Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
More than fuel economy, SUVs are terrible in many ways:
1) They are much more dangerous to others on the road (in a collision or even parked, blocking other drivers' views) in MANY ways
2) They take up more space in parking lots (requiring larger spaces and fewer spots ... aka more land paved over and more circling for non-compact spots)
3) They hide smaller cars in parking lots, again, requiring more circling around looking for a non-filled spot
4) More steel, more alloys and more size = more environmentally damaging
5) SUVs are harder on the roads, requiring your municipality to spend more money on petroleum products (asphalt) to keep the streets in good repair
6) and back to fuel economy -- your new SUV's MPG being better than your Volvo's is a straw-man. Once you decided to get a new car, your Volvo's MPG doesn't mean anything -- you have to make the comparison to relevant alternatives.
Mini-vans are lame, I agree, but there are alternative wagons that DO have a third row of seating, are plenty safe, and offer more than enough space for 95%+ of the time you are using the car (what? you take your kids, their friends, your dog and groceries with you everywhere?). In that 5% or less amount of time that you do NEED the extra space, you could rent something bigger. Ahh well. So much for thinking outside the box.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
