Mixed Messages

Recently I was standing on line waiting to be served in a Berkeley shop. A pair of forty-something, well-dressed women (not hippies, yippies or dippies) ahead of me were discussing the war on terror/Iraq and dissing Bush. I tuned out their litany of half-truths and smug catch phrases...but this exchange dropped my jaw to the floor:

Woman #1 "Aren't you a little worried about a terrorist attack here?"

Woman #2 " Oh, no they would never attack the Bay Area, we're on their side."

When I read Amir Taheri's piece in the NY Post it reminded me why the SF Bay Area Dems are devoted Fancophiles...they share a distain, nay, a visceral hatred of Fly-over America that lies outside the cantons of their political brethern.

It comes, in part, from Americans who want Iraq to fail because they want President Bush to fail. Some 81 books paint the president as the devil incarnate; Bush-bashing is also the theme of three "documentaries" plus half a dozen Hollywood feature films. Never before in any mature democracy has a political leader aroused so much hatred from his domestic opponents.

Others want Iraq to fail because they want America to fail, with or without Bush. The bitter tone of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan when he declared the liberation of Iraq "illegal" shows that it is not the future of Iraq but the vilification of the United States that interests him.

Add to this the recent bizarre phrase from French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin. The head of the Figaro press group went to see him about the kidnapping of two French journalists in Iraq; Raffarin assured him they would soon be freed, reportedly saying, "The Iraqi insurgents are our best allies." [emphasis added]

In plain language, this means that, in the struggle in Iraq, Raffarin does not see France on the side of its NATO allies — the U.S., Britain, Italy and Denmark among others — but on the side of the "insurgents."

Those who want Iraq to fail because they hate Bush and/or America as a whole (for reasons that have nothing to do with Iraq) know that "the insurgents" can't get anywhere. Nor would the Bush- or America-bashers really want Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi to become ruler of Iraq.

I wouldn't be so sure about the latter, for there are millions of Lefties who admire the likes of Castro, believe they can bargain with terrorists and view socialist Europe as a model society. A view provided by Europe's Leftist, anti-American media, and reinforced by travel well-cushioned from the realities of the system's shortcomings with beaucoup US dollars.

There was an anti-SUV article in Tuesday's SF Chronicle from Newhouse News Service by Rebecca Goldsmith that I can't source online. Goldsmith inadvertantly illustrates the difference in our standard of living and why Europeans hate the US...it's about envy, not hegemony.

The opposition (of Europe) to SUV's illustrates fundemental differences in the culture of cars.

In the United States, SUV's size and stature appeal to Americans' romance with the open road and the endless horizon. Middle-class folks buy them to get a feeling of security in an insecure world.

But in Western Europe, sport utility drivers seem to flout social mores that emphasize less flambouant lifestyles, environmental consciousness and respect for others. In this climate, SUV drivers get labeled as road-hogging, gas-guzzling pigs. It doesn't help matters that some German models cost more than many people's homes.

An anti-American sneer comes through in every point, but many of her constructs are Wrong (someone point the author to Google). Europe lagged twenty years behind the US auto emission and passenger safety regulations. There is a difference between a European auto and the same model built for the US export market. Many compact European models are not exported to the US because they are built to lesser standards, although since ENCAP crash testing began in 1996, safety on some mid-size and luxury models has improved dramatically in the past few years. The EU has yet to adopt a set of requirements, but then they haven't ratified their constitution either.

It wasn't until 1993 European Union passed regulations to reduce the emissions from cars and by 1996 they were lowing the standards as they couldn't meet the targets and most American federal standards still remain more stringent than the EU. The manner in which the EU chose is illustrative of the difference between the two "car cultures" as well:

EU environmental legislation allows member states to introduce favourable taxation to encourage the introduction of an environmental initiative earlier than legislation demands. This has been widely used by some member states to:

• * Encourage early introduction of vehicles meeting future emissions limits
  
• * Support the costs for retrofitting cars, trucks and buses with catalytic converters and diesel particulate traps
  
• * Accelerate introduction of cleaner fuels such as unleaded gasoline and ultra-low sulphur diesel.

Typical incentives are reductions in the rate of annual or circulation tax on vehicles, a restriction on the use of more polluting vehicles in city centres and lower duty rates on 'cleaner' fuels.

Compare this with our most populous, car dependent/crazed state: California, which while driving more SUV's, light trucks and luxury imports has become a world leader smog emission control and the effort to encourage the development and marketing of low and zero-emission vehicles.

• In 1971 California's ARB adopts the first automobile nitrogen oxide standards in the nation,
• 1980 Compliance testing performed by ARB on autos in use to determine whether they continue to comply with emission standards as they age. This is a strong incentive for manufacturers to develop more durable emission control equipment to avoid the risk of recall (catalytic convertors),n
• 1984 California Smog Check Program goes into effect to identify vehicles in need of maintenance and to assure the effectiveness of their emissions control systems on a biennial basis. (no pass-no license plate tag- no drive)

Only last week the remaining loophole in the smog regs was closed in California as the exemption of 30-year roll-over for classics and pre-76 models from emission regs, to cushion the poor from being forced to junk their old daily drivers and collectors was struck down by AB2683 when the new law was signed by the Governator, much to the disappointment of Jay Leno, car clubs and the Feste household.

As an ugly American and member of the *VRWBC, I might also point out that millions of Europeans are employed in producing road-hogging, gas-guzzling SUVs and luxury cars for the US market...cars fitted with advanced emission control equipment required by the DOT and not the EU.

Can you say hypocrite? I thought you could.

*Vast Right Wing Blogger Conspriracy

Posted by feste at October 2, 2004 09:41 AM | TrackBack