Green Cars According to Limbaugh

Seems Rush Limbaugh is back on his soap box again and this time it is about green cars, mainly hybrids. Edmunds.com recently published an article that spawned from one of Mr. Limbaugh's commentaries (link). Apparently Mr. Limbaugh thinks that no one buys hybrids and they are only built to keep Congress and California off the auto industry's back. He also claims that Washington and California killed the automotive industry. While I think there might be some truth in what he is saying I still think he missed the mark as usual. 

Over a ten year period there have been about 1.3 million hybrids sold in the United States. I agree that isn't many vehicles sold when you think that between 10 and 12 million vehicles are sold annually. However people who tend to through out numbers like this fail to look at the big picture. At the end of 1999 the average price of a gallon of petrol was $1.30, hardly expensive. We didn't even really get into the over $2.00 range until around 2004 and even then that wasn't expensive enough to keep people from buying Tahoe's. 

The Honda Insight, which was released to the US market in December of 1999, was only followed by the Toyota Prius a few months later and that was it. You had a choice between two hybrid models, both expensive in a time when fuel economy wasn't on everyone's mind. I'm guessing that probably has something to do with the fact that such a low number has sold over the years. The Honda Civic Hybrid came along in 2003, the Honda Accord in 2004, and the Ford Escape in 2005. So as you can see in proportion to how many models there were to choose from these cars actually sold decently well all things considered. 

These manufactures also saw a niche to be filled, there are clientele out there that want green vehicles, so why not build something for them? All it's going to do is increase your brand awareness and help you sell vehicles. Let's think about it this way, a pro-green person is in the market for a new car and like most consumers they don't know much about cars. They would like a Prius because it's economical and green however they are unable to afford it. They are still going to think of Toyota as a green company though and be more likely to look at their vehicles, which would probably result in the sale of a Yaris or a Corolla. So it's not all about getting the government off your back, it's about marketing your brand...which correct me if I'm wrong, is something they should be doing.   

Now to address what he said about politics killing the auto industry. I can agree with this to a point, especially when concerning the speed a vehicle can travel, but for the most part the government has to put regulations in because people are idiots and need someone to keep them safe. Also companies need protection against these idiots so they can't sue them even though whatever happened was a result of their stupidity. Look at stability control, it's mandated that it's put into every vehicle now because some half-wit was on the road and not paying attention. They had to swerve at the last second to avoid it (whatever it is, a dog, little kid, alien, pothole) and the vehicle flipped over because of their stupidity. Now they go an sue the car maker for millions because they now have a life altering injuries and the worst part is they win. This is why the government mandates things, to protect idiots from themselves. 

And if Rush can't find a vehicle he likes then he's not trying hard enough, there are thousands of vehicles to choose from and there is at least one that makes you go "ya I want that". 

So really Mr. Limbaugh, I still state that you, along with every other commentator need to shut up. 

Rush Limbaugh Needs to Shut Up

Honestly do I even have to explain why? Just listening to the man is torture in and of itself. Why the Republican party lets this man be their cheerleader is baffling. I mean nothing say progressive and modern like a middle aged, fat, white bloke who enjoys smoking cigars, playing golf, and abusing prescription drugs.

If the Republicans want to change their image and get back into power they need to appeal to a wider range of people including the moderates and *gasp* some left wingers. Having people like Mr. Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter and Bill O'Rielly leading the charge isn't going to win any favours with those who aren't already staunch conservatives. All these "commentators" are doing is driving people like me, who used to consider themselves conservative, away with all their idiotic remarks. Mr. Limbaugh's recent comments where he has stated he hopes President Obama fails pretty much did it in for me. I don't care who the president is, I don't want to see them fail because that ultimately means the country is going to fail as well. I'm sure Mr. Limbaugh is sitting comfortably with his $33 million a year salary, but most of us don't have that luxury and I'm pretty sure most of us do not want to see the USA fall flat on it's face because it's going to take all of us with it. 

