About Me

Name: thekeenobserver
Email: reallykeenobserver@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Has life in America become "too safe?"

Posted by thekeenobserver on Friday, June 05, 2009 4:42:31 PM
 

After World War II, American auto designers seemed to be stuck in a rut:

 

Beginning in 1946, they produced tank-like creations, which later "evolved" into the strange-looking, garrish tailfin designs of the early 1950's.

 

But in October 1954, the Chevrolet division of General Motors literally astounded the automotive industry: they introduced the sleek, 1955 Chevy Bellaire-- a stunningly beautiful design that caused a flurry of curious Americans to flock into Chevy dealer showrooms, and drive away in the car that would make the division the premier sales leader for the next 20 years.

 

Previous to 1955, American cars were solid, reliable, and durable; they used heavy-gauged steel, and had frames worthy of military vehicles. But they were bulky-looking, slow, and rather ugly.

 

Then came the introduction of the 55 Chevy, and everything changed:

 

Along with the revolutionary design, Chevy had crafted an equally ingenious ad campaign. "See the USA, in your Chevrolet" resounded from billboards, radio spots, and from the most popular television variety shows of that time.

 

Not only did the slogan have a decided "ring", it carried a subliminal message: it literally opened up American pop culture to the era of the drive-in, cruising, and "heading out onto the highway."

 

Almost overnight, American lifestyles had been transformed into the "car culture", which remains to this day.

 

American drivers --who had bought the new Chevy because of it stunning looks-- were to discover an even more delightful surprise under the hood... the Turbo-Fire 265 V-8;  It delivered exceptional torque, and packed raw acceleration not found in other low-priced cars.

 

The engine quickly spawned a new "performance" paradigm-- drag racing from stoplights turned  ’55 Chevies into defacto race cars whenever they were challenged.

 

Shiny, "souped up" 55 Chevies dominated the drive-in scene. The car became a status symbol -everybody wanted one. Just under 2 million 1955 Chevrolets were sold, accounting for more than 20 percent of ALL cars sold that year.

 

Pontiac noticed the trend to performance, and how quickly it could "goose" sales figures. In 1957, they introduced their upgraded 347 cubic-inch, 290 hp "Trophy" V-8, plus a 317-hp mechanical-lifter job sporting three, two-barrel carbs, which was essentially a racing engine

 

Now the performance race between the two GM divisions was on:
 
Chevy would counter with their all- new "power-pack" fuel-injected V-8 that generated an astounding 283 hp from just 283 cubes.

 

In 1958, Pontiac introduced its legendary 389, with a camshaft specifically designed to deliver maximum torque between 20 to 60 mph-- the speed where most street races were either won or lost.

 

Chevy again countered with another legend-- the "327"-- undoubtedly the best American V8 of all time. It produced an astonishing 350 hp when ordered in its hottest, "solid-lifter" format. A 327 Impala-- thanks to its thundering powerplant-- was capable of leaving long black strips from the rear wheels for an entire city block

 

From 1962 to 1964, the high-torque, fast-winding 327 Chevy could blast almost anything off the road.  So quick were these demons (from a stoplight) that a good, four-speed-shifting driver would often defeat its larger cousin, the "409" in the eighth mile-- the distance of most red light encounters.

 

The 327 Chevy would dominate America's stoplight parade until 1964, when Pontiac upped the ante and  introduced its fabled GTO, powered by the equally-fabled 389, replete with 10.75 compression, and triple 2-barrel, "3 deuce" carbs.

 

Car sales reflected the trend: between 1962 to 1965, Chevy sold an incredible 5.8 million Impalas; and in its first two years, Pontiac sold an amazing 112,000 GTO's.

 

But after 1965, GM began to experience a slow, ominous decline-- and at the time, no one knew it was to culminate in its eventual bankruptcy.

 

But what had gone wrong?

 

Of course, the liberal "do-gooders" in Congress-- lobbied hard by Ralph Nader—had decided they would make cars SAFER; and legislated the "improvements" which would significantly increase prices --decrease performance-- and eventually drive Americans to imports.

 

Of course, we all remember the first time Detroit added some federally-mandated, all-new safety feature that absolutely drove one into passionate fits of frustration & anger.

 

In 1966,  it was the requirement for seat belts. Nobody wore 'em; they were little more than some loosely-fastened lap restraint (something like worn at an amusement park kiddie ride). 

 

Even when you were a kid boarding a ride at carnival, you thought to yourself..."Is this skinny stupid belt supposed to keep me from getting hurt? If this ride DOES go haywire, this flimsy thing wouldn’t do nothin!"

 

The practically useless seat belts were indeed a nuisance- especially when you sat on the buckle, or cleaned the interior of the car. But it all probably goes back to Ralph Nader's childhood; perhaps-- as a little kid-- he got his ideas from some kiddie ride that he obviously didn't think was too safe.

 

In any event, the world has never been the same. Once seat belts became law for all the "Big 3" manufacturers, there was no looking back.

Next--in 1968-- it was those incredibly stupid, and worthless front-passenger head restraints. And they're still with us! But rather than preventing whiplash, these vision-blockers have caused far more woe than they've prevented-- it's much more difficult to spot an adjacent car coming up beside (or behind) you.

 

Remember the first time you sat in a car equipped with the new, oversized headrests, cowering menacingly behind you? You couldn't help thinking..."What in the *&%$** are these stupid things supposed to do ? Prevent whiplash?  NO WAY...especially if  if some drunk rear-ends me!"

And from the back, all headrest-equipped cars now looked as if they were occupied by two giant-headed, alien passengers. And worse, anytime you found yourself in back of a stalled-out car, you could no longer discern if the car had a driver, or what was going on inside.

