Just as with Dirty Diapers, Change is Coming
If change gets your adrenaline pumping, you are living through a great and historic period. The most pervasive and disruptive changes in history are happening all at once in major segments of the world’s operations: energy, the economy, climate, and politics.
In energy, the end of fossil fuel and foreign oil dependence is clearly visible down the road, as renewable energy sources whittle away at 100 year-old energy profiles. Another strange thing is happening. The Wall Street Journal reports that energy demand from utility companies has dropped dramatically in 2008 where they normally see a 1 to 2 percent increase. It appears that “the trend isn’t a byproduct of the economic downturn,” according to the WSJ, “and could reflect a permanent shift in consumption that will require sweeping change in their industry.” Could it be that a general population shift toward conservation of energy use and away from waste could be triggering the lower usage? Maybe it’s time for utility companies, with the help of government incentives, to change their business plan from making a profit from how much energy they can sell to how much energy they can save for their customers.
In Politics, no one needs to be reminded of the historic nature of new president-elect Barach Obama. But not only the election of an avowed energy and environmentally conscious leader, but with also a supportive House and Senate behind him, we may finally see a much quicker move to renewables and restraints on global warming than from the reluctant, anti-environmental former government. One of the big changes has already happened with Thursday’s House vote to strip Rep. Dingle from Michigan of his chair of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee that also oversees climate change and global warming. He was replaced by ethics bulldog and avid environmentalist, Henry Waxman. Dingle has long been a protector of the auto industry by fighting the government’s enactment of stronger fuel-economy standards and opposing tough air pollution limits on power plants. And with environmentalist Barbara Boxer as chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, you can expect an ally in making great changes to protect the earth and the environment–all good news for RVers who love the great outdoors.
The changing role of energy with the Waxman/Boxer led committees will be particularly effective in California, where the current government along with Rep. Dingle had previously thwarted the state’s efforts at leading the way in enacting stronger environmental and fuel economy standards than in place by the federal government.
With the more environment-friendly folk in charge, the possibility of what the San Francisco Chronicle headlined as Electric Car Paradise could become a reality. The article reported on a $1 billion investment into the Bay Area cities of San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose to build the nation’s first electric vehicle network. The plan calls for Shai Agassi’s company, Better Place, to invest in a network of electric-vehicle charging and battery-exchange stations (similar to programs already being built in Israel and Denmark) throughout the Bay Area by 2012. In exchange for this investment, the three mayors will create cohesive regulations for electric vehicles that will apply to the region’s cities and counties. 
With this type of forward-looking and highly-visible program, soon we will see a plethora of EVs on the market. One car company (no, not one of the Big 3 Detroit dinosaurs), BG Automotive, also announced this week that they will introduce by March of 2009 a 4-door, 5 passenger, electric city car with a top speed of 40 mph, capable of 60 to 120 miles per charge (depending on battery configuration), that will charge in any 120-volt outlet, and sell for $16,000 – $18,000. These will make perfect, emission-free, environmentally-friendly, high-mileage, and economically-practical tow vehicles behind our motorhomes–and they even come in a variety of colors.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Totally biased conjecture by Mr Difley.
“Totally biased conjecture by Mr Difley.”
That’s putting it mildly.
Mr. Difley must be a child of the sixties flower power generation. This article is truly totally biased on conjecture which I do not share.
Difley speaks like a true left brainwashed West Coast liberal. Boxer, Waxman, & Pelosi pose a real danger to our Country. Dilfy apparently hasn’t bothered to notice that the big 3 have made tremendous strides in fuel effeciency and alternate powered vehicles. GM is producing an electric car and all three automakers’ mileage is as good as or better than their Japanese counterparts. Our liberal press fails to notice that too. Ask Jay Leno, a real car guy, about the big 3 and his take on the situation.
What a nut. After reading this BO backers garbage one can only hope that they find BO was not a US citizen and thus throw the bum out with the rest of the clintions.
I can see why most that resist the environmentalnazi movement are being buldozed into the ground by the mindless and idiots who think they know it all.
I suggest that Bozo Bob turn in his RV if he in fact has one to begin with. He probably thinks that one can move his motorhome using a prius electric power.
Reality escapes him. However, he will be one of the first who will whine when he gets hit to pay for all this renewable junk. They think they are changing the world for a better place and look what is happening now. I have to agree with one who worked in the bay area and had to downsize. He needed to let 8 people go. So how did they make the determination as to who stayed and who went. Easy They went out to the parking lot and found 8 with OB /B stickers on them which were SUV’s. Guess who got the ax first… Indeed they experianced the motto… time for a change.
They elected OB to be president. Now lets see how long it takes ‘em to find out he lied on his promasses. I give ‘em till July to find out he is not who he says he is and that the change is what they have to give more of for the less they get.
About the only thing I can see a change coming in… is hold on to your wallet.. someone has to pay for it. Guess who.
And now were finding out that the so called super clean renewable energy E85 fuel is not all it was proclaimed to be. Lots of problems showing up. Worse gas mileage with more CO emissions than the old stuff.
And just to help billybob Difley out a little more… one needs to look at the effecenty of the electric cars… who do you think is going to recharge them batts? At a rate of 1.5 times as much energy to recharge than what you get gee ya think its more effecent? You probably think.. no problem just plug it into the wall and were good to go… Well Bozo where is that plant making the elect your plug’in to?
The problem is most of these so called environmental nazi’s never look at the big picture. Most only see about the length of their big nose. And of course they won’t hear of anything that they can’t control or issues contrary to their own. That is why most are control freaks that want to tell you what to do and how to do it . Over all the EV program is seriously defecent. If it was that great thousands would be beating a path to the manufactures door. Think about it. When the EV cars (when all the losses are calculated in) actually create more CO than your current car that uses GAS.
I am all for improvements… but let the engineers do their thing… politicans and the environmental nazi’s don’t know what they are doing. I for one would like to see the environmentalist nazi’s be backed up into the corner. They demand all these changes without any thought to how they are to be achieved. For years they have set goals and then left the engineers and manufactures to achieve them without any ideas.
We went through the global warming BS that another one got a nobel prize for and after he got it.. they proved he was wrong… but he kept the prize because he is a golden boy. Another hit is going to be the CO credit emissions. Where its all about the money and not doing a damm thing for the environment. It does support more of the idiots who are going to tell you what you can own and do though.
I think a lot of their babbling sounds a lot like what hitler used during the rise of the third group. Of course we all know how the animal farm book turned out. That must be BillyBobs bible. Say hellow to the new socialist. They have won as we not take from the rich and give to the poor… huh.
Around july to Nov I am looking for a big change to occur. Some won’t like it either as you will have to make a big choice. We will all be either living in RV’s or under bridges for sure thanks to the Change. Best hold on to your retirement anyway you can. People like Bob here are going to try and tell you… you can’t have your freedoms…. for the sake of the environment. Remember they know what is good for you better than you do.
Many of the statements that Mr. Dilfey presents as “facts” in the second and third paragraphs are debatable at every level. This rambling ignores well-published, logical arguments to the contrary that are published by educated and intellectual people who have thought it through and actually ‘get it’. I’d like to ask for the reason that this sort of cartoonish bias is permitted to be published on RV.Net!
Mr Diffey, do you think the government should mandate mileage standards for RV’s?
Thomas lasley
A real flower child!! His facts are pure speculation. I am afraid this is what we are going to get for the next 2 or 4 years.
Gee, I liked the article. I think there is a need and want for mixed types of autos. The EV will be reasonable in the Bay area and other cities and reduce the carbon footprint. Don’t see how that threatens me. Living in the Adirondacks I would like to see a decrease in coal fired electric plants so we could reclaim some of the acid rain runined lakes and trees. I fail to understand why people are opposed to conservation of the resources.
awww I just had to share this one with you about a happening at the Grand Canyon several years ago.
Seems we went to trailer village and got hooked up with the 31 ft AS. their they provide electic , water and sewer… nice campground.
Well right next door to us pulled in a guy and his girlfriend/whatever.. with their vw bus. His first comment to us was… those things should be outlawed because they use so much fuel to tow. Gee frendly kind of camper.
Anyway we all went to the campground ranger rick show and tell… it was a nice clear night… after the show started one of the ranges said… keep a extra blanket handy as its supposed to snow and the temp drop down into the minus degrees by morning… hmmm looking around one thought that maybe the ranger was smoking something the indians gave him… but we all headed home… we to our AS and the neighbors to their makeshift tent camper.
Set the heater in the AS for night sleeping… and went to bed after taking a nice hot shower and having a snack from out of the refrig… left over baked apple pie… yum
with ice cream… ya this is camping american style.
Anyway the next morn I got up put a T shirt on and opened the eyebrow windows on top of the trailer… what no light… hmmm opened the side window next to the table and sure enough their was about 6 inches of snow… wow… wonder how the ranger knew… but what happend next was where it gets fun.
Looking out the window sipping my hot coffee.. I noticed the young lady bundled up and looking like a wet pooch. I motioned to her as if to say would you like some hot coffee… she nodded … I looked and her boyfriend was busy trying to get the coleman stove lit… instead it was so cold (wasn’t the propane kind) that all it did was flame up… and then go out.
I put a jacket on as I checked the outside temp.. wow almost -5 deg F. thats cold… pourd a cup and went out the door… yep cold and frozen out here… I went over and gave her the cup of hot coffee and she thank me for it… I looked at her boyfriend.. and wow the look I got was like the frozen ground… I aske if he would like to have a hot cup while he played with the stove… his remarks can’t be printed…
I mentioned that I was going back inside the AS where its warm… and that if she needed to warm up she was welcome… she then blew his fuse when she said.. ya it started raining about midnight and snowing shortly their after… we had water coming throught he tent… and soaked everything… which then froze when it got cold this morning.. we didn’t get any sleep… at all… and were trying to get the stove going for heat but it wouldn’t light up…
She then turned and said .. hey just out of curosity how much are one of them AS… suddenly her boyfriend threw the stove away… and said.. if you like them so much why don’t you go find a guy that has one… and started throwing things back into the VW bus… I told her that they were about 35 grand… and have all the comforts of home… and that if she wanted to come in and see it… more than happey to show her around… this pissed him off even more… as he said .. were leaving… give him back his cup and get int the bus. She appoliges for his attitude… and did what he said…
I took the cup and got back into the trailer… sitting at the table looking out the window at the two of them in the bus… as he started to try and get it to crank… ahhh guess he didn’t know much about mechanics.. in that temp… it would hardly turn over… I just sat their with only my T shirt on… looking out at them shivering… finally after he threw another temper trantrum that requied me to turn up the radio… she got out of the bus and knocked on the door…
could you please help him get his bus started.. she asked…
Sure I said… as I grabbed my coat and gloves…
We fired up the old PU and backed it around to where he had the back open… jumpered the thing and it limbered to life belching black smoke from all the rich gas it was running with… (oh the CO and carbon emissions I mermered) Not a good word from him… as he still said I should n’t have all that stuff due to the environment damage it does… my comment back was… well all that stuff just got your ass back on the road dude… and why should I not have what I want… to make my life better..I worked hard for it… just because you think you have a better idea of what I should have?? Hey I am not the one freezing my nu-nu’s off out here…(with a smile) he just muttered and left…
But, that was not the end of the story… seems we also left about a hour later… headed for our next campground… guess who we saw broken down on the side of the road… needless to say I made the comment… I guess they like what they have.. something to be said for economics huh… I did toot as we went by…
What were seeing now is a grown up version of this jerk telling you what you should have too.
I always wondered if she found a guy with a AS and dumped the environmetial jerk. Life is good in a RV when your camping… reguardless of what others in tents say.
Hey Phil Welch,
You are not reading the comments any more thoroughly than Dilfey has analyzed the issues. You have missed the point that the responders object to the political nature and bias that the writer immaturely inserted into what could have been an inspirational thought regarding change in our lives.
No one…not any person…nary an individual…no one has mentioned even a word or syllable in opposition to conservation. Geez!!!
Stop drinking the Liberal Kool-Aid for a second. Did anyone learn any analytical skills in school?
The article speaks about an electric vehicle. I have been on the CA freeways and I do not believe the battery exists that will accomplish the movement along the world’s longest parking lots, especially when the batteries are being discharged at a rate that will not permit them to finish a short commute due to traffic stalls. What I have observed is that it is battle of cutlures, i.e. the aniti-carbon culture, the anti-electric transmission line cutlure, the anti-nuclear energy culture, the anti-big three auto maker culture. Who is going to dominate. Electric vehicles sound good, but they it all requires a source of electricyt. How much of the carbon fuels are utilized by cars? What about the transport of the goods for this great society of ours, trucks, buses, airplanes, and ships, all are carbon fuel users. What CA activitists have accomplished is the destruction of one of the nations strongest economys. The sane approach is to let the economic forces determine the best route to energy consumption and get off the environment kick. All together, the population of this great nation will come to the best solution, rather than a bunch of activitists and bunch of self serving bureaucrats. The power of the citizens coming together for solutions is greater than all of the bureaucrats combined. What I really see is the attempt to impose some sort of controll on the American Citizen.
GM: Great Story!! There are a lot of independent thinking folks who don’t want or need to be told by people of equal intellect (or less) what to do! We already thought it through, as you did. I appreciate your perspective on that.
Bob, You never answered my question- Do you believe that Global Warming is caused by water? That is water vapor? to the tune of 95%? I do agree that unless an RV can get over 30 mpg it should be grounded until your electric RV is available.
I live in the California DEsert where lots of “snowbirds” come in the fall and stay until the spring thaw. We are adjacent to the Joshua Tree National Park – it is our southern boundary of the town. I have lived here for 16 years and there are days we cannot see the mountains that used to be visible land marks. The park superintendent has said that in 50 years there may be no more Joshua Trees in Joshua Tree National Park because of drought and global warming. In the short time I have lived here, I have experienced changes in our weather patterns. I realize that is a very short time frame in the overall scheme of things, but I do think mankind’s conveniences have had an effect on our planet that cannot be explained entirely by mother nature’s variations. I drive a 35 foot motorhome and my toad is a Chevy Tracker, so I am one of those who knows a little bit about the RV lifestyle and I’m not about to criticize anyone who enjoys it as much as I do. However, that is not to say I wish there was someway to reduce my carbon foot print. I can’t afford photo voltaic cells on either my home or my motorhome, but I still wish for them. I drive 55 mph whenever it is safe to do so (in some places on our freeways you will cause safety problems if you go that speed) and I try to find a central location for the motorhome and see the sights by using the Tracker, so to save fuel and carbon emissions. I recycle everything I can and have found some great “buys” in thrift stores. I don’t know if that makes me an “environmental Nazi” or not. Because ofg the great distances I drive to get to “civilization” an electric vehicle utilizing current technology is not a viable option for me, but I hope the government DOES fund new cutting edge options for transportation, home heating, electricity generation, water reclamation and preservation of our natural treasures – I haven’t had the opportunity to see them all yet, and I surely hope to!
It seems unfortunate that most of the comments on this post have immediately jumped into a liberal vs. conservative battle with very little said about that fact that continuing to do things we same way we have for the past century can’t be sustained economically. (How quickly we forget $4 a gallon gas!)
I’d think, for example, that the RV community would welcome the possibility of an affordable toad that doesn’t require any gasoline. Everyone who must deal with the effects of serious air pollution in many large cities could certainly benefit if such vehicles could come into wide use in places like LA, and save gas for longer road trips.
Solving our economic and environmental problems will require changes, and those problems are so big that there’s no quick fix. Like the old axiom about eating the elephant one bite at a time, solutions are going come in the form of a lot of small steps that together can yield some real results. The electric vehicle that Bob mentions is an example of one such step. A major regret for me is that GM and other US firms have been so slow to make any real efforts in this direction- and consumers have made it clear what they think about it.
Yes, the current generation can probably hang in there with business as usual, and leave it to our kids and grandkids to get by with what resources we’re willing to leave them. I may not agree with all of the politics of the incoming administration, but I’m trying to be hopeful we’ll see some steps to try some new ideas.
Good article Bob! I’m always happy to see someone making sense when it comes to our out of control energy usage. With the enforcement of the band on harmful refrigerants and the mandated higher efficiencies of today’s appliances, I’d be happy to see the damage we’ve done during our lifetime begin to be reversed. We should all be concerned with energy usage but as we can all see by the ignorant comments raging against the common sense you talk about, sadly that isn’t the case. We got a lot of glutenous energy hogs that like their excesses and seem ready to fight anyone who suggests curbing their wastefulness for the good of the earth. What a shame everyone isn’t concerned with doing as much as they can to reduce, reuse and recycle so that future generations can enjoy the same wonders we have.
Never give up Bob!
Perhaps if you repeat the truth often enough, people will begin to believe it. The present administration has certainly done all it could to make us believe their lies by repeating them – the sad thing is, so many people have fallen for their lies.
Actually Jim,
None of the comments here “jumped immediately to a Liberal vs Conservative battle” as you put it. If you read closely, it’s the writer of the article who positioned the article with clear, biased, and prejudiced political references that are anything but bi-lateral, and that’s why the comments came out with so much energy to object to that tack.
That, sir is what is so unfortunate.
He could have written an article that might have provided some thoughtful points on change in our society without promoting his cheap political biases. That’s what most of the comments refer to, sir. He obviously took a considered controversial position with the words in his article…what would you expect the responses would be?
Personally, over the past three or four years, I’ve looked at any number of toad choices, including the Smart car, Mini-Cooper, Hybrids, and a number of electric four-wheel vehicles, not to mention two-wheel electric and combustion engined vehicles. Like others on this post, I’ve wrung my hands over how my driving habits could change to improve my MPGs. And how I could economically provide energy to my rig and be more eco-friendly in places I visit. I get it. Many others do too.
Like you, most of us just don’t like the kind of thoughtless political bias that Dilfey put into his article in the first place. For that, we all expect an apology.
Wow! Did I ever unleash the mega-ditto heads. Is “conjecture” the new buzz word with anti-environmentalists? It truly amazes me the virulent comments I get from what was hardly a politically biased or extreme-position blog. For those of you who disagree with me on one or more points I made, come back in and explain, so we can have a useful and educational conversation. I’ll reply soon to GM’s long blog. And Phil Welch, do you feel surrounded by antagonism? I do.
Bob, You and I have had at least one difference of opinion resulting from your previous article about the Pickens plan. This time you have also misrepresented the leasership you are promoting environmental champions. Since we are now name calling, to use yours, you have demonstrated that you are easily the “mega-ditto-head” of all time. Please get it straight. A couple of years ado, Obama stated he would make fossil power electric production so costly taht they would all go bankrupt and shutdwon. His platform has also stated an aversion to nuclear power. SOOOOO, where in the H*&% do you think you or he are going to get the electricity to power this multitide of electric cars, huh? Bob, you need to get real or quit writing. I for one await you next inept attempt to enlighten us. Once more and I will permanently remove myself from from RV.net. If we all do that maube you will loose your advertisers and implode!
