TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners Support Terrorists

[Mark Jones]

"Tom Keats" <tkeats@NO_SPAM.vcn.bc.ca> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I never did get into the car thing. And I quickly fell out of the Materials/Consumer thing.
> Remember that George Carlin thing about a house being a big pile of "stuff" with a roof on it?
Using Carlin as an example won't win you any intelligence points.

>
> I got plently o' nothin', 'n nothin's plenty for me. <w>
>
> If sometime you feel unhappy, look up "lifestyle simplification" on Google.
I am doing fine and I don't need to change.

 

[Max]

"Edward Dike, III" <[email protected]> wrote:

> When filled with passengers, or cargo, there is no comparison as to which is more efficient by any
> standard of measurement; 1 Ford Excursion, or 3 or 4 VW bugs.

And a fully loaded Missippi River barge is the most efficient transport ever.

It's about the dominant real-world, everyday usage pattern, not the never-achieved blue-sky
spin-doctored theoretical best practice. Every one of your arguements seems to be based on strawmen.

Tell you what. I'll buy you a plane ticket to Chicago. We'll go to one of the fine Ill. Tollway
Authority Oasis' overlooking one of our excellent expressways.

You bring $5,000 in 20's. I'll bring $25,000 in hundreds. We'll have a delicious breakfast of Egg
McMuffins and sit looking out the window at the traffic passing beneath us.

Every time a Excursion class vehicle with more than one occupant drives by, you get one of my
hundreds. Every time an single occupant Excursion class goes by, i get one of your twentys.

The game ends when i run out of hundreds or you run out of twentys.

.max

--
the part of <[email protected]> was played by maxwell monningh 8-p

 

[Mike Latondress]

"Zippy the Pinhead" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

>
> "Mike Latondresse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > If you don't like what I drive, **** you!
>> >
>> Actually we don't have a clue what you drive, it's you we don't like.
>
> Who is "we"? Do you speak for everyone but Mike? What does it take to get into your club?
>
>
Its the royal we baby, the royal we, but if you like him go ahead as he certainly appears to be a
polite and rational young fellow doesn't he.

 

[Zippy The Pinhe]

"Mark Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>Remember that George Carlin thing about a house being a big pile of
"stuff" with a roof on it?

> Using Carlin as an example won't win you any intelligence points.

"I base my entire life on Crusty's teachings." Bart Simpson

 

[Edward Dike]

max <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| "Edward Dike, III" <[email protected]> wrote:
|
| > When filled with passengers, or cargo, there is no comparison as to
which
| > is more efficient by any standard of measurement; 1 Ford Excursion, or
3 or
| > 4 VW bugs.
|
| And a fully loaded Missippi River barge is the most efficient transport ever.
|
| It's about the dominant real-world, everyday usage pattern, not the never-achieved blue-sky
| spin-doctored theoretical best practice. Every one of your arguements seems to be based on
| strawmen.
|
| Tell you what. I'll buy you a plane ticket to Chicago. We'll go to one of the fine Ill. Tollway
| Authority Oasis' overlooking one of our excellent expressways.
|
| You bring $5,000 in 20's. I'll bring $25,000 in hundreds. We'll have a delicious breakfast of Egg
| McMuffins and sit looking out the window at the traffic passing beneath us.
|
| Every time a Excursion class vehicle with more than one occupant drives by, you get one of my
| hundreds. Every time an single occupant Excursion class goes by, i get one of your twentys.
|
| The game ends when i run out of hundreds or you run out of twentys.
|
| .max
|
| --
| the part of <[email protected]> was played by maxwell monningh 8-p
So I guess the world would be a better place if the guy with 4 kids hauled his offspring to work
with him everyday? Using your'logic', a guy with a dump truck should drive around with it full of
gravel to legitimize it's ownership... Fortunately, no one has to answer to you(or me) as to what
they drive, or why. As to the barge, it might depend on whether your heading up stream, or down, and
I would still wonder if the RR wouldn't be the way to go. And how could anyone justify to you owning
a barge if it is occasionally empty? ED3

 

[Curtis L. Russe]

"Mark Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > My mom's Saturn station wagon gets 28-40mpg depending on driving
> conditions,
> > which is as good as any gasoline powered car of similar size. It's not
as
> > if Detriot can't do it...
> I had a 1985 Ford Escort 1.6L that got 35+ mpg on the highway. They have been able to do this for
> quite awhile, but these cars are flimsy and not very comfortable to drive.
>
And I rented a 9-5 Saab station wagon that averaged over 30 mpg on the freeway, was solid,
comfortable and rated a lot safer than any SUV that I am aware of. Carried a hell of a lot while
racking up the 30 or so mpg. No particular reason the same can't be built near Detroit. IMO, it
probably will be soon.

