Thursday, May 25, 2006

Fun With SUVs!




Download, Cut out and Share!



59 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pat Tillman died in Afganistan to friendly fire. Afghanistan was a legitamate strike on terrorism I think your choice for a face on your card is off point. Iraq was done to raise oil prices unfotunately we don't have as famous of a face from that war but I like where you age going with this the guzzlers are responsible for the oil prices too just as much as Bush did Iraq for the sole reason to raise oil prices.

Anonymous said...

I made two jpeg versions of this, for an ECONOMY-sized twenty-per-page Orange County Special.

One is in black & white (for you folks that want to go wide and get a LOT of them at Kinkos) and one in color (right-click, Save-as):

Color

B/W

Sadie Baker said...

Brilliant.

Freewayblogger said...

I used Pat Tillman because, while serving in Iraq, he said this to the person next to him:

"You know, this war is so fucking illegal."

PTCruiser said...

Is that why they shot him?

Bejammin075 said...

I agree with the first comment - Pat Tillman is not the right image since he died in Afganistan. While he may have said Iraq was illegal, almost nobody knows that. I didn't know that. The text is stunning though. I'd reconsider this particular project. I think almost all the other ways you have expressed your sentiments were better than this one.

Bejammin075 said...

Here's a phrase to toss out there:

"Don't surrender the Bill of Rights to the terrorists"

It puts you in the position that if you support Bush, you support surrender to UBL and Zarcowi. We defend the Bill of Rights, while Bush surrenders it.

Jim said...

I think Pat Tillman is not a bad choice at all. He reminds us that when a citizen actually takes the GWOT seriously to heart to go after Osama, he and all of us can still lose.

tony said...

I agree with all the people who say that you shouldn't use Pat Tillman's image. I mean, linking Tillman to the war in Iraq would be like linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11. How ridiculous!

Seriously, though. Rock on. I have a feeling Pat Tillman, a reportedly patriotic liberal atheist, would not object.

Anonymous said...

Afghanistan was a legitamate strike on terrorism

Or at least would have been if we actually caught Bin Laden, or treated it as something other than a stepping stone to Iraq.

Binkyboy said...

Screw it, use Pat Tillman all you want. The fact is that Tillman's death was a lie created by the Pentagon to create a "hero" for the masses. Unfortunately, dying by friendly fire (possible fragging) is a pretty non-heroic way to die, and for the Pentagon to cover it up just shows how willing they are to lie.

All of these little wars are based on lies. Afghanistan is now as dangerous as Iraq, with Taliban organized warfare erupting. Pat Tillman's image just reminds these people what a farce this whole ME adventure really is.

Anonymous said...

The US was able to finally get that oil pipiline built through Afghanistan down to the Caspian Sea. Tthe planning of the pipeline had been in the wotks since at least 1998.

Anonymous said...

Tillman should of had the number of troops needed to accomplish secure pursuit of Osama. Bush had an oil grab to do in antoher country... Osama Been Forgotten.

-Mr.Murder

Anonymous said...

The Azbeck/Afghan pipelines were bid assessed in the mid 90s by GH Venture Partners. John Ellis works with the capital investment group. He was Fox's Communications coverage director in 2000.

He's a cousin of Dubya.
-Mr.Murder
PS-Kissinger does PR work for the firm in South America as well.

Anonymous said...

use photo of a flag-covered coffin

Anonymous said...

I don't think demonizing everyone with an SUV is productive. I don't like them, but you can't assume you know everybody's personal story. The vehicle could be for work, it could be inherited from a dead Aunt, or maybe the only drive the thing once or twice a year.

If you think your Prius is so much better for the environment, you're sadly mistaken. It still had to be built, which created lots of pollution and wasted tons of water.

Anonymous said...

Yes, but the worst Prius mileage is still three times the average SUV MPG. More importantly, drving a Prius blatantly sends the message that the driver actually gives a damn about energy conservation, whereas most SUV don't, and many drive them exactly because they drink gasoline (and of course, cheap gas is the birthright of every American, righ?).

The use of Pat Tillman in this message is spot-on, and I hope it enrages SUV drivers. Be careful out there.

Arch Stanton said...

Afghanistan was not any more a "legitmate strike on terrorism" than Iraq was, since the "war on terrorism" itself is a criminal fraud. If ya'll want to pamphlet US drivers I suggest you get some copies of the Nuremberg Principles. You're going to need them.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget the minivans and muscle cars. They get shitty mileage too.

Anonymous said...

a Prius blatantly sends the message that the driver actually gives a damn about energy conservation, whereas most SUV don't, and many drive them exactly because they drink gasoline

Did you think about that when you put that out there? I can just see it now... A well-off couple goes car shopping. They have about $50K to spend on this thing. She finds a lovely red, 4-door sedan and says, "Honey, what do you think about this one? It has decent gas mileage though. I don't know if we can buy it! It will leave me too much money to spend on shoes, and jewelry, and my nails... Oh, how about this one? This one only gets 10MPG! Let's buy it!"

Um... yeah... I doubt it.

I drive a mini-van. I have children. I own my home. These two things mean frequent trips hauling lots of stuff. My #1 concern when getting a vehicle was -- Can I fit everything in it that I need to fit in it? and Does it have enough cup holders so that kids don't spill things all over?

Based on your assumptions (wrong ones), I drive my minivan (which gets a little bit better gas mileage than an SUV but not much) because I think I have money to waste. Yeah... with kids & a house that is 100 yrs old? I don't think so.

Making assumptions like that and actually letting them seep out of your brain makes you seem just as brainless as the people you are railing against. And it completely discredits you to those of us with a brain.

Anonymous said...

Yes to flag-draped coffin.

Nope to Pat Tillman. If you wouldn't want your child's image on such a card, don't use Pat.

Anonymous said...

to all of those that still "think" Afghanistan had nothing to do with our oil industry's wants -- the facts: in August 2001, VP Cheney with now convicted Ken Lay in his office made a direct threat to the Taliban leaders on Lay's/Enron's behalf: due to the huge fiasco with the power plant in India, Enron needed the Afghanistan pipeline to deliver cheap(er) fuel. Negotiations that included the White House (though nobody in the White House knows/knew Ken Lay... so they say) and then NSA: Condi Rice... were ongoing to keep Enron from going bust with the India power plant. In Afghanistan, everything had already been put in place regarding the building of the pipeline. This was needed otherwise the oil from Afghanistan would have to be transported out through the Caspian Sea -- Russia would control its price! This would have screwed Enron. The Afghani's seeing the problem Enron/the White House was having with India, decided to throw in some further demands; i.e. - that Enron must build road and other infrastructures if they wished to (also) build that pipeline. This added 100s of millions to Enron's already demised (forged) books, which they could not afford, and our Prez had already thrown them 1000s of millions...

Meanwhile, it is now coming out that Judith Miller had already been priviledged to White House insiders that ALREADY KNEW that bin Laden was planning a massive attack on U.S. soil; therefore, at least as of July 2001, Bush/Cheney knew an attack was planned. Therefore, each of their "we never could have imagined" statements (including those of Condi...) were flat out lies. They knew!

Anyway, during that meeting with Ken Lay in August 2001, Cheney made threats to the Afghanis that they would go along with the project as already negotiated with Enron or they would pay heavily! Considering the White House knew from July 2001 that there were threats directed at U.S. soil, and that binLaden was in the company of the Afghani Taliban leaders, our VP's threat was either totally insane or absolutely only to provoke the Taliban into immediate action! I think both. Immediate action had to be taken, otherwise Enron would have failed (which it did anyway). It is now known that Bush/Cheney had been working on a plan to take Iraq prior to when Bush stole the 2000 election. As it was, though Saddam does not equal a nice man, he had done nothing to provoke a US military strike. Once 9/11 happened, obviously, we needed to go into Afghanistan... the military's (real) main job there is to make sure that damn pipeline gets built. That is why the rest of Afghanistan is hell!

In the interim, using the images of 9/11 over and over on the American public and explaining how (all) middle easterners' are connected; i.e. - Iraq had nothing to do with the attack, but over and over again White House officials kept bringing up notions of that horrible mushroom cloud... in the same sentence as Saddam. And yes we are a racist country -- all mid-easterners "look" the same, therefore, they "are". ...eventually (and, might I add, without much fight -- I think the American people just rolled over! And you think he respects anyone... that is called using fear to get what "he" wanted)78 percent of the American population had this insane notion that Iraq had something to do with 9/11.

Therefore, they are a smart bunch! Those White House politicians... Crooked but brilliant! ...Had it planned way before anyone knew what they were up to; purposely ignored warnings of the 9/11 attack, then used that attack to scare the U.S. and the rest of the world into submission. Lied outright about their prior knowledge of the attack, stole billions of taxpayers' dollars to fund the Enrons and Halliburton profits, sent young, brave, unsuspecting troops into Afghanistan then Iraq... took away rights from anyone who got in their way, and therfore: YES, MR. TILLMAN's DEATH IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO OIL.

