"If they approve a single engine, that would be the last straw," double world champions protests.

Get ready for your electric car, Alonso. The cars will be practically remote-controlled within 5 years, toys for Bernie to play with, nothing more.

Formula One seems to be his toy to play with--spinning his whims and desires at every angle to get what he wants. For example, the medals system for drivers rather than points. You watch, he'll keep playing that up from every angle and get it passed.

One engine manufacturer, one tire manufacturer; what's next - one chassis? Sounds like the IRL to me (as Homer would say - boring).

I understand their (most teams, manufacturers, and fans) frustration because F1 is supposed to be the proving ground for automotive innovation. However, in their quest it's moved the racing from on-track heroics to pit/fuel strategy. There's something to be said about the racing from the past with small front tires, big rears, mediocre brakes, and zero driver aids that produced absolutely dynamic performances on the track.

I’ve got to believe that there must be some common ground that; 1) reduces cost to teams significantly, 2) improves racing on-track, and 3) increases the amount of potential race winners from few to several...I just don’t know what the right formula is, nor does the FIA.

Cost reduction in F1 is a nice goal but pretty unrealistic. F1 is meant to be a constructors racing series where they can highlight their engineering ability. Spec engines defeats the whole point of F1. The teams have already agreed to lower costs by using engines and trans for 2 races. Next year this will be extended to 4 races.

Bernie's belief that you should reduce costs and have more teams, is not what F1 is about. People aren't interested in more teams. More teams would mean Bernie makes more money but it would not mean better racing.

KERS is an example of how lowering costs by using engines for 4 races is more than offset by the huge costs for KERS. If KERS was actually related to passenger car use, you could write some of the costs off, but it isn't as Honda and others have pointed out.

The teams are actively trying to improve the racing and passing for the spectators. '09 might be a step forward in this area with driver adjustable front wings, slicks, wider front wings and smaller rear wings.

You won't see a spec engine in F1.

The smartest thing, Mr Alonso has said in (4) years.

I disagree with the idea that the purpose of F1 is to showcase automotive technology. There's a reason that the driver's championship predates the constructor's championship by roughly 30 years. Le Mans is the place for technical innovation; F1 is about the drivers first and foremost, and the cars (a close) second. To be sure, the cars must be the fastest, to reinforce the concept that only the best drivers in the world can tame them.
Having said all that, however, the idea of standardization is contrary to the spirit of F-1, IMHO, as teams have virtually always done this, and it sets F-1 apart from other single-seater series. Most importantly, I am utterly unconvinced that it will really reduce costs. As long as they have the money, teams will find ways of spending it. I support those who favor restricting budgets by an arbitrary spending limit, and letting the teams loose with the technology, so long as they remain within those budget limits. Hard to police to be sure, but technical limitations are just as hard to police these days as well.

Not just IRL but NASCAR as well. This would be a bad move by F1 if they go forward with this idea.

Agreed with Lindo.

There is no point for car or engineering firms to be in F1 if they can't showcase their abilities. Technology drives F1. If Bernie persists with foolish ideas, FOTA will take F1 from him and he will have another boring spec race that will be his demise.