Nissan & Hyundai: Just say "no" to Auto Alliance
http://ucsaction.org/campaign/7_05_nissan_hyundai/
Automakers Nissan and Hyundai will be introducing their first hybrid
models in 2006, helping to expand this important emerging market.
However, just as these automakers are seeking to establish their
“green credentials” with hybrids, the Alliance of Automobile
Manufacturers (a.k.a. the Auto Alliance) is courting these two
companies. The Auto Alliance is the lobbyist group representing most
of the major automobile manufacturers. Its stated priorities include
blocking any increase in fuel economy standards, and overturning
California’s breakthrough global warming regulations on vehicles.
Please contact the CEOs of Nissan and Hyundai and let them know that
the reputation they are trying to develop with these hybrid vehicles
will be severely damaged by associating with the Auto Alliance, a
group pushing to keep American drivers out of the cleaner cars we
want and deserve.
Personalize your letter: Increase the impact of your action by giving
it your own personal voice. Here are some questions that may help you
quickly and easily increase your letter's resonance:
* Are you in the market for a new car? Will you be in 2006?
* Do you own, or have you owned, either a Nissan or Hyundai
vehicle?
* Are you a current hybrid vehicle owner?
* Were you one of the over 20,000 people who took action and
filed a false advertising complaint against the Auto Alliance for
their "virtually emission-free" ad?
* Do you live on the West Coast and are currently being denied a
"clean air corridor?" because of the Auto Alliance's activities?
Tell me more
Subject:
Dear Mr. Ghosn and Mr. Cosmai,
(Edit Letter Below)
I am writing to applaud your planned 2006 introductions of hybrid
vehicles. As a consumer interested in cleaner, more fuel-efficient
car options, I am pleased that the Altima and Accent hybrids will
help push forward this emerging clean vehicle market. The fact that
the Altima hybrid will be assembled in the United States, and the
Accent hybrid may help make hybrid technology affordable to a larger
segment of the driving public are both very exciting developments.
I have also read, however, that the DC-based lobbyist group for many
of the major automakers, the Auto Alliance, is courting both of you
to join its ranks. The Auto Alliance has continually used fear and
deception to prevent any meaningful improvements in vehicle
pollution, safety, and fuel economy standards. For example, the Auto
Alliance recently ran advertisements calling today's autos "virtually
emission-free" -- deceptive language that resulted in over 20,000
false advertising complaints. Now the Alliance is purportedly focused
on preventing higher fuel economy standards and overturning
California's breakthrough regulations on global warming pollution
from autos among its top agenda items.
Your association with this group would severely undermine whatever
environmentally-friendly reputation you hope to develop through your
hybrid models, not to mention my interest as a potential customer. A
clear, public "no thank you" to this lobbyist group would, in turn,
give an indication that your hybrid models are not merely
"greenwashing," but a genuine step toward addressing the
environmental, public health, and gas saving needs of the American
consumer.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
[Your address]
usual suspect wrote:
> Beach Runner wrote:
>
>>>> http://www.commondreams....
>>>
>>>
>>> From their "about us" page:
>>>
>>> Common Dreams is a national non-profit citizens' organization
>>> working to bring *progressive* Americans together to promote
>>> *progressive* visions for America's future. Founded in 1997, we
>>> are committed to being on the cutting-edge of using the internet
>>> as a political organizing tool - and creating new models for
>>> internet *activism*.
>>>
>>> IOW, they admit they're *liberal* activists.
>>>
>>> <...>
>>
>>
>> hat is correct. If IF the many models
>
>
> SOME models...
>
>> that say global warming are correct,
>
>
> There's no indication that they are.
>
>> and there is no doubt there are many models,
>
>
> SOME models.
>
>> than radical chance is necessary.
>
>
> Radical chance? You twit, you mean radical change. And it is NOT necessary.
>
>> If things were business as usual, it wouldn't matter, but of course, they
>> are not business as usual except to the really blind conservative
>> people as yourself.
>
>
> Spoken as the elite leftist snob you really are. You want "radical
> change" on the basis of inconclusive evidence. Why? Because the "radical
> change" you advocate is consistent with your POLITICS. Such change is
> unwarranted by the SCIENCE, which doesn't show a clear-cut problem (and
> certainly not of the magnitude that would necessitate RADICAL change).
>
>> We are in the midst of a global change and you can't even see it.
>
>
> Neither can most studies.
>
> http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm
> http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html
> http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=294
> http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/gccour...2/seedsci.html
>
> Etc.
>
>> So you can correct some spelling or typos when I take medication
>
>
> Your drug abuse is your own problem, not mine.
>
>> You've still ignored
>
>
> No, you ****. I've addressed the substance of your "radical" claims
> which you claim necessitate radical change. I don't think other human
> beings should be subjected to your radical politics on the basis of your
> irrational concerns which aren't substantiated by scientific discovery.
> And at the end of the day, that's precisely what you want to do: require
> every human being to adopt your political worldview. That's ALL this is
> about. You're an authoritarian zealot. You've been exposed.