Those that support SUVs keep bringing up optimized use. Real world use by those that don't need them
will reduce their sales dramatically (depending on the article, it is already happening). We heard
someone in the parking lot at the University of Maryland basketball game say that she was going to
dump hers (dings on both sides from the narrow parking spaces. We watched some guy in Wichita, KS
cussing out his Excursion after attempting, and failing, to park it in the parking lot of a small
mall. Its like riding a tandem or putting a trailer on your bike for everyday use instead of a
single - you absolutely can do it, and some have good reason, but after a while most can't ignore
the trade offs.

Some will drive them no matter the cost, but many are reevaluating at each fill of the gas tank,
drive up a tight parking lot ramp, or attempt to park in slightly smaller parking space. Large SUVs
were never a vehicle whose time had come for a large audience - it was a vehicle that was always
living on borrowed time and marketing IMO.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA)

 

[Ken -Lsqny)]

On 14 Jan 2003 04:15:19 GMT, Barry Gaudet <[email protected]> spewed:

>n rec.bicycles.misc "Ken [NY)" <[email protected]_text> wrote:
>: On 13 Jan 2003 03:51:20 GMT, Barry Gaudet <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>:>In rec.bicycles.misc Mark Jones <[email protected]> wrote: [...]
>:>: I am well aware of the fact that a large part of my tax money goes to the U.S. military to help
>:>: ensure the continued flow of oil. That is one of the prices we have to be willing to accept.
>:>
>:> What price wont you accept? Is torture an acceptable expediency as long as your oil habit is
>:> maintained?
>
>: A solution, folks, would be to drill for our own oil and eliminate the oil habit. Hm. But
>: that would annoy the caribou. Oh hell, order some more body bags. It's a cheap price to pay
>: for not having wildlife annoyed.
>
> That is a different debate. Mark Jones said:

Actually, if drivers of gas guzzlers are supporting terrorists by buying the terrorists'
oil, then any who insist on our purchasing terrorist's oil instead of drilling for our own
are just as guilty, perhaps more so.

> 'I am well aware of the fact that a large part of my tax money goes to the U.S. military to help
> ensure the continued flow of oil. That is one of the prices we have to be willing to accept.'
>
> If that is his sincere belief [and I have have no reason to doubt it] then good for him. But it
> makes me wonder and ask the question: What price wont Mark Jones accept? Is systemic torture an
> acceptable expediency to ensure the continued flow of oil?

I don't know about him, but I don't think Iraqi oil has anything to do with what we are
doing militarily in the mideast. The president's father had the Iraqis on their knees in
1991 and could have taken over the oil fields then. Instead, we just signed a cease fire and
left. We are going back because Saddam violated that agreement.

> Simple question.

Yes. Regards, Ken (NY) Chairman, Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________

A reminder: Why we are fighting: http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/AmericaAttacked.htm

email: http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea-- massive,difficult to redirect,
awe-inspiring,entertaining and a source of mind boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect
it. -Anonymous

 

[Preston Crawfor]

In article <[email protected]>, Barry Gaudet wrote:
> In rec.bicycles.misc Preston Crawford <[email protected]> wrote:
>: In article <[email protected]>, Barry Gaudet wrote:
>:> In rec.bicycles.misc Doug Huffman <[email protected]> wrote:
>:>: The Economist, The Washington Post and Alan Dershowitz, Esq.??
>:>
>:> Normally I applaud brevity but: Care to expand on that?
>
>: Yeah, exactly. When typically conservative publications are questioning our tactics you might
>: want to wonder if we live in a police state.
>
> I'd just like to point out that, although it's often considered as such by those who assume that
> economics = pro-big business = conservative political parties: The Economist is not a
> particularly conservative publication. In fact it is one of the least partisan publications I'm
> aware of when it comes to politics.

