running out and buying a Moped to save you bucks at the fuel pump put you in that category? Not in my book. So why would I get all warm and fuzzy over that article? I'd rather go for the government jugular, for THEY put us into this energy crisis, not the American people, not the oil companies. Politically incorrect to the end, and proud of it.

No, I really don't care what you ride. I hope to leave a reader with a fire in your gut to stand up for what is rightfully yours; freedom to ride what you want, where you want, wear what you want, and be who you are.

And if it affects those rights, I'll write about it here, guaranteed.

If anything, part of my "personal war" is on the overwhelming state of apathy in this world. I love what I do, what I ride, where I live and work. And I'd fight to the end to keep it all, even if I have to personally object to stupid, narrow-minded journalists who spout propaganda that threatens those freedoms.

And I would inspire others to do the same.

"The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~ Plato

The Forest For The Trees

Wisdom comes with age, I always say, but then wisdom also comes with learning and life is just one big learning experience. Why is it the young who have not lived long are the ones who proclaim to "know everything"? Is it because they haven't lived long enough to understand that they don't?

Some of us prefer to learn the hard way, taking our bumps in the road with glee. Rather like riding your dirt bike through moguls, whooping and grinning through every foot of airspace we can get. We take our knocks when we get them because we've determined the trade-off is worth it. In these situations, we have the control, and the risk is carefully thought out (usually).

Far more boring, but with fewer knocks, some prefer to take the extra, and sometimes tedious, time researching for all the angles before making a decision. I do this sometimes, especially when I recognize that a subject cannot be inherently understood or learned without it. Those who don't are merely spouting groundless opinion.

In my opinion.

And still some sit in their armchairs waiting for others to "do something" about their problems for them. They cannot see the forrest for the trees. Apathy will be their downfall.

Often an opinion or belief comes from witnessing a horrific event and blinds us to other facts. We keep those blinders on so we don't have to feel guilty for believing otherwise, even when the facts sit right in front of our glazed over eyes.

I can fully understand why some bikers want to wear a helmet. I wear one. Do I think a helmet will prevent my death? No. I've said so before. It may prevent my head or face from being smeared all over the road, should some event cause me to go asphalt surfing. When my time comes, I'd like my daughters to be able to say good-bye to something other than hamburger meat. But if I didn't care about what my daughters would see? Well, I can also understand why some Bikers don't wear a helmet. Either way, when that Ford Explorer pulls out into your path, it is likely not going to make a difference.

When I was 18 years old, I saw a guy on a motorcycle T-bone a car late one night while I was pumping gas. He flew over the hood and landed on his head and left half his skull and brain on the road before he stopped sliding. A brick retaining wall stopped him, effectively breaking his neck.

I was first on the scene, and as I bent down to check for a pulse, I saw that he was still breathing, for his breath caused bubbles in the blood leaking from his mouth, and just a moment later, he was gone. I remember thinking that this was probably a good thing, for he would have been brain-dead after such an injury. The woman got out of her car, babbling about "not seeing him coming". I stayed with her until the Police came. He was not wearing a helmet. She was not charged.

What I didn't understand back then was that a helmet would not have saved him. Nor would a helmet have stopped the driver of the car from pulling out before looking to see if he was coming. Yep, I saw that too, but it didn't really register until many years later.

There I was, standing at a gas station filling my tank, and watching the intersection (there was nothing else to watch at 3:00 AM). I saw this woman screech to a halt at the stop sign, rolling through it as Californians do, then stand on the gas pedal to cross this busy street running through our medium sized town.

The man on the bike was not speeding, but he never had a chance. He struck the car (an El Camino I think) at the left front wheel, at about 45 mph. Besides me, they were the only two moving objects out at that time of night. Since he was not traveling on the wrong side of the road, it was clear he was within just feet of the car when it pulled out. I know, I saw it, yet she was not charged. With anything.

Now some of you may instantly say, "Well he might have survived if he'd had a helmet on." And you may be right, there might be a snowball's-chance-in-hell of that. Not. The fact that his neck was broken from hitting another solid object after being bulleted through the air (at probably 45 mph) makes me believe otherwise. For sure, only God knows the answer to that one. But his missing helmet is not the debate here. And if I were you, I would not make such a rash and ignorant statement.

One thing that is certain, unarguably, is that he would have lived another day had the driver of that vehicle stopped long enough to LOOK and see him coming. I saw him, from further away than she was, with the glaring overhead florescent lights, and other obstacles in my way. I heard him too. She never looked. As long as I live, I will never forget the senseless and gruesome sight of that man lying in the road.

