Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO vs. World

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-14-2003, 04:26 AM   #11
basel1120
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 29
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

Irony tends to get lost in this crowd.
basel1120 is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 01-14-2003, 04:29 AM   #12
Zapata
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18
Default Re: Huffington in a righteous huff

"What happened to 'give me liberty or give me death?' "



Indeed, what *is* happening to our Constitution and the personal liberties we once took for granted? Somehow it's now considered "un-American" to voice dissent. John Ashcroft and the rest of that rogue Administration must have forgotten about Paine and Jefferson, true Patriots in every sense of the word. Why, Shrub is nothing but a Connecticut Tory, a veritable "Fortunate Son."



If you must drive a SUV, at least agree that they should be beholden to the same emission and mileage standards as other passenger vehicles. If that's your choice, fine, but be prepared to pay a hefty price for that privilege.



Liberty, for me, is being able to see through the miasma of Republicrat doublespeak and their corporate underwriters.
Zapata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 04:36 AM   #13
basel1120
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 29
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

Frankly, I fail to see what's "moronic" about it. US dependence on imported oil, to which SUV's contribute disproportionately, contributes both directly and indirectly to the resources and justification for terrorism. The fact that Americans would like to continue a pattern of unlimited consumption of petroleum doesn't alter that.
basel1120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 04:51 AM   #14
gooseman_1
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 162
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

Ah.....Tim_White asked if it's true that the pres. of the Sierra Club drives a suburban, and the answer is yes. He didn't ask what this freak Ariana drives. Try this one: the terrorists are SOLELY responcible for their actions. It speaks volumes that anyone in this country would make excuses for their cowardly actions.



As much as I think SUVs are useless pieces of crap, I don't blame their drivers for the actions of madmen.
gooseman_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 05:22 AM   #15
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

Absolutely. It's all our fault! We need to wear sackcloth and ashes and beat our breats in penance. And write lots more checks!



Seriously, the amount of excess consumption of oil that SUVs cause is a veritable drop in the bucket. It's miniscule in the total picture of oil consumption. Anyhow, the US gets less than 20% of its oil from the mideast.



Should we find other sources of energy besides oil? Sure.



Should we strive for a pollution-free ecenomy? Sure.



But to think that any such actions will encourage these terrorists to leavs us alone is wishful thinking. These mideast despotisms NEED outside causes to blame for their own internal corruption and crushing poverty rates. That's why we are the target. These despots like Arafat and the rest live in multi-millionaire luxury while their people starve. We are the convenient scapegoat to blame for their own incompetence and criminality.



And I'm sick of these non-MC related threads too.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 05:28 AM   #16
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Re: Huffington in a righteous huff

What's wrong with you? You're not supposed to escape the fiction that there are substantial differences between the two major Syndicates.... er I mean Parties.



No one may escape. It's the scrutiny of the Toatal Information Awareness Department for you!
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 05:33 AM   #17
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

Sorry but I had to throw this one on the board. It's always a popular topic here at MO.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 05:36 AM   #18
bwarbiany23
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 33
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

First point: seruzawa, I'm not disagreeing with you, just using your post as a starting block...



I don't understand how the environmentalist think that somehow these other sources of energy will just magically appear, even if we fund them from the public till (I'm sure they're plenty funded)...



Should we find other sources of energy? WE HAVE OTHER SOURCES OF ENERGY. They're just not to the level, yet, where it's economically viable to implement them.



People want us to use electric cars. Well, if I didn't need to recharge for 6 hours every hundred miles, I would do so. I might want a hybrid, but what am I going to do when I want to tow my bike up to a trackday (full disclosure: I don't have a car, but will be buying a jeep wrangler this year)...



The simple fact is, people like SUV's. And for a lot of things, they're useful. Most people don't get that use out of them, but there's no reason that we should find some way to take their SUV's away. When the automakers can come up with a good, powerful, long-range engine running on alternative power (I think it'll have to be fuel cell, but that's just me), or when gas gets sufficiently scarce that the prices get too high, then we'll be there. Until then, no amount of complaining is going to get normal people to buy products that aren't as good (i.e. lower power and higher cost).



For me to make the switch, we'll need an alternative energy vehicle that meets my needs, and is as cheap or cheaper to run than a gas-powered vehicle. For example, I want a Jeep Wrangler. If you can put a fuel cell in that sucker, and give me a powerful enough engine that I can occasionally go off-road in it, then I'll buy it. Until then, it's the standard 4.0L dinosaur engine they stick in there...



Brad
bwarbiany23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 05:53 AM   #19
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Are Americans myoptic? selfish?

I am sympathetic to let consumers decide. However, I think her point is that if we all change are driving habit by our choice not by govenment regulation our country would be beter off. I admire that she has the courage of her convictions.



Cleaner air



Less foreign oil consumption



Less envy from the world



After living in Israel for short time, I wish we would do everthing in our power to reduce our dependance of middle eastern oil. Lots of folks say we get most of our oil from South America, Canada, etc . But the fact remains the Middle East is where most of world's oil resources are. Too me the political costs are too high i.e. supporting regimes, monarchies, that we would never support if they didn't have oil.





Also can somone tell me why gas is so much more in Canada? Which has more oil reserves than we do. Go to Vancouver B.C. and you will not see the epidemic of SUVs. I work with two Canadians who are amused with the U.S. consumer and how we are so willing to go to war about oil. If Iraq was in South America would we be going to war ?? I don't think so. Weapons of mass destruction good grief Pakistan has the bomb. You know that Pakistan is the country where Osama may be hiding out.



KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2003, 06:12 AM   #20
mconlon
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 145
Default Re: The SUV battle rages on

Please re-read my original post, above: point is not are SUVs good or bad; point is the Bush Admin's "Drugs fund terrorism" makes about as much sense as "SUVs fund terrorism." Only the SUV bashing ad is not paid by the public, like the anti-drug ads.



BTW, by the same logic as the new "drugs fund terrorism" ad campaign, buying cocaine in the early 80s was downright patriotic: not only were you supporting the country by funding drug cartel pruchases of US-made weapons, but you were also supporting both the CIA-advised overthrow of a democratically elected government in central america and covering up arms sales to middle east nations, some of which are now suspected of terrorist activities or harboring known terrorist organizations.



mconlon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off