Brummett Says Amen To A World Without Cars

(Somehow I never pictured Brummet advocating the Amish lifestyle)


I recently sent out an email entitled "Lefitists push for society without cars," quoting from a Michael Moore article and from the Arkansas Democrat Gazette and New York Times.   John Brummet wrote an article in response to that email.  Brummet used about one third of his article to attack the messenger,  describing me and other conservatives in his  typical liberal, genteel, unbiased, and  tolerant manner as extreme, delusional, zany, right-wing, paranoid, fear- mongering, screeching, conspiratorial alarmists–for being concerned about the leftists' push to do away with our cars. Link to my article:


(By the way, John, in your world I am probably considered zany.   But in my world, you are the zany one.  And on this issue of  doing away with our cars in the name of sustainable transportation and global warming, I believe I have at least  85% of the people in my corner.)


Brummett, then in the typical double speak language of liberals, confirms the information in the article I wrote was indeed true.  In his words:  " Let me be candid: I know some liberals very well and these expressions of Michael Moore reflect exactly how they talk among themselves. They believe government policy can compel better and more responsible human behavior and force us, if that’s what it takes, to operate more co-operatively and efficiently [doing without cars]. They think cars are destructive to the earth both in what is required to run them and in what they emit."  Link to Brummet's  article


And why are we right wingers nutty for being alarmed about this matter? Because  according to Brummett, "[T]hese kinds of things take time." So we need not worry.  Brummet also says "[T]he only substantive advocacy I've see for doing away with American automobile travel on anything resembling a short term basis-- a fine if utopian idea, generally impractical and specifically out of the question – was an essay of typical agitprop by the liberal documentary filmmaker, Michael Moore."


Brummet describes all the liberal policies quite well in that statement, "utopian , impractical and out of the question" .  But we are now seeing utopian, impractical, and out of the question policies being implemented en masse at every turn - using force and coercion - since the Democrats took control; so that is no longer anything new.   The liberals have now shown their hand to the world, and all but the leftists are shocked. So referring to our conspiracy theories doesn't have quite the ring it did before the leftist started playing their hand. I have been thinking about writing about  this push for a "carless" society for more than a year but didn't write on it for just that reason – that it might not be believable. But now it is.


And how can liberals talk about conservatives being fear mongers when the liberals are using the biggest fear tactic in history under the guise of sustainable development, sustainable transportation, smart growth transportation, and global warming in order to coerce people to yield to government control, higher taxes, and exorbitant increases in the price of energy?

And since Brummet is only aware (or so he says) of  one substantive advocacy for the world without cars on a short term basis ( Michael Moore's article), let me provide some research on that matter. Some liberals may only be talking about a world without cars, but others are hard at work. Follow the links below (or google the words in bold in the former paragraph)  and you will find numerous articles that show how rapidly the plan to do away with cars, which  Michael Moore described in his essay, is being developed.   


One need only look at  Fayetteville Mayor's home page to see how close at hand this movement is.   The Fayetteville Mayor has won international accolades for "discouraging sprawl and auto-dependency." Earning international praise means he has made some radical steps toward a society without cars.   Of course, it is all hidden for now behind language most people don't understand, but Michael Moore laid it out in plain language in his article. Fayetteville Mayor's website:  Michael Moore's article:



  • "The Smart Growth Network is a partnership between the EPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency] and a number of nonprofit, public, and governmental organizations working together to raise public awareness and promote smart growth principles. In its popular first volume of the manual Getting to Smart Growth, released in 2001 (a second volume was released in 2003), the Smart Growth Network suggested that towns should return to the designs of the early twentieth century. In those earlier times, land uses were more integrated, enabling people to walk to the corner store, to work, or to school. Today, such uses are more often placed so far apart they can only be reached by car. Numerous communities have sought to reverse this trend. Portland, Oregon, is an oft-touted model of sprawl containment. The city established an “urban growth boundary” in 1980 that protects nearby farmland surrounding the city and tightly limits development in outlying areas. Portland’s approach has not been without controversy.  From "Sprawl, The New Manifest Destiny? By Charles W. Schmidt 2004"


  • “Three things change people’s behavior at the societal level,” says Rees. “One is price; more good has been done by high energy prices about moving us towards thinking about sustainability than all the policy that any government anywhere has implemented in the last 10 years. Higher energy prices create real behavioral change.”  Note:  Many leftists are celebrating the higher gas prices and are not concerned in the least that alternate fuel will cost so much.  It will only enhance their chances to move faster toward doing away with our cars and saving Mother Earth.



This article can be read online at

and comments made on the blog at this link: