Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Did Obama Just Sign Your Death Warrant?

August 31, 2012 by  

Did Obama Just Sign Your Death Warrant?
PHOTOS.COM

“Following the direction set by President [Barack] Obama on May 21, 2010, NHTSA and EPA have issued joint Final Rules for Corporate Average Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas emissions regulations for model years 2017 and beyond, that will help address our country’s dependence on imported oil, save consumers money at the pump, and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change.” So proclaimed the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in a news release Tuesday.

Skipping over the poppycock that “greenhouse gases … contribute to global climate change,” let’s get to the meat of the new “direction.” Fleet fuel efficiency must average 35.5 mpg by 2016 (that’s just three model years away) and 54.5 mpg by 2025.

Under current government standards, the only way automakers can achieve these thresholds is by eliminating SUVs, vans and pickups (or downsizing them so that they are impractical) and replacing them with small-battery electric vehicles or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.

This is merely a sop to the environmentalists. In fact, there at the end of the release for all to see is the sop:

The program also includes targeted incentives to encourage early adoption and introduction into the marketplace of advanced technologies to dramatically improve vehicle performance, including:

  • Incentives for electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cells vehicles;
  • Incentives for hybrid technologies for large pickups and for other technologies that achieve high fuel economy levels on large pickups;
  • Incentives for natural gas vehicles;
  • Credits for technologies with potential to achieve real-world greenhouse gas reductions and fuel economy improvements that are not captured by the standards test procedures.

The new standards will drive up the average car price by $3,000 or more, according to the Federal government. The National Automobile Dealers Association warns that the additional $3,000 will drive about 7 million consumers out of the car market. The higher price tag will negate any “savings at the pump” promised in the NHTSA release.

And these new “Corporate Average Fuel Economy,” or CAFE standards are a death warrant. Studies show that as cars are made smaller and lighter, deaths and injuries in crashes increase. NHTSA data show that for every 100 pounds reduced from small cars, 322 additional deaths result. A 1999 USA Today analysis of crash data and estimates from the NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that, in the years since CAFE standards were mandated under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, about 46,000 people have died in crashes that they would have survived if they had been traveling in bigger, heavier cars. This translates into 7,700 deaths for every mile per gallon gained by the standards.

In essence, Obama just signed a death warrant for almost 208,000 people.

If the Obama Administration wanted fuel-efficient cars, it would relax emissions standards and allow importation of high-mileage diesel European cars like the Volkswagen Passat Bluemotion 1.6 TDI which currently gets 69 mpg.

But the aim is force you into cars you don’t want and that the free market would never support in order to placate Obama’s environmental constituency and pass more fiat money along to his green industry donors.

Bob Livingston

is an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Did Obama Just Sign Your Death Warrant?”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • GALT

    Did Bob Livingston just yank your chain?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy

    • GALT
      • Robert Smith

        From Bob Livingston: “Studies show that as cars are made smaller and lighter, deaths and injuries in crashes increase. ”

        Echos of “Unsafe at Any Speed” by RALPH NADER!

        My my how the flips flop. First they change their mind on national ID (remember 666) and now they support Ralph Nader in bigger cars are better.

        Rob

        • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

          Dear Robert Smith,

          You write: “My my how the flips flop. First they change their mind on national ID (remember 666) and now they support Ralph Nader in bigger cars are better.” Please show me where I have flipped on this issue or admit that you are, once again, speaking out of your hat.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • DaveH
      • Flashy

        Ahhhhh…just wait now for the naysayers to come out in force stating the way to freedom is to chain ourselves further to Big oil and Big Corporate America.

        Despite the fact we are slowly weaning ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, and as our gas mileage averages increase, our demand for oil decreases, and the price for oil will stabilize. The TPers and wacked Right will say this is wrong.

        Already, to help meet the standards auto makers announced the adoption of technology already in widespread use in Europe and japan. “Start/Stop”. There will be tech advances and more people will switch to hybrids as oil prices continue to be manipulated by OPEC and Big Oil.

        That the auto makers are able to meet the standards is not a question. So…do the math. $3000. 60 month car loan. 5%. Adds ….about $56.50/month to the car loan. Now…one gets 3 mpg extra per gallon. If one gets 15 mpg which increases to 18 mpg average, that would be about 140 gallons saved per year. At $4.00/gal. that equates to $2800 saved over 5 years. Break even.

        Add in the national security of decreasing oil dependency, the price of oil stabilizing and not increasing in a rapid steep climb, helping us transfer from an antiquated energy source to ones adaptable for continued growth into the future

        what’s the downside other than y’all have to choke up more lies to legitimize your whinings about how keeping this nation under the corporate thumb and moving us into third world status is the better way/

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “Despite the fact we are slowly weaning ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, and as our gas mileage averages increase, our demand for oil decreases, and the price for oil will stabilize. The TPers and wacked Right will say this is wrong”.
        The truth:
        http://chartsbin.com/view/oc2

        Flashman, the regulars know that you have no credibility.

      • Flashy

        DaveH…and that chart is for what reason? It says nothing 9let me guess…once again you saw the title but didn’t think you should look at the contents….typical for you)

        “U.S. crude oil demand fell to its lowest in nearly four years in July as the middling U.S. economy and fuel efficiency gains weighed on consumption, the American Petroleum Institute said on Friday.

        At the height of summer driving season, petroleum demand dropped 2.7 percent from a year earlier to 18.062 million barrels per day. It was the smallest amount of U.S. oil consumption for any month since September 2008. ”

        Now…go back and re-read what i wrote. Specifically, what do you find fault with? The math? The national security issues? That you can’t follow a complex thought because you have the mental swiftness akin with a herd of turtles racing through peanut butter?

      • Robert Smith

        Bob Livingston asks: “Please show me where I have flipped on this issue ”

        Awwww, looking for personal efforts when the general right wing has gone for the 666 damnation over the years? Check out: http://www.av1611.org/666.html

        IOW, the far religious right hasn’t approved of a national ID until they figured out it could stop minorities at the polls. Now they are all for it. Are you going to say your were in favor of a national ID all along in spite of Revelation 13:16-18? BTW, the bible is still the same. It must be the “interpritation” that’s changed.

        Now, on the physics of lighter vehicles. For DECADES Ralph Nader has been touting the “Unsafe at Any Speed” mantra. I doubt the right has agreed with him on anything. Yet are you now claiming that you AGREED with him all along?

        BTW, physics dictates that the heavier vehicle will win in a confrontation. One magazine used big trucks and a train to smash big cars with as an example to demonstrate just how silly it was to use size as the only factor.

        Cars today, even though they are lighter than ever before, are far safer than cars of old. Seat belts, crush zones, careful placement of fuel, are but a few considerations of todays cars. With dynamic handling packages and auto-driving efforts being developed (Google is even in on the game) the future actually looks safer than ever. BTW, lighter means less material in general, thus cost impacts are reduced. In fact I’ll bet it’s the corporations who WANT such so they can get a higher mark-up on the newer cars. Maybe not… We all know how much corporations can be trusted to do the “right” thing.

        To attempt to predict deaths on the basis of better fuel economny is just dumb. Remeber, as more folks move to more economical cars there will be more smaller cars on the road, thus reducing the chances of hitting a monster SUV.

        Rob

        • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

          Dear Robert Smith,

          You write: “Bob Livingston asks: ‘Please show me where I have flipped on this issue’” You acknowledge the question but don’t answer it. You attempt to categorize me with no evidence.

          You write: “IOW, the far religious right hasn’t approved of a national ID until they figured out it could stop minorities at the polls. Now they are all for it.” I don’t know the acronym IOW. I don’t speak for the “far religious right”, but I know of no CONSERVATIVE asking for a “national ID.” Please enlighten me.

          You write: ” For DECADES Ralph Nader has been touting the ‘Unsafe at Any Speed’ mantra. I doubt the right has agreed with him on anything. Yet are you now claiming that you AGREED with him all along?” Fallacy and proof by bald assertion.

          You write: “To attempt to predict deaths on the basis of better fuel economny is just dumb. Remeber, as more folks move to more economical cars there will be more smaller cars on the road, thus reducing the chances of hitting a monster SUV. ” Fallacy and proof by bald assertion.

