John Edwards - "Americans should 'sacrifice' SUVs for Env

[EvilMonkey]

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/r_m/

Snagged! In a recent speech, John Edwards told Americans to sacrifice their inefficient cars, and specifically, to give up their SUVs. But the presidential hopeful is driven around in a Cadillac SRX Crossover, which guzzles gas at 15 miles per gallon. His spokesman says that he drives a hybrid SUV in North Carolina, but reports say the Edwards family has a regular SUV and a small truck as well.

When the people who tell me to start worrying, start acting like they are worrying, then i will think about worrying.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Ding.

 

It's an issue of practicality.

 

For instance -- I can't bike to work every day (10+ miles one way and all 4 lane major roadways to get there) but I do car pool a few times a week. I walk most places that I am going to from my apartment unless I need my car (i.e. dropping off book donations at the Indy Media Center Books to Prisoner program or going to Danville helping out at the VA -- which'll start after I clear my TB test appt.) I do most of my grocery shopping at a local co-op. It is almost all organic and the vast majority of the products come from area farms so production and shipments are not using up fuel shipping things across the US/world. I only use my lights in the apt. when I need to when it gets dark. I recycle and reuse/repurpose as I can. Just because one does not live in a 1,000 sq. ft. house does not mean that what they say should be thrown out. Don't toss out the baby with the bathwater.

 

you got nothing on this guy.

 

With SUV's -- the high center of gravity/danger for accidents and flipping, the lack of fuel efficiency in an age of high fuel costs, the fact that SUV's are 3.5 times more likely to kill a pedestrian than a regular car if they hit a pedestrian and the lack of need for these cars by many consumers (think of the people who simply buy it as a status symbol rather than needing the space for products etc.) -- who the Hell would want to plunk down their hard earned dollars to buy one in the first place?

 

1) I know for a fact that a suburban going 35 mph won't kill a pedestrian if they hit on the right front corner of the vehicle.

2) You clearly have never lived in the NE where snow + ice + mountains = s***ty driving experience that only an SUV can handle.

 

 

[Reddy]

Why? Why should we allow these sanctimonious politicians to exude sacrifice of the rest of us while they gleefully exempt themselves from their own rules? You think John Edwards is going to give up his private jets or his fleet of cars? If he's so damn worried about the environment he should fly commercial, have his mansion turned into wetlands while he moves into a 1000 sq ft home and take public transportation everywhere he goes.

why should he give up the things that he's EARNED in his life just because he uses MORE energy than the average american?

 

if you had come from nothing, worked hard your whole life, and made millions of dollars wouldn't you spend it too? wouldn't you have a big house?

 

what's so fundamentally wrong about a big guy fighting for a little guy? why does the big guy have to pretend to be a little guy for it to not be considered hypocritical?

[southsider2k5]

Ding.

 

It's an issue of practicality.

 

So what part of "practical" is a $6 million dollar house in a state all of the way accross the country from his "home"?

 

I don't get how John Edwards gets a "Get out of hypocrisy free" card, while everyone enjoys the fall of every Christian who doesn't live up to the dogma that they preach. Why is a two face like John Edwards immune, while everyone laughs when it involves the church? I have been asking this same question over and over and over again, and no one can seem to answer that.

 

 

[mr_genius]

why should he give up the things that he's EARNED in his life just because he uses MORE energy than the average american?

 

Because, according to him, using the amount of energy that a large house like that requires will end up contributing to the deaths of billions of people. why would he want do something so horrible? why would you trust him to get anything done on pollution? he can't even convince himself to conserve, how would he convince anyone else?

 

 

Edited September 4, 2007 by mr_genius

[mr_genius]

how John Edwards gets a "Get out of hypocrisy free" card

 

he has the magic (D) next to his name

[Reddy]

he has the magic (D) next to his name

hahahaha so Bush does too then? always thought he was an ( R ) for some reason...

[EvilMonkey]

reddy, Bush's ranch makes the Goracle look like a power -using fool. Check out the stories on his ranch. If Edwards used any of the things Bush did to help make his house more green, he would have something to talk about. But he didn't.

[southsider2k5]

why should he give up the things that he's EARNED in his life just because he uses MORE energy than the average american?

 

if you had come from nothing, worked hard your whole life, and made millions of dollars wouldn't you spend it too? wouldn't you have a big house?

 

So then why do we get stories like the average CEO makes 364 times what an average employee makes? They have earned it too, and they earned it by more than just suing it away from doctors. Why do we hear about every oil companies record profits each quarter, after all they just made smart business decesions to get there. Why do we hear people complaining about Wal-Mart? They just came up with a better business model than anyone else in retail.

 

I don't want to get fed that it is OK to be rich on one hand, but the next instance it is not. Heck John Edwards himself rallies against these groups to score himself political capital for the election, and he is a part of these groups. Isn't that the very definitions of hypocrasy?

[EvilMonkey]

So then why do we get stories like the average CEO makes 364 times what an average employee makes? They have earned it too, and they earned it by more than just suing it away from doctors. Why do we hear about every oil companies record profits each quarter, after all they just made smart business decesions to get there. Why do we hear people complaining about Wal-Mart? They just came up with a better business model than anyone else in retail.

 

I don't want to get fed that it is OK to be rich on one hand, but the next instance it is not. Heck John Edwards himself rallies against these groups to score himself political capital for the election, and he is a part of these groups. Isn't that the very definitions of hypocrasy?

Touche'! Bravo! :notworthy

[Reddy]

So then why do we get stories like the average CEO makes 364 times what an average employee makes? They have earned it too, and they earned it by more than just suing it away from doctors. Why do we hear about every oil companies record profits each quarter, after all they just made smart business decesions to get there. Why do we hear people complaining about Wal-Mart? They just came up with a better business model than anyone else in retail.

 

I don't want to get fed that it is OK to be rich on one hand, but the next instance it is not. Heck John Edwards himself rallies against these groups to score himself political capital for the election, and he is a part of these groups. Isn't that the very definitions of hypocrasy?

no see you've got it totally wrong.

 

the difference is the CEO makes 364 times that of HIS employee. HIS employee at Wal-Mart doesn't make enough money to LIVE. THATS where the problem is. CEO's shouldnt have the right to better health care than their employees or any more benefits. Not saying that we should take them away from the CEO's, but they need to be available to ALL EMPLOYEES.

 

Point is, John Edwards doesn't have employees. He doesn't run a major corporation that f***s over the people working for him. He made his money fighting FOR the little guy and now he's got a big house to show for it. Well I say that thats alright.

[NorthSideSox72]

you got nothing on this guy.

1) I know for a fact that a suburban going 35 mph won't kill a pedestrian if they hit on the right front corner of the vehicle.

2) You clearly have never lived in the NE where snow + ice + mountains = s***ty driving experience that only an SUV can handle.

Having an SUV has zero to do with handling adverse weather driving. Zilch. Nothing.

 

Here is what helps: 4WD/AWD, proper weight differential, traction control, good tires, good brakes (w/ ABS).

 

Notice how none of those is the same as: 4000 pound oversized vehicle. In fact, contrary to popular belief, SUV's are often worse in snow and ice for a very simple reason - they are heavier and take more time to stop.

 

I really go nuts when I hear this argument that SUV's are safer in those conditions. They are not. And people think they are, so they drive really fast, because in their minds they somehow think that 4WD makes their car stop faster.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

Having an SUV has zero to do with handling adverse weather driving. Zilch. Nothing.

 

Here is what helps: 4WD/AWD, proper weight differential, traction control, good tires, good brakes (w/ ABS).

 

Notice how none of those is the same as: 4000 pound oversized vehicle. In fact, contrary to popular belief, SUV's are often worse in snow and ice for a very simple reason - they are heavier and take more time to stop.

 

I really go nuts when I hear this argument that SUV's are safer in those conditions. They are not. And people think they are, so they drive really fast, because in their minds they somehow think that 4WD makes their car stop faster.

 

 

I'll remember that when my sweet ass X-terra passes your tiny POS subraru when you're stuck in the 3ft snow drift...I mean, you did have 4WD and traction control and GREAT brakes, so why would you need my help?

 

have you ever seasoned a NE winter?

