View Single Post
Old 08-19-2009, 07:25 PM   #28 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,761

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,548 Times in 2,215 Posts
I chastised the sender of this junk when I got it a couple of days before this thread.

It falls squarely into the category of neo-con spam.

I'm sure you've all gotten an avalanche of this sort of **** over the years.

It's all the same. Attempt to mislead/deceive by presenting something along with fundamentally flawed "facts", along with fundamentally flawed "conclusions". These can be outright lies and fabrications and/or, a bit sneakier, lies of omission.

At any rate, I find it interesting that after all these years, I can't recall getting garbage of this nature from the "Lib" side.

Oh yes, you sure wouldn't think the simple physics of a car/truck crash is political; it shouldn't be. But there is always that agenda that goes along with neocon spam distortions; in this case, it is the anti-small car/plant your ass in a giant SUV agenda.

What does the originator of this hope to gain by saying it's a Smart car, when it ain't?

I've told many people over the years that when I get that junk from them, it stops with me.

Why propogate it?

What do you get out of spreading lies?

Don't you ever get tired of being proven wrong??? I always "snopes 'em" or otherwise blow that junk out of the water.

Man, if I was wrong as often as they are, I'd be quite unhappy. And ashamed.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
chumly (09-13-2012), NeilBlanchard (08-19-2009), The Atomic Ass (08-22-2009)