On the first amendment, I agree with you.

However the second amendment very explicitly includes the word Militia. What is unclear about it is how the concept of the Militia relates to bearing arms, or who constitutes the Militia. We should be able to, at the very least, agree that the word was included intentionally and not accidentally. Clearly we disagree on what the word means in relation to the rest of the statement.

Furthermore we should be able to agree that in no part of the text of the second amendment is the overthrow of the government mentioned.

That all depends on one's definition of violence. You have repeatedly advocated for extralegal termination of the administration. Once you get the mob rallied you can't count on them not becoming violent.

Your state level issue is largely handled by the Federal Preemption clause in Article VI, clause 2.

Hmm, you might want to reread that clause. it establishes the Constitution as the "supreme law of the land".

It does NOT say that a State can't do something that is specifically forbidden to Congress.

Now, the 14th Amendment DOES pretty much accomplish your objective. Of course, there were 75 years or so between the Constitution and the 14th Amendment, during which, by your logic the "much stronger" "Congress shall make no laws" could have been overridden by State laws. Or local laws.

Personally, I still find "shall not be infringed" to be stronger than "Congress shall make no law". But YMMV....

The hyperbolic nonsense lies in the amount of Konservative Kool-Aid (TM) that one has to drink in order to believe that President Lawnchair is some sort of absolute tyrant who needs to be overthrown violently. Similarly the very notion that there is an amendment in the constitution - written in code, no less - that is there specifically for the purpose of violently overthrowing the government is ridiculous. What the true meaning of the second amendment is, we may never agree on, but there is no good argument for the creators of the American Experiment being interested in inserting a way for citizens to violently discard democracy on a whim without needing to be willing to accept some responsibility for their choices and actions.

Who told you that? It's often very easy.

Except a lot of Audis weren't offered with a MT in the USA, so you have to buy a substantially different car. And new car, new problems.

It usually isn't much of a PITA at all, there are a number of such swaps that are very simple and commonplace, like Mustang or F-Series swaps. In the Audis, it's usually a simple matter of a recode, or replacement of a module with a relatively inexpensive used one. Going to an automatic is often a PITA, because of wiring issues. Unless, of course, you're installing a pre-electronics automatic with a VRV or similar.

You supported my point that the author is not fond of the Lawnchair Administration. And as we can all see, even she is reasonable enough to realize that the Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2010 is not able to lead to a single payer system. You and a few other loons are the only ones adequately entrenched in conspiracy theories to be willing to pretend that such a thing could happen.

I agree. And this car was not made by Mercedes. This was two very different Mercedes vehicles that were Frankensteined together. The drivetrain and chassis are mostly from a G wagon, with the body and interior from an SLK. The custom work was done by a custom shop. Mercedes never made a vehicle like this and has never announced any plans to do so. You can't even get the SLK with the diesel engine that they used (amongst other things).

They're not aiming to be there because they're already there. And it tends to be a lucrative market to be in, because those models attract people who will pay a lot for options.

Which Audi is it? I guess it's a pretty well solved problem (if spendy) to put a six speed into the A8

Guess what? It's not just Mercedes. I don't know where Mercedes gets their transmissions, but the automatics (tiptronic or not - actually, in some cars, it's a software and shifter issue only) that VAG gets from ZF seem to be quite crap. The A8Q I'm working on right now is on its second transmission, and the first one was replaced in about year two. As leaky as this car is, I wouldn't likely have bought it if it had been on the original slush box.

Germany was the watchword for quality up until the late eighties. But German cars are now, I am quite sorry to say, shit. My father once explained to me (repeating something a wise man must have said to him) that the Germans believed in using the best parts and the Japanese believed in doing the best design such that you could get away with the cheap parts. My experience is that these are in fact the design strategies employed by these nations. The problem with the German strategy today is that the companies making their parts are now making shit. Bosch is now turning out at least as many total turds as roses, for example, if not far more, and all of these German cars have Bosch ignition and traction control (etc.) systems — all the VAGs, all the Mercedes, and all the BMWs, as far as I can tell. These are both exquisitely expensive and poorly designed, vulnerable to water intrusion and for some reason these days typically mounted in the engine compartment. Except my LHD D2 A8, which puts the ABS control module in a really annoying place up under the dash instead of upside down in the E-box right under the PCM where they put it on the RHD vehicles, even more annoying.

Meanwhile, there are very few things that were annoying back in the W123, W126 Mercedes days in the 1980s. Turbo oil return on the diesel was crap. The engine mounts are a bit overcontrived to the point that you can't really torque all the bolts without a special tool, or taking off a bunch of stuff.

It's the economy, brother.

The last Mercedes built like that was the W126. I have a 1982 W126 300SD, with the OM617.951A... and with the 951B turbo from an '85. You wind up replacing suspension stuff about as much as any other car, but the control arms are actually quite inexpensive. I'm about to do them as soon as I get a spring compressor.

Saab never even came close to the cachet of Mercedes.

Mercedes is much more worried about Audi than they ever will be about Tesla. And not about EVs, either.

Mercedes is utterly capable of producing a complete EV. What they're trying to do is figure out how to sell it to the people who buy Mercedes.

Are we talking about the same Fukushima where one core is still missing and radioactive seawater is believed to be flowing out of the site on an ongoing basis?

If you're in the USA, that won't void the warranty so long as you use a compatible replacement SSD. For example, check to see what SSDs they actually offer in that model of laptop; you could definitely use any of those. But really, anything compliant (crucial? intel?) will not void your warranty.

Unless, of course, you have to break a warranty sticker to replace the HDD. But I haven't actually ever had that problem with a laptop...