Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

Democrat Hypocrites Drive the Gas Guzzlers

By Jasmyne Cannick, New America Media. Posted June 18, 2008.


Democrats rail against big oil yet ride around in chauffeur-driven high-polluting Lincoln Town cars.
Advertisement

The Democratic initiative to tax big oil profits was just another Washington "dog and pony show" designed to make you and me feel better. Blocked by Senate Republicans, the measure failed to achieve the 60 votes required by Senate rules to proceed. The vote was 51-43.

We've seen it before: Democrats put forth a piece of legislation that's supposed to make us think that they are in Washington fighting for us, and then the evil Republicans swoop in and kill it. Bad Republicans. But let's be real -- bad Democrats do it too.

When it was all said and done, both Democrats and Republicans scattered off to their various fundraisers in chauffeur-driven high-polluting Lincoln Town cars while their constituents were left to decide between food and gas.

"We're not afraid, on this side, to go after big oil when they are not doing the right thing," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York. "And we are not afraid to go after OPEC because they are a cartel that squeezes us," he added.

I'm not sure what Sen. Schumer means when he says "us." To the best of my knowledge, in California, with the exception of Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, I can't think of one California representative or senator who has demonstrated that they are, in fact, one of us. (Lee gets a nod of approval for taking the food stamp challenge and living on $21 worth of food for one week, the average weekly benefit for a food stam recipient.)

In fact, it's quite the opposite.

America's political etiquette dictates that elected officials are to be treated more like Hollywood celebrities than public servants, even during times of extreme duress (Read gas priced at $4.93).

So while your average taxpayer sees a 30-second sound byte of a representative "going off" on big oil's record profits at the expense of their constituents during a hearing on Capitol Hill, keep in mind that it's mainly for show.

For example, an amendment to last year's energy bill required House members who leased vehicles through their taxpayer office budgets to drive cars that emit low levels of greenhouse gases.

I could be wrong, but I don't think that includes Lincoln Town cars, Lexus, Cadillacs, and Ford Expeditions.

I guess what's good for the gander isn't necessarily good for the goose.

While Congress has mandated more fuel-efficient vehicles for "us," the public, (a public that quite frankly can't afford to fill their tanks, much less buy a new car), when it comes to their taxpayer-funded vehicle, nothing but the best will do.

According to an article published last month in the Los Angeles Times, 21 of California's 53 House members lease vehicles, among them Reps. Diane Watson, D-Los Angeles, and Laura Richardson, D-Long Beach.

The lease requirement passed narrowly last August after a brief debate, with most Democrats -- including Watson -- supporting it, and most Republicans opposing it. (Richardson was not in Congress for the vote on the amendment but supported the energy bill in December.)

In the article, Watson grew testy when asked recently about her taxpayer-funded vehicle.

"You guys ask me such idiotic questions," Watson snapped. Her spokeswoman, Dorinda White, explained that Watson chose the Lincoln because she is "over 6 feet tall in shoes" and spends a lot of time driving around her district.

But the double talk and fake sympathy doesn't come from just the Democrats.

In the same article, some Republicans lashed out at Democrats, accusing the House leadership of hypocrisy. "I will start driving a green car once Pelosi starts ballooning back and forth from coast to coast to save jet fuel," said Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla., referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, who has made climate change a top priority.

Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said the speaker's Chevy Suburban was selected by the Sergeant at Arms who oversees her security. But Hammill noted that Pelosi has asked that her next vehicle be a hybrid.

I find it very hard to believe some of the rhetoric coming out of Washington from people who not only ride around in taxpayer-funded, chauffeured luxury vehicles -- they defend it.

But short of getting caught toe-tapping in the men's room, there is very little that will move voters to hold their representatives accountable.

When it comes to the issue of the today's gas prices, who's fighting for "us" and who's fighting against "us," the Democrats and the Republicans are hard to tell apart.