 

Next, it was the loss of the ultra-cool side-vent windows. Everybody remembers 'em--everybody misses them. They opened up diagonally, delivering nice, breezy air...cooling and refreshing. And the faster the car went, the bigger the blast of fresh air. But in 1969 (who's ever stupid idea it was) side-vent windows disappeared from all the new cars. The convenience of  easy, fresh-air circulation in the car was now gone.

And then...ta-da!  The 1970's marked the dawning of buzzer- flasher -warning light civilization. Driving annoyance was now taken to a much higher level.

 

Upon opening the drivers' door...buz-z-z..."you left the key in, dummy," said the buzzer to the driver. Or if you didn't buckle your seat belt...buzzzzzz...or...e--e-e-e-e-e! And what was worse, the buzzer would be persistent-- it would not silence itself until you obeyed. And if the car had a low battery, it would ring even more annoyingly (o-o-o-o-o), like it needed a transplant operation or something.

But this time drivers fought back. They would go to their old reliable mechanic, at the old reliable gas station (yes--they actually fixed your car back then); and he would REMOVE the wire to the goddarn buzzer.

 

But then auto manufactures wised up. Because "too many lives were being lost," the car engineers wired them into the horn-harness assembly. So now, you couldn't foil the seat belt and ignition buzzers anymore-- and driving in America has never been the same.

Next it was unleaded gas. Then the catalytic converter. Sure, they made the air a lot cleaner; but V-8 cars were no longer fun to drive. Now, you could no longer  impress anyone by jamming on the gas and produce that ear-splitting, masculine sound of peeling tires.

 

Unleaded gas had all the punch of lighter fluid; and the customary fun of peelin' out of Mickey-D's, or Arby's-- or laying a strip in front of your high school-- faded off into the environmental sunset.

It's no wonder the young drivers are ALWAYS at home playing video games; today's cars are sterile, and for travel only.

The old cars had room. They had cache'. Everyone knew you by what kind of car you drove. You didn’t even need a destination, because just driving around and cruising was such fun.

Well now; it's back to reality: today's American cars are no fun. They're not even cars now-- they're basically a truck disguised as an s.u.v. Of course, they're safer than a Soviet tank-- IF you crash-- but that's where it all ends.

 

But what if you're never in a violent crash? Oh well... it's the THOUGHT of being safe that's worth it . Yes safety...saving lives...preventing deaths-- it’s all about doing good; doing what's right. Everything must now exist for the sake of feeling safe. Nowadays, safety counts for everything.

But stop and think... just HOW dangerous were those, "unsafe", super-fun cars of the old days? Do we know of anyone who survived the peril of living through that terrible, UNSAFE era, when there were no seat belts, no buzzers, no flashing dash lights, no head restraints, air bags, etc?

 

Sure, the cars of today are safe, but nobody really likes 'em. And that's why GM and the American auto industry have been going down the tubes and approaching extinction.

Gasoline runs in our veins.  We're like no other country. Your car is practically your life. It involves nearly everything. Besides walking (in good weather), you can do nothing-- or go anywhere-- without driving. Everything --our economy, our jobs-- is in some way (or some fashion) tied into either driving, or the automobile.

 But now that GM & Chrysler have declared bankruptcy, what then? 

 

This means less work for auto parts makers; less work for heavy industry; less money for  local economies. Laid-off auto workers can no longer eat out, deposit a weekly paycheck into the bank, buy a new shirt or shoes, or even see a movie at a local theater-- or even contribute to the church. They will stay at home now --watch TV-- and collect "compensation".

And this is what Congress has been doing to our entire economy for the last 40 years; making our lives more annoying, more miserable, less fun, less exciting-- but were so much safer!

 

Apparently, we’ve gone off the road, and have traded our semi-affluent, middle class lifestyles for a rust belt economy--basically because today's cars must be "made safe." This is on par with the stupidity of passing laws that make our offshore (and Alaskan) oil development illegal-- because drilling "harms" the environment.

 

So why don't we just pass a law that says auto accidents are illegal? It makes about as much sense. Let's all write in to Washington..."no more illegal auto accidents!"

We are literally being made 'safe to death' by the people on Capitol Hill!

 

You can hire 30 million traffic and highway patrolmen, you can install 25 seat and head restraints into every vehicle- and air bags "for every occasion"-- whatever. But you cannot eliminate traffic accidents unless you outlaw cars!

 

These coconut heads in Washington have done a bang-up job of eliminating most of our high-paying jobs (in one way or another) in the interest of safety!

QUESTION: what built America's middle class after World War II? It was mainly the auto industry, with the millions of jobs it provided, and its unlimited economic-multiplier effect.

 

Oil companies drilled for oil. Gas stations sold gas. Steel mills made steel, which required miners to mine coal, and iron ore producers to ship ore pellets across the Great Lakes to the mills in the East.

This was the "rust belt" back then. It was the economic envy of the world! A person with no formal education could come out of high school and live a life with a secure income and retirement-- all because of the so-called UNSAFE auto industry.

But today, Congress hasn't learned. They won't let the auto companies survive building conventional cars; and once-again, it's for the purpose of safety, and protecting the environment.

After Congress mandates "green" autos, Honda and Toyota will certainly beat us with a better product to the market. WHY? Not because they're better than us, but because they have better ENGINEERS than us.

We cannot our improve our lifestyles unless we improve our economy. And this means manufacturing jobs where we make our own goods, and keep the money earned within our country for reinvestment.

But with the government in control of the auto industry, it will only magnify the mistakes of the past: more regulations; more ugly green cars; and now, the calimitous environmental regulations of the Waxman- Markey "clean air" bill will guarantee the ultimate downfall of the American auto industry-- and the tens of millions of jobs that go with it.



www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Waxman-Markey march to Marxism...Da! Is good for Amerika!

