Patriotism

[rush22]

These fools don't realize that the environmentalists caused the SUV boom. My family had a seven passenger station wagon when I was growing up. The kind with a "way back." They can't make them anymore! The enviro-whacks successfully raised the standards so that car manufacturers had to start building seven passenger vehicles on a truck chassis, thus the birth of the SUV craze. A vehicle on a truck chassis is allowed to pollute more. If the nuts had left well enough alone, many of those SUV's would be less polluting, large vehicles built on a passenger car chassis.

It doesn't have to do with the chassis. For example, minivans are classified as light trucks, but are built on a K-car chassis. Station wagons are bigger than regular cars and weigh more, and therefore need to more power. More power translates into more pollution so the station wagon could no longer meet the new pollution standards as a passenger car. The argument might be that the station wagon does not weigh enough to be classified as a truck, so, as a passenger car, the pollution control measures were unreasonable, and station wagons disappeared, and heavier vehicles that could be classified as trucks took their place, polluting even more.

The only problem I have with this argument is that I don't know how one gets a car classified, and what the terms of the classification are. These days, based on weight, a station wagon could be classified as a light duty truck, like minivans. The classification does not exclude vehicles based on weight. Maybe the classification is based on 'passenger carrying' or the number of doors or something. I read somewhere on the 'net that minivans have sliding doors because they couldn't have four doors like a car and still be classified as a truck. (Everything I found on the 'net was about emissions standards, and not the classification). So if anyone wants to debunk this, find out what the classification requirements are for light-duty trucks and see if a station wagon could meet those requirements. (and if the classification existed in the 80s)

They still make station wagons. Lots of car companies (Volvo and Subaru come to mind) still make station wagons, and station wagons are comparatively popular in Europe. The only reason they are not more common in the US is because minivan took the market away and people don't think they're 'cool' enough. Now SUVs are taking away the minivan market, because now they're not 'cool' enough.

Maybe it will come full circle. Some of the new smaller SUVs look more like wagons than SUVs and are built on car chassis.

[rush22]

I really hate to point fingers, but several leading causes of pollution in America are big cars. People driving around big SUVs and trucks pollute a lot more than people that drive around smaller cars.

This is total BS. Are you really Ariana Huffington? Show me some data to support it.

scummybear, obviously bigger cars pollute more, everything Peanut said in the response you replied to is true, and doesn't help that 'blind right-winger' stereotype.

The Bush administation has also been increasing pollution by fighting against gas efficiency standards for trucks and SUVs and also allowing more pollution in the air and water. More specifically, he is allowing increased levels of mercury into the water. This aids large corporations, but harms anyone who might happen to drink water. But that's not a lot of people right?


He did no such thing. This is yet another false claim that has no basis in reality. The poison in question was arsenic, and involved minute levels. People are not dying from drinking water. Where is that data?

Yes I read your link about arsenic and found it interesting. I tend to agree that Clinton was being unreasonable when he reduced the acceptable arsenic levels, though I agree in principle that reducing toxic chemicals in water is something to strive for.

However, mercury is another issue. Most liberals don't even know about the whole arsenic thing (I didn't). The issue is that Bush proposed an increase in the levels of acceptable mercury (in air pollution) of 300%, apparently based on a report compiled by major industries. This would not be a problem if the report was correct, and if science has for years been way way off about mercury toxicity, which is highly unlikely as mercury is a well-known toxin.

But even if the accepted safe level of mercury is correct, or at least close to being correct, is mercury that big of a problem? Evidence suggests it is. 45 states have fish consumption advisories due to mercury-levels in fish and pregnant women are told not to eat fish, as mercury causes abnormal brain development and neurological disorders. 600,000 children are born each year with unsafe levels of mercury in their system.

Suffice to say, mercury is toxic, and removing unnaturally occuring mercury from the food-chain can only be beneficial. I'd like to be able to eat fish everyday if I wanted to, not ration it.

The proposal to relax mercury emissions standards is also contradictory to the laws of the Clean Air Act. The EPA estimates that current technology could reduce mercury emissions by 90% by the year 2008, Bush's plan increases emissions by 300%.

[TNRighty]

This is off-topic somewhat, but allow me to comment on the electric hybrid car, an invention many people think is the future to environmental salvation. If you haven't read my previous posts, I work for one of the largest producers of electric power in the country. I feel somewhat qualified to offer an expert opinion on the subject.

Electric powered cars DO NOT reduce overall omissions. The cars themselves are less environmentally hazardous, yet thats only half the story. An electric powered Chevy 350 itself would not emit the same volume of polution as a gas-powered Chevy 350, yet it would CONSUME the same amount of power via the law of conservation of ENERGY. Thats the key. The power that drives an electric vehicle is the same as the power that drives a gas-powered vehicle. It comes from the combustion of fuel, whether the fuel is combusted in an internal engine or in a power plant that converts it to electricity, its all the same. A megawatt that comes through the plug in your garage is no different than a megawatt produced by an internal combustion engine. If everybody in the USA owned a Toyota Prius, they'd plug it in every night to charge the battery. The power-demand produced by overnight car-charging would be met by coal-fired and nuclear power plants that serve the local distributors that deliver electricity to your home. You can go to the gas station and put fuel directly into your car, or you can buy an electric car and let someone else burn the fuel that produces the electricity that powers your car. Its all the same.

The answer lies not in reducing our consumption of energy, but rather in finding cleaner ways in which to produce it.

[BOLO]

Patriotism
\Pa"tri*ot*ism\, n. [Cf. F. patriotisme.] Love of country; devotion to the welfare of one's country; the virtues and actions of a patriot; the passion which inspires one to serve one's country. --Berkley.

Also this:

Patriotism
n : love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it [syn: nationalism]

Nationalism and Patriotism do go hand in hand.
This is not a bad thing, nor should it be.
One nation thinking it is better than another?
Of course.
If you do not believe your Nation better, then you believe it to be less.
Those kinds of feelings are intrinsic to the Human Condition.
Those that would try to make evil of those feelings seek a Utopian condition that would have naught but mind numbed robots for inhabitants. A true Uno Mundo,
Liberal Universe.
It is not feelings of being Superior as a nation that lead to War. The Majority of Wars were fought for either Religious reasons, land disputes, or ethnic superiority.
Without Patriotism no country could survive. It would lapse from dis-interest. There are examples of that in Africa. Many rather than fight for their country just pick up and run. No Patriotism. Soon no country.
Patriotism is what's driving the car in Iraq. Iraq Police, and National Guardsman, die every day, yet they continue to do their jobs, and to recruit.
For those that don't like patriotism. don't be one.
The rest of us will be.

[BOLO]

The problem occurs when people start beleiving that that their country, and the occupants of their country, are fundamentally better than everyone else. This is the fundamental principle behind patriotism, but it is also the fundamental principle behind racism, and many wars. World war two for example, was the result of the German government acting on a deeply patriotic beleive that the German people were the best in the world

A. Most people don't start believing that their country, and the occupants if their country. are fundamentally better than everyone else. You attribute a condition that does not exist in order to bolster your claim.
The large majority of people don't even think that way. They just get on with their lives.
Quit patriotism is the order of the day in most countries.

This is the fundamental principle behind patriotism,

B. this is not a claim you can back up either. Fundamental Principle behind Patriotism is love, and devotion, to ones country.
That does not mean that people use that as a springboard to Rabid Nationalism as evinced by Germany. In the very very large majority of cases it doesn't. More Countries are at peace than at war. The number of countries that actively invaded other countries is less than the total of Countries. Those invasions that took place were not, in large part, based on either Patriotism or Nationalism as much as on Religious or Ethnic purposes with the ocassional border dispute thrown in.

but it is also the fundamental principle behind racism, and many wars

C. Again you attribute to Patriotism a principle that does not exist, then try to apply it to a different subject all together.
That fundamentals exist in Racism is nonsense. The principle belief in Racism is: I am better than you because of my: 1. Heritage 2. Skin Color.
That's all there is to racism. No tie to patriotism is found or delineated.

and many wars

Many? Small word to have such a large meaning. Some Wars? Yes. Many? No.
Wars have been fought for Religious reasons more than for Ethnic, or any other, reasons.
You also conveniently miss a point. Some Wars were fought for very good reasons that had nothing to do with any of the above.
Japan did not initiate a War with us over either nationalism,or patriotism. Indeed the reason was (Where have I heard this before?) OIL !!!
we fought that war to defend ourselves.

World war two for example, was the result of the German government acting on a deeply patriotic believe that the German people were the best in the world

D. That's tired. The reason was not a deeply held belief at all. It was economic despair, and bungling by the Victors of WW I. principally France, their attitude and treatment of the German people. The treaty of Versailles was poorly crafted and enforced with a heavy hand. That led to a maniac using the tool of Nationalistic pride to whip the people into a frenzy, and achieve powers. The Aryan concept was an addition after Hitler saw which one would work better. Ethnic or Patriotism? He succeeded in combining both. However the underlying reasons were economy, and despair.
Skewed moral concerns?
How so? What do you have to back that up. (If you say it is just an opinion, then why did you bother posting)
The very large majority of people, and countries, are at peace. How then do you attribute skewed moral concerns to everyone? That is an individual choice. It has nothing to do with Patriotism, or Nationalism, it has more to do with Mob mentality. If you as an individual make the choice to become part of the mob, you surrender up your individual identity, and adopt the Mobs persona. The reason then become unimportant.
The only desire is what ever the mob desires.
There is nothing wrong with either Patriotism, or Nationalism,
You don't like them? To bad. You want to attribute the problems of the world to them?
You do so on a false premise, and miss the root causes for strife.

[bibster]

This is a reply to Peanut.
I'm Canadian and Canada's patriotism is evident to those people who travel there. All the CND flags eveywhere, the Oh Canada's eveywhere. the problem with Canada's patriotism is that it's driven by its hatred for America. Canadians are so brainwashed by socialism that they don't even realize that they're patriotic and that it is driven by hatred.

Go to www.itstherightway.com for more.

[BOLO]

bibster Posted on: This is a reply to Peanut.
I'm Canadian and Canada's patriotism is evident to those people who travel there. All the CND flags everywhere, the Oh Canada's everywhere. the problem with Canada's patriotism is that it's driven by its hatred for America. Canadians are so brainwashed by socialism that they don't even realize that they're patriotic and that it is driven by hatred.

Glad to meet you bibster. My wife is also a Canadian. She agrees with you. There are others. many good Canadians in Canada when they found out I was American. (They loved my Southern Accent) were eager to make sure I understood they were with us. I saw AmeriCanda Flags flying together everywhere. Those that didn't like America (one of them was the Canadian Border Guard) made sure I knew that also. For them I have no respect and no use. Peanut is one of them, but he is not alone. Neither are you.
BTW I know ALL the words to OH Canada! Thanks to my wife.

[Peanut]

I'm Canadian and Canada's patriotism is evident to those people who travel there. All the CND flags eveywhere, the Oh Canada's eveywhere. the problem with

Canadian Flags IN Canada?! The CANADIAN nationial anthem sung IN Canada?? YOU LIE!!!!

Canadians dont hate America, they just dont want to BE America.

[BOLO]

Canadian Flags IN Canada?! The CANADIAN nationial anthem sung IN Canada?? YOU LIE!!!!

Of course he does nut pan. You know it all, and he knows nothing. There there, settle down girl, it'll be all right. Nasty mans. Telling those diculous lies. Here wipe those tears away. C'mon now stop crying, we don't have that much Kleenex. Honest it will be allright. Maybe MO will censor him for saying that. Good girl, settle down now. There there nut pan easy does it.
No snarling now. No whimpering either.

Canadians dont hate America

Some, like you, do!
But now you knew that didn't you???
You just didn't want the rest of the world to know.
But hey! It's alright we know it. You can admit it now.
And Please, Stop whimpering.

they just dont want to BE America

Yes well, there you go. We (America) definitely do not want to be Canada. Most definitely. Awww! You were trying to hurt our feelings weren't you?
Whimpering again?
That jealousy of America, and Americans, just bites you doesn't it?
Aww! Well if you must cry and whimper then do so.
Mo! Mo! Clean up over here. Got a mop? Whew, it is wet.
Near on a pool. ;D

[Peanut]

Of course he does nut pan. You know it all, and he knows nothing. There there, settle down girl, it'll be all right. Nasty mans. Telling those diculous lies. Here wipe those tears away. C'mon now stop crying, we don't have that much Kleenex. Honest it will be allright. Maybe MO will censor him for saying that. Good girl, settle down now. There there nut pan easy does it.
No snarling now. No whimpering either.

You're an idiot. (Sorry MO, I couldnt help it! Feel free to change idiot any way you like, just please replace it with a word that states my intention )

Some, like you, do!
But now you knew that didn't you
You just didn't want the rest of the world to know.
But hey! It's alright we know it. You can admit it now.
And Please, Stop whimpering.

Who said I do? I know I didn't. I can't hate a country, it's not logical, the country in question didn't do anything wrong. I hate your administration, in my OPINION (which, my dear boy, i am free to have) they have caused a big rift between the states and the rest of the world.

Yes well, there you go. We (America) definitely do not want to be Canada. Most definitely. Awww! You were trying to hurt our feelings weren't you?

Um, that's great? So you dont want to be Canada, good for you. I wasnt trying to hurt anyone's feelings, how do you even preceive that notion from my statement.

So you like America, good for you, I still like Canada better, and for me, that's good enough. I DONT CARE that you DONT like Canada (or me for that matter) - me liking my own bloody country is not a SLAM against you, your royal majesty - IT'S (say it with me now) MY OPINION. Both countries have their goods and bads, I prefer the Good of Canada over that of the Good of America.

[Matter]

I hate your administration, in my OPINION (which, my dear boy, i am free to have) they have caused a big rift between the states and the rest of the world.

So much of a rift, that we have dozens of them in the coalition.

[Peanut]

So much of a rift, that we have dozens of them in the coalition.

The fact that you have other countries fighting you're ill-conceived war, doesnt show alligence to your cause, but greed. Once the states wins the right to all those wonderful new re-building contracts, the few that are left will go to anyone else you "helped".

Money makes the world go round.

[Matter]

The fact that you have other countries fighting you're ill-conceived war, doesnt show alligence to your cause, but greed.

Hmmm. Then explain those 'alienated' countries who participated in the corrupt 'oil for food' program yet rail against the US for being 'greedy'. Hypocritical, no?

Once the states wins the right to all those wonderful new re-building contracts, the few that are left will go to anyone else you "helped".

Two things:

1. Are you contending only US companies have benefitted from the rebuilding?

2. Are you contending that Afghanistan and Iraq were better off under previous regimes?

Want to clarify before I go posting links here.

Money makes the world go round.

This is a newsflash? It works that way under corrupt governments, too.

[rush22]

So much of a rift, that we have dozens of them in the coalition.

A lot of the countries in the coalition did not send troops to Iraq (i.e. Italy), some do not even have armies (i.e. Marshall Islands), some of those countries are the among the most corrupt in the world (i.e. Azerbaijan), some of them are 100% dependent upon the US for defense (i.e. Iceland), etc etc.

[BOLO]

You're an idiot. (Sorry MO, I couldnt help it! Feel free to change idiot any way you like, just please replace it with a word that states my intention

Aww....
Hims mad.
Practicing hypocrisy is hard work isn't it? You have done well though. You are a fully qualified hypocrite.
As to your mental state. Obviously in danger.
Your IQ. None to speak of.
Indeed the word that comes to mind is moron. However that is an insult to all morons. Rather, I think, a better word is jerk. It says so much. Stupid (you are) hypocrite (again you are) unintelligent (once more, you are) no sense common or otherwise, yeah Jerk says it better.
Stupid jerk to put a point on it.

Who said I do? I know I didn't. I can't hate a country, it's not logical, the country in question didn't do anything wrong. I hate your administration, in my OPINION (which, my dear boy, i am free to have) they have caused a big rift between the states and the rest of the world.

You said elsewhere that I knew everything. You were right of course. Something to do with Senate and Intelligence. Want to go read it? Hypocrite?
I make the same assertion you make. Tres Bien?
Apparently it stung. Poor Thang.
Hating a country is logical, happens all the time. You don't like our administration?
You were told on a previous occasion that our Administration represents us therefore it is our country. If you hate the one you hate the other. Were you too stupid to understand this?
do you think you will insist it in to being otherwise. You will not.
You are free? Your welcome.
The States? Would that be the contiguous States? All the States? Including possessions?
Would that be the States of Mexico? Estadas Unidas De Mexico?
How about the States of Bolivia?
How about the State of your mind? (In absentia)

So you like America, good for you, I still like Canada better, and for me, that's good enough. I DONT CARE that you DONT like Canada (or me for that matter) - me liking my own bloody country is not a SLAM against you, your royal majesty - IT'S (say it with me now) MY OPINION. Both countries have their goods and bads, I prefer the Good of Canada over that of the Good of America.

I love America. Great for me. I like it better than anyplace else including Canada. For me that more than just sufficient, it is awesome. You don't care?
Newsflash. I knew that. You liking your own country is a slam against...well...your own country.
Its (repeat after me, aww never mind it's in English) my opinion.
My country has good, yours has bad. It has you doesn't it? ;D
You prefer. Wonderful. Some day when you have a few nano seconds tell all the good things about Canada.