G W Bush...

[85MH325]

Close, Eric, but no cigar. I'm not justifying the Excursion as an environmentalist's dream wagon, not by a long shot. It's big and it uses fuel, no argument there. And I'm not trying to portray myself as a far-left, touch nothing environmentalist. It's not the choice of vehicle thats the problem, it's the pursuit of the hobby that's entirely wasteful from an environmental standpoint. NONE of us NEEDS an Airstream or a 6000+lb truck to pull it to go 'camping'. But, since we've all chosen that path of wretched excess in our unbridled pursuit of capitalism and bourgeois lifestyle, it makes sense to me to take the least harmful alternative in so doing. My point is that I considered the options when I spent my money and tried to take the least harmful course from the choices available at the time.

Roger

[Silvertwinkie]

Originally Posted by 85MH325

Close, Eric, but no cigar. I'm not justifying the Excursion as an environmentalist's dream wagon, not by a long shot. It's big and it uses fuel, no argument there. And I'm not trying to portray myself as a far-left, touch nothing environmentalist. It's not the choice of vehicle thats the problem, it's the pursuit of the hobby that's entirely wasteful from an environmental standpoint. NONE of us NEEDS an Airstream or a 6000+lb truck to pull it to go 'camping'. But, since we've all chosen that path of wretched excess in our unbridled pursuit of capitalism and bourgeois lifestyle, it makes sense to me to take the least harmful alternative in so doing. My point is that I considered the options when I spent my money and tried to take the least harmful course from the choices available at the time.

Roger

Still doesn't win either of us a pin for being environmentalists on ANY level which is what your initial statement said. "I consider myself an environmentalist." In fact you and I are both environmentalists of convenience which I would much more agree with, which only contributes to the problems we are talking about. Even a slight environmentalist would have made different choices (myself included). If you think that either of our trucks are the least harmful course, think again. The only way I'd agree is if one or both ran on hydrogen. Then, I'd be the first to say, YOU DA MAN (in more than the law enforcement sense). Until then, they are both belching pigs on the road contributing to the problems we are talking about. If for some reason thinking your truck is the least harmful course and makes you sleep better at night, I am very happy for you, but I'm not about to pat myself on the back for only getting the 6.0L compared to the 8.1L and say it was the least harmful.

[85MH325]

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

Still doesn't win either of us a pin for being environmentalists which is what your initial statement said. "I consider myself an environmentalist." In fact you and I are both environmentalists of convenience which I would much more agree with and only contributes to the problems we are talking about. Even a slight environmentalist would have made different choices (myself included).

I guess that depends on your definition of "environmentalism". Dictionary.com says:
en·vi·ron·men·tal·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-vrn-mntl-zm, -vrn-)
n.

1. Advocacy for or work toward protecting the natural environment from destruction or pollution.

Main Entry: en·vi·ron·men·tal·ist
Pronunciation: -&l-&st
Function: noun
1 : an advocate of environmentalism
2 : one concerned about environmental quality especially of the human environment with respect to the control of pollution

Note that it doesn't say "one who is dedicated to total abstinance of changing the environment in negative ways"... I have to think that considering and pursuing the least harmful choices in the paths we choose to take qualifies both of us. IMHO, advocating responsibility in the way we use our resources IS environmentalism.

Roger

[Silvertwinkie]

BTW Rog, you know I have a LOT of respect for you and regardless of agreeing to disagree on this one or more subjects, I still that same amount of respect for you..even if you are a die hard Democrat and proud to call you a friend.

Did I mention the beer needs to be cold.

[Silvertwinkie]

Originally Posted by 85MH325

I guess that depends on your definition of "environmentalism"[*]Advocacy for or work toward protecting the natural environment from destruction or pollution.

an advocate of environmentalism

one concerned about environmental quality especially of the human environment with respect to the control of pollution


Roger

I get it. Makes sense now...if I only am concerned about the environmental quality, then it's totally OK to say dump those lead acid batteries and used motor oil in the garbage can because I am not just concerned, but deeply concerned....Now I know how you are giving yourself the label of environmentalist...since we both do such nobel peace work for the environment each time we start up our trucks be in the burned fuel or all the materials it took and pollution it took to make all the gas our trucks burn. It's that we care that counts. My mistake!

