Couric HATES SUV's?

Published on February 2, 2005 By drmiler In Politics

Is this woman stupid or what? Reposted from media research center. Like the AG has nothing better to do than address her stupidity.

Anti-SUV efforts not anti-SUV enough for NBC's Katie Couric. In a Tuesday Today segment about an SUV safety advertising campaign, Couric, who admitted that SUVs "scare me a little bit because I feel like they could squash me like a bug," demanded of Connecticut's liberal crusading Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal: "What about the environmental impact of these cars? They're huge gas guzzlers, they're not particularly good for the environment. How come you're not emphasizing that as well?" Couric interviewed Blumenthal outside as the two stood in a front of the huge mascot for the campaign, ESUVEE, which the AP described as "a monster...that resembles a woolly mammoth with headlights."

See story #4

Link

Comments (Page 1)

Evorg

on Feb 02, 2005

Yeah her little feet can't reach the pedals

Moderateman

on Feb 02, 2005

couric lost all credability when she went into mourning after bush won this last election.. frell her..

perhaps_the_only_liberal_here

on Feb 02, 2005

well, if it's not in a rough terrain, then it's extremely inefficient as well as irresponsible. I know people who drive their suvs to the gym... 6 blocks from their house.

drmiler

on Feb 02, 2005

Reply #3 By: perhaps_the_only_liberal_here - 2/2/2005 6:47:43 PM
well, if it's not in a rough terrain, then it's extremely inefficient as well as irresponsible. I know people who drive their suvs to the gym... 6 blocks from their house

Get a grip. It's called America, the land of the "free". I don't care if I'm only driving "2" blocks to the store. It's a *right* that I as a taxpayer ( highway taxes) and a consumer ( gas prices, insurance and registration fees) PAY FOR!!!

ParaTed2k

on Feb 02, 2005

Someone needs to ask all the entertainment industry hypocrites why they figure that a gas guzzling stretch limo is any better for the "environment" than an SUV.

If you really want to fluster them, ask them if all the footage that ends up on the cutting room floor (and then the landfill) is biodegradable. But of course none of that matters since it is we (the great unwashed) who are supposed to bend towards their windmills. ;~D

ParaTed2k

on Feb 02, 2005

well, if it's not in a rough terrain, then it's extremely inefficient as well as irresponsible.

And how "responsible" is it for you to be on the internet. Do you realize how much energy is expended every day, just so you and I can Email, Surf and Blog?

sandy2

on Feb 02, 2005

And how "responsible" is it for you to be on the internet. Do you realize how much energy is expended every day, just so you and I can Email, Surf and Blog?

Umm.. id venture not nearly as much energy is used in a month for the internet as is used for a day for the Ford F150s and Explorers and the like.

sqrrldrw

on Feb 02, 2005

Computers really don't use very much power at all, especially compared to a F150 or better yet Toyota 4Runner (14mpg).

The responsibility factor is going to catch up with everyone once the prices rise or we have to declare yet another war for oil.

Couric is pretty dumb though, and not much of a journalist.

Angloesque

on Feb 02, 2005

Regarding fuel economy: Yes you have the right to choose if you're going to drive an SUV in your everyday use. You also have the right to choose if you're going to drive a more economical car. But one choice makes you a smarter consumer than the other. (Extenuating occupations and circumstances exempted.)

Regarding SUVs, absent of fuel, the facts are thus:

1. SUV headlights are blinding to nighttime drivers of cars because they are higher. This endangers other drivers.
2. SUVs do more damage in wrecks. Car occupants experience substantially higher fatalities and more severe injuries in collisions with larger vehicles. (Source: Paul Craig Roberts, "Fuel Economy Laws Bite Back")
3. SUV drivers tend to be poorer at parking within the lines of a parking lot, no doubt due to their poorer turning radii. This is, for lack of a better word, stupid.
4. SUVs are difficult to see around in heavy traffic, thus depriving smaller drivers of the knowledge of what's going on up ahead (if car drivers pull back, other drivers will continually seize the opportunity to cut in). Again, this can be dangerous.