Bob ya you do that.. and while your at it lets get right to the science of why were in global warming. Gee you think the Big light bulb in the sky (THE SUN) might have something to do with it? As history has shown we go through these cycles. Now you have the chicken littles runing around saying the sky is falling all over again. Atttt ain’t true folks…
Lucky we have a good group of science people who once again are being ignored just like old Gore wanted the loose nut media to do. The sun is now 6 miles bigger in dia than it was a year ago.. gee you don’t have to be a rocket science person to figure out if you stand closer to the fire your going to get warmer.. ?? go figure… however, now it seem a reversal is taking place according to the ones who really know and are not environmental nazis. Yep so far this year.. the earh has COOLED almost 1/2 deg. OPS now what you going to blame it on??? I know lets call it GLOBAL COOLING and blame it on all the JETS flying so high up where the water is freezing and drifting away.
Why according to the national cancer socitey … the air is so clean today that more cases of melanoma (skin cancer from the sun) is 6 times what it was 10 years ago. Yep all that pollution is cleaning up the air.
I still like the attitude some have taken. ITS FOR THE GOOD OF MOTHER EARTH THAT YOU DON’T DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. We worked hard and now to have some idiot come along with their brownie attitude of either your with us or your ONE OF THOSE. Two can play that game . Quite frankly billy-bob you are out of class. You should be wearing a white robe and have flowers around your neck…. oh and some Jesus shoes made from GoodYear 10 ply tires. (you know your in good hands when your walking on GoodYears) go figure
As to your being surrounded by antagonism… well gee now … you wrote it . Its like you walked up to a cop and smacked him and then say .. what are you arresting me for… geee really. Indeed you are out playing with alice and the cat. Check the CO alarm … The LEL is approching lift off at your place dude.
Now as to the electric cars. Effecency and all… I am sure if the engineers could come up with a option that worked and DID save both energy and environmental resources you would not have a hard time getting people to buy it. Most enjoy buying things that are cheaper to use and still perform. However, that is still a pipe dream and to force people by taxation or fees is socialistic. Again your telling US how we should spend OUR money.
I chuckle at the fact that if your in a accident with a EV vhicle.. you stand a greater chance of dying than with a regular SUV. Why you ask… well first off you have that fuel to run the aux engine. then you have all these batteries… all of which are high current potential shorts…not to mention the chemicals they use are extreamly toxic and deadly…
… so I can see the paper now…
Bob dies in a head on car crash in his “0″ emisssions vehicle on way home from the bar….
Seems he was reported to have either died from multipul exposures… hydrogen oxygen displacement affixation , chemical battery burns and/or least we forget electracution when his seat shorted against the high voltage batteries which then electricly toasted him first to a brilant orange glow… and then to a flat black carbon colored crispy critter..all of what remained of him in the car now are ass’es. The others couple in the second vehicle only had minor problems when their air bag deployed leaving them to look all white like the pilsbury dough boy. They are now sueing the car manufacture because they orginally were illegal brown skin colored from southern calimexico. Alas old Bob had he not been driving his hybrid… would be alive today. Bob, recently devorced from his 9th wife of 6 months because he was so demanding about how good his EV was, is survived by his only friend …a beer drinking rat dog named… spotty … “bob never could get to go in the EV ‘0″ emissions car”, said his late wife.
Well now lets see… what happened to the green earth concept. The science people were trying to move us away from hdrocarbon fuels into nucular fuels for CLEAN NO BURNING OXYGEN ENERGY. What happend to that? Well your demo led government shut the plants down right after hollyweard made a movie with Jane darling in your face fonda… (china syndrome) where they forcast doom and gloom of the plant blowing up…. even the posters for the movie trailer showed a small mushroom cloud. Could it happen… nada. Today its a laughable movie because we all know better. Matter of fact 3 mile island showed that even the human errors taken allowed the computer to clean it up and shut it down.. I have been to the michigan power plant. Their I learned that most of the problems come from the environmentalnazi’s. First they said it was killing the fish in the lake due to the warm water return. So they invested millions and made their own lake for cooling water.. and guess what… fishing has never been better . they love the warmer water… and grow to be biggins. then it was the noise… ahhh ya right like powerplants don’t make noise… then it was the global warming… huh that one still has me scratching my head. But all this time no mention of the 3 rivers plant down in Ohio which is burning coal.. to no doubt power those “0″ emision electric cars you like with wall plugs… their the environmenalist nazi’s don’t care about the acid rain, damage to the wildlife and health hazards. Not one word other than… it was a natural happeing. natural?? mega tons of coal is being burnt along with 11 parts of air per unit of fuel.. where as the nucular plant in Michigan just sits their humming along… with fresh clean air around it.. and environmental nazis at the gate protesting, and making all that noise
So whay did research and the governments dollars dry up on the nuc research progress up at sand point ? because of money?? Safety??? nope the environmentalist didn’t like it. So billy bob ” I didn’t have sex with that woman”…shut it down. The idea behind the curtain was to sell oil and gas futures… And the big money behind the curtain use them environmentalist like the mindless idiots they are to promote their agenda. . They were used like pupets on strings. Advantage big money/businesses that political buddies help.
(i.e the new CFL law and the banning of the old lights. CFLs are more toxic to the environment. they demand a ban on incandecent lights .. do we see YOUR environmentalist marching against that .. no because money was to be made. Buddies became millionairs over night once the law was on their side. Yet these same lights have murcury in them… one of the worlds most toxic substances to wildlife. So where are you? Where are you trying to protect US and stop this pollution? I thought so… think about it. here you buy what should save you money and help the environment… only to find out they are more toxic and oh that money you saved in electricity… to help green the earth.. well the electric company said that due to the reduction in demand for power… they having to rase the rates of the KWH. Nice huh…
I just can’t imagine people putting up with all this. Johnny doo good or we wont like you. To which I say if you think the US shouldn’t have the lead in the world, a lead which takes energy to produce, then what we have now in industry moving off to other countries that you blame bush for (oh ya GM, Ford and the big C are opening plants in USSR. Hireing 17000 labor workers over their because of environmental fees they would have to pay if they made them here in this country next year) is exactly what you and others like you Bob have in turn made this country into. A snifling, whining, we have our rights, heaving cespool where your rights are above mine. (aint going to happen bob)
Last time I checked we still have the freedom of choice here. (well so far at least.. some quetion about the pending admin)
So mabye the mega-ditto heads are really the good guys you don’t want to mess with. Here is my suggestion to you.. instead of trying to tear this country down in dictatorial environmental nazi fashon.. try building it up to the greatest country that makes others want to come here and enjoy what we have worked, lived and fought for get the environmental nazis to show us all how they can lead us to a better life by building a better vehicle that can do what the old one does now and be more efficent.. (oh they can’t ) Quit waisting time whining about how your offended and start making a better mouse trap that others will want to own and pay for. Like the old saying.. if you make it.. they will come (if its any good, cost less and does more)
You want a electric car.. knock yourself out Bob… but, don’t start demanding that I get rid of my SUV or RV. YOU think your helping to save the world.. good for you.. be the first on your block to show us all how your doing it. (problem is most of the time you all just whine and whimper and do nothing.. some don’t even work) Oh and by the way… GM is working on a hybrid elect SUV… grin… check it out… I am still waiting for my thermal nucular basket ball power genarator for house and RV. Seems the Govn’t won’t let ‘em buid it
The IH engine today is 1000’s a times better than it was in the ’60’s. Its more efficent and we get more power from every drop of fuel than we did. So why are you whining? Can’t you just be happy with what you have? Hmmm…
Oh and about the only person here that is not having a useful and educational conversation seems to be YOU. Look around at the numbers. If your smart you will decide… as they say .. choose wisely grasshopper. this country still is run by majority rule. Just make sure you have the facts correct their ma’mm … remember the Gore Points..
By the way I’ll take the Gentlman from Michigan any day over the pending socialist demo admin. however, time will tell all.
Keep smileing Drifity checks in the mail
Bob, Bob. Slow down, son.
First, I don’t know what a ‘mega ditto head” is, but it doesn’t sound like a good name for a writer to be calling his audience.
Second, Yep! You unleashed something that is probably amazing to you. You failed to understand that people have been emotional the past several years (maybe 200 years or so) over politics, and you brought up the subject in your article. If you feel like you’re surrounded by antagonism, I suggest you inspect exactly what things you are doing to attract it.
This conversation is sad in that you are a writer, but you insult your readers. Too bad. This last piece could have been a thoughtful article, but you made it an emotional one. I’m not sure you should be writing anything for this audience if you haven’t learned the basics of how to address it. There are some smart people out here who actually analyze stuff. No kidding.
Bob: WOW ! One thing true about your writings is you get far more comments than any writer.
1. Politions never solve anything worth while. It takes millions $ today to run for office and when elected they payback \ help their money folks.
2. For every ” great” solution proposed, there are many problems\ issues raised.
Just for example [ wind power] Wow, wind is free ! Costs to build ? Wind blows fast = more power & what do you do now. Shut down & restart alt. power.