Posted by thekeenobserver on Friday, April 03, 2009 4:18:21 PM

It was the morning of March 1, 1954: Members of the House of Representatives were meeting to discuss immigration policy. Four fanatical Puerto Rican patriots, in favor of statehood for their island, calmly entered the Capitol building, passed through the lobby, and ascended up the stairs to a balcony designated for visitors.
 
Of course this was long before the days of metal detectors and screening searches.
 
As the proceedings went on, the 4 Nationalists unfurled the Puerto Rican flag, then shouted, “Que viva Puerto Rico libre!” Within seconds, astonished members of the House were under attack! Brandishing and aiming their automatic weapons, the four revolutionaries opened fire on the U.S. Congress seated below.

Bullets whistled through the air. Pandemonium erupted in the chamber. Many congressional figures and their staff began screaming in panic as they frantically pushed over one another to get to the exit doors. Others avoided being shot by running to hide underneath tables and behind chairs. It was like Columbine on Capitol Hill.

Before it ended, 30 rounds were fired. Miraculously, only five congressmen were wounded-- none seriously. All government buildings were shut down, and security throughout the city of Washington DC was increased for months afterward.

The revenge-crazed nationalists were at once apprehended. The mass media immediately launched a campaign to demonize the whole Puerto Rican independence movement. The four were ultimately convicted, sentenced to life imprisonment, and Puerto Rico's chances to become the 49th state had been dashed on the rocks of insurrection.
 
It was the most severe act of "taking-it-out-on-Congress" in U.S. history. And of course, the House balcony-observation deck has since been closed.
 
But with the 111th Congress we have seated now, its almost as though many flustered and frustrated Americans would also like to somehow "take it out" on this devil-may-care Congress, for they are indeed (in military parlance) a "target rich environment", a cast of odious anti-Constitutional leftists out to destroy the freedoms of besieged Americans.
 
There there now... calm down-- this is not to imply we lock 'n load and head for DC to attack our legislators, but Americans have had enough, and ironically, our constitution's Founders thought of almost everything but a redress of legislative grievances--i.e. there is no way to "get even" with Congress for making our lives intolerably (and unnecessarily) miserable.
 
But can we afford to wait till 2010 to vote them out? By that time, we may not have a free nation left-- or the cherished lifestyle that goes with it.
 
Now let's go back to September 18, 1948, where Harry Truman addressed a gathering in Dexter, Iowa (the occasion was the "National Plowing Contest"), an occasion used by Mr. Truman to condemn the failure of the Republicans in the 80th Congress to pass a democratic-sponsored farm bill, branding them as the "do nothing Congress"... a name which has stuck ever since in American history.
 
But nowadays, where is the "do-nothing" Congress when we need them?
 
With passage of the $410 billion "Omnibus" spending bill, coming hard on the heels of the $787 billion stimulus package, plus the $700 billion bailout of the financial sector-- along with the prospect of more bailouts, rescues, buy-ins and stimuli to come-- Democrats tell America... "Now is the time to "do everything"... including the approval of our anti-president's 3.4 trillion fiscal travesty of a budget.
 
Nancy Pelosi flatly stated that, "This is what the people of America voted for." But isn't this the worst of the WORST case scenarios-- a radical leftist congress, in control of BOTH houses?

Yes they can!
 
But before we get too negative, let's pretend for a minute and play, "what if?"
 
-What if congress had done nothing for the last 6 months?
-What if they had not passed the TARP, the bailout , the stimulus, the Omnibus, the budget, the "Give" Act, or-- as Mr. Truman had once railed-- had been a "do nothing" Congress?

Answer: just like it always does, our free market economy would be on the way to recovery, and unemployment would be leveling off (or falling), and American taxpayers would NOT be faced with a forever-impossible-to-payback 16 trillion dollar national debt--that's what!
 
But instead, not only are we much deeper in debt, the inflation unleashed by the inevitable borrowing/printing of money will debase (and perhaps ruin) our currency. And to top it off, if we do get a brief recovery, we'll be in for another round of recession, as worldwide interest rates are forced to rise due to the increased competition for credit, to fund Congress' massively misguided amounts of deficit spending.

And we'll undoubtedly be far worse off than we are today. And all for what? Just so these Democrat-socialists can buy the votes to keep themselves in power!

This is the ultimate nightmare scenario, the Freddy Kruger 111th Congress --and it's the ultimate nightmare to which they're exposing all of America.

But why all of a sudden?

It's almost as if this nightmare 111th Congress suddenly emerged from hell, and let loose with an agenda out to eternally punish Americans for sins they did not commit.

We're constantly facing one law after another; one bill after another-- for higher taxes, higher utility bills, outrageous deficit spending, cuts in the military, mandatory government 'volunteer' service, calls for cap 'n trade, forced unionism, no domestic drilling, climate change laws, pollution limits, mandatory abortion, restricting wage limits, breaking contracts, seizing companies, going after opposition groups; ad infinitum ad nauseum.

The horrendous usurping of our language is almost as bad as the legislation itself. And who are these cretins that so brazenly have the nerve to mis-label these fascist, constitution-destroying  measures to abolish our freedoms?

Mandatory abortion is labeled "Freedom of Choice"; mandatory unionism is labeled the "Employee Free Choice Act. Laws to abolish conservative talk radio are labeled the "Fairneess Doctrine". "Voluntary"/mandatory service for our youth is labeled the "Give" Act.

And there's no end! No end to these laws that Americans do not want, are not asking for, and ironically, resemble measures that are more reminiscent of 1935 Soviet Union than 2009 in the United States of America.

