Doomer theory: the pro-Palestine business is a non-coordinated effort by American Diaspora Jews to subtly encourage the wiping of Israel from the face of the earth, thus giving them a lever by which to increase their power in America AND sparing them from having to deal with all those alpha-male and red-hot-female IDF types.
You missed the fundamental reason, they're embarrassed to be Jewish. You do understand that they despise Jews like myself and Derek even more than they look down upon your Ohio neighbors.
Because they want to be lefties much more than anything else. Israel is the bete noire of the modern left, so being Jewish makes it much harder if not impossible for lefty Jews to be fully accepted by their lefty peers
Derek, boychick, there's always been schisms in the community, going back to the Eruv Rav, Korach and Egel HaZahav. When your great grandparents and other eastern European Jews came to North America they were looked down upon by the establishment which was dominated by the Yekkish Reform movement. Note that HIAS, which was very much established to assimilate those EE Jews as much as it was to help them, stood for Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, it wasn't JIAS.
The Reform movement considered Berlin and Cincinatti to be the new Jerusalem and it was only the events of the 1930s and influence of mostly one man, Stephen Wise, that Reform got Zionist. Even then Wise pitched a fit when Orthodox Rabbis protested FDR's inaction during the Holocaust.
The Zionist movement has also been splintered between socialists, secularists, and religious Zionists. Ben Gurion tried to have Begin killed on the Altalena. The unofficially Labor Zionist day school that I attended never said a good word about Begin or Jabotinsky.
The Federations had to be dragged kicking and screaming into funding day schools and yeshivas because they were in love with the Melting Pot and what Jew would send their kids to a parochial school? Now their grandkids tear down posters of Jewish hostages.
The Jew haters online have recently discovered the Kastner Transport via Abbas's thesis at Patrice Lumumba U in Moscow (I have Ben Hecht's Perfidy on my bookshelf) so they can carry on about Zionist collaboration with the Nazis (should we tell them about the truck deal that fell through too?), but Kastner was assassinated.
"...what Jew would send their kids to a parochial school?" Ricky Weinstein was a high school classmate at St. Sebastian's Country Day School in the '60s but his mother was Catholic.
I've never understood how people figure out who has the fastest car independent of the driver.
In any case, I bought (or am in the process of buying) another Miata! I was able to negotiate a grand off the facebook listing price, plus the hardtop and OEM steelies.
Impossibly clean for a rust belt car of it's age. No rust anywhere, underside is mint, engine bay is flawless and the factory radio even works. It's really as nice as it can get.
I have no space for it so my two other Miatas are getting sold come spring. Between two Miatas and a hardtop for sale, I might be able to swing 20k out of the whole deal (they go for a lot more up here I notice).
What do you think of the Solstice? I saw one for sale at the side of the road on my way home from buying an amp in A2. Just 10K miles with a 5 spd. I took the number down but I haven't called yet. I can swing a loan but then I'd have to insure it with collision.
I would say part of it depends on how tall you are. I had the recent opportunity to drive a Solstice GXP--and by that I mean go and get gas a half mile away in the city I was in--and aside from nearly being side-swiped by a 3rd gen MDX, there were good and bad impressions. Good: the turbo makes it QUICK, and I was barely on it. No idea what the NA version would be. It's an attractive-enough vehicle, and is an alert city street handler. Ride was composed enough over bad pavement (plenty of cars fail this). Bad/No Thanks: The convertible top is a faff to operate. Low windshield header, but a Miata isn't much better (if you're not 6'5" you'll likely be fine!). Easy enough to get it right, but this is no Miata. Interior design is alright. Feels super wide (3" over a NC Miata). NA versions in my area seem to be priced attractively.
If the looks float your boat, take it for a spin and see what you find. I'd say they're a plenty competent looking and operating car. Personally, I'd prefer its contemporary the NC (3rd gen) Miata or a S2000. I fit the S2000 really well, but it's now incredibly expensive compared to the others, with the Miata around $10k give or take a few grand. If I'm honest, I don't fit in any Miata. Certainly not without seat/seat bracket modification at least--which is to say I bought a 3rd gen Protege with a 2.0 and a 5-speed so I could have the MX-5 experience while having actual tall person comfort, visibility, (barely, lol) increased mileage, and greatly increased practicality for a lot less money and a bit less acceleration. I'll take it.
There's always a way and part of why I bought my crappy little termite farm / house in The Ghetto......
My vehicles were and are more important than my ex wife .
Old VW's are _everywhere_, I realize that foolish people have driven the prices crazy (these are the same typ of boobs who used up and destroyed millions of old VW's & didn't care) but if you beat the bushes you'll find one and can fix it with wobbly pliers and a bent screwdriver .
The MIATA is a modern fun to drive comfortable conveyance with ICE COLD AC ! .
Either way is good, I don't think many people get the joy out of driving a rusty death trap as much as I do .
You must live somewhere pretty hot, because I prefer some vehicles to not have AC at all! I had a Jeep TJ for a time with AC and used it once. If it's hot, I figured I could just... take the roof and doors off. Same with the Miata, it's nice having the top down.
So much for my prediction that Piastri would trouble the podium in either the Sprint or the Grand Prix.
I think that the Red Bull probably remains the best overall car / team package (and certainly driver), especially in light of the strong Hamilton pace being attributable to running the car too low.
On The Free Press (Bari’s, not Detroit’s):
I canceled my subscription after what was until recently a high quality, differentiated news source transformed itself into the internet’s foremost BREAKING NEWS IN THE ARENA OF PERPETUAL JEWISH VICTIMHOOD AND OPPRESSION OLYMPICS CORRESPONDENCE while, like, totally ignoring the hundreds of Palestinians that Israel is murdering every single day.
Alanis:
I guess all of the tweets, posts, and memes about Chili’s weren’t just pretend.
No, I don’t love Bari Weiss (or her wife, Nellie) by any stretch.
I don’t generally read NYT op-eds, unless they are the kind that generate a lot of traction, so most of her content that I have consumed has been The Free Press. The Free Press now offers one content vertical, and I’m not willing to pay a nickel to support it.
40 seems to be the “sympathy for israel” cutoff. Im right at it and while id say I’m more sympathetic to israel, the amercian temper tantrums in the press are not helping.
I dunno but I'm a die hard Conservative who's been forced to live under the thumb of Jews and muslims at different times, muslims have a long _long_ ways to go before I give a shit about them .
The American educational system has been converged for years. Pro Palestinian demonstrators today barricaded Jewish students in the Cooper-Union library that had to be evacuated by police via tunnels, but I guess that's just more perpetual Jewish victimhood and oppression olympics.
There are people who hate Jews for no reason. Im sure they exist because ive seen them online but i have never met one. But there are also people who hate Jews because some rich Jew called his rich Jew friend to get some dude making 55k a year fired from his job for being insufficiently “pro israel” because he made a joke on Twitter. is that fair to hate all for the cause of a few? Not really but it is also human nature. Which is obvious watching jews blame Palestinian children for hamas attacks under the exact same logic. It’s a shit show
Have you ever used the phrase "rich Christian", "rich Muslim", or "rich atheist"? Just asking.
The proper English is "rich Jewish friend." You sound kind of troglodytic. There's a difference between "some motherfucker white guy," and "some white motherfucker".
I'm not going to get that worked up if some entitled asshole at Brown loses out on a six figure gig for celebrating Hamas.
I’ve never seen some rich Christian, rich Muslim, or rich atheist (lowercase on purpose) get a dude fired on Twitter for disagreeing with them on a conflict 8k miles away. I don’t see Christians calling everyone who disagrees with them “Christian haters”
Ronnie. I’m an accountant. The nuances of the English language are not my strong suit. I do numbers.
“ I'm not going to get that worked up if some entitled asshole at Brown loses out on a six figure gig for celebrating Hamas.”
I’m not either but when that exact same guy was calling for “death to all whites” my priest didn’t get him fired.
"I’ve never seen some rich Christian, rich Muslim, or rich atheist (lowercase on purpose) get a dude fired on Twitter for disagreeing with them on a conflict 8k miles away. I don’t see Christians calling everyone who disagrees with them “Christian haters”
"Everyone". No stereotyping people there, no, not at all. No trading in stereotypes. Uh huh.
Mere disagreements or endorsing bestial behavior?
"Ronnie. I’m an accountant. The nuances of the English language are not my strong suit. I do numbers."
Bullshit.
I have an idea, how about you send a letter to all of your clients telling them your opinions about some "rich Jew friend" in that very language?
It's not the Jews' fault that your priest tolerates anti-white racism. Maybe you should find another priest.
I'm a little late to the party here but thought I'd point something out that I see as (emotionally charged) flawed logic. Only picking on you since I saw your comment first, but I see this flaw everywhere in pro-Palestinian rhetoric:
"Murder" is what Hamas assault teams recently did to Israeli civilians. Meaning, the intent was to find unarmed non-combatants and kill them in what would have been an otherwise non-violent setting. What Israel's military is now doing is engaging in low-scale conflict, and Palestinians are suffering military and - important point here - unintentional civilian casualties. This conflict is the predictable, and likely desired, consequence of the Palestinians' political leadership.
It may seem grotesque that I'm asserting semantics in such a sad and bloody situation... people are dying and it's tragic. But if the goal is to see it clearly, then INTENT is critical here. If you were driving your car at night, and suddenly you saw a pedestrian in the road, what would your reaction be? Murder is turning the wheel towards the person and killing them. If you immediately tried to avoid the person, but couldn't and killed them... you're not a murderer. Even if you were speeding, drunk, and hadn't seeviced your brake pads... you might be negligent, or even reckless... but you're not a murderer.
This is the world’s most ridiculous trolley problem. And it’s far from accurate.
What Israel’s military is now doing is firing rockets into a densely populated strip of land, which is resulting in hundreds of people - including many, many Gazan civilians - perishing every single day.
Israel wants carte blanche to exterminate the pesky Palestinians while whining in the media about how Israel is perpetually victimized.
Would you apply dispassionate semantics to hand-waive away mass civilian casualties if, say, Iran decided to get involved today?
I try to think about everything dispassionately... I find it serves my conclusions well. What do you mean if Iran got involved? In this situation, is Iran targeting military targets or music festivals?
Did Hamas establish routes out of their intended target areas before they attacked? As Israel did? Did Israel then attack the safe passages knowing that they could "exterminate the pesky Palestinians" massed on the routes?
If you read all of my comments - which is a rigorous, demanding standard, I know! - you will see that I have never defended Hamas or characterized them as virtuous. They are terrorists.