Further note: nobody seems to remember the middle eastern investment hearings of the early 80s... that scandal also involved these same players: Osama bin Laden (before he went radical) had invested I believe 20 million into Airbusto, which was made up of those including Bush and Ross Perot... among others. More Arab money was also laundered into the venture. This was illegal. The US Senate found that due to the illegalities of the investment, the Arabs who invested (the binLaden family mainly) could not reclaim their monies nor make any profit from them. Bush I was already friendly with the heads of the family, and since has made up for that loss so many countless ways that they have proffered. BUT: Osama - then, being young and idealistic was furious over his family's seeming roll over to the Bush oil biz... (at the time, he did not see the future profit in the scheme), and his own loss of money in that venture. The Senate did not make the TX investors return the money (they kept every cent) as they pleaded that doing so would put people out of work, and would have been bad for the economy... Basically, soon after the company folded and the investments were kept without recourse. It was stealing from binLaden... at least, as he saw it. He has hated Bush ever since.

Put it together: Bush/Cheney knew of the pending attack threat and that it was a threat coming from Osama (who personally hates Bush!) and was in the presence of the Afghani Taliban; at the same time Ken Lay was attempting one last deal that he desperately needed to keep Enron's appearance out of the red... so they could all sell their stocks before the bubble burst... he needed the Afghani pipeline to deliver fuel to the India powerplant to keep that from going bust! Which by the way, many top White House officials had heavy money invested in Enron (Rove = 250k); the White House was actively helping to broker this Enron fiasco -- and had secretively committed the use of US military to help with the pipeline (way before 9/11) -- they were just without a way to sell Congress on their plan... again, they knew an attack was threatened -- they did nothing -- they got their way into Afghanistan!

Basically, we're a bunch of raging idiots to have put up with this administration --they all belong in prison-- and that young man along with thousands others has had his life taken away from him for the profit of Bushco; ie. - oil

I think using his image is appropriate.

Lefty said...

I love the sentiment, but like others have said I'm uncomfortable with Pat Tillman's picture on the card.

Anon- There are plenty of minivans that get reasonable mileage.

leftcoastbreakdown.com said...

If I were a conservative and wanted to create an argument about why the Left is insane and should be marginalized, I'd just post the URL to this thread. This is ridiculous.

First, the SUV. My sister drives a Chevy Suburban. She has seven children in her blended family, and a nine passenger vehicle is going to burn a lot of gas, indeed. MY sister is a saint of a woman, who raises her often taxing stepkids as her own, does a huge abount of volunteering, often hauls other folks kids around, and babysits for half the neighborhood. She has told me how, if the auto manufacturers made a high milage car big enough for her needs, she'd but it in an instant, even if it was more expensive. She feels she has no choice, and she doesn't. When we manufacture a large vehicle that gets 100 mpg, that's when the amount of fuel we burn will diminish. By placing these notes, you are painting everyone as selfish who drives a large car, without knowing their situation.
This is not a liberal way of thinking.
(BTW, I know a guy here in L.A. who drives a Suburban that runs entirely on Biodiesel. Are you going to put one of these on his vehicle?)

Second, by choosing Pat Tillman, you are associating a specific person with what you have chosen to do, a man whose opinions you know nothing about. How would you feel if, say, you placed this note in an SUV that turned out to belong to Tillman's sister? How would you like to see your loved ones politicized? The horrible truth of the whole Tillman affair is that the administration tried to turn his death into a recruiting poster, to politicize it. His family rightly condemned this. Now you are doing the same. Leave the man to rest in peace.

Finally, as some of the posters above noticed, Afghanistan is not Iraq, and you do nothing by confusing the two, the paranoid scribblings above aside. One problem with political extremists of any stripe is that in their rush to cram facts into their wordview, they often get the facts themselves wrong. Take the long posting above. Just to pick at random the first three mistakes that I noticed reading it:

1)It was Unocal, not Enron, who met once with the Taliban in the late nineties to discuss the possibility of building a pipeline if things settled down politically in Afghanistan. The meeting went nowhere, and no contracts were reached or signed. Enron had no known deal with the Taliban.

2) George Bush's oil company was called Arbusto.

3) It was the Bin Laden Group who invested in Bush's oil firm, not Osama Bin Laden. The Bin Laden family does control the Bin Laden Group, but the Bin Laden family is made up of hundreds and hundreds of members. It's more what in English might be called a "clan" or "tribe" then how we think of a family. Osama was never involved in any substantial way in the Bin Laden Group; he started down his path as a radical at a young age, and was actually fighting the Russians in Afghanistan at the time that his family was investing in Texas oil firms. BTW, the Bin Laden Group has billions invested in the U.S. and Europe. It is one of the largest construction firms in the Middle East. The Bin Laden Group has not been tied in any substantive way to supporting Osama. They might be funneling him money through the back door, but this is the equivalent of blaming Paris Hilton's antics on the hotel chain whose name she carries.