And to show I'm not biased against conservatives I think plenty of liberal commentators need to stuff it as well, mainly Michael Moore who is another middle aged, fat, white bloke with to much free time and a camera. There is also Keith Olbermann who's just as whacked out. The only difference is not nearly as much attention is paid on this guys. The last time I heard from Mr. Moore I was laying in a hotel bed in Barcelona watching an episode of Leno with Catalan subtitles. That was back in 2007 and I haven't heard much from him since. 

So why are the conservatives so outspoken to the point where they just need to shut up? Well I think they still think it's the 1980's and Ronald Regan is still in charge. I also think they are upset that the United States wants to become more progressive and, I don't know, advancing. I agree that Bush did get a bad wrap from everyone under the sun and he didn't deserve some of what was thrown at him but still that does not excuse Mr. Limbaugh from looking like an idiot when he says he hopes our president fails. 

Now as I've said, I'm not a huge Obama supporter but I want to see him succeed because that means America will (hopefully) succeed. So really these commentators need to just shut up about things, because while they are making millions of dollars of their media outlets the rest of us average people are struggling to ride out the recession. 

For Once Listen to Hollywood

So scientist at the University of Melbourne and the University of Texas have discovered a way to get genes from extinct animals (Link). Now forgive me if I sound a bit cold hearted here but why on Earth do we need to bring back animals that went extinct? What good could possibly come from it? 

Let me put it this way. When I was first taking my anthropology classes I was taught that in the course of evolution a species either has to move, adapt or die when a new challenge is given. This is why we do not have legitimate Neanderthals promoting Gieco, only modern humans in costume. Obviously the animals they are trying to bring back failed somewhere along the way which is why they are extinct now. 

Yes, I understand many animals went extinct because of something humans did. The dodo bird is a prime example, if humans hadn't introduced new species that killed the dodos they would still probably be here today. However, that still does not dismiss the fact the dodo died off because it was unable to move or adapt. Left with the only option the dodo slipped off into the sands of time.

Then there is the issue of what will happen if we reintroduce some species into a ecosystem not designed for them. I can help but to use the example of Jurassic Park (the film, the book is long and wordy). I sure most people have seen it in the 15 or so years it's been out so they will know what I am talking about when I say I don't want a T-Rex running through downtown San Diego. Granted they probably won't be able to bring back dinosaurs and it's questionable whether they can bring anything at all, but I'm still concerned they are even trying. 

Let's just hope this idea goes the way of the dodo because honestly extinct animals are probably best left that way. I mean would you want your species to be brought back from the dead only to be either over hunted again or turned into a cute and cuddly pet? Probably not. 

Is the Apocalypse Nigh?

A recent study found that more American than ever have turned away from religion altogether according to CNN yesterday (Link). I know the Atheist will jump up and down and say they are winning and I know the religious will shout from the roof tops that America is suffering moral decay. The article uses a quote from William Donohue, who is the president of the Catholic League, which basically states that people are not turning into Atheist but are rather becoming fed up with religion telling them what to do. 

I think Mr. Donohue has a very good point since more and more America is becoming a nation of individuals (unless of course you are a teenager) and we want to do our own thing. But I also think now that science is beginning to answer more questions more people are starting to question things they have been taught to believe from religious scriptures. Creation stories being the main one that I can think of. Science is constantly collecting more data on evolution and showing how it probably worked, so that right there goes against just about every religion worldwide. There is always going to be a group of people who will say science is wrong, which is fine since this is America and you can believe whatever you want, but I think the majority of people will just accept things because it has been shown to be correct. With that accepting they might begin to question some of their other beliefs...it's all part of being human. 

As I've said in previous posts, I don't consider myself religious so I suppose I fit into that group that is growing in America. I do not consider myself an Atheist because I can't say for sure there is no supernatural being out there. I guess the best thing I can classify myself as is an Agnostic, or in layman's terms "I don't know" and as I've stated I really think more and more Americans feel the same way. Religion is confusing since there is little or no evidence to go on and people are scared of things they do not understand for the most part. 

So on to my point in all of this, is this the sign the apocalypse is nigh? Depends on who you ask. Some of the more bible-thumping people I know would say this shows what happens to a country when a liberal takes over (Link), when you legalise gay marriage or allow stem cell research. They would also tell me that this un-Christianising of America shows our moral decay and will lead to the end of the world. What I think this people don't understand is that you have morals even if you don't have religion. Yes religion can enforce certain morals but morals are not the result of religion no matter what your bible-thumping friends tell you. 