We all expect other drivers to obey traffic laws, just as we all expect to live another day when we get on our scooters and ride. What is also glaringly apparent, every time I ride, is that these expectations are akin to expecting you'll win the lottery on Saturday when the winnings are the highest. And actually, the probability that you'll be killed or injured by another driver, through no fault of your own, is much more likely than winning any game of chance.

My mother always admonished me to see the bright side of things. The glass is half full, not half empty. Be positive. Expect the best and you'll get the best. So I try to use this philosophy in my life as much as possible. But when I ride my bike, I ride with just the opposite attitude. I ride like every vehicle is secretly scheming in hundreds of ways to make me crash. How could I not? After all the people I see on cell phones, weaving in and out of traffic. And the people who run stops signs in an effort to beat that truck coming so they won't have to drive behind it. Or the ones who ignore the solid white line that means, "stay in your lane". So they bump another car, have a fender-bender, so what? Bumping into me on my bike is almost certain death, and certainly catastrophic injury.

Recently the wife of a man I know rolled her car. She was changing a music CD and drifted to the shoulder and lost control. She could have just as easily drifted across the center line and hit head-on whoever was coming in the opposite direction. There have been countless motorcycle deaths for exactly this reason.

Am I more afraid of hitting my head, should I fall off my bike when navigating my driveway? Hell no! I'm afraid of all of the above, the majority of automobile drivers. Do they care? Some do, but most don't. After all, using a cell phone is more important to some than assuring the safety of others around them on the road, and there's no punishment beyond a traffic violation for killing someone on a motorcycle.

With all the knowledge I have of crashes and the things I see drivers do every day, whether it's in my auto or on my bike, I have to have a "half empty" attitude if I still want to enjoy my motorcycle. And live. Even then, it's still that "game of chance".

What I am still astonished to hear is when other bikers tell me, with conviction mind you, that helmets are the answer to reducing motorcycle deaths. Are they blind? Right-of-way violators account for 3/4 of motorcycle deaths every year. The other 1/4 are mostly alcohol related, and I have no sympathy for those who choose to drink and ride, and end up killing themselves. Sadness for their loved one's loss, yes, but it's no secret that alcohol impairs your riding and driving ability. You make a conscious decision to ride when you know your ability may be impaired. But I don't know anyone who makes a conscious decision to slam into some vehicle that shouldn't be in the way.

Yes, I was one of those, who for years held the opinion that a helmet would save my life in the event of an accident on my bike. So believed because of the accident I witnessed all those years ago. Then one day I had an accident on my horse and broke my back. I flew through the air after being ejected from the saddle while going over a 4 foot jump, and hit the sandy arena floor. I estimate that I reached about a 10 foot height, and was traveling about 10 miles per hour. I was wearing a helmet which had not a scratch on it. I was lucky that day. Two of my vertebra were broken, but I had no spinal cord damage.

What ran through my mind, however, was imagining if I had been on a motorcycle, traveling much faster, and hitting something much less forgiving than sand. Would I be paralyzed? Would I even be alive? Wasn't that helmet supposed to save me from injury? What a naive thought!

And yet, this is what our government and the media wants us to believe. Even when they know an automobile is a much bigger, heavier object controlled by a human being who ignores traffic laws? Surely they know and acknowledge that a motorcycle never wins in a contest with a 4000 lb vehicle?

Yet our government is shoving helmets down our proverbial throats as a solution to motorcycle deaths? Who are they trying to fool? Apparently they think you and I will buy it. I don't, but how long will YOU be fooled? Do you think that a mother somewhere is fooled by this, after having her son killed by a right-of-way violator and our government does not lift a finger to change our laws? Sadly, she and others had to learn this the hard way.

Apparently our own government is also fooled by this fallacy, for they are so focused on making sure our heads survive a crash that they refuse to acknowledge the CAUSE of why we might lose our heads in the first place. They can't see the forrest either.

Like any other Mother, I worried through the years of watching my children grow up, and came up with intelligent ways to prevent them from bodily harm. We teach them not to play in the street - we don't dress them in helmets. We teach them about animals and the danger of being bitten - we don't make them wear Kevlar gloves and turn them loose with the neighborhood stray. We analyze the cause and take steps for prevention. We don't buy bigger bandaids.

