Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Anyone catch Tucker Carlson on Morning Joe??

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:17 AM
Original message
Anyone catch Tucker Carlson on Morning Joe??
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 06:20 AM by polichick
He was making the case that it's up to him to choose what car he drives (in his case, a big-ass Chevy Suburban) ~ government shouldn't insist that Detroit make green cars. He doesn't even think we have the technology to do it.

Americans like him are exactly why we're in this mess. WHAT AN ASSHOLE!

Mike Barnacle said he's going to kick his ass later.

(edit to add Barnacle's remedy.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Blarch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. Somehow our grandparants made due.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Our grandparents didn't have to think about global warming...
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 06:28 AM by polichick
We really do have to insist that Detroit make green cars. I find attitudes like Tucker's flat-out selfish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
27. What?
We've been altering climates for hundreds of years. Thousands of years. Long before cars came around. We're also not going to solve those problems by making different cars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #27
39. Well, we certainly are NOT
going to solve it driving the same gas guzzling, air polluting parade floats currently crowding the roads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #27
44. What's happening now threatens the entire planet, without which we cannot live...
Our grandparents didn't have to think about such an enormous environmental catastrophy.

Green technology is exactly the way to solve it ~ in cars and everything else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Labors of Hercules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #27
60. What the hell? And you think all that isn't cumulative?
You're damn right we've been altering the climate for thousands of years, and we have altered it more in the past 50 years than the previous 2000 years combined.

We've been racking up a huge tab. The Earth is tapping us on the shoulder to pay up, and it won't be long before she calls the bouncer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deminks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. He was pretty full of it this morning.
He said:

1. The economic crisis is not Smirk's fault, it's Nancy Pelosi's fault because of too much regulation.
2. He is 'toying' with the idea of running for the Senate
3. He is a union member, but he is still against bailing out the auto industry.
4. People hate the news media (no we just hate you, F*cker).

He was all over the map. I don't know why they give this guy air time anymore, he is so out of the loop.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I've heard he has connections - must be, because he is brainless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. I nearly threw my coffee
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 06:40 AM by polmaven
at the TV screen when he talked about how much "labor" is whining about being badly treated, and then said he was in a union and doesn't believe "that one".

I kept yelling...."LABOR UNION, a**hole! With the EMPHASIS on LABOR! What hard LABOR do the members of YOUR union do???"

My kitty ran and hid under the couch, but I never got an answer from Tucker.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. Gee, even Smirk disagrees with #1. He blamed it on policies put in place
a decade before he took office, which would have been during his daddy's term. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. The Senate? Is he jealous of Matthews considering a PA rub?
What state is he from?

Part of this may come from the way these talking heads have come to think of themselves as having more political acumen and more sense on policies than the politicians on their shows. Most politicians pander so much to them that many have come to think they could do it better. No one saying that "too much regulation" caused this crisis has a chance - I quess he missed the last election where the Republicans tried to argue that it was the Democrats who rejected the regulation that they wanted (of Freddie and Fannie) that caused the problem. (Ignoring that only 13% of the bad loans were bought by the FMs and that the biggest difference between their Senate bill and the bipartisan House one that Senate Democrats favored was that it would have made the FMs smaller and the less regulated private companies bigger.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. I think it was a shot at Matthews
Remember Tucker had a show at one time and now he doesn't.

If the RW talking heads actually start taking shots at Matthews his popularity is going to increase here ironically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
6. He must oppose unleaded gasoline as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
21. No doubt - and birth control as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. To bad his mother didnt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
7. Tucker has a point. What Congress and the so-called president..
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 07:34 AM by Kahuna
should have done is pass new CAFE standards. Then Tucker could have chosen to drive a behemoth but one with better fuel economy. The republicans refused to address CAFE. And Detroit refused to take the initiative. So while I would like to see the American Auto industry survive, there is plenty of blame to go around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. Sounded like he's against Congress insisting on any standards from Detroit...
...including CAFE standards.

Tucker has that "What I want is all that's important," attitude that has gotten us where we are ~ said every family with four kids and two dogs needs a Suburban. Hell, why are people having four kids these days anyway? That's another thing Congress could help with ~ tax more for many kids instead of offering tax breaks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #17
26. I think the repuke Congress took the position that it was up to Detroit
to compete as they pleased and it was therefore their choice to increase CAFE or not. When you think about it, Detroit should have taken the initiative even without congress imposing standards. I'm not excusing the repukes. I think that they should have imposed higher CAFE regardless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Seems the big three have been in the tank, so to speak, with big oil...
Maybe the oil companies can bail them out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. Yep! In short, they were. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
8. It's like the Exxon ad that shows "new electric cars" that look like go-carts
People need to watch "Who Killed The Electric Car"... especially Fucker Carlson...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
11. Catch Carlson?. . Like a cold or the flu?
(He's too much of an irritant for me.. I hit the mute button if I see his percy puss)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipi_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Cooties!!! aughhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!
Lysol! Rubbing alcohol! Bleach! Gasoline!


:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #11
18. He really is one SICK fucker. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terrya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
13. My suggestion: slap a huge luxury tax on these obscene gas guzzlers
If little ol' prissy bow-tie wants his Chevrolet Gas Guzzling Behemoth, he should pay a big tax for the privilege of owning it. Like, say, 50%. That Chevrolet Gas Guzzling Behemoth used to cost $45,000? WRONG. Now it will cost little prissy bow-tie $90,000. Hell, he can afford it.

It's a new world out there. If you want something that's not justifiable anymore, you'd better damn well be prepared to pay for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #13
19. I agree - and tax him for all those kids too...
Tucker said that every family with four kids and two dogs needs a Suburban. Why in the world are we still giving tax breaks for each child, no matter how many?

imo Congress should come up with a plan to reward people who live responsibly on a polluted, warming and overcrowded planet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terrya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #19
24. And use the revenue from this tax to fund energy independence and the fight against global warming.
In my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #24
33. I agree - people need to think about what they're doing in all their choices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. Thanks but i have five kids
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 08:48 AM by mkultra
The tax break is in place to insure that children remain fed, clothed and housed during tough times like this one. Maybe we should tax DINKs and single people who own cars. They are the ones that don't need them.


FYI. We own a Toyota Avalon and a Honda Oddssey. Both get over 22 miles per gallon and we have zero need for a suburban.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kalyke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #25
31. I have two kids and three dogs
We have a Mustang and a crappy Beemer (breaks down every three months).

We are considering getting an Escape Hybrid after hubby pays down the crappy Beemer so he's no upside down on a car loan because we can't take all the dogs with us anywhere. However, we have managed thus far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. We've known about over-population (with regard to resources) since the 60s...
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 01:38 PM by polichick
Each child uses a tremendous amount of resources in a lifetime (and continues with subsequent generations) ~ imo it's irresponsible and selfish to have large families, and has been for decades. Heavy taxes might make some people think twice.

Sorry if that offends you but, as a lifelong environmental activist, it's what I believe.

I also think people should pay heavy penalties for owning monster houses, which eat up tons of energy, and for other irresponsible habits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. you are more than welcome to be
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 10:06 PM by mkultra
as stupid about this as you want to be. Im not offended, i simply question your priorities and judgment. The only people truly wasting resources(from a species perspective) are those who do not have children. Sure we create a larger carbon footprint, but you would be surprised at the wasteful way people live until they actually have a family. In a sense, i would suggest that we are probably far more efficient per person than anyone with zero children or domestic animals.

Simply put, if you drive a car and are single, you are wasting far more than I.

We need to protect the earth so it can continue to support life. Life which I help support.


Lets not forget the opening of Idiocracy. Maybe the thinkers shouldn't be limiting their intellectual impact on the human form.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. Lol - you don't get how each person (and his or her offspring) consumes resources...
...and yet suggest that I'm being stupid?? It doesn't even occur to you how offensive it is for people to keep churning out kids in an over-crowded world, where we're all impacted by the irresponsible decisions of everyone else.

The planet isn't just about HUMAN life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #43
48. actually, the only reason to save the panet is to insure human existence for years to come
We are in a symbiotic state with the environment(or we should be) but only to an end that essentially supports the continuation of human existence. If humanity wipes out the planet environmentally, human life will cease, but the planets ecosystem would eventually recover. That may take a billion years, but it would happen, and life would spring new again.

I don't believe the government should be taxing, monitoring, or regulating reproductive rights for anyone. Frankly its fascist to suggest that it should and any suggestion in ANY manner is immoral.

We are by no stretch "over-crowded". This is probably the core disagreement that we have on this topic.

If you where to implement government monitoring and punishment for carbon foot printing, it would be wiser to measure the per person foot print and punish the big offenders.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. The only reason to save the planet is to insure human existence??
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 02:12 PM by polichick
What about the rest of the inhabitants of the earth? How arrogant to think only human life has value.

imo that attitude is immoral. Suggesting that people limit the number of children they bring into the world is hardly immoral ~ it's just plain sensible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. oh no, the other inhabitants have great value
but human life has more. Only a fool believes that a life has either value or no value. If i where forced to choose between the life of a bear and the life of a human child, i will choose to save the human child every time. I would make that choice with regret for the life of the bear because, in a sense, he is our brother. I would, however, make that choice without regret for my judgment.


This is a theoretical question, but a model non the less. What would be your choice and why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. That's not the same as humans choosing wisely so there is still room for animal habitats...
btw I just added to my last post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. i see, well i think your putting words in my mouth then
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 02:40 PM by mkultra
i still think people should do their best to choose wisely regarding reproduction but every circumstance is unique.

