regfootball

GK is a FKFACE. ok, maybe not that harsh, but another one of those who tend to think they are more important than they are. he's another minnesotan liberal peckerhead trying their hardest to play the part of an east coaster, yet retain their lake cabin so they don't have live in a smelly eastern megalopolis. i mean, his show is probably decent, but too many of the bleeding heart MPR/NPR democrat liberal softies want to have the comfort and non confrontational lifestyle of being in the midwest, but they want all the ego spoils that come with being an artsy, liberal, 'forward thinking', green, any progressive cause you can think of advocate. ugh, i am so sick of these types of people attempting to rule the country. can we please shut down the radio and presses and tv and all that so these folks can be reduced to the same importance the rest of us are?

i guess they think the chimpokemon look appeals to some.

10 cupholders, for the empties. Still only a meager 118hp? 8.9 seconds? Jesus Christ, can we at least have 140hp and something in the range of 7.2 seconds?

gm powertrain warranty 5/100k. that alone should be a tilting factor.

and here i thought someone in CA might get a clue such as 'hey why don't we team up with GM and the electric industry and build the volt here'? but i would never accuse CA of being that forward thinking

i know the thought of having kids for many brings thoughts of 'no way do i want one' and 'they are too much work and expensive and a pain in the ass' all i can say is hmmm, imagine / do you ever wonder if that's how your parents felt about having you? I think not. some things are worth the work and effort in life. its not always about 'just you'. as poster mentioned above, the part about having a part of you running around, can be fulfulling. a lot moreso than too many days and nights at the coffee shop. sure, kids are expensive...but many people find it to be a good investment. your own parents probably did. what is amazing about watching and helping someone develop from scratch is you no longer take for granted all the things you do in everyday life. Breathing (try sitting in a hospital room with your kid hooked up and the doctor saying she is not getting enough oxygen from breathing) or peeing or pooping (ask some parents whose autistic kid is 9 years old and still isn't potty trained yet) or just things like talking, reading, language, socializing.........relationships.....just helping a child learn how to become social and acclimatize their own personality into the rest of the harsh world. i know its not for everyone but dumb stuff like playing kitchen tonight with the kid, drinking tea, cutting up pizza, its enough to make you smile and can outweigh the bad stuff like, i dropped the milk all over the kitchen floor.

the 83 bird was the game changer and ushered in aero. the audi 5000 also ushed in aero and the taurus was sort of spawned off that and the tbird. aero saved ford and was popular. and they did it well. my brother in law had an 85 cougar xr7, than an 87 tbird turbo coupe which was an awesome car. he kind of introduced me to fords. my first two fords were my 89 SHO and 95 T bird. the 90+ tbirds had sort of a 6 series influence in them. the 89 SHO was well packaged. nice ride height, good cabin space, overall the car was right sized and not ponderous and was a lot more comfy then any GM's downsized FWD floaters of that time. everything runs in cycles. the aero look is not nearly en vogue these days. Ford's kinetic design themes of the verve concept and Iosis suggest a return to some aero themes.....we'll see if that gets accepted.

looks like i picked the wrong week to quit smoking.

i think gm figured out its about the customer. the uaw never has. for that reason, its time to do whatever it takes to bust the union and send them packing for good. america as a whole has so much venom for people who cannot play as a team. 95% of Americans are getting the shaft and have no tolerance for those who think they deserve more than what the rest of us are getting. i actually am ok with GM shutting down for several months to bust the union if they can afford to. GM should actually sue the UAW for disruption of the business and also because union labor creates slander within the eyes of the public, harming sales. GM would have a more positive image if they could shed the union.

swivel and go ought to be renamed..... SIT AND SPIN

yeah, but CAKED ON?

you get pretty sick and tired of bustin your ass each day and we bend over and kiss everyone else's ass.

Press has the most unique position in the industry. 37 years on the import side of the fence. Now he can use those long experienced years to help Chrysler. Sounds like that was part of why he joined them.

we could do without the car, and the gotta have chicks and young execs that drive them and 3500 pounds? jeez bmw makes no effort to trim curb weight. corvette is what, 3200? no surprise i guess the mini is fat too

that's all well and good, but do the seats clean up?

the background for my comments here.... i drove a nitro at the chrysler ride and drive last fall and i sat in a new loaded liberty at the chryco dealer the other day. i like the look of both, even if they are not mainstream. the nitro is bling where the liberty has a very well jone jeep look. the nitro's interior could be the worst in the industry. the seats in particular are worse than abysmal. in the liberty, there is enough done so its not so terrible. the look is improved with better hues and a little nicer layout. it looks cheap, but not disagreeable since its one of the nicer jeeps. cargo space looks tight, but oh well. i thought the nitro drove like garbage. unrefined in just about every way and built junky. i'll assume the jeep is improved. i like jeeps products right now but would never buy one because they are too butch. the last liberty was a big time chick car, and thankfully, this redo gets rid of the chick car stigma. the compass is jeep's chick car now. a man can drive the liberty now (BTW liberty is a pretty feminine car name) and not have people saying 'guy in a chick car'. it helps this thing has a stick. the liberty is distinctive, as is jeep as a whole. i like having this on the market to go with the xterra and h3 and stuff. and future h4. we could stand to get rid of crap like the ridgeline and fj cruiser.

yucky steering wheel

brendas are into pulltabs yeah, and heavy metal

nice try. there are many other larger more functional cars than the fit that have that stuff standard as well. power windows and locks is something you expect on all cars these days so that's not special. where is the 6 speed auto? that front end shot of the white one looks like the aztek that is in my garage already. by the way, no one will be buying one of these for less than 17-18k. in the real world. that's no deal for 100hp and pop can structure.

i guess its an improvement. fits honda well. i hope it gets some real hp. too ricey for my tastes but would do in a bind. if it had hp. it will likely be too pricey for what you get.

i've known a couple brendas who were as bob described...LMAO that is too funny

still looks like poopoo inside. who wants to drive around in a toilet?

as long as your out of the dykish northwest, sure atlanta is alright. i hear.

so if 'marraige is dead', then lets remove the concept from the books in our civil and legal system then.

random thoughts....... flame it or whatever, just tossing some devil's advocate out there. the concept of marraige as a religious deal (in a lot of denominations) is defined as man+woman bound by God (for the purpose of creation of family). I think religion defined marraige before sovereign states did. i may be wrong and in some religions, divorce is not supposed to be an option. marraige for many is recongnized as being eternal that cannot be changed or reverted or swapped or cancelled out by decisions of humans themselves. many folks do not believe in religion, yet i think the concept of marraige most likely is religion based and has carried through time that way. do you think early humans especially men would by their own accord sign up to the concept of being with one person for ever and ever and ever...... over time the United states in terms of maintaining separation of church and state has tried to make marraige more of a tax code and civil status issue, while still trying to promote the very ward cleaver/gotta have mom and dad bring up the kids in happy homes thing. for stability, uncle same still feels it best if mom and dad get drunk, bump uglies, move into a nice suburban two story, and pop out a little johnny and jenny. mom and pop stay together till death to us part because we all benefit supposedly from the nuclear family and stability. Now, if they broaden the definition of marraige for civil purposes, it really becomes something different than the religious definition of marraige which the whole thing has been loosely based on so far. So if this is where society wants to move with laws and the social code, to be fair, you really gotta open it up to same gender and polygamy and just about anything if you truly want to separate the civil marraige concept from the religious one. strip any benefits to taxes, wealth transfer, and health care for being married completely out of everything, because we don't want to discriminate against single people. marraige should really not even be any sort of civil status on record anywhere. divorce should not exist in legal terms. owning property with the one you are married to should merely be joint ownership, not married persons owning assets that can be fought over in court on taxpayer dollars. health plans should only recognize status of dependents, not spouses. the person you commit to, is a dependent on your plan, just like your natural birth kid or adopted kid. how you get married or how you define it then becomes entirely up to you. your commitment is truly what you wish it to be. the core of what i am saying....as a country lets decide if we are going to cling to the notion of the religious concept of marraige, or if we are going to define marraige and civil unions in a more encompassing sort of way. we all like to think any society especially ours which says we have separation of church and state, should have it fully, but doggone it if a lot of our legal code isn't based upon what the puritans brought over with themselves on the boat. so you cannot deny religion has not influenced our civil law. there is no full separation and never will be. thou shalt not kill. thou shalt not steal. thou shalt not marry more than one woman although you have been screwing the lights out of the neighbor's wife when he is away at work. that is why we struggle as a society with it and can't neccessarily update it fast enough for everyone. really its one thing to get legal and civil acceptance of same gender marraige and alernatively, polygamous arrangements....but if you really want to crack the code on the issue, i think the best way to break down the barriers through acceptance will be through the religious arena. because that's i think where the whole concept of marraige and monogamy most likely originated. If same gender marraige and polygamy becomes challenged and more accepted in religion, then it will be an easier path to acceptance in our civil code. For many folks this might be an unacceptable idea....but it probably is where the battle really needs to fought to be most fruitful. try it on the pope and see what he says...LOL.....now those mormons, they are on to something....amish too........