" Sorry John, but you obviously don't realize that the purpose of the bill is to force Americans to drive vehicles they otherwise would never even consider buying.

People love the safety and convenience of large automobiles. But the B.O. administration is h*ll bent on forcing us to buy little tin cans on wheels.

Just like they are trying to mandate EVERYTHING in our lives, how we live and where we work... "

" Try and comprehend the Liberal Al Gore-type philosophy of cramming total nonsense down everyone's throats. They even go so far as to mandate that Al's stupid global warming movie be taught in our schools to brainwash our kids. The liberal mentality wants to teach kids what to think, instead of how to think.

As Obama said to his Hollywood pals, "You ain't seen nuthin' yet."

Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. If you drank any of Obama's Koolaid, it's probably too late for you. Hopefully, some of you will sober up in time to stop this. It's not too late.

BTW - There is no energy shortage. It's all just smoke and mirrors designed to tax us into oblivion. "

" It is unlikely the cash for clunkers bill will have much effect. In order to take advantage, one has to have an old car and trade it for a new car. The most you can get is $4500 and this is in lieu of trade in value. Most people who drive a care valued less than $4500 can't afford a new car.

Really Kevin, the rants against only Democrats are tiresome. Is the other party full of saints? Please..... "

" Our Republican friends don't seem to realize that many newer models, even large ones get better mileage than before. And in the case of light trucks and SUVs the new car only needs to get as little as 2 MPG better than the one it replaces.

I don't hardly think that is a horrible price to pay to get a $3,500 to $4,500 check.

And it's sad that Republicans don't want car dealers to sell cars in these tough economic times. All the Republican senators were eager to see Chrysler and GM go bankrupt, remember?

It's not like there is a shortage of SUVs to buy, is there? The gas hogs are not selling, while hybrids are hard to keep on the lot now that gas is back up to $3 a gallon.

For me, as someone looking to buy a full electric 'battery-exchange' SUV or CrossOver I kind of like the idea of being able to turn in a gas hog for a new higher-mileage car, even though the Cash for Clunkers program will be over before I can buy my electric car.

Republicans can buy all the gas hogs they afford. No one is stopping them.

But like my momma used to say, "They just gotta have something to gripe about. If you gave them a mink-lined toilet seat they'd gripe that you only gave them a white one."

~Ruff "

" "the rants against only Democrats are tiresome."

So you never noticed Ruff's rants against Republicans? A little balance is a good thing...
There is enough blame to go around both parties. I'm beginning to think our representatives seldom pass legislation that benefits the average American. Perhaps the lure of post-political employment with one of the lobbyist ventures is too much to resist. "

" John, with this I agree, Ruff's rants blaming republicans are just as tiresome.

This law will only succeed in getting those cars off the road that are valued less than the rebate (or more accurately a guaranteed trade-in value if you buy a new car that gets better gas mileage). The way it is written I suspect few will take advantage because they are unable to buy a new car, and those that can afford a new car have vehicles that are valued more than the amount the government will chip in. "

" Another fabulous example of nanny government intruding into our lives.
I don't want my tax money going to fund non essential services, even if it does get a “clunker” off the road. What's next Nancy and Obama, free cars for the poor to "help" the environment?
Small businesses are the economic engine of our society, this will end up hurting auto mechanics, who will then get a bail out and round and round we go and end up with what we’ve already got and worse… 10% unemployment and Obama wants to double down. No thanks.
Keep it up dems… I know I’ll be donating some $$ to the challenger to Thompson, if I don’t they’ll take it away in taxes anyhow. "

" So John, are you saying this regulation won't allow engine/transmission replacement? What constitutes a gusler, 20 MPG or less? Can we rebuild our engines? What if you have a 1970 Cuda the has a 383 and you want to turn it into a 426 hemi cuda, you won't be able to do this? It would be far from a clunker. I guess I need to research this subject more but I'm afraid I'll only get upset. I'm so tired of dumb regulations. Anybody try to put gas in a boat with those regulated spring loaded gas nosels, gas goes everywhere, real dumb. I just went and bought a water jug instead that looks like the old gas can but says WATER USE ONLY but it doesn't seem to know the difference, duh. You can get them at motorcycle shops. "

" Republicans who find my rants tiresome may 'shocked, I tell you, shocked' to find that I consider the multiple Republican ranters against Democrats and Obama just as tiresome.