At the moment, the ground war has not yet begun. So your line of rhetorical questioning isn’t relevant yet. But what has been happening - daily - for weeks, is ongoing air strikes in Gaza, which is densely populated.
You cannot genuinely believe that the civilian casualties are “unintentional” or collateral damage; if Israel prioritized the lives of civilians, they wouldn’t be firing rockets into tower blocks.
Let me expand on my Iran comment. What if Iran … or Hezbollah … or fill in the blank (regional entity hostile toward the existence of Israel) decides to get involved and starts hammering Israel, day-in and day-out? Let’s say that Israel suddenly goes from Goliath to David and they’re fighting a war that not even the involuntary largesse of the American taxpayers can ensure they will win. Will you apply the same dispassionate framework to Hezbollah or Iran or whoever, or does Israel merit a more favorable consideration (for whatever reason)?
No offense, but you're either not seeing the meat of my point, or intentionally dancing around it... "Murder!" is about intent... in reality, and in your hypotheticals (which aren't particularly useful but I don't want to appear like I'm avoiding them), who do we call "Murderers!"... as you did in your first comment?
I never said you called Hamas virtuous. This is the moral relativism of our progressive era, where actions are always framed by whether people are "good" or "bad" (or perhaps "oppressed" or "oppressor").. and it's where your logic is failing. Understanding concepts dispassionately isn't assigning (or stripping) virtue and then trying to fit the actions of people into some more comfortable version of reality... for example:
What does it matter who's David and who's Goliath? Are you saying only Goliath can be a murderer because he's bigger? In your hypothetical, is Israel trying to murder the foreign entities' civilian populations or destroy that entity's capability to threaten Israel's existence? Can you understand the difference?
You said that "the ground war has not yet begun". That's wrong. The ground war started on 7 Oct (l'm curious why you don't see that... is only Israel capable of mounting a "ground war"?) If all Israel wants to do is murder Palestinians, then why are they waiting on their ground offensive? What is it that seems to be holding up their desire to murder in mass?
Are you critical of Israeli military capability to surgically strike and completely avoid all civilian casualties? I mean, that's pretty silly if you understand the realities of military operations... but if you want to argue that, then it's a completely different argument than "Murderers!"...
Murder is about intent. I'm not sure I can more clearly explain this point...
As a postscript, maybe this will help: if you had said you unsubscribed to Bari Weiss's page because she wouldn't talk about Israel "killing" Palestinians, I wouldn't have commented...
Brad would LIKE us to think it was just a finger he was pushing back on...
So as someone with small stature I've had to deal with working hard to make an initial impression a lot.
When I was in the dealership finance office in 2022, under conditions not too dissimilar for buyers of new PHEV minivans with a second kid on the way, all I had to do was say No! once, and not even pull a Clint Eastwood face.
All you need in civilized company is language to convey you're not into the fingering, often a look suffices.
F1: I think the Red Bull has a peculiar weakness in having to give up a lot of points of aero just to make it over rough surfaces, which won't make a comeback again for the tracks that are left. It remains the class of the field, although by not as much as at the start of the season.
On the AT situation - unless you believe they'll lie through their teeth to have DR's grin sell clothes, the official answer is that his car had issues that prevented it showing its pace. The driver may still not have had it in him, but either way, it couldn't be seen at COTA.
While the young lady with the nondescript gray vehicle may be a little, ah, broad in the beam, this is really a classic example of using a cell phone instead of a real camera. The default lens setting is "big-ass wide angle," which is, well, unflattering.
By next year, the AI algos will not only make her look as svelte as Diana Rigg, they will make the car look like a '89 Olds Delta 88, just for Klockau.
Whatever it is, every time I happen across a photo of that broad (get it) I have to stop and try and understand what the fuck is going on with her body shape. I do think it is a more entertaining way to spend my time versus reading or watching any of her content.
RE: new truck shopping, we’re back to deep four figure discounts on Silverados, especially if you don’t mind the 2.7.
Which I would very much in such a vehicle.
But still. ~$43k for a brand new, full-size, crew cab truck is a good deal imo.
Only real issue is gonna be interest rates, where someone like me who is young enough to have only known extremely low rates, do present a real obstacle. Captive finance arms are pressed to do like 6.9%. It’s not great!
Yeah I'd be VERY cautious about buying a Silverado with the 2.7, but that's just me. I have ZERO interest in a forced-induction gasoline engine in a truck, of any size. Had I bought an F-150 instead of an F-250, I'd have gotten a 5.0.
I’d be very cautious buying a Silverado at all, simply because I think the interior space is truly terrible in the segment — I no shit would rather have a Titan — but that is a personal opinion of mine. They switched to some shitty, digital rocker shifter in the models with a console post-refresh. Hate them for that dearly.
I know it’s for EPA reasons, but looking at a monroney and seeing the 2.7 get like A Mile Per Gallon better over the 5.3 is so annoying. Just… why fucking bother? There’s a reason they sit on lots forever and are dumb cheap by 2023 standards. No one wants that shit.
If you’re just using it as pure transportation and not towing frequently, I assume it’ll be adequate. They’re torquey as hell, and some cursory reading says they aren’t notably unreliable.
I WOULD rather have the 2.7 in a Silverado than a CT4-V, which while quick, is one of the worst sounding “performance” cars I have ever heard. It’s gross. Just give me the 3.6 back imo.
My brother is saddled with a 2.7 Silverado fleet truck that replaced a 5.3. That one MPG on the Monroney disappears as soon as it is exposed to the skinny pedal and the grueling paved terrain of Oklahoma and west Texas. He uses it as pure transportation and "adequate" is not a term he has used to describe it. I guess the General needed a modern day Iron Duke.
Yes, a long-stroke aluminum four PLUS turbo PLUS direct injection PLUS TTY bolts PLUS lots of plastic parts, all driving a properly American-sized truck.
Had to look up TTY bolts. That's some scary shit. Now I have data to support my unease about the 2.7 powering the Silverado I was driving last week, quick though it was. The 6.6 diesel felt far more natural.
Yeah, the whole rationale for TTY bolts is that the relentless pursuit of reduced vehicle weight has resulted in engine blocks with too little metal in them to maintain their rigidity, which in turn makes deck flexing and then head gasket failure a genuine danger, especially with forced induction. Head gaskets are just barely holding on in modern engines and WHEN they need to be replaced, they need much more carefully-machined surfaces to mate to. More expense.
TTY bolts are also an "answer" to the "problem" of needing skilled assembly personnel to build engines. Design the bolt to stretch a certain specific amount - ONCE - at a given number of degrees of rotation and you don't need a guy who knows how to use a torque wrench. Yes, it takes more engineering work to design than a normal bolt, but that's done ONCE, instead of the millions of times major bolts are installed in engines at your plant.
Interesting in that in early 1971 VW's 1600CC air cooled engines were pulling the 10MM head studs out of the block so VW re engineered them to have an 8MM 'wasp waist' and the problem was solved .
Personally I think TTY head bolts are bullshit but I'm usually wrong .
Why the philosophical objection to gas turbos? I wouldn't do a four-cylinder for acoustic reasons, but the stats suggest the first-generation 3.5 EcoBoost was the most solid engine in an F-150 for most of the years it was sold. I think there's no shortcut to looking at the reliability record engine by engine.
Replacing a V8 with a turbo 4 in a truck inherently means you are goring to be smacking the hell out of it to get similar performance. With a load of crap from Home Depot or a few passengers that V8 is going to accelerate from a stoplight without any real effort. The turbo 4 is going to have to rev quite a bit to accomplish the same task. Over the truck's lifetime that will result in the turbo 4 spending a much greater percentage of it's time under high stress. That can be designed for, but often isn't.
The real kick in the face is that outside of a CAFE test the real world MPG of that turbo isn't going to be noticeably better than the V8. So more complex, less durability reserve, sounds funny, and no real MPG benefit.
In addition to the fact that it self-destructed at 32,000 miles, one of the things I did not like about the Ecoboost in my Escape was that you could have either Eco or boost. Not both. And even the Eco wasn’t particularly impressive for a four-cylinder.
Modern turbos tend to be lower-revving than their naturally aspirated counterparts. The load at those low revs will be higher, but, as you say, you can design for that. Sometimes OEMs do, sometimes they don't. The proof is in the long-term reliability record. Some turbos have been very good, and I think it's pointless to reject them on principle.
I don't know what's up with GM engine engineering lately but they all seem to be terrible, turbo or NA. Ford has been wildly inconsistent, but it has had some good engines, including a few EcoBoosts.
I'll try to add to that by saying that having a turbo means more points of failure, higher intake temps, higher engine bay temps, higher oil temps, and and more complex packaging compared to something naturally aspirated. TL is pretty on the money here.
Even comparing NA to Turbo 4 cylinder engines I don't see much real-world difference. My wife and I took a ~200 mile road trip in separate cars last weekend. The 2.5 NA Ford Fusion reported 36 MPG, the 1.6 T Sonata reported 34.
Yeah, that's the other thing: no real-work mileage advantage. Done simply to satisfy the gummint (the one word Reagan, with all his oratory prowess, couldn't quite master).
I owned a generally well-regarded turbo-6 in between owning two V8 cars. I just have a lot more fun with a naturally-aspirated V8 even if a genie tells me reliability is the same. YMMV.
Doesn’t every diesel pickup sold in America feature a turbocharger? That argues for reliability. On the other hand, my F550 work truck with the power stroke shelled its turbo at 61,000 miles. Which argues against reliability.
U.S. market diesel light trucks have not been a shining example of anything. All three OEMs have pursued d!ck-waving torque numbers at the expense of anything else, when the effort should have gone toward achieving reliability with modern emissions equipment. All three diesels are way finickier than any truck engine should be.
If you want to see engines that are engineered to deal with high loads, go a couple classes up and look at heavy truck engines. Today, they are all turbocharged inline sixes. In their lower ratings, they can go a million miles between rebuilds.
" I think there's no shortcut to looking at the reliability record engine by engine."
Absolutely, but empirically the average turbo engine is under much more stress than the average NA engine PLUS it has extra moving parts that endure 100,000 rpm and 1000 deg F.
When you have machines of the complexity of modern airliner engines that rack up the reliability records they do, the idea of complexity in a car engine, on its own, doesn't seem that scary. Have the engine internals been designed properly for the level of stress? Has the turbo? If so, time will tell.