So no the apocalypse is not nigh and no just because people are turning away from organised religion doesn't spell doom and gloom (unless of course you consider Wall St. a religion). There are plenty of other countries where religion isn't very strong and they have not imploded yet so I don't really think we have much to worry about here in America.

Jesus Wouldn't Bash Homosexuals, So Why Would You?

Apparently there was a huge protest in California last night over Prop 8 and there is a court ruling today, somehow this was overlooked in the news because two NFL players more than likely drowned.  CNN never ceases to amaze me on their priorities of news. Yes it's sad that two people died in a fishing accident but the court case concerning Prop 8 is a big one and should be reported on. I know homosexuality is taboo in America for whatever reason but people need to understand that there are going to be attracted to the same sex, so deal with it. 

I didn't really understand Prop 8 very well since I live about 3,000 miles from California and like I said the national news found other things more important. Now that I've actually read up on it it makes me just shake my head at the way democracy works here in the US. Apparently there were 18,000 or so legalised same-sex marriages in California but now that Prop 8 passed they are not. It's little wonder why the rest of the western world thinks we are socially backwards. 

I've heard some rather inane remarks about same-sex marriage as well, with my favourite being that homosexuals want more rights than everyone else. I don't quite seem to understand that logic but then again it comes from bible thumping Conservatives and whacked out, Constitution thumping Libertarians, so really I'm not surprised it is a head scratcher. Homosexuals aren't asking for more rights, they are asking for more equality in our society which I think is only fair. 

The only argument against same-sex marriage that I know of is that most religious groups do not support it. As far as I know the United States is supposed to have a separation of religion and government but apparently I learned a different view of history. I have nothing wrong with people being religious and I have nothing wrong with those people saying same-sex marriage goes against their beliefs. However I do find it wrong when religious view points make it into the government since this is suppose to be a country where you can practice any religion you like or choose to not practise anything at all. 

Another thing that gets me is how same-sex couples are treated by people who claim to be Christian. Now I don't know if Jesus really did all those things the bible says he did or if he was even a real person, but I'm guess that if Jesus was real he would have befriended those who were outcasted in society...like homosexuals. I think many Christians need to go back to the "What Would Jesus Do?" school of thought.  

I just hope the US realises eventually that we no longer live in the 1950's and we need to accept that there are going to be people who are different. Honestly two men or two women marrying isn't going to affect you in any way, shape or form, so really why be against it? 

Is it All Just a Waste of Space?

With all this doom and gloom being broadcast through the airwaves it got me thinking if perhaps an alien race could be listening in an laughing at us. For all we know we could be the laugh stock of the galaxy. Granted they couldn't be all that far away since the radio waves haven't had enough time to travel all that far, but still there is a chance. 

Even if we aren't being spied on by little green men, it still does beg the question, are we alone in the universe? I think it's rather daft of us to believe we are it because if we really are the pinnacle of creation then either a supernatural being or the laws governing random chance goofed along the way. There has to be something out there that is more intelligent and more advanced then us. 

To illustrate this point I think we need to look at some incomprehensible numbers. In the Milky Way Galaxy alone there are an estimated 200 - 400 billion stars perhaps more. For the sake of argument I'm going to go with the higher estimate and say there are at least 400 billion stars. Now there is an estimated 125 billion galaxies in the known universe based on Hubble's predictions. Now if you multiple that out you get an estimated 500 sextillion (that's 500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) stars in the known universe and if each of those stars could have 8 or more planets around them. You can see where the chances increase for life to exist out there. And remember this is a pretty conservative estimate. 

Dr. Frank Drake who is a retired professor from the University of California, Santa Cruz developed an equation to basically find out how many contactable civilisation there are in a known galaxy, this became known as the Drake Equation. The equation basically takes all the factors needed for a civilisation to develop and then tries to work through all the factors logically. It works to a degree but since we don't really have all numbers right now everything is just a big guessing game. The best current estimations state that there are 2.31 contactable civilisations in the Milky Way. I think that number is probably very low since I highly doubt there are only 3 or 4 planets that support intelligent life out of trillions of possibilities.