Blows slower= back up? People living close to wind farms having health problems & there is a constant noise issue. Wind farms in remote areas = transmision issues. Maintance costs ??? Boone Pickens ever now backing out!
3. As RVers , we all need to be a little smarter w/ fuel, energy, waste ( recycling),etc. Some will do more & some less, but it will all help. I think most will strive to save money as politions will be taxing more & more. Those things that save a person $$, will \ should be used to conserve.
4. One thing great about RV-Net has been some great suggestions, articles, comments etc. for RVs. From tire pressure to solar systems. Good maintance ideas = more efficient operation. later TXBrad
Bob…
I think were about done roasting ya…
For your pentence…
Write three good articles on tech issues…. before going to bed tonight
Make a good act of … never do this again
and promass to stay out of push button political hot topics
Oh and stay out of hybrid cars… you know how hard it is to get the ashes out of the carpet.
Have a great day…
Bob Difley,
Lordy, lordy. Let’s hope some of your readers never figure out where you live. You may need a bodyguard. There is some genuine hatred out there.
This soon after the election is a touchy time to give praise to the new regime in Washington on a public forum. After eight years of masquerading happiness, the losers of this election are unwilling to accept another’s opposing views – even when the subject matter has some value for everyone.
Some misanthropics reveal their true oppressiveness when faced with a loss.
They will even express their confrontational expertise by telling a story of how much joy they derived from spitefully watching others suffering from an unexpected bad condition. They feel especially ecstatic to boast about how much better their mode of camping is when compared to the sufferers.
That kind of cruelty is a cancer always ready to infect others with their viciousness. They parade around ponding their chests – just like their primate ancestors.
Anyway, as usual, you did good and I’m proud of you for the guts you have for opening up this kind of disscussion. I’m looking forward to meeting you in person one of these days out there by the river.
Stay warm, Fred
There are people walking around on this planet right now who tried to open up a door of awareness many years ago (read 5 acres and independance) Some of us were actually “smart” before our “leaders” stepped up to the plate with their mouth diarrhea.
WOW….I thought I was the only one that got on the ole soapbox and railed on and on about things, guess not. I do, however, try not to name call and insult one for their opposing views on issues. Politics is usually a no-no subject, but in this day and age, that’s just not possible. I didnot vote for the President-elect and am not afraid to say so. I feel we are in for some bumpy and costly times ahead as he made some pretty heady promises with OUR money and now it’s time to “pay that bill.” Some of what he promised, he has had to “back off” on and his cabinet appointments leave me wondering whether it is going to be an Obama presidency or a third term for Clinton. Okay, enough of that. I’m quite sure in the near future we will see just what we always see when the new president takes over, be that a Democrat or Republican. That being that reality and promises are almost always two different things. I just hope it doesn’t cost me too much. I don’t have that much to spare.
On the issue of the EV and the 40 mph, etc. I guess I have a problem with spending that much money for something that only goes that speed and for that short amount of mileage. I just don’t think that is realistic in this day and age when speed is all we hear about. I don’t know where a vehicle of this type would be appropriate except maybe in one of those retirement complexes in Florida and other places where the older folks retire to. They would not be appropriate to the main highways and would certainly be a hazard at that speed. I have noticed an increase in the hybrids on the roads anyway, so I believe all that needs to be done is to build more of this type of vehicle and make them a reasonable price and people will buy them. Basically, people want to do what is right for their world, but when it costs too much to do so, they won’t do it. That’s the reality, so cater to the people and problem solved.
I do disagree with the idea that our dependence on oil is going to be a thing of the past. We need to use our OWN oil/gas/coal here in this country instead of buying from others and making them rich. There are alternative power sources and the problems associated with them can be dealt with. But as long as people who really don’t know what they are talking about, keep yelling about the “hazards” of these alternatives, we are going to remain in the state we are in now. I, for one, hope cooler heads prevail and decisions are made based on facts, not fears, assumptions and scare tactics. I am probably one of the biggest tree huggers around, but I do try to balance that with our need to survive. There is a balance here and we can achieve it with education and give and take on both sides of any of the issues.
As far as the comment about the person and his story about the camping experience at the Grand Canyon, seems to me that “rose colored glasses” person that made the “holier than thou” comment to him was the offender in this case. All he had to do was keep his mouth shut, but as is the case with many who think like he did, they believe that us who don’t share their particular point of views are heathens and are destroying the earth. Seems to me one of the most prominent reasons we RVers do what we do is because we appreciate this country of ours and want to see as much of it as we can with what time we have left, right? One only need to read the many, many blogs from RVers and look at the tons of photos we take to see what I mean. If we want to do that in some form of comfort, we shouldn’t be criticized for doing so.
Live and let live, I say. If we all did that, imagine how peaceful it would be
Response to Merl Bell’s comments of Nov. 22.
Merl – Well, it seems that that one difference is now up to a few more. However, don’t stop reading athe RV.net blogs because of our difference of opinion. Le me deal with your points, then you decide whether it just might be possible that you might change your mind just a bit, that maybe those that disagree with you could be right. I wonder how you can be so certain that you are right and those that disagree are wrong. We all–me included–need to listen to those who disagree and consider what they say. So:
* “you have also misrepresented the leadership you are promoting environmental champions.” (How am I misleading?)
* “Since we are now name calling, to use yours, you have demonstrated that you are easily the “mega-ditto-head” of all time.” (Regretfully, I agree that I should not have used reverted to name calling. I have already taken back that statement on the blog. Now do suppose the rest of the name-callers could do the same?)
* “A couple of years ado, Obama stated he would make fossil power electric production so costly that they would all go bankrupt and shutdwon.” (Not so. What he said was that polluting coal plants would either have to install systems to scrub or sequester the CO2 emissions, which are a primary source of air pollution and gloal warming, or they would go bankrupt because of government regulations designed to eliminate the pollution.)
* “His platform has also stated an aversion to nuclear power.” (Also not true. In a story posted by Reuters on June 20, 2008, “U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Friday nuclear power was “not a panacea” for U.S. energy woes but it is worth investigating its further development.” The further developments include pebble bed reactors, which is new technology and removes much of the fears of nuclear disaster or of theft by terrorists of weapon-grade material, which this process eliminates.)
* “SOOOOO, where in the H*&% do you think you or he are going to get the electricity to power this multitide of electric cars, huh?” (The case has been made over and over that supplying power [from electricity] for the transportation sector would eventually come from centralized and regional power stations rather than from each individual vehicle supplying its own [i.e. gasoline and diesel]. But that requires the infrastructure of both a nationwide system for charging [or swapping, as in Shai Agassi's plan] electric vehicle batteries. Secondly, power lines are needed to get the power from solar arrays and wind farms to the power generating stations. This is where government needs to come into play, by providing the incentives to investors, as the government has done in the past for oil companies, that will get this done. That is what the incoming government will do, and what the current government was reluctant to do.
* “Bob, you need to get real or quit writing.” (Terribly arrogant to assume that my writing is not worthy of reading.)
* “I for one await you next inept attempt to enlighten us.” (Let me repeat, nothing is gained by slinging insults, but rather from intelligent, thought-out response.)
* “Once more and I will permanently remove myself from from RV.net. If we all do that maybe you will loose your advertisers and implode!” (Is that a threat? Is that the right way to respond with someone who differs in opinion with you? If I upsete yo so much, you don’t have to read my blog. But you can rest assured that I will not stop trying to post subjects that elicitthe responses that this one has. I just hope that the resulting discussions will be based more on facts and thoughtful discourse than rant and insult.
Response to Thomas Lasley on Nov. 22
Thomas – I don’t think that mileage standards should be placed on RVs, but rather that they should be placed on engines that are used in trucks, busses, and RVs. This is not a problem to do, it just costs money to do the engineering and build a better product (engine). Toyota, Honda, Nisson, and lots of independent car companies are doing just that. There are now hybrid busses running in Toronto and a couple other more cities, with more coming. Trucks are being built with new technologies that result in better fuel economy. This will filter down to the RV industry, especially when buyers start demanding fuel economy when they buy RVs. The big 3 Detroit automakers have resisted improving on engine technology while others went ahead and did it. And it has hurt them. But it won’t be long before you will see RVs with better economies, like the new Mercedes diesel engines now being installed on Dodge Sprinter chasis for 24-foot sized RVs that get 19 mpg.
AW Walker responded to my personal email, so I will post his comments here followed by my response.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 9:16 PM, AW wrote:
No! You absolutely read that incorrectly, sir! Read it more carefully; I referred to the comments that were a result of the tone of your article, not the content! Repeatedly.
The topic of conservation is fairly simple…I learned much of it starting in Boy Scouts in the ’50s. The issue of conservation is so basic these days that advice in that arena is usually in the form of “Tips”, and unless you have lived in a cave the past 20 years, there is not any real new knowledge that you can teach folks. I’m in total disbelief why Mr. Welch would even have a need to try to defend ‘conservation’. We get it!
My challenge regarding analytical skills is to read articles like the one you wrote and use basic analytical skills learned in high school and college to see that even though you had some good ideas around the dynamic changes going on in our lives, your article also presented a shallow bias towards some specific politicians. Furthermore, you failed to attribute any details to support your claims, including date, author and column title of your references to WSJ, nor did you mention any specific legislation or quotes of any of the politicians you mentioned. That tends to swing the whole thing over to the side of “Opinion” rather than “Fact”. When you write opinions, then I can write back with mine. When you write facts, then I’ll have more respect for what you write.