My suggestion was not that choosing wisely in this regard is somehow immoral, but rather your next step in suggesting that the government should regulate the reproductive rights of people to this end. To me, this second step crosses the morality line.

People and animals must live together in balance, but from a logical perspective, the primary(<--emphasis) reason for this is human survival. If your primary reason is a sort of natural morality, then i say more power too you. But having the government punish/monitor/regulate/tax people who break this natural morality is the exact same thing as Christian fundamentalists trying to use the law to push their morals. You have just chosen a different cause to be extreme about.

so... how about answering my question.

On edit..let me also add an additional question:
What if the choices where a bear and Tucker Carlson :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. Well, as long as you don't believe scientists about our over-crowded planet...
...we can't possibly agree on what measures to take to save it.

imo it's critical to curb population growth in order to regain balance ~ and there's nothing wrong with offering tax incentives in order to get it done.

I would gladly watch the bear eat Tucker Carlson. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. well i dont believe your ivocation of "scientists"
if you have them handy or have the time id be happy to read what you have.

Frankly, I've traveled the US considerably, and it is still mostly empty. I know that the last time i did ethanol research i determined that there where approximately 2trillion acres of "ready" farm land while we are using only 900 billion. This was a global number.

I think there are countries that have overcrowding problems such as India but even China has vast tracts of open land.

Since you seem unwilling to answer my previous question regarding the bear and the child, let me ask another.

Do you believe that the government should tax mothers who have abortions to discourage the activity?

Also, i agree on your Carlson answer but would add that he may not qualify as human.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. There are tons of articles to read about this, but here's a quick look...
...at the problem from a site with lots of other info.

http://www.overpopulation.org/USAFactsZPG.html

I didn't answer the question because it has nothing to do with my point ~ most humans would save another human over a members of a different species. That doesn't mean that we should overwhelm the earth with our presence.

Open land is deceiving ~ water is an enormous problem in the west, and population growth in some western areas is threatening the entire ecosystem. Politicians are even trying to divert water from the Great Lakes, which would threaten that system.

I'm grateful abortion is legal ~ otherwise we'd have an even bigger population problem.

Humans are behaving like a virus on the earth ~ imo we need to be willing to check ourselves in many, many ways in order to regain balance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #66
67. well, i dont disagree with most of those numbers but
they don't lead me to believe there is a crisis of any sort. Frankly i doubt that we are among the highest in teenage pregnancy. I would say that is only true of nations that track that data.

As far as the "adding four states" part, if you have been to the Midwest, you would know that we have room.

Our energy consumption problem is related to our dependence on foreign oil.


As for your comment about abortion, I think you are foolish. All life, as i said, has value.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. You don't seem to understand how it all works together...
Oh well...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. or perhaps you have the instructions upside down
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 03:44 PM by mkultra
:)


Or perhaps i have stricter personal moral code.

For example,

You think abortion is a good way to control human life because its important to protect the earth.

I think that its important to protect the earth so that it supports human life, something that abortion destroys.


Almost the same thing in reverse.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #69
72. I didn't say abortion is a good way to control human life...
I said I'm grateful it's legal, since we'd have more of a population problem if it wasn't. Obviously, it would be best if people simply behaved more responsibly.

You seem to see the planet as something in service to humans ~ the way many fundamentalist Republicans see it.

In any case, if you'd like to familiarize yourself with the situation we're in on the planet ~ there's plenty of good info out there, starting with Al Gore's book Earth in the Balance, written decades ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #72
73. well, something like that
The planet is something we MUST use to survive. We do this everyday when we eat or get shelter. I'm not afraid to be called fundamentalist by someone who thinks we are lucky to have abortion for environmental reasons. I think the difference for me is that i believe that we live symbiotically with the planet and they look at it as a pot to take things from.


I haven't read Gores book but I saw the movie and it was great. He, like you, is passionate about the environment but, unlike you, has well thought out arguments and ideals.
I feel very justified in my stance and feel it easily meets my personal morals.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. I would ask in what way my arguments are different from Gore's...
...but it's obvious that you don't have a clue. Keep wallowing in your bitchy ignorance ~ just do the planet a favor and use some birth control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #74
75. i would hope that you are using birth control as well
If so, dont stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
14. I did.
It reminded me of a conversation that I had with my normal brother a couple of years ago. He said that he wished that Tucker had to spar with my younger son, as punishment for being such a jackass. I was wishing the same thing this morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. LOL - lets hope Barnicle really does kick his ass!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #20
29. I'd prefer
having him spar my son. (smile)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
16. The petro-dictators' best friend
Yay, Tucker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. My town is so full of Suburbans, Hummers and big-ass pickups I could scream!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
28. Those asshoses need to have their choices mean cash.
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 09:41 AM by Gman2
The REAL costs of damages, insurancewise. Including the new greener, lighter cars vs. them. The REAL costs of damage to road surfaces, compared to the new, lighter cars. The REAL costs of pollution, and parking spaces for their fat asses. And RESTRICTED city parking of barges. GET ALL LIBERTARIAN ON HIS SCRAWNY ASS>>>>>>>>>>>>!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Let him argue against that! I'll add, we could add a lanes to freeways, and restrict his ass to 55, like all the other trucks. And charge them as commercial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. Definitely - I'm always amazed that we STILL fail to factor in environmental costs...
...in economic models. Many Americans are completely blind to the REAL costs of anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErinBerin84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
30. Tucker Carlson personifies Yuppie Scum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
35. Perhaps he can find himself a new Suburban made in China?
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 12:20 PM by mzmolly
:eyes:

He's the epitome of the f-d up short sighted mentality (that got us into this mess) and those who wish to appeal to it. Eventually most of them learn the hard way, at our collective expense.

Guess what Tucker, if we're putting up the money - it's conditional. If you and your R/W friends want to bail out the big three, feel free to set your own agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critters2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
36. When I drive around, I see more SUvs than anything else.
Americans want these, and Americans buy them. Americans are idiots, but they want and buy SUVs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Medusa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. Exactly. THat was what the public wanted to buy
so that's what Detroit made (and sold). And don't give me the BS about how the foreign automakers didn't do that--they did too. Look at Toyota: their pickups got progressiverly bigger and bigger and almost every single one of the auto makers I can think of came out with some type of SUV vehicle over the past 10 years. Why? Because of public demand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Well, maybe it will be one step at a time.
From medium-sized SUVs, maybe the next vehicle will be a mid-size sedan or a small SUV or crossover. Maybe they'll even get a hybrid. That's assuming that gasoline goes back to $2.50 or so.

If gasoline stays at $1.25 for a couple of years through this severe recession, many people will keep fixing the clunker, but gasoline prices may not be the determining factor in auto choice for those who must or can buy a new or new-to-them vehicle.

If gasoline goes back up to $4.00 and stays there, I think that they'll get the message.

Personally, I went from a small pick-up to a mid-size sedan and am enjoying a considerable improvement in gasoline expenses!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #36
45. "Americans are idiots,"
That's why the gov't can't leave something so critical to environmental health up to the public ~ the big stuff is what gov't is for imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryOldDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
46. Well, like they say...
...if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

And why is it surprising that Carlson holds this opinion? Just another case of "I got mine, screw everyone else." Yes, Tucker, you ARE free to drive whatever you want, but you should have some iota of social responsibility, especially if you are fully aware of current events, as you keep insisting you are.

Too bad Tom Friedman wasn't on the show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. "I got mine, screw everyone else."
It's sad that so many Americans feel this way ~ I'm hoping Barack will help people think differently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
50. I wish I had a choice.
I'd like a serious American union made hybrid with good mileage. Not some half assed hybrid that still gets under 35pmg like all the American companies are producing. I don't have a choice and I need the government to force the auto makers to give me one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. I'm with you - just rented a Prius and loved it. Got 60+ mpg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
51. No, but he was on the afternnon program
and I was surprised to hear the hostess referring to him as "MSNBC' Tucker Carlson." I thought tha the was banished.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:19 PM
Original message
They call him a poltical analyst now - can you believe it?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
55. Allow them to own the big gas guzzlers, but make them pay a huge tax.
Then use that money for environmental causes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. I'm all for it - and for monster houses and for having more than two kids, etc...
We have to get serious about the planet ~ humans are behaving like a nasty virus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
56. Yep, everything that other nations do efficiently, some
RW butt joke like him comes along and says we can't do it. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. They're invested in the status quo - that's where their money comes from...
...oil and other big business. Thank God Barack will soon be in the WH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
62. tucker carlson = aroogant prick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
63. He was spouting the typical misinformed Pube drivel. We DO have the technology!
And the problem with Detroit is NOT the union worker's costing too much.

He's sooooo stoopid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #63
70. We've had the ability for decades - just needed the right leader!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
65. He'd be an asshole if he drove an electric car. He's just an asshole. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
71. Mike Barnicle on the same show said that George W. Bush is the most
gracious person there is. Whatever that means, but lauding GWB with superlatives should be illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JaneQPublic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
76. Tucker was ON Joe? I always thought Tucker was a bottom. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamincali83 Donating Member (70 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 01:08 AM
Response to Original message
77. Tucker "The Fucker" Carlson can kiss my ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babydollhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
78. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 31st 2014, 02:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC