I Hate SUVsYesterday the
Opionion Journal posted the following:
Make SUV, Not War
Almost three years ago, we quoted Keith Bradsher, a New York Times reporter, who had this to say about people who drive sport-utility vehicles:
"They tend to be people who are insecure and vain. They are frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood. They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their neighbors or communities."
Well, at least he didn't say they're excitable! Blogger Andrew Sullivan, just back from vacation, has alighted on this ancient trope:
As far as I'm concerned, those people driving SUVs are aiding and abetting the enemy, and helping to finance the terrorists that want to kill us all. I'm well aware that the notion that the Bush administration has any interest in energy independence or taxing gas or deterring SUVs is about as likely as their demanding subsidies for sex-changes, but I might as well vent. We can always stigmatize these SUV-terror-enablers. How about bumper-stickers for non-SUVs that simply say: my car doesn't subsidize Saudi terror. Would that help?
Later he relays a reader's tasteful slogan suggestion: "How many soldiers-per-gallon does your SUV get?"
Meanwhile, al-Jazeera reports that "speculation over the actual size of Saudi Arabia's oil reserves is reaching fever pitch as a major bank says the kingdom's--and the world's--biggest field, Gharwar, is in irreversible decline." If this turns out to be true, then SUV drivers should be regarded as heroes, not goats, for they are helping hasten the day when the Saudis run out of oil.
And today they ran this followup:
Make SUV, Not War--II
Our item yesterday about hysterical opposition to sport-utility vehicles brought this thoughtful comment from reader David Bookstaber:
I must admit I hate SUVs. I think they are obnoxious and dangerous compared with lower, lighter cars, and I believe relatively few SUV owners use the cargo, towing, and off-road features that would justify their expense. But still, this anti-SUV hysteria misses the mark.
Rank the following groups according to their guilt in keeping us dependent on foreign oil:
People who choose to drive an SUV that gets 15 miles a gallon instead of a sedan or wagon that gets 25 miles a gallon
People who choose to live 10 miles from where they work each day instead of five miles.
People who choose to commute to work in private cars instead of on public transportation.
People who choose to heat and cool a 5,000-square-foot house when they could maintain a 2,500-square-foot-house with the same number of rooms.
People who choose to fly overseas for vacations instead of going to a local retreat.
People who oppose nuclear power plants.
I don't believe the SUV owners are at the top of the list. And my guess is that many of the SUV haters won't countenance somebody questioning their decisions to live where they want, in what they want, or to vacation when and where they want, even though on net those decisions probably consume more oil than an individual decision to drive an SUV.
I would also wager that the anti-SUV crowd has a large intersection with the anti-nuclear-power crowd. which, amusingly, also intersects with the pro-Kyoto treaty crowd. You just can't win with some people.
Indeed.
I'm with David Bookstaber. I hate SUVs not because of their gas consumption. I drive a car, not a semi-truck and trailer. I hate it when I'm looking in the parking lot for my car and I can't find it hidden behind the giants. I think they're ugly like expensive big track homes that all look alike. I prefer variety to conformity. I think it will be really bad when all these SUVs go on the used car market and are driven by impulsive teenagers.
But the anti-environment arguments the anti-SUV crowd uses are stupid.
