I said below that Lance Armstrong would not wear the yellow jersey during today’s stage, in deference to David Zabriskie, who lost the jersey yesterday thanks to a crash. Race director Jean-Marie Leblanc insisted, however, Armstrong don the malliot jaune, warning that if Armstrong did not wear the leader’s jersey, he would not start the stage. Armstrong did eventually relent, and wore the jersey (which, by the way, he will wear at the start of tomorrow’s stage).
Posted on 6 July 2005
Sorry, nothing coherent here. I’ve got an ever-growing post about our climbing trip this weekend, including details of how we left Jen’s harness at home and my thrilling fall on a gear route. But you may have to wait for the book to read about these and other antics.
Lance Armstrong took the yellow jersey after the team time trial yesterday at the Tour de France. CSC’s David Zabriskie literally had the jersey ripped from his shoulders when he fell roughly a kilometer from the finish line. Armstrong had at least one minute separating him from the other contenders at the moment, so it will take quite an attack in the mountains to prevent the Texan from winning number seven.
Update
Armstrong is not wearing the yellow jersey today out of respect for Zabriskie, since he lost the lead thanks to his crash. He still, obviously, leads the GC.
On politics and religion, Fr. Jape outlines why, perhaps, Christians need not be so worried about the comings and goings in the political sphere (though the Jebbie might cringe at such a term):
But in the main, I do not think there is any real hope for “reform” of the late-liberal state. I think the best answer is to resist disorder personally, and if one is truly successful at this, it will spill over into one’s family and one’s immediate community. Hunker down and wait for the big crash per MacIntyre* and Eliot.** See what’s salvageable from the rubble.
If you’re at all interested in the larger discussion that prompted the above post, follow the trail of posts here.
In related news, let me complain about Blogger for a bit — it seems their HTML editor adds a <div style="clear:both;"> to the beginning and end of each post upon publication. If you use any sort of floating div layout (as the DCH site does), those divs break the layout in Firefox. I’m not happy, but I’ve been too busy to complain directly to Blogger.
Posted on 6 July 2005
Several blokes have posted their impressions of the alleycat:
Eli also put his professional skills to good use by mapping the various routes our little group took around the city during the race.
Posted on 28 June 2005
Eli and I pick our way through the crowds at Point State Park. It’s hot. Really hot. Really, really hot. A group of people surrounded by bicycles have congregated under a stand of trees near the fountain, and we swing around to join them. Five dollars later I have my manifest, and we standing around with a group of friends plotting the course. The rules are simple — there are five neighborhoods listed, each with three checkpoints. You’ve got to go to four neighborhoods. The rub? Only one checkpoint in each neighborhood is manned. It’s up to us to figure that out on our own.
We quickly decide that Lawrenceville would be pared from our journey. The first two checkpoints were close enough to 40th Street that if, if, one of those were the One True Checkpoint we would be in good shape for Bloomfield, but the third checkpoint was on beyond Stanton Avenue, and that would mean an excruciating climb. No thanks. So we plotted our course:
1. Oakland
2. Shadyside
3. Bloomfield
4. East Liberty
There was a contingency plan for Shadyside and Bloomfield. If the Shadyside checkpoint ended up being the Ellis School, we’d break over to Bloomfield and then get Ellis on the way to East Liberty.
Soon enough the organizers gathered us ’round, and instructed us to leave our bikes at the top of stairs by the fountain and walk down to the fountain. Hands on the fountain wall, we awaited the signal. The cool mist felt good. I wish we could stay here.
“GO!”
Click-clack, click-clack as we ran toward the steps (I was happy I had made the swtich to clips and straps and could wear tennis shoes). I found my bike in the mess, took off running and mounted cyclocross style, bouncing along with the pack through the grass, over the old foundation of Fort Pitt. Yelling and screaming cleared the sidewalks for us, and the pack of 50 or so riders surged into the roads downtown, halting traffic.
The pack quickly splinters as we leave the park. We stick to our plan, and make it over to Forbes Avenue. I haven’t ridden Forbes in a long time, and I can’t quite remember the road from uptown to Oakland. I brace myself for the worst, expecting a large hill. Traffic lights split our little pack even further. Apparently, at some point, I lost my nerve to cut through an intersection and nearly got hit by Joshua, who was expecting me to continue on. Oh well. Once past Duquesne University, I settle into my pace, watching someone roughly half a block ahead of me. Forbes rolls through uptown, gently. I’ve caught the rhythm of the traffic signals, and I rarely have to alter my cadence. The stretch of road into Oakland is the hardest. The hill isn’t steep, and even that long really, but on such a hot day, with the pace as it in such situation (faster than the usual commute), dealing with traffic of several other roads funneling into Forbes, it’s not something to look forward to.
