Croc

Yup. GM is only focused on Toyota and Lexus, so they have 8 brands doing little more than competing model-for-model. A different division for each Toyota trim level!

Sitting for the winter. Really. You're in college, you have a car, and it's "sitting for the winter"? Fess up, NOS...how'd you get your license suspended?

So what, are we supposed to "create jobs" via the Orange County model of economics?

As I said, she's a terrible public speaker, especially to the press. She didn't get to where she got by being a dingbat; she's the Speaker of the House, and a woman. And as far as I can tell, the House isn't in anywhere near the level of dysfunction as the Senate is under Reid, so I'm going to wait for her to royally screw up before I get on the I-hate-Pelosi bandwagon. She hasn't offended me yet, and I've seen some good things come from her already.

I think she's actually pretty smart...she's just not much of a press person.

Is Jersey the other?

AND YOU COULD GO CAMPING IN IT!!

Speaking of "California Dreaming," check out the DJ Sammy cover if you haven't already...I like it a lot better than the original.

This is pretty stupid. I was hoping I could come in here and defend a ban on fart can mufflers or something, but no. This is lunacy.

Actually a lot of places are phasing this out because of problems with drivers not knowing whether the phasing is 4-way stop, or 2-way stop. When a signal fails, it's default is the all-way flashing red. This can easily be confused for a 2-way flashing yellow, 2-way flashing red phase by motorists on the red sides, who think cross traffic is going to have to stop, when they do not have to.

Of course I stop. If 20 seconds to a minute have passed, though, I chalk it up to a broken loop detector and cautiously evaluate how to procede.

LOL

I know, right? And then of course it's "but look at what THE MEDIA portrays!!" Yeah...because we know the media isn't all about ratings and sensationalism or anything... Sorry, I meant interstate. I'll correct my previous post. That said, while the 99 is the inland bypass of the 5, it is not fully grade-separated, nor is it up to freeway standards throughout its entire length. You can get to Fresno from LA and Bakersfield via the 99 without ever leaving a "freeway" but nowhere else. Every other connection requires leaving a freeway, so Fresno is the largest city in the US not connected to the freeway network.

I really don't know what you're talking about, here. People definitely work harder--by far--out here than anywhere else I've been in the US, with the possible exception of NYC. You have to--one job doesn't pay the household rent. Now, maybe people seem more laid-back and less maniacly-stressed, but that's just the attitude out here. Why is "funny"? I'm going to defend myself and my friends when you make it personal about where we live...just because of the dominant cars in CA? You're really admitting to being that superficial? Newsflash: the foreign hybrids are greener, and they were on the market first. The Volt isn't out yet, and GM dismissed hybrids as a short-lived "trend," hence why the "hybrids" they currently offer are so half-assed. GM's handling of the EV1 irritated some people, and then you have the massive Asian populations out here--so many of them "buy Asian." And when someone tells me of an American luxury brand that actually competes with Mercedes-Benz and BMW model-for-model and not just is able to compete when it feels like it on certain models, then I'd bet you it would do well out here. I see plenty of CTSs every day. Basically: when the cars are best in class, they do well out here. When they're half-assed, they sit on lots. It's pretty simple.

Yup. Interior is WEIRD

Stupid, stupid...

Sorry, I just fail to see how you can say the mentally ill "screwed up," or a Vietnam Veteran who was exposed to Agent Orange, or the woman with three kids whose husband was just killed in a car crash and now needs to be the sole breadwinner for her grieving family. It just isn't so black and white--life happens, and sometimes it isn't anyone's "fault." Charities are just that--charity. The aid people (and those organizations) get is completely dependent on the goodness of the public's hearts. How's the Salvation Army doing these days? Has this recession hit them hard? When you're dealing with a government program, the money coming in might fluctuate with a boom or bust cycle, but it never just stops. Also, the government makes sure ALL of their programs get funding, not just the trendy cause like a Children's Hospital. What do you mean, a "survey"? There's no proof of claims there! Terrible, unreliable data source! If you've worked with public surveys before, you should know that people LIE to look better. It's like all those surveys of public transit: "I think it's a great idea, I'd take the train!" Then it's built and none of those people take the damn train. How do you know all the technical standard deviation information, but can't even replicate the actual question? Also, it doesn't matter that it was the same question--sociological biases and weasel words may have been used to influence the responses of one group of people versus another. I'd also like to know what research group conducted the survey, what the sample size is (because that is really more important than SD and MoE), who was asked, and how the survey was even conducted. But I have to tell you my BS detector is pinging when you don't know/can't find the questions or any really relevant information, but just KNOW that the disparity between the groups was so statistically significant that it proves Republicans have more "familial values" than Democrats...which I think is a load of horse$h! anyway. If you want to make a ridiculous claim, then have a damn good source to back it up. And all of these programs were created because there was a societal need, and charities were not being effective. Hence, "lender of last resort." You can't really live off government aid...it's bare bones and inadequate. But at least it's something, which for many people is more than nothing. Get outside your bubble. What about abusive families? What if the family has mostly died out, either through natural causes or tragedy? What about people whose parents freaked out over their sexuality and threw them out of the house with nothing at 18--or did they just "screw up" by telling their parents too soon? What if your family has alcoholism or drug addiction? Families aren't everyone's safety net. They can't be. If yours is, then you're fortunate--but not everyone has that same luck. Ehhhhh Sacramento I would NOT classify in the same league as LA or SF. San Diego for sure belongs in there with LA and the Bay Area, though. Fresno is the largest city in the US that has no interstate* freeway in it. Suburbs are definitely NOT what you're looking for BV. By "affordable housing" you want a detached single-family home with a pool, deck, garage, 3-4 bedrooms and 3-5 baths, all for under $1million, then yes--but you get a looooong commute. Not what I'd ever be interested in, that's for sure. I've never understood the gripes about traffic. LA traffic is much better than Chicago's--yet LA has a much higher population. As far as the scenery goes...Orange County is beautifully green. If the political and social climate were different there, I'd love to live there. B-E-A-UTIFUL! But SD and LA counties are both very scenic, too--just in different ways. ETA: *Correction