I would agree with that assesment to a point. I am more or less a liberal/libertarian and I absolute
adore the Economist, in part because it is more even-handed than any magazine out there. It's the
only magazine I know of that's even-handed enough to be palatable to someone like me who's a
libertarian and a liberal on international/social issues. For example, the Economist (make a
libertarian/economic argument) is always hammering away at the ridiculousness of the drug war. I
appreciate that.

Since it's a magazine about the economy, however, I do always sense a right lean. After 9/11 the
magazine has done a HARD right lean towards Bush, which has been disappointing. Bush is the single
most destabilizing force on this planet in the last 30 years, in large part because he's pushing his
agenda forcefully, withdrawing from treaties left and right and basically telling the entire planet
to screw off. The Economist will never question the wisdom of conducting "diplomacy" like this and
that's disappointing to me.

Preston

 

[Mark Jones]

"Gary German" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAM_.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Mark Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > "Gary German" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAM_.net> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]... It makes the opposition look like idiots. Probably not
> > what they had in mind.
>
> A lot of folks think it's the drivers of super-sized land yachts that look like idiots, and that's
> the real point of the ads.
As a percentage of the total population, I would expect that very few people really oppose SUVs.

 

[Max]

In article <[email protected]>, "Edward Dike, III"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Take a deep breath, get over your irrational hysteria, and, calculate the passenger miles per
> gallon of a Ford Excursion(9 pass.)

I'll offer a change in the rules: for every Excursion with 9 passengers, you get $1000/passenger,
for ever single occupant excursion, i get $10.

--
the part of <[email protected]> was played by maxwell monningh 8-p

 

[Max]

"Edward Dike, III" <[email protected]> wrote:

> So I guess the world would be a better place if the guy with 4 kids hauled his offspring to work
> with him everyday? Using your'logic', a guy with a dump truck should drive around with it full of
> gravel to legitimize it's ownership...

I believe you opened the door by claiming a 9 seat SUV was more efficient than a bug since it
_could_ carry more people.

I'm asserting, a with testable, real world 900:1 odds proposition, that your claim is disengenuous,
specious, and laughably disconnected from reality.

But -- i think you're on to something with the dumptruck -- maybe we could upgrade Expiditursion
drivers to Terex's! <http://www.bigthings.ca/bc/pictures/spar1.jpg> (they'd then finally have the
cargo space for their bs.)

> Fortunately, no one has to answer to you(or me) as to what they drive, or why.

Another social atomist, living in a world where your responsibility to your neighbors is ... not
your responsibility.

What's that old saying about Freedom Without Responsibility ... ?

.max

--
the part of <[email protected]> was played by maxwell monningh 8-p

 

[Mark Jones]

"Gary German" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAM_.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> People are getting real tired of driving behind and parking next to those fat-ass road hogs.
I don't mind following behind them or parking next to them. Maybe you should relax and enjoy life
instead getting so easily upset my what other people are driving.

 

[Zippy The Pinhe]

"Gary German" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAM_.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Those ads wouldn't be running if the average Ford Excretion on the road
was carrying anywhere NEAR 9 people. With very few exceptions, the ones I see on the road are
occupied by one person.
>
What? Well, don't just stand there, shoot them.

 

[Curtis L. Russe]

"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Curtis L. Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>

...
>
> If you haven't actually driven them, you'd be surprised at how well many Detriot cars do -- 30
> MPG, or close to it, is quite typical these days,
even
> for large sedans. I've done that well in V8-powered Thunderbirds that
I've
> rented, and that was a few years ago.
>

Well, technicaly I'm leasing a Chevrolet Impala, but driving the Saab 900 turbo that my son is
buying (he's driving the Impala). With all of the feedback readouts and careful driving, the big six
had trouble staying near 26 mpg. My wife's former Monte Carlo with the small six could stay near 27
mpg. Both of us drove a lot on the Interstate to get to work, so there was a lot of highway driving.
(BTW, flooring the Impala at the bottom of a hill and watching the instant readout fuel use was
impressive - could bury it close to 4 mpg).

