Comments on: Lawmakers pushing for stricter fuel economy rules

By: beantownslut

beantownslut — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:39:01 +0000

he’s an idiot and he makes New England Look Bad

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:50:48 +0000

Come oooooooonnnnnn $170 … get these regulation haters to suffer for their misplaced hatred …… WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

By: fuzz40

fuzz40 — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:55:36 +0000

Well after the government gets done regulating the auto industry, what part of “freedom to choice” will they go after next. Freedom of speech seems like a good one to crack down on. We don’t want people to complain about the new fuel standards. Big government was a big mistake.

By: HemiRoadRunner

HemiRoadRunner — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:33:42 +0000

Ed Markey is a piece of $H!T. He’s the guy that said “On April Fool’s Day, the biggest trick of all is being played on the American consumer by Big Oil”. He couldn’t kick big oil’s @$$, so now he’s the vulture going after the dehydrated American auto companies. I love how the gov’t knows EVERYTHING about engineering and science, where they can mandate these BS laws on things they actually know NOTHING about. They let the oil companies merge, and ever since the OIL COMPANIES control the market, our govt just makes too much money off of them to really do something.

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 04:32:50 +0000

CAFE is good. But I’ve made my case too many times already.

Regardless, $170/barrel guaranteed this year … that’ll **** up enough people causing them to settle for something they never really wanted … suckers.

By: elviososa

elviososa — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 04:17:18 +0000

good!

By: howsmydriving

howsmydriving — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 02:01:23 +0000

Bring it on. If you mandate it, it will happen.

By: brassmonkey

brassmonkey — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:36:59 +0000

Good job, Congress. Pass more legislation, because that ALWAYS works. ****ers.

By: corvette

corvette — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:49:07 +0000

31.6 MPH average? spell check needed.

By: xyunya

xyunya — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:40:02 +0000

mayer_ray_nagin, #5 is unnecessary: we already have open mind, it is our valets that remain closed for other brands.

By: Bryce

Bryce — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:07:25 +0000

It should be 50% because 20% isn’t fair.

By: mayer_ray_nagin

mayer_ray_nagin — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:04:41 +0000

Other laws Congress should pass because if passed they’ll work:

1) Gas prices shall not exceed 98¢/gallon until Jan 20, 2138.
2) Ben & Jerry’s will still taste good but only have 3 calories.
3) Terrorist are no longer allowed to commit acts of terror.
4) Criminals must turn in their guns this afternoon.
5) Hondaphiles must have an open mind.
6) Apples must be crunchy and sweet.
7) American Idol must no longer suck.
Wile E. Coyote must catch the Road Runner in 20% of episodes.
9) Avocado pits must be smaller, and
10) Cats must be obedient by nature.
.
Congresspeople are blithering morons.

By: A4

A4 — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:03:29 +0000

representative grampy from nebraska saw his MPGS jump to 45 on a downhill with no accelerator on his digital readout in his buick and thought to himself: “oh we are already there with these cars so make it mandatory for all!”
thats how politicians think

By: Z06ified

Z06ified — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:56:27 +0000

The only way to get that kind of AVERAGE mileage is to build super light vehicles, no more than 3,000 lbs. When people start dying left and right from crashes in these super light vehicles, then the government will be crying again about safety, and institute new mandates. All of these mandates will cost MONEY, and lots of it. A safe, light vehicle that gets 35 MPG will cost triple what the average car costs today.

In the end, it will cost consumers more than the gas they will save. That’s what happens when politicians get involved – stupid things happen.

By: Bryce

Bryce — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:41:38 +0000

The anti-regulation side of the CAFE argument has consistently made a logical argument against higher standards. I don’t think that there should be any more debate. And those politicians should be embarassed that their political careers are made possible by idiot voters.

By: mayer_ray_nagin

mayer_ray_nagin — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:35:36 +0000

I think if Congress passes a law saying 48mpg average by 2009 the market will know we are serious and prices will drop to 98¢ per gallon, because we all know if Congress passes a law like this the rest is easy as pie.

By: ChicagoCTS32

ChicagoCTS32 — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:31:51 +0000

Is anybody else surprised by the 5th word in the 2nd paragraph?
I’m with golf4me on the plasma idea. Far better use of gov’t funds.

By: xyunya

xyunya — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:24:16 +0000

My tax dollars at work: Congress should propose those rules 5 years ago when writing was on the wall that gas prices are moving up. Market will force automakers achieve fleet economy of 35 mpg even before 2015 now without pontifications in congress. Actually the breaking point was $80/barrel: alternative fuels become cost effective at this point (gasoline from coal, oil extraction from oil sands etc).

By: renzogtr

renzogtr — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:21:28 +0000

140 a barrel WTF

By: golf4me

golf4me — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:21:07 +0000

So let me get this straight: The government is bumping CAFE because fuel prices are too high? How does that make sense? IF I can’t afford to fuel a 1/2 ton pickup, then let ME make the decision to buy a Prius, please. I can see if they said, “we want CAFE to be higher to reduce emissions, or something to that effect, but the gov’t should have no input on what we buy because of price alone. If that’s going to be the case, can we do something to make a 50″ plasma only cost $300, please? I think that would be a better use of tax dollars, and by default would reduce consumption because more people would stay home and watch TV!

By: A4

A4 — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:08:02 +0000

HAHAHAHAHA wtf