Quite OT: NYTimes.com Article: TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners Support Terrorists

[nealtovsen@yahoo.com (Neal)]

> It makes me think that the fucking liberals running the media, esp. the
> NYT, have scary power.

Liberals running the media? You haven't looked around much lately? Sure, NYT
more than others, but hardly worthy of that much praise. :)

Anyway, I haven't yet understood why anti-terrorism, fuel economy, and the
environment have to be liberal vs. conservative issues. It's sad that it is
so polarizing that people don't read the articles anymore, assuming that it
is some [insert liberal or conservative here, preceeded by appropriate
explatives] plot. I firmly believe that more than a few conservatives go out
of their way to buy the biggest vehicles possible just because it pisses off
the liberals.

If you read the article, it is pretty explicit that it was aimed against
Reps AND Dems. The article and commercials did not in any way advocate
legislation against SUV's (which is the usual battle cry of the
conservatives). I thought it was rather well done.

I'm proud of someone who is actually stepping up and making people think
about stuff they take for granted. Americans love to pretend they can do
whatever they want without accepting the consequences. Gas-guzzling cars are
simply the low hanging fruit in the equation that the average American might
identify with. Certainly not the only part of the tree. Nobody said pickups
were eco-darlings either. And "but everyone is doing it" doesn't make it any
better.

It may blow the issue out of proportion, but that's the point. The really
funny part is that the concept was invented by conservatives in Bush's
anti-drug campaign (which was also overblown and ignores key issues). And
the whole concept of polarization is something the Republicans have
historically done very well.

Neal
(conservative and liberal, but not really either...and in the market for a
truck...)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: scirocco-l-admin@scirocco.org
> [mailto:scirocco-l-admin@scirocco.org]On Behalf Of Ron Pieper
> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 6:19 PM
> To: scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> Subject: Re: Quite OT: NYTimes.com Article: TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners
> Support Terrorists
>
>
> --- Neal Tovsen <nealtovsen@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I thought I'd post this since it has been a hot issue
> > in the past. Whether you agree with it or not, it sure
> > does make you think, eh?
>
> It makes me think that the fucking liberals running the media, esp. the
> NYT, have scary power.
>
> WHY didn't they start their bitching when PICKUP TRUCKS - certainly
> higher fuel consumers than SUV's - became the largest selling passenger
> vehicles in the US?  I sell a hell of a lot more empty bed pickups than
> I do one passenger SUVs.  Tell me *they* are more practical and consume
> less fuel per man-mile!  Ha!  This is a typical liberal-dumbocrat
> selective attack.
>
> And *we* can't talk either.  Outside of Drew, name one of us who
> SPECIFICALLY aimed and succeeded at making his/her car *more* fuel
> efficient and less polluting?  Who drives conservatively?  All I see is
> no cat, big engine swap, 0-60 and 1/4 mile times...I'll offer that it's
> hypocritical for us to agree with this NYT crap.
>
> Freedom of choice, keep the government OUT of my wallet and OUT of my
> garage.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scirocco-l mailing list
> Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l