So why is it so many humans think we are it? I know most religions state we were created by some sort of supernatural being and never mentions anything else (although I could be wrong, my scope on world religions isn't excellent). But who says creation stories are subject just about human beings? Many of these stories have been changed so much over the course of time anyways that things very well could be taken out of context. 

But if for some reason we are it, the only intelligent life ever to surface in the billion of years the universe has existed then I think we need to either question everything we know about science or rethink religion...either way it's pretty concerning because if we truly are it then the universe is nothing more then a enormous waste of space.  

United We Stand, Divided We Fall

I read a pretty interesting editorial from the New York Times this morning entitled What Part of 'Stimulus' Don't They Get? It features two of the rising stars of the Republican Party, Gov. Bobby Jidal from Louisiana and Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina who are both threatening to turn away federal aid to help those who had low income jobs and are now unemployed. The worse part is the only reason they want to reject the aid is because it goes against Republican ideology, not because they actually think it will be bad for the state. 

It seems like everyday now the Republicans are criticising President Obama's plans to try to fix this country. I'm not going to say Obama's plans are going to be the saving grace of this nation because honestly I don't know, but at least it is something. Obama has also said numerous times he wishes to work with Republicans and get rid of partisan politics and while some Republicans have crossed that bridge many have not. Honestly guys, lets put away the ideologies and fix the problems. Obviously the Republicans weren't doing what was right for a majority of the people in this country, hence why they are no longer in power. 

Right now is a time more than ever to work together as a nation and pull ourselves back up. We are the ones that created this mess, now we need to be the ones who fix it. Old, rich white guys need to stop pulling their money out of the stock market every time Obama talks. Some union workers (i.e. UAW)  need to give some slack to these ailing companies. Everyone needs to realise the housing market is broken. These is so much we need to do and if our leaders are, for a lack of a better term, having a pissing contest over ideologies then who are we to turn to? 

I don't really consider myself a part of any political party since they are all more or less full of BS'ers and crooks so I don't really care about ideologies. The Democrats have things I agree with as do the Republicans and as do many third parties. I thought I used to subscribe to the Libertarian way of thinking but they are delusional about how to fix the nation, I mean honestly any group that say all major companies should fail isn't going to be overly popular right now with anyone. 

So what are we to do? I know some of our leaders are trying, but unless their is unity we are doomed to fail like every other great civilisation throughout history. 

Game On My Wayward Son

So GameStop just released their earnings and they are up 11.4% and projected to go up an additional 18-22% this year. That is some incrediable numbers in this economy, but it's also not that surprising when you think about. 

Let's take for example a game I've put more hours on than I probably should mention since it's going to make me look like uber-geek. The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and all of it's expansions probably add up to about a $130 worth of gaming goodness. That sounds fairly expensive but between the 5 characters I have put it 427 hours of game play...that's almost 18 days of total play time. Anyways that works out to be $.30 per hour which is pretty good value for money. Now lets compare this to say going to the movies which cost $10 for a 2 hour flick. For you non-math majors that works out to be $5.00 per hour. 

See it's not hard to see why video games offer a better entertainment option and therefore why people are buying them in this economic climate. We all want to be entertained and we are all cutting back quite a bit so it doesn't seem like that far fetched of a statement to say you want to but Rock Band over going to see someone in concert. 

This is also not to mention the social aspect of gaming, my buddies and I play Left 4 Dead just about every night and we communicate with one another via headset. Some will say that's not social interaction but I challenge anyone to explain to me how it isn't. By sitting at home, being social and entertained we are all saving money. No buying expensive drinks at a bar, no burning petrol to drive anywhere, no overpriced food at a restaurant, and so on. We get hours and hours of entertainment out of a game that cost us $25. 

Then there is the other big reason why people play games, and that is to escape the awfulness which is real life. I mean I look around all I see is doom and gloom that I have no control over. That's not very fun, but I guess it takes someone with a warped sense of thinking to have fun in a world where zombies have taken over and the only way to survive is to unload massive amount of lead into them. I don't know I think I would rather be apart of a world with a zombie apocalypse than a world where the economy is collapsing and it's all being ran by idiots...I can at least shoot the zombies. 