          Since you won’t admit it, I’ll say it: You are speaking out of your hat.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • Robert Smith

        What hat? I’ve proven that the right in general has opposed a universal ID, etc.

        You are trying to make YOUR beliefs absolute and squirm around trying to create an impression that it’s wrong to state that the right has opposed (666) a national ID and that the sound or Ralph Nader agreement is ringing loudly.

        Now for clarity, are you representing yourself or the extreme right?

        Rob

        • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

          Dear Robert Smith,

          You write: ” I’ve proven that the right in general has opposed a universal ID, etc.” You have “proven” nothing of the kind. You have stated it. I have not argued that premise.

          You write: “You are trying to make YOUR beliefs absolute and squirm around trying to create an impression that it’s wrong to state that the right has opposed (666) a national ID and that the sound or Ralph Nader agreement is ringing loudly.” Not so. You need to go back and read your own post. I have tried to differentiate between my beliefs and those you attribute to the “right.” You are the one who keeps conflating the right and me. From your original post: “My my how the flips flop. First they change their mind on national ID (remember 666) and now they support Ralph Nader in bigger cars are better.” As I am the author you are addressing, the obvious conclusion is the “they” referred to is in fact, me. Therefore my response: “Please show me where I have flipped on this issue or admit that you are, once again, speaking out of your hat,” which you never addressed except as you pulled in the term “far religious right.” Now, for clarity, are you addressing me or the “far religious right,” or are you calling me “far religious right?”

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • Flashy

        Mr. Livingston…Robert Smith makes a very convincing argument.

        • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

          Dear Flashy,

          You write: “Robert Smith makes a very convincing argument.” Not so. He’s not even sure who he’s arguing with, me or the “far religious right.”

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • Buster the Anatolian

        ” Remeber, as more folks move to more economical cars there will be more smaller cars on the road, thus reducing the chances of hitting a monster SUV.”

        The reduction in SUVs and full size pickups on the highways will not be as great as you claim. There are MANY of us that need the full size vehicles to carry and tow heavy loads. Also from my pewrsonal observation the number of full size SUVs has already gone down to mostly those who need them for carrying multiple people that would not be possible to carry in a compact car. It would appear that most of those who purchase SUVs have moved to the mid size vehicle in place of the full size ones.

      • Robert Smith

        From Buster: “There are MANY of us that need the full size vehicles to carry and tow heavy loads.”

        Most certainly. And the increased fuel cost will be a cost of doing business. They’ve dealt with it in Europe for many many years. BTW, the guy who worked on my stand-by diesel uses a Freightliner. He’s getting over 20 mpg and it’s way bigger than a Suburban.

        However, a strong argument can be made that those who use big SUVs for business or as family haulers are going to be much more sober drivers than the yahoo who uses his pick-up as a regular vehicle instead of something smaller. Look at the parking lot of any bar and count the number of trucks vs. bikes and cars.

        MOF, rather than addressing claims about how mileage will cause deaths it’s already a certainty that alcohol related deaths are a tragic fact. Why not deal with the reality of that horror and quit speculating about how mileage (something that is good for America) might fuel more unfounded nasty about Obama.

        Rob

      • Flashy

        “Dear Flashy,

        You write: “Robert Smith makes a very convincing argument.” Not so. He’s not even sure who he’s arguing with, me or the “far religious right.” <— Bob Livingston

        Mr. Livingston. One area which i believe may touch on this is that with the PL "contributors", you are linked with their writings as you sanction them. Thus, when one of the contributors makes a statement, then later contradicts that statement, the mind connects you with those contradictions.

        I realize few would agree with some of the insanity written by Crystal, and Root is a hoot with the outlandish far-fetched writings he pens to this site, and it has been noticeable the quality of john Myers has slipped of late, but to your credit, with exception of slipping and sliding when called on to explain some….dubious statements concerning a few subject areas and dissing people when such would be cause for exclusion and banning from this site had those same statements been penned towards you or the authors……you're pretty much a straight shooter.

        However, it is your site and them are the rules. Understandably so.

      • Robert Smith

        From Bob Livingston: “He’s not even sure who he’s arguing with, me or the “far religious right.””

        Is there any significant difference?

        May I bring you to some issues?

        First is the fact that there has been a significant flip flop on IDs that goes from nyet because of 666 to yes, it slows down the minorities.

        And the FACT is that Ralph Nader has been screeching for years that small cars are “dangerous.” Now I see those on the right doing the same thing. The real fact is that with modern designs small cars are generally much safer than the boat cars of the past. Dash board design, and all that stuff. And! They are more relable. My car is just about at 200,000 miles and still getting over 30 mpg.

        So, do you want to argue about arguing, or do you want to address the real issue that smaller cars are good for America and curbing gas guzzling for alternative energy sources is also good for America?

        Sheesh, next I expect someone to come in with how evil CFLs are because they didn’t “choose” them. Man up folks. We need to use less energy as indiiduals. Either it will happen voluntarily or it will happen. How’s that for a choice?

        BTW, I already have some LEDs in use. What are you doing to save energy?

        Rob

    • GALT

      Where is the LOVE, Bob….for:

      1.) American know how and ingenuity?

      2.) That entrepreneurial spirit seeking to COMPETE and prevail, rather than exploit because capitalism does not and would never exploit ANYONE? ( the love of competition is so great here that that U.S. Auto Makers and the U.A.W. are in lock step against it. )

      3.) The fact that nothing compells anyone to buy a new vehicle?

      4.) The possibilities for you and various patriots of assorted ages, weights and hat choices, to offer all manner of secret solutions and technologies so that someone?will surely FEAR HIM and you had better act NOW…..BEFORE THEY SHUT HIM DOWN?………I think the date may be the 12th of never, so you don’t have much time.

      The preceding has been a P.L.F. presentation and is of course intended in the nicest possible way.

      • DaveH

        Galt says — “That entrepreneurial spirit seeking to COMPETE and prevail, rather than exploit because capitalism does not and would never exploit ANYONE? ( the love of competition is so great here that that U.S. Auto Makers and the U.A.W. are in lock step against it. )”.
        As usual Galt disses Capitalism, which we haven’t had anything even close to since the 1800s. First the Progressives pervert our Free Markets with Crony Capitalist favoring actions (subsidies, quotas, tariffs, price controls, competition-stifling regulations), then they point to the Unfree Markets as examples of Capitalism failing. How convenient.
        If Free Markets exploit consumers, who don’t have to buy the products, who have a vast number of choices, then what do Unfree Markets do? With Unfree markets the choices are limited by meddling Government people with the Power of Force who decide for us, whether we like it or not, what we can buy.
        Finally Galt makes the ridiculous statement that “the love of competition is so great here that that U.S. Auto Makers and the U.A.W. are in lock step against it”. Are you joking, Galt? That’s the best you can do? Anybody with half a brain can figure out why Big Businesses or Unions would NOT love competition. They would much rather have the Government protect them than to face the rigors of competition and the potential failures that it brings.
        For those who would like to do some studying and learn just how intellectually (and morally) bankrupt the Progressives are:
        http://library.mises.org/books/Kel%20Kelly/The%20Case%20for%20Legalizing%20Capitalism.pdf

      • GALT

        To my dearest and bestest friend DavidH………

        I once told you, you are not my enemy…P.L.F.’s only have real enemies……you could never be that………also I don’t believe our value systems are all that far apart which presents an interesting challenge…….because while I believe we are striving for the same goals………the words are getting in the way………and mostly, you need to start getting out of your own way………because your biggest problem is “self contradiction”…….which you are blind to and which I obviously have not managed to alter……despite the fact that it is so easily demonstrated and quite obvious.

        As usual Galt disses Capitalism, which we haven’t had anything even close to since the 1800s.

        I am not dissing capitalism, I am dismissing it……….for what it is…….a confidence game whose basic premise is to declare that something has value, which in fact has none, for the purposes or concentrating power to take advantage of those foolish enough to believe it.