In 99% of the reported motorcycle deaths that occur in this country, the media harps on whether or not the rider was wearing a helmet. Even if the biker was run down by a motorist through no fault of the biker. In most cases, the driver of the auto is not charged or fined. And when they are, it's a traffic violation. For killing someone! One state charges a fine of $50 for killing someone because of a traffic violation. A very few states have jail time attached but it's rare for a judge to sentence it, since they have the option not to. It would seem all it takes is to produce a few crocodile tears and say, "I didn't see them". So, it had to be someone's fault, why not the biker? In spite of the driver violating his right-of-way, it's the biker's fault for not wearing a helmet? Am I missing something here?

Ask yourself how you would feel if your child was run down in the street by someone who violated a traffic law, and the media immediately states, "well, the child wasn't wearing a helmet", and law enforcement lets the driver go because they said, "I didn't see him". I can already hear you saying, "well, that's different!". But is it? If I'm riding my motorcycle down the road, and a driver pulls out in front of me, violating my right-of-way, distracted by something, such as a cell phone, and kills me, helmet or not. Should they not be punished for killing me? How is this my fault? Someone is allowed to pull a 4000 lb vehicle into my path, illegally, because I'm not wearing a helmet? Apparently so.

I've got news for you, this happens every day! There are web sites that spotlight accident victims of this type. Their injuries cover every bone in the body, not just heads. How can a helmet save your life when your injuries don't involve the head? Most of them die. Some that live have no quality of life, and NO head injuries. Some that wear a helmet die of head injuries anyway.

Our government claims to want to save more lives by forcing motorcyclists to wear helmets. Is it only a few of us who recognize the futility of this belief? Forcing this law won't change a thing, except spend more of our tax dollars on court cases for those who refuse to wear them. And they will win those court cases too. The government does not certify helmets, nor does it provide a list of qualified helmets, and the qualifying description of such helmets cannot be understood by the common man, making the entire law constitutionally vague.

Yes, a few people will survive a crash with head intact, and live out their lives in poverty and no quality of life. The percentage is VERY small. The rest will die anyway. While traffic violators continue on their merry way, picking us off one at a time.

Why is it that I can see with real clarity that the major cause of motorcycle deaths involves other vehicles, and our government can't? As with our own children, shouldn't we address the cause (other drivers), and not the effect (bodily injury)? Especially when the effect, when combined with another vehicle, is not minimized with any real success, no matter what you wear? How many of you really believe that your leather boots, chaps, jacket and helmet will prevent your death should you smack into an SUV at 45 mph and up?

You may have heard some of the "uprising" coming from bikers about the proposed federal mandatory helmet law. Have you merely scoffed at all this and made some snide comment like, "it's just a helmet, get over it!"? If this is so, then wouldn't you question why I am so passionate about getting this information out to you? After all, I wear a helmet. It won't make a bit of difference to me if they make it mandatory country-wide or not. My life will go on until some driver ends it because they can't remember what right-of-way means, or don't care to.

This issue is two-fold. 1) It's another "right to choose" that the government seems to eager to take away. Each time they succeed, they become bolder and take more rights away. And 2) the real cause of motorcycle deaths is not even being adressed: Traffic violators.

Sorry, the #1 cause is not alcohol, though it does cause many motorcycle deaths each year. It's also something I personally can prevent. I can choose not to drink and ride.

If you ride a motorcycle, you owe it to yourself to learn all you can on this issue. It's not just about our right to choose what we wear on our heads, it's about our right to live. And about our right to protection from those we elected to serve us. If you don't educate yourself on the issues, how can you arrive at an intelligent viewpoint about this issue that affects all bikers, whether you wear a helmet or not?

And if you don't care about any of this, don't care to learn the truth? Don't go wailing to anyone about the unjust death of someone you know or love at the hands of another driver. You're really no better than the person who sits in their armchair waiting for someone else to fix their problems, and then whines when they don't like things the way they are.

I'll be the first to say I'm a Patriot. I also donate my time and money to charity. I strongly believe it's part of what I should spend my life doing. I'm also an avid motorcyclist, and through that love I contribute to both Patriotism and charities. So I make part of my life about Bikers Rights also, MY personal rights. So don't go spouting off about how you are a "Biker" if you can't get out of your armchair long enough to stand up for the right to be one.

