TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners Support Terrorists

New York Times ^ | 1/07/03 | KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

[kattracks]

ASHINGTON, Jan. 7 — Ratcheting up the debate over sport utility vehicles, new television commercials suggest that people who buy the vehicles are supporting terrorists. The commercials are so provocative that some television stations are refusing to run them.

Patterned after the commercials that try to discourage drug use by suggesting that profits from illegal drugs go to terrorists, the new commercials say that money for gas needed for S.U.V.'s goes to terrorists.

"This is George," a girl's voice says of an oblivious man at a gas station. "This is the gas that George bought for his S.U.V." The screen then shows a map of the Middle East. "These are the countries where the executives bought the oil that made the gas that George bought for his S.U.V." The picture switches to a scene of armed terrorists in a desert. "And these are the terrorists who get money from those countries every time George fills up his S.U.V."

A second commercial depicts a series of ordinary Americans saying things like: "I helped hijack an airplane"; "I gave money to a terrorist training camp in a foreign country"; "What if I need to go off-road?"

At the close, the screen is filled with the words: "What is your S.U.V. doing to our national security?"

The two 30-second commercials are the brainchild of the author and columnist Arianna Huffington. Her target audience, she said, is Detroit and Congress, especially the Republicans and Democrats who last year voted against a bill, sponsored by Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, that would have raised fuel-efficiency standards.

Spokesmen for the automakers dismissed the commercials.

Eron Shosteck, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said of Ms. Huffington, "Her opinion is out-voted every year by Americans who buy S.U.V.'s for their safety, comfort and versatility." He said that S.U.V.'s now account for 21 percent of the market.

In an interview, Senator Kerry distanced himself from the commercials. He said that rather than oppose S.U.V.'s outright, he believed they should be more efficient.

"I haven't seen these commercials," he said, "but anybody can drive as large an S.U.V. as they want, though it can be more efficient than it is today."

Ms. Huffington's group, which calls itself the Detroit Project, has bought almost $200,000 of air time for the commercials, to run from Sunday to Thursday. While the group may lose some viewers if stations refuse to run the advertisements, the message is attracting attention through news coverage.

The advertisements are to be broadcast on "Meet The Press," "Face the Nation" and "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" in Detroit, Los Angeles, New York and Washington.

But some local affiliates say they will not run them. At the ABC affiliate in New York, Art Moore, director of programming, said, "There were a lot of statements being made that were not backed up, and they're talking about hot-button issues."

Ms. Huffington said she got the idea for the commercials while watching the antidrug commercials, sponsored by the Bush administration. In her syndicated column, she asked readers if they would be willing to pay for "a people's ad campaign to jolt our leaders into reality."

She said she received 5,000 e-mail messages and eventually raised $50,000 from the public. Bigger contributors included Steve Bing, the film producer; Larry David, the comedian and "Seinfeld" co-creator; and Norman Lear, the television producer.

[GOP_Raider]

How about we drill for our own freakin' oil in this country Arianna (sp)???? But I guess she would rather have Americans feel guilty over their affluence rather than actually look towards towards a realistic solution to a problem.

Typical...

[Protagoras]

Your violent world view was shared by many despots. All dead.

Thankfully the chance of this country attacking the world is nil.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

"Oh, if only life were so simple as that. You say gov't should have no say in the public's purchasing decisions where oil consumption is concerned. Do you believe that's the way it should be with every other resource having national security implications, as well? "

Since you're the true DUtard, I thought I would go back to your original quote. The problem with this world is that there are too many do-gooders and fools who take a black and white issue and make it into a rainbow like the queers and Frisco parade around. The world is not like that. The resources either have to be managed by the government (communism) or the market (capitalism). If you can not handle that basic concept of the way of the world, go back to DU and play with the children. This is a serious matter. We are discussing the potential of government regulation and control of economic resources. Even during WWII when resources were declared to be strategic resources (note that that was a "declared" war) the capitalist system hummed along producing and managing the resources because the government told them what they needed. The rationing program and restrictions on consumer goods was not debated because there was a true threat to national security and the existence of the USA. Now until our borders are militarized (like 1942), a war is declared (like 1941) and the resources openly declared to be rationed for the need of our survival (hello, I don't think I've heard W say that yet, have you?) then let the market do it's job. Until then, shut up, go back to hugging your tree, or burning your draft card or whatever it is you hippie-commie-lib types do.

[smith288]

I would run terrorists over with my SUV... So there.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

"Your life was just fine before SUV's came on the scene, and the roads were a lot safer for the rest of us."

While conservation is practical, small vehicles are not. After spending over $90,000 getting my neck and shoulder repaired because one day I decided to take my wife's small econocar out instead of my massive SUV (and getting whacked by a quality driver not paying attention), I've elected to keep that car in mothballs until gas prices soar again and we can sell it for a huge profit. The roads are not unsafe because of SUV's. That's like saying walking down the street is dangerous because guns are sold. The roads are unsafe because most drivers suck. If you're blaming the tools then you must be a crappy craftsman.

[Protagoras]

I would run terrorists over with my SUV... So there.

ROTFLMAO! Good one!

[Nuke'm Glowing]

I think we're dealing with DU plants. They can not grasp why capitalism would solve the "energy crisis" they have dreamed up.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

Sadly, my violent world view was shaped by 2 years in and out of the Middle East. The reality is that if we do not persuade, , either peacefully or violently, these nations to our point of view, there will be more American dead. Bush was right: You're either with us or against us.

[philosofy123]

The SUV started almost a decade ago as an alternative to van for soccer moms. Unfortunately, the name incorporated the word SPORT, which in itself made all kinds of people feel good about themselves. Fat old lady, is really feeling sporty, because she drives an SUV!

On the highway, one person is driving to work in a big SUV (as big as a bus) guzzling 10-15 MPG? The stupidity simply keeps going on because we have freedom of choice? The problem here is if one side is organized, and the other side is simply ignorant, guess which side is going to win? The people who are selling and marketing SUVs utilizes the best Madison Ave image marketing talents, on the other hand, the people who are interested in ENERGY INDEPENDENCE are simply a bunch of nerds with no resources.

The right wingers think the government has no business telling us what to drive. On the other hand, when we become so dependent on Saudi Arabia, and our government starts to behave like a bitches in prison, with no way to fend off the Saudis, we start crying how did we get to this stage.

Yes the government needs to tell the stupid Joe-six-pack what to drive. The question is which government? The one controlled by influence peddlers, or the one that thinks America first?

Hey to all of you radical right wingers, I want you to know 1) I hate the environmental people; 2) I am as far a right winger as any of you can think. The differences are, I am highly educated person who thinks that America and its future should come above self indulgence, and good government can provide good energy policies. I have to admit, after seeing the Hummer H2 commercials; I am very tempted to get one. SELF RESTRAINTS!!

[FBD]

"The most effective way to end Islamic terrorism is to take away their funding oxygen."

The "daisy cutter" bomb is made of a petroleum fuel. By Arianna's logic, it's use in Afganistan supported terrorists...

[Protagoras]

The reality is that if we do not persuade, , either peacefully or violently, these nations to our point of view, there will be more American dead.

Which is a tad different from the tone of your other post.

Killing the people who are trying to kill us is legitimate, and I'm sure we will get it under control. And we won't have to "nuke glowing" millions of innocent people in the process.

[Protagoras]

Arianna is interested in thing only. Self promotion. She is a twit, and she always was in my view.

[atomic conspiracy]

I posted this on a duplicate string (this one has won out):

"You know, I was thinking... if having an SUV supports terrorism, isn't that an excellent argument for ANWR?"
Not only that, it also works for nuclear power. Millionaire ecowackies like Dennis Weaver and Alec Baldwin have been touting hydrogen as a vehicle fuel for some time, ignoring the fact that you can't just extract it from the ground. Water is the raw material, but turning it into fuel takes energy. Any kind will do but you have to have a lot of it.

Their usual suggestions, solar and wind power, have been the objects of intense research for 50 years. The net result: low efficiency, and high environmental cost in equipment, maintenance, and land use. The only benefit is to pie-in-the-sky researchers. They don't push these Greeny fantasies because they are likely to work, but because they are likely not to work, sending the peasants back to the fields and shanties where they belong.

Nuclear works, it would work better without the extra costs associated with endless litigation and regulatory review. The Hollywood/Madison Avenue Cultural Axis has demonized nuclear energy, consistently exploiting ignorance and paranoia to turn a fast buck. More people died at Chappaquidick than in the 3 Mile Island "catastrophe", as media panic-mongers consistently refer to it.

What about Chernobyl? Just which American or European nuclear plant could have a similar accident? The answer is none, there is nothing like Chernobyl in the West. That abortion of a plant could only exist in a country where totalitarian bureaucrats control all information; a lot like the ideal Greeny society come to think of it. In any case, compare the eco-wacky death claims (including their outrageously cooked figures for cancer deaths)to the millions of deaths they attribute to coal and oil pollution, the destruction of the world that they allege will result from global warming, and, of course, to Huffington's terrorist road-hog accusations.

