JOHN EDWARDS AND THE SOCIAL JIHAD AGAINST SUVs

http://www.autoextremist.com/ and the Associated Press are reporting on anti-Sport Utility Vehicle comments made by fading, long-shot Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards to the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, on August 28, 2007.

(Of course in the media fire storm surrounding IdaHO Senator Larry Craig's tapping feet, Edwards got almost no coverage. (Senator Craig -- Don't be like Bill Clinton-- retire now for the good of the GOP and the country))

The retired trial lawyer John Edwards says "Americans should be asked to drive more fuel efficient vehicles. He says he would ask them to give up SUVs."

Cynics suspect that with John Edwards's trial lawyer buddies having milked dry the Ford Explorer-Firestone Tire mess, the next litigation frontier is greatly enhanced by moving Americans into smaller, less crashworthy vehicles (smaller cars will produce more serious injuries, which will then mean more litigation and bigger contingency fees for the ambulance-chasing set).

Certainly John Edwards can "ask" "U.S. Americans" anything he wants. Just as Speedzzter can "ask" the hypocritical Edwards family to give up their energy-guzzling 28,000 square foot mansion, their travel on private jets and their other energy uses. . . .

As long as all of this "asking" is polite and voluntary, who cares? We ought to be intellectually and emotionally strong enough to argue our differences reasonably and with common courtesy. The problems are when "ask" is code for the heavy hand of government intruding on our vehicular choices, or when the asking becomes de facto arm-twisting by a ranting mob.

John Edwards' simplistic "bumper sticker" demonization of SUVs recounts the sorts of anti-SUV jawboning going on across the country. Nowhere has this debate been more vitriolic than in Flagstaff, Arizona.

On Sunday, July 01, 2007, LEIGHTON HASELGROVE of Doney Park, Arizona, wrote the Arizona Daily Sun the following:

To the editor:

"Yes, I'm one of those Hummer drivers in Flagstaff. I enjoy off-roading and the huge tax deduction I received when purchasing my H1. I own a small business in town and provide jobs here. I also spend a lot of money with local vendors to keep my business running. I work hard, have a lot of stress and earn every penny I make."

"I took my 10-year-old son to enjoy a movie tonight and he wanted to stop by Petland on the way home to look at the pets. We were enjoying a father-son evening. After parking and exiting my vehicle, a belligerent man immediately gets within five inches of my face and uses the f-word about 15 times with my son standing there. He was judging me by the vehicle I was driving. He called me a rich expletive and questioned how expletive cool I thought I was by driving this vehicle."

"My father was in the military for over 20 years and has two purple hearts, silver and bronze medals of honor. He fought so you and I can have the freedom to purchase whatever vehicle we want in this country. It's pretty sad that in this town, the extremists feel the need to flick off drivers of SUVs and use profanity in front of children to get their point across."

"I have to make difficult decisions daily in my workplace that are stressful. The biggest decision this man probably made today was whether to eat tofu or vegetables for dinner. My biggest decision I had to make today was whether to punch this guy in front of my son or be a bigger man and walk away. I think, even though I may not drive the politically correct truck in this town, I'm a bigger man than this guy."

"RVs, boats, commercial trucks, buses and all kinds of other vehicles burn just as much fuel if not more than my Hummer. One day this guy is going to approach the wrong person, or me without my son, and will discover that not only do people have the right to drive what they want, they also have the right to defend themselves and their families."

Mr. Haselgrove's somewhat tepid defense of his legal right to choose an SUV then touched off a raging storm of internet.