        What I represent…..for you……is the FORCE of EVOLUTION…….the opportunity to examine “ideas” which you believe…….but in fact…….have no valid reasoning or evidence to support that belief……….and more ironically,you understand the POWER of illusion….as it pertains to religion…….but can not bring your self to consider that, that is not the only arena where this “power” can be applied……actually, that is not true……you do understand, you just won’t consider it……for the illusions YOU have fallen victim to.

        Ravi Batra, in his book the Great Depression of 1990, laid out an interesting cycle which went…..Agriculture…..Military……….Mystic……..Acquisition……in a progress of consecutive cycles, each one leading to the next……and he, at least for the eurocentric model, marks the end of the first run through at the end of the Roman Empire……and offered that we are in the Acquisition Phase of the second cycle………the last part of which is…..collapse.
        In hind sight…….I don’t think he had a clue to what extent this last phase would take….

        But here is the problem with…..”anything close to capitalism since the 1800′s”…….which means NEVER………unless capitalism = free and unregulated markets with voluntary transactions……which means the year 2000 to the present and beyond, and it doesn’t matter if you call it CRONY….the conditions you cite are PRESENT. ( but it’s NOT
        CAPITALISM ?) Do you see the problem…….?

        Even Ayn Rand knew that Capitalsim had never existed……otherwise ” The Unknown Ideal” doesn’t make much sense………as a title…..

        Which brings us to the problem…….you can’t defend something unless you can establish some logically consistent foundational structure………but rather than continue, here is an interesting exercise……please tell me what you think of the following two thoughts….you can make it simple…..agree /disagree strongly or not……or elaborate further……

        So first:

        “A man must live by his work, and his wages must be at least enough to maintain him. They must even on most occasions be somewhat more: otherwise it would be impossible for him to bring up a family and the RACE of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation.”

        and then:

        “The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

      • GALT

        P.S. my dearest and bestest friend…..it is never a good thing to respond emotionally in matters where only a cool head can prevail……..and i hope you will agree that it is better to consider actual evidence when calculating a response……..

        given the series of posts by me……on this topic…….with this being the last of the initial three…….why is it that it is YOU, that is responding?

    • steve

      there are, right now, two alternatives available which the government does not want to support. natural gas and hydrogen. hydrogen is the future and it’s been here for a while but until the government supports the idea no one will mass prduce this type of vehicle. follow the money and you will see why. and you can have big vehicles with these two products. andthey run 99% clean . so what’s up us government.

      • steve

        p.s. with the government new epa standards , electricity will be come very expensive to run cars and you will end up pay more than gas at the pump

      • DaveH

        Steve says — “hydrogen is the future and it’s been here for a while but until the government supports the idea no one will mass prduce this type of vehicle”.
        It’s not economically feasible, Steve. If it was, somebody (barring Government meddling) would produce them and make their fortunes.
        Government only needs to provide support, with taxpayer money, when an idea isn’t really marketable. Ahh, the deep pockets of the American Taxpayer.
        http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp90.pdf

      • Mikey

        Steve,
        Let me correct you on two points. First, it takes more energy to product hydrogen from water molecules than it produces when burned in the vehicle. This is very inefficient and cost prohibitive. This may change with new technologies in the future, but right now this is where it stands.
        As far as the price of electricity goes, it will probably go up, but not because of EV adoption alone. It takes very little electricity (comparatively speaking) to charge an EV. My EV takes less energy to fully charge than my electric dryer does to do a load of laundry. And the good part of electricity is that you can create your own, via solar panels or a small wind turbine if you live in a windy area. Granted, these power sources are rather expensive at present, but their prices have been coming down quickly. And, when you generate your own energy and power your EV from it, you don’t have to pay at the pump. EV’s have fewer moving parts = less maintenance costs. With regenerative braking, even brake pad life is tripled. So your cost of operation is far less than that of any internal combustion engine. Currently the cost of operating a gasoline powered vehicle is around $.25 a mile. The cost of operating an EV is about $.02 a mile. Even though EV’s are expensive, they will pay for themselves quickly. And, as battery technology improves, their prices will come down a bit. Check out more at http://www.eaaev.org

      • Flashy

        Mikey…exactly. As you pointed out (and which DaveH conveniently omits as he pastes link after link without reading the actual paper itself), the assumption which states hydrogen is not viable because of the amount of electricity used and the pollutants and cost of that electricity ignores the fact that electrical generation doesn’t have to continue using pollutant creating sources.

        I have long maintained the reason electric, alcohol, and hydrogen automobiles aren’t ‘viable’ is because of the stranglehold bog oil has on us. Given an even field of subsidies for creating the regenerating facilities, stations and refueling depots…oil would be in a battle which, ultimately, it would lose.

      • Robert Smith

        Steve says: “electricity will be come very expensive to run cars and you will end up pay more than gas at the pump”

        Actually you can do something about that under many circumstances. See: http://www.gmindustries.com/greensolar/index.htm

        Also I see in the margins around here a lot of stuff about magic electricity. Might be worth checking out.

        I have natural gas in my home and I’m anticipating setting up so I can use it in my car. Wouldn’t it be great to get a hybred with a gasoline engin that can be switched to compressed natural gas at will! Commute on electricity from solar cells, and on a trip I’ll be able to go over 500 miles. I wonder if I can get a car with a bathroom or I’m going to have to stop long before that 500 mile mark.

        Rob

      • Flashy

        Robert Smith…. an empty soda bottle may benefit you about the 350 mile mark ;)

      • Robert Smith

        Hey Flashy, sorry but I can’t do that. Just can’t. I’ve recycled too many not to think that bottle may come back to me some day.

        For an entertaining moment google AMXD.

        Rob

    • DaveH

      Galt says — “Did Bob Livingston just yank your chain?”.
      In what way, Galt?

      • GALT

        Couldn’t resist the set-up…..so in the spirit of Hope and Crosby, Martin and Lewis, and Henny Youngman…….Take my wife….it just fit……

        Clearly, being an e.i.P.L.F. ( which is a gift….and a curse ) these inciteful posts, require some ‘counterpoint’? Today was an interesting experience….not the first……but having superior pattern recognition skills………this post seemed to be something a “staph writer” would have offered……….and me and Bob being tight and all, and not being particularly
        informed regarding the particulars…..I felt I needed to be slightly more familiar so I did a search……..and lo and behold…….all the “usual suspects” are already out there……and of course you being my hero……I figured I’d do a little link dropping,,,,,,to kinda flesh out what C.A.F.E. was…….and a positive article on the impact ( I mean WHO DOESN”T LOVE car and driver ) and finish up with my own “unique” take……..in the spirit of capitalism, personal liberty and ” the purpose of a business is to make a profit.” spirit that Bob exemplifies……….

        Why do you ask?

    • Gordon

      Skipping over the poppycock that “greenhouse gases … contribute to global climate change,”

      Common sense and facts dictate that premise is correct. Also if it weren’t for the pressure focused on auto manufacturers, WE would almost still be driving ’58 BelAirs with 283s and powerglides getting 13 mpg. Personally I am quite satisfied with a Lincoln TownCar that gets 27 mpg hwy at 70 mph.

      • Gordon

        “If the Obama Administration wanted fuel-efficient cars, it would relax emissions standards and allow importation of high-mileage diesel European cars like the Volkswagen Passat Bluemotion 1.6 TDI which currently gets 69 mpg.”

        Actually the “administration” did NOT exclude that vehicle. VW chose not to modify and certify that vehicle because it was anticipated that FEW Americans would purchase such an under powered vehicle. It is substantially weaker than the 2.0 TDI. Is that 69 mpg mileage calculation based on US standards? Check again. An Imperial gallon is five liters. Sure it is better than the 2.0, but would you drive a vehicle that would be a danger to accelerate into congested traffic?

      • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

        Dear Gordon,

        You write: “Common sense and facts dictate that premise is correct.” In science, common sense and consensus do make “law.”
        http://thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/7005-us-cooling-not-warming-over-past-decade-govt-data-shows?tmpl=component&print=1
        http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/empirical-scientific-data-continues-to.html
        http://www.express.co.uk/features/view/280948/Is-global-warming-over-
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2055191/Scientists-said-climate-change-sceptics-proved-wrong-accused-hiding-truth-colleague.html
        http://www.examiner.com/article/us-government-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced

        You write: “Also if it weren’t for the pressure focused on auto manufacturers, WE would almost still be driving ’58 BelAirs with 283s and powerglides getting 13 mpg.” Nonsense. Logical fallacy.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Gordon

        Bob, thanks for your kind reply. I reserve my right of my beliefs that mankind is damaging the earth in a permanent irreversible way. I was a commercial pilot, flying since I was 10 yrs old. My eyes, nose, and common sense exercised over 6 decades has shown me that things are NOT well with the earths atmosphere, and the accelerative effects that I have witnessed indicate that mankind is a contributing problem. I do believe that we should be energy self sufficient, using oil, coal, etc. I have billed myself as a conservative tree-hugger for decades. Whether we are right or wrong, Mr. Livingston, our posterity will have to live with the results of our choices.

      • independent thinker

        I had a 1969 AMC Javalin V8 that routinely got 22-25 mpg on the highway and if I could cruise at 75 or more would get 30+ mpg. So, your 58 chevy illustration is at least partialy false. My parents had a 62 Impala with a 327 and powerglide that routinely got better than 13 mpg as well. As I recall it regularly got around 18 mpg and got as high as 22 on the highway. I know that is low by todays standards but it is much better than what you claim.

      • Gordon

        Thinker: Must be nice to only drive on the freeway at 70 all the time. Most of us get stuck in routine driving of 20-50 most of the time. The average 283 powerglide got 13 in mixed driving, and 15 mpg at 60 mph highway. Been around tons of them….. quicky…. I have friends who insisted that their xxx car got 30 on the highway. Curiously, when I rode with them their car could only manage 24. mmmmmm.

        • Wumingren

          Well, Gordon, how much do you weigh, anyway?

      • Gordon

        Oh ya, my TownCar got 33 mpg at 73 mph on cruise while travelling I57 down Illinois…. with a 35 mph tailwind.

      • Robert Smith

        From Gordon: ” and the accelerative effects that I have witnessed indicate that mankind is a contributing problem. ”

        I heard that the deniers of mankind having a hand in global warming are of similar mindset to those who deny the holocaust deniers, and are just as evil, kinda like Mel Gibson.

        That’s what I heard.

        I also heard this: “Former National Academy of Sciences president Dr. Frederick Seitz, who, according to an article by Mark Hertsgaard in Vanity Fair, earned about US$585,000 in the 1970s and 1980s as a consultant to R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company,[48] went on to chair groups such as the Science and Environmental Policy Project and the George C. Marshall Institute alleged to have made efforts to “downplay” global warming.”

        The best science money can buy.

        From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

        Rob

      • Mikey

        I usually agree with Bob, and disagree with Robert Smith on most issues. However, when it comes to the climate change debate, my observation is this. If it really is true, then it serves the left politically. If it turns out that it’s hype, it serves the right politically.
        So, to agree with Robert: If there’s any chance that we are causing damage to our planet, why not err on the side of caution. And, when applied correctly, green alternatives can save you money as well.
        But more to Bob’s point: I think most people will agree, without it being forced upon us by government. Our transportation choices should be just that, our choices.

      • independent thinker

        “Thinker: Must be nice to only drive on the freeway at 70 all the time.”

        Show me where I said I or my parents drove on the freeway at 70 all the time.

      • Gordon

        Thinker, I did not say that. Reread what was written objectively without your spin on it.

      • independent thinker

        “Must be nice to only drive on the freeway at 70 all the time.”

        Your words not mine Gordon.

  • Warrior

    Well, you will still be able to get your SUV, however you’ll either have to be an employee of the gubmint, an athelete or hollywood celeb to be allowed to drive it.

  • oldkoreanwarvet

    This is only the tip of the ice berg read this!!!!
    Executive Orders

    After today’s announcement by our President to give illegal aliens quasi citizenship by fiat, I looked into the executive orders he has issued in the last three and a half years. I found this article in Western Journalism that scares the hell out of me and should frighten all of us. Get out the vote in November folks!!! This guy is dangerous…

    A Comprehensive List Of Obama’s Worst Executive Orders

    JUNE 15, 2012 BY LAURIE ROTH

    There have been over 900 Executive Orders put forth from Obama, and he is not even through his first term yet. He is creating a martial law ‘Disney Land’ of control covering everything imaginable. Some of the executive orders he has signed recently have been exposed thanks to ‘Friends of Conservative Action Alerts.’ They have compiled a choice list of ‘Emergency Powers, Martial law executive orders’: Get your headache medication out while you still can without a prescription.

    * Executive Order 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

    * Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

    * Executive Order 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

    * Executive Order 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

    * Executive Order 11001 allows the government to take over all health education and welfare functions.

    * Executive Order 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

    * Executive Order 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

    * Executive Order 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations.

    * Executive Order 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.

    * Executive Order 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issues over a fifteen-year period.

    * Executive Order 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

    * Executive Order 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute Industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

    * Executive Order 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the president declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

    It is more than clear that Obama is planning for the total control and takeover of America via Martial Law. Food, energy, transportation, work, banking, and health.he has it covered.

    While Obama is busy pulling executive orders out of the sky to control everything inside our country, he has been issuing executive orders to force us to submit to international regulations instead of our Constitution.

    Sher Zieve exposed this in one of her recent articles. Damn the U.S. Constitution, damn the American people and damn U.S. sovereignty.

    Executive Orders

    After today’s announcement by our President to give illegal aliens quasi citizenship by fiat, I looked into the executive orders he has issued in the last three and a half years. I found this article in Western Journalism that scares the hell out of me and should frighten all of us. Get out the vote in November folks!!! This guy is dangerous…

    A Comprehensive List Of Obama’s Worst Executive Orders

    JUNE 15, 2012 BY LAURIE ROTH

    There have been over 900 Executive Orders put forth from Obama, and he is not even through his first term yet. He is creating a martial law ‘Disney Land’ of control covering everything imaginable. Some of the executive orders he has signed recently have been exposed thanks to ‘Friends of Conservative Action Alerts.’ They have compiled a choice list of ‘Emergency Powers, Martial law executive orders’: Get your headache medication out while you still can without a prescription.

    * Executive Order 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

    * Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

    * Executive Order 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

    * Executive Order 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

    * Executive Order 11001 allows the government to take over all health education and welfare functions.

    * Executive Order 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

    * Executive Order 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

    * Executive Order 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations.

    * Executive Order 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.

    * Executive Order 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issues over a fifteen-year period.

    * Executive Order 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

    * Executive Order 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute Industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

    * Executive Order 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the president declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

    It is more than clear that Obama is planning for the total control and takeover of America via Martial Law. Food, energy, transportation, work, banking, and health.he has it covered.

    While Obama is busy pulling executive orders out of the sky to control everything inside our country, he has been issuing executive orders to force us to submit to international regulations instead of our Constitution.

    Sher Zieve exposed this in one of her recent articles. Damn the U.S. Constitution, damn the American people and damn U.S. sovereignty.

    • Michael O’Hara

      Old Vet, the posting doesn’t get any more true when you post it twice, and it wasn’t true even when posted once.
      Read more about it at SNOPES: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ndrp.asp

      • mike

        “For the past few years http://www.snopes.com has positioned itself, or others have labeled it as the ‘tell-all, final word’ on any comment, claim and e-mail. But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com.

        Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it -kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team – that’s right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It’s just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby. David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago – and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research.

  • WillMay

    Carmakers could offer around town horse & wagons to bring up those average milage numbers

    • http://www.thefreedomtrainusa.com Freedom

      These would be good sources of transportation for ZERO and MOOOOOOCHELLE…….get them out of the gas guzzling limos………..and ground Air Force One………Save the taxpayers lots of money……..as it would stop all of Mooooochelle’s vacations on the taxpayer dime………

    • Wumingren

      Perhaps automakers should just buy out Schwinn and other bicycle makers and add self-propelled vehicles to their fleets.