Traffic is light, and I enjoy the last bit of flat as I work my way over to the right-most lane. The hill is short (relatively), so I don’t let up much, alternating between sitting and standing. Traffic is backed up at the traffic signal at the crest of hill, so I stand and accelerate through the maze of stopped cars. Soon enough I’m through the intersection and on the flats of Oakland. First checkpoint — the Frick School on Thackery and Fifth. I weave up and across Forbes, cut across Bouquet, and ride the bus lane on Fifth for a block. Turning up Thackery, I’m happy to see a girl standing on the sidewalk, bike at her side, handing out scrabble pieces. Up to O’Hara Street, and I’m on my way to Shadyside.
This was the easy part of the ride, and I tried to take advantage of it by pushing my pace a bit. I was riding alone at this point, though I saw at least two people a few blocks ahead. The checkpoint at Winchester Thurston was empty, so it was time to make a decision — cut across Morewood to Bloomfield now, or continue to the Liberty School on Ellsworth. I was already headed toward Ellsworth, so on to Liberty I went.
Good choice.
I picked up my scrabble piece (why can’t all the checkpoint voluteers stand in the street so I don’t have to get off my bike!), and backtracked a bit to South Aiken. On to Bloomfield.
I couldn’t decide what checkpoint to hit first. I finally decided to stop at the Immaculate Conception school first, which was only a block off Liberty. Traffic was again light, so I pushed up the slight rise on Liberty, cut over just after the old movie theater and found myself in the mayhem of a fair and road construction. The checkpoint was empty, so I made my first mistake of the race — I confused South Matilda and South Graham. I cut across Friendship Avenue, through the park at West Penn hospital before I realized my gaffe. I ended up on Penn Avenue in Friendship, cursing my bad decision, and headed back toward Winbiddle. I spied two other racers (on track bikes) up ahead, so I accelerated a bit, and was happy to see a volunteer on the corner of Winbiddle and Coral.
I followed the two fellows back up to Penn, and while they pushed ahead of me (bigger gears, I told myself), I thought about what to do next. One more set of checkpoints in East Liberty, with the further from the finish being Reizenstein school. A portion of Penn Avenue was closed through Penn Circle, so the most direct line was out. I saw the pair in front turn left on Negley, and it looked like they were going to check out the checkpoint at Peabody high school (which was only blocks from the finish). I followed suit.
The Peabody checkpoint was visible from East Liberty Boulevard, and it was empty, so we continued along the Boulevard to Reizenstein. The third checkpoint was only a block or two away from Peabody, but it was far enough from Reizenstein that it wouldn’t be worth taking that risk. So on we went.
Up and down, up and down on East Liberty Boulevard, and soon enough we were picking up scrabble pieces in the school’s parking lot. One of the volunteers mentioned we were among the first to arrive, but with no set order, who knows if some folks had skipped the East Liberty stops entirely. The pair sped off ahead, and I was now riding with another fellow on a track bike, and we hogged the lane back across the Boulevard. He turned right on Highland, while I took my chances on Negley. Turns out it wouldn’t matter.
I cut across traffic on Negley and hopped on the sidewalk in front of the Union Project — the finish line. My track bike cohort hopped up about the same time, and we Alphonse and Gaston-ed it for a moment or two as to who would take 11th place. He finally obliged.
12th place. Not bad. I was the fifth track bike to finish, and the first track bike was actually third overall (quite a surprise, actually). The course favored geared bikes, with loads of mostly flat roads and only one climb. The good news? I took second place in the luck-of-draw Scrabble score contest. For my troubles I got a t-shirt and a water bottle, more than making up for the measly entry fee.
Did I mention it was hot? I didn’t notice it as much when I was riding (though sweat was pouring off my head), but when I finally stopped at the Union Project, I was fairly certain I was going to burst into flames. Total water consumption for the roughly 40 minute ride? 110 ounces (one large Camelback and several large glasses of water at the finish). And even after another 50 or 60 ounces later in the evening, I still had a headache that night.
Posted on 27 June 2005
Note: I’m entering a domain better left to experts, but I think the ramifications of this Supreme Court decision will be felt here in Pittsburgh.
Awhile back, I mentioned a case coming before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding eminent domain — they power of a government to take private property for “public use” development. Today, the high court ruled in favor the New London government, allowing the city to take private property (even against the wishes of the land owners) for public development. Their argument? A local government knows what’s best for local economic development. Of course, who is first beneficiary of property taken via eminent domain? The private developers. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was clear about this in her dissent:
Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.
My politics are pretty hard to pin down, especially when viewed within the red/blue lenses most folks like to wear. I may lean toward big C Conservatism, but this decision makes me uncomfortable for rather libertarian reasons — I’m just not comfortable with the idea of a government having the power to take private property for “economic” development. As O’Connor pointed out, perhaps many years down the road, those who were displaced will feel the positive economic effects of their government’s action, but those private developers who gain business will always be first beneficiaries (I hear those trickle-down economists arguing already — “but the development will create jobs!” My response? Why not just randomly raze and rebuild parts of the infrastructure every few years to create more jobs?). And of course, those families being displaced by the New London government will probably not be enjoy the development, since it will include a hotel, an office park, and a health club. Looking out for the best interests of the citizens indeed.
Posted on 23 June 2005
The City Paper has posted the fixed gear article on their website. Enjoy my crumbs of wisdom.
Posted on 23 June 2005
A week or so ago, I was contacted by a reported from the Pittsburgh City Paper to talk about fixed gear riding here in the ‘burgh (the paper was running a series of articles about bicycles to coordinate with Bike Pittsburgh‘s Bike-Fest). She asked the usual round of questions (“Why do you do this? Do you have other bikes? What’s it like riding in traffic?”) and I did my best to get across my rather odd reasons for riding a fixed gear bike year ’round. Several times during the interview, I was asked if riding a fixed gear was “punk rock.” I responded, well, maybe, but I’m not, as a happily married father of one who owns a house, really punk. I guess I do see riding a fixed gear as a subversive activity (heck, just commuting on a bike these days is kinda subversive), but I thought perhaps a weekly entertainment rag wasn’t the place to wax philosophic about such things.
Anyway…the article isn’t available online yet (the site is updated on Thursdays), but perhaps I’ll post the link in a fit of self-promotion when it becomes available.
Posted on 22 June 2005
With a tip o’ the hat to Moon….Dahlia Lithwick gives an unprecendented view into the decision-making process of this nation’s highest court.
Posted on 20 June 2005
Maclin Horton and I seem to share the same dilemma — we can’t finish a book. I have the best of intentions — I have a stack of things that I’ve started but yet to finish (I find a way to justify this, however. I remember a professor I had who would typically read ten or so books at a time) — but few actually get finished. Like Horton, I typically spend my reading time reading journalism and blogs. I squeeze that time in the early morning, before the family awakes, and during lunch at work (where I’m probably seen as anti-social). Some nights I try to read a bit before I go to sleep, but, after the bike commute, chasing the boy around the backyard for a few hours, and, sometimes, climbing, this is nothing more than a noble intention as I quickly drift off to sleep.
I also found that Horton and I share similiar work experiences:
I?ve always had trouble concentrating, and almost every aspect of my life seems to encourage that fault. My job involves technically demanding tasks which demand extended concentration and yet requires that I be available for interruption at any moment. Comparing notes on this with a co-worker, I found that we had each arrived at a similar state: that even when there is no interruption or distraction present, the constant expectation of it makes concentration extremely difficult.
Posted on 17 June 2005
Howard Zinn, in the latest issue of the Boston Review, examines the long history of American exceptionalism. Critics of the neo-conservative foreign policy agenda of the current administration often forget (or are ignorant of) the rich tradition of exceptionalism that the United States has. This is hardly the first time in our history that a president that waged war in the name of democracy and liberty. Zinn writes:
American exceptionalism was never more clearly expressed than by Secretary of War Elihu Root, who in 1899 declared, “The American soldier is different from all other soldiers of all other countries since the world began. He is the advance guard of liberty and justice, of law and order, and of peace and happiness.” At the time he was saying this, American soldiers in the Philippines were starting a bloodbath which would take the lives of 600,000 Filipinos.
…
Bush?s national-security strategy and its bold statement that the United States is uniquely responsible for peace and democracy in the world has been shocking to many Americans.
But it is not really a dramatic departure from the historical practice of the United States, which for a long time has acted as an aggressor, bombing and invading other countries (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Grenada, Panama, Iraq) and insisting on maintaining nuclear and non-nuclear supremacy. Unilateral military action, under the guise of prevention, is a familiar part of American foreign policy.
Zinn also points out that while many of Bush’s critics are on the left of the political spectrum, exceptionalism is hardly a conservative practice. Progressives and liberals, notably Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt, were not afraid of waging war in the name of freedom. Alternately, there are plenty of conservatives who shudder at the current direction of U.S. foreign policy, from isolationists like Buchanon to, well, curmudgeons like Wendell Berry.
And of tangential interest, Zinn’s discussion perhaps offers another perspective on the on-going discussion of pacificism and just wars on Gideon’s site.
Posted on 14 June 2005