danny

when he does the burnout did he put oil on the tires to make them smoke?

I like the idea of merging Pontiac/Saab/Saturn into one brand - probably Saturn. This would allow them to trim the product lines into the best products. In Europe, Saab could continue to exist as a luxury Opel. Saab can probably go from the states, it's not compatible with the other divisions. Pontiac would fall under Saturn as the "Red line". Low-end Saturns would be Opel products.

"one word can change a sentence"
... you mean "the hummer"
as in,
a sexual reference?

consider rephrasing
"10 percent of the cost of the car"
to
"10 percent of the production cost of the car"

I think it is a great looking truck and actually I am more excited about this than any other vehicle because it is exactly what I need: A SMALL truck that is versatile and gets (presumably) good mileage. I do not agree that this truck is ugly, and I do have a good eye for car design. For example, yes the Subaru baja and Honda ridgeline were both horrible looking, as was the first Avalanche. The second avalanche wasn't too bad to look at. This A-BAT does have the workings of a decent looking vehicle. However, I share the concern about the blind spot due to the rear pillars. I hope it comes to market soon for less than the tacoma in price.

GM sold most of its shares in Suzuki in 2006, reducing the ownership to 3% - not enough to guarantee a partner on truck development. But what I was going to say is that this vehicle doesn't make sense in the market, BUT I think more importantly, it establishes a pretense for Suzuki as a truck company - making any later truck products they might introduce to market seem more credible.

This thing sounds rather horrible in comparison to the Mitsubishi PK20 Pocket Projector, which costs less, doesn't use bulbs (LED), fits in a small place, uses less power, etc.

if it's just a 32 mb memory card then why couldn't action replay card do the same thing with the special software added to it?

if I saw someone start the car with that, given
its price, I'd say
"yur stoopid."

this story is pretty stupid because most states are no-fault anyway, which means cheating doesn't really make a difference in the divorce proceedings. The story might be more relevant to criminal cases, where a defendant's location could be shown at a particular time and place. Also, the story operates on the assumption the cheater may actually drive where a toll would apply- certainly not always the case.