And with the cast of congressional characters who are behind it all, it's almost like some fictional horror movie where the tail wags the dog, and a handful of Politburo-like soviet planners decides just how much more misery they can heap upon their subjects-- "Da...it is for their own good! The Proletariet are incapable of making these important decisions for themselves...so we must save them in the spirit of good soviet unionism."

This Congress far exceeds the height of arrogance-- they heap upon us a legislative mountain of misery that keeps climbing ever-higher.

A prime example of this soviet style "enslavement planning " is the Waxman-Markey proposal (Henry Waxman, D- California; Edward Markey, D- Massachusetts)--and predictably, it's been labeled with a sickeningly misleading title..." the American Clean Energy and Security act". But it's provisions would more aptly title it, "the Stalinist plan to destroy America's Free Lifestyle Act".

And this is no exaggeration--it will ultimately lead to America's energy insecurity!

These two supremely arrogant congressional coconut heads want an even more onerous and costly attack on fossil fuels (and the kind of cars we'll be forced to drive) than what has already been proposed--as if that weren't bad enough.

Their bill requires that emissions be reduced 20 percent (from 2005 levels) by the year 2020, and that  emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases be reduced roughly 80 percent by 2050...that's right-- EIGHTY PERCENT!

This is beyond madness.

First of all, the proposal says nothing about how this miraculuos 'clean air' transformation shall occur--only that we get there. So this means that despite the fact that we have enough coal to last until the year 2525 (or beyond), we'll need to go to windmills.

This means that although there's nothing on the horizon to replace oil, we'll have to go to the little insect-like electric cars-- cars that Americans do not want, and that we do not really need.

And it's only the beginning:

If this proposal passes, imagine opening your electric bill in a few years: "Ar-r-r-r-gh! That **!#^#** Obama and these democrats! Why in the *!**^#** did I ever vote for them?

And if this proposal passes, imagine driving one of the green cars of the future:

Gosh-DARN-it! This *#*!!*#** flimsy car won't even go up a steep hill with my golf bag in the trunk. Why in the **#**!* did I ever fall for that Obama con-job about saving the environment, and trading in my gasoline car for this little barfbag-- it's the worst! If I get in an accident with this thing, I'm as good as gone!

Ironically, the Waxman-Markey bill emerges at a time when many Americans are rightfully wary of wide-ranging environmental legislation that will not only spike energy costs,  but could cripple industry--and take away JOBS!

A number of lawmakers around the country ( particularly in the Southeast and coal regions) are crying "foul"-- the natural resources and technology to meet it don't yet exist. There is nothing to replace coal. There is nothing to replace oil. There is nothing to replace the internal combustion engine.

Yet Markey and Waxman must answer to their environmental lobby cohorts, (i.e. Sierra Club, et al) who've contributed gosh knows how much to their campaigns, and for favors they've "earned" from fronting for these fanatical fruitcakes who seek to PERMANENTLY destroy American jobs and lifestyles.

There is no global warming. And climate change is a front for taxing all of America into submission-- a weapon of mass distraction away from America's true problem--these uncontrollable congressional demagogue-crats, who answer to no one-- not even their own consciences!

So what do we do? Term limits? Hardy har! Vote them out? That's even a bigger joke--all of them come from the safest congressional districts in the country. Pelosi from San Francisco; Waxman from Hollywood; and Markey from nearby Boston.

So it's still as it was back in 1954, as the aforementioned Puerto Rican nationalists clearly understood; there was no way for them to get rid of their worst enemies in Washington, other than by taking matters into their own hands-- but they missed.
 
www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Hold your horses, everyone...they'll be time a-plenty to land one of them green jobs of the future"

Posted by thekeenobserver on Thursday, December 11, 2008 8:32:30 PM
 

Whoa-Nellie! The Congressional liberals are getting restless indeed. Like stallions jammed into the starting gate, they are literally champing at the bit waiting for the Obama presidency to blast them off to liberal la-la-land. But mysteriously, their fearless leader has told them to "hold your horses."

Critics of President-elect Barack Obama's transition policy have been rebuffed several times after Obama was quoted saying, "There is only one president at a time. That president is George W. Bush, and he will be president until I'm sworn in on Jan. 20."

Democrats are growing impatient with Barack's refusal to inject himself in the major economic crises confronting the country. But the Chosen One continues to send mixed signals. He has stymied Barney Frank by refusing to weigh in on how to handle the auto bailout; but on the other hand, he has given a very detailed outline about his proposed mega- trillion stimulus package.

 

Obama wants to 'put people to work' on government infrastructure projects. He wants to 'modernize' school and federal buildings. He wants to invest in technologies to create 'green jobs of the future'.

After a private meeting in Washington with former Vice President Al Gore, President-elect Obama held a brief, impromptu press conference: He was quoted as saying, "We have the opportunity now to create jobs all across this country, to re-power America, to redesign how we use energy, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and make us competitive for decades to come, even as we are saving the planet."

TRANSLATION: Were gonna tax all you fossil-fuelers to green oblivion, and all points beyond!

O.K., get ready America for another law...it's Murphy’s prodigal twin brother-- the law of Unintended Consequences. And like Murphy’s law, its a law that cannot be repealed, an unfortunate circumstance for all indeed.

Let take a close look at the thought process behind this law. You start with some liberal do-gooder intention; oh, something noble, like saving the planet; rolling back the oceans; and changing the climate back "to what it was"...you know, something simple. Then you make a big announcement. Then you gather in all the accolades, take a bow, and the law passes with flying colors. And then rather ingloriously, everything LITERALLY crashes around it after it's been in effect for about 3-5 years down the road.

