Opinions

Posted on September 21st, 2006 by dan.
Categories: , , .
Talk about cheap political tricks!

Cailfornia Attorney General Bill Lockyer is suing GM, Chrysler, Ford, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan because California is a polluted cesspool.
But is it really the fault of the car companies? And why isn t BMW and Mercedes part of the suit?

(Admittedly, Chrysler is owned by Merceds, so technically it is, but it wasn t directly named.)
So, here are some facts that cannot be ignored:
Cars do not produce any emissions when they are not driven.
California does not have a reliable mass transit system in any major city (by this I mean commuter rail and subway system, not bus or trolley).

The emissions from cars are not caused by the cars themselves, but by the process in which they burn fuel to create motive power.
California does not have any driving ban laws on the books, like Colorado once had where in everyday a certain letter and number are chosen and if your license plate has either of them, you don t drive.
So, because the politicians of California s present and past never had the foresight to create mass transit systems other than buses, the automakers have to pay?

Well, here is a solution that the named auto companies should consider: Shut down California.
Close all dealerships, refuse to service California cars, close all automobile assembly and parts factories within the state, then tell California to go screw.
The backlash of these events would make public lynching of politicians an acceptable practice, because you know there would be riots in the streets if those lazy pricks in Hollywood can t drive 2 blocks in their gas guzzling SUV s to get their Starbuck s Grande Verde Triple Mocha Skinny Espresso Latte With A Twist!

(You can tell that I know nothing about Starbuck s coffee after that line! I stepped footinto a Starbuck s once in my life, and the smell of their coffee was so bad I started to gag. I had to leave before I puked all over their floors.

)
And to top it all off, this puke of an attornet cannot get re-elected as Attorney General due to term limits. But he s running for state treasurer, so you know he is only doing this to score a few points in the polls. Especially since the election is only 48 days away.

What a slime ball!
Instead of suing the people making the cars, why not make it prohibitively expensive to OWN a gas guzzler? You want a Humvee, Governor?

Sure! That will be $6 million for the first 100 miles, then $500 thousand for each mile after that!
Your Excursion only gets 10 miles to the gallon with a 50 gallon tank?

Well, gas for you is $29.99 a gallon. Have a good day, asshole!

Then take the money you get from the gas guzzler driving shmucks and BUILD A DECENT MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM, YOU MORONIC SHITS!
Here in NYC we have just as many people and cars as LA. But we have half as much air pollution.

Why? We have subways and commuter rails!
This is the sort of shit that happens when you get idiots running a state or country.

Next thing you know, they ll be suing cattle ranchers and pig farmers because the animals produce more methane in a year than a car produces emissions.
Whak jobs. All of them.

Posted on September 19th, 2006 by dan.
Categories: , , .
I know that the American Automobile market isn t exactly wowing anyone in the sales department.

But this is NOT the solution!
Merging the only 2 remaining American car companies (Chrysler no longer counts, because it is completely controlled by the Krauts at Mercedes) would probably start the next civil war!
True Ford people are loyal only to Ford, and True Chevy people are loyal only to GM (who makes Chevrolet), and never the two shall meet.

Afterall, who wants to drive a Ford Corvette or a Chevrolet Mustang. Even typing those words in that order seems sacreligious.
If these last two remaining car companies truly want to turn around their misfortunes, they need to do what the Japanese car makers did - make Style and Quality the ultimate goal.

Sure, I can get a Chevrolet Cobalt for around the same price as a Toyota Yaris, and sure the Chevrolet will have more power, but the Yaris has better quality and gets better gas milage.
Yes, a Ford Focus will be the same price as that Yaris, but the Yaris just looks better and has more standard features.
Until Ford ang GM realize that in order to compete with Toyota and Honda they truly need to compete, they are going to suffer from falling market share, shrinking profits and higher debts.

Ford s motto once used to be Quality is Job 1. If that were the case, why does Toyota have fewer recalls? And it s obvious the design has never been Job 1 at Ford.

Their newest cars look like something out of the Audi book of design from 1988.
The Five Hundred looks like an Audi 5000 of 20 years ago, with some slight modifications. If I wanted to buy a 20 year old Audi, I would look for a 20 year old Audi and save myself $20,000+ dollars.