    • Robert Smith

      “Carmakers could offer around town horse & wagons to bring up those average milage numbers”

      The far right doesn’t want the compition for the fertalizer, and the left doesn’t want to support more.

      Thus, no government support for it.

      (BTW, how comfortable are you with Monsanto producing both the seeds and the insecticides?)

      Rob

  • Roger

    Reading what governments original job entailed when adopted by our founders, one begins to wonder, When did government take over and decide that our personal lives will now be controlled by them?
    When things are put in place a little at a time, so as the people don’t notice, by the time they realise what has happened, it’s usually to late Rog.

    original role of federal government – United States

    Having experienced mistreatment at the hands of the British government, writers of the United States Constitution were careful to limit the powers of government and protect the rights of individuals. The primary purpose of federal government was to: 1. Defend the shores
    2. Establish a system of currency
    3. Deliver the mail
    4. Protect individual rights

    Consider Amendment X, the last in the Bill of Rights:
    Amendment X
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
    Interesting question: Does the U.S. Constitution grant rights to its citizens?

    Answer is, No. Looking back at the forerunner of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, we find the Grantor of individual rights:
    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    So, the Constitution does not grant rights. It assumes people have those rights from the Creator and establishes that government shall not take them away.

    The Constitution could be a dangerous instrument if it granted rights, because by amending it, those in power could take our rights away. The founding fathers were adamant that citizens already had those rights.

    How far we have come since then! Look again at Amendment X. The founding fathers wouldn’t recognize us, would they?

    Sources: United States Declaration of Independence and Constitution

    • Richard Pawley

      In my 2006 autobiography, recently updated last year to include the reasons why I believe the long awaited “Great Earthquake” in Los Angeles County will happen in the summer of 2014, I also mentioned the safest small car in the world and the one with the most pollution free diesel engine that Canadians have been able to buy for many years, the 72 mpg TDI diesel powered SMART CAR. Even the gas version sold in Mexico, once owned by a friend in Texas got over 54 mpg and once got 60. We were finally allowed to buy a Smart Car here but not until it was dumbed down for Americans and only gets 39-41 mpg. Granted it’s not for everyone but of thousands of Americans did buy it even with the less efficient engine and only two seats. I truly believe that if the bureaucrats were interested in saving the country and not destroying it they would allow vehicles like the more practical family car, the Volkswagen Passat Bluemotion 1.6 TDI or some of the many others that Europeans and Asians are allowed to purchase.

      However, while forcing American car manufacturers to use carbon fiber rather than steel in some of their future cars, and a few hundred thousand more deaths, none of this will have any measurable effect on global warming: zero, zip, nada! Why because as I have pointed out many times in books and articles, the pollution from Chinese coal powered power plants can be measured in California and they have built around 400 times as many coal powered electric plants than we have in the last two decades.

      I fully expect South Carolina like weather to exist in New Your State in the 2020′s and have a four year old southern pecan that I have nurtured there that I believe will be able to survive on it’s own by then. Interesting times we live in and they are going to get a whole lot more interesting.

    • GALT

      “and there’s the throw. the play at the plate……….STOP RIGHT THERE…. I WANNA KNOW RIGHT NOW……”Roger?

      You got a little jumbled up there……..I mean a Bill of Rights does sorta kinda deal with that, RIGHTS stuff far better than the Declaration……..not to mention the line you quoted is a bunch of B.S. none of which is true……..

      If you had gone a little bit further……you would have run into……”that to secure these rights governments are instituted among……..” which tells you the “purpose” of government…….

      Now this line actually provides a lot of information regarding the previous total B.S. part
      that precedes it………I mean: how can something be “unalienable and a right” and self evident…..if it requires “government” to “secure it’? of have a source “other than government”………..and remain “unsecured”, and……..?

      Consider Captain Kirk v. the M-5 computer…….where he sucks the computer into calculating pi……..all he had to do was quote this garbage and the circuits would have frozen or fried immediately. Yet this crap has survived almost 250 years without a single intellectual inquiry that has managed to make a dent in the meaninglessness of this rather obvious self contradictory construction………

      As for the reverence…..you need to get past that…….they were the elite of their time,
      dealing with circumstances that could in no way have anticipated “our time”…….none were happy with what was produced…….and they only idea that actually had merit was Jefferson’s that the Constitution automatically EXPIRE in 19 years….

      The Declaration, also contains one more item which is extremely important….”governments derive their just POWERS from the CONSENT of the
      governed”……..

      Yet these two items represent a sublime evolution from that which preceded it, and what was constructed to implement these “evolutionary concepts” was clearly doomed to failure
      before it began…….continued reverence, for abject FAILURE……and trotted out for “political purposes”………simply guarantee’s continued failure……..

      ” All hail Landru…….are you not one with the body?”

      ” To conquer, first DIVIDE!” ( and then HANG….separately.)

      P.S. for FRANK…..if you ARE following me, we are back on topic……

  • http://www.thefreedomtrainusa.com Freedom

    Did the ZERO just sign his Death Warrant…….People in this country will not buy these expensive tin can piles of enviro junk……..

    • Robert Smith

      Ummmm, Preus is doing well and the Chevy Volt just broke all sorts of sales records for GM.

      Rob

      • Gordon

        Robby, that’s an accurate statement but it is a manipulation of reality. Setting sales records for a type of car that never existed before is somewhat a distortion. Researching the facts you will discover that on a per unit sale the Volt is losing thousands of dollars for Government Motors Corp, a corp that is losing millions daily. The old saying is “Liars figure, and figures lie” holds true here as well as in political circles.

      • Gordon

        I also wish to state that purchasing a 4 yr old LincolnTown Car for 1/3 of the sticker price and getting 25+ mpg equates to saving an easy $20,000+ from buying a new Volt, and that $20 grand will buy a lot of extra gasoline compared to 36 mpg of some small car….. all the while riding in the largest car produced in North America with comfort and size safety. THAT is a good investment.

      • Gordon

        Sometimes I am still amazed how “people” will advocate purchasing a tiny car just to feel good that they are saving $40 month in gasoliine expense, and then waste money eating out 7 times a week.

      • Andy

        What’s the problem with the king of hybrid cars?
        Compared to last year, Toyota Prius sales are down more than 15 percent. Why?

        Is it the depressed California auto market still reeling from massive losses in property values? Are buyers simply waiting for plug-in vehicles? Is it gas prices? The recall scandal? All of the above?
        Not long ago I heard an auto analyst claim that California auto sales have improved from “horrible to bad”. Since a majority of hybrid cars are sold in the golden state, a drop in hybrid sales isn’t that surprising. Nonetheless, gas is still averaging $3.51 in the West – almost 75 cents higher than the national average. Coupled with some of the best hybrid deals ever, especially on the Prius, shouldn’t sales be rising, or at least holding their own in California?

        Recently, some have argued on this blog that consumers are waiting for plug-in vehicles. Really? Last I heard there were only 10,000 people with $100 deposits on the Nissan Leaf. Likewise, GM has made it quite clear that Volt sales will be very limited by supply for at least the next few years. Can plug-in demand really be behind the lack of Prius interest – and hybrid car interest overall?

        Then, of course, there’s the Toyota recall scandal; however, Prius sales haven’t tanked nearly as much as many other hybrid brands. So, a decline in Prius sales is certainly about more than just the recall scandal.

        Ultimately, the decline in Prius sales is probably a mixture of all of the above, and even more variables.

        The Future

        So, what does the decline in Prius sales indicate for the future of hybrid cars and plug-in vehicles?

        In recent months both Ford and Toyota have made very bullish forecasts for future hybrid sales, such as at least 20 percent hybrid by 2020. Likewise, Nissan has claimed as much as 10 percent EV by 2020, and the government has claimed 50 percent battery powered penetration by 2030.

        What changes so dramatically in the next few years that we achieve such high levels of penetration when after a decade hybrids still can’t overcome even 3 percent penetration?

        Certainly, it’s easy to claim that much cheaper battery prices are around the corner, and/or that much higher gas prices are inevitable since both assertions are probably true, at least to some extent.

        Nevertheless, commodity prices will limit the downside cost potential of lithium technology at a price that will still be very hard to compete with gasoline and ever more efficient internal combustion engines, suggests a plethora of research. Higher gas prices, on the other hand, would mean consumers have less money to spend up front on transportation according to the studies. Thus, consumers would have to downsize into cheaper and cheaper vehicles rather than hybrids and plug-ins and their greater upfront costs.

        In fact, to some extent, that is exactly what has happened since the recession and gas spike. Consumers have downsized into more efficient vehicles, but they have not converted into hybrid vehicles. And with the greater costs and limitations of plug-in vehicles, can a mass exodus from gas vehicles into plug-in vehicles really be expected?

        The Toyota Prius has now been on the road for more than a decade. During that time, according to Consumer Reports, JD Power, etc., the Prius has been one of the most reliable and most repeat-buyer-coveted vehicles available. Additionally, many Prius hybrids with old battery packs – less technologically advanced – have survived not just 10 years, but hundreds of thousands of miles without a battery pack replacement. Therefore, newer NiMH-powered hybrids should have even longer life spans. Regardless, in terms of life span, the Prius has proven itself.

        Ultimately, the Prius is an exceptionally efficient and likable vehicle, especially for urban commuters – a group of drivers that represents far more than just 2-3 percent of American commuters. And, today, the Prius deals are even better. More important, compared to the 2008 gas spike, for example, Prius buyers are today literally saving several thousand dollars up front on their purchase. (How much gas does several thousand dollars buy for a Prius driver, even at $5.00 per gallon?)

        So, seriously, why are Toyota Prius sales down if the battery is on the brink of revolutionizing the auto industry? Where’s the disconnect?

      • Gordon

        I have an acquiantance that is on his 5th Prius. He trades every two years because he doesn’t believe the batteries are worth a xxxx. He is one of the reasons that Prius sales are so high. Ya he gets 41 mpg. Big deal.

      • Sirian

        Gordon,
        It’s kinda funny that your friend is getting 41mpg with his 5th Prius now. HA, I was knocking down 43mpg in my Opel GT back in ’74. Go figure :)

      • Gordon

        Ya, but he does it IN TOWN and ON THE ROAD… though they rarely do any interstate highway travel.

      • Robert Smith

        Hey Andy, you claim: “Toyota Prius sales are down more than 15 percent. Why?”

        The most recent I found was for April from http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/14/toyota-prius-sales-earn-best-april-yet/: “Toyota Prius recorded its best ever April with a total of 25,168 units sold, increasing 126.9 percent compared to the same period last year.”

        More from that article: “Overall, Toyota Motor Sales recorded sales of 32,593 hybrid vehicles, an increase of 124.6 percent compared to the same period last year,…”

        Where did your “facts” come from?

        Rob

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        I can’t imagine WHAT kind of records the volt broke! They’ve SUSPENDED PRODUCTION because they’re NOT selling!
        http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-08-28/industries/33437961_1_volt-production-chevrolet-volt-gm-plans

  • JROD

    It truly amazes me how little people really do understand about what is going on in this world we live in.I guess people get so caught up in the America thing and take thier eyes off of God and what He has going on.How could Zechariah 14 even begin to happen with America in her prime able to defend Isreal against anyone?But wait till Dictator Obama finishes.IF not himself he will have it good and set up for his predecessor.

    • Robert Smith

      If you brutal god is so powerful why did he let Obama be president in the first place?

      Maybe he thought McCain and Palun were worse. Who are you to question him?

      Rob

      • dhh

        Or maybe Obama is God’s judgment on America.

  • mark

    One of the reasons that the death rate is so high for small car drivers is because of all these giant gas-guzzling sedans, SUVs, and humongous pick-up trucks on the road that dwarf the 4 cylinder gas-efficient cars. If you downsize these larger gas pigs, and put the giant pick-ups along with the big diesel cargo trucks in a separate Jersey-barriered lane like they do in other countries, you will cut down dramatically on small car deaths, save the country and consumers huge amounts of money in energy costs – and make us less dependent on the Middle East for oil.

    • Gordon

      Until then, I will drive my Lincoln TownCars for comfort and safety.

    • Gordon

      Hey, don’t the liberals/socialist want population reduction?

    • Andy

      So–if this were the case, who you gonna call the next time you need help moving anything larger than your Aunt Emma’s bonnet? Be careful what direction that warped thinking of yours takes…

      • Walter zumbrennen

        That is my point exactly. I would love to see someone driving a Smart try to carry a sheet of plywood, or half a dozen cinder-blocks. Small is all fine and good but there are times when you need big, and if you do a lot of woodwork or any kind of gardening, you need BIG a lot.

      • Gordon

        Come on guys, you are arguing from a point that less than 1/2 of 1% of the people once or twice a year ever carry anything in their cars. Just get a golf cart trailer and share it with a buddy, like I do.

      • Robert Smith

        From Walter: “I would love to see someone driving a Smart try to carry a sheet of plywood, or half a dozen cinder-blocks.”

        At Home Depot I can rent a pick-up for $20 plus half a buck a mile when I need something bigger than my 10 year old 31 mpg. Vibe won’t hold. I can usually wait for them to deliver. Delivery is often free if I can wait until they have a cluster in my neighborhood.

        Rob

    • independent thinker

      mark, none of the eco vehicles you tout so highly can routinely pull 5,000+ pounds 15 or more miles on hilly curvey highways and don’t even attempt to take that load over a mountain with the little 4 bangers or electric vehicles you would burn out every berring, piston, electric motor, battery, etc said vehicles had.

      • Gordon

        Repeat after me: “people movers, people movers, people movers.”

    • Andy

      This is for Smart-Start Gordie: I own horses–ever try to haul hay, feed, shavings, etc. in one of those bubble cars? Hell, you can’t even buy a decent amount of groceries and haul them in those eyesores. Get a grip…

      • Andy

        If you allow the govommit to decide the size vehicle you need, when do you think they are going to move on to the size house you can have? Why….just 2 people should be fine in 800 or 900 sq. ft, right Gordie? And you don’t need all that yard you got…just a postage stamp lot should do. Oh yeah–don’t decide to have more than X number of children or the govommit will have them aborted or carted off to do some type of labor camp. Think it can’t happen? Look at some other countries that thought the same thing. …idiot..

      • Robert Smith

        You are sooooo right! When China got control of abortion they started coersing women to have one with their heavy handed policies. I think that’s why it’s best to leave abortion decisions to each woman. That way some can decide to carry to term if they want.

        Rob

      • Flashy

        Hmmm…I suppose the city buses driving using bio diesel don’t have a need for torque and capacity eh?

  • Bill

    During the CAFE standards death from auto accidents have dropped significantly, as safety standards (from government have increased). And not all of those who would have been saved from driving in larger vehicles must have chosen (libertarian) to drive those vehicles as clearly other choices were available.

    Net is that there are no death certificates signed, and likely lives saved as we lessen our dependence on foreign oil.

  • Walter zumbrennen

    Yeah let’s all drive the “rollerskate” cars or electric cars and cut down on the fossil fuels we use. There are several problems with this. I have looked at the little cars and they are way to small. If all I wanted to do was carry a tiny bag with a toothbrush in it, they would be fine, the problem is, try getting camping gear in one of those things. Tent, cots, stove, etc. Ain’t no way it’s gonna happen. So carrying capacity is one strike against the small cars. As for electric cars, when they get so you can drive across the country, carry a load of camping gear, and recharge in 10 minutes so you can keep driving, THEN talk to me about electric cars. Looking at the electric cars, most get MAYBE 150 mile driving range before having to recharge for 5 or 6 (or more) hours. Not exactly an incentive to buy one not to mention the cost of replacing batteries is astronomical.
    And the final and biggest problem with the eco cars is PRICE!! When they get down to $10k then I might consider buying one. Otherwise I will continue to drive my 15 year old car.

    • Rob

      Walter, Make sure you take real good care of that 15 year-old car. By the time the electromobiles are cheap enough for us all to afford, they will be equipped with gov’t-mandated GPS tracking, self-driving capabilities, and remote shut-down, etc. so the gov’t can exact even more control over the masses if the leftists stay in office. I don’t think you would want such an equipped vehicle. Besides, if that is the case, and if you get too old to drive it (the car you currently own), if it becomes a collectible it could be worth some $$.

