balthazar

I cannot get away from the fact that there are possibly trillions at stake here, more than enough to motivate great masses of people in all walks of professions & politics to subscribe to a theory and the likely ensuing legislation with little more than a 'how can you be so stupid; IT'S OBVIOUS!!'. I'm willing to accept the premise with pure science demonstrating the evidence. But I'm still waiting for a public presentation of that pure science, and meanwhile all sorts of monies are being allocated as hurriedly as possible, with little oversight and no consideration for potential outcomes, and in strict ignorance of public opinion. -- -- -- -- -- >>"The reason "global warming" has given way to "climate change" is because it isn't just warming that takes place--scientists have figured out that excessive carbon outputs have thrown off equilibrium, and while warming effects have been observed, it seems frequency and intensity of weather events has been increasing as well."<< So... if not just warming has taken place, and the climate IS changing, cooling must also have been observed. But as you mentioned, all we ever heard for a great while was "global warming"... until recently. Logic states the science on this is far from done if this simple characterisation hasn't been nailed from the start. -- -- -- -- -- >>"Technology got us to the point... ...pollution-cleansing concrete."<< Many would say it was technology that is the root of pollution, and I would agree. But no- there's no 'going back'. As for the concrete- a private company invented a radiator that was said to cleanse the air as it drove, another coating + airflow = conversion to inerts, resulting in a car that left the air CLEANER after than if it had stayed parked. Announcment was at least 5 years ago.... where is it ?? Either other influences have prevented it, or the science wasn't pure on it.. because the demand was built in before the product was announced. -- -- -- -- -- Put the entire money issue aside, get the science pure, consistant & demostratable, formulate a plan and get as much word-wide co-operation as you can, THEN address funding (beyond science).

GM at 29% fleet is supposedly fine - I have read numerous sources that state above 30% is where 'damage' can begin to occur.

Like I said: none are excellent, some are intolerable. There's 2 categories here: straight news shows, and the commentaries. Each & every 'network' has some real bozos as host/anchors, but what sours me on the MSNBC / CNN channels (primarily the commentaries) was the outright worship during the '08 campaign. That level of 'tankism' only spreads disinformation, which is why I would never 'ban' a news source when I am interested in getting a handle on an issue/personality- you need both sides to cancel out the 'tankism's. So I watch them all when I watch. 'Be informed', you know. I even force myself to sit thru that condecending Olberman, and he's "the Worst in the World". We just had one of his vids linked here where he bashed 2 personailties (I forget who) for "inciting hate", then he promptly wished them dead and decreed their lives were worthless. Hypocrit, much? Credibility, none? But IMO, tuning out a particular network because you think partial-brain outpatients watch is akin to putting people on message boards on an 'ignore' list because it makes you feel more comfortable in your own opinion. Think Consumer Reports. That's escapism, and this Country's future is far too important for that.

Not 'downplaying' : I said FOX has NOT been "sensationalizing" the toyoyo issue; it's been pretty straight forward. I watch all the news channels intermittenly - none are excellent, many are intolerable. Fox is neither. Their general balance is often better than some other shows who fail to ever bring in anyone who's not rigidly-aligned with their POV.

Not into the music, but it's hook-y. Anyone else get a Marilyn Manson vibe outta her stuff, for some reason ??

{...watches Dodgefan suspiciously from the hedgerow across the street...} -- -- -- -- -- I think I posted this whole toyoyo thing reminds me of audi- nearly drummed out of the U.S. market with claims of unintended acceleration. But audi affected FAR less consumers (by millions & millions), and at least had supposed quality & the relatively unique quattro to entice them back. Toyoyo has NOTHING.

Not to make light, but ..... if only China would suspend the export of insufferably cheap sh!t to the U.S.....

>>"The electronic throttle system uses sensors, microprocessors and electric motors, rather than a traditional link such as a steel cable, to connect the driver's foot to the engine."<< And we wonder why modern cars weigh more than an 18-ft long iron-block Pontiac with less than 10 lbs of plastic in it. Engineered complexity for complexity's sake.

'71 'cuda, solid but rough, parked in driveway looking unregistered. '70 Chevelle coupe, dark blue w/ white skunk stripes & SS bumper strip, all chrome painted bodycolor, rust bubbles plentiful, OK plates, on flatbed. '64-65 Mustang coupe, dark blu w/ Cragers, very clean, parked by residence.

>>"I don't think most of today's Cadillac buyers know about Cadillac's ancient history. "<< They kno it as well as they kno BMW means (a miniscule edge in) handling, or mercedes means.... someone help me here. It's baked into Cadillac. What's NOT is a corporate-wide engine underhood- that's a perception changer, right now. Long-term corporate success will hinge on how well "GM" is de-emphasized and 'Cadillac', 'Buick, etc are emphasized (and marketed). "GM" is the biggest albatross perception-wise, and there are no products sold only with 'GM' badging. It must step back into the shadow, and yes; it can be done. Focus must be put on the Divisions first & foremost. Engineering is a primairy cog in that machine. Do you kno that all lexsuxes used to have glass marked 'toyota', but not too long ago even that was changed ? Tiny lettering only read by squinting. Same corporation. You can figure out why; perception. It's paramount, esp in light of the sheer volume of competetion and the equalizing of said competition in quality & features, plus the near-death of stylistic progress. The little things are becoming big things because the big things are settled out already (for the most part). >>"That should be good enough "<< Most will reply that that attitude has without question wreaked all sorts of problem for many years. I've read it vehemently in a 33,xxx post thread on the XTS elsewhere. No; it's not good enough. Well, it would be... for the bean counters.

I traditionally run a tight ship household-wise, so at the moment- no changes in daily life.

>>"I personally do not think that there will be a psychological barrier to caddy buyers if the cars use the same engines as top of the line Chevys. Toyota uses the same 3.5 liter in both their Lexus and Toyota models. Nissan shares the VQ35/37 between the Infiniti and Nissan models. It hasn't impeded on the success of the RX, ES, G or FX models."<< HUGE difference here. infiniti/lexus were created FROM nissan/toyoyo; they have grown apart from one source. infiniti/lexus have NO unique heritage, no pretense of being an independant entity- just marketing. Cadillac was fully independant, and remained autonomous in reality a good 50 years, plus proprietory another 25. The heritage of a 'Cadillac engine' is longstanding. Of course I know this is 'ancient history' as far as 2010 goes, but it's relatively well-known history, and it DOES color modern impressions. Look at Jaguar- still viewed as British when it's been decades since being so... yet read the common reference in reviews. If GM were to institute a cross-board corporate V8, they might as well shut Cadillac down. Think of the economies of scale if GM was 1 brand to everyone. You can make the same economies of scale WRT any component; radios, seats, body shells, steering wheels, whathaveyou. But at some point these things are noticed, harped upon, and reduce price tiers & brands to irrevelancy & redundancy. Engines is not the place to do this.

Allow me to complain about a non-exclusive corporate engine in a Cadillac. Am I against 556 HP/ 550 TRQ and 'king sedan' performance ?? Of course not. But it should be from a Cadillac engine, period. V should be running a 556/550 Cadillac engine in there. Look, plenty of naysayers already harp on a 'Chevrolet' engine in a Cadillac WRT the CTS-V, I've read the comments in numerous forums over the years, we all have. The very root of GM's problems, regardless of the other 1000 reasons you can readily read just about anywhere- is the homogenization / castration of the Divisions. They've had 4 vehicles on the same chassis / platform numerous times : sometimes it worked exceedingly well, others times disasterously. Proprietory engineering is the key to answering 'why?', and it's beaten down to nothing as it is. I hold onto the slim hope another Cadillac V-8 will emerge, the Ultra or at least a proprietory one (Northstar II). I cannot state emphatically enough how 'wrong' I believe this proposal is (and, IMO, of the 'old GM' school of thought).

They're NOT Jersey- the bulk of them are Yawkers.

Looked @ half an episode once- the NYers on there drive me nuts.

>>"One more thing, starting Jan 1, 2010, government has started to tax extra for the tires not made in USA."<< Wow. This must be related to the chinese junk tire fiasco, correct? -- -- -- -- -- Michelin had a tire factory 10 minutes from my house. I was checking the site out last month- seems unlikely they'll open it back up- they left in '30 and the place has gotten a bit... rough.

No coffee, ever. Plenty of ice tea, but no hot tea. Maybe 6 hot cocoas a year- no other hot drinks. The darkness in my belly likes the cold.

It looks like every single building in the city was made of concrete. Concrete can be ground & mixed in with fresh concrete as aggregate, question is: does haiti have a plant that does that? Also- I've seen a surprising amont of rebar in the 'crete- I have not heard that separating that from the concrete is feasible- and that is likely a further specialization as far as a plant to handle it would be concerned. If more of the buildings had been of wooden construction, there likely would have been far less death. Assumedly timber is in short supply on haiti.

Much like the muscle car ads of particular notice ('xx,xxx miles, most put on a 1/4-mile @ a time' )... For me: many has the dollar been spent in bars, 'most spent 1 tip at a time'.

That cock rocks.

Unbelievable (except, unfortunately, it is).

I actualy lost my back-up for plowing- but we're only supposed to get sleet/rain IIRC, not any accumulation. I'm not sweating the $2.50 savings, but on principal it might be nice to meet up with enuf folk to call it a 'C&G meet'.

Lot of people can't make it... what say you to a reschedule, Roger ??

LaCrosse: to my eye, the beltline & overall height conspire to make it look narrow. Then again, I'm more familiar with 79-81"-wide vehicles, so everything looks narrow to me. XTS is almost 2" wider than the LaC IIRC; I don't see the same minor ungainliness there... but more width is always welcome IMO.

'67-gen Eldorado is one of my top 5 auto designs of all time, bar nothing. Back in the '80s there was tired soldier '68 in Balimer, and I would walk around it for 20 minutes at a clip. Fast forward to last year here in Jersey, another '68 shows up at a gas station 2 miles from my house, and another 30 minutes of my life happily slips away. I say 'top 5' yet there is no other car I've (yet) seen where I soak the design in so vigorously. F-ing amazing. -- -- -- -- -- That said, if we are going to compare the XTS to what it COULD'VE been, I'd be having a completely different conversation from my POV.