I've heard all the excuses; my job won't allow me to fight, I don't "do" politics, it doesn't concern me, I already wear a helmet, I don't have time, i just want to have fun riding. Well, lemme see, I know Bikers who fight in secret to protect their jobs, many who take a few minutes now and then to send out emails to legislators (certainly not as many as you send to friends), some who, like me, wear a helmet but want the same thing as anyone - to live and ride, and dammit, if you ride, it DOES concern you.

There are laws taking effect NOW that are a precursor to limiting how many and who can even ride. Georgia has made it impossible to register a custom bike. Insurance companies would like to not insure us at all. You see, it costs them way too much money when one of their auto-insured runs us over. With each right the government takes away, the closer we get to not having even the smallest ability to just "ride and have fun".

To our government, a dead biker is just a statistic of how many do or don't wear helmets. My life is worth more than that to me.


You've gotten this far in this long blog. Don't give a damn? Stop reading now, as I'm sure the image below won't inspire you to give a damn either.







I read recently that "if you don't take an interest in politics, sooner or later, politics will take an interest in you". How true.







(Click the image above if it isn't animated)

On the off-chance you think the driver should go to jail for what he did (rear-ending a motorcycle stopped at a RED light), read and learn:

http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/BruceOnBikersRights0801.pdf

http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/BruceOnBikersRights0711-2.pdf

http://www.motorcyclists-against-dumb-drivers.com/

http://pub42.bravenet.com/forum/3562429698

http://www.bacsuv.com/

http://www.usff.com/BOLT/articles/0198pan.html

http://www.usff.com/BOLT/articles/0398pan.html

Journalism: Where is the Consistency?

The news article below was posted here on November 27, 2007. I am saddened by the loss of life in this accident, and for those who were injured. Especially on Thanksgiving Day.

The atrocity of this accident is portrayed very effectively. When you read it, you might feel blind anger at illegal immigrants in general, and drunk drivers most certainly. Then you will feel anger that our law enforcement failed to keep this particular immigrant within his country's borders, only to return to the US illegally and kill innocent victims.

Nowhere in this article does it say if anyone was wearing a seatbelt, and surely not the young man who died of his injuries.

Illegal Immigrant Accused Of Driving Drunk, Causing Fatal Boone Crash

BOONE, N.C. -- An illegal immigrant is accused of driving drunk in Boone over the Thanksgiving holiday and plowing into a sport utility vehicle, killing a man inside.

Boone police said Juan Manuel Juarez Reyes slammed into the rear of a Lexus SUV that was about to turn from Highway 105 onto Poplar Hill Drive shortly before 11 p.m. Friday. The SUV was skidded 250 feet, hitting a Watauga County deputy’s patrol car. The occupants of the SUV were trapped inside their vehicle but the deputy was not hurt.

The driver, Sallie Ellis Newell, and passenger Jacqueline Elizabeth Newell were taken to the Watauga County Medical Center where they were treated in released. But Brian Alan Newell and Andrew Russell Newell, who was in the back passenger-side seat, were flown to Johnson City Regional Medical Center.

Andrew Newell, 22, died at the hospital. His father remains in critical condition.

Family members said the Newells were returning from a Thanksgiving trip to South Carolina and were only a quarter-mile from home.

Authorities said Monday that Juarez Reyes was caught in the country by Border Patrol agents in 2002 and was sent back to Mexico. They aren’t sure when he re-entered the United States.

Police say he was speeding and drunk when the crash happened.

Juarez Reyes was first charged with driving while impaired, driving without a license and three counts of felonious assault with a deadly weapon causing serious injury by vehicle. On Tuesday he was charged with second-degree murder and two counts of assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury.

He is being held under $1 million bond and has asked for a court-appointed attorney. He’ll be back in court Jan. 14.

What is astounding about the outcome of this accident are the charges, and the bail.

At this point, you're probably asking why I would be astounded. After all, this man, an illegal immigrant, was drunk, speeding, and he killed an innocent American and injured others. Doesn't he deserve harsh punishment?

Why yes, I believe he deserves to go to jail the rest of his natural life. He broke the law - driving while alcohol impaired, and disobeying traffic laws, which resulted in one death and critical injuries to another.

I may be astounded at the severity of the charges and bail amount, but I am even further astounded that law enforcement sufficiently charged this man with his crimes in this case.

However, I'd bet a year's pay that it would not read this way had it been an innocent motorcyclist who had been plowed into and killed. I see it every day in the newspapers. Motorist runs down a motorcyclist, driver NOT charged, motorcyclist wasn't wearing a helmet. You could write a canned report, with [insert rider's name here], and [insert at-fault driver's name here] and they would look no different than the hundreds of articles written in newspapers about motorcycle accidents involving death or injury.

Even when the driver is drunk and kills a motorcyclist, the charges are never so severe as this report. So what is it this time around? Is this man being charged this way because he is an illegal Mexican? It can't be because he was drunk, as that hasn't produced charges like this for a dead motorcyclist. Is it because he caused the SUV to strike a deputy's patrol car? The officer wasn't hurt, so that can't be it. Why then?

When I read this report, and saw the injustice committed on those inside the SUV, I actually feel kindly toward the Journalist who wrote this, because it was written without placing any blame on the SUV driver who was merely making her way home with her family, after a Thanksgiving dinner.

So why is it when a motorcyclist dies at the hands of another at-fault driver, the Journalist must immediately discount the rider, and excuse the at-fault driver? He wasn't wearing a helmet, he was speeding slightly, the auto driver "didn't see him coming".

Would it matter if the motorcyclist was "just a quarter-mile" from home? Or returning from having dinner with his family? From what I've seen, the answer is no. All that matters is he was riding a motorcycle, taking a risk in competing with a 4000 lb automobile, and he lost. Too bad.

Even when the driver of the auto that kills him has been drinking and leaves the scene, when they turn themselves in, they get a pat on the back for being so "honest" and coming forth and confessing. "It's alright, we know you didn't see him".

I used to think Journalists were just stupid, and were blinded by the government about motorcycle accidents. I used to think that the pitiful laws we have are what allows people to walk away with a $45 fine and no jail time for killing a motorcyclist on the road.

From what I see above, in this news report, Journalists do know how to report an accident with facts in an unbiased way. Law enforcement does have the wherewithal to charge accordingly for killing someone in an at-fault accident.

Just not when it's a motorcyclist that dies.

I don't know whether to be angrier or sadder. Until now, I still held out hope that it really wasn't a predjudicial act upon bikers. I needed to be in that cocoon of naive trust, believing that I wasn't being profiled because I ride a motorcycle, that it was all just a coincidence.

But it isn't. My rights to due diligence won't be upheld if I am run down by a negligent motorist. Here's what it will read when my time comes:

"Early this morning, on her way to Starbucks just a mere quarter-mile from home, a woman riding her Harley Davidson motorcyle struck an SUV, who was attempting to make a left hand turn in front of her. She died on the scene. She may have been speeding, according to the driver of the SUV, I didn't see her coming. The driver of the SUV was not injured. She was wearing a helmet. The driver of the SUV was not charged."

Think that sounds farfetched? I challenge you to find me a newspaper report of a motorcyclist who is killed by an at-fault motorist, like the one in the report above, and show me where the driver was charged as that one is.

You won't find one. Your news report will read the same as mine, mark my words. But will it matter when we are already dead?

Journalists are just as bad as law enforcement. Both are responsible for the injustice done to dead American motorcyclists. Journalists are responsible for the attitude of the American public, who blame bikers for their own injuries and deaths at the hands of those same Americans.

And law enforcement could do something about it, but they don't. Not unless it's a scenario like above. They may be kind officers, they may shout 'rah rah' about Motorcycle Safety week (for that week only), but when the chips are down, the bottom line is, they don't care if we live or die. Better to target specific groups for being stupid and pulling wheelies; just another finger pointing game to say we kill ourselves. They might as well say I chose that SUV with the dumb driver behind the wheel as my suicide weapon of choice.

For the family in that SUV whose son is dead now at the hands of the drunk, speeding, illegal immigrant, I hope you see justice done. At least someone should have the right to it.

Jouralism By the Light of the Moon

Or should I say "by the light of Moonrider"?

I've spent a lot of time harping on Jouralism, and the ignorance or unethical writings of this country's Journalists. But I'd like to bring your attention to one Journalist who could write the book on Journalism.

She goes by the name of Moonrider. She is a Journalist, a true Journalist, meaning that's her profession. And she lives by the creed that all Journalists should live by, but sadly do not. She's also an avid motorcyclist.

All of her blog posts are well written and refreshing. Here you'll find not just editorials on the M$F, but on other subjects. Many of them will make you snark, chuckle, or just laugh hysterically. And some will inspire you to join the Freedom Fighters of this country who despise those who would take away our right to ride free.

Take a moment and view the video created by Moonrider below. This video is also posted on Big Bend Bikers For Freedom along with another editorial about it.

As in all of Moonrider's videos, this one is extremely well done, and spells it all out in plain words:

We, as motorcyclists face another foe who has no qualms, feels no remorse, about killing us. The very people who sell us our rides are in league with the M$F, and unless we come together to fight it, our next generation riders are going to suffer.

It's time to start asking questions, folks. Do the motorcycle dealers in your area support this farce? What is the M$F's agenda anyway?

Check out Moonrider's blog here and see for yourself. You'll find all the answers there, the data to support it and a huge eye-opener.

Ride free, keep your friends close, keep your enemies even closer.

Ron Paul Gets My Vote

As a biker, I am concerned about the growing discrimination by our nation's government toward those of us who ride. It's all "dressed up" in shiny words about how they want to save our lives by making us wear helmets, but refuse to address the most common cause of motorcycle deaths; distracted drivers and ROWV.

There have been letters sent, too numerous to count, yet they still ignore the facts and insist on pushing this mandate in spite of knowing their facts and figures are wrong. In spite of knowing they could work toward saving many, many more lives if they would leave off with their own personal agenda. But they won't. And the President won't do anything either. In fact HE appointed them to their posts.

So I am looking very seriously at the coming campaign for President, and I've thought about what I want as an individual from my government. And I've made my decision.

With all the hullabaloo going on with motorcycle rights, foreign policies and the war in the middle east, here's what I'm hearing on the election front:

Liberals: Spend more money, take more control. [Stupid little American tax payers don't know any better, so we'll make all their decisions for them.] Constitution be damned.

Republicans: War, war, war. Spend more money. Constitution be damned.

Libertarians: Govern by the Laws of the Constitution, by the people, for the people.

Hmmmm, now I wonder which of these might be what is good for our country, especially today with taxes eating us alive, too much government spending and squandering, too much government control of us, when it should be the other way around.

I've stated here before that I am a group of one, an individual, whose rights are dwindling with each new controlling law the government hands out. If I'm to be expected to hand over so much of my hard earned pay to support our government, then I want to feel like they work for me.

I believe in the Constitution and so does Ron Paul. His record speaks for itself. He says what he thinks and feels, and he does what he says. How unique is that? I like what Ron Paul says.

Ron's recent rebuttal on his foreign policy states that he is not an isolationist, but rather a non-interventionist. See the story here.

Read the comments of overwhelming support for this man who would be President. Again, I am encouraged that there is hope for the voting American people yet.

And, as a side note, I thought to myself, wow, a journalist who really does cover both sides by allowing the rebuttal, and then he burst my bubble by posting his arrogant nasty reply to all the comments.

"Ron Paul is the Dennis Kucinich of the GOP, he doesn't have a chance, he makes a good conscience for the front runners but he is not electable, I will be glad when fringe candidates like him leave the race so that we can get some substantive discussions between the ones who could be elected, all he is is a time consumer at debates., when he starts rambling I shut him off."
- Richard L. Fortin, Manchester

Interesting how he never makes a comment on what Ron Paul's policy positions are, but rather he criticizes Ron Paul as though he [Mr. Fortin] has a perpetual hair up where the sun don't shine. Are there any journalists out there who aren't part of the political puppetry? I am happy my daughter decided journalism wasn't for her. I would hate to lose respect for my own daughter.

The comments to Ron's rebuttal are encouraging. I found them to reflect my own thoughts after reading the story. One interesting comment though, gave me pause to stop and consider how this would affect our country's position on terrorism.

Would a non-interventionist foreign policy mean that we would not defend ourselves, or keep safeguards in place within our country as we have since 911? I don't think so. I don't get that from Ron Paul's words.

What I get is this, we are all different, unique. Each country has it's own way of governing its people. America is not to sit in judgement over whose government is right or wrong. (How much arrogance is that?) I don't believe that Ron Paul, if elected President, would tolerate crimes against humanity, but surely the form of a country's government would make no difference to him. Non-intervention means just that, no intervention.

Our ability and will to defend ourselves as a nation is strong, but politics should be left out of war as much as possible.

I have never believed it was our place to help overthrow a government so we could establish a democracy against the will of that's country's people. We must be diplomats not war-mongers, and stop using strong-arm tactics by blocking free trade. This is what Ron Paul supports.

How refreshing is that? Live and let live. We will still be a super-power to be reckoned with, but we don't have to arrogantly flaunt it in the faces of others.

Yes, there are a few things Ron Paul says that I don't agree with. But when the majority of what he says gives me hope that we can reclaim this country back from those in government who wield too much power, and get back to the basics of our Constitution, I am encouraged.

There is hope.

The media in this country will try to convince you that Ron Paul will hurt the election and hurt the GOP or divide votes. I say, pure and simple hogwash. The media is controlled by the liberalized government (see my blog on Oct 2) and this is what they want you to believe.

This election is not a popularity contest. It's not whether to vote for Hillary because she's a woman candidate or not (God help us). It's not about getting a Democrat or a Republican elected. It's about electing the candidate who will work for the people. It's about who will listen to US. Not this group or that group, but all of us.

Our government is like a large family of children who have run amok for too long; spoiled rotten, willful, wasteful and deceitful. What it needs is a strong firm hand to bring them back into line. I believe Ron Paul can do that.

I believe Ron Paul can turn our government around, straighten out our federal [non-existent] reserve, assure me that my Social Security will still be there when I retire, and that of my children, and bring this country back to the prosperity we once had. And that's what I want too.

Ron Paul gets my vote. Who will you vote for?

Left: More spending, more control up front.

Right: More spending, more control by hidden agenda.

Libertarian: Less spending, less control, more freedom of choice, Honor our Constitution.

It's a no-brainer.

Support Ron Paul NOW, and get him elected. This country needs a fresh perspective, and a return to the rightful honoring and upholding of United States Constitution.

Journalism: Why You Should Not Believe What You Read or See In This Country's Media

The following "disclaimer" is copied verbatim from the pages of Neal Boortz.

ALWAYS REMEMBER

Don't believe anything you read on this web page, or, for that matter, anything you hear on my blog [The Neal Boortz Show], unless it is consistent with what you already know to be true, or unless you have taken the time to research the matter to prove its accuracy to your satisfaction. This is known as "doing your homework".

This statement is so very true of any newspaper report, article online, radio report, TV report, and any other media report. Media is often used by government to sway public opinion. It's called propaganda. Additionally, the government allows the media to know only what it wants them to know. Do you feel informed yet? Read on.

Gag orders

Today, government agencies are furthering this agenda by implementing a "gag" order on employees; the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for instance. This is the government agency who researches safety issues and makes sure our automobiles are safe for us to drive, among other things. Today I read a blog post by a reporter (of all people!), and what he had to say is a concern, and should be a concern for every American. View that post here.

And here's a comment posted beneath that blog post, one of several hundred:

You don’t have ANY idea how bad the morale is at NHTSA. The political appointees (PA) have instituted such a culture that the entire agency is in the CYA mode.

No one is willing to take any decisions, always punting that up the chain, all the way to the Administrator, who knows NOTHING about auto safety.

The career managers spend half the time chasing unrealistic edicts from the PA, and the other half of their time trying to guess what the PA wants!!

Like in any bureaucracy, we are hunkered down, waiting for the PA to leave and certain “senior” Associate Administrators to retire.

— Posted by Current employee

Does this concern you? It concerns me. If the more than 750 employees of the NHTSA are feeling "suppressed" by the new appointed administrators, namely Nicole Nason, just what is going on within this agency? And why is information that the NHTSA is researching kept from the American public, and from reporters? Check out the NHTSA website sometime. Read the fluffy statements. Does this sound like an agency that "gags" it's employees, or promotes disrespect among them? How about the comment above? Does it sound like someone who enjoys working there?

Sounds to me like Ms. Nicole Nason needs to address her own house-cleaning before trying to clean house on Americans.

[Oh, and Nicole? If you're reading this, the key to happy employees is treating them well, and showing some integrity yourself, the same as you expect them to have. Take a page from being a mother. "Don't do what I do, do what I say" doesn't work.]

The reporter who wote the blog about the NTSB is most likely telling it like it is. It's on his own blog, and is independent of any newspaper or media syndicate he works for. So why isn't this being reported by the major national newspapers? And if the NHTSA is withholding information from the American public, does that include information on automobile recalls we should know about. What about posted studies on the NHTSA website? Are these accurate, or only what they want us to see? Why are we not seeing this information reported by the press????? And instead it shows up in some reporter's blog?

Why? Because the press only reports what they are told, and broadcast media only broadcasts "approved" information.

Propagandism

I've recently been accused of being a propagandist. I suppose that's true to some degree, since many of my blog posts are my own opinion and written here in hopes of "swaying" your viewpoint. However, I always try to base my opinion on facts that I read, such as statistical reports, studies, etc. Or, from years of experience on the subject. So when I read newspaper articles that spout statistics that I know to be untrue or skewed, I write to the journalist who wrote it. I'd want someone to tell me if I had my facts wrong, wouldn't you? Or at least read the material I present to them, and explain where and how they derived their numbers.

Propaganda: this word has two meanings; one in a positive light, and the other in a negative light.

1. information put out by an organization or government to promote a policy, idea, or cause
2. deceptive or distorted information that is systematically spread

I like to think of myself as the propagandist in #1. However, I don't think that's the one he meant. But #2 is exactly how I view some of the journalists reporting these days.

I can say with conviction that I would not skew data as it is researched and studied by those qualified to do so. If they make a mistake in their numbers, then it will get printed that way. I have no control over that. But many of the journalists out there simply grab some numbers quoted somewhere else (without verifying the accuracy of such quotes) and draw their own conclusions based on how dramatic they can make it sound.

Unethical and simply BAD journalism

The person who accused me of being a propagandist is a journalist (and I use that term loosely) in the small town (3000 people) of Towanda, PA. His name is Ronald W. Hosie, Editor of the Daily and Sunday Review. He is the Editor, and he wrote the article. In a town this small, he is probably the only journalist on this paper. That means he can print whatever he wants (bully for you, Mr. Hosie). He probably writes his own paycheck, while his townspeople trust him to print the facts and the truth. I've got news for you Towanda, you're paying for a load of crap.

I wrote to Mr. Hosie in response to an article he wrote in his small town newspaper that quoted inaccurate statistics about motorcycle deaths. He refused to answer any of my questions on where he obtained reports to support his findings. And he responded with replies that matched word for word the replies he sent to others on the same issue. In short, form replies.

So why have I posted all this on my blog, you might ask? Because I detest ignorant journalists, and this one takes the cake. And because he posted an article on the issue of motorcycle helmet laws (and clearly showed his lack of research and knowledge on the subject).

In this article, his words convey the message that helmets will save thousands of lives, and if a motorcyclist doesn't wear one, their subsequent head injury (through no fault of his own) will also cost taxpayers millions of dollars in hospital care and is subsequently the motorcycle rider's fault!

Well let me tell you sportsfans, if the people of this country endorse a universal helmet law, and I get mowed down by some inconsiderate right-of-way violator, you can bet your house on the fact that I don't care if you have to pay my medical bills. In fact I'll send them to you.

Spending money on forcing a universal helmet law down the throats of American motorcyclists will not stop the injuries and deaths. But spending that same money might save millions of lives if the root cause is addressed; driving distractions and right-of-way violations in particular.

I went back to the URL where the article was posted, and it had been removed. Could it be that he received so many negative comments that he didn't see fit to leave it posted? Who knows. I won't ask either, for I'm sure I'll get yet another canned reply.

Did this reporter "do his homework"? No. His statistics are incorrect. However, what he wrote is in itself a crime. What this article will garner from readers is outrage over statements that are over-exaggerated and statistics that are full of holes. But isn't this what newspapers want? Sensationalism? To hell with the truth, show me the money! Makes me wonder if this guy took a bribe from the representative he quoted. I surely wouldn't be surprised! (Sorry, no statistics here, just plain ol' opinion based on the ignorant replies I get when I write to journalists, and the information readily available on political bribes that happen every day.)

The "right" thing for him to have done in response to my letter was to research the information sent to him and write another article with at least the correct statistics. Even if his "opinion" was still the same, he at least owes it to his readers to print the facts, not parroted numbers from another source who also miss quoted those statistics.

So with all that said, take a look at some of this stuff that I found on Neal Boortz's website about what isn't reported in the media. I'm sure it will make you think twice before swallowing some of what you read in the media, and surely wonder why the things important to us as Americans aren't reported.

And if it doesn't, well, you could win $100,000 just by reading this blog in its entirety. Really!

Here ya go. Read and learn, if you dare. If you don't care, leave this page and go back to your mundane, submissive little life. Your spinelessly uneducated opinions mean nothing to me.

Why you should not believe what you read or see in this country's media

Observations on Journalists

Media Bias Basics

Other fascinating things to pass along here

Tasty Trivia

Do your homework. Find the truth about the candidates you vote for, before you vote! Fight for your freedom and rights. If you do nothing, don't complain, you have only yourself to blame.