[85MH325]

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

BTW Rog, you know I have a LOT of respect for you and regardless of agreeing to disagree on this one or more subjects, I still that same amount of respect for you..even if you are a die hard Democrat and proud to call you a friend.

Did I mention the beer needs to be cold.

Roger

[silver suz]

Would anyone explain what Bush means by "compassionate conservativism? thanks silver suz.

Ps Twink- I get NO choice from the state of TX allowing gas and oil co.s in getting my property taken over. I have no legal protection. As for moving- not as easy as you think. My house is an extremely well built ecologically clean prison, very difficult to replicate. The few times I go out I have to be on oxygen. And family matters dictate that we live here for at least another 3-4 years. I have put my sons and husband's needs first. Therefore "the escape pod" is a desperate attempt to live close enough to see my family and to allow the 31' sov 1971 to be built properly. But frankily living alone in an RV park with critical health problems, is not my piece of cake. Twink you just do not comprehend how good you have it. You always make fun of me, but "maybe you should walk in my shoes". I mostly have a positive attitude, despite a lot of others with this who commit suicide from the sheer isolation of it.

Roger as always I agree with you. But does this mean I should start practicing with a gun? I was thinking of compound bow and arrows as they smell less! Too bad I don't have depth perception or throwing knives would work. How about a taser. Are they legal? suz And what is ""compassionate conservatism""?

[Silvertwinkie]

I don't belive my comments were that of humor. I don't expect it would be easy to move, but if you can get into a CCD, it leads me to believe that in your situation with wells only feet from your door, that you might in fact be able to find a different situation. I don't see any humor in anyone being forced from their homes and if your family situation dictates that you must stay (which I didn't see in your original post), as you said, you have little choice.

[85MH325]

Originally Posted by silver suz

But does this mean I should start practicing with a gun?

No Suz... that's NOT what I'm advocating. I don't advocate that any citizen become a vigilante. I DO advocate that we, as a society both politically and socially, need to re-evaluate what our position on personal safety as well as the safety of the Union really means to us, and how best we can go about securing both as what we're doing today isn't really working very well.

Roger

[bredlo]

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

I get it. Makes sense now...if I only am concerned about the environmental quality, then it's totally OK to say dump those lead acid batteries and used motor oil in the garbage can because I am not just concerned, but deeply concerned....Now I know how you are giving yourself the label of environmentalist...since we both do such nobel peace work for the environment each time we start up our trucks be in the burned fuel or all the materials it took and pollution it took to make all the gas our trucks burn. It's that we care that counts. My mistake!

Twink, I think it's a step beyond that, and I don't think it's as easy as making a blanket statement that no environmentalist can ever own or ride in an SUV, or they cease to be an environmentalist.

Imagine this:
Your typical 2 car family. But instead of Mom and Dad each driving their own SUV everywhere, maybe there's only one SUV - to pull the Airstream on those several vacations per summer! Maybe the other car is a hybrid, or ULEV sedan for daily driving. Perhaps instead of both cars running everyday, all day, maybe one parent takes the Metra to work. Perhaps the kids rollerblade or bike to school on nice days, rather than being driven every single day. Over time, it may really start to add up, if you multiply that lifestyle by millions of families. Combined with tax incentives for hybrid vehicles, California-style carpool lanes, etc.... even if it doesn't reverse the pollution, won't it conceiveably slow the damage down somewhat?

But the current mindset is that it's not "cool" to walk to school, in fact you're ridiculed if you show up in anything less than the best car your parents can afford to drive (or better yet, buy for their kids!) And it's not as convenient to take the Metra or EL, when the leather seats, A/C and XM radio in your car are so much nicer. It's as if we feel like we must drive our cars as much as we possibly can, or somehow we're not taking full advantage of them.

This new mindset is not all that old.. we've only had these luxuries on this scale since the post-war era. We can go back, even if we'll be kicking and screaming the whole time. It will be a new environmentalism, and it will be something a larger percentage of the population can swallow. We don't all need to live in trees and eat GORP three meals a day to make an appreciable improvement.