The lefty panic-mongers, at least the hard-core eco-wacky contingent, might drop this demonization of SUVs when they realize that they are being taken for a ride, ie it is working against them. OTOH, it is nearly impossible for them to let go of such a potent fantasy symbol, so they may keep it up until the inevitable reversal is an obvious and embarrassing necessity; much as they are now in the ludicrous position of defending nuclear weapons proliferation in their pet states of Iraq and North Korea.

By the way, Greenpeace, Sierra Club, and a few other eco-terror exploiters tried an anti-SUV/pickup/RV campaign back in the '80s. It vanished into a black hole about the time Ford Foundation started contributing millions to these enterprises. Coincidence?

[grasshopper2]

Fat old lady, is really feeling sporty, because she drives an SUV!

One of my neighbors drives her 11 year old son to the bus stop every day in her Surburban. And she waits there every afternoon for him even though the bus stop is only about 1000 feet from her house and he's old enough to walk. Then, she keeps the damn thing running until the bus arrives. She drives every single day, even on the most beautiful days. (Is it any wonder that she's fat and her son can't play baseball?)

[MEGoody]

"How about we drill for our own freakin' oil in this country Arianna (sp)????"

You know, this was my reaction when I first heard about these commericals. If buying foreign oil is 'supporting terrorism' then isn't it unpatriotic to forbid drilling in Anwar?

[MEGoody]

"I am highly educated person who thinks that America and its future should come above self indulgence. . ."

Well, I would presume that, for the good of the country, the government could also tell you with whom and under what circumstances you can have sex.

[newgeezer]

The resources either have to be managed by the government (communism) or the market (capitalism).

See? There you go again. Black and white. You are such a simpleton, a stubbornly naive idealist.

Here's some breaking news for you: The US gov't restricts access to a lot of our resources. Thus, according to your rules, you must believe we live in a communist country.

If you can not handle that basic concept of the way of the world, go back to DU and play with the children.

I can do the same thing right here. You are the FR version of the DU children. Your brand of logic is precisely what I expect I'd find there. See "The 25 Rules of Disinformation." Surely you can find something new there.

let the market do it's job

Yeah, as long as we let today's market do its job -- that is, as long as we artificially restrict our own capacity to produce -- we keep funding radical Islam, and 9/11 will happen sooner. Then maybe you'll be happy when we find ourselves in the war that you insist we must have in order to recognize any resources as being "strategic."

Flame on, FRetard. In your little world, there are exactly two kinds of people: those who think exactly as you do, and hippie-commie-libs.

Until then, shut up, go back to hugging your tree, or burning your draft card or whatever it is you hippie-commie-lib types do.

Since you insist on telling me where to go and what to do, why don't you stick your head back where your brain got starved for oxygen in the first place. Coming out for air doesn't seem to be helping you see the reality of the situation, and you're just making a fool of yourself.

[biblewonk]

And the day I'm told that I "have" to do that is the day I take the part of Mel Gibson in the movie "The Patriot".

oh boy

[Mo1]

In an interview, Senator Kerry distanced himself from the commercials.

I bet he did

Doesn't Kerry drive a S.U.V.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

"See? There you go again. Black and white. You are such a simpleton, a stubbornly naive idealist."

Better to be an "idealist" than a buttkissing socialist sheeple.

"Here's some breaking news for you: The US gov't restricts access to a lot of our resources. Thus, according to your rules, you must believe we live in a communist country."

Other than uranium, which can easily be obtained with the right "paperwork" name another smarty pants?

The rest of your "rants" are not worty of response. Basically speaking you are willing to surrender your freedoms because you are a cowardly little chicken bleep. Go for it. I don't care what you do. BUT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO TAKE MY FREEDOMS AWAY FROM ME. If you can't handle that concept then fine, go back and suck or do whatever it is you do with those DU buttkissers. You need to really quit trying to defend the stripping of rights and freedoms away from others. It makes your ignorance glow and your stupidity flash like a cheap neon light in the gay district of San Francisco. Perhaps that type of "lighting" makes you feel at home. However for the FReedom loving crowd, it doesn't wash. The phoney conservatives like Airiannabrain don't wash here. There is a differnce between conservation and communism. Learn it, love it and leave here please.