Thread: Global Warming
View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Beach Runner wrote:
> Nissan & Hyundai: Just say "no" to Auto Alliance


You've gone to a leftwing website and produced an activism form letter
without understanding the real issue at hand. The Auto Alliance is not
anti-environment.

http://www.autoalliance.org/environment/

> Automakers Nissan and Hyundai will be introducing their first hybrid
> models in 2006, helping to expand this important emerging market.
> However, just as these automakers are seeking to establish their
> “green credentials” with hybrids, the Alliance of Automobile
> Manufacturers (a.k.a. the Auto Alliance) is courting these two
> companies. The Auto Alliance is the lobbyist group representing most
> of the major automobile manufacturers. Its stated priorities include
> blocking any increase in fuel economy standards, and overturning
> California’s breakthrough global warming regulations on vehicles.
> Please contact the CEOs of Nissan and Hyundai and let them know that
> the reputation they are trying to develop with these hybrid vehicles
> will be severely damaged by associating with the Auto Alliance, a
> group pushing to keep American drivers out of the cleaner cars we
> want and deserve.


They're not trying to keep anyone out of any cars: they favor allowing
freedom of choice, something you authoritarian leftists don't respect.

> Personalize your letter: Increase the impact of your action by giving
> it your own personal voice.


Hahaha. They know that most of you morons will just send what they've
written.

> Here are some questions that may help you
> quickly and easily increase your letter's resonance:
>
> * Are you in the market for a new car? Will you be in 2006?
> * Do you own, or have you owned, either a Nissan or Hyundai
> vehicle?
> * Are you a current hybrid vehicle owner?
> * Were you one of the over 20,000 people who took action and
> filed a false advertising complaint against the Auto Alliance for
> their "virtually emission-free" ad?
> * Do you live on the West Coast and are currently being denied a
> "clean air corridor?" because of the Auto Alliance's activities?
>
> Tell me more
>
>
> Subject:
>
> Dear Mr. Ghosn and Mr. Cosmai,
>
> (Edit Letter Below)
>
> I am writing to applaud your planned 2006 introductions of hybrid
> vehicles. As a consumer interested in cleaner, more fuel-efficient
> car options, I am pleased that the Altima and Accent hybrids will
> help push forward this emerging clean vehicle market. The fact that
> the Altima hybrid will be assembled in the United States, and the
> Accent hybrid may help make hybrid technology affordable to a larger
> segment of the driving public are both very exciting developments.
>
> I have also read, however, that the DC-based lobbyist group for many
> of the major automakers, the Auto Alliance, is courting both of you
> to join its ranks. The Auto Alliance has continually used fear and
> deception to prevent any meaningful improvements in vehicle
> pollution, safety, and fuel economy standards.


Bullshit.

> For example, the Auto
> Alliance recently ran advertisements calling today's autos "virtually
> emission-free" -- deceptive language that resulted in over 20,000
> false advertising complaints.


None of which has resulted in adverse actions against them.

> Now the Alliance is purportedly focused
> on preventing higher fuel economy standards and overturning
> California's breakthrough regulations on global warming pollution
> from autos among its top agenda items.
>
> Your association with this group would severely undermine whatever
> environmentally-friendly reputation you hope to develop through your
> hybrid models, not to mention my interest as a potential customer. A
> clear, public "no thank you" to this lobbyist group would, in turn,
> give an indication that your hybrid models are not merely
> "greenwashing," but a genuine step toward addressing the
> environmental, public health, and gas saving needs of the American
> consumer.
>
> I look forward to your reply.
>
> Sincerely,
> [Your name]


Just sign it "another mindnumb activist following marching orders."

BTW, note that you failed to address any points I made below.

> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>
>>>>> http://www.commondreams....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From their "about us" page:
>>>>
>>>> Common Dreams is a national non-profit citizens' organization
>>>> working to bring *progressive* Americans together to promote
>>>> *progressive* visions for America's future. Founded in 1997, we
>>>> are committed to being on the cutting-edge of using the internet
>>>> as a political organizing tool - and creating new models for
>>>> internet *activism*.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, they admit they're *liberal* activists.
>>>>
>>>> <...>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> hat is correct. If IF the many models

>>
>>
>>
>> SOME models...
>>
>>> that say global warming are correct,

>>
>>
>>
>> There's no indication that they are.
>>
>>> and there is no doubt there are many models,

>>
>>
>>
>> SOME models.
>>
>>> than radical chance is necessary.

>>
>>
>>
>> Radical chance? You twit, you mean radical change. And it is NOT
>> necessary.
>>
>>> If things were business as usual, it wouldn't matter, but of course,
>>> they
>>> are not business as usual except to the really blind conservative
>>> people as yourself.

>>
>>
>>
>> Spoken as the elite leftist snob you really are. You want "radical
>> change" on the basis of inconclusive evidence. Why? Because the
>> "radical change" you advocate is consistent with your POLITICS. Such
>> change is unwarranted by the SCIENCE, which doesn't show a clear-cut
>> problem (and certainly not of the magnitude that would necessitate
>> RADICAL change).
>>
>>> We are in the midst of a global change and you can't even see it.

>>
>>
>>
>> Neither can most studies.
>>
>> http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm
>> http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html
>> http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=294
>> http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/gccour...2/seedsci.html
>>
>> Etc.
>>
>>> So you can correct some spelling or typos when I take medication

>>
>>
>>
>> Your drug abuse is your own problem, not mine.
>>
>>> You've still ignored

>>
>>
>>
>> No, you ****. I've addressed the substance of your "radical" claims
>> which you claim necessitate radical change. I don't think other human
>> beings should be subjected to your radical politics on the basis of
>> your irrational concerns which aren't substantiated by scientific
>> discovery. And at the end of the day, that's precisely what you want
>> to do: require every human being to adopt your political worldview.
>> That's ALL this is about. You're an authoritarian zealot. You've been
>> exposed.