Of course, all these details aren't really what this is about. What it is about is that you would choose to shoot yourself it the foot this way. Do you actually think that these notes will change minds? Do you think that by demonizing people, you can make them come around to sharing your views? All these notes will do is to make people feel mad and defensive. They will make them less likely to consider your criticism, because this note will give them a chance to dismiss you as a hate-filled nut. I met you, Freewayblogger, at the Americablog get-together in SF, and I know that you aren't the asshole that these notes make you seem. I'm sorry, but this adds nothing to the debate. Demonizing people whose situations you don't fully understand is not a progressive act. There is something deeply Rovian about this. It may be deeply satisfying on an emotional level, the glorious rush of self-righteousness you feel when you place these little paper bombs, but if you think it helps the cause, you are fooling yourself.
I suppose next you will be calling SUV drivers traitors. This is what happens when real debate dies. Just because the Right revels in crass attacks and low unreasoned slander, doesn't mean that progressives should as well. We need to fight, but we need not lose our souls. Otherwise, it means nothing, and it's just an empty game.

Anonymous said...

Re the invasion of Iraq - Bush's administration was working for the oil companies financial well-being specifically.

Saddam had been selling his oil via the Euro, not the dollar. Which was pissing off the oil companies. Profits! Tony Blair/Britan went along as our ally because they are the only European country that does not use Euro; they use pounds.

There was no threat to our security as in a bomb or otherwise, Saddam had nothing. The "threat" was to oil profits if Saddam continued to sell oil via the Euro.

I believe the current price hiking/proft taking of American oil companies is to heavily line their own pockets before this long coming reality is fact. The whole war(s) is to take control of the mideast oil before it goes on the market permanently via a different currency.

South American countries are taking possession of their own oil fields (rightly so), and Bush can't wage war on them... that is why his admin is so against the Prez of Venez... and others, and has set up smear campaigns... to hopefully start an overthrow; as of yet, the support isn't there. The rest of the world is growing up and US imperialism isn't as easy any longer.

Solar/Wind power! (and leave other ocuntries alone!!!)

Freewayblogger said...

Actually, I do have a son who's old enough to enlist. I asked him about it, but he seemed to prefer that I go with the Tillman image instead. Both Tillman and his family have made it clear by their words how badly they feel this country has been cheated and lied to by this administration.

I also own an SUV, believe it or not. A 2001 Toyota Tacoma with four wheel drive. I used it to bring clothing and blankets to villages up in the Sierra Madre mountains after hearing about a cholera outbreak up there. It took about three years, but I managed to get warm clothes and bedding to about 7,000 of the poorest, most isolated people on the continent.

So long as they're being used to provide direct assistance to people in need living in primitive areas, I think SUVs are great.

Arch Stanton said...

Here's a little hint: If you're uncomfortable with Pat Tillman's image, just substitute any one of the other 2500 soldiers "we" sent to their deaths so Exxon could get its windfall profits. And of course, let's not forget the some 120,000 Afghanis and Iraqis that have been slaughtered. Save some of your tears for them.

MonicaSF said...

Freewayblogger, I love your work!
And I also agree with leftcoastbreakdown.
It can cause more harm than good using Tillman's photo, unless you got his family's permission.
Things are changing and more than ever we have to do things right, well thought out, carefully, exactly the way things are *not* done in the White House :)
Cheers & great work!

Anonymous said...

to the person who attempted to point out an error in an above post. Well you were partly correct, it was Unocal that met with Afghani leaders years ago, but it was Enron/Cheney that threatened the Afghanis in August 2001 re the pipeline that was to provide the (cheaper) fuel to the India powerplant (which was Enron, not Unocal) and was the pivot for the threat made. And was entangled with all the current government negotiations made on Enron's part with the Indians.

Spelling is not an error of fact, as in Arbusto or Airbusto -- owned by Bush, Perot, et al. (that is a fact); as stated differently within that initial post it was mainly the binLaden family, which owns BinLaden group... whether that be cousins, brothers, uncles -- the fact noted was correct. Your post seems only anal. The records of that time were that Osama did personally invest money in the venture (others than the "Group" personally invested) -- none of which was returned; he went to Afghanistan ONLY after the investment (was not returned) It took time prior to the Senate Hearings -- they came way after the investment was even found.

perhaps, the facts need to be posted out here in syberspace. Obviously, our current administration with aide of a complacent media isn't doing the job. If 78% of the nation thought Iraq had something to do with September 11, then there is something wrong with the information that is known.

I personally think people need to know the truth; otherwise, we might as well all live in caves. Usually people will calm down once the initial "anger" you speak about is resolved. Only when the truth is known can any society go forward productively.

As far as your SUV scenario: you are partly correct -- perhaps 1% of all big car drivers actually need such a big car (as maybe your sister does), but the MAJORITY of drivers are ONE PERSON PER VEHICLE WITH CELL PHONE TO EAR. I personally would be delighted if every large vehicle I passed on the road had 7-9 passengers in it. I think that was the initial idea when such vehicles were designed... but then, they just got marketed as the ultimate suburban vehicle... But the fact is, that is the exception not the rule.

Thus far, "your" post seems the only one to be self-righteous and preachy -- all the others are more to fact.

Freeway blogger is doing something in an attempt to open up minds to think! It is none violent, and yes, someone needs to be out there trying to get this society to realize that they are helping a very dark industry. "Your's" are the Rovian actions via attempting to shame into submission... shame on you!

leftcoastbreakdown.com said...

Anonymous,
( and I'm sure you have very valid reasons for remaining so) I would love to see the results of your survey on SUV usage. I would never doubt that you used proper scientific rigor to come up such a precise figure as 1%, but I am wondering what parameters you used to define your terms? What did you mean by "need", for instance? Did you include cell phone usage in your study, or did you simply base it on a meta-analysis of existing statistics? I don't mean any affront by my questioning of your methods or rigor, but as anyone who watches Fox News knows, occasionally, in service of hyperbole, folks can be tempted to pull useless anecdotal statements out of their ass to prove a pre-determined point.

Beware of any argument that contains the phrase "the fact is". It's one of the flashing red lights of bullshit.

Freewayblogger, thanks so much for your anecdote. That kind of work is amazing. I liked you in SF, but now I'm really a fan. As you have pointed our, every person is different, and they have to make good decisions about how they live. We should be encouraging folks and educating them about wise use choices. I myself get to work through a combo of light rail and biking, and I've no love for gas guzzling. I'm even looking for a nice used diesel right now, because my employer has started a biodiesel cooperative here at work. I've got to say, however, that if I recieved one of these notes on my windshield, my natural reaction, and I'm someone who firmly believes that the need for oil negatively effects our foreign policy, would be "fuck you" to whomever left it there. They don't know me, they don't know my situation, and they have no right to accuse me of complicity in the death of Pat Tillman or anyone else who has died in this Administration's wars. I just don't see how this helps, in any way. I love some of the things you've done with freeway signs, but these notes stand as a strangely personal accusation, and the natural reaction of those who get them may very well be to dismiss them, and thereby dismiss the reasonable argument that both you and I are trying to make about wise use and the impact of oil. Lets not lose the message in an ad hominum attack.
Cheers.

Anonymous said...

I don't think using Tilman here is off the mark. I do not agree that Afghanistan was a legitimate target. The Afghan battle plan was in place prior to 911, Osama was a convenient scapegoat that allowed the administration to gain a geo-political foothold in the one remaining resource-rich region on the planet.

The problem is that we've allowed oil and gas people to run our foreign policy. The card is illustrating that our best and brightest patriots are being sacrificed for profit, not democracy.

Avery said...

Actually, most people drive SUVs becasue in an accident, well, fuck the other guy. I can't prove this, but let me cash in on an SUV manufacturer's market research.

Last night I saw an commercial on TV where guys in lab coats load crash test dummies into midsize and SUV and then shoot midsize at SUV in super high tech vehicle testing facility. Mid-size hits SUV and goes flying off into space. Not a mark on the SUV.

That this add exists tells me that folks in marketing believe that their focus group is the sociopaths out there.

Meanwhile, back in reality. Guy in Explorer turns in front of me in my 740 wagon. I nail him at 30 mph just behind passenger side wheel. Guy in SUV leaves on backboard. I call wife from nearby business and pull my stereo because the car is toast.

It's hard to cry for the SUV drivers.

Tweek said...

Why don't you just take out Pat Tillman and replace him with the coffins or a blown up car?

Freewayblogger said...

I don't know. Why don't you?

Josh said...

While the "anonymous" in the argument with leftcoastbreakdown might get a little excited, many of his basic points are right. Both Iraq / Afghanistan were wars of choice to benefit Wallstreet/Oil Companies/US Strategic Chessboard. High ranking military and administration officials knew about 9-11 in advance, allowed/facilitated it, and used it as a pretext for these wars. 9-11 was one of the greatest intelligence successes of all time - not a failure. (The theologian David Ray Griffen has an excellent, calm, well-reasoned book about this called "The New Pearl Harbor." www.fromthewilderness.com is a good website) With this in mind, using Tillman's image does make sense, although it might not be the best choice for other reasons.

Secondly, like many people have said, targeting SUV's specifically is misguided. Lots of people without SUV's are wastefull with Energy, and many SUV drivers may go to great lengths to conserve. The energy crisis is society-wide, and there is plenty of blame to spread around. A Prius still runs on gasoline, and using 1/3 of the gas that a typical SUV uses is really not that much when you consider that many oil insiders consider that gas has not begun to become expensive yet. In order to solve the problem, massive, radical changes need to take place in the way we live, work, grow and distribute food (industrial ag uses LOTS of oil and natural gas), and consume goods. Visit www.postcarbon.org, it's a great site.

Anonymous said...

Once again, you miss the point. This war is NOT for Oil, it is for Israel. The US has to protect the Zionist state even while risking her young men and women, and making enemies all over the world.

... Even though they shot us in the face (like Cheney)! See below:

"I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation... Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous "
-- US Secretary of State Dean Rusk

http://www.ussliberty.org/

Anonymous said...

Pardon me, but Afghanistan was no more a legitimate target for us than was Iraq.

I, too, at one time thought "it was different in Afghanistan, we had a right to be there." But that was before I questioned just how much Bin Laden really had to do with 9/11. And it was before I questioned whether, if Bin Laden DID have to do with 9/11, was he really simply doing so for "Al Quaeda" and for the supposedly fanatical brand of Islam which he supposedly represents? I now think that there is much, much, much more to the real 9/11 story than we know. It was just TOO convenient the way it happened... Maybe we should ask Mr. Silverstein, who has a multi-million (or is that billion) dollar interest in the WTC and the real estate on which it stood. If you don't know who Mr. Silverstein is, look it up. You need to know something about the people who were financially involved with the WTC, in order to try to figure out this 9/11 mystery. (I don't pretend to know all the answers, but I definitely do not believe the Official Story.)

Couple these doubts with my finding out about the pipeline which Unocal desired to build to bring Caspian basin oil to market, and the fact that Afghanistan was THE perfect location for this pipeline. I learned this by reading articles at www.onlinejournal.com. Look up the articles about Bridas at that site, read them, and you may be surprised.

I also note that the Taliban is still there, and that Mullah Omar was not only never captured, but he has been totally forgotten and never really seemed a priority for our forces. I conclude that the action in Afghanistan was not what our government represented it to be.

I can hardly stand to look at a pic of Pat Tillman, or to read about him. The tremendous waste of each of these men's lives makes me literally nauseous.

Be that as it may, I think it's perfectly right and legitimate to use Tillman's photo for the card which we are invited to download and place on the cars of presumed members of the Chickenhawks Brigade. And we should also send one of these to Deadeye Dick Cheney, the coward who dares to criticize real soldiers when he cowered in his bed through five Vietnam deferments.

Anonymous said...

Not that anyone's reading this far, but...

If you use oil AT ALL (never mind what you drive), this is the kind of thing you should be thinking about. That includes oil for your SUV, your Prius, or your heating system.

Targeting people who drive SUVs might be satisfying on some level, but it's not really helping. That's because it doesn't matter WHY the oil is being consumed -- it just matters that it IS, and getting a Prius owner to turn their thermostat down is as important (although not necessarily as effective) as getting an SUV owner to downsize their car.

Anonymous said...

Okay - so, how many people have downloaded the 20-per versions I made?

Just curious.

Anonymous said...

You know what's kind of pathetic? People saying they NEED a freakin' or minivan SUV because they have five kids and lots of shit to drag around. More pathetic: acting all upset because someone else calls you on it, that they don't "understand" you, that you're not a selfish pig. Well, ask yourself who told you that 5 kids was appropriate? Who told you had to drag all your shit around? Why do you need cupholders for all your delightful progeny? Why do they have to be drinking and eating while you drive?

Question your own behavior. Just because you aren't gleefully driving a gas guzzler doesn't mean that your global footprint isn't completely out of whack.

Anonymous said...

A good one would be a pic of Tillman with the wrods;

WHO LIED ME TO DEATH?

Dave Lartigue said...

You know what's kind of pathetic? People saying they NEED a freakin' or minivan SUV because they have five kids and lots of shit to drag around.

Five kids and i'll cut 'em some slack. (Except of course for having five kids in the first place.)