Go game on my geeks and geekettes, game on! 

It's OK, I acted Childish

After checking to see who won the Super Bowl and rewatching Bruce Springsteen's crotch attack the camera on YouTube a couple times this morning I figured I would see if anything pressing was in the news. Something caught my eye, mainly because it was the lead story on CNN. Michael Phelps, the swimmer that won all those medals for the 3 people whom live under a stone, was photographed smoking a bong at a party. (Link)

My question from all of this is it really that big of a deal? I mean the guy is still a college kid and, based on what I've been told from numerous people who've met him at U of M, he is exactly the type of guy that would go to a party and do something like that. But still what is the big deal, millions of college kids do drugs, drink excessively, among other things everyday. Granted I never did anything like that but I would say I was an exception for the most part. I really do think most college kids experiment with stuff they were always told not to do. 

The one thing that does irritate me though is that Phelps will walk away from this without consequence because he released a statement saying that his behaviour was regrettable. If an average college kid were to get caught doing this he or she could face jail time, several fines, and a mark on their record. I still don't think smoking pot is that big of a deal, but I do think it's a big deal that a so called celebrity won't face the same consequences an average person would. 

Why should celebrities be treated any differently than anyone else, especially athletes since they are only famous because they were able to play a kid's game well? Like I said people who smoke pot are the least of my worries and I don't really care what you do. But there are laws stating that it's illegal to use marijuana and if you are caught you have to face the consequences whether they are right, wrong or indifferent. But hey Phelps is famous and can swim fast so a statement saying that he acted childish is good enough right?

Won't Someone Please Think of the Children?!?!

Like most people who arrive at work before they are supposed to I cruise the Internet looking for something interesting I might have missed the night before. My rounds typically include going through the news on CNN and hitting up a couple other blogs. This morning though my trip was cut short when an article appeared on CNN.com about how small cars have higher insurance premiums because they are by nature unsafe.  (Link)

I couldn't help but think what a load of tripe this was, are we as Americans still under the impression that a little car can't be safe? It seems to me this is nothing more then Helen Lovejoy screaming "Won't someone please think of the children?" 

Granted this article did come from AOL Autos which doesn't know anything about cars, but I still feel that this mentality is alive and well with the American consumer. I really do fail to understand why people assume that if you have 6,000lbs. of vehicle around you, you'll be somehow safer than if you had 2,500lbs. 

As I've already said numerous times I own a 2007 MINI Cooper which is the second smallest four wheeled vehicle you can currently buy in the US with only the Smart Fourtwo being smaller. I've been in an accident with it as well and I'm still here without injury and I was hit by a big, heavy VW Passat. 

Even though this is a bit old now it still shows my point. This shows the results of a 40mph offset barrier crash test between a first generation MINI Cooper and a Ford F-150 (Link)

I am almost certain I would rather been in the MINI during a 40mph collision because it looks like I might be able to walk again. If you look at the crash dummy's legs in the F-150 you can see that bloke would be a paraplegic for life. And nothing screams safety like having your knees thrown into your chest by the bloody dashboard. 

Now my absolute favourite knock at my little car is when people tell me that I will most certainly die if a bigger vehicle hits me, like say a Chevy Tahoe. Well one unfortunate MINI owner in Texas did the experiment for us small car enthusiasts when a Tahoe ran a very red light and more or less ran over the front of the MINI. The pictures speak for themselves. 

These photos were taken by Matt Groner and sent into Jalopnik. Apparently Groner walked away with just minor bumps and bruises that just about anyone would suffer in such an accident. The Tahoe driver was in slightly worse shape considering their vehicle ended up laying on the driver side. 

The Smart Fourtwo fairs just as well in crashes according the the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which gave the Fourtwo excellent ratings.  So really next time you are car shopping, which lets be honest won't be for a while because you are probably broke, really take into consideration if you need that 6,000lbs Tahoe because it's supposedly safer. I mean it's for the children right?