Evidence of this law abounds everywhere. To illustrate, lets rewind back to an example of this exact situation in Michigan last year, and  hear what Governor Jennifer Granholm (a member of Obama's economic advisory team) had to say in her, "Jobs Today, Jobs of Tomorrow" speech to the Michigan Chamber of Commerce:

 

(quote)..."Let me talk for a moment about one sector that has blockbuster potential for Michigan: Alternative energy. Because of the need to reduce global warming and end our dependence on expensive foreign oil, the renewable energy and energy efficiency industries will create millions of good paying jobs. I say we will win these jobs for Michigan, and replace the lost manufacturing jobs with a whole new, growing sector..."(unquote).


Uh-oh. Barack Obama is sounding just like Governor Granholm, trumpeting the millions of green jobs of the future. Michigan has only gotten much worse since Granholm delivered her hollow promise. Michigan leads the nation with 9% unemployment, high taxes, and everyone looking to head for greener pastures, but cannot sell their houses to escape the woe. It's exactly what happens to a state's economy when people wait for the green jobs of the future to materialize.

 

But oh boy, it sure sounds promising. And what a great election slogan! Who wouldn’t want one of the green jobs of the future? But of what green jobs are Granholm and Obama referring to? Green is a nice color, favored by all. Everyone knows what green stands for. But can ANYONE actually define a green job of the future? Yup, the silence is deafening! 

What if you walked into your local state unemployment office, sat down with a case worker, and declared..."I'm here to apply for one of the green jobs of the future!". You'd probably be escorted out by the security guard after the case worker got up and moved away from where you were sitting.

Or, what if you submitted your resume to the local power company, trumpeting your qualifications, and then at the bottom, you stated..."my objective is to obtain one of the green jobs of the future". The H.R officer reading it would probably buzz the entire floor and invite them all in for a group laugh. You'd certainly be mocked in the break room. They'd probably even write you back and tell you, "yes...come in for an interview'', so they could meet you in person; and for sure, nobody in the department would miss work the day you were scheduled. 

But why would it be funny to human resource people in the first place? Simple. Everybody knows there is no DEMAND from anywhere in the private sector for providing green jobs of the future! NONE. Why? Because there are no problems in our energy pipelines to begin with.

Consider the average homeowner, who thinks..."what's wrong with the way it is now? I turn on my furnace...set the thermostat, and nice, warm, clean heat comes out of my baseboards in my house. Then I pay my utility bills once a month. I don't see any problem with that."

Consider the average auto owner: "I start my car in the morning. It's reliable in the summer and winter. It gets 20-40 mpg. And once in a while, I change the oil and replace the tires. I don't see any problem with that."

Or consider the average utility company. "We send out our power to our communities. We take delivery of our gas/coal from the energy providers. And according to the costs for commodities , we adjust bills to our customers periodically by applying for rate changes through our state PUCO. We don't have any problems with our current system."

Now here comes Barack on his green high horse, riding in with his environmental posse, trying to solve a problem that does not even exist. So where will that take us in 3-5 years?


Lets now play hypothetical: President Obama is in his second term; and let's pretend he's magically infused our entire society with those green jobs, and all of his environmental directives of the future.

 

First, lets revisit our homeowner who's opening up his mail. "Oh my gawd! Another hike in my electric bill! What's wrong with that *#^!^*!**#!* Obama, with all these environmental taxes he keeps imposing on our utilities? Jeez, thing's were OK before he got in".

 

Now, lets revisit our auto owner, who's also opening up his mail...."Oh my gosh, look at this electric bill!  Ugh! That *!*^#*!#*! electric car I bought because of Obama, is the worst! I have to use up all my electricity charging up that ugly thing for 6 hours, and it only takes me 40 miles. I wish I would have kept my gasoline car, instead of falling for Obama's tax deduction to trade it in on this stupid thing that I'm stuck with for now".

 

And the utility companies? Devastated. Crippling environmental regulations. Crippling taxes and penalties for excess emissions. Stock holders decimated. Dividend checks shrunk down to practically zilcho. Communities suffer because the job losses, higher municipal operating costs, and the onerous regulations now prevent the utility companies from supporting local charities; and citizens of the community are furious with the local leaders who all were urging everyone to vote for Obama.

 

But the environmentalists will get their way in the Obama administration. The Sierra Club will get their day in court, and push the green agenda on a society that wants no part of the supposed threat of global warming...er, climate change . And why was 'global warming' morphed recently into 'climate change'? Because even the staunchest supporters know they need wiggle room-- there are too many unanswered questions.


First, anyone with half an ounce of common sense knows it's impossible to have warmer winters and "global" warming within the Arctic circle at the North Pole, but freezing terrible winters in the temperate zone of the United States, which is not that many degrees of latitude farther south. But according to these environmental marxists, should we just change it to regional global warming? No? But still, they continue to force this climate change-pseudo religion upon us. Slick indeed! After all, it was Lenin who first wrote: "The big lie, when told often enough, becomes the truth". (and were not talking about John Lennon either). It was Vladimir, that communist dude. Remember him?

But lets re-introduce common sense. How big is the earth's atmosphere? (Infinite in size). Now how many actual vehicles burning gas and oil are there in the world? (a finite number). So, what if you drove every SUV in the world up to the north pole and ran them at full speed for the entire winter? How much warmer would the Arctic Circle get as a result? This is laughable. But according to these climate-changers, they actually have millions of people believing that fossil fuel burning can warm the earth.

There cannot be any regional global warming! Yes; there is climate change...spring to summer, and fall to winter. But that's what they'll call it for now. And political correctness will support it.

 

But it all goes back to the liberal idealism of, "government should always be expanding, and always seeking change". Why? Because the liberals are smarter and the masses are inferior. And because, “its the right thing to do”. Yes...liberals always feel they have the moral authority to change the lives of the poor huddled masses for the better; but they always end up making them worse because of the law of Unintended Consequences. And despite all evidence to the contrary...they’ll never learn.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Is it the economy? No...it's the environment, stupid!"

Posted by thekeenobserver on Wednesday, December 03, 2008 9:46:46 PM

All hiel on Capitol Hill! Yesterday, prime minister Nancy-nazi-Pelosi, read aloud her solemn decree of obedience to the auto industry executives in front of the media..."Thou shalt build the green cars of the future or ye shalt not receive thy remittance from capitol hill!"... And the auto executives knew THIS was coming. But they we're in the process of driving to D.C. from Detroit in hybrid cars, which made the situation all the more polyester in meaning.

But the big question hanging in the balance was not "would they get the bailout"? No; the real concern..." would all three hybrid cars manage to make the ten hour trip without breaking down somewhere?

But most Americans took little note of the event. Oh yes, they're aware that the auto industry is in trouble; Chrysler's on the ropes; Ford is still breathing...and GM is on life support, and needs an immediate $4 billion in walking around money by years end, or it's bye-bye assembly lines, and hello ch. 13, ch 7, ch 11, and any other chapters the bankruptcy lawyers care to toss in.

But dear Americans out there, this news concerns YOU a lot more than Pelosi, the "'Big 3", or the financial bailout. Once again, just like with the recent elections, Americans are content to assimilate little bits 'n pieces here 'n there about news stories that will affect their lifestyles, money, and satisfaction with life in general; but they'll absorb every last bit of news about  their favorite team or soap opera like they were going for a doctorate degree.

Pay attention now...LISTEN UP! What Nancy Pelosi said (or read) yesterday is going to begin to affect you PERSONALLY in the next 2-3-4-5 years, and you will notice it immediately, and will probably HATE IT! What the Nazi was saying, in effect, was that Congress (ahem, ahem) is demanding the auto makers go GREEN.

Ai-yee! Is it starting to sink in? We are all soon going to be driving in, riding around in , or getting hit (maimed/killed) by the green cars of the future! HOW, you axe? Just read on.

Don't we all remember the FIRST time Detroit added something onto our new cars (mandated by Congress-or Ralph Nader) that absolutely drove one into a  passionate fit of anger? Oh man...where do we start?

First it was seat belts in the mid 60's cars. Nobody wore 'em ...they were a little more than some loosely-fastened lap restraint, something like they'd put on you at a kiddie ride; and even when you were a kid you thought to yourself..."is this little strappy-crappy thing supposed to keep me from getting hurt? Ha! why'd they even bother? If the ride DID tip over, this thing wouldn’t do nothin!"

Actually the appearance of the wider, little strappy things in our cars was a federal mandate REQUIRING that all auto manufactures back then had to install restraints to save lives. Great. And so, did that set the trend? Well have to ask Ralph Nader; maybe when he was a little kid he got his idea from some kiddie ride that he obvoiusly didnt think much of. In any event, the world has never been the same.

Back in the 60's, once the seat belt mandate became law for all 3 manufacturers, there was no looking back.

Next it was those incredibly stupid front-passenger head restraints. Aaargh...the first time you spotted one, or sat in a car with one cowering menancingly behind you, you couldn't help thinking..."WHAT in the world is this stupid thing supposed to do ? Prevent whiplash? HOW? No way this thing's gonna do anything if some drunk rear-ends you...hmmmm.

And worse, from the back, all cars now looked as if they were occupied by two giant-headed, alien-shaped passengers. So now, if some hapless car was stalled at a red light ahead, you would feel incredibly stupid after honking and swearing at the car in front you, but then when you finally got around the stalled car, you thought ..oh-uh-duh...nobody home in that car! But because of the stupid, alien head restraints, how would you know?

Next it was the loss of the ultra-cool (literally) side vent windows. Everybody remembers 'em...everybody misses them. You could open them up slantways (diagonally) and have instant air; nice breezy air,cooling and refreshing, and it was neat! The faster the car went, the bigger the blast! Then, in 1969, who's ever idea it was, they disappeared from all the new cars that year...gone. Yes the cool breeze was gone...the fresh air circulation in the car was gone.

Smokers were now a grave nuisance; and were commanded to "CRACK YOUR WINDOW OPEN, DAMMIT!" Tsk tsk . This is one idea they should bring back. But sales of air conditioned cars in the north would drop dramatically.

And then...ta-da! The 70's marked the dawn of buzzer-flasher-warning light civilization. Now the annoying was taken to a much higher level! Open the drivers door...buzzz, "you left the key in, stupid," said the buzzer to the driver...didn't buckle you seat belt? Buzzzzzz! or e--e-e-e-e-e! And what was worse, the buzzer would be persistent, it would not silence itself until you obeyed! And if the car had a low battery, it would ring even more annoyingly, like it needed a transplant operation or something.

But this time drivers fought back. You could go to your old reliable mechanic at your old reliable gas station (yes--they actually fixed your car there back then) and get him to REMOVE the wire to the goddarn buzzer. But then auto manufactures wised up quickly. Too many lives were being lost because seat belt buzzer disablements were jacking up insurance premiums; so the electrical engineers wired them into the horn-harness assembly. So now, instead of the customary, "first thing to do with your new car," was no longer an option...you couldn't foil the seat belt and ignition buzzers anymore; and drivers in America have never been the same.

Next it was unleaded gas. Then the catalytic converter. Sure--they made the air a lot cleaner, but V-8 cars were no longer fun to drive. The unleaded gas had all the punch of charcoal starter in your tank, and the customary fun of peelin' out of Mickey-D's or Arby's, or laying a strip in front of your high school, faded off into the environmental sunset.

It's no wonder the young drivers are ALWAYS at home playing videogames; today's cars are now sterile, and for travel only.

