I used to cross there on my bicycle, to get to my job at the chicken farm about a half mile past the intersection. That was in the 1970s, I'm sure it's long gone now. Scary to cross even then, the green light didn't mean you wouldn't get run down by left-turning driver.

Jughandles were conceived in the 1930s, they were never intended to handle the traffic we have now.

Glad to see you out there! My friends and I have toured PA on our motorcycles for decades. We've mostly been on the 3-digit state roads, where the fun and beauty are. 30 and 6 are OK in some places but traffic hell in others.

Cool. Perhaps some sections near the roads got filled in. Usually when I see a historical marker for the canal, I can make out the remnants of the towpath, but no trench for the canal. Probably if I followed the path I'd find more.

I criss-cross the Morris canal right-of-way on backroads near Washington NJ and other towns. No canal left, just signs saying the canal used to be there.

I was passing through Trenton one day on errands, and I was on my motorcycle. A group of dirt bikes overtook me, doing all the usual asinine antics. I thought about turning off to get clear of the idiocy, but didn't need to because they soon left me behind, since I was stopping for red lights and stop signs.

Not as big a scene there as Philly or Baltimore, but it really does go on in most cities.

There also appear to be 80-year cycles - four generations. Check out the book The Fourth Turning.

Nonsense. Boss Tweed would like a word with you.

To implement the constitutional right, the state legislature must codify the rules. It's how it works in all 50 states. Pennsylvania's election laws were sane, deterring fraud while maintaining full access. But they were overridden egregiously "because covid". The election laws weren't changed by the legislature, they were just ignored where inconvenient to those running the elections... mostly in the major cities, which lean strongly toward one party.

If the school board has in loco parentis responsibility to the students, as it always has done, then they must prevent porn like Gender Queer (with its explicit sexual images and text) from reaching elementary school, or any age, children. "Banning" is an inflammatory word for what they've always done, and should do, which is to ensure that books are appropriate for children.

Anyone who has actually looked at the contents of Gender Queer, and still believes that prepubescent children should have it pushed on them, is morally suspect.

There are some very explicit pictures and descriptions in Gender Queer which do not belong in elementary schools.

It feels to me that the LGBT lobby continually shifts the definition of "homophobic" and "transphobic" toward "we don't even want to hear a single criticism of any of our behaviors or beliefs." This is already starting to backfire, and it's only going to get worse.

> “intimidating” faculty into self-censoring

> deadnaming of trans students

> “thinly disguised” effort to censor

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. It's bad enough that the 'inclusive' teachers are bedwetting about it, but the ACLU lawsuit will burn up our tax dollars on lawyers, not the education it was intended to be spent on.