I'd have very little fear buying any of the Ford V6 EcoBoosts, with the exceptions of the 2.7 in the Bronco and Ranger and the hybridized 3.0 in the Aviator Grand Touring. The fours are more of a mixed bag.
Domestic light truck engines are not designed to do truck-like things, most especially hauling actual truckloads of anything heavier than groceries. They are simply a large and slow substitute for a car.
Back in my day (old man rant) average work trucks used inline 6 cylinder engines and they'd typically outlast the truck as long as properly maintained .
Where can we find *trustworthy* reliability statistics?
(I used to subscribe to Consumer Reports, but their reliability info was not (in my experience, at least for consumer goods) reliable. Plus it became shit when the recent editor took over)
Do the automakers jealously guard repair statistics to avoid letting consumers know how bad it really is, and to cover up the fact that they're dropping turds on auto buyers?
CR and industry groups like JD Power are part of the picture, but you also have to do your own primary source research. Where there is a serious and recurring problem with an engine, it will be reflected in owner forums, FTC complaints, and NHTSA complaints. Those sources will also often teach you how and when the problem was fixed, if ever.
If you do that over the life of the first-gen EcoBoost - used through 2016 in the F-150 and all the way through 2019 in D3-platform vehicles - you learn that it had some teething issues on introduction in 2010 and then became remarkably problem-free thereafter. I'm not singling that engine out as some kind of beacon of greatness, just using it as an example of a turbo engine that did well.
I'm probably being unrealistic, but it's disappointing that reliability statistics aren't mandated for public release after a few years. Assessing old forum posts and formal complaints is not scientific and forces you to infer based on what you're reading.
Never take it to someone else to do, always buy bottled goods and a quality filter, three times a year, when you have someone else do it, you have no idea what is going in your engine, not the oil or the filter, maintenance schedules by the manufacturer are insanely optimistic!
Dad had a '21 F150 with the 3.5 EB in high output form. That truck hauled the mail without much throttle provocation, but the whole darn thing was NERVOUS. Super EPA-upshift happy 10-speed trans, tuned-for-torque-NOW EcoBoost, Max Tow suspension plus light and reactive steering. Oh, and a rough/lumpy idle, for no reason. '18-20 is my favorite looking era for the modern F150s, but I'm going 5.0 if I ever get one. I'll trust a turbo in a diesel, but not in a gasser (truck). A turbo gas truck engine goes against the whole point, to me, of a non-diesel engine: dirt-simple proven tech that trades (greatly) increased capability for (greatly) reduced headache. At least in theory. In that vein, yeah, no way I'm rolling a 2.7 Silverado.
Or to step back to the 80’s, try a new Trans Am at 14.9 percent. But then again a fully loaded TA was $10,000 so on was only financing $5,000 or $6,000 for 36 months…. Different time different MSRP…
I'm thinking I can get 1 or 2 more years out of my 2010 Frontier before the rust claims it, and the new Colorado looks so sharp, but I'm so averse to turbo engines. I do a good bit of towing (though usually under 5k lbs) on roads that would put the engine at full boost for minutes at a stretch. Also I'm told that in order to turn the headlights on and off, you have to access the touch screen menu. As of right now the redesigned Frontier looks to be simultaneously the least exciting mid sized truck, but also the simplest, which imo speaks to durability. I really wish the previous gen Colorado diesel wasn't so fraught with issues, that would've been an ideal truck for my uses.
Eh with auto lights I wouldn't worry too much about that. New Colorados are indeed very nice to look at, and a Trail Boss is a hell of a lot of capability for the price if you like to go off the beaten path like I do. Interior is also decent if you can get around stupid digi-shifters and piano black. I don't have enough seat time in them to give an honest opinion about any of how it rides or drives, but I do like to look at them at least.
If you're extremely against turbo trucks, the Frontier is both a good choice AND your only choice! Handsome exterior, functional interior, powertrain that's been in use for a while. The Hardbody Edition is particularly enticing to me.
I very much want a *new* GMC Canyon, right truck, right size, right capability for my needs - but the turbo-4 reliability issue throws me off. Wish they'd simply kept the LFX v6, or ideally one with a 5.3, to say nothing of one with a 6.2
(on that note if anyone wants to be semi fairly compensated for the brutal wiring headache of swapping an L87 6.2 into a '23 Canyon for me - please reach out)
Have noticed the sudden drop in used truck prices that has accompanied the new willingness to deal on new trucks, have been looking at used trucks as a result. Would be buying cash, though; the prices are still not so attractive if you have to finance.
Ive been dropping an extra 4k a month on top of my 855$ payment to get this damned audi paid off. I dont feel like selling my investments in one swoop to do it. 19k left
The guy handles criticism in the comments of his articles like he’s a comedian being heckled, only with about 10% of the skill. Not to mention the story you relayed about his treatment of a fellow writer whose work I actually do respect. In my opinion, he’s earned everything you give him here and then some.
It was very unusual when Liberty took over F1 and suddenly instead of seeing wide shots of grass painted with the Rolex logo we started seeing more crowd shots. I’d been watching F1 since the 80s and other than seeing tifosi with enormous flags in the background it was hard to make out who was actually there and if they were having fun.
I remember Kimi crashing out and then suddenly there’s a shot of a bawling child in Ferrari colours. Wife and I laughed hard. Then a while later there’s another shot of Kimi with the kid signing a hat or something and we’re high-fiving for the guy.
I don’t know if it’s an American television thing but growing up (in Canada) watching WWF, American Gladiators, NFL football, NASCAR and more the television directors always seem to be eager to show people having fun and I like to see this sort of thing in F1
I saw Mrs Andretti in the pits at Nazareth around that year. Definitely a non-ugly American. I think they had to change tires if she walked to close to the cars.
The audience are more like trained seals, waiting 'til the cameras are on them so they can self-consciously emote and demonstrate what a splendid time they're having. Watch closely: for many of them it's as if the camera guy gave them a cue that they're on air. I find it artificial and tiresome. The best ones are when audience members aren't aware they're on camera and when they are, they immediately look at the screen they're on, not the camera recording them. As soon as they're aware, the director switches to something else.
Most of the time the crew is going to have two-way radios and they’re constantly communicating back and forth with a producer or director about what’s in front of them and that person in the truck is both asking for something particular and also directing what makes the broadcast feed.
I used to do candid street photography and the challenge was always getting people to ignore the camera and continue being normal, but it’s nearly impossible with the video rigs they use for this sort of broadcast. When I’ve been at pro wrestling and MMA events and they need a self conscious reaction shot they just walk up and point the camera in a persons face.
For the record, when it’s happened to me (and being a noisy foreigner in a crowd it happened often) I’d just wave or talk into the camera. I don’t like seeing myself doing stuff. I’ve never looked at the screen or watched the broadcast afterwards
A couple of years ago I had some very good tix for friendly between some EUFA Champions League teams (think Barcelona v. Man City or something). We were behind one of the goals and there was a camera on a big crane that could swoop around. Whenever the action was on the other end the camera would turn around and shoot the stands. The people did not need a cue to ham it up. As someone who does not attend many sporting events it was eye opening.
I remember the first SmackDown taping I went to and half of the arena was empty, with the crowd packed into the other half. All of the hard cameras were on the empty side and it was bizarre watching the wrestlers pose and shout and react to people in the walkouts that weren't there.
I went to a top fuel event back in the day after watching on TV and I was absolutely exhausted by the noise at the end of the races. My buddy handed me a pair of in ear plugs as well as cups and it didn't feel like it made a lick of difference. Still haven't been to an F1 race and I'm kinda sad I never got to see the V10s in person
The problem with training yourself to feed on negative energy from Twitter commenters, just like the problem with training yourself to brick into a napkin while watching porn, is that you have to keep raising the stakes to get the same thrill.
A dude I was friends with in high school used to post pictures of himself standing beside celebrities he paid for that photo at a convention on facebook back when that site was still fresh and new. He looked (and probably still does) just like that drawing, beard and all. I was pleased to look through my own pictures and saw that expression ZERO TIMES. Not that I'm opposed to an occasional show of raw, unfiltered delight, but when that's your go-to photo face for every goddamn photo of you, something might be wrong...
Also, I am stealing this idea and serving rice that way to my wife, just to see what kind of reaction it get. It will not be positive. It will just be white rice ice cream scooped, soy sauce and planted broccoli fleurettes
This is the most common sense idea and yet the vast swath of people posting and/or vomiting their opinions on social media don’t seem to understand it, and, can’t handle it when someone comments back at them. Fragile people.
It's a uniquely feminine idea to think you have the right or even the ability to control what people think or say about what you put into the world. As if we are guaranteed the right to positive reinforcement in the Constitution. I think the root of this is female high school society, where people will say insincere but kind-sounding things about their fellow students by default.
This is literally the ONLY time I ever have a disagreement with the wife, her going off the rails on something and not fully comprehending people can think whatever they want.
Maybe that's because with interactions between human males, if certain boundaries are transgressed, it almost will certainly get physical. I'm sure some domestic violence stems from that, women either unknowingly or knowingly pressing a guy's buttons. DISCLAIMER (I'm posting under my own name and it's possible that some woman I might want to date could read this): I'm not justifying DV.
Females don't have that natural brake on their aggression.
There's a book called Worriers and Warriors, by a female psychologist who examined the way boys and men vs girls and women play, work together, and socialize. Men form hierarchies where even the least able has to pull his own weight. I guess if you're tying to take down a wooly mammoth, you need all hands. Females, on the other hand, form cliques, making one person a pariah, probably to enforce in-group conformity. I guess sometimes you don't want everyone to know where the good berries are. The really cruel thing, though, is that from day to day the pariah can change.
I mean, I watch Alex Dyke's reviews from time to time, and NEVER got the impression that he was talking for an hour in front of the camera for a product that was HIM. Also, he doesn't try to show off his body?
My wife, who endlessly berates herself for not fitting into the race suit she wore a few serious surgeries ago -- and will probably eventually get back into it anyway.
Wow. Alanis King really does have a, shall we say, "rather beamy hull configuration," doesn't she?
Regarding the "how people see you" part, I was thinking about how I've never had to chase a paycheck that was legitimately owed to me. I know of lots of people, my dad included, who've had shady employers pull that.
Do you think that might have something to do with the fact that at at least two separate jobs, I've come into work fuming about Canada geese causing a traffic jam, and how the little bastards should all be exterminated? Or how I called in angry to a retail job once?
It's just a lack of pressure. If they closed central park for an archery weekend the behavior would change. Same with rabbitts; pre-season they just sit and look at you from a few feet. In season not a tuft of fur to be found.
Alanis likes attention of ANY kind like most of her generation which is always bizarre to me. But I'm almost 62 and most of my comments are probably "Get off my lawn" adjacent to that group. She's probably not that broad in real life and I'd be more concerned with her wide forehead and emerging baldness if I were to comment on such.
Well like the gorilla in the Thailand zoo, she’ll know when she’s too fat when all the brothers start hitting on her. I bet she’s already reached that point.
Alternate joke: why is a fat white chick like a pile of bricks? Eventually both will get laid by a Mexican. I’ll be here all week, tip the servers.
Re: Thunder Thighs. Going to that video comments section, there are only three comments on the outfit out of 146 in total. One of the three was positive and the two negative statements weren't even directly insulting her. Just suggesting a different outfit choice. What does she expect from youtube comments? That's actually an excellent positivity ratio, considering how she chose to present herself on camera.
It's narcissism. She NEEDS to be the subject of discussion. And she also NEEDS to be a victim. And that's how you go from "1 iffy comment in 146" to "THE BOYS ARE TALKING ABOUT MY LEGS" which reminds me of the excellent Cowboy Junkies song:
Baby hit the back door breathing real heavy
Said the boys in the alley wouldn't leave her alone
Mama did her make-up in a terrible hurry
She finally got ready, but the boys were gone
Mama, don't you worry, night's approaching
There's a hole in heaven where some sin slips through
Townes Van Zandt wrote the song with and for the Cowboy Junkies. Here's the story:
“Cowboy Junkies had heard some of my songs and got a hold of my booking agent in the States. They were looking for an opening act and I was solo so that makes it much easier. We became very, very good friends. They’re very, very good people. They’d played here and over in England on a couple of tours at the same time as I had a tour over. I’d see the posters but I didn’t know who they were or what they sounded like.
“It was a nice tour in the States. It was about two months with one big truck for the sound, one bus for the roadies and one for myself and the Cowboy Junkies. We wrote ‘Cowboy Junkies Lament’ in the bus. It’s the only song I’ve ever wrote on purpose for somebody to play. Cause I’ve written songs about people but I don’t think I’ve ever written any for somebody else specifically to play. I wrote it to their rhythm. Bomb-be-bomb-be-bomp! And I would ask Michael (Timmins) ‘What do you think about this line? Is this too corny?’ ‘No, that’s great!’ It was real fine.”
Jorge Martin made a big gamble on tire choice with the soft rear and looked to be in total control until the last few laps when his pace went down faster than a tridelt sorority girl. This opened the door for Bagnaia to put points on and open the gap up to 25. With a few races left the championship looks to be a duel between these two that could go down to the wire.
To add insult to jnjury: weather caused rhe sprint to be cancelled and denied Martin the opportunity to make up points after the fact.
ZARCO, my distant French cousin, won his first ever MotoGP race just before he transfers to LCR Honda in hopes of developing the RC machine.
KTM continues to show promise and I hope next year they are competing toward the front more often.
What a race. Loved watching Zarco explain he wasn’t going to cry yet after stepping off of the bike. It’s great watching a lot of motorsport and seeing first wins
Jorge Martin made a big gamble on tire choice with the soft rear and looked to be in total control until the last few laps when his pace went down faster than a tridelt sorority girl. This opened the door for Bagnaia to put points on and open the gap up to 25. With a few races left the championship looks to be a duel between these two that could go down to the wire.
To add insult to jnjury: weather caused rhe sprint to be cancelled and denied Martin the opportunity to make up points after the fact.
ZARCO, my distant French cousin, won his first ever MotoGP race just before he transfers to LCR Honda in hopes of developing the RC machine.
KTM continues to show promise and I hope next year they are competing toward the front more often.
Doomer theory: the pro-Palestine business is a non-coordinated effort by American Diaspora Jews to subtly encourage the wiping of Israel from the face of the earth, thus giving them a lever by which to increase their power in America AND sparing them from having to deal with all those alpha-male and red-hot-female IDF types.
You know, Tolstoy once said that the Russian loves his ignorance, because he truly believes no one can ever know everything about any one thing.
To paraphrase this thought - brother, I truly don't believe anyone has the sort of power/control and intelligence to pull something like that off..
I've known a lot of American Jews who think the existence of Israel hurts their cause in the USA, for two reasons:
0. They have to defend a fundamentally right-wing ethnostate while demanding that the United States turn into a local garbage dump;
1. The fact that Jews have a place to go makes it easier to ask (or force) them to go there.
You missed the fundamental reason, they're embarrassed to be Jewish. You do understand that they despise Jews like myself and Derek even more than they look down upon your Ohio neighbors.
Why would they be embarrassed? Seems like the one group in America that's allowed to be proud of what they are.
Because they want to be lefties much more than anything else. Israel is the bete noire of the modern left, so being Jewish makes it much harder if not impossible for lefty Jews to be fully accepted by their lefty peers
You can't be both a faithful Jew AND a leftist at the same time.
extradition go brrrrrrr
Derek, boychick, there's always been schisms in the community, going back to the Eruv Rav, Korach and Egel HaZahav. When your great grandparents and other eastern European Jews came to North America they were looked down upon by the establishment which was dominated by the Yekkish Reform movement. Note that HIAS, which was very much established to assimilate those EE Jews as much as it was to help them, stood for Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, it wasn't JIAS.
The Reform movement considered Berlin and Cincinatti to be the new Jerusalem and it was only the events of the 1930s and influence of mostly one man, Stephen Wise, that Reform got Zionist. Even then Wise pitched a fit when Orthodox Rabbis protested FDR's inaction during the Holocaust.
The Zionist movement has also been splintered between socialists, secularists, and religious Zionists. Ben Gurion tried to have Begin killed on the Altalena. The unofficially Labor Zionist day school that I attended never said a good word about Begin or Jabotinsky.
The Federations had to be dragged kicking and screaming into funding day schools and yeshivas because they were in love with the Melting Pot and what Jew would send their kids to a parochial school? Now their grandkids tear down posters of Jewish hostages.
The Jew haters online have recently discovered the Kastner Transport via Abbas's thesis at Patrice Lumumba U in Moscow (I have Ben Hecht's Perfidy on my bookshelf) so they can carry on about Zionist collaboration with the Nazis (should we tell them about the truck deal that fell through too?), but Kastner was assassinated.
"...what Jew would send their kids to a parochial school?" Ricky Weinstein was a high school classmate at St. Sebastian's Country Day School in the '60s but his mother was Catholic.
I've never understood how people figure out who has the fastest car independent of the driver.
In any case, I bought (or am in the process of buying) another Miata! I was able to negotiate a grand off the facebook listing price, plus the hardtop and OEM steelies.
i have three now
this is a cry for help
How is just three Miatas a problem?
Describe the new Miata.
YES
I now need a rough Miata so I have something to drive in the winter/modify/race.
Impossibly clean for a rust belt car of it's age. No rust anywhere, underside is mint, engine bay is flawless and the factory radio even works. It's really as nice as it can get.
I have no space for it so my two other Miatas are getting sold come spring. Between two Miatas and a hardtop for sale, I might be able to swing 20k out of the whole deal (they go for a lot more up here I notice).
Keep me in mind when it's time to sell, I am saving up for a Miata springtime-ish.
I'm in Canada, so it might be a bit of a drive depending on where you live.
But I'll let you know when they come out of storage in Marchish.
That makes it complicated, I assumed Midwest.
Yeah, it'd be way easier for you to find a better car for a better price locally to you.
When he said “rust belt” he actually meant “anywhere except Vancouver”
Lousy Smarch weather!
What gens?
All red, all NA, one is a '91, the other two are '90. All are also Canadian cars, so no airbag for anyone.
We die like men.
Yes. It's nice having a better looking wheel and switchgear over a (potentially useless) airbag.
What do you think of the Solstice? I saw one for sale at the side of the road on my way home from buying an amp in A2. Just 10K miles with a 5 spd. I took the number down but I haven't called yet. I can swing a loan but then I'd have to insure it with collision.
You can LS swap them.
That alone should be enough to convince you.
If you have an LS, you win.
Only if you also buy an Equinox for winter duty ;)
I see what you did there :-)
I would say part of it depends on how tall you are. I had the recent opportunity to drive a Solstice GXP--and by that I mean go and get gas a half mile away in the city I was in--and aside from nearly being side-swiped by a 3rd gen MDX, there were good and bad impressions. Good: the turbo makes it QUICK, and I was barely on it. No idea what the NA version would be. It's an attractive-enough vehicle, and is an alert city street handler. Ride was composed enough over bad pavement (plenty of cars fail this). Bad/No Thanks: The convertible top is a faff to operate. Low windshield header, but a Miata isn't much better (if you're not 6'5" you'll likely be fine!). Easy enough to get it right, but this is no Miata. Interior design is alright. Feels super wide (3" over a NC Miata). NA versions in my area seem to be priced attractively.
If the looks float your boat, take it for a spin and see what you find. I'd say they're a plenty competent looking and operating car. Personally, I'd prefer its contemporary the NC (3rd gen) Miata or a S2000. I fit the S2000 really well, but it's now incredibly expensive compared to the others, with the Miata around $10k give or take a few grand. If I'm honest, I don't fit in any Miata. Certainly not without seat/seat bracket modification at least--which is to say I bought a 3rd gen Protege with a 2.0 and a 5-speed so I could have the MX-5 experience while having actual tall person comfort, visibility, (barely, lol) increased mileage, and greatly increased practicality for a lot less money and a bit less acceleration. I'll take it.
I feel like at least one of those Miatas could have been an S550 Mustang convertible. Let me tell you all about them...
Go on..
Power, torques, area under the curve, blah blah blah. The puddle lamp illumination are galloping horseys, it's wonderful.
whee
horseys
im sold
With 3 Miatas, you have achieved Jinba Ittai: Oneness of Horse and Rider
i have become horse
"With 3 Miatas […] Oneness of Horse and Rider"
More like the foursome about which Jack was referring a couple of articles ago
What help do you think you need here Speed ? .
You didn't say 'the new one has broken AC' so I fail to see any problems .
Please remember that it's an acronym for
Miata
Is
Always
The
Answer .
I can't even fit in one properly (insert crying emoticon here as I had to pass on a FREE one with working AC and a supercharger)
Apparently you have the $ and knowledge to own and enjoy them, NO PROBLEM, in fact I'm jealous
-Nate
I suppose I should clarify that my problem isn't the number of Miatas, but the fact I don't really have the space or the money to keep all three.