[drcharles2]

Who needs the Sunday morning talk shows, the 'beltway boys', the erudite MacLaughlan group when we have the diversity in this forum ?

No opinion of any substance offered here, but I'm reminded of the two Amish boys, who for fun, dropped their trousers, dipped their fannies in sunflower pollen, then mooned a beehive just to see who could run faster while laughing uncontrollably.

My airstream fantasy was, and still remains, to mudwrestle with Paris and Nicole when they pass through our Indiana farm. In the interim, while that fantasy remains on hold, watching re-runs of the Johnny Carson skits the last two days trumps anything else on television in the last ten years, and this thread, assuming civility is maintained and absent inflammation or contamination, will take care of the next ten years. Inexpensive entertainment, keep it going......

Dr. C.

[85MH325]

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

I get it. Makes sense now...if I only am concerned about the environmental quality, then it's totally OK to say dump those lead acid batteries and used motor oil in the garbage can because I am not just concerned, but deeply concerned....Now I know how you are giving yourself the label of environmentalist...since we both do such nobel peace work for the environment each time we start up our trucks be in the burned fuel or all the materials it took and pollution it took to make all the gas our trucks burn. It's that we care that counts. My mistake!

Actually NOT dumping your oil AND properly disposing of your batteries are exactly the kinds of things that responsible folks who are concerned about their environment do. It's foolish to believe that we're going to stop using petro products later this afternoon. We'll continue using lead-acid batteries as long as they're produced cheaply.

And yes, if you bought a truck for your 'needs' that gets 12mpg instead of 9mpg towing, you have acted responsibly. If you feel guilty about the whole idea of the energy expended in towing a trailer, that's another whole issue. And you have to consider how often my Ex or your Sub actually are out polluting. Frankly I WOULD feel guilty as h*ll if I were using my Ex as a daily driver rather than something that gets 25mpg+. I DO feel less guilty about using it when I have need of it, and otherwise leaving it sit.

There are, however many many things that we ought to be concerned about environmentally that we CAN do something about politically... MTBE in ground water in CA, nitrites from animal waste around 'hog factories' in Iowa, etc. etc. etc.

And each of us CAN be responsible about our water usage, what we put into it, and how we dispose of our junk. We can also buy more durable goods that aren't necessarily throw-away when we have the opportunity. There are lots and lots of mundane, every day choices we can make that millions of us making together will have an impact, as Brad pointed out. ELF and such folks are wackos and haven't a chance in hell of gaining their goals. We, however, as regular folks CAN make an impact in a big way. Not the big 'E' for environmentalism, just a whole lot of little "e"s that will help add up at least until some genius comes up with THE answer... (that I DON'T have).

You were right in your earlier post that environmental concerns have to be balanced with economic concerns. Where that balance lies is up for interpretation obviously, but each of us, on our own can contribute significantly each in our own way.

Roger

[85MH325]

Originally Posted by drcharles2

... and this thread, assuming civility is maintained and absent inflammation or contamination, will take care of the next ten years. Inexpensive entertainment, keep it going......

Dr. C.

Glad to oblige...

Roger

[Silvertwinkie]

I think it is that simple in a small way. A vegetarian eats no meat, they just don't eat meat when it suits them. A true veggie doesn't buy leather goods. Those that do eat meat or buy leather goods are only folks that watch what they eat, etc. Though you are on the right path, the fact is that if one truely cares for the environment and call themselves an environmentalist, they care for it period, not just when it suits them, like the alcoholic deciding when it's ok to drink or the drug addict saying when it's ok to do drugs after being through detox. I am sure if you ask folks on the Greenpeace circuit, they'd tell you the same thing. The key word is environmentalist of convenience, not environmentalist, which is my main point. Sure I recycle my cans, bottles, plastics, but I (and others) chew through fossil fuels like there is no tomorrow cause it's what we feel is our part. Several good things for one or two sins...again an individual choice, not governments.

The hybrid situation you describe is not the situation Roger and I are talking about. Though it might slow any issues we've discussed, it has not been proven that it will do anything and moreover, if every one out of ten folks does as you say, in my mind, it does nothing.

In regards to Dr. Charles, it's funny to hear the ol guy say "No opinion of any substance offered" and have him not share any of his vast substance of knowledge with all of us. Mudwrestling? Must be nice living in never, never land, mabe we'll all come vist you (some of us for the second time) next summer and we might get some of that mud wrestling underway.

[Chuck]

C'mon, Twink. you know we don't live in a world of "absolutes". by this reasoning, anyone that wants to be a "true" environmentalist would be forced to kill themselves, in deference to the earth. hey, I'm using O2, DHMO, eating food, giving off CO2, burning fuel for heat. I must do all of these things to live, and they are all arguably detrimental to the environment. I'm willing to bet that the folks over at greenpeace drive cars, too. The clips I've seen of them trying to intercept fishing vessels and so forth out at sea...they weren't using sailboats. no, they were consuming fossil fuels, themselves, in large quantities. By your definition, the only "true" environmentalists on the planet are those that are indigenous primitive tribesmen, living in the outback, or in a rainforest somewhere. and even they occasionally fart, which contributes to the methane problem.

and btw: I believe that someone that uses NO animal products whatsoever, is called a "vegan". It is a rather "extreme" lifestyle, to say the least. The term "vegetarian" is just about diet, and also, isn't always necessarily rooted in any particular ideology.


and BTW: I got you both beat. My Airstream is a recycled model.

[Silvertwinkie]

Originally Posted by chuck

C'mon, Twink. you know we don't live in a world of "absolutes". by this reasoning, anyone that wants to be a "true" environmentalist would be forced to kill themselves, in deference to the earth. hey, I'm using O2, DHMO, eating food, giving off CO2, burning fuel for heat. I must do all of these things to live, and they are all arguably detrimental to the environment. I'm willing to bet that the folks over at greenpeace drive cars, too. The clips I've seen of them trying to intercept fishing vessels and so forth out at sea...they weren't using sailboats. no, they were consuming fossil fuels, themselves, in large quantities. By your definition, the only "true" environmentalists on the planet are those that are indigenous primitive tribesmen, living in the outback, or in a rainforest somewhere. and even they occasionally fart, which contributes to the methane problem.

and btw: I believe that someone that uses NO animal products whatsoever, is called a "vegan". It is a rather "extreme" lifestyle, to say the least. The term "vegetarian" is just about diet, and also, isn't always necessarily rooted in any particular ideology.


and BTW: I got you both beat. My Airstream is a recycled model.

No doubt your're correct on the vegan thing, but you get the point. Folks that think it's cruel to kill animals for food, yet wear leather gym shoes or have leather seats in their cars aren't real or don't seem really concerned to the issue, but reseve the right to stand in front of McDs telling you how bad eating meat is and how McDs is a murderer like Murder King. My point is environmentalist of convenience. No one suggests we are gonna stop fossil fuel overnight, just like McD's Big Mac isn't going anywhere either. However, when one person claims they are an environmentalist in one thread, then when called on it, says well, I'm not really that far left in another post because my SUV can be recycled up to 85% and I only drive it once in a while, has this mongo SUV and mongo coach is an environmentalist of convenience, not a true environmentalist. I'm a total environmentalist of convenience. Why, cause I made a choice not to put solar on my house. I made a choice to get a mongo SUV and 6300lb coach. I made a choice to pollute. I also recyle all my paper, plastic, bottles etc. None of which will help the fuel, greenhouse problems. If I really wanted to be more environmentally sensitive, I'd have a smaller coach, a smaller less abusive SUV, but again as has been suggested, it's a choice....but then don't get all in GW's sandbox saying he's full of $hit and his policies are BS cause my friend, we are all part of the problem. Look from within and act locally, then globally before lobbing accusations about how the current admin doesn't do this and that. That's the bascially it.
For those that think John Kerry would have done better, look a few posts back where I posted some of the questions about his own personal use of fossil fuel wasting machines.

[interstateflyer]

I try to follow environmentally sensitive practices as much as possible. Airstream's Interstate is a great example of an RV that can be both fuel efficient (23 mpg) and practical as an RV, touring coach and daily driver. It is the only RV that I have ever been in that doesn't smell like a toxic waste dump. Airstream's choice of non-off gasing interior materials combined with it's fuel efficient Mercedes diesel make it an environmentally sensible vehicle. Kuddos to Airstream for leading the way.

We still tow our 5,500 pound race trailer (kart racing) with a 10 mpg (towing) 2001 Chevy Tahoe. It is just about to turn 100,000 miles, half of which are towing miles. We'll most likely soon switch to the 23 foot Mercedes Sprinter based Dodge van chassis, the same chassis that Airstream uses for the Interstate and Westfalia. It's 5 cyl diesel motor is quiet and relatively oderless.The Sprinter will be a mobile race shop and will tow a small trailer. It has a 5,000 pound towing capacity and should get around 20 mpg towing, twice that of the Tahoe. A new Tahoe would cost approximately $44,000 as compared to $38,000 for the Sprinter.

We all need to pressure auto manufacturers and government into promoting fuel efficient multi-use vehicles, not only as a response to higher energy costs but for the quality of our environment and our safety. The planet is running out of renewable resources. If we want to continue with our current lifestyles and want to avoid more wars-for-oil we must find different ways to fuel our passions for touring, camping, racing or whatever.

[Hippo]

You know that environmentalist everyday drink water that has fluoride in it. Some even brush their teeth with it to. I have not seen them except in Oregon have any problems with it. The fluoride chemical added to water is an unprocessed, INDUSTRIAL WASTE-PRODUCT from the pollution scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry. My source is www.fluoridealert.org.

[john hd]

suz,

thats easy, I am a compassionate conservative. always have been, always will be. even before W was elected.

i believe that people should always be given the benefit of the doubt first, no matter what race, creed, or any other "lifestyle choice".

i believe people should be given a hand up not a hand out. But, there should always be a safety net for orphans and widows. they deserve it.

take for example: i am the only conservitive on my block, probably in the whole nieghborhood. (our ward voter tallies prove this, i'm one of three that voted for W out of 12,000!)

does this bother me? no.

does it make me like my nieghbors any less? no.

am i the first guy they come to for a jumpstart help with a flat tire, wiring problem, advice, borrow a tool etc.? YES!

just goes to show even us conservitives can co-exist in the minority.

that is compassionate conservitism.

just look at W's nominations for cabinet/courts have you ever seen such a diverse group in our history? nope, not even during the clintonista years!

that also is compassonate conservitism.

get the idea?

john

[Chuck]

what we have here is a "big picture" problem, and you're arguing with small-potatoes examples. whatever I can do myself, as an individual, doesn't amount to a p-hole in the snow, compared to what W (or any other prez) is capable of doing. so yeah, I'll get all in his sandbox without a bit of guilt. OTOH, I got no problem with him driving around in a 1-mpg armored limmo, OR a 747. its required for national security.

we drive much more fuel-efficient and less polluting vehicles today, not because of any choices we made as individual citizens, but because the government forced automakers to make changes. Changes that they fought tooth and nail to avoid, because it might have cost them a few short-term bucks. The clean air act...clean water act....Bad for the economy, too. (translation: bad for big-business's wallet). Thats the sort of thing a president can do. sorry, but I don't think I give up the right to criticize the current administrations environmental policy, just because I have to drive a car to get to work. OR because I own a pickup truck and a camper. (remember, its an "airstream", after all. 30% better gas mileage, yadda yadda yadda ). Nor is becoming a vegan the only valid way to support "animal rights".

by your definition, the only "ists" that exist are the rare, radical extremists. (on any given subject). We all have to act in our own best interest as individuals, at least to some extent. Its governments that can affect real change. Yeah, I have to drive a car to work, but I'd take the train, if there was one. I can't do anything about that myself; but the government can.

which reminds me: while I'm not intimately familiar with Mr. Kerry's personal transportation choices, I do know that his ex-boss, also a former Dem Presidential candidate, was well known for taking the subway to work every day.