probeGT

There's nothing wrong with my pubic that I know of.

I notice they all say SHO as "show"--I prefer S-H-O. Oh well.

Can your guy get copies of the Erin Andrews videos? :happy feet:

I think it's biggest engineering achievement is the fact that it's actually UGLIER than the model it replaces.

Interesting article, although all this lifestyle focus bothers me generally. The most unbelievable thing is I just read an article about Ford in the mainstream press that didn't take any digs or have anything bad to say. Couldn't they have at least MENTIONED the Prius or something?

That right there is enough to make my day.

I actually can't believe anybody bought one of those EVER, never mind not having a refresh.

I wonder what they look like when they're on the ground. . .

But the roads were still built--by the government--and somebody had to pay for them--so it isn't as if Bass Pro shop did all the work on their own, etc. Your previous post argued that the government didn't do anything for companies that got tax abatements. I thought you were going to make the distinction between state/local and federal as I was typing last message. Again--to me--I'm not making a distinction because I still pay both kinds of taxes. I do understand your principle of right of state/local v. federal.

This seems like a huge (and inaccurate) assumption. When my local govt. gave abatements for the garish new Bass Pro Shop, Bass Pro Shop did not build the roads leading up to it, did not extend services to it, etc., governments did. This scenario seems to be the one played out under most tax abatements. . . see for example the current NCR HQ move from Dayton to Atlanta where they're actually talking about using stimulus money to help build infrastructure for the new HQ.

I can see the difference, but thanks for the helpful reading and comprehension advice. The money "never taken" has to be made up by others or in the form of services that never happen. That's how it works in the world I live in, although maybe not in the world you long for.

If people boycott GM and Chrysler because they've taken government money, are they also going to boycott companies that get tax abatements?

Yes, the way for this to work is for the attitudinal changes to just happen--and I think it already is. Ford shouldn't try to play too hard on this, and neither should any other organized groups. I think most people are already getting the message. Grass roots on this, just like the tea parties. . . let them rise from the people, with no promotion or real organization by any entrenched entities. Ok, bad example . . .

I'm suddenly seeing quite a few Flexes on the road, too.

Now THAT's funny!

Yeah, that's it--the Zebra head reference! Naw, I'm pretty much just guilty of the Olbermann accusation. It's not like no one else has ever jumped on a tangent from an unrelated topic around here. . .

They didn't mention how the cargo area is almost big enough to hold O'Reilly's empty head.

Or maybe the Fusion only runs until August 1, 2009.

The "looks like it's moving even when it's not" tag is a bit of a disappointment, but I do like the ad. It would be nice to see Ford doing "hipper" stuff over here in its ads. I hate Kias, but that ad with the hamsters driving the Soul is pretty cool.

A positive preliminary review from Car and Driver. Looks like maybe the kids are going to like this Ecoboost thing. :happy feet:

I believe I caught the end of the Ellen show on which she gave away a sweet red 2010 Taurus.

True, true. I agree that it takes a special kind of person to WANT TO be a CEO in the first place. Not everyone is cut out for it, for sure. I'm just dismayed at a huge swath of this country seems to get a lot more fired up about a guy who does sweat-work all day long getting a little extra while we celebrate hogs like Jack Welch and Wall Street types. It's not hard to guess where Glenn Beck would come down it all this, I guess.

I know he has withdrawn from the discussion now, but I think some are being a little hard on Pioneer. It does always amaze me in this country how quick we are to jump on union members and "little guys" about their perks, but we're basically OK with the CEOs backing the trucks up and loading them up. You saw this exact thing in the "liberal media" with the way they latched onto UAW wages with the auto bailout but initially didn't give a rat's a** about all the Wall Street perks and bonuses. Having said all that, I reiterate that I support Mulally in this. The other thing, to me, is that my sense is that Mulally is probably already financially set--he could just walk away from this (he didn't have to come here in the first place)--and just go an be in Seattle full-time if he wanted to.

I have to say that as an official bleeding-heart liberal, I'm normally with Pioneer on this kind of issue. But the fact of the matter is that Mulally is perhaps the one person on earth who is capable of saving Ford. Without him up to now, we can pretty much be sure that Ford would be in AT LEAST as bad of shape as Chrysler and GM. So, I'm pretty much of a mind that he is worth every cent and every perk.

I thought about that as I was typing, but was too lazy to actually look up Payson and took a chance.