Also why are you jealous? You have old beetles, which are far cooler anyway. If anything, I ought to be the jealous one!
Well..........
There's always a way and part of why I bought my crappy little termite farm / house in The Ghetto......
My vehicles were and are more important than my ex wife .
Old VW's are _everywhere_, I realize that foolish people have driven the prices crazy (these are the same typ of boobs who used up and destroyed millions of old VW's & didn't care) but if you beat the bushes you'll find one and can fix it with wobbly pliers and a bent screwdriver .
The MIATA is a modern fun to drive comfortable conveyance with ICE COLD AC ! .
Either way is good, I don't think many people get the joy out of driving a rusty death trap as much as I do .
-Nate
You must live somewhere pretty hot, because I prefer some vehicles to not have AC at all! I had a Jeep TJ for a time with AC and used it once. If it's hot, I figured I could just... take the roof and doors off. Same with the Miata, it's nice having the top down.
Yeah ;
I now live in Sunny Southern California, land of fruits, nuts and flakes .
I'm Scots/Irish extraction so I don't do sun very well, I go from my normal color to red like an over boiled lobster in 30 minutes or so .
When I was young and skinny I didn't mind the dry heat as long as I had shade .
I recently drove my non AC 1959 VW Bug on a two day 600 + mile road trip slightly East Of Bakersfield, Ca. goddamn it was _hot_ .
I had a ball and sweated like a whore in church, I'm sure that was good for my fat old self .
I love looking at rag tops but not driving with the top down .
-Nate
Now that makes a lot more sense. So-Cal is hotter than literally everywhere in Canada. At least you don't have snow!
On Formula 1:
So much for my prediction that Piastri would trouble the podium in either the Sprint or the Grand Prix.
I think that the Red Bull probably remains the best overall car / team package (and certainly driver), especially in light of the strong Hamilton pace being attributable to running the car too low.
On The Free Press (Bari’s, not Detroit’s):
I canceled my subscription after what was until recently a high quality, differentiated news source transformed itself into the internet’s foremost BREAKING NEWS IN THE ARENA OF PERPETUAL JEWISH VICTIMHOOD AND OPPRESSION OLYMPICS CORRESPONDENCE while, like, totally ignoring the hundreds of Palestinians that Israel is murdering every single day.
Alanis:
I guess all of the tweets, posts, and memes about Chili’s weren’t just pretend.
No, I don’t love Bari Weiss (or her wife, Nellie) by any stretch.
I don’t generally read NYT op-eds, unless they are the kind that generate a lot of traction, so most of her content that I have consumed has been The Free Press. The Free Press now offers one content vertical, and I’m not willing to pay a nickel to support it.
she really was about that life
40 seems to be the “sympathy for israel” cutoff. Im right at it and while id say I’m more sympathetic to israel, the amercian temper tantrums in the press are not helping.
Are there muslims and lefties condemning hamas without qualifiers?
I dunno but I'm a die hard Conservative who's been forced to live under the thumb of Jews and muslims at different times, muslims have a long _long_ ways to go before I give a shit about them .
-Nate
The American educational system has been converged for years. Pro Palestinian demonstrators today barricaded Jewish students in the Cooper-Union library that had to be evacuated by police via tunnels, but I guess that's just more perpetual Jewish victimhood and oppression olympics.
There are people who hate Jews for no reason. Im sure they exist because ive seen them online but i have never met one. But there are also people who hate Jews because some rich Jew called his rich Jew friend to get some dude making 55k a year fired from his job for being insufficiently “pro israel” because he made a joke on Twitter. is that fair to hate all for the cause of a few? Not really but it is also human nature. Which is obvious watching jews blame Palestinian children for hamas attacks under the exact same logic. It’s a shit show
Have you ever used the phrase "rich Christian", "rich Muslim", or "rich atheist"? Just asking.
The proper English is "rich Jewish friend." You sound kind of troglodytic. There's a difference between "some motherfucker white guy," and "some white motherfucker".
I'm not going to get that worked up if some entitled asshole at Brown loses out on a six figure gig for celebrating Hamas.
I’ve never seen some rich Christian, rich Muslim, or rich atheist (lowercase on purpose) get a dude fired on Twitter for disagreeing with them on a conflict 8k miles away. I don’t see Christians calling everyone who disagrees with them “Christian haters”
Ronnie. I’m an accountant. The nuances of the English language are not my strong suit. I do numbers.
“ I'm not going to get that worked up if some entitled asshole at Brown loses out on a six figure gig for celebrating Hamas.”
I’m not either but when that exact same guy was calling for “death to all whites” my priest didn’t get him fired.
"I’ve never seen some rich Christian, rich Muslim, or rich atheist (lowercase on purpose) get a dude fired on Twitter for disagreeing with them on a conflict 8k miles away. I don’t see Christians calling everyone who disagrees with them “Christian haters”
"Everyone". No stereotyping people there, no, not at all. No trading in stereotypes. Uh huh.
Mere disagreements or endorsing bestial behavior?
"Ronnie. I’m an accountant. The nuances of the English language are not my strong suit. I do numbers."
Bullshit.
I have an idea, how about you send a letter to all of your clients telling them your opinions about some "rich Jew friend" in that very language?
It's not the Jews' fault that your priest tolerates anti-white racism. Maybe you should find another priest.
Oh, wait, I get it now.
I'm a little late to the party here but thought I'd point something out that I see as (emotionally charged) flawed logic. Only picking on you since I saw your comment first, but I see this flaw everywhere in pro-Palestinian rhetoric:
"Murder" is what Hamas assault teams recently did to Israeli civilians. Meaning, the intent was to find unarmed non-combatants and kill them in what would have been an otherwise non-violent setting. What Israel's military is now doing is engaging in low-scale conflict, and Palestinians are suffering military and - important point here - unintentional civilian casualties. This conflict is the predictable, and likely desired, consequence of the Palestinians' political leadership.
It may seem grotesque that I'm asserting semantics in such a sad and bloody situation... people are dying and it's tragic. But if the goal is to see it clearly, then INTENT is critical here. If you were driving your car at night, and suddenly you saw a pedestrian in the road, what would your reaction be? Murder is turning the wheel towards the person and killing them. If you immediately tried to avoid the person, but couldn't and killed them... you're not a murderer. Even if you were speeding, drunk, and hadn't seeviced your brake pads... you might be negligent, or even reckless... but you're not a murderer.
This is the world’s most ridiculous trolley problem. And it’s far from accurate.
What Israel’s military is now doing is firing rockets into a densely populated strip of land, which is resulting in hundreds of people - including many, many Gazan civilians - perishing every single day.
Israel wants carte blanche to exterminate the pesky Palestinians while whining in the media about how Israel is perpetually victimized.
Would you apply dispassionate semantics to hand-waive away mass civilian casualties if, say, Iran decided to get involved today?
I try to think about everything dispassionately... I find it serves my conclusions well. What do you mean if Iran got involved? In this situation, is Iran targeting military targets or music festivals?
Did Hamas establish routes out of their intended target areas before they attacked? As Israel did? Did Israel then attack the safe passages knowing that they could "exterminate the pesky Palestinians" massed on the routes?
Again, intent is critical here.
If you read all of my comments - which is a rigorous, demanding standard, I know! - you will see that I have never defended Hamas or characterized them as virtuous. They are terrorists.
At the moment, the ground war has not yet begun. So your line of rhetorical questioning isn’t relevant yet. But what has been happening - daily - for weeks, is ongoing air strikes in Gaza, which is densely populated.
You cannot genuinely believe that the civilian casualties are “unintentional” or collateral damage; if Israel prioritized the lives of civilians, they wouldn’t be firing rockets into tower blocks.
Let me expand on my Iran comment. What if Iran … or Hezbollah … or fill in the blank (regional entity hostile toward the existence of Israel) decides to get involved and starts hammering Israel, day-in and day-out? Let’s say that Israel suddenly goes from Goliath to David and they’re fighting a war that not even the involuntary largesse of the American taxpayers can ensure they will win. Will you apply the same dispassionate framework to Hezbollah or Iran or whoever, or does Israel merit a more favorable consideration (for whatever reason)?
No offense, but you're either not seeing the meat of my point, or intentionally dancing around it... "Murder!" is about intent... in reality, and in your hypotheticals (which aren't particularly useful but I don't want to appear like I'm avoiding them), who do we call "Murderers!"... as you did in your first comment?
I never said you called Hamas virtuous. This is the moral relativism of our progressive era, where actions are always framed by whether people are "good" or "bad" (or perhaps "oppressed" or "oppressor").. and it's where your logic is failing. Understanding concepts dispassionately isn't assigning (or stripping) virtue and then trying to fit the actions of people into some more comfortable version of reality... for example:
What does it matter who's David and who's Goliath? Are you saying only Goliath can be a murderer because he's bigger? In your hypothetical, is Israel trying to murder the foreign entities' civilian populations or destroy that entity's capability to threaten Israel's existence? Can you understand the difference?
You said that "the ground war has not yet begun". That's wrong. The ground war started on 7 Oct (l'm curious why you don't see that... is only Israel capable of mounting a "ground war"?) If all Israel wants to do is murder Palestinians, then why are they waiting on their ground offensive? What is it that seems to be holding up their desire to murder in mass?
Are you critical of Israeli military capability to surgically strike and completely avoid all civilian casualties? I mean, that's pretty silly if you understand the realities of military operations... but if you want to argue that, then it's a completely different argument than "Murderers!"...
Murder is about intent. I'm not sure I can more clearly explain this point...
"What is it that seems to be holding up their desire to murder in mass?" Iran, China, and Russia.
How is the wanton, indiscriminate slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza anything other than … “murder”? The rationalization boggles the mind.
You are right on the ground war having begun on 10/7; I was thinking of subsequent round(s) of the ground war in Gaza.
As a postscript, maybe this will help: if you had said you unsubscribed to Bari Weiss's page because she wouldn't talk about Israel "killing" Palestinians, I wouldn't have commented...
There’s zero evidence that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians.
They sure do have bad aim, then!
Brad would LIKE us to think it was just a finger he was pushing back on...
So as someone with small stature I've had to deal with working hard to make an initial impression a lot.
When I was in the dealership finance office in 2022, under conditions not too dissimilar for buyers of new PHEV minivans with a second kid on the way, all I had to do was say No! once, and not even pull a Clint Eastwood face.
All you need in civilized company is language to convey you're not into the fingering, often a look suffices.