GM designs aren t that much better. But I do applaud GM for finally trying to make sure the cars that are the same don t look the same, as they did for 20 years. While the Pontiac G6 and Buick Lucerne certainly look similiar, there is enough differences between the two to disctintly identify which is the Pontiac and which is the Buick.

Ford still can t do that with their Ford, Lincoln and Mercury divisions.
A good example of Ford s interchangable design is the Ford Fusion, Mecury Milan, and Lincoln Zephyr. The only differences between these three cars are the grilles and taillights (on the outside.

Inside, the three cars have somewhat more unique looks.)
And if I can t see a significant difference between a Ford Fusion and a Lincoln Zephyr, why would I spend $15,000 more for the Lincoln?
This is the sort of backward thinking that has destroyed Ford and, to a lesser degree, GM.

Instead of saying Here is our latest car design, make it work for your group they (Ford) should be saying Here is the latest platform. Design your car for your group.
(Chrylser suffered this same problem just before the Mercedes takeover with their cloud cars: the Chryler Cirrus, Dodge Stratus and Plymouth Breeze.

)
GM is starting to learn this lesson, thus the reason why the Pontiac G6 and Buick Lucerne look so dissimilar. Now they need to learn to improve their quality, and not just pretend that there is more with a new longer warranty period (5 years/100,000 miles on all new GM cars and trucks).
The longer warranty does no good if your car is in the shop all the time for quality issues.

Now, before someone out their accuses me of being anti-American, let me just say that that I would trade in my 5 year old Toyota right this minute if I could be guaranteed that the following criteria were met by an American car:
1. That I would get 40+ miles to the gallon. I am averaging about 45 in my Toyota Echo (Have gotten as high as 56, and as low as 36)
2.

That recalls would be kept to a minimum (I have only had to deal with one recall on my Toyota in the 5 years I have had it. Granted, it was a rather large recall, but it was in an out of the dealer in a matter of hours)
3. That I would have the head room, leg room and storage space equal or better than my Toyota.

(The Echo may not look like a big car, but get inside one and you will know what I mean. And open that trunk and look at all the space it has!)
4.

That my riding experiance will be just as taught and solid as my Toyota (something that most GM cars seem to handle now, but Ford still has a long way to go.)
5. It not cost an arm and a leg to purchase, register, and insure (even better if it were free, of course!

)
If I could get all of that in an American car, it would be sitting in front of my house tomorrow. I might even be willing to throw the caveat in #5 out the window. Posted on August 30th, 2006 by dan.

Categories: , .
Before I get to far into this post, I need to make apologies to anyone who might end up offended by what I am about to ask and say about it.
The question that has been going through my mind for quite a while now is What makes a gay icon a gay icon?

What is it about Barbra Streisand, Judy Garland, Liza Minelli, Cher, Madonna and Kylie Minogue icons in the gay community?
Yes, Judy Garland had an amazing voice, but if I hear Over the Rainbow one more time, I m likely to go postal!
Barbra Streisand had a good voice.

But she is long past her prime, and yet gay men seem to flock to anything and everything she does.
Liza Minelli What the F***? She s more likely to marry a gay man (just like her mother) than to support the gay community.

Cher, well, she had an amazing run, but again, more likely to marry a gay man, than support anyone in the gay community, even her own daughter.
Madonna this one amazes me more than most. Her music is okay.

She has a couple songs that I do like. But her voice is crap, her looks are crap, and she doesn t come across as someone willing to lift a finger to help anyone, let alone support the gay community.
Finally, there s Kylie Minogue.

Okay, not so much icon, as just a lot of gay fans, including myself.
But why are these women considered icons in the gay community? What is special about these women to make them be worshipped by legions of gay men?

And why are they all women? Why are there no male gay icons? After all, we re gay MEN!

Why don t we look up to George Michael, Elton John, or even Boy George? Better yet, why aren t famous gay men like John Wayne, Clark Gable or even Lance Bass considered gay icons? Hell, even the guy who played Sulu in Star Trek.

Why are the gay icons always women? And why those particular women??

It s one of those questions that may never be answered, but boy would I like to know the answer!