At the end of the day, America's drivers are on their own on this one.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: congress, gas, gas prices, big oil, oil prices

Jasmyne Cannick is a critic and commentator based in Los Angeles who writes about the worlds of pop culture, race, class, sexuality, and politics as it relates to the African-American community. Her work has been featured in the Los Angeles Times and Ebony Magazine. A regular contributor to NPR’s ‘News and Notes,’ she was chosen as one Essence Magazine’s 25 Women Shaping the World.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Democrats bungling energy issue
Posted by: Moonray on Jun 18, 2008 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats might well snatch defeat from the jaws of victory -- again -- if they continue to blunder on energy issues:

1) The proposed windfall profits tax on oil companies makes the Dems look like tax-and-spend liberals. Even laymen understand that it's a bad idea and Republicans are having a field day attacking Dems at every level because of it. The Democrats should scrap this idea as part of a broader, sexier approach to energy policy that would emphasize higher vehicle-mileage requirements -- Europe already requires 40-plus mpg -- and funding alternative sources.
2) Continued opposition to ALL offshore drilling would play right into the hands of the Republicans. The Reprobates can make mince-meat out of Democratic candidates as gas prices climb higher and higher. As part of their sexier new energy policy, Dems should allow SOME offshore exploration while emphasizing the need to re-regulate the oil futures market to end rampant speculation.

Most important, the Democrats need to act quickly and nimbly to these campaign challenges or the Republicans will murder them. Clinging to old liberal positions on energy issues is just asking for defeat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gore in a smart car!
Posted by: carbon-based on Jun 18, 2008 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you..someone with a clear view as to what is happening.

...but in fairness, do these congressmen and women carpool in those big limos? Is one Lincoln worth 3 smartcars? Will we see Al gore driving a smart car any time soon?

BTW, the windfall profits tax didnt work under Carter and wont work here. I don't want to till pay $4 per gallon just to have it go into the govt's pocket. Windfall profits doesnt help me at all

While this goes against my economic senses, price controls seem to be in order here!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No free lunch (or fill-up) Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: No free lunch (or fill-up) Posted by: bornxeyed
» Crazy H Posted by: pfeifer999
» oil as a utility Posted by: pfeifer999
» why taxes matter Posted by: Drclaw
» RE: Gore in a smart car! Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: Gore in a smart car! Posted by: carbon-based
Dems think they'll get a Pass with Obama in Nov- WRONG!
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jun 18, 2008 5:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm out tho not only throw out the majority of Dems from this Congressional era- I'm out to see them Tried as Co Conspirators.
Peleosi & Reid are top of the List- hey Nan, I bet you'll look great in Orange & shackles just like Condi!
they better pick up some new colored markers (Purple?) when neither Republicans Nor Dems win in Senate, House or State elections this year.
I AM ROLLING THE DICE...Independents, Liertarians, Green Party....I will not vote for any state Dem on the Ballot.time to give Both 'Parties' a big piece of Humble Pie and their Pink slips ( a Suboepena Too?)
Did You hear the Loud BOOOs when Granholm brought up Hillary ?? I was Sooo Proud.Hillary NEVER won this State (MI)-she stole it with the Help of Corrupt Dems like Levin (buddy from Armed Services which failed in it Oversight Duties!)
Obama will take MI easily- but the rest of the 'Dems'running here had better clean up their resumes or start hiring some defense attorney's,esp the 'old timers' who sold this state out to the Whores of the Oil Industry- the Big 3 deacades ago.
If they aren't up then they will be hearing 'RECALL and INDICTMENTS"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And that's why America needs 3rd party candidates such as Ralph Nader for a HUGE CHANGE !
Posted by: maxpayne on Jun 18, 2008 5:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why vote for either one of these parties when you're better off voting for someone outside the two-party box? All this same ole' "you have to vote Democrat or the Republicans will ruin America" doesn't work 9 out of 10 times. Anyone who tells you to vote "Democrat" just because the GOP is bad is not telling you the truth. Both parties are doing the same damage and neither one of them deserves your support in reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This written by a Reich-winger?
Posted by: Phred42 on Jun 18, 2008 6:21 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It should raise a red flag for you when someone refers to the "Democrat" Party

That is a Reich wing talking point

There is no such thing as "the Democrat Party"

It's the Democratic Party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Facile comment Posted by: chlamor
» RE: Facile comment Posted by: nochicagoboys
freshlemon2
Posted by: freshlemon on Jun 18, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact of the matter is that ALL Americans bought into the "big bad" humvees, trucks and off-the road vehicles. For several years now I have been intimidated on the highways by their drivers whose attitude seemed to be "get out of my way 'cause my vehicle is bigger and badder than yours".

