As a Toronto resident, I apologize.

That said, that seems a bit fishy. I swear I heard people talking about the 'war on cars'/'war on the car' before 2009.

Made up.

They just don't like it that people figured out it was made up by their right wing "brain trust".

Meanwhile, we Citizens of Seattle continue to heavily subsidize cars.

The only war there is ... is that of the Billionaires and Millionaires to force Seattle Citizens to pay for their gold-plated vanity projects.

It makes no sense to trust anyone who says this, even in a heated exchange. It's just more shortcuttery, and transpo discussions get bogged down in murky premises quite enough as it is.

If you trace it all back, it goes to the media company that has conservative Canadian pols, including their ex-PM, on the board of directors:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulro…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_Sun owned by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Media owned by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebecor_Me… owned by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebecor ...although I'm surprised I didn't stumble across Murdoch along the way.

Right-wingers have as many bitching points -- formerly: talking points -- as they have warts on their steatopygous asses, which is to say many thousands.
A day without a talking point for right-wingers is like a day without beating their meat at least five times.
Right-wingers flagellate themselves with stories just to make themselves miserable.
They lead tiny, self-absorbed, pointless, greedy little lives and want everyone else to feel as miserable as they do. Hence their bitching points.

Let's all close our eyes and wish for Tinkerbell to take away all the fucking right-wing assholes in the world.

This "war on cars" meme has got to be the bastard offspring of the classic "class warfare" accusation that gets trotted out every time anyone dare support returning marginal tax raises for high earners back to their Clinton-era levels, or imposing any kind of tax that might hit the rich harder in the pocketbook.

And you know, there are some taxes or tax rates that are too high or too progressive or do inhibit the economy--I'm still torn myself about I-1098--but that's an opinion you can only express in an adult discussion. The whole point of phrases like "class warfare" or "war or cars" is to squelch adult discussion. People who use these phrases want to avoid rational debate at all costs because they know that, if it comes down to a rational debate, they lose.

I can't find it now, but I remember recently reading Tim Burgess--the last person anyone would accuse of waging a "war on cars"--make a case on Publicola for market-oriented parking meter rates. And the case he makes doesn't differ in any real way from that made by our alleged Car Hater #1, Mike McGinn.

We're fighting a war on cars just like we're fighting a War on Drugs.

(You have to keep in mind that when I say "drugs" I include alcohol, tobacco, and psychoactive pharmaceuticals or you won't cwatididthar)

Meanwhile, I actually support a war on cars. Fuck 'em and fuck the war machine that made 'em ubiquitous.

Wait, there is no such thing as a war on cars? Dammit. I was preparing to mine I-5.

Cars are the dominant paradigm, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. But stupid people do love a good catchphrase.

Remember in the 90s...

http://www.ifc.com/videos/portlandia-por…

To amend my comment @7, the father of "war on cars," even more than the current use of "class warfare," has got to be the fake "war on Christmas." Because you know, in America today, Christians, just like automobile drivers, are a persecuted minority, and any attempt to acknowledge that there's any solstice holiday besides Christmas can only be interpreted as a direct assault on Christmas.

See Rotten666 @9.