Yeah, the Solstice is much more like the original ’50s Vette in terms of size, but some of its tricks, like the roof and the shape of the front fenders, are borrowed from the ’70s.

No offense intended as regards GM. It’s just that I haven’t yet forgiven them for all of the bad cars I’ve had over the years. I’m giving them another chance after having sworn “never again.” This time I’m simply unimpressed, as opposed to feeling like I’ve been screwed in the ass.

Thanks for the link to autoextremist, btw.

How do they broadcast this shit to people’s dental fillings anyway?

New and rare, yes. Supercharged, yes. But, MR MARK and Nancy, both those cars are the all-new ZR-1, not the Z06. All 6.2 liter, 638 horsepower and $102,600 base price of them. HUGE difference in price and performance.

And, Alex, while I congratulate you on your choice of the Solstice, please don’t insult it with comparisons to the ’70′s Vette. Completely different animals. Have you ever seen, let alone driven, one of these behemoths?

http://usedcorvettesforsale.com/1975.shtml

The closest Corvette to your car, and its Saturn Sky cousin, in size and spirit is all the way back to the original, the ’53-’55. Still underpowered, until they put a V8 in the ’55, but all the original spirit was there. The 1962 was the last of this style and still comparable to the Solstice in its soul.

http://usedcorvettesforsale.com/1954.shtml

It isn’t reasonable, nor acceptable to me, to lable everything GM puts out as crap, or to say no one wants or buys it. Yes, they are in big trouble now, due to the kneejerk market changes. But beginning in 2000, they started a real turnaround in offerings with style and, yes, build quality. Alex, you can’t be faulted for assuming your car is “still in development”, because GM always had a history of rushing a car to market and let the consumer (and dealer) sort out all the issues. And, when they finally got it right, after five or seven years, the public had lost patience and quit buying them. Some examples: Pontiac Fiero, Olds Aurora, and the ’70′s 350 diesel, which, yes, they eventually did get right. But, who cared by then?

I’m not an apologist for everything GM has done to the public. It’s just that since Bob Lutz came on the scene after he got shafted at Chrysler, a real car guy HAS had some influence on product design and development at GM. He is responsible for the Solstice and Sky. As Alex pointed out, for way too long in the ’70′s and ’80′s, the bean counters had way too much influence. GM needs to shed one more line, probably Buick, lean out the model offerings, and they’ll be back.

If you want some no-holds-barred inside info and opinion about what really goes on in Detroit, here’s one of my favorite sites:

http://www.autoextremist.com/

DeLorenzo is not hopeful about Detroit, but he does offer some solid criticism GM, Ford and Chrysler had better heed.

“You should broaden your horizens to include more than a left wing paper. You now have time to catch some real news. Try Mike Mconnell on 700 wlw around 9 till noon.And Rush is on wowo at noon. Keep a open mind, and listen to another view.”

At first, I just thought that using “Rush”, “real news”, and “open mind”, in the same statement was was kind of funny. Then I realized that many voters really think just like that, and now they don’t even have to admit they won’t vote for Barack because he’s black, they can say they’re being open minded and voting for a woman! Not funny at all.

Thank you for the “60 Minutes” link. I thought Senators Obama and Biden were outstanding. (Is “60 Minutes” “…real news…?)

As for Palin, I’m sure she’d get pregnant while in office. After all, it’s totally up to God to determine who gets pregnant. For her delivery, she’d fly back to Alaska, drop the kid in the field while drawing a bead on a bull moose. She’d then cut the cord while gutting said moose. Then, she’d slap her newborn child onto a tit and gnaw on some raw moose meat while extolling the virtues of the second half of the second amendment. Glory, glory hallelujah!

It seems to me that the more controlling and absolutist the stand on abstinence, the more likely that there will be teen pregnancy. It seems when you take a hormone laden teen and say to him/her “just say no” and expect them to make rational life altering adult decisions you are not fully preparing them for reality and you are deluding yourself.

Teens brains aren’t fully developed. We don’t let them sign contracts, but we’ll let them procreate because it makes us uncomfortable to talk to them about sexuality of any kind. They definitely want to know about sex and if they’re not getting information from their parents/church/school we can be pretty sure that they will be conducting field experiments on their own. Add barrels of hormones to an underdeveloped brain and you’ve got kids begattin’ kids.

If you truly want less teen begattin’, then we need something other than “just say no.”

So, to drone on about Palin, do y’all suppose she’ll carry and deliver another baby while in office? fine if she does, I just wonder if the pill is acceptable now that she has had a Downs baby and may become veep. ya gotta wonder, right? So many rabid anti-choice folks are against, you know, abortifacients.

Obama or McCain on Nov. 4, i like the national conversation we seem to be having. This isn’t something we’re going to solve or anything, but if we can toss out the “abstinence only” myth and the “condom cure-all” myths as equally unfair to both their advocates and the kids who are trying to become adults listening to it all, i’m good with everyone. Really. If we can figure out what to say to 14 year olds who are trying to figure out if they have same sex attraction or are just admiring the heck out of a cute friend, we may actually be healthier as a society for talking about all this.

My personal bias is still that you shouldn’t have sex with anyone you couldn’t even remotely imagine having a child with — i’m not Catholic, and i don’t mean you have to want that outcome, but my teaching & preaching benchmark is exactly that: if you would absolutely not want to raise a child with a person in your imagination, you shouldn’t, um, yeah — do that.

Where that puts me on premarital sex is anyone’s guess. Scary news flash — the Bible has nothing to say on that subject. I waited, but i’m a cautious, methodical guy, as is the wonderful woman who chose to marry me. Caution, not scripture, led me to that choice, because there is not a Biblical verse that unpacks that little question. But i think a Biblical (not Biblicist) approach leads you to exactly this — if you wouldn’t even remotely want to have a child with them, don’t do it, even with protection.

Perversely, i think that advice works in a hypothetical way even for gays and lesbians. Had a deacon at a former church who was quietly partnered with another lady (i prayed at their service, did not conduct it, applauded happily with all at the end), and she thought it worked as a standard, even if it didn’t, ah, work.

Good night, sweet princes and princesses! May flights of Alaskan coots wing thee to thy rest, and a blessed Labor Day.