Not a tree hugger...

I think you'll find a number of PC members that agree with you -- me included. We're the minority though.

I'm right there with you insofar as reducing the flow of money to OPEC. I believe God gave us this planet to enjoy, and He expects us to be good stewards of it, not worship it. Global warming might be a reality, but cyclic warming and cooling of the planet is a natural fact. My mind's not made up on whether man is significantly contributing to it. Intelligent people on both sides of the debate have compelling arguments but ulterior motives.

Anyway, welcome to PriusChat and Prius-dom!

 

Good for you.

The beauty of sustainable design is that it not only reduces negative environmental and societal impacts but it saves money and creates jobs.

Now the next step is to drop political labels and ideologies and concentrate on solutions instead of seperation.

 

Yep, I'm in the same camp. I primarily drive a Prius because I refuse to support countries that hate America (when I can help it). I still want to make the environment a cleaner place.... but that's a secondary reason.

 

Whether humans are the cause of the current warming is debatable, though I believe most scientists are convinced that, at the the very least, humans are a significant factor in the warming.


Perhaps the more pertinent questions as far as global warming is concerned may be:

1. What are the effects of the current warming?
2. Assuming the effects are negative, can anything be done to reverse the course our halt the trend?

But, as far as I'm concerned, these are the questions of merit:

1. Why continue to pollute our environment? In case people haven't noticed, there are ready alternatives, such as driving less, using cars with better MPGs, etc.
2. Why do we encourage people to spend "disposable" income on "disposable" things? Why even talk about "disposable" income. There are plenty of people who wouldn't throw away trash, much less money.
3. Who loses if we pollute less?
4. Oh Yeah: Why continue to support and give political power to countries and/or regimes that have no interest in our well-being?

 

I for one (as I can't speak for other conservatives) 100% agree with your post. If I were to order your 4 "questions of merit" I would move number 4 to number 1 and move number 1 to 2. I'd remove number 2 as I believe the way someone chooses to spend their $$ is a personal choice. Other than that, I agree 100%. As you can see the only place we differ slightly is the order of these priorities.

 

Wow, you are REALLY among the minority with that statement. It even contradicts what your leader has to say. Check out this flip/flop:

"Revising his stance on global warming, President Bush proposed a new target Wednesday for stopping the growth of the nation's greenhouse gas emissions by 2025"
Bush shifts on climate change - CNN.com (click for article)

Ah, and your current nominee goes MUCH, MUCH further:

"Kicking off a week-long push seen as outreach to independent and Democratic voters in crucial swing states, John McCain on Monday delivered a speech outlining his vision for combating global warming.
Sen. John McCain's stance on global warming has put him at odds with some members of his party.

"We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great," McCain said in Portland, Oregon. "The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge."
McCain appeals to independents with environment pitch - CNN.com (click for article)

Why do you think the conservative leadership is wrong?


... Brad

 

You didn't answer my question, cleeve. Why do you think the GOP is wrong in terms of believing in global warming and its impact to our planet?

BTW, I'll bite .... who do you believe is an America and caucasion hater?

... Brad

 

Welcome! I'm with you! If you really want to have fun go visit Fred's House of Pancakes.

 

I think I understand your view now.

... Brad

 

Somehow we would find a way to move from 100% to something less, I'm sure.

In terms of foreign policy, our "energy policy" is just wrong. In terms of protecting human health and the environment, our "energy policy" is just missing the point. I wonder if we weren't better off at the time many of us joked that the amount of energy required to ruin the environment was "one Watt."

Still, I would prefer the discussion move away from the direction it is headed even in this thread. Does it matter whether we are blue or red, liberal or conservative? Does it really hurt anyone to use less energy or to accomplish the same task with more efficient uses of power and/or less damage to the environment?

For the moment I'll bite on the question of spending. I think it matters greatly how Americans spend their money. Excesses are just that -- excessive. Should we legislate the limits of wealth or spending? No. Should we encourage people to consider the effects their actions have on others? Absolutely. Resources (even printable money) are limited. Buying something today for $200 that will be thrown in the trash or forgotten on a shelf within months is a horrible waste. Why not provide it to someone who really needs help with rent or food? Or, if you are a CEO making millions but laying off workers, how about considering retaining some workers to make your products or facilities safer, cleaner and more efficient? (Oh well. . . where is that dead horse icon thingie when you need it?)

 

Cleeve:

BTW, Welcome to PriusChat. You've made an interesting first posting.

I'm not the first one to have succumbed to the temptation to post political/moral/religious views on PriusChat. Most of that, though, has been given over to Fred's House of Pancakes. There, anything goes -- particularly if it isn't related to the Prius!

Your post does offer a valid discussion in the Prius Main Forum, and I hope that it becomes something that doesn't run the course of arguing which political viewpoint or party has the better stance on environmental issues. I think it could be just as it first appeared to me, a place for people to post both "environmental" and "non-environmental" reasons for buying a Prius.

 

It's ok, I still like you ming.

Let's save the AGW debate for the environmental section and simply welcome a new member.

 

Not really a topic for the main forum, is it: either we tell each other why the OP is right, or why he's wrong. That's what FHOP is for.

Anyway, congrats to him on making the correct choice, and thanks for sharing.

 

Sorry to be pedantic, but a Watt is a unit of power, not energy. I know the time you are talking about, and the context of the joke, but as a physicist, I cannot help pointing out that the Joule is the MKS unit of energy, and 1 Watt is 1 Joule/second of energy *transfer*.

I agree about our *cough* *choke* energy policy.

I bought my Prius because I wanted my commute to be less costly; I got really motivated when my weekly fillup went to $50 (and this was 2 years ago, way before gas was nearing $4/gallon). I am concerned about the environment, and therefore all the low-emission, high-mileage tech in the Prius is a real bonus to me. None of this has much to do with my position on the political spectrum, which in any case is changing.

I'm really hoping for a plug-in hybrid and expansion of solar and wind power generation for individual houses; the two should really go together, I'm thinking...