  • Rob

    In 1994, Caterpillar developed a fuel from a mixture of naphtha, water, and an emulsifier. It produced 40% more mpg and was virtually pollutant-free. A gasoline engine only needed a nickel catalyst for it to work. Yet none of the major car manufacturers have produced vehicles designed to burn this fuel. The manufacturing facilities would need minor re-tooling, if any, and minute changes to the alloys used in the pistons, or even nickel-plated spark plugs. They would not need major investments in r & d. Instead, manufacturers have gone down the road of electric vehicles, and the government is trying to force the technology on us via the Chevy Volt. My question is, why?

    • Gordon

      Why? Electric plug-ins are a lot easier to make/use than to spend bazillions for a totally new infrastructure to manufacture, deliver, and dispense exotic fuels.

      • Rob

        Naphtha is like diesel, a by-product of crude oil. It has been used for thousands of years. Ever hear of Greek Fire? Ancient incendiary bombs were made from it from Greco-Roman times to the Crusades. All it would take is for a gas station to empty out their gas tanks, clean them, and fill them up with very little expense. Installing plug-ins for electric cars would cost more… Plus, where would the elctricity come from? Coal burning plants? Oil burning plants?

      • Gordon

        Ya, and until we get some invention that is viable we had better be using oil, coal, and nuclear fuel ……. all the while trying to get people to TURN OUT THE LIGHTS, and STOP WASTING GAS DRIVING AROUND FOR NO REASON. You don’t have to go to WalMart every day.

      • Gordon

        Rob, ethanol blends sucks for fuel mileage compared to gasoline. Consider what naptha would do to today’s common everyday gas burning vehicle. It is NOT a direct drop-in in any sense of the word.

      • Gordon

        IF electric, naphta, diesel, E-85, natural gas, etc. were to become popular overnight, it would be maybe 20 years before the common man (average income) could afford one of them…. and then probably only used. The administrations want the old “gas hogs” eliminated, but the lower classes can’t afford something newer and more fuel efficient, like now, the fuel-efficient cars are way-high in price because of demand. Inverse of what happened in 75.

        • Wumingren

          The “Cash for Clunkers” program was designed to remove heavy metal from the roadways of America. What I had thought to be an unintended consequence — a dearth of vehicles for the used car market — seems to have been intended all along. With fewer used cars on the market, resale values climb, making new cars seem more affordable by comparison. With more people looking at new cars, some of them might be persuaded to go “green.” Add government incentives to drive down the sticker price of a Volt, and higher sales might be achieved.

  • http://Chamberlain James

    All you have to do is Google “HHO”. See what is being done in the development of water as a fuel source. Yes, water. Hydrogen and oxygen. Great strides are being made now but if the government would get behind this research, we could all be truly energy independent. I mean for transportation, electricity, heat and anything else where fossil fuels are currently used. Pollution would cease, food prices would drop, everyone would have their own generator for electricity or local generators for small areas of homes and the fuel source would be free water. It is theorized that terrorists have our electric grid as a major target. This threat would be virtually eliminated. Let’s face it, the true reason we are in the middle-east is oil. We, or should I say BIG OIL, wants these countries “stabilized” so BIG OIL can continue to control the price of oil and control our lives. Think about how our lives are controlled by oil prices. BIG OIL would no longer have a grasp on this country. With the development and use of HHO, America could be put on a new plane in the world community. Of course that would put BIG OIL out of business.

    • Rob

      I’ve told people about that theory before, about terrorists attacking our infrastructure instead of attacking large population areas. A powerplant, some bridges, whatever would cause chaos and not necessarily deaths, would have an almost instant and longer-lasting effect. People wouldn’t know what to do. Your theory about self-sufficiency is great, too. The only problem is, there are too many people who are unwilling to become self-sufficient or even self-reliant for it to work. They want the gov’t to take care them. Only when folks realize they need to depend on themselves, their family, and possibly their community will they understand. When that happens it will probably be too late.

    • Gordon

      Oversimplifing: Of course it is all about the OIL. Muslims control 70% of the actual known oil resources in the world. When they get together, we infidels will find that they will control our “western” oil based society. Cars, clothes, food, lights, etc. We won’t even be able to feed ourselves. period. We better start building pipe lines and refineries NOW.

      • Gordon

        Mark my words: Muslims are like street gangs. They fight among themselves until the cops get there, then it is cops against the unified gangs. Sooner or later they will unite against US.

  • Old504Troop

    Around 1990, major auto makers came out with true electric cars, including the GM EV-1. They had a range of about 100 miles (sound familiar- 2012 Volt?) The battery maker was using nickel-acid, and later lithium, but towards the end developed lithium-ion, more than doubling the range to about 300 miles. GM sold the battery company’s majority share to Chevron, along with the patents, and the technology as related to cars was suppressed. With a true conspiracy (not theory) between auto makers, Big Oil, and the US Government (remember G.W. Bush was an oilman), the cars were all collected AND DESTOYED. Google “Who Killed the Electric Car”. Remeber- this technology came out OVER 20 YEARS AGO! Now, we again have cars with ONLY 100 mile range- WTF?
    Also, The Bakken oil field in North Dakota and Montana is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay, and has the potential to Eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates It at 503 billion barrels. Most of your elected representatives don’t even know about it.

    • AJ

      Or they’ve been paid to forget about it!

    • Michael O’Hara

      “Old504″, that number (503 billion) sounds like a lot of oil, but it’s not really. If all of that estimated deposit could be extracted economically (and that’s always doubtful) it would amount to about 16 years worth of current world oil usage.
      The important number is the production per day – how much oil can you get out of the ground in what period of time. With all the wells that have been drilled in that area in the last couple of decades, the production has not been visible when combined with the total US production.
      For a more elaborate (and technical) story on this, see the “Oil Drum” blog:
      http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5928

  • AJ

    “Obama just signed a death warrant for almost 208,000 people.” The UN will be pleased to see our leader is in step with their population reduction agenda for 2013..

  • Jimmy the Greek

    If a car does not have a V8 and a manual transmission they can stick it were the sun don’t shine ! Looks like the mustang well never be sold ,

    • codeboyx

      the manual transmission generally gets better mileage anyway.

      • dhh

        That used to be true. However, new cars with automatics usually have EPA ratings nearly as good as (and in some cases better than) the same car with a manual transmission.

  • tom

    if no one has jobs,gas goes high,it does not matter what the cars get.no body can get a new car if they are poor.

    • Gordon

      Like today, many people can only afford an older land barge. 10 yr old Toyotas are selling for $8,000 or more. Lots of people don’t have that cash, and old cars are not financable…. except through “buy here, pay here” lots that charge $3,000 more than the actual value of the car.

  • codeboyx

    I have watched video of official crash tests from start to finish of their tests about an hour video. They where using 20,000 pounds of concrete highway dividers at a slight angel. They where crashing other types and years of vehicles pickups,5 ton trucks,and full size cars for performance comparison. The mini cars did good at low speed crashes but at 55 miles per hour the occupant safety is in question because the small car has to be made very rigid to take impacts witch transfers more energy to the passengers. The Seventy mile per hour crash test really did not look good the car look like a half stepped on soda can. The outcome was that the person in a crash at 70 would not walk away. The jaws of life would be needed to get you out. The lack of size is a problem at higher speed collisions because their is less material in front and to the rear to absorb the impact. In other words these small cars do not have crumple zones of enough size to keep you safe for highway speeds impacts they would be OK for in the city use. A Honda Excel sized vehicle is way safer than these cars. We have the technology now to make way more fuel efficiency motor vehicles that would not need to be so small,but people making the big money off big oil suppress, steal or kill such innovations. Not to mention the people that make them. If a 40 model road master can get 100 mpg on a vapor carburetor so can a hummer because they just about weigh the same.

    • Wumingren

      Yikes! It occurs to me that the Left’s solution for reducing the additional highway deaths brought about by miniaturization of cars will be to decrease speed limits. If 70 mph is too fast for the cars, they’ll drop the speed limit to 55 mph. If 55 mph is too fast, they’ll drop the speed limit to 35 mph.

