Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
#111
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and take
your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
"eddie wilson" <rquigney85@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:3473f01b.0311011103.45f70f47@posting.google.c om...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:<5e190aec50b6739ba291544f9a87fbb9@dizum.com>. ..
> > >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that
I
> > >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it
would
> > >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a
bonus.
> > >
> > >Lisa
> >
> > Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes
guts.
> >
> > You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> > over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> > nauseum.
> >
> > Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars
discarded
> > to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never
cease
> > to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy
SUVs.
> >
> > The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can
burn
> > it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going
to
> > kill somebody with it because you are scared shitless to whip that
steering
> > wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no
alternative
> > but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of
kids
> > because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation
you
> > will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide
into
> > your victims' car and taking them out as well.
> >
> > There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you
could
> > have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge
you
> > with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> > because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> > accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute
some
> > of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> > Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> > judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and
up?
> >
> > One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> > already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When
they
> > are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they
are
> > MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All
things
> > considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> > CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> > launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they
had
> > any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> > depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> > Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> > and go to prison penniless.
> >
> > Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> > certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes
back
> > in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> > triple safe.
>
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.
your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
"eddie wilson" <rquigney85@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:3473f01b.0311011103.45f70f47@posting.google.c om...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:<5e190aec50b6739ba291544f9a87fbb9@dizum.com>. ..
> > >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that
I
> > >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it
would
> > >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a
bonus.
> > >
> > >Lisa
> >
> > Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes
guts.
> >
> > You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> > over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> > nauseum.
> >
> > Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars
discarded
> > to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never
cease
> > to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy
SUVs.
> >
> > The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can
burn
> > it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going
to
> > kill somebody with it because you are scared shitless to whip that
steering
> > wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no
alternative
> > but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of
kids
> > because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation
you
> > will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide
into
> > your victims' car and taking them out as well.
> >
> > There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you
could
> > have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge
you
> > with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> > because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> > accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute
some
> > of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> > Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> > judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and
up?
> >
> > One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> > already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When
they
> > are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they
are
> > MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All
things
> > considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> > CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> > launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they
had
> > any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> > depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> > Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> > and go to prison penniless.
> >
> > Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> > certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes
back
> > in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> > triple safe.
>
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.
#112
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and take
your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
"eddie wilson" <rquigney85@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:3473f01b.0311011103.45f70f47@posting.google.c om...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:<5e190aec50b6739ba291544f9a87fbb9@dizum.com>. ..
> > >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that
I
> > >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it
would
> > >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a
bonus.
> > >
> > >Lisa
> >
> > Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes
guts.
> >
> > You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> > over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> > nauseum.
> >
> > Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars
discarded
> > to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never
cease
> > to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy
SUVs.
> >
> > The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can
burn
> > it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going
to
> > kill somebody with it because you are scared shitless to whip that
steering
> > wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no
alternative
> > but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of
kids
> > because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation
you
> > will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide
into
> > your victims' car and taking them out as well.
> >
> > There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you
could
> > have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge
you
> > with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> > because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> > accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute
some
> > of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> > Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> > judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and
up?
> >
> > One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> > already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When
they
> > are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they
are
> > MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All
things
> > considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> > CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> > launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they
had
> > any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> > depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> > Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> > and go to prison penniless.
> >
> > Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> > certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes
back
> > in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> > triple safe.
>
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.
your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
"eddie wilson" <rquigney85@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:3473f01b.0311011103.45f70f47@posting.google.c om...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:<5e190aec50b6739ba291544f9a87fbb9@dizum.com>. ..
> > >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that
I
> > >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it
would
> > >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a
bonus.
> > >
> > >Lisa
> >
> > Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes
guts.
> >
> > You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> > over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> > nauseum.
> >
> > Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars
discarded
> > to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never
cease
> > to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy
SUVs.
> >
> > The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can
burn
> > it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going
to
> > kill somebody with it because you are scared shitless to whip that
steering
> > wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no
alternative
> > but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of
kids
> > because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation
you
> > will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide
into
> > your victims' car and taking them out as well.
> >
> > There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you
could
> > have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge
you
> > with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> > because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> > accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute
some
> > of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> > Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> > judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and
up?
> >
> > One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> > already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When
they
> > are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they
are
> > MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All
things
> > considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> > CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> > launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they
had
> > any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> > depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> > Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> > and go to prison penniless.
> >
> > Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> > certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes
back
> > in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> > triple safe.
>
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.
#113
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 17:09:40 -0700, "Gerald G. McGeorge"
<gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
>How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and
take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
From OE Help:
To ignore a conversation
In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.
In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.
Notes
To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.
If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.
end help.
If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.
HTH.
<gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
>How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and
take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
From OE Help:
To ignore a conversation
In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.
In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.
Notes
To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.
If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.
end help.
If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.
HTH.
#114
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 17:09:40 -0700, "Gerald G. McGeorge"
<gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
>How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and
take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
From OE Help:
To ignore a conversation
In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.
In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.
Notes
To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.
If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.
end help.
If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.
HTH.
<gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
>How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and
take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
From OE Help:
To ignore a conversation
In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.
In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.
Notes
To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.
If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.
end help.
If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.
HTH.
#115
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 17:09:40 -0700, "Gerald G. McGeorge"
<gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
>How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and
take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
From OE Help:
To ignore a conversation
In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.
In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.
Notes
To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.
If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.
end help.
If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.
HTH.
<gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
>How about everyone stop posting this -------- in the Jeep forum and
take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
From OE Help:
To ignore a conversation
In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.
In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.
Notes
To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.
If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.
end help.
If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.
HTH.
#116
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote
> Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
>
Jeeps are SUVs, the Grand Cherokee is a bloated joke of a SUV.
The Wrangler passes the grade of being usefull in hard work offroad
environments, but the Cherokee and GC don't they're too much the product of
being aimed at supermarket warriors.
rhys
#117
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote
> Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
>
Jeeps are SUVs, the Grand Cherokee is a bloated joke of a SUV.
The Wrangler passes the grade of being usefull in hard work offroad
environments, but the Cherokee and GC don't they're too much the product of
being aimed at supermarket warriors.
rhys
#118
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote
> Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
>
Jeeps are SUVs, the Grand Cherokee is a bloated joke of a SUV.
The Wrangler passes the grade of being usefull in hard work offroad
environments, but the Cherokee and GC don't they're too much the product of
being aimed at supermarket warriors.
rhys
#119
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
> "P e t e F a g e r l i n" <pete@petefagerlin.com> wrote in message
> From OE Help:
> To ignore a conversation...... <
> If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read threads
that don't interest you. <
Frankly, I ignore the SOBs, but it's just too much fun to just annoy the
crap out of these pompous asses!
>
> HTH.
>
#120
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink
> "P e t e F a g e r l i n" <pete@petefagerlin.com> wrote in message
> From OE Help:
> To ignore a conversation...... <
> If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read threads
that don't interest you. <
Frankly, I ignore the SOBs, but it's just too much fun to just annoy the
crap out of these pompous asses!
>
> HTH.
>