Umm... not to defend him, but is he really that far off the mark? The dude is being honest, you gotta give him at least that much.
But beyond that, the implication that in most bike/car collisions the cyclist did something wrong is quite accurate. And, frankly, when one of these Darwin Award contestants flies off the sidewalk in front of a right turner from his right while the driver is looking left (after already checking for peds, not speeding cyclists, on the sidewalk to the right), of course it's an inconvenience when the collision happens.
In the particular collision he writes about, he notes that the motorist was probably at fault, but he doesn't know to consider whether the cyclist was properly positioned to be visible - judging by how most cyclists ride, especially around campuses, he probably wasn't riding where motorists tend to be looking.
Whether we like it or not, most drivers see it as their primary responsibility to not hit another vehicle, or not to hit a pedestrian who is legally crossing or traveling in the street. In particular, at best, it is a secondary responsibility for them to look for cyclists obeying neither the vehicular nor the ped rules of the road. And when a cyclist crosses an intersection riding "off to the side" he is not obeying the rules of the road.