Now most folks are stuck with them and can't afford either to replace them or drive them.

Sure, members of congress should set an example and go for the most energy efficient means of travel. But cultural standards are hard to change, and our cultural standards have been based on relatively inexpensive gas and buying into the marketing concept that "bigger is better". Riding in a limousine has been a sign of status, wealth and special occasion.

We all (including the author of this piece) need to realize that the changes we need to make in response to gas prices and environmental problems requires more than just running out to buy a more efficient vehicle. It requires a change in the way we think about a lifestyle that is ingrained in most Americans whether they are Republicans, Democrats or independents.

We must start to think outside the perimeters of consumerism for its own sake or to satisfy our own egos. We must think about the impact our "stuff" has on the economy, the environment and our own budgets.

That finger of admonishment that the author is pointing at members of congress needs to be pointed at all of us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No! Posted by: badkitty
» RE: No! again. Posted by: undrgrndgirl
Supporting Democrats is a serious political disorder
Posted by: chlamor on Jun 18, 2008 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
like alcoholism or returning again & again to an abusive spouse who repeatedly lies to you. It's easy to fall off the wagon, to make excuses & rationalizations for it.

Even many whose views are developed enough to recognize such truths as the fundamental rottenness of the 2-party system & the complicity of Democrats in all of the Republicans' major crimes, are still unable to draw the logical consequences of these insights. (Those so naive that they still conceive of Democrats as being the "opponents" of Republicans are another case altogether.)

The central point is this: capitalist society permits the Democrats to be one of the 2 allowed parties for a very definite reason. It's not because the Democrats "serve the people." It's because in a subtle but effective way, they help the capitalists keep the populace under control by providing them with the illusion of possible change. TPTB don't want the people "served." They want them managed, or controlled.

It is the job, the central social function of the Democrats to always be dangling before the people's noses vague pseudo-hints of possible change, so as to keep them from bolting from bourgeois politics altogether. It is the Democrats' intention to never deliver meaningful change, but rather to keep dangling hints of it alluringly forever. This produces control -- a populace habituated to remain safely within the lines required by ruling class interests.

This is why the Democrats NEVER paint a picture of US history that's the slightest bit accurate -- they want a brainwashed population every bit as much as the Republicans do. This is why they NEVER are willing to set forth an honest socioeconomic analysis of why things are as they are -- they much prefer that people not understand such things.

As long as a large chunk of voters can be deceived by the seemingly "nicer guy" act of the Democrats, there is no hope whatever of coming to grips with the core problems of our society. The most dangerous trends -- a wasteful consumer society, environmental destruction, grotesque social inequality, and an uncontrollable propaganda/war machine -- cannot even be approached within the framework of bourgeois politics, because they all serve ruling class interests. This is what is really being protected, when people opt to support Democrats just because they seem less blatantly cruel on TV.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Same old BS
Posted by: solrev on Jun 18, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results, then whine about it. Where have you heard that before? When you decide to quit being individuals and become nationalists, then we can have two cars in every garage and two chickens in every pot, and the rest of the world can have that also. You can institute a government that will secure the entitlements of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Americans are such cowards; they refuse to rock the boat. They preach change as long as someone else does the changing.
We are an oil-based society, every product you possess required two basic material inputs to produce oil and water. We do not have to change society that much, just tweak it a little. A good start is to nationalize the oil industry number two on the list is a nationalized water industry. Fight that battle and nationalizing healthcare is easy. That is too bold of a step for you progressives. Why nationalize the oil industry? We need to use the remaining oil money to create a renewable oil source. To produce oil you need carbon instead of using the carbon stored over billions of years we make it a real time circle, carbon in and carbon out. We are changing the carbon cycle because we dig up the ancient carbon in place of using current available carbon to create the oil. Every nation on the planet can follow that model. Here is a better idea let us elect another uniter. They flip parties on you and suck you in. Stand up and boycott the purple pinky elections as non-responsive, hell no we want are turn to feed at the public trough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Same old BS Posted by: Axiom69
Just who are The Democrats?
Posted by: chlamor on Jun 18, 2008 6:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats are just a faction of the enemy -- not allies in any sense. They are not the "lesser evil;" they are an auxiliary subdivision of the same evil. They have betrayed us beyond all possible reconciliation, and are more truly allies of the Republicans than they are "friends" of ours.

