On the road to the White House

Now that the presidential fight card is set, we at Up to Speed decided to check out the candidates' transportation choices.

The tale of the tape:

Barack Obama (D): Drove a Chrysler 300 with a V-8 engine (18 mpg) until last summer, when he switched to a Ford Escape hybrid (30 mpg) after getting bad press about driving a gas guzzler.

John McCain (R): Cadillac CTS sedan (19 mpg). Reportedly, his first car was a 1958 Corvette (no mpg rating — it predated the rating system — but probably not too great).

Joe Biden (D): Although his main vehicle of choice is the Amtrak Acela from D.C. to Delaware, he is known to drive a 1967 Corvette (again, no mpg rating).

Sarah Palin (R): As governor, she drives a Chevrolet Suburban (16 mpg) owned by the state of Alaska. In July, she was involved in a multi-vehicle accident on the way to work. The SUV sustained several thousand dollars in damage. She also has been known to drive her husband's snowmobiles.

These are going to be a hard-fought couple of months. But there's clearly one thing both tickets can agree upon: If you want to run for high elected office in the U.S. of A., you'd better drive an American car. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) drives a Toyota Prius, so we know why McCain passed him over.

Then again, with Secret Service escorts, none of the candidates will be doing any driving anytime soon.

—Ken Bensinger

Photo: Gov. Sarah Palin and her daughter Piper with Sen. John McCain and his wife, Cindy.

Credit: Stephan Savoia / Associated Press

Comments

[Wilbur]

When was the last time any of these guys drove a car? Took public transportation? Flew commercially?

The better transportation question is to ask what each of these guys flies. Gulfstream (American-made)? Challenger (Canadian)? Falcon (French)? Learjet(USA and Cdn).

Run the fuel efficiency tests on any one of these and then ask yourself if any of this discussion really matters.

[Jared]

I wish they would ride bicycles. That would say more about them.

[Bill]

The reason obama yo mama is being criticized for driving a gas guzzler is because he's a hypocrite, running around telling you to conserve. McCain says "drill more in the US".DUH!

[Maggie Knowles]

Obama knows that government can be used to encourage innovation and that's what he intends to do when he becomes president.

No auto manufacturer acting to maximize profits would ever adopt a national strategy for energy independence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years. His plan will provide retooling tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so they can build new fuel efficient cars rather than overseas companies. Obama will also invest in advanced vehicle technology such as advanced lightweight materials and new engines.
John Talbott - Obamanomics
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I hope more people start reading and learning about Obama's real plans and policies - they are available online on his website http://barackobama.com .

[Maggie Knowles]

Mark asked - "Maggie Knowles, How does fuel efficiency improve national security?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Improving fuel efficiency means we use less foreign oil, so we don't have to use our military to make sure we have control of another country's natural resources (oil wells).

Our soldiers are at risk, we need to bring them home in a responsible way.

Another part of fuel efficiency is reducing pollution and the release of greenhouse gasses into the air, adding to the global warming problem that the Pentagon has reported to be a national security risk.

See "An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security", October 2003, By Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall

http://tinyurl.com/33tmx3 (pdf file)

Peter Schwartz is former head of planning for Shell Oil and sometime CIA consultant, and Doug Randall of the Global Business Network, a California think tank.

[Maggie Knowles]

Orvile - increasingly, the rich are rich because they are paying lobbyists to protect their interests in Washington, at the state, regional, and local levels, and are stealing from the American middle-class taxpayer. For every issue that is important to me and my family, there is a lobbyist being paid to make sure that I don't get a raise, that my health benefits are cut, that I pay more than my fair share of taxes, that the future labor of my granddaughter is already promised to pay the debt we owe China. I say enough of this with my vote for Obama. Obama wants to restore the American Dream, where anyone who works for it can obtain it. That's all I want, for my granddaughter to have a chance to get a world class education if she wants it, to live in a country where she has equal opportunity to achieve her American Dream.

[Maggie Knowles]

Wilbur - Joe Biden rides the public train to and from D.C. when he's not campaigning, as I understand, he's been doing it for years.

[Reina]

No US President, regardless of who he is, has or will have enough sway to convince major automobile corporations to uproot their current processes and completely re-tool their factories. It's just not practical for them financially.

[Maggie Knowles]

Nerjo Machiavelli - ask yourself, why can't a country that can put a man on the moon, why can't that country produce a fuel efficient SUV that will fit all your family?

The answer is that we can, but we have to create the conditions that encourage our best companies and people to put their minds to the problem.

I don't see any reason why we can't resolve all of our problems, if only we could come together to do it. We all want the same things.

[Beaon on the Hill]

I don't understand how Obama thinks that throwing a few hundred million dollars at an industry that runs on hundreds of billions of dollars will help. Also, where does everyone think this money will come from? The Government? Where do you think the Government gets its money? Anyone remember "We the People..?" The one thing I think I think is: we should try to help any industry that directly or indirectly effects most of our economy. The fact that the US auto industry employs approx 1 in 14 citizens directly and indirectly means that if it sinks, we sink.