F1: I think the Red Bull has a peculiar weakness in having to give up a lot of points of aero just to make it over rough surfaces, which won't make a comeback again for the tracks that are left. It remains the class of the field, although by not as much as at the start of the season.
On the AT situation - unless you believe they'll lie through their teeth to have DR's grin sell clothes, the official answer is that his car had issues that prevented it showing its pace. The driver may still not have had it in him, but either way, it couldn't be seen at COTA.
"So as someone with small stature I've had to deal with working hard to make an initial impression a lot."
Brother Bark, who is a modest five-eight-ish, is the master of this IMO. People are always more scared of me than they are of him.
While the young lady with the nondescript gray vehicle may be a little, ah, broad in the beam, this is really a classic example of using a cell phone instead of a real camera. The default lens setting is "big-ass wide angle," which is, well, unflattering.
Nah, it's so the computers have max data with which to deepfake you into a felony conviction
No guys, it's all those things and more!
By next year, the AI algos will not only make her look as svelte as Diana Rigg, they will make the car look like a '89 Olds Delta 88, just for Klockau.
I thought it was necessary for use at arm's length. I've done with a dslr.
🤣
What, like "rap video" wide angle?
Whatever it is, every time I happen across a photo of that broad (get it) I have to stop and try and understand what the fuck is going on with her body shape. I do think it is a more entertaining way to spend my time versus reading or watching any of her content.
Alanis knows exactly what she's doing and she *likes it.*
Also, would.
Most unjustified Russian penetration since August 20, 1968
Hahaha, that’s great 😁
haha! Caveat it with "after five beers"
RE: new truck shopping, we’re back to deep four figure discounts on Silverados, especially if you don’t mind the 2.7.
Which I would very much in such a vehicle.
But still. ~$43k for a brand new, full-size, crew cab truck is a good deal imo.
Only real issue is gonna be interest rates, where someone like me who is young enough to have only known extremely low rates, do present a real obstacle. Captive finance arms are pressed to do like 6.9%. It’s not great!
Yeah I'd be VERY cautious about buying a Silverado with the 2.7, but that's just me. I have ZERO interest in a forced-induction gasoline engine in a truck, of any size. Had I bought an F-150 instead of an F-250, I'd have gotten a 5.0.
I’d be very cautious buying a Silverado at all, simply because I think the interior space is truly terrible in the segment — I no shit would rather have a Titan — but that is a personal opinion of mine. They switched to some shitty, digital rocker shifter in the models with a console post-refresh. Hate them for that dearly.
I know it’s for EPA reasons, but looking at a monroney and seeing the 2.7 get like A Mile Per Gallon better over the 5.3 is so annoying. Just… why fucking bother? There’s a reason they sit on lots forever and are dumb cheap by 2023 standards. No one wants that shit.
If you’re just using it as pure transportation and not towing frequently, I assume it’ll be adequate. They’re torquey as hell, and some cursory reading says they aren’t notably unreliable.
I WOULD rather have the 2.7 in a Silverado than a CT4-V, which while quick, is one of the worst sounding “performance” cars I have ever heard. It’s gross. Just give me the 3.6 back imo.
The CT4-V was a deeply unimpressive car.
Never drove one!
Do you feel the same way about the Blackwing?
Nope. That's a brilliant car that just happens to look like dogshit.
My brother is saddled with a 2.7 Silverado fleet truck that replaced a 5.3. That one MPG on the Monroney disappears as soon as it is exposed to the skinny pedal and the grueling paved terrain of Oklahoma and west Texas. He uses it as pure transportation and "adequate" is not a term he has used to describe it. I guess the General needed a modern day Iron Duke.
! A FOUR CYLINDER FULL SIZE TRUCK !?! .
Even in mostly flat Los Angles this is a foolish idea .
-Nate
Yes, a long-stroke aluminum four PLUS turbo PLUS direct injection PLUS TTY bolts PLUS lots of plastic parts, all driving a properly American-sized truck.
Ragnarok-proof, that one.
Had to look up TTY bolts. That's some scary shit. Now I have data to support my unease about the 2.7 powering the Silverado I was driving last week, quick though it was. The 6.6 diesel felt far more natural.
TTY bolts: https://ricksfreeautorepairadvice.com/tty-bolts/
Yeah, the whole rationale for TTY bolts is that the relentless pursuit of reduced vehicle weight has resulted in engine blocks with too little metal in them to maintain their rigidity, which in turn makes deck flexing and then head gasket failure a genuine danger, especially with forced induction. Head gaskets are just barely holding on in modern engines and WHEN they need to be replaced, they need much more carefully-machined surfaces to mate to. More expense.
TTY bolts are also an "answer" to the "problem" of needing skilled assembly personnel to build engines. Design the bolt to stretch a certain specific amount - ONCE - at a given number of degrees of rotation and you don't need a guy who knows how to use a torque wrench. Yes, it takes more engineering work to design than a normal bolt, but that's done ONCE, instead of the millions of times major bolts are installed in engines at your plant.
I hate the fuckin' things.
Interesting in that in early 1971 VW's 1600CC air cooled engines were pulling the 10MM head studs out of the block so VW re engineered them to have an 8MM 'wasp waist' and the problem was solved .
Personally I think TTY head bolts are bullshit but I'm usually wrong .
-Nate
Personally, I think you're right about TTY bolts. They're a bandage for problems caused by bad design, dressed up as "progress."
And where else have we seen THAT strategy?
Very interesting. Thanks.
Why the philosophical objection to gas turbos? I wouldn't do a four-cylinder for acoustic reasons, but the stats suggest the first-generation 3.5 EcoBoost was the most solid engine in an F-150 for most of the years it was sold. I think there's no shortcut to looking at the reliability record engine by engine.
Replacing a V8 with a turbo 4 in a truck inherently means you are goring to be smacking the hell out of it to get similar performance. With a load of crap from Home Depot or a few passengers that V8 is going to accelerate from a stoplight without any real effort. The turbo 4 is going to have to rev quite a bit to accomplish the same task. Over the truck's lifetime that will result in the turbo 4 spending a much greater percentage of it's time under high stress. That can be designed for, but often isn't.
The real kick in the face is that outside of a CAFE test the real world MPG of that turbo isn't going to be noticeably better than the V8. So more complex, less durability reserve, sounds funny, and no real MPG benefit.
In addition to the fact that it self-destructed at 32,000 miles, one of the things I did not like about the Ecoboost in my Escape was that you could have either Eco or boost. Not both. And even the Eco wasn’t particularly impressive for a four-cylinder.
Modern turbos tend to be lower-revving than their naturally aspirated counterparts. The load at those low revs will be higher, but, as you say, you can design for that. Sometimes OEMs do, sometimes they don't. The proof is in the long-term reliability record. Some turbos have been very good, and I think it's pointless to reject them on principle.
I don't know what's up with GM engine engineering lately but they all seem to be terrible, turbo or NA. Ford has been wildly inconsistent, but it has had some good engines, including a few EcoBoosts.
I'll try to add to that by saying that having a turbo means more points of failure, higher intake temps, higher engine bay temps, higher oil temps, and and more complex packaging compared to something naturally aspirated. TL is pretty on the money here.
The Coyote V-8 is a wonderful engine, but simple, it is not. Cam phasers, port and direct injectors, etc.
Doesn't the 2.7 have those as well? Hardly anything is simple now.
Naturally-aspirated + enough displacement is my preference. It worked very well in The Abolished Past.
Hang on, someone's at the door...
It's still a great idea, just ask Ford and their new 7.3.
As my buddy says, “You can have the eco, or you can have the boost.”
Even comparing NA to Turbo 4 cylinder engines I don't see much real-world difference. My wife and I took a ~200 mile road trip in separate cars last weekend. The 2.5 NA Ford Fusion reported 36 MPG, the 1.6 T Sonata reported 34.
Yeah, that's the other thing: no real-work mileage advantage. Done simply to satisfy the gummint (the one word Reagan, with all his oratory prowess, couldn't quite master).
I owned a generally well-regarded turbo-6 in between owning two V8 cars. I just have a lot more fun with a naturally-aspirated V8 even if a genie tells me reliability is the same. YMMV.
With the sedans you've had that makes all the sense in the world, but I don't really think I care in a truck.
Doesn’t every diesel pickup sold in America feature a turbocharger? That argues for reliability. On the other hand, my F550 work truck with the power stroke shelled its turbo at 61,000 miles. Which argues against reliability.
It’s all so confusing.
U.S. market diesel light trucks have not been a shining example of anything. All three OEMs have pursued d!ck-waving torque numbers at the expense of anything else, when the effort should have gone toward achieving reliability with modern emissions equipment. All three diesels are way finickier than any truck engine should be.
If you want to see engines that are engineered to deal with high loads, go a couple classes up and look at heavy truck engines. Today, they are all turbocharged inline sixes. In their lower ratings, they can go a million miles between rebuilds.
" I think there's no shortcut to looking at the reliability record engine by engine."
Absolutely, but empirically the average turbo engine is under much more stress than the average NA engine PLUS it has extra moving parts that endure 100,000 rpm and 1000 deg F.
When you have machines of the complexity of modern airliner engines that rack up the reliability records they do, the idea of complexity in a car engine, on its own, doesn't seem that scary. Have the engine internals been designed properly for the level of stress? Has the turbo? If so, time will tell.
I'd have very little fear buying any of the Ford V6 EcoBoosts, with the exceptions of the 2.7 in the Bronco and Ranger and the hybridized 3.0 in the Aviator Grand Touring. The fours are more of a mixed bag.
Domestic light truck engines are not designed to do truck-like things, most especially hauling actual truckloads of anything heavier than groceries. They are simply a large and slow substitute for a car.
So very well said ! .
Back in my day (old man rant) average work trucks used inline 6 cylinder engines and they'd typically outlast the truck as long as properly maintained .
-Nate
To say nothing of the expense you have to deal with IF you keep one long enough to replace major parts.
Woyld you rather have a roided-up midget or Dwayne Johnson carry you out of a burning house?
They'll both get the job done.
If it’s on video, give me the roided midget
🤣 🤣
Well, midgets ARE one of The Nine Inherently Hilarious Things.
the joke is that theyre both on gear
Oh, no doubt.
🤣
Was the 3.5 EcoBoost actually such a good engine?
Where can we find *trustworthy* reliability statistics?