[StrangeSox]

I'll remember that when my sweet ass X-terra passes your tiny POS subraru when you're stuck in the 3ft snow drift...I mean, you did have 4WD and traction control and GREAT brakes, so why would you need my help?

 

have you ever seasoned a NE winter?

 

NSS has it right. The only benefit they have is clearance if the snow gets REALLY deep. An Audi or Subaru with a set of good winter tires will get by just as well if not better than a big Suburban or other SUV.

 

SUV's have their place, its just that 95% of people that own one have zero reason to.

Edited September 4, 2007 by StrangeSox

[NorthSideSox72]

I'll remember that when my sweet ass X-terra passes your tiny POS subraru when you're stuck in the 3ft snow drift...I mean, you did have 4WD and traction control and GREAT brakes, so why would you need my help?

 

have you ever seasoned a NE winter?

I grew up in Chicago, and have lived in Iowa and Colorado. Suffice it to say I've driven in some snow.

 

And the Subaru probably wins that contest anyway, unless there is some giant 2 foot drift, then the clearance comes into play.

 

Believe what you want, but the physics don't lie. A Subaru or Audi, versus a Yukon, if they both have good tires, ABS, AWD and a competent driver, the Sub/Audi will be better at stopping, skid arresting and vehicle control than your SUV. And if both engines are sufficiently torquey (made up word, I know), they'll be the same or the sdan will do better in getting out of slick or snowy areas. The only thing the SUV is likely to win is that it has an extra couple inches to avoid high-centering.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

So then why do we get stories like the average CEO makes 364 times what an average employee makes? They have earned it too, and they earned it by more than just suing it away from doctors. Why do we hear about every oil companies record profits each quarter, after all they just made smart business decesions to get there. Why do we hear people complaining about Wal-Mart? They just came up with a better business model than anyone else in retail.

 

I don't want to get fed that it is OK to be rich on one hand, but the next instance it is not. Heck John Edwards himself rallies against these groups to score himself political capital for the election, and he is a part of these groups. Isn't that the very definitions of hypocrasy?

 

 

yeah, I never feel pity on the poor african kids in those videos...s***, they didn't EARN anything, so why should we send them stuff?

 

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

I grew up in Chicago, and have lived in Iowa and Colorado. Suffice it to say I've driven in some snow.

 

And the Subaru probably wins that contest anyway, unless there is some giant 2 foot drift, then the clearance comes into play.

 

Believe what you want, but the physics don't lie. A Subaru or Audi, versus a Yukon, if they both have good tires, ABS, AWD and a competent driver, the Sub/Audi will be better at stopping, skid arresting and vehicle control than your SUV. And if both engines are sufficiently torquey (made up word, I know), they'll be the same or the sdan will do better in getting out of slick or snowy areas. The only thing the SUV is likely to win is that it has an extra couple inches to avoid high-centering.

 

 

you give the best alternative versus the worst SUV, so of course you can make that argument. I abhor Yukons and similar vehicles. As I said, I'd take an X-terra before any of those cars. Clearance, Torque, handling, etc over a subaru.

[southsider2k5]

no see you've got it totally wrong.

 

the difference is the CEO makes 364 times that of HIS employee. HIS employee at Wal-Mart doesn't make enough money to LIVE. THATS where the problem is. CEO's shouldnt have the right to better health care than their employees or any more benefits. Not saying that we should take them away from the CEO's, but they need to be available to ALL EMPLOYEES.

 

Point is, John Edwards doesn't have employees. He doesn't run a major corporation that f***s over the people working for him. He made his money fighting FOR the little guy and now he's got a big house to show for it. Well I say that thats alright.

 

No John Edwards ended the careers of people whose job was to save people's lives! Call me silly, but I'll take some oil company profiteering over some ambulence chaser anyday.

 

And I think you are missing something in the translation here. John Edwards does have employees. He wants to be the guy that everyone in the country is working for, not just a regular old CEO. When you are a public official, everyone is your employee. Everyone is at the mercy of all of your votes and policies. Just because someone elected him, doesn't mean he is immune from the same market forces that I get to hear are evil everyday, in other situations. I guess if Bill Gates stood up and told me that I should not spend so much on technology, that would mean its OK that he made his billions in technology? It doesn't add up to me.

[StrangeSox]

you give the best alternative versus the worst SUV, so of course you can make that argument. I abhor Yukons and similar vehicles. As I said, I'd take an X-terra before any of those cars. Clearance, Torque, handling, etc over a subaru.

 

The only thing that's better is the clearance.

 

If you'd rather drive an Xterra, fine. Just don't pretend that its any better in adverse weather.

Edited September 4, 2007 by StrangeSox

[NorthSideSox72]

you give the best alternative versus the worst SUV, so of course you can make that argument. I abhor Yukons and similar vehicles. As I said, I'd take an X-terra before any of those cars. Clearance, Torque, handling, etc over a subaru.

The point is... the fact that a vehicle happens to have an SUV box is irrelevant to how it handles adverse weather conditions. All it accomplishes is to make the car heavier. What matter is at the ground level - tires, torque, brakes, traction contol, handling, clearance. And other than clearance, none of those things is tied directly to have an SUV frame on top. Even clearance isn't necessarily so, but certainly tends to be more often than not. The whole "my SUV is safer in the snow" think is a myth. Like I said, its heavier and takes LONGER to stop, so you be driving SLOWER than those around you.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

The only thing that's better is the clearance.

 

If you'd rather drive an Xterra, fine. Just don't pretend that its any better in adverse weather.

 

Ah-Ha. See, It's my personal choice that points me towards an X-Terra, based on the above attributes, Clearance and Torque are more important to me than braking distance, not to mention pricing and maintainence.

 

Northside was saying that SUVs universally are worse than the example of a Subaru. I was simply contending that there are many fine choices of SUVs, especially with hybrid crossovers becoming popular.

 

Interesting stuff here:

SUV Owners of America

[NorthSideSox72]

Ah-Ha. See, It's my personal choice that points me towards an X-Terra, based on the above attributes, Clearance and Torque are more important to me than braking distance, not to mention pricing and maintainence.

 

Northside was saying that SUVs universally are worse than the example of a Subaru. I was simply contending that there are many fine choices of SUVs, especially with hybrid crossovers becoming popular.

 

Interesting stuff here:

SUV Owners of America

Let's be clear. I said SUV's had not particular advantage over other cars, and that is true. That is not however the same as saying that they are universally worse - it depends somewhat on what features they have, as I noted. Certainly an AWD XTerra would do better than a Suburban in almost any adverse weather scenario, and would undoubtedly do better than many sedans. But, as I said, its not the fact that its an SUV that is relevant.

 

Anyway, this is an aside. Sorry for the hijack. Point is, Edwards is a doofus.

 

[EvilMonkey]

I've had a Jeep CJ5, a Mitsubishi Montero Sport (4WD version), and an AMC Eagle w/ AWD. I have never been stuck in either of these, and used to take the jeep offroad thru mud and stuff. I used the Montero for deliveries because my customers don't give a s*** if there is snow on the road, they want their stuff. yes, a Yukon would not be an ideal choice for off roading, but you are using extreme examples. I'll also agree that there are many people who have bought them for the 'status' part of it, have no idea how to drive them in bad weather and simply because it has 4WD think they are safer. it helps, but you still have to drive defensively and use your head. Some people need SUV's. Some don't, but want one anyway. Oh well, their gas bill. Although i still laugh at the one lady that I see every week by my store, dropping her clothes off at the dry cleaner next door. This 5ft tall woman gets out of a huge Excusrsion, I swear she needs a ladder to get in and out of the thing. I bet the same woman would have been complaining that a station wagon was too big to drive 20 years ago.

[BigSqwert]

Point is, Edwards is a doofus.

That's probably why his poll numbers and cash raised are lower than Clinton and Obama's. Seems like America isn't buying his message.

Edited September 4, 2007 by BigSqwert

[NorthSideSox72]

That's probably why his poll numbers and cash raised are lower than Clinton and Obama's. Seems like America isn't buying his message.

I don't think that Hillary HAS a message. She's banking on who she is - a woman, who knows how the White House works.