somebody find out where that ape limbaugh first heard this story

8/20/2007 8:09:03 PM

physics is a bitch huh

8/20/2007 8:59:18 PM

are those statistics based on all small cars out? because most small cars on the road pre-date modern safety systems

i mean a random old truck is safer than a some old japanese car, but not safer than a modern small car

[Edited on August 20, 2007 at 9:03 PM. Reason : for example]

8/20/2007 9:01:43 PM

Quote :

"most small cars on the road pre-date modern safety systems"

a lot of old cars were built like tanks

8/20/2007 9:30:22 PM

but a big car (airbags + crumple zones or not) is going to win against an old small car, but is not always safer than a modern small car. i know a couple years ago the mini did better in crash tests against an f150.

8/20/2007 9:39:54 PM

I'm still trying to understand what hooksaw's point is as he makes it relatively ambiguous

8/20/2007 9:57:55 PM

^ Just wow.

Here's another "good" liberal intention gone bad:

The likes of "Hanoi" Jane Fonda, Gloria Steinem, and others will start a radio network for liberal women. It'll be great, right, spreading the liberal message to women across the United States? Taking on Rush Limbaugh et al, right? Except the liberal feminist radio network turned out to be an utter failure:

Quote :

"Radio network for women signs off The national radio network for women was unable to obtain long-term financing, said Jim LaMarca, GreenStone's executive vice president and chief operating officer. Though GreenStone president Susan Ness was in discussions with several venture capital groups, LaMarca said, the deals were not coming through quickly enough. In a conversation with Ness last month, she would not disclose how much money the company had. She would say only that GreenStone had raised funds beyond the initial $5 million round contributed by the founders, who included feminist leader Gloria Steinem, actress Jane Fonda, and Ness [and Rosie O'Donnell]."

Quote :

"Based in Seattle, GreenStone never fully caught on with stations after debuting last September. The network had only managed to sign on 12 markets, as compared with the 25 to 30 the organizers had hoped to achieve by this time. GreenStone had not reached profitability, and had 60,000 listeners nationwide"

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2007/08/20/daily3.html

8/20/2007 10:35:07 PM

i dont think anyone would ever say liberals dont have some great ideas...but as the thread title implies, some of the ideas are awesome in theory but just dont work out in practicality

8/20/2007 10:41:09 PM

^ Bingo. And those are the bad ideas I'm focused on here.

8/20/2007 10:47:05 PM

I don't remember liberals hating on large cars, just SUVs. In fact in the same study you originally posted, they make it clear that:

Quote :

"Pound for pound across vehicle types, cars almost always have lower death rates than pickups or SUVs."

http://www.iihs.org/sr/pdfs/sr4204.pdf
On page 6.

Quote :

"Liberals like small cars, such as hybrids."

Most hybrids are mid-size cars

[Edited on August 20, 2007 at 11:03 PM. Reason : ]

8/20/2007 11:00:12 PM

Quote :

"Most hybrids are mid-size cars"

You have a pretty loose definition of mid-sized. I don't even fit in a Prius

8/20/2007 11:22:19 PM

was the american revolution a liberal or a conservative idea?

8/20/2007 11:38:09 PM

Radically liberal.

8/21/2007 7:26:46 AM

so is hooksaw implying we should ban cars?

because obviously they are dangerous.

maybe we should declare war on korea for making small cars

8/21/2007 7:30:42 AM

hooksaw, are you going to acknowledge that the two lists do nothing to compare small and large vehicles?

If you know anything about cars it's glaringly obvious that the chart does not back up your statements.

Infiniti G35: 3rd best car

Nissan 350Z: 3rd worst car

They're the same cars. Same chassis, same engine, same everything save for styling. Gee, I wonder what other factors could be at play, then?



[Edited on August 21, 2007 at 8:04 AM. Reason : .]

8/21/2007 7:39:55 AM

Quote :

""Results from the IIHS study show that vehicle weight and size factor into the death rate. Generally, the smallest, lightest vehicles have the highest fatality rates in crashes. None of the 15 vehicles on the lowest-fatality list are small, while 11 of 16 on the highest list are small [emphasis added]." hooksaw - (1) I posted an example. (2) Others are supposed to do the same. And (3) you have done nothing but foam."

Yes, you posted an example. Yes, others could do the same to debate/refute you. However, others could ALSO decide to challenge the logic behind your argument. This has already happened, thanks to GrumpyGOP amongst others. I specifically mention Grumpy because, even to a conservative thinker, your argument make precisely ZERO sense.

First off, lets review your logical progression:

1) Liberals encourage people to drive more fuel efficient cars.

2) Small cars are fuel efficient.

3) 11 of the 16 cars with the highest fatality rates are small cars.

4) Therefore, the liberals' good intentions about fuel efficiency are, in fact, encourage people to drive less safe cars. Some might argue liberals are trying to get you killed for the sake of the environment.


Now, I could reject your logic, as GrumpyGOP did, by reminding you that small cars will naturally have higher fatality rates due to accidents with larger vehicles. However, I'd rather refute you more directly.

Now, lets review the fuel efficiency of the cars on the highest fatality rate list as listed by this EXACT website:

Note - The site lists the 2005 average fuel effiency as 24.17 mpg

Chevrolet Blazer (2 door, 2WD) - 16/22mpg (2005 model, city/highway)
Acura RSX - ~25/~34 (2006)
Nissan 350Z - 20 (2007 model, city)
Kia Spectra (hatchback) - 27 (2007, city)
Pontiac Sunfire - 26/36 (2005 model, city/highway)
Kia Rio - 32 (2007, city)
Chevrolet Cavalier (2 door) - 26/36 (2005 model, city/highway)
Mitsubishi Eclipse - 20 (2008, average)
Dodge Neon - 27/34 (2005 model, city/highway)
Pontiac Grand Am (2 door) - 20/29 (2005 model, city/highway)
Chevrolet Cavalier (4 door) - 26/36 (2005 model, city/highway)
Ford Mustang - 19 (2007, average)


Averages (w/city mpg) - 23.4
Averages (w/highway mpg) - 28.5


By these numbers, I reject #2 in your logical progression, which incorrectly assumes that small cars, like those with the highest fatality rates, are fuel efficient. Therefore, your conclusion is dreadfully inaccurate.


Fuck, I spent 45 minutes putting this shit together. Why does refuting idiots take so fucking long...

8/21/2007 12:49:06 PM

the law of unintended consequences does not affiliate itself with any particular political leaning

[Edited on August 21, 2007 at 1:23 PM. Reason : ggfgfgfgf]

8/21/2007 1:23:17 PM

Quote :

"You have a pretty loose definition of mid-sized. I don't even fit in a Prius "

How tall are you? I'm 6'3" and can sit easily in the front seats.

8/21/2007 2:56:21 PM

Every car's growing.

The 2008 Accords are no longer mid-sized according to the EPA


So has hooksaw adopted salisburyboy's techniques? All he does nowadays is drop retarded piles of crap on the soap box, then never directly defends his position.



[Edited on August 21, 2007 at 4:10 PM. Reason : .]

8/21/2007 4:08:03 PM

pretty much.

8/21/2007 4:13:24 PM

His argument was torn to shreds long before I arrived, just wanted to finish the last nail in its coffin.

8/21/2007 4:50:37 PM

Rush didn't tell him how to deal with challenges to his argument, so really it was only a matter of time before he folded.

8/21/2007 5:10:14 PM

Quote :

"was the american revolution a liberal or a conservative idea?"

Depends on your definition of liberal and conservative. Today's conservatives and especially today's liberals would be seen as big-gov't statists to those 18th century revolutionaries.

Today's liberal sees gov't control over our lives as a beneficial thing. The founders created the Constitution in the hopes to keep the gov't under control and not becoming a tyrannical monster.

I would say the American Revolution was more about promoting the ideas of liberty and freedom.. and less about gov't bans on trans-fat, smoking and income redistribution.

[Edited on August 21, 2007 at 5:27 PM. Reason : .]

8/21/2007 5:26:44 PM

I think he was talking about this American Revolution:

8/21/2007 5:30:31 PM

Quote :

"Radically liberal."

Not in the same way "liberal" is defined in this day and age.


FWIW, I need my 5,400 lb four wheel drive Z71 pickup that gets 17 mpg. I put it to good use regularly, pulling my big ass boat that gets about 5 mpg on the water.

8/21/2007 5:43:16 PM

^i like to leave my car running throughout the entire day with the AC running so when i do have to drive somewhere the car is nice and cool (I dont really do this btw)

then when somebody bitches at me i wipe my ass with the constitution and tell them to fuck off...ah, freedom

8/22/2007 12:52:35 AM

freedom to spend an assload on gas.

8/22/2007 8:38:49 AM

freedom to work at a company that gives me gas cards

i havent paid money out of my own pockets for gas more than a couple times in the last few years

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 10:20 AM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 10:19:57 AM

Do you get to drive the company car, too?

8/22/2007 10:34:44 AM

do you?

8/22/2007 10:36:52 AM

Hell yeah I do, but mine is white and goes to soccer games.

8/22/2007 10:40:24 AM

sounds like some govt employee with waaaaay too long of a summer vacation is jealous of my gas cards

8/22/2007 10:40:59 AM

You had better have an American flag plastered somewhere on it as well. You don't want people thinking you are some kind of commie do you?

8/22/2007 10:42:01 AM

^ You don't seem to mind, commie.

8/22/2007 11:02:50 AM

Oh hey, hooksburyboy dropped into one of his threads.

8/22/2007 12:05:43 PM

^ Oh, hey, Boone-Tard offers nothing--as usual.

8/22/2007 12:07:10 PM

So are you going to form a rebuttal, or concede defeat?

8/22/2007 12:11:12 PM

GOSH NOTHING GETS UNDER MY SKIN MORE THAN WHEN SOMEONE ELSE CHOOSES TO DRIVE A CERTAIN VEHICLE

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 12:27 PM. Reason : ]

8/22/2007 12:22:35 PM

Giving a shit about what people drive doesn't upset me.

Good communication skills, chief.

8/22/2007 12:27:05 PM

yeah as long as you personally determine that a vehicle has "a reason to exist"

or have you already forgotten how much of a tree hugging fag you came across as on page 1

Quote :

"If their choices didn't have a direct impact on my well being I wouldn't give a crap"

yet you do give a crap

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 12:29 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 12:28:40 PM

Way to edit that out.

To clarify, I do give a shit about what people drive, as their choices have a direct impact on my well being on multiple levels.

But you write like a 12 year-old, and I was making fun of you. I guess you still don't get it, though.

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 12:31 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 12:30:03 PM

edit what out?

i simply ADDED, not edited

thats so douchebags like yourself wont change the subject from you being a whiny bitch to "OMG NICE GHOST EDIT"

Quote :

"as their choices have a direct impact on my well being on multiple levels"

omg the hummers people drive directly cause global warming! i'm a fucking moron!

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 12:32 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 12:31:31 PM

Quote :

"GOSH NOTHING GETS UNDER MY SKIN MORE THAN WHEN SOMEONE ELSE CHOOSES TO DRIVE A CERTAIN VEHICLE"

Was a complete redo of your original statement.

You said something to the effect of "nothing gets under my skin like when people give a shit about what someone else drives." Well, since I -do- give a shit about what people drive, this clearly wouldn't annoy me, and thus I disagreed with your statement.

8/22/2007 12:33:43 PM

and thats why i edited the statement...so retards like you would know what i meant although i figured you'd realize i was making fun of your retarded opinion

the point is you give a shit about what other people drive because your personal opinion is that it somehow affects you...but you're an idiot

i guess when you have a 3 month vacation you can worry about the most piddly shit ever

btw if you knew how to use carats (^s) i wouldve known which edit you were talking about earlier

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 12:37 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 12:35:16 PM

Quote :

"edit what out? i simply ADDED, not edited"

Quote :

"and thats why i edited the statement...so retards like you would know what i meant although i figured you'd realize i was making fun of your retarded opinion"

8/22/2007 12:36:32 PM

Quote :

"btw if you knew how to use carats (^s) i wouldve known which edit you were talking about earlier"

usually people assume the last post if there are no carats

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 12:37 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 12:37:23 PM

It's not the 8th grade reading level, it's the cover-up.

8/22/2007 12:40:40 PM

why would i expect you to use carats or quotes and point out what you're talking about when you don't even know how to right click and save a file

8/22/2007 12:46:38 PM

To Boone-Tard et al: First, I'll do what I choose--if anything--when I choose. I don't post on your schedule.

Second, you foaming moonbats can try to spin the numbers any way you want, but these are the facts:

Quote :

"Compact car is a largely North American term denoting an automobile smaller than a mid-size car, but larger than a subcompact car, similarly recognized in much of the world as a 'C-segment' (between B- and D-segment) vehicles. Compact cars usually have wheelbases between 2.54 meters (100 inches) and 2.67 metres (105 inches). The American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines a 'Compact' car as measuring between 100 ft³ (2800 L) and 109 ft³ (3000 L) of combined passenger and cargo volume capacity."

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

Since many of you younglings do not remember, affordability of operation, which included fuel efficiency, was a primary reason for the creation of compact cars. In addition, whether you like it or not, fuel-efficient vehicles, which are pushed incessantly by liberals, tend to be smaller, while larger larger vehicles tend to be less fuel efficient. As evidence of this, the following is the latest from the EPA:

2006 Model Year Overall Fuel Economy Leaders

Rank Manufacturer/Model MPG/city/highway

1. Honda Insight (hybrid-electric, manual) 60/66

2. Toyota Prius (hybrid-electric) 60/51

3. Volkswagen New Beetle and Golf (diesel, manual) 37/44

4. Volkswagen Jetta (diesel, manual) 36/41

5. Ford Escape Hybrid FWD 36/31

6. Volkswagen New Beetle and Jetta (diesel, automatic) 35/42

7. Volkswagen Golf (diesel, automatic) 33/44

8. Ford Escape Hybrid 4WD 33/29
Mazda Tribute Hybrid 4WD 33/29
Mercury Mariner Hybrid 4WD 33/29

9. Lexus RX 400H 2WD 33/28
Highlander Hybrid 2WD 33/28

10. Toyota Corolla (manual) 32/41

Lowest Fuel Economy by Vehicle Class*
2006 Model Year

Class Model MPG/city/highway

Two Seater Ferrari F430 12/17

Minicompact Car Aston Martin V12 Vanquish S 11/17

Subcompact Car Maserati Coupe Cambiocorsa/Coupe GT 12/19

Compact Car Bentley Continental GT 12/19

Midsize Car Bentley Arnage 10/14

Large Car Bentley Arnage LWB 10/14

Small Station Wagon Audi S4 Avant (manual) 15/21

Midsize Station Wagon Mercedes-Benz E55 EMG Wagon 15/21

Sport Utility Vehicle Dodge Durango 2WD and 4WD 12/15

Minivan Ford Freestar Cargo Van FWD 17/23
Ford Freestar Wagon FWD 17/23
Mercury Monterey Wagon FWD 17/23
Buick Terraza AWD 17/23
Chevrolet Uplander AWD 17/23
Pontiac Montana SV6 AWD 17/23
Saturn Relay AWD 17/23
Toyota Sienna 4WD 17/23

Pickup Truck Dodge Ram 1500 2WD (8.3 l engine, auto.) 9/12
Cargo Van Ford E150 Econoline 2WD 14/17

Passenger Van Ford E150 Club Wagon 13/17

*Trucks over 8500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating are exempt from federal fuel economy requirements

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/e1fffb2c795ec9b2852570210055ba60/d1243d6f7f608399852570980058d0ef!OpenDocument

Fourth, you and your ilk couldn't defeat the field in a one-horse race.

PS: Don't forget this trinket from Boone-Tard:

Quote :

"18-wheelers are bigger, but A) they have a reason to exist and B) they're driven by professionals with special licenses."

(1) The government issues licenses to teachers, too, but that doesn't mean they're qualified, right? And (2) as long as a driver holds an official piece of paper from the "politburo" you're cool with it, right, comrade?

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 1:05 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2007 12:47:15 PM

Did Rush revisit this topic today?

Quote :

"fuel efficient vehicles [...] tend to be smaller and less fuel efficient, while larger larger vehicles tend to be less fuel efficient."

Can you rewrite this so that it makes sense?

[Add: You beat me to it, but that sentence is too funny for me to edit out]

-----

To make sure that I understand your last post, is this what you're saying:

Smaller cars are more fuel efficient than larger cars and the EPA has data to back that up.

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 1:08 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on August 22, 2007 at 1:21 PM. Reason : Can't forget ]

8/22/2007 1:00:14 PM