Back then, cars were it. They were gorgeous; even the cheaper economy models resembled mini versions of their big brothers. They had shiny chrome, high compression engines; unbelievably muscular-sounding dual exhausts. You could impress anyone by jamming on the gas, and produce that ear splitting, masculine sound of peeling tires on the pavement. If you pulled up to someone at a stop light, the resulting excitement of a heart-pounding drag-race would be something remembered for the rest of your life.

The old cars had room; you could go to the drive in. They had cache. Everyone knew you back then by what car you drove. You didn’t even need to go anywhere in particular, because just driving around in them and riding in them was fun!

And not only did the cars have sex appeal; they had SENSE appeal. They looked awesome. They sounded awesome, felt powerful, and were exciting to drive. The old crummy AM radios even sounded great because the music back then was awesome. They even smelled awesome. Everybody always liked getting in new cars at the showrooms back then, because they had that SMELL. And whatever that was, they should use it now for perfume or cologne, or air freshener; 'cause a smell like that is something you never forget.

Well now; it's back to reality, Today's cars are no fun. They're not even cars now; they're s.u.v. truck disguises. Sure they're safer than a Soviet tank if you crash, but that's where it ends. So if your never in a violent car crash, then?..oh well... it's the THOUGHT of the safety that's worth it . Yes safety--saving lives...preventing deaths …it’s all about doing good; doing what's right...saving something for the sake of safety. Yes safety.

So stop a second; think...just how dangerous were those, unsafe, super-fun cars of the old days back then? Do we know of any one who might have survived after driving all through that UNSAFE era, when there were no seat belts, no buzzers, no red lights blinking...no head restraints etc. Sure the cars of today are safe, but nobody really likes 'em. And that's WHY the American economy has been going down the tubes ever so slowly, but surely.

Now think about this: is there is any other culture tied into the auto like America? Gasoline runs in our veins.  We're like no other country. Your car is practically your life. It involves nearly everything! Besides walking a little (in good weather), you can do nothing or go nowhere without driving.
 
Everything --our economy, our jobs, our family's and friend's jobs-- is in some way or in some fashion tied into either driving, or the automobile. People work at the "drive thru", people work at restaurants, theaters, bars, retail stores, and banks...everywhere you can imagine. And when people can't drive there; these places suffer.
 
How about the people working in manufacturing? If its metallic or plastic-related, its probably in some way auto-related.

Whenever an auto job was lost in the USA, it resulted in an unlimited negative economic multiplier effect. This meant less work for autoparts makers; less work for metal producers; less work for  local economies everywhere because that laid off auto worker can no longer eat out, deposit a weekly paycheck into the bank, buy a new shirt or shoes, or even see a movie at a local theater, or contribute as much to the church. He has to stay home now, watch TV, and collect "compensation".

This is realty! And this is what Congress has been doing to our entire country for the last 40 years... making our lives more annoying, more miserable, less fun, less exciting, and much-much worse off financially! BUT HEY..HO .. were so  much safer now! Cars are safer...driving into crashes is safer.

Yes America—we’ve traded our semi-affluent middle class lifestyles for a rust belt economy, all because it's now so much safer to get into an auto crash! How **!**!*# stupid! It's stupidity on steroids. This is on par with the stupidity of leaving all of our offshore and Alaskan oil in the ground, and instead buying it from OPEC. And it's also apparently safer to do that, according to Nazi Pelosi, who has decreed, in so many words, that offshore oil is illegal! So why don't we just pass a law that says auto accidents are illegal? It makes about as much sense. Let's all write in to Washington..."no more illegal auto accidents!"

We are literally being made 'safe to death' by these people on Capitol Hill! You can hire 30 million traffic and highway patrolmen, you can install 25 seat and head restraints in every vehicle- whatever--but you cannot eliminate traffic accidents unless you outlaw cars! But these coconut heads in Washington have done a bang-up job of eliminating most of our high paying jobs in one way or another.

QUESTION: what built America's middle class after World War II? It was mainly the auto industry, with the millions of jobs it provided, and the unlimited multiplier effect. Oil companies drilled for oil. Gas stations sold gas. Steel mills made steel, which required miners to mine coal, and iron ore producers to ship ore pellets across all the t Great Lakes to the mills in the east.

Yes, this was the "rust belt" back then. It was the economic envy of the world! A person with no formal education could come out of high school and live a life with a secure income and retirement, all because of the so-called UNSAFE auto industry.

But today, Congress hasn't learned. They won't let the auto companies survive building conventional cars--in the interest of safety again.

But this time, it's the environment, stupid! All that dirty gasoline and oil! Yes... millions of people out there-- coughing, wheezing, choking, gasping for clean air --if we don't start manufacturing plastic, little amoeba-like green cars now! And never mind all the millions of oil workers, coal workers, steelworkers, metal fabricators, gas stations, and the hundreds of thousands of others who'll lose their jobs and be miserable. But hey now...we'll have nice, clean, sparkling, safe air to breathe, and in 20 years, we'll be a third world, economically bankrupt country, with a citizenry riding around on bicycles to get to the store...but they'll be breathing healthy air.

Why would we want to go around this block again? If Congress mandates green autos, Honda and Toyota will certainly beat us with a better product to the market. WHY? Not because they're better than us, but because they have better engineers than us.

Today American kids consider being studious as someone who really knows how to google up an answer. Great.  But can you google a complex answer to a physics question? Or a complex calculus problem? Engineering is about problem-solving.  The curriculum is not for indolent American kids, because they have lost their "study ethic". They shun tough subjects, like math and science..."oh those are for nerds and geeks". They text the answers to test questions to each other. School is not for learning; it's for designer clothes and socializing.

44% of Asian students study engineering in college, vs. 6% of Americans. Admit it... we will never catch up to them in this generation because it's a lost generation as far as academics are concerned.

And if the politics doesn't change, and they keep dumbing down the schools, it'll only get much worse. And in the future the Asians will leave us vulnerable, and perilously dependent on them for almost everything. And we're getting closer to that everyday. Yet Americans returned 87% of their congressional incumbents in the November election. Our national ship of State has become a ship of fools.

It's time to get real about our lives in America. And we will never improve our lifestyles until we improve our economy. And this means manufacturing jobs-- we must make our own goods, earn this money for our selves, and keep it in this country for reinvestment.

And buying a foreign car is only part of the problem. It's the attitude (stupid) that must change. We have to change our attitude to politics. If Americans insist on neglecting what's going on in Capitol Hill on a day-to-day basis, then the aristo-crats in Washington will only laugh all the harder as they continue to legislate more misery upon us, and line their pockets with lobbyist lavishments and campaign contributions.

So now-- what is so vitally important about green cars? Why the urgency? Safety? The Sacred Environment? No, it's because of the environmental lobby, and all the companies who'll benefit from the sea change to these little, hideous (and dangerously quiet) cars of the future! They're about as loud as a wheelchair! You cannot hear them coming! They can't go past 40 miles without a 6-hour recharge. Instead of running out of gas, we'll be worrying, and measuring, and calculating-- "uh gee.. will this thing get me home? Instead of watching the gas guage occasionally, we will now be watching a "power resevoir" guage CONTINUOUSLY.
 
And even hybrid cars (let alone all electric ones) are notoriously unreliable! They have so many moving, whirring, spinning, complex parts and assemblies that they often need service; they're a nightmare to fix, and their cost is prohibitive.
 
And electric cars have no torque: if your batteries are low, you WILL slow down going up a steep hill. But will Nancy Pelosi ever have to drive one? No way. She'll be too busy traveling around in her government issued, VIP, co2-emitting  private jet, that holds her entire entourage of family and friends. And she charges it all to us, the taxpayers!

And is Nazi Pelosi suffering about this? How much does she stand to benefit from campaign contributions from the environmental lobby?

And how about House democrat Henry Waxman, who recently won an important chairmanship from Michigan's John Dingell, a loyal, trustworthy backer of the auto industry. Waxman, 69, won a bruising intra-party battle with Dingell, a staunch supporter of conventional vehicles. These two have long been bitter rivals over clean air policy, and the pace at which to limit greenhouse gasses. And the chairmanship of The Energy and Commerce panel is one of the most important and influential House positions to hold.

But we've saved the best for last! Waxman is from clean-air, economically-bankrupt California, and half of his district encompasses Hollywood! Do you think he might be just a little on the liberal side in his outlook? Representative Henry Waxman believes every American has a right to know basic information about environmental hazards. Yes it's Henry Waxman to the wescue. He's got the green light now; he'll be able to save tens of millions of Americans from the  perilous, deadly, kryptonite-like emissions of carbon dioxide...a proven environmental non-hazard!

Henry Waxman has about a seventh grade level of science comprehension. And by today's standard--let's make that 2nd grade. Waxman is of the belief that C02, carbon dioxide (which is one carbon atom in a co-valent bond with 2 oxygen atoms) is a poisonous gas. Of course ALL plant life would die if Waxman had his way, because plants "inhale" co2, and 'exhale' 02 (oxygen) in the life-sustaining process of photosynthesis. But Waxman knows he must save lives, or else lose the environmental lobby and all the campaign contributions and lobbying perks that go with it.

However, this is only the beginning. Waxman wants conventional cars to get 50 miles to the gallon, something nearly impossible in the laws of Newtonian physics (Energy=Mass x Force). So unless we're talking about an all-aluminum /titanium basic car body, with the equivalent of a lawnmower engine, to push the mass forward with sufficient inertia to reach conventional speeds, basically it would have to structurally resemble a Fred Flintstone yabba-dabba type car to achieve such unrealistically high mileage. This would stymie any auto engineer with a conundrum of how to combine sturdiness, practicality, rigidity, and high mileage.
 
Even the Asians would laugh Waxman out of their country if he tried to promote something as far-fetched like that over there.

But Waxman won't be deterred...he knows his limits (they are virtually NIL) and he's controlling the very fate (with Pelosi) of Americans for generations to come! This man single handedly has the power to author the most damaging (but environmentally sound) auto legislation in the history of the industry! Yes; ain't it grand! Henry Waxman to our wescue again with his wonderful enviwonmental wegulations. Oh happy days Lord --we are saved!

Now once he's done burdening the entire America auto industry with ever more complex regulations, then what? You guessed it... what's left of the rustbelt will now go rotten; and what's left of the auto industry will go to the South, where some of those discharged workers will be hired by Honda and Toyota, to handle the huge influx of new business they reap as a result of the Waxman-Pelosi axis of evil environmentalism...all in the name of saving lives, and losing ouir jobs and the rest of the economy that goes with it!

Until Americans can achieve engineering par with the Asians, they'll run circles around us because they can innovate faster/better than Americans. But the Big 3 can compete in conventional autos because it's less about innovation, and more about improvement and refinements.

But Americans will continue to ignore all this, shrug their shoulders, and go about their "merry" ways, worrying about the economy, but ignoring everything that's happening on Capitol Hill, because it doesn't directly affect them. "Nosiree! Not me! That doesn't affect MY job".

So sleep soundly tonight America, since nothing other than sports or TV, directly affects you. Be confident that Nancy Pelosi will come to the rescue of the auto industry with a bailout, and it'll be Henry Waxman wescuing all the rest of us from our poison air, so we can all hope to survive longer and breathe freely someday again! In the meantime well just all have to somehow live through it.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »