-
To the guy in the blue, late 80’s Ford pickup on I-45 yesterday: yeah, one way to get the attention you crave is to hang a device representing a bright pink pair of dangling testicles from your trailer hitch. Another would be to carry a flashing neon sign, surrounded by chase lights, saying “DUMBASS” in three-foot high letters. Both have approximately equal effect, IMO.
-
Read your bumper stickers before applying them, people. The one with the American flag, reading “Under GOD. Understand?” Well, sorry, no, I’m afraid I don’t understand. Likewise, the unintentional hilarity of having two identically-designed stickers, one saying “I’m pro-life” and the other saying “I’m pro-gun”, on the same rear window, may be causing following drivers to stray out of their lanes as they try to wipe the tears from their eyes.
-
General Motors, stop trying to call SUV’s something else, and if you must continue to do so, at least get your divisions to agree on what the new name will be. Sport Utility Vehicle is bad enough, since most of the SUVs in your line are about as sporty as a Great Lakes ore freighter. But you seem to be insisting that we call the pickup version of the Escalade a “SUT” (Sport Utility Truck? Sorry, not until I see one carrying a load of mulch, or covered in mud from the Rubicon Trail, which will be, like, never). And for the new GMC Envoy, you seem to actually believe that we are going to start referring to it as a “XUT”, as if that means anything at all. Furthermore, despite your braying about what an innovation the Envoy’s sliding rear roof section is, some of us remember that it first debuted on the Studebaker Lark Wagonaire of the early '60’s. Yup, real cutting-edge stuff you’ve got there.
That Studebaker would look pretty sweet with some 22 chrome wheels.
I predict this will become a suv bash within 12 replies. 
I would just like to say that the SUV offerings of the 1960s (when SUV became a word, and the 4x4 category was taking off), as referenced in my Standard Catalog of 4x4s (1945-2000) were definitely of kick-ass design, including the Wagoneers, the CJ-5/CJ-6, the Dodge Power Wagons, the Original Broncos, the IHC Travellalls, and so on.
Great designs, even if the manufacturing and quality control of the time left something to be desired…
Hmm, on rereading I think I meant to say “XUV” for the Envoy. Same difference.
Just one objection.
It is possible to be pro-life and pro-gun. I hold both positions.
See, what it is is that I prefer to let someone do something wrong before I kill them.
SUV bash in 12 replies, or pro-life/abortion debacle in 10?
I don’t even call them SUVs - I call them VBMFs (View-Blocking Middle Fingers). But that’s just me.
(Just for the record, I can’t even call them by their real names anymore - they’ve been Yukon Denials and GMC Penis Envoys to us for so long now.)
Well, it’s your rant but I think you are complaining about some perfectly good entertainment.
Testicles? Really?
Yes. Highly detailed, right down to the wrinkly bit above the ball sac. Stopped short of having protruding hairs on them, praise be.
I was gobsmacked. This was a manufactured object, presumably sold to someone for actual money.
Oh, yeah, I know, and then there’s target shooters and all that. Still, it made me giggle, or perhaps something more manly involving laughter.
Oh, I get it. Because the vehicle is a penis substitute.
Actually, that’s sort of clever. I certainly wouldn’t have one, but I do think it’s just a little bit funny.
So we’d have better vehicles on the market if they were designed under the direction of people trained in chainsaw manufacture?*
*i.e. the Studebaker.
Yup, testicles. www.bumpernuts.com.
While I’m generally not amused by plastic replicas of body parts, these crack me up.
mischievous
Linky no worky. A shame, considering I really wanted to see what the hell you’re talking about.
Corrected Link. (link and text were reversed).
Sigh. It was my first attempt to make a text link. Might have known I’d mess it up.
Um, ewwwww. Those flesh-coloured ones are positively…obscene.