Welcome to the IHoP

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

[///M5 2,833]

Oh Canada!

[dem beats 1,223]

It may be that the z7 can handle all the home audio functions in a really great way Sean. I will have to research some more and make sure it can work with win7 but I might be in luck

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

BURGER

[dem beats 1,223]

I would love a shroom and swis.

[///M5 2,833]

It may be that the z7 can handle all the home audio functions in a really great way Sean. I will have to research some more and make sure it can work with win7 but I might be in luck

I figure, good for a temporary and perhaps even long term

[///M5 2,833]

I would love a shroom and swis.

Make me one too.

[dem beats 1,223]

I may just be making one on sunday when I didtch the diet for my cheatin day.

[///M5 2,833]

Drove a M56 and a new CTS-V yesterday.

[///M5 2,833]

Making Beef Laab and Curried Baby Eggplant for dinner. Just don't know what to eat for lunch.

[dem beats 1,223]

Drove a M56 and a new CTS-V yesterday.

What did you think?

Auto on the cts-v I assume.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

Ted Stevens died in a plane crash, may his soul rot in hell for all eternity

[dem beats 1,223]

The man had skills.

[///M5 2,833]

Drove a M56 and a new CTS-V yesterday.

What did you think?

Auto on the cts-v I assume.

Both were impressive, but overpriced. The CTS is too small, which I knew, but wanted to get in one again. Figured it was a good way to spend my lunch. It did confirm a few things to me though. 1) Japanese cars are boring, the Infiniti was the closest one of them to me liking, but at $70k it should stir your soul more than it can, 2) I am no longer interested in an E class Merc at all, 3) If the Cadillac weren't so damn ugly and overpriced it would be a good buy, but considering 09 M5's and 09 CTS-V's are within $5k (almost the same actually) the car is a complete joke. It should be significantly less. I don't understand the hype that is keeping used ones at nearly used prices. 4) The S4 is too small, 5) And most importantly, I am really only interested in a BMW or Jaguar atm but the Jag I want isn't really for sale.

Figures, I knew this shit 2 years ago but had to go through the damn diligence of thinking about it incessantly.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

I would love a shroom and swis.

I had one for lunch.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

Drove a M56 and a new CTS-V yesterday.

All the shit you talk about GM and you're still messing around with the Caddy idea?

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

To many conservatives, almost everything is a secret liberal plot: from fluoride in the water to medicare reimbursements for end-of-life planning with your doctor to efforts to teach evolution in schools.

But Conservapedia founder and Eagle Forum University instructor Andy Schlafly — Phyllis Schlafly's son — has found one more liberal plot: the theory of relativity.

If you're behind on your physics, the Theory of Relativity was Albert Einstein's formulation in the early 20th century that gave rise to the famous theorum that E=mc2, otherwise stated as energy is equal to mass times the square of the speed of light. Why does Andy Schlafly hate the theory of relativity? We're pretty sure it's because he's decided it doesn't square with the Bible.

In the entry, "Counterexamples to Relativity," the authors (including Schlafly) write:

The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.[1]

To what does that reference lead? Why, a note by Schlafly:

See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by Barack Obama. Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold

In other words, reading a theory about physics is correlated to a decrease in people's interest in reading the Bible, which means that it causes people to stop reading the Bible.

Schlafly also points to the Bible as a reason that Einstein's theory must be wrong:

9. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54.

Conservapedia defines "action-at-a-distance" as "Action at a distance consists of affecting a distant body instantaneously. At the atom level, this is known as "non-locality." In non-confusing terms, that indicates the ability to cause something to happen instantaneously in another location (i.e., faster than the speed of light). Since Jesus could, reportedly, do this, thus Einstein is wrong. Schlafly's evidence is John 4:46-54, in which Jesus reportedly cured someone's son just by saying it had happened.

Once more he visited Cana in Galilee, where he had turned the water into wine. And there was a certain royal official whose son lay sick at Capernaum.

When this man heard that Jesus had arrived in Galilee from Judea, he went to him and begged him to come and heal his son, who was close to death.

"Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."

The royal official said, "Sir, come down before my child dies."

Jesus replied, "You may go. Your son will live."The man took Jesus at his word and departed.

While he was still on the way, his servants met him with the news that his boy was living.

When he inquired as to the time when his son got better, they said to him, "The fever left him yesterday at the seventh hour."

Then the father realized that this was the exact time at which Jesus had said to him, "Your son will live." So he and all his household believed.

This was the second miraculous sign that Jesus performed, having come from Judea to Galilee.

Schlafly brags on Conservapedia that he has homeschooled 185 children, all of whom do exceptionally well on standardized tests.

As with Wikipedia and other online crowd-sourced resources, Conservapedia is a collaborative effort of its users and any registered user can post to the site. Schlafly is a frequent contributor to the site, and is identified as the initial author of the entry and well as the editor of the note identified above. Schlafly did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Had to post this so I'm not the only one suffering from a stupidity induced headache

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

[///M5 2,833]

Drove a M56 and a new CTS-V yesterday.

All the shit you talk about GM and you're still messing around with the Caddy idea?

No, wasn't messing around with the idea but driving to justify why I wouldn't. You know me well enough to realize that I have to explore all options before making a decision. Personally I am a bit scared of the V10 beast that BM'er puts in its flagship sedan but it is easier to swallow the risk if there is nothing else out there that I like. I'd actually take a 550i over the CTS-V from how they drive. Wouldn't be as fast sure, but that isn't exactly everything.

[///M5 2,833]

Now if the CTS-V were $40k new then it'd be a different story. The new SHO is actually way more car, but would need more power and some suspension work to really be neat. I'd love to see an SVT SHO.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

just get an M5 already would you, sheesh

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

Personally I am a bit scared of the V10 beast that BM'er puts in its flagship sedan but it is easier to swallow the risk if there is nothing else out there that I like.

Scared of the maintenance costs or scared of the performance? If its the latter you're a pussy

*runs far far away from the wrath of the lumbering giant*

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

[dem beats 1,223]

epic!

[cheese20323 13]

just get an M5 already would you, sheesh

the M5 is It's pretty badass but in my OP I dont like CTS's I like more M5's or a good german sedan. Or get an Aston LOL.....

Edited August 10, 2010 by cheese20323