Those are my arguments against SUVs. I'm not a big Katie Couric fan, but if she's driving a small car, it can squish her--yes, just "like a bug." A stinkbug, perhaps.

-A.

drmiler

on Feb 03, 2005

Reply #9 By: Angloesque - 2/2/2005 10:10:29 PM
Regarding fuel economy: Yes you have the right to choose if you're going to drive an SUV in your everyday use. You also have the right to choose if you're going to drive a more economical car. But one choice makes you a smarter consumer than the other. (Extenuating occupations and circumstances exempted.)

Regarding SUVs, absent of fuel, the facts are thus:

1. SUV headlights are blinding to nighttime drivers of cars because they are higher. This endangers other drivers.
2. SUVs do more damage in wrecks. Car occupants experience substantially higher fatalities and more severe injuries in collisions with larger vehicles. (Source: Paul Craig Roberts, "Fuel Economy Laws Bite Back")
3. SUV drivers tend to be poorer at parking within the lines of a parking lot, no doubt due to their poorer turning radii. This is, for lack of a better word, stupid.
4. SUVs are difficult to see around in heavy traffic, thus depriving smaller drivers of the knowledge of what's going on up ahead (if car drivers pull back, other drivers will continually seize the opportunity to cut in). Again, this can be dangerous.

Those are my arguments against SUVs. I'm not a big Katie Couric fan, but if she's driving a small car, it can squish her--yes, just "like a bug." A stinkbug, perhaps.

-A.

Have you ever been in a *SERIOUS* accident? I'll bet not. If you ever had been your choice of vehicles would show it rather quickly! You neglected to mention that SUV *drivers* tend to suffer fewer injuries due to the larger vehicle sustaining less damage. And BTW #3 is a crock. If they seem to be bad at parking that's the drivers fault NOT the SUV.

on Feb 03, 2005

You neglected to mention that SUV *drivers* tend to suffer fewer injuries due to the larger vehicle sustaining less damage.

Exactly. They feel less obliged to drive more safely. I have seen so many SUV drivers drive around in a very risky way. I almost got in serious accident with 3 SUV so far, and only one regular car. The regular car one was my fault, I am still kinda new on driving and I made a major blunder.

You could easily power entire house from one of those SUV engines for longer time than they last with a full tankful of gas. So you're basically making so much power driving around, but doing nothing but move around and create tons of heat. Maybe listen to some music, and some lights, thats it. The heater don't count, since it uses the engine's heat to heat up the air.

drmiler

on Feb 03, 2005

Reply #11 By: XX - 2/3/2005 1:05:38 AM
You neglected to mention that SUV *drivers* tend to suffer fewer injuries due to the larger vehicle sustaining less damage.

Exactly. They feel less obliged to drive more safely

WRONG. They suffer less damage and injury due to the sheer size, weight and metal content in an SUV Even if what you say is true. Is that the SUVs fault? NO! It would be the drivers fault.

Dr Guy

on Feb 03, 2005

Yeah her little feet can't reach the pedals

That is kind of ironic as most of the people I see and know who drive them are little ladies. They must use booster pedals!

Dr Guy

on Feb 03, 2005

Umm.. id venture not nearly as much energy is used in a month for the internet as is used for a day for the Ford F150s and Explorers and the like.

And you would be wrong. There are thousands of 150s and Explorers. There are over a billion internet users and the equipment needed to make it run sucks down a lot of juice.

Dr Guy

on Feb 03, 2005

You could easily power entire house from one of those SUV engines for longer time than they last with a full tankful of gas. So you're basically making so much power driving around, but doing nothing but move around and create tons of heat. Maybe listen to some music, and some lights, thats it. The heater don't count, since it uses the engine's heat to heat up the air.

Not unless you live in a log cabin. When we lost power for 10 days after isabel, I got a 5500 watt generator. That would only run the lights and small utilities, not the heater/AC, Washer Dryer etc. And it used over 5 gals per 24 huors. Adding the rest to a generator that would carry the load would easily drink up 25 gals per day. Most SUV drivers dont use near that much in a day.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!