      Of course, there is still the issue of large vehicles on the road. Next thing you know, they’ll bannish vehicles over a certain weight limit, or increase their tag fees to the point that it becomes such an economic burden that only commercial operators will survive … at the expense of their customers, naturally.

  • codeboyx

    the manual transmission generally gets better mileage anyway.

  • raw

    The statistics are incomplete – pick-up trucks only make up about a third of the vehicles on the road, but are involved in almost half of all accidents.

  • Ranchman

    Then why don’t we insist Obama has to drive around in a battery powered limousine or stop flying to all his vacation spots, both he and his wife? Let’s see what president zero does in November when he’s defeated, does he buy a hybrid car to run to all his speaking engagements? Has he raised his kids to believe this nonsense? Will they both drive a Prius? This is nothing but an attempt on his part to further destroy our economy, knowing full well that we cannot run our country on alternative fuels! The man is a Marxist and only wants to destroy Capitalism and denying us the ability to run our economy on fossil fuels will do just that. The man is a traitor, pure and simple

    Remember 1776 and Keep Your Powder Dry!

    • http://belinkov@sbcglobal.net Lev Belinkov

      Mr.Ranchman!
      You are absolutely correct! But I’d add:All of us should ask all EPA agents (and management!) stop driving cars and start use bicycles, after short period of time
      NTSB should follow EPA and then… another Government Departments.
      Just imagine how healthy all of these people would be!
      And air in our country will be more safe!
      So, what do you think about it?

  • Walter zumbrennen

    Just wondering, has anyone here driven from coast to coast in any of the eco-cars? That would be one of the tests of whether one would be worth owning.

  • Pingback: Rebound Headaches – Misery Is This morning headache medication cause? | MEDINFOPAGES.COM

  • Shirley De

    Mr. Livingston,

    Tesla, one of the greatest minds of our time, designed a “Core Energy Battery” that would rune off the magnetism from the core of the earth.

    J.P. Morgan had funded him. Einstein employed him and took credit for some of his inventions. When J.P. Morgan learned of the Core Energy Battery, he realized there would not be any reason for people to buy electricity or gasoline. Bad for the GREEDY RICH ELITE.

    J.P. Morgan bankrupted Tesla. Tesla suffered a stroke and was never was able to build his tower to give “FREE, CLEAN ENERGY WORLDWIDE”.

    Tesla died in the 50′s. Hoover and the F.B.I. removed all Tesla’s research and buried it somewhere in D.C.. They have the answer. The mass majority of our politicians are bought or blackmailed into doing what the “RICH ELITE” tell them to do.

    It is like BIG PHARMA, OWNED BY RICH ELITES. They have the cures. The cures are natural. There is no big money there. They give us medications to cause problems and treat the symptoms, not cure us. These meds cause problems so they can give us more meds to cause more problems till we die.

    Shirley De

    • Gordon

      It wasn’t Einstein, it was Westinghouse and Edison. Tesla has a great reputation for lots of inventions, many of which were never proven to actually work. One of the few that worked is the lighting of fluorescent lights without wires through electromagnetic waves in the air. Today we know that EMR causes cancer, headaches, nausea, insomnia, learning disabilities, etc. So the lights worked, but could have been a health problem. France last year removed all wifi and radio devices from it schools due to proven learning disabilities. Tests have proven that children who use a cell phones for 3 minutes have brain waves altered for several hours. Of course, it is your choice should you choose to stand in front of your microwave oven while it’s cooking, or live next to the gigantic power transmission lines….. not to mention residential home wiring and TV and computers. Grandpa always said, “Don’t sit so close to the TV, it will ruin your brain.” Precognicense?

  • Bob Button

    Actually this is just another attack on Small Businesses. You know the People who used to produce 70%+ of the jobs in this country. Most of whom use small to medium size trucks and vans to conduct their business.

  • Whit

    One subject I’ve noticed is conspicuously absent in this discussion is the very real possibility of our very own Sol rendering our electrical systems useless, in effect sending us back to the early nineteenth century way of life.

    EMP (electromagnetic pulse), CME (coronal mass ejection), and/or a significant solar storm would render most all devices, systems and equipment dependent on electricity useless. Most vehicles manufactured after the mid 1980′s would be affected, but even if you could get it running, there would be no way to fuel the vehicles.

    Personal transportation would be the least of our problems, imagine life without electricity!

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/229032/sun-also-flares/clifford-d-may

    http://www.truthistreason.net/emp-attack-and-solar-storms-the-complete-guide

    Should an event such as this occur, survival would depend upon cooperation and working together.

    Cheers

    • independent thinker

      While it has not been mentioned in this discussion the subject has been covered in previous discussions.

  • Jimbo

    The national fuel economy and pollution standards for vehicles are, and have been, a joke for years. Notice that they are all a “fleet average”. Which means that only people who can’t afford larger, more powerful, safer vehicles are saving fuel, doing their bit for “the environment”. Our politicans and the people who can afford it, will be driving big, heavy, safe, gas guzzling vehicles, while the rest of us will be forced into the deathtrap tin boxes which will help the car companies meet the “fleet average”. People think because all vehicles have pollution controls that everyone is sharing in the attempt to stem “global warming” and polution. Not true. The standards specify a PPM (part per million) number for Carbon Monoxide, Nitrous Oxide, etc. PPM is in effect, a percentage of the exhaust volume. Big cars and trucks with thirsty engines have exhaust streams that are many more cubic feet per minute than economy cars. So meeting a PPM standard on a large car means you are still polluting much more than if you met the PPM standard on a small car.

    Obama’s limo is rumored to get 4- 6 MPG. When he travels he takes a fleet of vehicles, airplanes, etc. And this guy is going to DICTATE to me that I have to get into a crackerbox with HIM on the road in a 40,000 lb. vehicle?! Why doesn’t he lead by example and get his wife and staff to stop traveling separate planes? Why doesn’t he get a smaller limo (like previous presidents)?

  • Jimbo

    I love how the President and Obama think they can MANDATE technological advancements. None of them, including their egg headed scientific advisors have ever DESIGNED anything practical. They think technological innovation occurs because someone waves some money, or passes a regulation. When in fact, technology occurs because some individual has an idea, and exerts a lot of effort to pursue it to a practical product.

    If Obama really wants to know what is feasible, he should ask some ENGINEERS. The fact that he won’t was demonstrated when he allowed oil to spill for months off the coast of Louisiana. None of the academic theorists advising him had ever plugged a faucet, let alone an oil well. That is why we endured months of drama. I’ve worked in engineering for 30 years, and had GREAT practical ideas for stopping the BP spill, less than a week after it started. I emailed my Democratic Senators, Congressmen, Obama, and the egghead “science advisors” he put in charge of the BP spill. I told them I had great, simple ideas for stopping the spill, but couldn’t easily put them in an email. No one even responded to the letters! I doubt they even read them.

    I wrote the Navy website Obama setup for that purpose to say that I had some great ideas, but instead of asking me what they were, I got a phone call from a young idiot female Navy Lieutenant suggesting that I volunteer to clean birds! When I asked her if anyone there would want to LISTEN to my ideas to stop the spill she said they had “enough” scientists working on that, and they didn’t need my suggestions. And what did we witness? Ping pong balls. Yeah right….

    And who puts a Navy admiral in charge of an OIL SPILL?

  • bluejacket.

    To Bob Livingston,

    If you check this link, http://personalliberty.com/2012/08/31/abortion-survivor-attacks-obama/?eiid= for Robert Smith’s brain dead comment, you will see your common sense replys to him are a waste of time.

  • Pingback: Articles for Sunday » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog

  • Vincent Corrado

    Less cars on the road would be a good thing. Even better, let’s bring in more public transportation.

    • pweiters9

      9/2/12, Better yet: life after people, 5yrs; 100yrs; 5000yrs, etc. How ridiculous is that?

  • http://rdsocial.com/index.php?do=/profile-11299/info/ visit this Web page link

    This website has some really helpful info on it.
    Cheers for helping me.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.