My first Prius rage

At a recent job interview, I was asked if I minded seeing people with guns.

"Uh, like cops?"

"No, security guys."

I was pretty amazed. Security guys with guns - whatever next? I guess I should worry if they want to see my donation chit to ANSWER or the ACLU.

ObPeeve: We have to wear ID badges at work now.

MoPeeve: There's nothing here worth stealing.

On the other hand, I've replaced my photo with the mug shot of Earl J Hickey. I'll report back if anyone notices. My previous experience with replacing my photo with a shot of Mao Tse-Tung while working in a DoD facility indicates that no one ever will notice.

Ooooh, baby. Whaddaya doin' Saturday night?

F.

I followed one of those in Berkeley a few years back. The bumper sticker read "Nader 2000 Green Party", but the aging Toyota's tailpipe belched a cloud of smoke that could've hidden the USCG Morgenthau. Some folks ain't too versed in irony.

Francois.

gee whiz, thankyou. I'm an intelectuale. It's because old boy tom said so.

They are heavy into symbols and light on action.

Unless you catch them doing it behind closed doors. They don't want to be seen fondling their guns in public, but when as there's nobody watching it's O.K.

Really?

People will steal anything that isn't nailed down. I'm actually surprised at the petty theft that I've seen: lots of common items that are available just about anywhere if you have more than ten dollars to your name. Sometimes if I wonder whether they could be socialists embracing the latest in subliminal marketing techniques, but not much longer after that, I usually wake up.

What year is it again?

Regards,

Steve

1994, dumbass.

Adam

I knew it. I only suspected that my watch was running slow but now you've confirmed it.

Regards,

Steve

Depends, depends. James Woolsey makes a pretty good point about Rock Ribbed Conservatives saving as much gas as they can so Persons of Rag get fewer American dollars to pursue their nefarious terrorist coddling schemes. For these guys the environment is a secondary consideration.

Francois.

On the other hand, Honda's definitely hiding their hybrids whereas Toyota knows how to market the sumbitches. I wasn't aware the hybrid Accord even existed until a couple of months ago, though it's been on the market since late 2004.

Besides, the Honda system doesn't shut down the gas engine at all, whereas the Toyota will turn it off until it's needed, which means Toyotas have better mileage in stop & go traffic, a useful feature in the Bay Area. Might it be that Prius drivers considered the merits of the two approaches and *gasp* bought the better technology?

Uh-huh. After thirty years of watching the Democratic Party riding madly off in all directions (tm Stephen Leacock) you still believe that? I have a *wonderful* bridge...

On the other hand, you've made the same choice as a whole passel of French folks - doesn't that tent your trousers some?

Not necessarily so. The current lot of Prii have enough miles on them that battery life can be fairly well extrapolated, and at 160,000 miles the cells still have better than 90% capacity. Things are looking pretty good in the battery corral: it isn't like a laptop where the battery will get either sucked down to zero or float charged for most of its life, either of which will shorten life. Gentle discharges and charges are the best way to keep batteries alive, which is exactly how hybrid cars use the things.

"Oh no, they say he's got to go Go go Godzilla!"

Francois.

: Maybe they're insecure poseurs who yearn so strongly for the : approval of others that they have to be seen making a statement : with their choice of automobile. That would certainly go a long : way toward explaining why the Pious...er, Prius, outsells Honda's : hybrid offerings: the Hondas look identical to their non-hybrid : counterparts, but with the Prius, everyone knows you're driving : a hybrid. Tree-huggers are overwhelmingly liberal, and this need : to be seen and approved of would be consistent with the way the : libbos care so goddam much about what people in other countries : (e.g., France ) care about the U.S. Liberals, after all, : are fundamentally herd animals.

Yeah, right. I think of that every time I step out into my driveway and catch sight of my brace of Benzes. I feel so inadequate!

The idea that Prius owners are "intellectual" really seems to be quite important to you for some reason.

Then why are you so defensive on behalf of those who do, you simpering lickspittle? Are you hoping that by associating yourself with them, their "intellectual" cachet will rub off on you?

(You know what "cachet" is, don't you? If not, maybe you could find one of those educated Prius owners who'd be willing to explain it to you.)

