Talk:Ed Orcutt

Bicycling controversy
In March 2013, Orcutt proposed a controversial tax on bicycling, arguing that bicycling is not environmentally friendly, because bicyclists exhale more CO2 than people who are walking.

Before any edit wars break out between his supporters and detractors, I would propose that we include the statements made about bicycling, but let's try to keep some perspective. Apparently, this is becoming some kind of cause du jour, and lots of outraged people are flocking to this page. Let's explain the situation, give a citation, and move on. I think a single sentence or two will do. Already, we've had one person revert the page, and several activists hastily re-add the information (sometimes in different places in the article). Let's just calm down, state the facts dispassionately, and remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a soap box or mouthpiece of the Revolution. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I largely agree with NinjaRobotPirate's position. Nonetheless, Wikipedia is an evolving encyclopedia, and issues change in importance over time. Currently, Orcutt's idiotic stance has been the subject of extensive news coverage and has caused considerable outrage in the cycling community. The facts as currently stated are a minimum necessary to accurately represent the weight of a stupid action from a relatively insignificant politician who has only gained notoriety through his stupidity. Truthteller52 (talk) 4:16, 5 March 2013 (UTC)