There are more Republican voices. I am outnumbered (in numbers anyway). ;o)

You can imagine how repetitive I find your 'free speech' since there are more of you repeating it.

So I grant that Republicans might not like my 'free speech' anymore than I like theirs.

~Ruff "

" Give me a break Ruff, have you turned on the TV, read a newspaper or magazine. They're all Liberal all the time, why do you think Fox has the ratings it has, it's because we conservatives are so exhausted by all the liberal wall of sound and we need balance and it’s the only place to obtain contradicting views.

There are a few conservative voices on the NVR blogging, but that's because some of us run business and don’t want our car’s keyed, but still need an outlet. "

" As an independent it is tiresome to hear republicans blaming democrats and vice versa. That discourse does nothing to solve any problem, and puts people off on your opinion based solely on your obvious political affiliation rather than any idea you may have. But sure, you have free speech rights, so go ahead and keep bashing each other over the head.

The law says nothing about prohibiting rebuilding cars. It only states that if you take the government check for your clunker, that car must be crushed. The letter writer, as a salvage operator wants to be able to reuse parts of cars destined for the crusher. If you want to change the engine in your Cuba, go ahead. However, make sure you don't devalue it by doing so like folks who took a 302 out of their Z28 for a 350, because then you will be sorry....... "

" It's okay, Ruff. I think we're all very accustomed to the radical liberal attack dog style of dialog. Typical hate Bush, pro-gay, pro-abortion, blame everyone except those at fault. I smile at the constant in-your-face dialog, because you don't seem to know how it makes you look.

Reasonable, polite discussions would make you a conservative, and we wouldn't want that at all. You're much more fun just the way you are. ;-) "

" I have an old clunker, bought new in 1994--a beloved minivan. It still runs, though it's homely as you-know-what.

Don't be fooled that only poor people drive clunkers. Smart people drive their cars for as long as they can. Ever listen to Clark Howard?

The deal is, it's the wealthier folks, or those who are more frugal with their money, who may avail themselves of this rebate offer, because they can afford to pay the balance due after the $3500 rebate on their new car.

I would think that Democrats, who favor social programs for the poor, and who are against tax cuts for the taxpayers, would be opposed to this plan to reward people who already have money.

Another problem with it is, the government doesn't make money, they take money. Where will the bureaucrats get the $3500 to subsidize each person who takes advantage of the plan? Will they raise taxes, or will the money have to come from some other service, so it can go into the pocket of someone who may not really need it? Is the plan to pay wealthy/frugal people to get rid of their clunkers while the struggling class continue to struggle with theirs?

To be sure, since this is a government program, there will be rampant fraud. One only has to own the clunker for one year before it qualifies for the rebate. So, if you're going to be in the market for a new car in a year, a little planning ahead and a small investment may make some sense for you.

This is why government intervention into economics is sooooooo stupid most of the time. Fact is, most clunkers will take care of themselves by attrition. "

" I'm not sure I understand, but would this bill prohibit me from putting a new "reman" engine in my Jeep for less cost than the rebate allowance, but would take my (otherwise in great shape) vehicle and crush it for scrap?
Seems wasteful. I still wouldn't be able to buy a new car to qualify for the rebate. Not well thought out. "

" After the last 8 years of Republican blinder wearing denial it is quite humorous to hear them complain of government intruding in our lives. So silent when there "team" threatened the Constitution, civil liberties, and American ideals but now...

The Kool-aid line is ever so tired but to think that one side is dry is even more funny. "

" Funny that the old Lib argument against vouchers for educating children is always "the same people that already send their kids to private school will just take advantage of the vouchers".

Doesn't the same argument apply for buying new cars? "