Tuesday, September 24, 2002
Apparently, not everyone agrees with the Times reporter, Keith Bradsher, mentioned in the post below.
Here are two reactions I took from Amazon (needless to say, sic throughout):

i invite you stand in front of my Jeep. Since I'm so insecure and vain i probably won't stomp on the gas pedal with all my force....
but then since i lack confidence in my braking ability, you probably should run for the hills.
(a reader in Hartford, Conn.)

This second one, from a man in San Marcos, Calif., requires a little more effort.

This book is based on a very dishonest thesis. Having closely covered Detroit and the U.S. automotive industry for the New York Times, Mr. Bradsher knows full well how and why sport utility vehicles (SUVs) gained the popularity they enjoy ... >Automakers and consumers, however, trumped the Car with the SUV. The CAFE Standards Act exempted light trucks. Hence, put a passenger compartment on a light truck frame and, voila, the result is a tougher, larger, and safer version of the station wagon that is not subject to the CAFE Standards Act. It's no wonder that the SUV became an instant hit with consumers. It took the idea of a station wagon and improved tremendously upon it, resulting in a very practical, rugged, versatile vehicle. Plus, it preserved the option of a larger vehicle for consumers despite the Car Nazis' imposition of "the incredible shrinking car" upon the American car-buying public. The free market spoke, loudly and clearly--much to the chagrin of the Car Nazis.

Bitter that their plans to impose CAFE standards on the public had been foiled by the champion of individual freedom--the SUV--the extreme environmentalist movement, with the complicity of the liberal press, has been working overtime to besmirch the reputation of SUVs. Witness ridiculous, persecutory headlines such as "SUV Jumps Sidewalk, Injures Three," and "Police Say SUV Responsible for Three-Car Pile-Up on Interstate," frequently appear in our nation's newspapers. (It's as if the drivers of the SUVs themselves had no hand in these incidents.) SUVs are statistically involved in no greater a percentage of accidents than any other class of vehicle, so why do such stories get printed at all? There is a thinly veiled anti-SUV agenda being pursued by a majority of the left-leaning media, obviously. Mr. Bradsher's long-winded diatribe of a book serves only to add to the mythology of the "Monster SUV"--a creature so foul and devoid of compassion that it has set out not only to destroy human life and property, but the entire world! (Insert loud scream here.) ... But thank God we are not obligated to pay attention. The bottom line is, this book is not worth your time or your money, not even for the comedic value it provides.

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

08/01/2002 - 09/01/2002 / 09/01/2002 - 10/01/2002 / 10/01/2002 - 11/01/2002 / 11/01/2002 - 12/01/2002 / 12/01/2002 - 01/01/2003 / 01/01/2003 - 02/01/2003 / 02/01/2003 - 03/01/2003 / 03/01/2003 - 04/01/2003 / 04/01/2003 - 05/01/2003 / 05/01/2003 - 06/01/2003 / 06/01/2003 - 07/01/2003 / 07/01/2003 - 08/01/2003 / 08/01/2003 - 09/01/2003 / 09/01/2003 - 10/01/2003 / 10/01/2003 - 11/01/2003 / 11/01/2003 - 12/01/2003 / 12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004 / 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004 / 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004 / 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004 / 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004 / 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004 / 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004 / 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005 / 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005 / 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005 / 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005 / 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005 /

Powered by Blogger