What I have encountered is that SUVs/minivans become essential at just ONE kid. Because of course it's impossible to tote a kid around in a plain old sedan. Lord only knows how so many accidentally stayed alive in those days before giant, gas-wasting vehicles. And if you drop out a second kid? Well then you need a BIGGER one!

There are all kinds of things people can do to help out. Big things or small things. Alternatively, we can just come up with excuses for doing nothing.

Yasonyacky said...

First of all, to all the defensive Dahlias above:

1) Please stop conflating Minivans and SUVs. Minivans and SUVs are different beasts entirely. Please take a look at MPG statistics for the two classes of vehicle; most minivans get much better gas mileage than SUVs. Reason: SUVs are big honking heavy TRUCKS, almost all built on truck platforms, while Minivans are usually built on a car platform, and are much lighter. So the whole "you're demonizing my aunt who has 75 kids and has to take them all to soccer practice" argument doesn't hold water. Nobody has to drive an SUV. People choose to drive SUVs. Other options are minivans and station wagons. And please name me ONE job in which an SUV is a necessity (as opposed to a Jeep CJ-7 or a 4-wheel drive car like the Subaru Outback or Outback sport). Maybe some jobs (park ranger, for one) require something like the old Land Rover style vehicles (more like the old Jeep CJ-7 or CJ-5), but no job I have ever heard of requires a Lincoln Navigator. It's people's egos that require those civilian tanks.

2. If there is this huge class of people out there who absolutely MUST drive SUVs, then why have SUV sales dropped off the charts since gas prices spiked? I think that the whole "I have to drive an SUV - I have to pick up groceries and kids and stuff!" is a justification that people use. Another one (and one that I hear a lot when I get into a deeper conversation with an SUV owner/driver is "I just like to be up higher than everyone else." Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

3. A commenter above nailed it with this (paraphrasing): What in God's name did all these phantom families - who are simply FORCED to drive gas-guzzling SUVs - do before SUVs existed? Jesus. Times must have been tough - they must have had to walk EVERYWHERE! Or strap their kids and groceries to the top of the car with bungee cords. You have bought the Detroit sales pitch hook, line, and sinker - "anyone with one or more kids absolutely MUST have our HYPER-SAFE (not) child-toting miniature semi tractor trailer!!! No other car has room for you and your kids and your groceries!"

4. The whole SUV craze has been an arms race. My first car was a 1988 Ford Bronco. At the time, that was a HUGE car, and it got crappy gas mileage - something like 20 mpg! I saw one of those old Broncos the other day, and it is TINY. Smaller than the RAV-4. People have this idea that they need to have the biggest SUV, in order to protect their families from the OTHER huge SUVs out there. Imagine getting T-Boned by a Navigator in your Yaris! The bumper, instead of striking the car in the area where your legs are (as would be the case in a car-on-car accident) would instead strike the car where your shoulders, neck, or head are. To combat this risk, you buy a bigger SUV, for "safety", never mind the rollover potential, or the dangers posed to the whole fucking planet by the out-of-control fossil fuel consumption.

gjdodger said...

This would be the perfect bumper sticker. I'm surprised I don't see any around:

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS...
IMPEACH BUSH

Blogtopus said...

1. Pat Tillman died in an utterly tragic way that had nothing to do with saving anyone or protecting anyone's rights, but everything to do with incompetence and denial of the people who sent him there. If that doesn't make him the PERFECT image to use for representing everything that is wrong with this war, I don't know what is. And don't talk to me about that 'if he was your child you wouldn't want that there' b.s: You could make that argument about anybody (Lincoln's mother wouldn't have wanted you to put him on the penny, because he died so tragically and you wouldn't want to remind his family of that). So sorry.

2. Getting into flame-wars about how Priuses still kill the environment is helping NOBODY. Repeat, NOBODY. Its called PROGRESS, not IMMEDIATE PERFECT SOLUTION. If you are worried about how much of an effect creating a Prius has on the environment, why don't you just bitch about how the aluminum in a ten-speed was ripped from the Earth at a high cost to future generations and get it over with. Better yet, just sit on the street corner waving a sign about how breathing only makes things worse. And be sure to let people know that you think Liberals and Conservatives are equally irresponsible and that you're voting for some schmuck in a burlap sack come next election. Forest for the trees, folks.

Anonymous said...

Tillman allegedly said:

"You know, this war is so fucking illegal."

Then, why fighting it? Being proud to fight an illegal war seems a bit strange...There would have been more pride in fighting those who decided to waga an illegal war...

Anonymous said...