I've heard people talk about SUVs and large sedans getting 25-30 mpg. I also do mileage for our
MPVs/SUVs/autos (we transport disabled adults). Even the units not transporting wheelchairs and are
relatively unloaded don't get anywhere near the purported mpg readings, ESPECIALLY the SUVs. And
we're not talking V8 Excursions.

Reality is that a Malibu or a similarly sized Detroit vehicle can push 30 mpg for many drivers, but
I'd have real trouble believing it from a big six or small eight. 25-27 mpg is not bad, but it isn't
near to what my (OK, until March, my son's) Saab gets. Nor does it do as well as my wife's current
Vibe, which is getting a real world mileage of just under 30 mpg.

OTOH, it isn't far off what my 1986 Saab 900 got in combined city/road travel. A lot of cars across
the spectrum are getting better mileage.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA)

 

[Curtis L. Russe]

"Mark Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Curtis L. Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Those that support SUVs keep bringing up optimized use.
>
> I personally have no use for an SUV. It isn't really optimized for anything. It is a compromise
> for everything that it does.
>
> A passenger van is better for hauling people.
>
> A truck is better for hauling large loads.
>
> It is a waste of gas if one person is using it for basic transportation. I thought an Explorer was
> big, and then they brought out versions that make it look small.
>
The original Suburban was optimized for certain activities, with only a club cab truck in
competition. They had uses in many places, including taking crews up fire cuts. That started to
dwindle when what was to be called a SUV was less and less purchased by people that understood
that they were getting a passenger truck and understood about harsh rides and blind spots on
large, tall vehicles.

I won't argue that Excursions and whatever they call the Lexus, Mercedes and that new Porsche make
any sense.

Something tells me that for a small few, the Hummer2 actually makes sense as well. Probably not the
guy that seems to use his only for parking at the University of Maryland tailgate parties.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA)

 

[Stephen Harding]

Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> Mark Jones wrote:

> I'm thinking of the same thing. My trailer was recently used to move a 90" x 40" x 36" sofa 400+
> miles, towing it behind my car. It doesn't require much room because I store it tipped vertically
> onto its tail.
>
> Again: your problem is your thinking is too conventional.

Did you *really* need that car to haul the trailer?

A bicycle might have done it too, and what a great workout!

SMH

 

[Mark Jones]

"Gary German" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAM_.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> But, fortunately, free speech is alive and well in America, and hopefully these ads will make
> those who choose to drive these behemoths look self-centered, wasteful, and ridiculous. Sorry if
> that lowers the sense
of
> "rugged independence" you get from steering a land yacht to Starbucks.
They look like successful wage earners to me because they can afford to buy one.

 

[Mark Jones]

"Frank Krygowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Hmm. So if my next door neighbor should decide to burn big smoky piles of garbage in his backyard,
> I shouldn't complain?

This activity is illegal and driving an SUV is not.

 

[Zippy The Pinhe]

"Gary German" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAM_.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Well ALL contribute to the problems, Ed. But, our lifestyle choices can
greatly lessen or exacerbate the degree to which we do.

The whole point of terrorism is to influence "lifestyle choices". And that war is over.

> Whenever I exhale, I'm breathing out "greenhouse gases". But, because
I've chosen not to drive a bloated Ford Excretion, I'm contributing less to the problem than
those who do.

And if you'd stop breathing, there'd still be the small problem of the products of fermentation
working on your bloated body -- such compounds are also greenhouse gases. But you'd have fulfilled
the terrorists' expectations of you -- you would be dead, which is what militant Islamists desire.
The don't give a chabulla what you drive, they just want you dead.

So you don't drive. Great. You're halfway to where the terrorists want you.

You make your own decisions. But you don't get to surrender in my name.

 

[Preston Crawfor]

In article <[email protected]>, Mark Jones wrote:
> "Tom Keats" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Drivers take things so fuggin' seriously, like junkies who's stashes are threatened. Addicted
>> drivers really should lighten-up, and live longer. The Lifestyle Simplification thing was just
>> one suggestion toward that end. Don't havta bite my head off for suggesting it. Give your
>> respective blood pressures a break.
> If it wasn't so cold, I would go for a long bike ride. We need some warm weather, but it is
> months away.

What a pansy. Put on more clothes. Go ride.

Preston