This probably sounds more shrill than what I would normally project, but I can’t tolerate any more political “Opinions”. Give me documented, referenceable, unbiased facts, please. Or else be ready for my own healthy flow of feedback on my Opinions!
Best Regards,
A. W. Walker
AW – Well, at least we can agree on conservation. But someone wrote in, I can’t remember exactly where, that he was dismayed that no one was presenting an argument against conservation. I didn’t think there was one.
Regarding your comments:
* “your article also presented a shallow bias towards some specific politicians.” (All mention of politicians was in reference to how these elected officials in their government committee leadership capacity would affect energy and climate change policy of the incoming government. I don’t know what there is in there that you object to, but you can check for yourself that Obama is in fact the incoming President, Dingle was unseated by Waxman as the head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Barbara Boxer is chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and the three mayors are, in fact, the mayors of the cities I state.
* Furthermore, you failed to attribute any details to support your claims, including date, author and column title of your references to WSJ, nor did you mention any specific legislation or quotes of any of the politicians you mentioned. ( I did, in fact, link to the articles I quoted from. Check the blog again for the text in a different color–click on that and it will take you to the article, both the WSJ and the SF Chronicle.)
* “That tends to swing the whole thing over to the side of “Opinion” rather than “Fact”. When you write opinions, then I can write back with mine. When you write facts, then I’ll have more respect for what you write.
Your additional comments will be appreciated. Bob
Response to rrrick08 from Nov. 22
Regarding your comments:
“Boxer, Waxman, & Pelosi pose a real danger to our Country.” (My references to Waxman and Boxer were solely in reference to the committees they head and how that would affect environmental policy. What did you mean?)
“Dilfy apparently hasn’t bothered to notice that the big 3 have made tremendous strides in fuel effeciency and alternate powered vehicles. GM is producing an electric car and all three automakers’ mileage is as good as or better than their Japanese counterparts.” (Fact: the big three have fought fuel efficiency standards for years. Toyota and Honda have been out with fuel efficient cars long before the big 3, and even the Chinese have more stringent fuel-economy standards than what is in effect in this country. The reason the Big e now want $25 billion of our dollars is because they waited too long to jump on the bandwagon of success that Toyota has had, and why Toyota has beaten all three in car sales. And not one of the Big 3’s cars mathes in mileage to the Toyota’s Prius which has been on the market for years.)
GM – You exhaust me. I promise I will get to your comments soon, as well as the rest as I work down the list. But now I am off to see the new James Bond movie for a dose of unreality. Bob
Bob, GM would exhaust anyone. GM has been a professional bully for so long, there is no hope left. Please, please don’t waist your words, time and energy.
Fred
Haven’t we become viloent in our opinions. Who knows who is right? So many of you express your beliefs as absolutes. ah the folly of the ego of man…
To think that mankind is more powerful than the forces of Nature, i.e. global warming. Say did we create the last Ice Age also?
I bet those earthquakes and volcanoes are our doing too.
re: EV’s. is anyone working on a hybrid with no batteries? something like a vehical with a gas engine that gets the vehical up to speed or propels it in stop and go or around town traffic but has, maybe, a generator on each wheel that, at certain MPH, generate enough electricity to have an electric engine kick in, taking over for the gas engine, and runs the vehical down the road.
I know, sounds like perpetual motion which has been said cannot be done, but I wonder?
Already saw it when it was in tranfer mode… lots of pryotech’s and action… and yes a lot of un-reality… talking about leaving you exhausted… that movie is one thing right after the next.
Ahhh wrong again.. ford has a vehicle that makes over 60 mpg… now selling in EU. GM’s little Geo they made will make better mileage than the preius but, your riding in a go-kart with only sheet metal to protect you… in crash test … over at the proving grounds.. they didn’t do so well. We used to call them coffin cars… you can bury it and the driver at the same time in one nice neat compact package.
Actually when the two toyotas were tested… the gas model made 56 mpg average over 10 drivers and 50,000 miles while the hybrid made a dismal 48 mpg for the same drivers and mileage… toyotas mileage so we found out was calculated only… Of course if you only drive out to the front yard to get the mail and never crank up the gas engine… ya you would make more mileage.. but were talking practical every day man use to and from work driving. One reasion the hybrid may not make the mileage is due to the weight of the battery’s and all the hardware… their system relys on the battery helping the enigne from the standing start or when you demand more power… in the mountains of CO. We used to think of them like the old 36 hp VW… once the battery depleats… your walking up the hill being passed by bike riders… once going down the hill .. your off to the races and can actually use some of the energy to recharge the bat’s. which you will need for the next hill… grin… On the level… you have to rely on the engine to get you down the road as well as recharge the bats… and with the physics of 1.5 x the amount of energy you used.. to recharge…. not very effecent and digs into the gas mileage. While they are a start… they are not all that they can be…
Toyota said that they are working on a more effecent engine..turbo diesel to put into the car… we await their results. We had also had herd that you could power your house with it too… but, have not seen anything
so far compaction crash testing resulted in all the hybrid cars bursting into fire. (compaction testing is where you hit the wall from the front and a second weight/vehicle impacts the rear.. like in a multi car accident but between two simi trucks sort of thing) Of course the disposition of the battery’s (which by the way are $11,000 dollare replacements) still needs to be considered due to their toxcicity to the environment…
So you see Bob… if they built a better mouse trap .. we too would buy one… we actually use a small car for around town and only the big’n for hauling the load… I think most people given the choice would do the same .. its logical and a savings in fuel and money. Aint no dummys out here camping…
Fred on November 23rd, 2008 3:12 pm
Bob, GM would exhaust anyone. GM has been a professional bully for so long, there is no hope left. Please, please don’t waist your words, time and energy.
Fred
wow Fred been hitting the bottle hard… again
Probably took at least two to get you back out of the closit… again
Professional bully?? don’t think so.
but… my flag says “Dont tread on me ”
Bob has a right to his views… right up to the point that he then starts telling me what I am going to have to put up with…
I for one fred enjoy RV’n and making new friends that like similar. I don’t like someone telling me I can’t because its for the good of the EARTH BS.
are we having fun yet?
I can see this is going no- where Bob has not considered his options which means now we must consider ours. I enjoy reading his wifes blog but, not this junk Bob put out.. and calling the readers mega-ditto heads (somthing he probably regurgatated like a parrot from rush limbie..) That is just asking for it. Clearly you dont’ consider your self when one dishonors you . If fireing back when one insults and offends you charter… is your difination of being a bully… then your not the guardian of the camp.
Typical… I see you still are telling people what to do…by butting in your reply to which his statement was not addressed to you… I think they have a word for ones like you too… hmmmm LOL
Bob,
My comment that Waxman, Boxer, & Pelosi are a danger to our Country referred to the fact that they are such extremist’s. There is no middle ground, compromise, or other thoughts allowed. It’s their way or no way. Also Pelosi is not trusted by many due to the continual rumors regarding numerous family members on her payroll supported by our tax dollars, her placing loop holes in laws so her investments are exempt from regulation, and other such reports.
Congress has been controlled by your party the last 4 years. Why didn’t they put forth an energy program for us, alert us to the fact our investments were going down the toilet this year, but were working on a plan to repair the problems, or in general be better stewards of our Country?
Most RV’ers I’ve encountered are conscious of the environment and do their part to live as green as they can and within their means. We just don’t like our political leaders extolling us to live one way but they continue to live in excess and luxury. Referrence to Al Gore and Hiliary Clinton for example. Private jets, huge homes, big cars.
Most RV’ers love their Country. Michelle Obama recently started loving our Country too. This is a good thing although too many, including her former pastor Rev Wright, still hate America and would like nothing more than to have us go under. This concerns RV’ers and we become skeptical that ‘change’ will be the wrong type of change. More liberal give aways, more folks not contributing to our Country, just taking from it, higher taxes, things of this nature. Well, as one reader suggested, politics is a no no subject to discuss as you can instantly upset plenty of folks. So that’s it for rrrick 08 and this subject.
God Bless America!
Once this topic gets hashed into the ground, I have another one you can stick your neck out on. How about limiting the number of dogs a camper can have with them and campgrounds enforcing the pet rules most of them already have in place. As long as we’re telling folks what to do, let’s see how this goes over!!Regards, rrrick08
Response to Nancy who commented on Nov. 23.
Hi Nancy – Welcome to the rousing list of comments. Glad to have another woman on board–too much of a lob-sided male dominated response on this one. Anyway, I had a few comments on your comments–though I will skip over the political stuff.
“On the issue of the EV and the 40 mph, etc. I guess I have a problem with spending that much money for something that only goes that speed and for that short amount of mileage.” (This particular car is built to be a town car, not for high-speed highways, where drivers don’t need speeds over 40mph. Other electric vehicles (EV) will do much higher speeds. The range of 60-120 miles should cover what one drives around town in a day, then plugs in to an electric outlet at night to charge up the battery again.)
“I do disagree with the idea that our dependence on oil is going to be a thing of the past. We need to use our OWN oil/gas/coal here in this country instead of buying from others and making them rich.” (The problem is that we have only about 3% of thw world’s proven oil reserves yet use about 25% of the world’s reserves. If, with alternative sources of energy, such as solar, wind, ethanol, biodiesel, and all the rest being researched now, we could whittle down what we have to import, that would be dimminishing our dependence on foreigh oil. Oil cannot at this point be eliminated, but if the price goes back up–which is a certainty–than alternate sources become more economically viable and will enter the market place replacing foreigh oil.)