[Reason]

Jobs are moving to places like Mexico and China for many reasons the biggest being US Labor Unions. How can a Japanese, German, Korean, etc. company build a car in the US for less than a US manufacturer? Their labor costs aren't as much, they don't have the benefits obligations, etc. The unions (along with poor management) have killed the American Auto industry, poor managers can be fired but these labor contracts are the anchor that is dragging the companies into the ground. Labor unions that support BO and the Democratic party.

Programs should be in place to help those whose jobs have moved on, but those people also need to be thinking about certain things when they force labor contracts on companies that essentially kill their ability to operate.

Also "rich" is subjective, a person making 250k and supporting a family of 4 where I live is not rich, they are comfortable. They can afford a decent home, take a vacation every year, put away for their retirement and kids college funds, and drive a slightly better than average vehicle. Houses average about 300k in my area and 400-500k in the suburbs closer to the cities.

[MichaelB]

What is the MPG on the campaign JETS they are using? Aren't they are burning 400-500 gal/hr as they blaze around the country with their entourage? How many millions of gallons will this campaign cost? Makes the difference between a Chysler V8 and a Ford hybrid a non-issue.

[Rob]

I thought Sarah Palin drove a VW Jetta. Somewhere there is a story posted about herself driving to the Capitol in her Jetta.

[Nelson Day]

I believe the biggest problem in the United States is one of taking responsibility for our actions. The government should represent the people of the United States. Relying on the government as a means for survival is relying on our fellow Americans as a means of survival. This is an all right philosophy, as long as all Americans are trying equally hard to improve their life and become independent of outside help for survival. The problem with relying on the government as a means of survival is the foundation of why Communism does not work. Communism is a great philosophy. Everyone works together for the good of everyone. The problem with this philosophy is that not all people try equally hard to improve their lifestyle. People end up relying on the government to make ends meet, and to make their lifestyle possible. These type of people do not contribute to society, they only take from society. Social programs encourage this type of behavior. The government is not Santa Claus and should not have the power to support any type of lifestyle. If social programs are the best answer we have to poverty, we are falling into the trap of socialism. In a socialist type of economy, wealth is evenly distrubuted among the people. This means that everyone will be equally impoverished. It has been proven in history that once the general public becomes dependent on the government, it is only a matter of time until the government cannot support the people, and this leads inevitably to a revolution. Supporting a government that condones social programs is supporting denial of responsibility for our lives, relying on the government, and eventually anarchy. The only way this country can change is for people to take responsibility for their lives. Hoping for the government to help is not the answer!

[M]

Orvile,

Don't you think its just a little self-centered to think other countries voted out their presidents just because they resisted American foreign policy? Don't you think they might have a myriad other reasons for choosing their president? The world, contrary to abundant delusions, does not completely revolve around America.

Bush did hurt our standing in the world. That doesn't mean the world overwhelmingly hates Americans - I wonder if you are able to discern any shades of gray in this matter?

I don't have a discernable American accent and have lived overseas for most of my life, in a variety of countries on 3 continents. I was in Australia when Bush invaded Iraq, and I moved to New Zealand shortly thereafter. I can assure you that public sentiment was overwhelmingly angry at what Bush did, and as he persevered in his arrogant, unilateral posturing, the sentiment became deep-rooted. Americans who came to work at the company I worked at in 2003 in NZ copped a lot of flack for Bush' actions (at least those who tried to defend our President's image).

The feelings were not so much anti-American at that time, at least not amongst the majority - but they turned markedly more so when we decided to re-elect him for a second term. The prevalent assumption was that we had realized our mistake and would not repeat it, but when we did - a lot of people lost all hope that the biggest military power on earth was capable of electing responsible leadership.
Although I dislike Bush, I had some compassion for my compatriots at that stage because few people abroad are aware of the intensity of the reactionary fear campaign the Bush administration maintained in order to remain relevant to voters. Living in the US at that time may have swayed otherwise level-headed Americans to vote a second time for Bush.
My friends say I am too kind - that Bush gained his advantage from the zombified religious right who lapped up his moronic yet manipulative rheotric about evil-doers and axis' of evil. Maybe both angles hold some truth.

As for your rant about the highest tax payers being punished for their success, and being forced to carry the slack of those less astute and/or less fortunate - perhaps you neglected to realize that not all of your tax dollars go towards a safety net for the poor. A great deal of those dollars go towards maintaining our country's infrastructure, funding our military, our schools - and even to corporations in the form of government contracts and corporate tax-breaks.
Those same corporate tax breaks benefit the pockets of the same poor, poor over-taxed 1 percent of our richest citizens that you are so very concerned about.

Of course, the only explanation for your focus on the tax proceeds that go to those poorer than you is that its the easiest point to make against taxes in general. It requires no real analysis, no real argument - merely a knee-jerk against having to work to help others.

Arguing against the other uses of our taxes is somewhat more involved - you and those who think like you seem to follow the path of least resistance... God forbid that you would question how much of your tax dollars were spent invading a nation that had not attacked us. That might actually lead you to challenge some of your conceits.

Our military can stand being weakened - it is the most bloated military on the planet. Compare our military spending to that of other nations, and then ask yourself whether merely warning against a weakening of our military without providing any context is really so appropriate.

[X_POLYGAMIST WIFE]

This might explain why John McCain never drove to Colorado City, Arizona where 8,000 polygamists suffer the worst human rights violations in the United States. ..sheesh!

http://www.bankingonheaven

[Joe Pearson]

Yes, I am selfish. I want to know who will reduce the national debt? I want it for myself, my family, and my children's children. Generally I don't care if they are chauffered in a rocket plane (then again, that Amtrak probably gets 500 miles per person per gallon. That kind of efficiency can only help reduce our waste, reduce our dependency on oil.)

[fedup]

I hear that Barack Obama is going to buy all americans cars that get 2000 miles to the gallon, and that the gas will be free, and that all the cars will be zero emissions because the gas they run on will be made out of love and kindness, and the best part again, is that no one will have to pay for it, because tax dollars will pay for everything! Isn't that awesome! The only catch is that we have to change our name from the USA to the United Socialist Republic of America and we all have to wait in line for bread and health care now, but that's cool, cause it's free, I mean, as long as you don't count the fact that you are paying for it already with your taxes that is. But I am sure you can upgrade your health care, like they do in jolly old England, so in essence, you will be double taxed, but that never really bothered anyone before, right John Adams?

[Rhonda]

It's sad when someone doesn't have a legitimate argument and they try to be funny. "Obama yo mamma", it lacks imagination and original thought. But we've been hearing a lot of these times of comments from people who want to consider themselves part of a populous party. I hope Obama does save the world, I hope Palin's daughter can live happily ever after. Sadly neither can happen until people in general let go of their fears and stop trying to force individuals into a mold of the perfect "American". As citizens of the United States we are free to make our own decision and not accept what is forced upon us as right. It's okay to go against the grain, as long as you’re strong enough to deal with the fallout.

[Vicious6]

Real Americans buy American. Hungry, out of work? Eat you import. Any man that drive a Corvette has my respect!

[BubbaGump]

You people on here who wish to redefine words to spew your partisan spew.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Obama? Marxist?
NO! The last 8 years MARXIST!.
Classical Marxism- a belief that capitalism is based on the exploitation of workers by the owners of the means of production.
Obama? Socialism?
NO! No such thing!
Classical Socialism- theory of social organization advocating that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be regulated or owned by the community.

Some of you people need to read a book!

[Tucker]

the real reason the factories are closing their doors is the UNION. The American economy is up higher than any other country. People should get their news from all sources.

[Auntie Illegal]

I don't think the american women will be fooled by this woman running for vp. She was chosen because she makes mcbush look good on stage. She has funded a program that pay people to shoot wolves in Alaska from planes and pay $150.00 per front left leg of the wolves and almost bankrupted the town where she was major, 11 hundred people, she has no experience and can hardly wait for biden to smile his charming smile and send her home crying like a hockey mom. Oh my a woman with 5 kids she brought into this world, do not be fooled, she does not do housework, cook for the family, that is all done by staff, and big deal she can drop 5 kids, my illegal non english speaking neighbbors do that, doesn't make them vp material.

[Munki]

I am only thinking...
Have anyone given credit to China for uniting one language from 140+ dialects (not verified the exact number) in a very short period of time? Now, one language can communicate with all of its 1.3 billion plus overseas Chinese and ethnic Chinese.

How could our country do something to change? Freedom did come with a huge price - from our founding fathers (there's no mothers?), Martin Luther King to much more...

How could we educate us - one common ground... unity and back to our fundamentals... and reconstruct?

Each candidates have its point... priorities, please...

[o.c.kid]

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their
new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish
history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had
this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some
2,000 years earlier:

'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply
cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'

'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that
voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts
from the public treasury.'

'>From that moment on, the majority always vote for the
candidates who promise the most benefits from the public
treasury, with the result that every democracy will
finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is
always followed by a dictatorship.'

'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations
from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'

'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed
through the following sequence:

1. from bondage to spiritual faith;

2. from spiritual faith to great courage;

3. from courage to liberty;

4. from liberty to abundance;

5. from abundance to complacency;

6. from complacency to apathy;

7. from apathy to dependence;

8. from dependence back into bondage'

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of
Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting
facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29

Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000
Republicans: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million
Republicans: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the
territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the
taxpaying citizens of this great country. Democrat
territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
government-owned tenements and living off various forms of
government welfare...' Olson believes the United States is
now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase
of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some
forty percent of the nation's population already having
reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty
million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote,
then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five
years.

If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete
this message. If you are not, then pass this along to help
everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that
apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE,
ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE