An article written by a jerk that provides unintentioned insight into Keith's ESPN life

[Berry Cool]

The DU'er "hatrack" actually first pointed my attention to this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x196683

an article in which a jerkass writer for the Hartford Courant essentially sings the praises of gas-guzzling classic cars and says something to the effect of "Drive 'em while you got 'em, before B. Hussein Osama forces us all into tiny lookalike pods that save gas but are no fun to drive at all and do absolutely nothing to help us guys compensate for having small penises."

Well, he doesn't quite say that, but he might as well. He's pretty much rejoicing here in the sound of loud engines that go real fast and burn up a lotta gas because even though they are environmentally incorrect and aren't always safe, hell they are FUN and driving one is what being American is all about. Even worse, the majority of the comments back him up in his sentiments.

What does this have to do with Keith? Well, because the author discusses for a bit the attempt in some parts of the world to create--gasp!--"car-less communities"--you know, places where you don't HAVE to own or drive a car in order to just live comfortably, and admits:

Reliance on the automobile and poor planning have marred parts of Connecticut and the nation. Witness Route 6 through Bristol, Queen Street in Southington, the plastic subdivisions that absurdly take the names of farms and orchards they displaced.

Southington...OUCH. Right near Bristol. That's where Keith's house was when he worked at ESPN. No wonder it was a hellhole for him. Sure he worked for The Worldwide Leader, but he paid a hefty price for it in quality of life. He couldn't go effing ANYWHERE, aside from work, without having to bum a ride off someone.

The disadvantages to him of being unable to drive in suburban Connecticut have been mentioned before, but this makes Southington and Bristol sound like places that are especially hostile to the car-less. In contrast, Keith has said living in LA, the city where everyone says you "need" a car just to live, was simple for him: the taxi companies were never busy and anytime he had to go anywhere, a taxi would pick him up right away; he could practically request them by make, year and color. (And given the expansion of public transportation in LA since 1990, he probably had an even easier time of it in the late '90s when he returned there than he had in the '80s.)

Of course, Mr. I-Love-Gas-Guzzlers defends this lifestyle:

...people like to have their own space. They want their own backyards to barbecue and play with the dog, and many want big vehicles to carry the kids safely, load up with groceries and deck lumber and hit the open road once in a while.

Yeah, maybe they do...but that wasn't Keith. Living in a town in which everyone else but him had a wife, kids, a dog, and a big honkin' SUV must've been torture for him.

Through our love affair with the automobile, we have created an America in which there are parts of the country in which people simply cannot live comfortably unless they have their own personal vehicle and are capable of driving it. And also an America in which we have persuaded ourselves that we NEED a big honkin' vehicle BECAUSE we have the kids and the dog.

I wish I knew of a solution to this, but I do think that this country is sadly in need of more public transportation as one component of it. Sure, there are places where it's just plain impractical and if you can't or don't want to drive, choosing to live in those places would be kind of a dumb thing to do, period. But boy, would it be nice to make life in America less personal vehicle-dependent in the places where public transportation isn't a foolish or impractical concept, just an unpopular one.