“If we want to do that (ed. travel) in some form of comfort, we shouldn’t be criticized for doing so.” (Though our RVs do take more fuel to move around, you never have to apologize for it. The rest of our way of RV life is much more environmentally-friendly than living in a large brick and mortar house–which has to be heated and cooled, commuting miles every day to work, using untold gallons of water to flush toilets, water lawns, etc.
Thanks again for your comments. You are most welcome to come in again. Bob
rrrick08 responded to my response (I can’t keep track of this any more–I must be aging rapidly) on Nov. 24.
In my opinion, the statements about Waxman and Boxer (I didn’t mention Pelosi) that I made were factual statements supporting the wide-spread opinion that energy policy would change–moving more toward alternative sources of energy and away from fossil fuels–with the new government. Do you–or does anyone else–have an argument with that statement?. You bring politics into the discussion when you express opinions on the character of those people and what you think they will do over the course of the new administration. This is not a political article. It is about energy policy and the future of electric vehicles.
Now I’m curious, though. The reaction I got on this blog post surprised me. I know that attitudes on political issues vary around the country and with the areas we all live in. I live in Northern California. Yes, a blue state, and in a very liberal part of the state. Even our Republican governor is accused by the “further to the right” of being liberal. However, most of the folk in the state, and especially so in NoCal, think more along the way I do than along what seems to be the opinions of many of the responders to this blog. Does that make us wrong? If so, than half the country must be wrong, since more left of center people were elected than right of center. Maybe this is just my impression, but it seems that those on the right are more set in their opinions and the way government works and what they should do (conservative) than on the left that would like to see changes and improvements to the status quo. (progressive, ie liberal). Is that a wrong impression?
But back to my curiosity, I would like to know where the home base is of those who disagree with me and of those who agree. And secondly, do most of the folk that live where you live feel as you do? Third. How do we all come together in the middle and get done what needs to be done in the best interests of everyone? Your comments, please.
Bob,
Son, you need to hear this story. It’s about Roger Smith; it equates exactly to your yarn that simply living in NOCAL, and that you think that most others who also live there think like you do, doesn’t mean that’s a meaningful truth.
Here’s the story:
Roger was the CEO running General Motors for a while. I became an executive employee of GM through an acquisition in 1984, and stayed and observed pretty closely for the next five or so years. Roger and his close allies didn’t seem to be very responsive to the influx of foreign cars during the early eighties, and kept producing heavy, inefficient, large, cheap, noisy, failure-prone cars, compared to selected Japanese, German and Southeast Asian cars. J.D. Power feedback reinforced that concept. The CEO of my GM subsidiary was kind of a maverick, and he came out and said this of Roger and his car team; He said that they drive all over Detroit and the other towns that have plants that make GM cars and all they see are GM cars (being driven by GM employees and suppliers who get them on employee discount). The execs couldn’t see beyond Detroit what was happening on the left coast or the right coast or anywhere outside the GM towns. They got into a ‘groupthink’ mentality and when they talked to each other, they focused on what each other was into. In other words, Roger and his ‘guys’ were driving up and down the roads all all around their plants and all they saw was Detroit-produced cars. Had limited perspective that there were so many overwhelming preferences for offshore vehicles in other parts of the country. They only focused on their GM group of ideas….groupthink. Someone produced a video called “The Abilene Paradox” to illustrate this as a management tool to encourage leaders to think more analytically.
So the coaching point is this: If you live among a bunch of like-thinking people, unless you really, really challenge that thinking, very soon you believe that that is the predominant thinking of everyone. And then you fall into the Abilene Paradox.
Bob, according to what you say, you haven’t begun to understand there are strong, strong preferences beyond the NOCAL Boxer/Waxman orientation. And beyond that, Pelosi, Dingell, and some others who are beyond your one-note energy agenda. So if you want to create a right/wrong conversation based on the last vote, here is something to think about, based on millions of votes: According to millions and millions of people, you are wrong on energy usage, wrong on your political choices, wrong about drilling, wrong on economics. Millions of smart, thoughtful, educated people said that.
Your “facts” are unsupported. You haven’t been responsive to requests to defend your opinons and you haven’t presented any kind of convincing argument…and this is your blog, where you are expected to do so here in order to be persuasive with your viewpoint.
Maybe you should just leave the political angle alone. It hasn’t worked very well so far.
If you want to challenge this well-documented factual absolute regarding the doubt of your arguments, please give us your supporting facts, then you can ask us for ours. There is no problem that there is a ton of factual information that refutes every unsupported claim that you make on energy, politicians, fuel use, fuel discovery, alternate energy usage, and so on, including exploration in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, the Outer Continental shelf in California, Florida, Virginia and Gulf States. Your arguments so far have been lightweight.
When you write back this time, please include specific, documented references to your claims, to my comments that you challengs and to specific requests for which detail you are seeking. Your unsupported opinons don’t matter to me. Just facts, please. And please describe what you will do for us to “come together in the middle” as you requested. Thanks.
Well, it seems that Bob decided it was allright to print my private email between me and him. I will resist the urge to share with you all what he said to me privately. Instead, I’ve just copied into one place all of Bob’s comments subsequent to the ‘idiot’ article he wrote. If I get really perturbed, I might consider sharing Bob’s private email to me, the same as he shared my private email to him without my permission or knowledge. Unbelievable!
Here are all of his responses so far…Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:55:40 -0800
From: bobdifley@gmail.com
To: jawaw@msn.com
Subject: Re: [blog.rv.net] Comment: “Just as with Dirty Diapers, Change is Coming”
AW – I sent you the last reply before scrolling down and finding the rest of your comments. My reply is more lengthy on the blog than the one I sent to you. I would welcome you to come back in and be more specific with your comments. This is a conversation, not an argument. l apologize if my feathers got a little ruffed, but I was taken aback by the massive negative response to my blog, and re-read it to try to understand why and still don’t. But you’re right about the “mega-ditto head comment.” After I made it I told my wife what I had said and that I regretted it. Lelsson learned, If if get my feathers ruffed, I need to take a step back, take a deep breath, re-read what set me off, try to figure out why the person said it, than make a reasoned response. I would like to think my readers would do the same. And as you can see, they often don’t. Again, thanks for your input and your comments. Bob
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Blog Admin wrote:
New comment on your post #2913 “Just as with Dirty Diapers, Change is Coming”
Author : A.W.Walker (IP: 71.164.224.193 , pool-71-164-224-193.dllstx.fios.verizon.net)
E-mail : jawaw@msn.com
URL :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=71.164.224.193
Comment:
Actually Jim,
None of the comments here “jumped immediately to a Liberal vs Conservative battle” as you put it. If you read closely, it’s the writer of the article who positioned the article with clear, biased, and prejudiced political references that are anything but bi-lateral, and that’s why the comments came out with so much energy to object to that tack.
That, sir is what is so unfortunate.
He could have written an article that might have provided some thoughtful points on change in our society without promoting his cheap political biases. That’s what most of the comments refer to, sir. He obviously took a considered controversial position with the words in his article…what would you expect the responses would be?
Personally, over the past three or four years, I’ve looked at any number of toad choices, including the Smart car, Mini-Cooper, Hybrids, and a number of electric four-wheel vehicles, not to mention two-wheel electric and combustion engined vehicles. Like others on this post, I’ve wrung my hands over how my driving habits could change to improve my MPGs. And how I could economically provide energy to my rig and be more eco-friendly in places I visit. I get it. Many others do too.
Like you, most of us just don’t like the kind of thoughtless political bias that Dilfey put into his article in the first place. For that, we all expect an apology.
To the blog, my appologies, GM is not a professional bully, he’s a amateur bully and a deeply troubled masochist.
His name-calling, vocabulary and spelling is proof that he is still living in his elementary school years. That of course, also reveals his mental age.
This coward is suffering badly from a narcissistic complex. His hero is the Marquis de Sade. Should we ask how many times a week he beats his wife?
His flag says “Dont tread on me”, while everyone else’s flag says Love Thy Neighbor.
He asks, “are we having fun yet?” That’s like asking “Is my knife in your back as painful as I hope it is.”
GM is “the guardian of the camp” – as in the Death Camp, Auschwitz.
Response to AW Walker’s first comments on Nov. 24.
“according to what you say, you haven’t begun to understand there are strong, strong preferences beyond the NOCAL Boxer/Waxman orientation. And beyond that, Pelosi, Dingell, and some others who are beyond your one-note energy agenda.” (If you could relax with the inflammatory rhetoric ["haven't begun to understand" and "one-note energy policy"] this conversation might have more appeal to the general reader.
“So if you want to create a right/wrong conversation based on the last vote, here is something to think about, based on millions of votes: According to millions and millions of people, you are wrong on energy usage, wrong on your political choices, wrong about drilling, wrong on economics. Millions of smart, thoughtful, educated people said that.” (OK. Tell me what I said that the millions and millions disagree with–specifically.)
“Your “facts” are unsupported. You haven’t been responsive to requests to defend your opinons and you haven’t presented any kind of convincing argument…and this is your blog, where you are expected to do so here in order to be persuasive with your viewpoint.” (OK. Let me try again:
Fact #1: Henry Waxman unseated Rep. Dingle as chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Fact #2: Barbara Boxer is chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Fact #3: Both are ardent environmentalists and advocates of alternative sources of energy and a reduction of fossil fuels.
Fact #4: President-elect Obama is an advocate of the same.