(I used to subscribe to Consumer Reports, but their reliability info was not (in my experience, at least for consumer goods) reliable. Plus it became shit when the recent editor took over)
Do the automakers jealously guard repair statistics to avoid letting consumers know how bad it really is, and to cover up the fact that they're dropping turds on auto buyers?
CR and industry groups like JD Power are part of the picture, but you also have to do your own primary source research. Where there is a serious and recurring problem with an engine, it will be reflected in owner forums, FTC complaints, and NHTSA complaints. Those sources will also often teach you how and when the problem was fixed, if ever.
If you do that over the life of the first-gen EcoBoost - used through 2016 in the F-150 and all the way through 2019 in D3-platform vehicles - you learn that it had some teething issues on introduction in 2010 and then became remarkably problem-free thereafter. I'm not singling that engine out as some kind of beacon of greatness, just using it as an example of a turbo engine that did well.
Kind of what I expected.
I'm probably being unrealistic, but it's disappointing that reliability statistics aren't mandated for public release after a few years. Assessing old forum posts and formal complaints is not scientific and forces you to infer based on what you're reading.
Have had no issues with my 3.5 ecoboost, just oil changes
Joe here, isn't the average North American Consumer by a long shot .
Oil is the cheap Mechanic .
Only change when hot and always change it whenever the company that made it says to under extremely hard duty .
-Nate
Never take it to someone else to do, always buy bottled goods and a quality filter, three times a year, when you have someone else do it, you have no idea what is going in your engine, not the oil or the filter, maintenance schedules by the manufacturer are insanely optimistic!
Yes and no ;
Those who drive the vehicle at least one hour after every initial startup tend to get *very* long engine life .
-Nate
"When you have your oil changed by a garage, you can never tell if they've done a bad job. Whereas if you do it yourself, you know."
- Red Green
Truth!
Dad had a '21 F150 with the 3.5 EB in high output form. That truck hauled the mail without much throttle provocation, but the whole darn thing was NERVOUS. Super EPA-upshift happy 10-speed trans, tuned-for-torque-NOW EcoBoost, Max Tow suspension plus light and reactive steering. Oh, and a rough/lumpy idle, for no reason. '18-20 is my favorite looking era for the modern F150s, but I'm going 5.0 if I ever get one. I'll trust a turbo in a diesel, but not in a gasser (truck). A turbo gas truck engine goes against the whole point, to me, of a non-diesel engine: dirt-simple proven tech that trades (greatly) increased capability for (greatly) reduced headache. At least in theory. In that vein, yeah, no way I'm rolling a 2.7 Silverado.
Not to sound like an old man, but my first new car was a 1991 Civic Si financed at around 10%. So jump on that 6.9% as it can get worse.
Or to step back to the 80’s, try a new Trans Am at 14.9 percent. But then again a fully loaded TA was $10,000 so on was only financing $5,000 or $6,000 for 36 months…. Different time different MSRP…
Beginners .
I remember home interest rates passing 18% ........
Whew, those were not happy days .
-Nate
I remember when a BRAND NEW third-gen Trans Am was fifteen grand out the door.
I'm gonna go yell at a cloud.
I'm thinking I can get 1 or 2 more years out of my 2010 Frontier before the rust claims it, and the new Colorado looks so sharp, but I'm so averse to turbo engines. I do a good bit of towing (though usually under 5k lbs) on roads that would put the engine at full boost for minutes at a stretch. Also I'm told that in order to turn the headlights on and off, you have to access the touch screen menu. As of right now the redesigned Frontier looks to be simultaneously the least exciting mid sized truck, but also the simplest, which imo speaks to durability. I really wish the previous gen Colorado diesel wasn't so fraught with issues, that would've been an ideal truck for my uses.
Eh with auto lights I wouldn't worry too much about that. New Colorados are indeed very nice to look at, and a Trail Boss is a hell of a lot of capability for the price if you like to go off the beaten path like I do. Interior is also decent if you can get around stupid digi-shifters and piano black. I don't have enough seat time in them to give an honest opinion about any of how it rides or drives, but I do like to look at them at least.
If you're extremely against turbo trucks, the Frontier is both a good choice AND your only choice! Handsome exterior, functional interior, powertrain that's been in use for a while. The Hardbody Edition is particularly enticing to me.
Wait, Tacoma is now turbo only as well?
Starting 2024 yeah. 2.4 Turbo four with or without hybrid assistance.
Oh, for FUCK'S SAKE!!!
Enough the turbos already!
I very much want a *new* GMC Canyon, right truck, right size, right capability for my needs - but the turbo-4 reliability issue throws me off. Wish they'd simply kept the LFX v6, or ideally one with a 5.3, to say nothing of one with a 6.2
(on that note if anyone wants to be semi fairly compensated for the brutal wiring headache of swapping an L87 6.2 into a '23 Canyon for me - please reach out)
Have noticed the sudden drop in used truck prices that has accompanied the new willingness to deal on new trucks, have been looking at used trucks as a result. Would be buying cash, though; the prices are still not so attractive if you have to finance.
Ive been dropping an extra 4k a month on top of my 855$ payment to get this damned audi paid off. I dont feel like selling my investments in one swoop to do it. 19k left
Some grasp simple mathematics, hat's off to you sir .
The money lenders hate folks like you .
-Nate
Just got 4.9 through Mazda @ 60 months
Funny you should ask. Here's my take on the 2.7 turbo four compared to the 6.6 turbo diesel that I drove last week:
https://bimmerfan739.substack.com/p/trucks-i-thought-i-knew-them?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=827454&post_id=138231553&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=e0lnc&utm_medium=email
“Some of you get annoyed when I pick on Fat Brad“
Who are these fun-hating losers?
Oh, a couple of them might comment here! And they're right to chastise me. Brad is what he is.
The guy handles criticism in the comments of his articles like he’s a comedian being heckled, only with about 10% of the skill. Not to mention the story you relayed about his treatment of a fellow writer whose work I actually do respect. In my opinion, he’s earned everything you give him here and then some.
He treats Twitter as therapy in general. Like there's nobody in real life who likes or wants to talk to him.
Beer is cheaper than therapy. Twitter is cheaper than beer.
The Social Media Formerly Known As Twitter.
Prince did that SO much better.
I know exactly zero about Brat Fad.
But I'm picturing Fat Bastard singing "I want my baby back baby back baby back ribs..."
I will stick with the beer, twitter is such a bore.
Twitter as therapy? Nah, I just send friends 6 emails in 24 hours.
What is going on in the pictures of the woman in the stands to start this article?
When Lewis got around Lando Norris the cameras cut to this interaction.
From what I could tell, it was in good fun among people who had probably been bantering for two hours at that point -- nobody looks angry.
But there was a lot of heartache among F1-fan Americans: is this how the rest of the world sees us?
I thought it might have been a high-five.
EDIT: a one-sided high-five, not done in anger.
It was very unusual when Liberty took over F1 and suddenly instead of seeing wide shots of grass painted with the Rolex logo we started seeing more crowd shots. I’d been watching F1 since the 80s and other than seeing tifosi with enormous flags in the background it was hard to make out who was actually there and if they were having fun.
I remember Kimi crashing out and then suddenly there’s a shot of a bawling child in Ferrari colours. Wife and I laughed hard. Then a while later there’s another shot of Kimi with the kid signing a hat or something and we’re high-fiving for the guy.
I don’t know if it’s an American television thing but growing up (in Canada) watching WWF, American Gladiators, NFL football, NASCAR and more the television directors always seem to be eager to show people having fun and I like to see this sort of thing in F1
I remember they used to show Michael Andretti’s wife in ‘93, but I think that was more of a “see, ugly American!” Thing.
I saw Mrs Andretti in the pits at Nazareth around that year. Definitely a non-ugly American. I think they had to change tires if she walked to close to the cars.
Oh, yeah, the one with the big, um, hats!
?? Horizontally exceptional ?? .
-Nate
The audience are more like trained seals, waiting 'til the cameras are on them so they can self-consciously emote and demonstrate what a splendid time they're having. Watch closely: for many of them it's as if the camera guy gave them a cue that they're on air. I find it artificial and tiresome. The best ones are when audience members aren't aware they're on camera and when they are, they immediately look at the screen they're on, not the camera recording them. As soon as they're aware, the director switches to something else.
Most of the time the crew is going to have two-way radios and they’re constantly communicating back and forth with a producer or director about what’s in front of them and that person in the truck is both asking for something particular and also directing what makes the broadcast feed.
I used to do candid street photography and the challenge was always getting people to ignore the camera and continue being normal, but it’s nearly impossible with the video rigs they use for this sort of broadcast. When I’ve been at pro wrestling and MMA events and they need a self conscious reaction shot they just walk up and point the camera in a persons face.
For the record, when it’s happened to me (and being a noisy foreigner in a crowd it happened often) I’d just wave or talk into the camera. I don’t like seeing myself doing stuff. I’ve never looked at the screen or watched the broadcast afterwards
A couple of years ago I had some very good tix for friendly between some EUFA Champions League teams (think Barcelona v. Man City or something). We were behind one of the goals and there was a camera on a big crane that could swoop around. Whenever the action was on the other end the camera would turn around and shoot the stands. The people did not need a cue to ham it up. As someone who does not attend many sporting events it was eye opening.
I remember the first SmackDown taping I went to and half of the arena was empty, with the crowd packed into the other half. All of the hard cameras were on the empty side and it was bizarre watching the wrestlers pose and shout and react to people in the walkouts that weren't there.
I went to a top fuel event back in the day after watching on TV and I was absolutely exhausted by the noise at the end of the races. My buddy handed me a pair of in ear plugs as well as cups and it didn't feel like it made a lick of difference. Still haven't been to an F1 race and I'm kinda sad I never got to see the V10s in person
Yup.
MILF titties, that's what.
Here is the thing with the Alanis King type situation: If you don't want comments on your legs don't thrust them in everyone's face.
The problem with training yourself to feed on negative energy from Twitter commenters, just like the problem with training yourself to brick into a napkin while watching porn, is that you have to keep raising the stakes to get the same thrill.
🤣
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/photographing-something-you-want-to-show-everyone
I just saw an article somewhere on this very thing recently... Can't remember where...
Fat Brad makes an appearance here as well:
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/467/451/3dc.png
That meme always reminded me of JG Pasterjak (who consequently looks like he could be Brad's dad).
They could ABSOLUTELY be related.
AHH!!! CUCKFACE!!!
Why do they always have beards?
A dude I was friends with in high school used to post pictures of himself standing beside celebrities he paid for that photo at a convention on facebook back when that site was still fresh and new. He looked (and probably still does) just like that drawing, beard and all. I was pleased to look through my own pictures and saw that expression ZERO TIMES. Not that I'm opposed to an occasional show of raw, unfiltered delight, but when that's your go-to photo face for every goddamn photo of you, something might be wrong...
I believe the appropriate response to this strategem is, "TITS OR GTFO!"
My wife served me om-rice yesterday in the shape of a pair of tits. God bless the Japanese.
Like graphic? Nipples and areola and everything?
Also, I am stealing this idea and serving rice that way to my wife, just to see what kind of reaction it get. It will not be positive. It will just be white rice ice cream scooped, soy sauce and planted broccoli fleurettes
shes japanese so the omurice tiddies probably had a black bar over them
There you go! A strip of nori.
This is the most common sense idea and yet the vast swath of people posting and/or vomiting their opinions on social media don’t seem to understand it, and, can’t handle it when someone comments back at them. Fragile people.
It's a uniquely feminine idea to think you have the right or even the ability to control what people think or say about what you put into the world. As if we are guaranteed the right to positive reinforcement in the Constitution. I think the root of this is female high school society, where people will say insincere but kind-sounding things about their fellow students by default.
This is literally the ONLY time I ever have a disagreement with the wife, her going off the rails on something and not fully comprehending people can think whatever they want.
Women are totalitarian. They only respond to force
The next time my wife complains about a box of comics arriving on my doorstep I'll just beat the shit out of her.
You don't have to. She just needs to know you can!
Maybe that's because with interactions between human males, if certain boundaries are transgressed, it almost will certainly get physical. I'm sure some domestic violence stems from that, women either unknowingly or knowingly pressing a guy's buttons. DISCLAIMER (I'm posting under my own name and it's possible that some woman I might want to date could read this): I'm not justifying DV.
Females don't have that natural brake on their aggression.
There is an old Bill Burr bit about this that is worth watching.
Billy rocks
There's a book called Worriers and Warriors, by a female psychologist who examined the way boys and men vs girls and women play, work together, and socialize. Men form hierarchies where even the least able has to pull his own weight. I guess if you're tying to take down a wooly mammoth, you need all hands. Females, on the other hand, form cliques, making one person a pariah, probably to enforce in-group conformity. I guess sometimes you don't want everyone to know where the good berries are. The really cruel thing, though, is that from day to day the pariah can change.
Women can be pretty vicious.
There's plenty of reasons! You just don't do it.
You think those ass-beatings just fall outta the sky?!
Her pinned Tweet is a thirst trap of her in a short skirt. Like come on, who is this fooling?
I don't even think she looks good in THAT, and she thinks its cute.
It makes her head look really small. Like Zika small.
I mean what she gonna do a large cranial cavity?
With enough planet-scale brainpower she might be able to edit Elizabeth Blackstock into coherence.
With, goddamn edit not there on the app.
She has the fashion sense of a 10 year old. I'd go further and make a loveline reference to her voice, but that might be in bad taste.
Why is she shaped like a traffic cone in that pic?
She's shaped like a traffic cone in EVERY pic.
Not fair to talk about how something/one looks and not provide a link.......
Old Geezers don't automatically know who's / what's what .
-Nate
I mean, I watch Alex Dyke's reviews from time to time, and NEVER got the impression that he was talking for an hour in front of the camera for a product that was HIM. Also, he doesn't try to show off his body?
Well there's a reason he's not showing off his body: because it's not worth showing off!
I'm ugly so I can say that.
Too bad Alanis doesn't realize the same.
What woman has an honest idea of her appearance in The Age of Body Positivity?
My wife, who endlessly berates herself for not fitting into the race suit she wore a few serious surgeries ago -- and will probably eventually get back into it anyway.
"Do these pants make me look fat?"
"You mean AT ALL, or for you?"
"WHAT'S THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN?"
"It means don't ask me trick questions!"
I have a voice for radio, and the face and body to go with it.
I don’t even have the radio voice 😂🤣
Alex also appears to be autistic and adheres to a strict rubric which I appreciate
One of the few good reviewers on YT.
I always enjoy it when people get 'good and hard' what they've been unmercifully giving to others.
Wow. Alanis King really does have a, shall we say, "rather beamy hull configuration," doesn't she?
Regarding the "how people see you" part, I was thinking about how I've never had to chase a paycheck that was legitimately owed to me. I know of lots of people, my dad included, who've had shady employers pull that.
Do you think that might have something to do with the fact that at at least two separate jobs, I've come into work fuming about Canada geese causing a traffic jam, and how the little bastards should all be exterminated? Or how I called in angry to a retail job once?
Maybe I just haven't met enough people.
Walking into work clutching the severed head of a goose would certainly go a long way towards convincing people to treat you with decency.
"Found this jammed in the grille. I was wondering what that THUD was."
I know someone who did that with an authentic looking human head prop from a movie. Freaked his entire office out.
A couple of guys I went to college with majored in Movie Special Effects, and built an animatronic panhandler for their graduate thesis project.
Made about a thousand bucks with it, too.
Twice I told my boss that I was going home until I got paid, and 'oh, I'm STILL in the clock and will be charging you for THAT too'.
Got paid within a couple hours each time.
Sometimes you gotta draw a line...
To be fair there are too many of them. Not opinion, Denver parks & rec had to cull them a few years ago.
I think they KNOW they're Federally-protected. They're too arrogant to not know SOMETHING.
It's just a lack of pressure. If they closed central park for an archery weekend the behavior would change. Same with rabbitts; pre-season they just sit and look at you from a few feet. In season not a tuft of fur to be found.
You just wanna drive a combine across the golf course while they're molting.
Spraypainted with "GOOSE-B-GONE" on the side.
Alanis King would be a very stable gun platform. Useful if she fits through the canal locks.
Alanis likes attention of ANY kind like most of her generation which is always bizarre to me. But I'm almost 62 and most of my comments are probably "Get off my lawn" adjacent to that group. She's probably not that broad in real life and I'd be more concerned with her wide forehead and emerging baldness if I were to comment on such.
She's not pretty.
I'm not pretty.
So I can say that.
I'm also fat, but I'll stop there.
Well like the gorilla in the Thailand zoo, she’ll know when she’s too fat when all the brothers start hitting on her. I bet she’s already reached that point.
Alternate joke: why is a fat white chick like a pile of bricks? Eventually both will get laid by a Mexican. I’ll be here all week, tip the servers.
My fat white chick neighbor runs through Mexicans.
I can promise you there's not a lot of running involved
"Nothing runs in your family. Everything waddles."
A lot of things could be said about that second joke, and one of those things is that it's TRUE.
OUCH .
You guys .
-Nate
I shall be sober in the morning...
Always wondered why women were called "broads."
And knowing is half the battle. (G.I. JOE!!!)
Old Man Yells At Cloud.
Page 3.
Re: Thunder Thighs. Going to that video comments section, there are only three comments on the outfit out of 146 in total. One of the three was positive and the two negative statements weren't even directly insulting her. Just suggesting a different outfit choice. What does she expect from youtube comments? That's actually an excellent positivity ratio, considering how she chose to present herself on camera.
It's narcissism. She NEEDS to be the subject of discussion. And she also NEEDS to be a victim. And that's how you go from "1 iffy comment in 146" to "THE BOYS ARE TALKING ABOUT MY LEGS" which reminds me of the excellent Cowboy Junkies song:
Baby hit the back door breathing real heavy
Said the boys in the alley wouldn't leave her alone
Mama did her make-up in a terrible hurry
She finally got ready, but the boys were gone
Mama, don't you worry, night's approaching
There's a hole in heaven where some sin slips through
Close your eyes and dream real steady
Maybe just a little will spill on you
"You can do side bends and situps,
But please don't lose that butt!"
She don't look like Flo-Jo to me.
Uh, excuse me, that is a Townes song.
No sir it is a CJ song written for them by Townes! Literally the only time he did that.
hoisted on my own petard!
*with
Damn, now it's like a petard hoisting inception.
Yup, just posted about same.
Townes Van Zandt wrote the song with and for the Cowboy Junkies. Here's the story:
“Cowboy Junkies had heard some of my songs and got a hold of my booking agent in the States. They were looking for an opening act and I was solo so that makes it much easier. We became very, very good friends. They’re very, very good people. They’d played here and over in England on a couple of tours at the same time as I had a tour over. I’d see the posters but I didn’t know who they were or what they sounded like.
“It was a nice tour in the States. It was about two months with one big truck for the sound, one bus for the roadies and one for myself and the Cowboy Junkies. We wrote ‘Cowboy Junkies Lament’ in the bus. It’s the only song I’ve ever wrote on purpose for somebody to play. Cause I’ve written songs about people but I don’t think I’ve ever written any for somebody else specifically to play. I wrote it to their rhythm. Bomb-be-bomb-be-bomp! And I would ask Michael (Timmins) ‘What do you think about this line? Is this too corny?’ ‘No, that’s great!’ It was real fine.”
https://genius.com/Townes-van-zandt-cowboy-junkies-lament-lyrics
Good points. And thank you for doing that research!
MotoGP continues to excite down under (teehee).
Jorge Martin made a big gamble on tire choice with the soft rear and looked to be in total control until the last few laps when his pace went down faster than a tridelt sorority girl. This opened the door for Bagnaia to put points on and open the gap up to 25. With a few races left the championship looks to be a duel between these two that could go down to the wire.
To add insult to jnjury: weather caused rhe sprint to be cancelled and denied Martin the opportunity to make up points after the fact.
ZARCO, my distant French cousin, won his first ever MotoGP race just before he transfers to LCR Honda in hopes of developing the RC machine.
KTM continues to show promise and I hope next year they are competing toward the front more often.
What a race. Loved watching Zarco explain he wasn’t going to cry yet after stepping off of the bike. It’s great watching a lot of motorsport and seeing first wins
MotoGP continues to excite down under (teehee).
Jorge Martin made a big gamble on tire choice with the soft rear and looked to be in total control until the last few laps when his pace went down faster than a tridelt sorority girl. This opened the door for Bagnaia to put points on and open the gap up to 25. With a few races left the championship looks to be a duel between these two that could go down to the wire.
To add insult to jnjury: weather caused rhe sprint to be cancelled and denied Martin the opportunity to make up points after the fact.
ZARCO, my distant French cousin, won his first ever MotoGP race just before he transfers to LCR Honda in hopes of developing the RC machine.
KTM continues to show promise and I hope next year they are competing toward the front more often.