It was the first--and so far only--Toyota that I saw from afar at an autoshow, thought "Sweet, what's this? Who makes it? This thing looks gooooooooood!" ...and then promptly felt nauseous when I realized it was a Toyota. They didn't beat the damn thing with an ugly stick this time, though I highly doubt it drives as dynamically as it looks.

And where didn't you learn that humans are by nature selfish? None of these entitlement programs would EVER have been made if everyone did what they're supposed to. See, here's what happens: Let's say you should give X amount of money to help out disadvantaged group A, but you aren't required to do so. You want to, you have every intention of doing so, but then you see that big shiny toy at the mall and just HAVE TO HAVE IT, so you donate amount Y, which is significantly less than X because that was the only way you could get said toy for YOU and YOUR LIFE versus some random, nebulous person out there you do not know and will never know. THAT'S HOW HUMAN NATURE WORKS. And if this mortgage crisis hasn't taught you that by far a huge number of people SUCK at managing THEIR OWN budgets, what makes you think that even by "instilling values" (not even going into whether or not this is a measurable goal) you can somehow get a grossly financially incompetent populace to manage a CHARITY BUDGET that they pay regularly to? And even then...what's to say the people with the greatest needs are even being served? Say $100 is donated to charity privately. What if 70% of the private charities are for the homeless, while the mentally ill get 30%? But the mentally ill need $35 to function even remotely effectively. And the homeless really only need $60 to be adequately aided. That's why the government does what it does. How do you suggest a government do this? What are the performance measures? How are they to be evaluated? How is this an actionable, executable goal? It just isn't. And I once saw a poll that 80% of Republicans believed Iraq had an ongoing nuclear arms program after we invaded Iraq. It's called sampling, statistical significance, and how the question was even worded in the first place. Find it. The phrasing of the question is sooooo easy to manipulate in order to manipulate the entire survey. What are you talking about? How is providing for social welfare giving up freedoms, liberties, and personal responsibility? I'm just as responsible for my own actions now as I would be if I didn't pay taxes for any of these things. But have you noticed? It's awfully hard to get a job without a physical address. If you're homeless, how do you get work? If you don't get work, how do you get a place to rent? It's an awfully vicious cycle. And what about people who have schizophrenia, and who may stop taking their meds, or who cannot afford their meds? What about them? Surely you can't be on a personal responsibility soapbox for people who are not of sound mind! And honestly the government does NOT tell you how to spend your money. You are free to shop wherever you want if you can afford to do so. Like it or not, taxes are a necessity. The Articles of Confederation failed for a very fundamental reason. Taxes are the price to pay for living in this country; if you want to go live somewhere where there are no taxes, then you will more than likely be off the grid in some developing nation, in a rural area...and when someone barges into your house demanding $10,000 or they will shoot you, there will be no 9-1-1 to call, no one to take any information, and possibly not even any statute to charge them under...assuming what law enforcement exists isn't bought and paid for--or worse--complicit in the whole thing. Lesson #1: The state is called "California." "Cal" refers to Cal-Berkeley, and "Cali" refers to tourists. "SoCal" is the "Southland," which is LA-OC and San Diego...as well as the "Inland Empire" of the inland counties (particularly Riverside and Imperial Counties). "NoCal" is what Southlanders derisively call the North, and "NorCal" is what those who live upstate call themselves. And don't ever say "Frisco" as you are liable to alienate everyone within earshot. Oh, and if you ever call it "The OC" you will be mocked. It's just "OC," unless you are being explicitly ironic. Aaaaand I hope you get to make it out here. Something tells me you'd really love it.

Seriously, what am I missing?

Waitaminute...you just admit that you've met A LOT of smart Angelenos, and MANY smart San Franciscans...yet because of the political party we collectively vote for you're convinced that the majority of people lack common sense, as defined by wanting a balanced budget and low taxes? THAT IS--BY FAR--THE MOST ASININE THING I HAVE EVER READ ON THIS SITE! Maybe people out here choose to tax themselves more to provide more social services for the most vulnerable populations? We have a lot of homeless people, and while some have undoubtably come from out of state, a large percentage of them are VETERANS. Why do we take care of them? Because the US Government didn't give a $h! about them when they were sent off off to Vietnam at 17, and it didn't give a $h! when they came back from the war because "they didn't win." Hardcore PTSD, schizophrenia, nerve damage, and a ton of other physical and psychological issues leave so many unable to get or hold a job. We vote for increased social programs BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. So many people have come to California to live "The Californian Dream," and while not everyone reaches it, so many of us recognize how fortunate we are to have, and with what material success we have earned, we do not have a problem "giving back" to the community. You want to know why the budget isn't balanced? Because we'd really like to have free lunches for poor and vulnerable populations. We want to help the homeless acquire skills to work or at least have a place to stay the night inside. We want to fight against injustice so ALL of our friends and families can have the CHOICE whether to marry or not, instead of being denied that choice based on their or their partner's gender. We want to do our part to clean up the environment, so we vote for high speed rail to lessen freeway congestion and provide an alternative method to get between northern and southern California without dumping all that pollution in the air (by car, or by plane). We made it a priority in the 1970s to make sure ALL schools receive equal funding from the state. We also cap our property taxes at 1.25% of the sale price, and they cannot raise more than 1% of THAT per year because we don't want senior citizens taxed out of the homes they paid off decades ago. We want to help out so many people of so many different walks of life that the limited funding resources can only go so far...and yet each group wants to ensure that their cause celebre isn't cut in the budget. Whether it's education, public safety, youth mentor programs, homeless training and housing, environmental preservation, historical preservation, or whatever "fluff program" we have that infuriates you so much. Our budget is f@#ked because the economy is in the $h!ter, inflation has been rapid, costs have skyrocketed, and yet no one wants to concede "their" vulnerable population or legacy effort to be screwed over as part of necessary budget cuts while other causes--in their eyes lesser--still hang in there. So, what's the common sense solution there? What do we defer? Infrastructure maintenance? Nope, that's pretty dangerous to do--look at New Orleans and Minneapolis. Cut homeless welfare programs? Oh, that's a toughie...even more will be on the streets relying on petty crime just to make it through another day. Cut education funding? Hmmm...and potentially jeopardize the future of our youth? Sell state assets to make up the shortfall? Well shoot, what do we do next year? Raise taxes? Possibly...but the middle class has been dwindling for years now, and we don't want it to be impossible for our kids to live in the same town they grew up in. So please, tell me, since you have all the "uncommon common sense" answers!

This is so amusing. Why are there so many "save the trees" people in LA (technically, they're in Santa Monica and Malibu, completely different municipalities)? Because LA has very few trees. It's a concrete jungle. Even fewer trees existed prior to the 1930s, when all the irrigation public works projects took place. In its natural state, LA is a semi-arid desert...and in its non-natural state, a concrete jungle. I'm also not quite sure what constitutes a "flake," but I hope you don't watch movies or television, or buy any goods imported from Asia (so no shopping at Walmart) because those "flakes" are directly responsible for at least 90% of all US media, and nearly all Asian imports reaching your state. I also hope you aren't bemoaning the end of the Cold War, because the Southland was one of the primary headquarters for all the aerospace and defense contractors whose hard work kept America strong from the 1940s-early 1990s. When driving the freeways, I hope you don't pass through any stack interchanges, because those "flakes" at Caltrans invented those in 1952. In fact, most standardized freeway design and signage came from the Caltrans standards. In fact, you can blame those "flakes" in California for those red stop signs, too! Every other state originally used yellow (or white) with black lettering. Plus, this whole internet and technology revolution is due to all those "flakes" up in Silicon Valley. Heck, even Google is headquartered there! Those damn "flakes," ruining CA for everyone else...

Wow. Please, by all means go ahead--take your ball and go home.

Disagree. Windows Live maps are better. http://maps.live.com Live has higher-quality, more recent satellite images of more of America, especially LA (Google is way behind here), and Google Maps has a lot of errors. One notable error directed a bunch of us to a freeway onramp that hasn't existed since the 1960s. While Google has Street View, Live has Birdseye View, and you can rotate it along the compass 90 degrees. Far more useful for me.

Nice Toyota Venza. Funny