Fact #5: The current administration has had less of an interest than the incoming administration in reduction of fossil fuels and the pursuit of clean energy.
Fact #6: Rep. Dingle was instrumental in influencing the EPA’s action in preventing CA from enacting more stringent fuel economy standards than federal ones.
Pick which numbers (or anything else I said) that you specifically consider biased, or not factual and I will provide supporting documentation.
“Maybe you should just leave the political angle alone. It hasn’t worked very well so far.” (As I’ve said before, this was not a political article. It was on the future of energy policy and electric vehicles. What exact words that I wrote do you [or any others] consider political?)
“please give us your supporting facts, then you can ask us for ours.” (I don’t know what specific supporting facts you want. Tell me. I will gladly supply them.)
“there is a ton of factual information that refutes every unsupported claim that you make on energy, (Let me guess: Is it “with also a supportive House and Senate behind him, we may finally see a much quicker move to renewables and restraints on global warming than from the reluctant, anti-environmental former government.” If that is it, tell me and I will supply the documentation.) politicians, (Which politicians did I make unsupported claim about?) fuel use, fuel discovery, (I didn’t mention “fuel discovery”) alternate energy usage (again, specifically what “unsupported claim.” I’m not going to go through my blog and supply proof for everything until I know what you are talking about.) , and so on, including exploration in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, the Outer Continental shelf in California, Florida, Virginia and Gulf States.” (I didn’t mention any of those points.
“Your arguments so far have been lightweight.” (I didn’t put forth any arguments, only statements of what changes are happening and will happen and how those changes will affect energy and EVs.)
“When you write back this time, please include specific, documented references to your claims, (again, I ask, what claims? If AW won’t tell me, will some of the others? I still don’t know what I claimed that is not generally already known.) to my comments that you challengs and to specific requests for which detail you are seeking (which I have done at length). Your unsupported opinons don’t matter to me. Just facts, please. And please describe what you will do for us to “come together in the middle” as you requested.” (I didn’t claim that I will do something to bring us together in the middle. I asked your thoughts on how we might do this. But since you asked, one might be to look at others opinions with an open mind and try to see their point of view, and not just claim that those you disagree with are wrong or are “idiot” points of view.
Now to AW Walker’s second response of Nov. 24th.
“Well, it seems that Bob decided it was allright to print my private email between me and him.” (I’m sorry about that. I, apparently, thought that it was all part of the blog discussion and that you had just forgotten to missed posting your comments on the blog. That’s why I mentioned to you that I had gone ahead and posted them there. When I make personal comments to you directly instead of on the blog, it is only because I feel that it is not in the general interests of the readers, and more a personal conversation with you–which, by the way, I enjoy the stimulation of) I will resist the urge to share with you all what he said to me privately (It’s OK if you want to share my emails to you.).
“‘idiot’ article he wrote.” (That is uncalled for in this discussion. Note that as a blogger on RV.net I have the right to delete any comment that I don’t feel is suitabIe. I have never done this (except for spam advertisement comments).
it’s the writer of the article who positioned the article with clear, biased, and prejudiced political references that are anything but bi-lateral,” (Instead of making broad statements, point out exactly what words you find biased and prejudiced. The article is not political, but merely on energy policy and electric vehicles.)
“He could have written an article that might have provided some thoughtful points on change in our society without promoting his cheap political biases.” (Again, the article was on the future of energy policy and electric vehicles, but i would be glad to write “points on change” in another blog. And “cheap political biases” (You ask me to stick to the facts, how is that statement sticking to the facts instead of undefined sweeping rhetoric?)
” He obviously took a considered controversial position with the words in his article” (What was controversial? I’ll be glad to explain my views. Again, this was not a political article, only on energy policy and EVs.)
But with all that said, we–and probably many of the others that “disagree” with me–are on the same page for considering mileage-efficient vehicles and energy saving personal habits. And let’s all stay there at least, as we work out our “perceived” differences. A last note. My brother-in-law is a just left-of-center conservative republican and at lunch the other day commented that with all the fighting and arguing back and forth, conservatives against liberals, if we just clearly defined what we believed, we might find that we are not as separated as we think we are, and that maybe the means and not the end result are where we differ, in which case if we talked rationally our differences could reach a center point. I agree.
Lastly, you AW are above your last statement that my comments are: “thoughtless political bias that Dilfey put into his article in the first place. For that, we all expect an apology.”
Fred on November 25th, 2008 12:30 am
To the blog, my appologies, (hmmm fred you missed on that one looser) GM is not a professional bully, he’s a amateur bully and a deeply troubled masochist.
His name-calling, vocabulary and spelling is proof that he is still living in his elementary school years. That of course, also reveals his mental age.
This coward is suffering badly from a narcissistic complex. His hero is the Marquis de Sade. (again with the spelling error fred.. you should talk.. hmmm) Should we ask how many times a week he beats his wife?
His flag says “Dont (grammar error) tread on me”, while everyone else’s flag says Love Thy Neighbor.
He asks, “are we having fun yet?” That’s like asking “Is my knife in your back as painful as I hope it is.”
GM is “the guardian of the camp” – as in the Death Camp, Auschwitz.
___________________________________________________________
fred…. I fart in your direction to give you that fresh breath of air your used to.
A lot of the others who say they know y ou personally claim that y our mental handicap is one where your known as the person experiencing a Dissociative Fugue having recently suffered the reappearance of an event or person representing your earlier life trauma, the emergence of an armoring or defensive personality seems to be for you, a logical apprehension of the situation.
Therefore, the terminology fugue state may carry a slight linguistic distinction from Dissociative Fugue, the former implying a greater degree of motion in your case. For the purposes of this posting then, a fugue state would occur while one is acting out a Dissociative Fugue.
This is in your case defines as:
* your sudden, unexpected travel away from home or one’s customary place of habitat, with inability to recall one’s past,
* Confusion about personal identity, or the assumption of a new identity, and
* Significant distress or mental impairment.
I don’t know your problem but you clearly are looking for a fight that you really don’t want to get into with me looser. Somehow you think that your always right BMOS and that your in control… well bud.. dream on. Most have identified you as the sniveling whining boneheaded idiot you really are. You and the Nancy pol, no on 8 people, we are going to tell you because were better than the rest, have a lot in common.. You stink like the stuff you spew out… from your bad breath one can tell you’re a potty mouth. Socialistically incline? … You clearly have a mental problem. To which no one wants you around… your weird dude… I suggest you seriously go seek immediate medical physic help and step away from the keyboard. You can’t hide it dude . Dude your have either been out in the sun too long or locked in the closet past your prime. And don’t blame your mother for your being. You are who you are by your own making.
As we said most people who try to save the resources by giving up what they have and try to conserve…. only get ripped off by the same government which suggested that they help save it for the future generations. (check it out most states and the feds are now talking razing the price of fuel back up by increasing taxes on it!!!!! not allowing it to come back down in price because you conserved.
What is starting to happen now is that with the conservation of energy, the companies… are having to recover the lost funds. Thus, they are going to raise the rates of the goods they sell. The government also needing more money now that the conservation effort is effective then also looks at the there lost revenue. They are then also going to raises the taxes on the product you used to use freely.
So now in effect you have cut back on the energy you consume driving… your nice car. You are driving a go-kart with little or no accessories and yet you’re now paying more for less. Nice way to rip off the consumer. But, think of all the people that were put out of work, which used to be your friends. The company that used to give them the jobs, had to let them go as they too had to cutback on the overhead to make ends meet… these people then had to give up their houses because they didn’t have a job anymore… This then caused the bank to have a shortfall and so they too had to close branches and shut down the freebies that they extended to you. They then don’t loan the farmers who feed you the money to buy the seed, the business’ that would hire more are out of luck because the bank can’t loan money they don’t have… so joblessness rises… All this because bonehead Fred decided that he wanted to be a good boy and tell you to cut back for the good of the earth and future generations.
So not wanting to be un-politically correct you followed his way of thinking… ops big time… you know how it hurts your to think now fred… so why do you keep being masatisticaly incline? For fred, self-injury is not the main problem; it is a symptom. So what could his main problem be? Some reasons for Freds’ self-injury other than parental abuse are also linked to his childhood. For instance, cutting can be linked to a lack of handling during infancy (Strong, 1998). It can also be caused by body alienation resulting from childhood illness and/or surgery . It is difficult to determine the intent of Freds’ self-injurious act because sometimes fred doesn’t know why he/ she did something. At best, the Fred can give a reason after he or she cut. This given reason is subject to memory distortions and therefore may not be very accurate. I.e he doesn’t know of which he speaks…
You know Instead, if you kept using what you were none of this would have changed. But then old Bonehead Fred would not have anything to do because you didn’t listen to him. (Its ok fred they will eventually let you know how screwed up you thoughts really are when it starts effecting them) you would not feel good that you tried to help conserve the original resource and/or help the government like you were told you should want to.
Has it happened before.. yes .. look at the Nat Gas, Electric, water and heating oil. Some of those people back east were asked to cutback on the usage of oil. Feeling that they wanted to do something good they did… They then froze because the mandatory reduction the next month cut them back even more. All this while the people, like fred, who didn’t cut back and used what they wanted lived just a little bit colder when the mandatory reduction came around.
Same thing with the gas/oil and the environmental nazi movement to tell you that you have to conserve or else we will run out… wrong.. According to the resource management people there is more oil than air on earth. (Now fred won’t believe it but if he can keep from hitting his head on the computer screen for a while he might be able to tickle the keys (instead of his… nose) and find the figures anyone else can.
