Ford is a real mixed bag, I'm not a superfan by any means, or even a fan frankly. I've bought two Ford pickups and regretted them both. But I also got frankly some of the worst examples, one of them was supposed to have been worked on and it turned out it was rebuilt incorrectly and the other was a 7.3 IDI with a turbo and I didn't know about their weak blocks at the time. But I also had a V6 Aero Bird which was a shockingly good car, and have only respect for the 80s F150 with the 300ci straight six even though I'd rather have a '60s Chevy with a 292.

The F150 Lightning also isn't a good enough truck for what they charged for it. Ford was banking on a larger supply of suckers. I'd love to own one, but I'm sure not shopping in that market segment. Ford also didn't plan to ever offer the Lightning I wanted, a tradesman model with the big battery.

I saw Google and Plus together and got momentarily excited. :-D

I think you're wrong. I think the U.S. government has too much incentive to bail them out again no matter how badly they tank.

But you're not wrong about Ford being the least likely to survive the next ten years without massive government bailouts. IMO, Ford has never made good cars by any reasonable standard, giving rise to jokes all the way back in the late 1980s of Ford standing for "Found On the Road Dead" or "Fell Off the Road Dead", and I've seen no evidence that they have gotten much better since.

By someone legitimate, or by someone looking to get page hits?

Oh, Consumer Reports... the same company that has pretty much been dumping on Tesla for many years, and whose criticisms have been widely ridiculed by actual Tesla owners.

Make a specific objection or fuck off with your vagueposting.

Spoken like a true worshiper of prosperity theology.

I smell a maggot who doesn't want to be reminded that Cheeto Benito pardoned drug traffickers.

The cybertruck is pure shit. It is the least reliable Tesla by a wide margin, and Tesla was recently named the least reliable vehicle in America.

The lightning might be a vehicle without a business case, but it's a major revision from the normal f-series, down to having independent rear suspension. The f150 is also the most popular vehicle on the planet. While Ford has had some massive failures in it like the 3 valve 5.4, you're still barking up the wrong tree here

There was a separate law passed in 1792 that defined what weapons should be available for people in a militia, but I can't find any evidence that the second amendment ever did that. It was based around similar laws in other states and in England, none of which specified such things, so it would be very surprising if they had considered doing so.

Even if we assume that the intent was to protect the right to bear all future military-grade weapons, it was still intended for forming militias for the defense of the country, not for storing high-power weapons at every individual's house for their personal use where kids can pick them up and shoot each other.

Weapons of that time would not have been easy for a kid to discharge multiple times. They would not have been easy for someone to discharge a hundred times in anger and mass-murder people. And so on. And that's the point I was trying to make. These weapons are materially different from anything they could have conceived of at the time.

I bought a 43 inch smart tv from LG to be my monitor. I'm using it right now. Never connected to the network.

It takes a lot of effort to coordinate bringing in cocaine in USFS planes, turning it into crack, and putting it on the street. They were busy.

You should get a dictionary so you can learn the difference between objective and subjective. Enjoy your ratio.