Because they p'loot more than gasoline-engined cars. Specifically, they put out more oxides of nitrogen, plus all those particulates. (Not that I give a shit, of course. I'm a planet-raping Republican who cares only about his own bottom line...and no, I'm not referring to my asscrack. Get what passes for your mind out of the gutter.)

Anyway, you'd have known that if you were an inneleckshal like a Prius owner. No goddam wonder you don't own one of the things. The sales- men at the dealership probably heard you talk for a few seconds and laughed in your face. "I'm sorry, 'sir,' but I'm afraid you don't qualify. We don't sell these cars to just _anybody_, you know. I'd say you're more Kia Rio material. Or maybe you could get someone to sell you a used Geo Metro. Next!"

I'm the kind of moron who's too smart to ask someone else a question, and then call him a moron before I'd even seen his answer, is what kind of moron I am. You?

: And not only that, but you're going to have tons o'fun trying to : unload the thing when it gets older, seeing as how a purchaser : (or you, if you decide to keep the thing) will have to shell out : ten grand for new batteries at some point. Talk about your money : going to Japan...woo hoo! Looks like you'll get your wish, doesn't : it? May as well avoid the rush, and bend over and greeze : up your bunghole now, financially speaking. Japan, Inc. is headed : your way, and its bouncing choad is glistening-tipped and hideously : empurpled.

It being their problem doesn't negate what I said. (You know what "negate" means, don't you? Maybe you...oh, forget it.)

The demand demonstrates that purchasers of Prii either haven't thought far enough ahead to consider that looming expense in their future (and its potential effect on their car's resale value if they don't take care of it), or that they're so insecure that they just don't care, because getting approval by making a visible political statement is more important to them.

(Back during the run-up to the election, I thought of renting a Prius, putting a Bush/Cheney bumper sticker on it, then driving it through Santa Cruz and watching people's heads explode. BOOM! "There goes another one!")

Yeah, Mercedes of all sorts are known for their poor resale value, aren't they? Especially the diesel models, what with gasoline prices heading up again. *snort*

: What those who screech about opening up ANWR have trouble wrapping their : tiny li'l minds around is the idea that while the oil from ANWR wouldn't : last very long if it were pumped out and released all at once, that isn't : how it would be -- any more than all the oil from any other source would : be pumped out and released all at once. If nothing else, it'll take time : to get it out of the ground. It'll be added to the global oil market, a : tributary flowing into a conceptual river. It's the aggregate oil supply : that determines how long the supply lasts.

Bullshit. That's just more of that received lefty "wisdom" that you people are so enamored of.

: As for all this sanctimonious handwringing about the "wilderness" from : you tree-hugging dirt worshippers, the oil facilities will occupy about : as much land as a postage stamp, relative to the overall size of the : Alaskan wilderness. And how many of you are ever going to see the place, : anyway? I've been there; have you? Didn't think so.

Where, specifically? Ever attended a wet T-shirt contest at the Breakers in Kodiak?

The point isn't that it's all right to "destroy" them. The point is that it's a bit strange for people to feel so strongly about a place they're probably never going to see. It illustrates how environmen- talism has become a secular religion (with the "wetland" as a stand-in for the Christ figure, I might add).

According to what I've read, oil drilling in ANWR would occupy about

2,000 acres, all told. That's 0.01% -- one one-hundredth of one pecent, for those of you in Rio Linda -- of ANWR's twenty million acres. We're well into "BFD" territory here, I'm afraid. Get a grip.

"With no benefit to the public?" First you say that the sale of oil from AnWR will just make the oil companies richer. Then you claim that there'll be no benefit to the public. Uh, in order for the oil companies to get richer, they'll have to sell that oil to somebody. And the people who'll buy it are, by definition, people who'll have a need for it -- folks who will benefit from it, in other words.

You really haven't thought this through, have you? Conservatives think; liberals *emote.*

: There's still time to reregister as a Republican. We have a big tent.

We'll see, won't we?

Geoff

: Think rec.aviation.military, maybe ten years ago. I'm a former : flight engineer on USCG C-130s.

I liked it a lot. The designers really thought of everything. I'd say the fact that it's been in production longer than any other airplane in history speaks for itself.

What changes were those, if you don't mind my asking? I never saw anything that even hinted at corner-cutting.

Geoff

On 21 Apr 2006 07:22:13 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@u1.netgate.net (Geoff Miller) wrote to ToMh:

GUFFAW!!!

: I live in the mountains and get to and from the freeway via 17 : miles of two-lane mountain road. I deal with such people often. : A lot of people who live in my area are slow drivers with control : issues (overly-tolerant Santa Cruz County is a magnet for misfits : of all sorts), so I'm more than familiar with the type.

And you're in denial.

"Zilch evidence?" When someone sees that a driver behind him wants to get around, and he refuses to either speed up or pull over to let the faster driver by, "control issues" are the only possible explana tion: the slower driver wants to control the speed at which the other person drives.

Wrong. I want slower drivers to either speed up *or pull over,* their choice.

As far as speeding up is concerned, driving at the maximum legal speed when there's someone else behind you is the least you could do. And it isn't unreasonable that you'd do so.

Faster drivers don't want to force slow drivers to drive faster; they just want to get around them. You can drive like a little old lady all day long for all I care, so long as you don't obstruct traffic.

Slower drivers, on the other hand, often *do* want to control the speed at which faster drivers drive.

I did. It was an aside, to underscore how a lot of drivers in my area have control issues.

Speaking of consideration, learn to use a text editor, won't you? There's no reason to include so much quoted text in your follow-ups, especially if you aren't even going to reply to the points therein.

Geoff

I'd like people to at least do the speed limit, which I think is reasonable. And it would be nice if they'd be considerate enough to pull over and let faster drivers by even if they're doing the speed limit, if it's apparent that they'd like to drive faster still. Beyond that, people can be slowpokes all day long so far as I care. It comes down to an analogue of that saying about how your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose: drive slowly if you want -- as long as it doesn't impede anybody else.

I live in a mountainous area of northern California where there are a lot of two-lane roads (one lane in either direction). A lot of them are sufficiently winding that there really aren't that many opportunities to pass safely.

Also, it used to be the default that passing was legal on two- lane roads in California. But about ten years ago, the law was changed and all two-land roads were marked "no passing" (with the customary double yellow lines) by default, with only selected stretches left legal for passing. These legal-passing stretches are ridiculously few and far between, reducing passing opportunities still further if one doesn't want to risk getting a ticket. (Police, in the form of the Highway Patrol, are far more numerous in California than they are in many places in North America.)

geoff

No, the argument is about why people buy Priuses, you pathetic little c*ck-knocker.

Congratulations on finally posting an article that didn't contain any misspellings.

Geoff

: Here's the deal. Faster drivers don't want to force slower drivers : to move at their (the faster drivers') preferred pace. They just : want to get around them.

Let me get this straight: I'm an asshole if I make it clear that I want to get around someone, but he isn't an asshole for getting in my way to begin with? Your bias is showing. I bet you're a Democrat.

No, it _isn't_ "the way it goes." My taking that route or not pulling over isn't the problem. Someone driving too slowly is the problem. Let's place the blame where it belongs.

It isn't about "getting there" first. It's about driving at one's comfortable pace.

Geoff

I.P.Freely asks Le Grenouille:

"Whenever I hear someone say 'Berkeley,' I reach for my Browning."

Geoff

Since you were at ther mercy of the line (which, in turn, was at the mercy of the cashier and the bagger), why did she feel that you were the source of the problem?

Thiat wasn't an "impatience" problem. It was an "unclear on cause and effect" problem.

Those aren't examples of "people in line being impatient" problems. They're examples of cashiers and baggers not doing their jobs prop- erly, with the necessary care and attention to detail. Working quickly needn't mean working carelessly.

So you believe that anytime someone wants to move more quickly than the person ahead of him, he's being unreasonable?

I'm sure that at some point, things could be slow enough that even you would get impatient. Where is the line drawn between an "acceptable" delay and an "unacceptable" one? And by whom?

Don't intellectualize. Just get out of the friggin' way.

Geoff