It's just a fallacy to believe that the Democrats can somehow be transformed into a political force defending the interests of the broader public. That's not what they are. That they dare posture as the "party of the people" is an insult to our collective intelligence. In reality, they use this tattered & tired popular image to collude with the rightwing, confuse the public, & sell us out at every turn.

This is a party ready for the dustbin of history. The only "help" we should give them is helping them get there. We should focus on laying the groundwork for a party that genuinely represents our interests, not helping to resurrect a disgraced & decaying enemy.

The real face of the Democratic Party is revealed, for example, by the way they had police drag people out of the 2004 convention for wearing anti-war tee-shirts. Or by John Kerry, who tried to pretend during the entire campaign that his connection with Vietnam was just that he "served" -- trying to hide the fact that he'd been an outspoken OPPONENT of a criminal war.

In other words -- don't be fooled by the existence of a few decent Dems. They make no real difference in the overall alignment of the party, and will never be internally influential. They are a distraction.

Also, "taking over" the party is a naive illusion. Both parties are dominated and driven by the interests of huge corporations and plutocrats. Neither gives the slightest hoot about the well-being of the general public -- which, as both of them well know, is utterly defenseless, politically. Both parties regard the public as a lamb to be fleeced on behalf of their (the parties') patrons. This condition is non-negotiable & not subject to alteration by ordinary well-meaning people.

Both parties represent little more than the will of giant oil, banking, media and defense corporations. The only way they differ is in marketing strategies, target populations, rhetorical style, & external fluff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, sweet jesus, tell me something I don't already know
Posted by: sausage on Jun 18, 2008 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is news worthy?

U.S. Senators riding round Washington, D.C., and their home states, in chauffer driven limousines?! And they're Democrats?!!

Who knew??!!!

I actually witnessed my U.S. Representative driving a Chevy Impala!!! Yes!!! My U.S. Congressman was actually behind the wheel of a big U.S. sedan!!!

The horror! The Horrrrrrrrrrrrror!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is no political party
Posted by: Last Chance on Jun 18, 2008 7:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to represent the need to peacefully reduce the human population and recycle 100% of human waste and garbage, and if there were such a party it would immediately look for rich contributors to finance their election campaigns, which would compromise any pledges it made for family planning and a clean and healthy environment.

Only the people themselves can save the Earth, and only then if they ignore advertising and abandon the mainstream economy in favor of a continental network of eco tech villages. Otherwise, it's business as usual as both Republicans and Democrats compete for power and privilege (but maybe Obama will be different) -- How To Save The Earth

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Windfall profits tax is a bad idea!
Posted by: xvictor on Jun 18, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what if the oil companies make a lot of money (if that's indeed the case). Good for them. And who is paying them? The American consumer, of course!!! Because of cheap oil, the energy outfits made a lot of money from customers who buy a lot of gas to top off their SUVs and such.

If we follow market dictates, higher gas prices will reduce consumer consumption. This reduces profits for the oil concerns. Higher gas prices does not necessarily make the oil companies any richer (and will be able to pay LESS in taxes). So this will all work out in the end.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Windfall profits? Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Windfall profits? Posted by: vivachavez
» RE: Windfall profits? Posted by: Axiom69
Oh Please!
Posted by: helenwheels on Jun 18, 2008 7:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Politicians are politicians. Hypocrisy is what they do. I'm amazed that anyone is surprised at their choice to ride in a Lincoln Towncar.

Maybe someone should address the problem of AIRPLANES because unless that changes, it doesn't matter how fuel efficient our cars are. Please do some research. A typical 747 uses a gallon of fuel every second. And spews it out directly into the atmosphere.

I'm sort of tired of people being expected to follow to the letter everything they vote on at their job. It's unrealistic. When have politicians EVER done that?

Just sort of a naive view, I think. Sure, we'd all love it to change but as other commenters pointed out, if you don't realize that the Democrats are in collusion with/nearly as bad as the Republicans at this juncture, you're really pretty blind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't that a "corker" . . .?
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on Jun 18, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And - here in Texas, anyway - at ninety to a hundred miles an hour. These same "environmentalists" also fling every manner of trash out the windows as the hurtle past, and when the inevitable happens that they kill themselves (and a few innocents) by rolling the old SUV or ten-ton pickup half a dozen or more times, their friends don't bother to clean up the mess, either.

It all tells one where we're going, though. Amazing what the microcosm can tell you, isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I spent two years working in Greenwich, CT...
Posted by: Illiteratilumen on Jun 18, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... and I saw more foreign-produced gas-guzzling cars with Kerry and Hillary or Obama stickers on them than you could shake a stick at. Volvo's seemed to be really popular along with BMW and Mercedes. Speaking from a very limited experience most self-identified "liberals" I knew in Connecticut were about as progressive as Dick Cheney. So listen up comrades! When the revolution comes make sure that the residents of Fairfield county are first against the wall. Work your way towards Manhattan next.

Perhaps my experiences living in a blue state were distorted. After all, I was living in the richest county in the country. It is a real shithole, full of greedy and selfish jerks who drive European luxury cars and want you to get the hell out of their way because they have someplace important to be, ok, so they are gonna ride your ass until you get in the other lane even if there is no point to it. I'm glad to be back in Michigan with my very decent neighbors. They mostly drive pickups but at least they are American-made!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DemocratIC - please don't buy into the Republican framing!
Posted by: Lilah on Jun 18, 2008 8:46 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm disappointed you'd use "Democrat" instead of Democratic to refer to the party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The author used the correct terms Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Yeah, yeah, yeah...
Posted by: Quannah on Jun 18, 2008 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whatever. Democrats drive around in limos. And what do Republics drive? I doubt they have converted to Amish and are scurrying around Washington in horses and buggies are they?

The most informative thing in the article comes at the end. Talk about in-your-face stupid!

"...In the same article, some Republicans lashed out at Democrats, accusing the House leadership of hypocrisy. "I will start driving a green car once Pelosi starts ballooning back and forth from coast to coast to save jet fuel," said Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla., referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, who has made climate change a top priority..."

Stupid is as stupid says. I wonder how congressman Feeney gets back and forth from Florida to Washington? These guys are never disappointing in the absurdity of the rhetoric they use.

Oy Vey! Too bad we can't fire them all. (Or at least most of them)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yeah, yeah, yeah... Posted by: Axiom69
Plugin EV
Posted by: EinMD on Jun 18, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that Democrats who are expousing about the environment should be driving better cars. But lets take a closer look here. Currently there are few if any options on the market. You do honestly expect Speaker Pelosi to show up for a meeting in a Kia Rio? The Republicans would laugh her out of office. These Democrats you are bitching about have only slightly more options than the average joe. What are they supposed to do? Buy a $100,000 Tesla Roadster? How many options do you see for decent sized sedans that are plugin electrics or hybrids on the market that get decent gas mileage? The best Lexus can do is the RX 400h hybrid that gets a measly 26/24 city/highway mpg for $42,000. I don't know about you, or Pelosi but I doubt any of us have that kinda cash just laying around especially given today's crunch. Unless of course you work for an oil company.

Tell you what... you get Th!nk Global over here and have them put out a $13,000 plugin electric and I'll buy it. So will a lot of people. It'll only cost $10 million to build a plant capable of pumping out PEV's on demand at up to 30,000 units a year. Then you can talk about hypocrisy all you want.

What options does the regular citizen have? A showpiece Prius which STILL uses gasoline and costs $16k for anything more than a box with wheels and motor? Sit around and wait for GM to get off it's ass and end it's collusion with the oil companies? Wait for Schwartzenegger to buy us all Tesla coupes?

Yes I drive a SUV that uses gasoline. I bought it used when gas was $1.90 a gallon after I totaled my Kia Rio in a 30 mph crash two weeks after I paid it off. Even if I still had the Rio, I wouldn't be able to fit the stroller, diaper bag, bag of toys and other assorted crap needed for the baby I just had last year.

Now I'm spending $600 a month just fueling this and my wife's car. My car is now worth about $1200 less than what i have left to pay on it. So even if I sold it, I'd still be in the hole which would be tacked on the car loan for the next vehicle I buy unless I can pay it off. Which I can't because the oil companies are sucking my wallet dry.

And yet why are there no plugin-EV's for public use? Because General Motors pulled the plug on them in 2003. Give me an option that's better than what I have right now and i'll take it.

I agree that pressure should be applied to both Republicans and Democrats in the public eye to switch to alternative fuel and electric vehicles. But the fact is that there aren't enough options out there to satisfy your claim so how precisely are they going to do it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Plugin EV Posted by: frantaylor
» RE: Plugin EV Posted by: ahmlco
"over 6 feet tall" boo hoo
Posted by: blogbooks on Jun 18, 2008 10:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I drive a beat up '99 Civic and I'm a 6 foot 220 pound man. If I had the money would I drive a huge luxury sedan? Yea, probably.

But I wouldn't preach to you about saving the environment while driving around in my luxurious, GPS guided, car with air cushioned suspension and satellite radio.

Even the Greens in Europe drive around in huge SUVs that get 8-10 miles to the gallon (once you add armor and body guards to the weight of the vehicle).

Hypocrisy from the left is about as new as hypocrisy from the right, that is to say not at all. The game is about control, not benefiting the citizenry. That's an occasional accidental side effect.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "over 6 feet tall" boo hoo Posted by: YogiBear
Driving an SUV or similarly huge vehicle says one thing
Posted by: blogbooks on Jun 18, 2008 10:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"My life is more valuable than yours."

That's what you're saying.

Trust me, here in the D.C. area I see this message given loud and clear on the roads every day. So many soccer moms driving their huge kill mobiles that it boggles the mind.

Someone on my street just bought an H3 hummer a few weeks ago. Seems they don't give a crap how much gas costs because they make good money and they want to kill anyone they crash into while driving their 4 wheel drive kill-mobile down to Whole Foods like good yuppy trash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ever considered.... Posted by: ahmlco
» Ever considered.... Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: ver considered.... Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: ver considered.... Posted by: sirios
» RE: ver considered.... Posted by: crashgrab
Telecommuter Congress
Posted by: Gaubladt on Jun 18, 2008 10:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If congressional members were allowed to vote remotely, and hold net congressional meetings and telecommute from their home districts, they wouldn't need to spend any money on transportation at all.
Then there would be no excuse for not voting on major legislation. It would also insure a quorum.
It would help the cause if they could also be required to drive plug in hybrid electric autos.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Walk!
Posted by: sirios on Jun 18, 2008 11:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Make them walk to work, sure it will take more time away from their jobs, but then if they aren't doing anything when they finally get there,nothing is lost.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Transport needs of citizens and officials differ
Posted by: supercrisp on Jun 18, 2008 11:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Limos for government officials aren't luxury items. People ride in limos for security reasons and to get work done while they move from place to place.

I biked four miles to work today in the heat of a southeastern summer. But I'm a college teacher, and it just doesn't matter if I'm a little sweaty and no one is about to take a shot at me.

We all should do our part, what fits with our jobs. This is "each to his need," not "some animals are more equal than others."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Baby you can drive my car! Posted by: 113121
No news here
Posted by: zorba1 on Jun 18, 2008 10:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our elected officials have been getting free vehicles and free gas for decades.
This is nothing new.
No matter what party they belong to.
If they want armored they get it, if they want a limo they get it, many get free airfare and vacations.
All they have to say is the vacation is a diplomatic or fact finding mission.
We foot the bill.
To them its just one of their perks, their entitlements.
I've been driving at or near empty for two months, and am worrying about how i can pay for propane this winter,
propane follows gasoline.
I took out the propane water heater and went electric but our heat and cooking are propane.
There are millions of poor, elderly and disabled like us who are worried for the same reasons but not a smidgeon of help from DC.
They do not have to buy gas or diesel.
The expence accounts they voted for themselves almost equal their salaries.
I am voting for O'bama but i also know that the power of the office can corrupt anyone.
All we can do is wait and see what happens and hope Bush-Cheney do not invade Iran or anyone else.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

cejay42
Posted by: cejay42 on Jun 19, 2008 3:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found very little in terms of fact about who is driving what but quite a bit of general rhetoric about the subject. Actually some of the cars named are good milage vehicles, even tho expensive and some are quite good at low emissions. Much todoabout nuthin

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]