As a military mom, I don't like the use of Tillman just because like many said-people are very unaware of how he felt about the war. His parents are not seemingly concerned about their sons stance on the war in Iraq-shame on them for not taking up his fight.
The coffin pics would certainly be appropriate-if people are uncomfortable leaving them on SUV's-just put them on the morons who still have Bush/Cheney stickers on their cars.
I really would like to see a couple of versions-this is a great idea-so was "freeway blogger" signs.
Keep up the outstanding service to our country!!

nunya said...

Ok. All this stuff about Tillman and SUV's is going to be pointless when we realize we've all been taken for a ride that we don't want to be on, and wasn't planned with anything but next quarter's profits in mind. The people who really run things run them for a profit. So far the infrastructure has made life convenient and pleasant in the suburbs. How about we get a clue regarding unstustainable infrastructure?

Smiley said...

:)

Pale Rider said...

This is aimed at all those that are trying to lay a guilt trip on SUV owners. Drive what you wanna drive and we'll drive what we wanna drive. Ain't America grand? It's called freedom of choice. ;)

V said...

My parents raised six children in a Volkswagen Beetle and a Studebaker Lark.

But people apparently need a playroom full of toys, a DVD player, and a snack bar in their automobiles to keep the children happy these days. Why not just up their meds for the trip? It's all about convenience, isn't it?

Read High & Mighty, a book about how SUVs were marketed. Hint: they weren't marketed to the reasoning forebrain.

For example, it's pointed out (by auto-industry people) that the minivan has a profile "like a pregnant woman wearing a long dress"--which apparently offends a man's sensibilities.

And don't forget that TV ad in the gym where the PA says, "tan minivan in the lot with its lights on . . . " and no male wants to claim it.

These "my SUV is moral" people make me sick.

Anonymous said...

REPLACE TILLMAN with an image of a dead Iraqi child... now that's powerful imagery/words

Anonymous said...

I think the photo will make people uncomfortable which is what it should do. Why should we be comfortable? The money we dump into gas is going to companies like Shell Oil who are the cause of massive environmental destruction, displacement and loss of life in countries like Nigeria.

If we had to live one day in the life of someone from a Niger Delta town poisoned by the oil industry ... I mean imagine having your home, your families' farmland and your river, the only sources of sustenance you have, completely destroyed? Now you are homeless and risk getting shot if you protest, and there is no other housing or food, no place to go, no welfare system, and you have no money. There is utterly no way of legally obtaining any money. And the oil companies' plan is for you to shove off and die quietly so they can get the oil.

Well if that was us for a day I believe we'd all think just a little more about where the gas comes from and how it gets here and how much of our money we want these bastards to take. Maybe it’s an idea to make a card with some stats about oil companies to leave at the pump for people to read.

Anyway, when they see your card, people who really need an SUV can decide for themselves, ok, it's a necessity. People who don't, if they aren't just plain braindead, might get uncomfortable about it. That's ok with me. I've feel uncomfortable about a lot of things my money has paid for. Hopefully this will make me a more thoughtful person and influence my decisions in the future.

Anonymous said...

AFGHANISTAN was about an oil/gas pipeline that has been on paper at UnoCal since 1975!!! Russia moved in in 1979 to block the pipeline from being built. The Taliban was set up by the US to provide security for the pipeline but since they aren't Afghanis they couldn't get the job done. Care to guess where "President" of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai worked in 1999? UNOCAL!!!!

Anonymous said...

1. Killing trees needlessly (bad for environment)
2. Littering
3. Messing with another man's vehicle (violation of man law)
4. Disrespecting the memory of a fallen US Service member


Pathetic!

Anonymous said...

you piece of crap how dare you use this mans image however you feel this is so direspectful hope you get what is coming to you when you put this on the wrong car.

Anonymous said...

He was proud to die to protect you, not oil. Including to protect your freedom of speech. However freedome of speech does not mean that everything that is said is worthwhile. And this is stupid.

ps - you use so many things made from oil that even if we all drove hybrids we'd still have to import the stuff. And everything you own had to be transported. And the home you live in was probably built by a guy (or gal) with a truck and used it. So unless you live in under a freeway underpass, walk barefoot, wear animal skins, eat only the roadkill you come across in your search for enlightenment, then quit with your holier-than-tho crap and quit disrespecting Pat Tillman (and there's a good chance he drove a truch or SUV).

suvdriver said...

hahaha all these comments crack me up..your all a bunch of idiots, it amazes me that you can be so disrespectful of someone who gave their life for your country and rights, so you can go and use his picture on your dumb ass card. Get over yourself, driving a prius that takes less gas doesn't make you any better then anyone else. Just makes you a bandwagon hippie...

Freewayblogger said...

"Y'know, this war is so fuckin' illegal." - Pat Tillman, to his brother, in Iraq.