The "debate" has been marked by such "reasoned" comments as:

• "the fact that you carried only two people and not much stuff that I know of in that screaming guzzling death trap is obscene."
• "your abuse of our freedoms will ruin the right to certain freedoms for your children and grandchildren in the future."
• "You are breaking economic and scientific laws and the consequences are quite predictable if people like you do it long enough just because there are no current laws of humans against it."
• " The country was free when the means of transportation was via horseback. Cars and hummers are not sustainable. You can be free or chained to gas guzzlers -- you can't be both. "
• "To me, Hummers are so glamorous as to be almost as attractive as a burning cigarette in a doctor's office. A Hummer is, in fact, more like a belch or a fart in a sushi bar - little more. If we could create an homage to Hummers, we might start with a collection of plastic out-houses and a few piles of barn waste."
• "there's no question they're welfare queens. America drives large cars because we subsidize them."
• "Hummer owners are gasoline/Diesel consumption terrorists."
• " Just driving such a gas guzzler is a provocative act. It supports foreign powers with whom we seem to be at war (anyone who has oil). Instead of being patriotic - it is the opposite - no matter how many flags are pasted to it."
• "People like you and the Hummer drivers are the terrorists. You have no respect for the environment and you don't feel any duty to try ensure a better world for the ones that live after you. "
• "I say long live the gas guzzling Hummer. The sooner we run out of dirty petroleum, the sooner we can start enjoying cleaner air again. "
• "From his attitude, I'd say the guy has a fish stuck on the back of his Hummer. He obviously has no compassion for either the mentally ill individual who confronted him nor the world whose resources he is wasting. And his goal in life is to impose those views on others via war. He is deluded into thinking this is what World War II was about -- if his father was like most vets, he didn't talk much about that ordeal. Delusion about religion, war, and individual rights -- a bad combination. "
• " It is un American to own a Hummer. "
• " Just because you own a business in town doesn't really give you a right to suck up hundreds of gallons of gas that you don't really need to use. "
• " It's OK to destroy the environment we all depend on for life, but watch that language. What a perverse value system. "

John Edwards' "request" isn't all that much removed from these sorts of sentiments. It just is in the syrupy, measured tones of a slick trial lawyer selling a "bill of goods."

Speedzzter is no great fan of SUVs simply because they generally yield a poor driving experience as compared to sports cars, "muscle cars" and high performance GT sedans. But millions of people want and need them. And those of us who believe in vehicular freedom of choice must all "stand together" or we will "hang separately" (metaphorically speaking). Don't think that for one minute when the enemies of freedom are finished attacking SUVs they won't then turn their fire on race cars, sports cars, restored and antique vehicles, hot rods, work trucks or other "non-conforming" modes of transportation.

John Edwards and his fellow nanny-staters can't be satisfied with living their own tiny "hair shirt"/all-natural fiber/"low-carbon footprint existences" (not that most of them really live in conformity to their extreme anti-carbon rhetoric)

NO! They've got to DEMAND -- via legal force (i.e. Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations, consumption taxes) and obnoxious social disapprobation -- that everyone else follow suit.

NO THANKS!

Liberty means the freedom to drive a 8,500 lb. SUV or a 500+ horsepower V8 supercar if one so chooses.

If LEIGHTON HASELGROVE wants to spend his hard-earned money on an SUV, he has every right to do so. By the way, "hard earned money" also includes TAX DEDUCTIONS (Remember, you've got to EARN it before you can deduct it!)

Certainly, while the First Amendment means that Mr. Haselgrove cannot be wholly insulated from the moronic rantings of the self-appointed "Greeniacs" who "feel" the need to demand orthodoxy, it doesn't protect the sorts of "fighting words" attacks he reported.

More critically, what has happened to freedom of choice? Whatever happened to common courtesy and respect for differences? These concepts are rapidly disappearing in the "heat" of the politicized climate change debate.

John Edwards' simplistic rhetoric adds nothing to this debate and signals again his lack of respect for personal liberty and individual responsibility.

As for Speedzzter, you sanctimonious little Prius drivers and bicyclists better keep your goofy little eco-heaps out of the fast lane! (After all, it's not legal to obstruct faster traffic)

VIVA V8 POWER!

VIVA HOT RODS!

VIVA SUVs!

VIVA RVs!

VIVA POWERBOATS!

VIVA PRIVATE AIRCRAFT!

VIVA PERSONAL LIBERTY!