Bob… As to the comment that toyota and the others lead the sales in the us currently… look in the parking lot at work… most are better built vehicles from the good old USA. (Only the toy’s and other junk cars had obama/no on 8 stickers on them) Besides I don’t see many toy cars towing 5th wheels or trailers or hauling campers down the road around.. They just don’t seem to have the pony’s to make the grade… least one try for long.
I had to recently chuckle when toyota said their PU could out pull anything in its class (1/2 t pu) To which the add was removed from TV quickly after ford pointed out that their 1/2 T could not only out pull toy but made better gas mileage too. Why didn’t ford say this at the products marketing… well most US trucks have a reserve.. Knowing that people like of Fred their are going to overload it and abuse it anyway… they then said.. well we designed it to really pull this much more… nice to always have the reserve. On the Internet ford showed from the testing grounds in Az that the frame on toy was not as good as they said either.. Again they proved that the current ford truck could outperform and outlast the junk made off shore. Toy quickly pull their adds on TV. (if you wondered where they went… grin)
Now old bonehead fred their who bought a toyota with his disability welfare food stamp check… thinks everyone should have one… but, shall we look at the effect he caused?
Smelly fred took money that he was paid here in this country and gave it to a off shore company that didn’t pay any taxes nor did they hire any US labor to make it here in this country (yes I know they have a plant in the south east but were hyper theory here)
so he took his fraudulent obtained disability welfare check and spent it on an off shore country’s vehicle product… he got a good deal.. But was it for the country? … seem he basically put several people out of work that made US pu’s. They lost their job because of this…reduction in sales revenue… (for our country.. theirs is gaining) which then caused the government to have to fork out more money to support them while they look for a new job outside the automotive industry. Fred basically put them out on the street also because they couldn’t afford to pay the mortgage on the house… the bank.. Well you know the rest of the story… all because smelly fred bought a toy truck that he later found out didn’t haul the camper… crashed around the corner and found he couldn’t sue the manufacture because they didn’t tell him it wasn’t that good… after all they are not from this country so to sue. .. he would have to go their… and they would laugh at him like he is here… so fred now whines about not being able to have equality and enjoyment like the others do out at the river camping. He now wants the government to help him attain his rightful level and place in the camping community….. He wants more money…
Money you and I have to make up in taxes and fee’s. So in reality all that money he fraudulently got and gave.. which came from all of us who worked for ours… basically left the country to make them rich and us poor’er with thousands out of work that used to supply us with the goods we needed and had extra for the good social life we enjoyed camping together. But, they too had to tighten their belt… and so the camping industry loses another good customer… all because of fred .
Don’t think so .. take a look at the RV industry. With the fact that the environmental nazi’s don’t look with favor on people who are not politically correct in buying large vehicles which could tow, carry or have for pure enjoyment… it puts the manufacturers out of work… it puts the campgrounds out of business and it then has the trickle down effect back to the economy. All because bonehead fred convinced you he was right… May I suggest… to save the economy and have a better life you instead ignore fred and enjoy your RV and the industry it provides.
Both Dilfey and Fred are working together to make this blog continue on .. they are laughing at the reactions they are getting… I think most of us take it serious while they dink around with feelings and innuendoes… thus without an apology from them for their degradation…we have no further concerns… we will stop here.. and suggest to others that they too ignore the two of them .. Eventually they will go away when shun’ed and ignored enough. Its part of their demented and sick psychological make up . I am only sorry that Bobs wife is related to the rv society. I feel that she makes contribution unlike bob and fred here. I am sure she is saying about now.. is there a good divorcé attorney in the house?
Bob, Sorry, but this is my last post on this blog. I simply cannot participate alongside some of the personal gutter-level rot coming from a few of the boors who’ve responded to what should have been an argument of ideas. This last one – from GM – is the last straw…but not the only one. His is one of the best examples of an angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled rant that one could possibly imagine.
Count me out, if this is how a dissenting opinion and a critique of ideas is going to turn out. I’m “outa here”. Guys like that, hiding in the anonymity of the internet, simply waste my time and offer me nothing whatsoever that is useful.
Good luck.
A.W.Walker on November 27th, 2008 1:00 pm
Bob, Sorry, but this is my last post on this blog. I simply cannot participate alongside some of the personal gutter-level rot coming from a few of the boors who’ve responded to what should have been an argument of ideas. This last one – from GM – is the last straw…but not the only one. His is one of the best examples of an angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled rant that one could possibly imagine.
Count me out, if this is how a dissenting opinion and a critique of ideas is going to turn out. I’m “outa here”. Guys like that, hiding in the anonymity of the internet, simply waste my time and offer me nothing whatsoever that is useful.
Good luck.
—————————————————————————————
A.W.
wow…. you know your going to miss us.
one angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled rant (your participals are dripping again) Of course its easy for your to say
I’m “outa here”. Guys like that, hiding in the anonymity of the internet, simply waste my time and offer me nothing whatsoever that is useful. — LOL A.W.
In reading Bob’s reply to you.. I find he is stating his facts that he based his opinion on. To which I reply…. how long to convert over… if at all. In the current news about OB .. seems he is coming to grips with reality and while a pipe dream its going to take years to achieve. I doubt if the powers to be will allow it.
Similar things happened with the solar “off the grid ” powered homes. As soon as they started to get popular (green) The power generation co. put a stop to it by so many road blocks that one never would get ahead. They don’t want you to make things better and take their money. (look for elect rates to increase for a long list of effective reasions)
I recently heard RL on the EIB go through the same thing we said. You feel good about helping your country and go buy a EV car. No problem the fact that your making all that gas mileage and trying to save money…. only makes the price of oil go up per gallon. So where is the savings? and now your ride is a go kart instead of your SUV. Its their money….. they will get it one way or the other and you will pay.
Bob about the only thing I can see is going to nuc power. Here we not only save oil burning (most are Nat Gas right now .. from one public seervice company to the other that has you in check) but also the fact that the trees don’t have to work so hard because were not burning oxygen. Now the electric cars make sense. Nuc energy can be renewable source also. Breeders have shown that. But, will the current power co’s allow it? Not unless they have something to gain by doing so. (They tell the politican what to do.. not the other way around… do you see airlines decrease its fuel useage? Look at what it takes to get just one jet across the country in fuel.. and their are hourly flights )
I am all for effecency. Waist not want not. But, most of the orginal article still says …. We’re going to have to change. Why not tell the environazis to show us the way with practical advancements and not just regulations to force us into submission.
I for one enjoyed the thanksgiving week. Put lots of miles on the RV. Which economically is more practical to US than maybe to the environmentalist. Then again do I care? All they can seem to do is take toys away and get rich while doing it.
From my point of view… The real reasion that this country is in such depression is because no one can make anything here anymore. They look to the housing industry as a main contrubitor to the economics of the country… Instead they should be looking to the manufacture of goods and services. Something the environmentalnazi’s seem to have forgotten is the basic building block of the economic engine. If no one builds anything how is someone supposed to buy anything. Most seem to think the freebies and handouts are going to do the trick but … nothing is free in the world… thus who is going to pay for it? Well we see the time for a change OB saying that he wants to tax the rich and give it to the poor.. good idea…. bad thinking… as the rich are the ones who made things, hired the guys and gals to build his products… who then could buy things with the money they earned. Now take that away and what do you have… exactly what we have today. The Demo’s it seems, have used the environmental issues to force businesses off shore… closing factories…. and the rich take their money and go home. And the loser in the end is…. You make no money building houses if the people can’t afford to buy it because they don’t have a job. And who gives them that job? Yet the Demo’s draw big pay, make the rules…. that strangly exempt them… and then pat themselves on the back with degrees and honors that we all should be in awe with. Hmmmm…..
By the way Bob.. you might want to examine boxers and finklestines husbands income. They worked as a team to get the surplus navy land and made millions building condos out in the SFO bay. Just a little self interest there? That after they claimed the environmental conservation. I think Abe said it best. You can fool most of the people all of the time when you impress upon them that your right and they are wrong. However Mark twain said it best… when in doubt tell the truth. Something that most don’t like to do these days.
Were stuck with the antics and ravings that the new admin is starting. One thing for sure… he has 4 years to prove he can do a better job than the other guy. Time will tell all… if he was a good choice…. my hopes are high but my practical side says… tighten your seat belt and hold on to your wallet…
Oh and AW… before I finish… one slap deserves another… I commend you sir for your blissful mirror discription of yourself… one angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally disturbed uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled ranting … non factual dude.
did I leave anything out AW ? oh ya don’t let the door hit … well you know the saying. LOL
A.W.,
I share your sentiments, I will not take part in this blog again. It’s unfortunate that one person is allowed to run off the rest of us but GM’s tactics are no different than those of evironmentalist, merely more crude. Also unfortunate is the fact that I agree with him on the issues.
The first articles I read on the subject of green RVing were, I thought, interesting and provactive, giving some new ideas worth considering. So, I read them and welcomed some bits here and there. I am NOT anti-environment, just anti-environazis. I, like most RVers, conserve where I can and save where I can. But, I will not support the destruction of our way of life in support of ‘feel good’ extremists driven by emotion rather than science and truth.
This type of leftist rant offered by Bob does not belong in RV.NET. If I want politics, I’ll chose my own sources, not just swallow the propaganda.
Very dissappointed,
Hal