Such political bravery can pay off. Vancouver BC's Gregor Robertson (and his councillor slate) has been elected twice with strong mandates in large part because of his commitment to bike lanes.
Bike lanes, for example, according to these people encourage people to bike more, which encourages higher density cities (as people want to be within bike range of work). Having us packed tighter into cities will make it easier for the UN troops to round is up and take away our guns and then our property.
These people tend to be politically active, and have turned up in enough numbers at some city councils where bike lanes were being considered to shout down those in favor or bike lanes, and scare the politicians into thinking bike lanes are actually controversial among the general electorate.
The Republican Party is encouraging this stuff. They made opposition to Agenda 21 an official part of their party platform. They didn't mention any particular things, like bike lanes, put simply mentioning Agenda 21 is going to encourage the conspiracy nuts.
Plenty of amusing but frightening on this in Goole, if you are curious. Here's a good start: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/06/inside-agend...
In SF, there are quite a few bicycle lanes. That's cool. Half of them are ruined by parking. That's not cool. Half of my bike-riding coworkers have been "doored" so far.
Heck, it's still a lot better than no bike lane, but it's hard to get right since the space is already taken by car lanes and parking lanes.
In Paris, even thus, as per previous posts, scooters ride on it, some lanes are actually part of the sidewalk and are forbidden to pedestrians. In Germany I've seen that too (albeit theyre not as well designated IMO). Advantage: no one car park on it. No car can even cross them. Feels a lot safer.
Unfortunately in Paris that's not the norm, its only a few places where they were able to do that.
North American bike lanes, as they're currently implemented, in general, are easily criticized because they don't actually buy a safer ride for cyclists. They buy the illusion of a safer ride[1].
Some of the problems:
* Bicycles going straight through an intersection are encouraged to overtake cars
that are turning right on their right side. The motor vehicle can turn into the
path of the overtaking cyclist.
* Bicycles going straight through an intersection are encouraged to stay close to
the curb, where they can be hidden from the view of drivers turning left into
their path by cars that are traveling in the same direction and slightly
ahead of them. The left-turning car then turns behind the car travelling in
the same direction as the cyclist and into the cyclist.
* Bicycle lanes widen the travel lane, encouraging drivers to travel
at higher speeds.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bike_lane#Crash_types.2C_junct...
My kids are 8 and 10 and cycle 1km to school each day without me or my wife riding along. And that's a mix of regular streets, cycle paths and residential areas. I feel pretty thankful to the ones campaigning in the 70s!