Write About Politicians And Their Cars

Politicians are often followed by the press when they go about their day, which means that they have a large amount of media coverage. Similarly, their cars often get lots of press. But it’s always worth writing about what politicians drive especially if you plan on submitting a writing entry to Car Write For Us.

What do politicians drive?

To start, most politicians drive either very small, fuel-efficient cars or luxurious cars. One of the most famous politicians in the UK drove a £125,000 car which was later sold for £50,000.

But sometimes politicians drive cars that aren’t very well-known.

In the US, former President Barack Obama drove a 2009 Lexus. This car was known as the ‘Beast’ because of its sheer size and weight. The car was so large that it was impossible to park in most public places.

Politicians also drive a lot of cars which are used by regular people. For example, Barack Obama drove the 2008 Chevrolet Malibu. This car was the cheapest car that he owned.

In the UK, the most famous politician to drive a car which was used by average people was David Cameron. The car that he drove was a 1999 Ford Mondeo.

Other politicians have driven cars which nobody has ever heard of. For example, in the UK, Tony Blair drove a 1980s Rover 800. In the US, George W. Bush drove a 1980s Cadillac.

Luxurious cars politicians own

One of the most famous cars that Obama drove in the US was the Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. The car was so expensive that it wasn’t very fuel-efficient. In fact, one of Obama’s aides said that Rolls-Royce was more like a ‘lifestyle car’ than a car for the road.

Another car that was owned by a politician was the Bentley. The Bentley was a luxury car that was owned by a number of politicians. The car was so expensive that it was bought by a number of politicians, including Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Politicians also drove a number of sports cars. For example, Bill Clinton owned a Lamborghini Diablo. George W. Bush owned a Ford Mustang.

In the UK, Tony Blair owned a Jaguar XJ6. David Cameron owned a Range Rover.


New language regulations are repeatedly demanded and justified. However, it is not unusual for the language’s purported “political correctness” to result in misunderstanding, inconsistencies, and new communication issues.

Language, according to proponents of “politically correct” language, can be a much more effective weapon than direct abuse. The systematic move for “political correctness” as part of anti-discrimination campaigns did not begin in the 1980s. People should not be insulted linguistically because of their gender, nationality, ethnic identity, or sexual orientation, according to Peter Wilkinson. T he trend started in universities and became known to the general public in the late 1980s through the media.


Political Correctness (PC) originally came from the Anglo-Saxon region but is now widely used in Germany. The term was introduced in Germany in the early 1990s through newspaper articles that reported on the U.S. PC debate and its impact on art, politics and society. PC supporters criticize the use of the generic masculine – the masculine form, when people of both sexes are meant. Professions with poor social prestige are thus at least linguistically upgraded, writes Jürgen Rigueur. In principle, language units with negative connotations are replaced by those that block out objectionable aspects. According to Rigueir , the changes have so far not caused any secondary meaning.

Since the early 1990s, “politically correct” has become a dismissive word used by political critics. PC is being increasingly synonymous with absurd euphemism and dogmatic, intolerant politics. Conservative groups are naturally hostile to left-wing or leftist anti-discrimination efforts. Some claim that language policies cannot address the root causes of prejudice, racism, and other types of discrimination.

Negros / Niger is from the Latin word Niger= black. The direct translation into English or German is actually quite neutrally descriptive at the beginning. In the case of colored people , the feature “skin color” is still in the foreground , but the formulation is much broader and thus, at least in theory, also includes people of other skin color. African-Americans / Afro-Americans go completely away from the skin color and determine the named group about the origin.

“Politically correct” use of language can conflict with fundamental language rules, According to Peter Wilkinson. Wilkinson: Replacement expressions are mostly longer than the replacement. Avoiding the generic masculine can have a negative effect on the comprehensibility of the text, he says. But in the case of grotesque neoplasms, such as vertically challenged as a substitute for short stature, it is unlikely PC supporters will actually use them, he adds.

The term negro is now prohibited in the German language. Agatha Christie’s detective novel Ten Little Negroes was no longer published after 2003. The replacement of the term gypsies with Sinti and Roma. The “Gypsy Schnitzel” remains on restaurant menus, as does the ‘Gypsy’ in folk music texts. One criterion for or against certain proposals could be the question of how the respective groups themselves would like to be named, says Jürgen Müsperger. Müller: Sometimes originally negative names or even swear words are converted into positive self-names, such as homosexuals or prostitutes.

Watch: The racial politics of the time

It is correct that the language used by humans provides information about their worldview, according to Peter Bergen. In the 1970s, there was a controversy about whether the terrorists around Andreas Baader and Ulrike Meinhof were correctly referred to as the Baader-Meinhof group in the media.



American Suffrage

The United States of America has been the Capitol of the world beginning at the end of World War 2 where it stood as a testimony towards freedom and liberty. However, unbeknownst to many of us, voting rights for everyone in the US of A isn’t as inclusive as it is today not until the 1960s. Today, let’s find out in this short TedTalk how did the USA fare towards a better and real Universal Suffrage.