Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-13-2006, 07:34 PM   #46
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
Im going to take a shot out because im sick of this DODGE PT CRUISER??!?!
WTF man chrysler pt cruiser daimler cruiser is more on than dodge.

THE UGLIEST CAR THIS YEAR IS ANYTHING STEEL SPIRIT OWNS.
YOUR NAME IS RETARDED ALL IT NEEDS IS A COUPLE MORE X's
LIKE STEEL SPIRITXX yeah THEN YOU WOULD BE A BAD ASS.
IM SICK OF ALL THIS POINTLESS STUFF I COME HERE TO LEARN NOT ARGUE SENSELESS OPINIONS OF WHAT CAR LOOKS BETTER OR WORSE AND THERES NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT HOW CARS WORK BECAUSE YOUR PROBLY 12 AND WILL WORK AT UPS THE REST OF YOUR LIFE OR SOME OTHER WORTHLESS JOB.
Actually, my friend, you are wrong about pretty much everything. First off, my user name is the same one I use on the Pittsburg Steelers forums, as I have been a fan since since I was old enough to understand the concept of sports and football. Talk about retarded names, what the hell is an Aondor?
I 'm glad you think that my car is ugly without knowing what I own. You might be able to start your own TV psychic hotline someday with your instincts, man.
And yes, it is a virtually pointless thread-- but it would be fun to discuss as long as the thread isn't inundated with jellyfish-brained people like yourself. But if you come to these forums to learn and not argue about what cars are ugly, why did you even post on here? You seem to be suffering from form of inner turmoil.
And no, I am 28 years old and I actually work for a large Defense Corporation as a Windows/Unix system administrator, making more money in one month than you probably gross in a whole quarter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
AND OH BTW THE NEW MUSTANG IS AWESOME THE 300C is the best chrysler inovation in years!!! YEARS! you say the 300c is bad but lets compare to the other chrysler crap such as the K CAR and the Imperial.
The new mustang is hideous looking, in my opinion. If you took the time to read my earlier posts, you would see that I specifically stated that because I thought the cars were ugly on my list didn't mean that I thought they were shitty cars. Underneath that ugly-duckling of a body are some of the best vehicles Detroit has ever put out. And yes the 300C is uglier than sin, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
You probably think civics are cool because they have 200 hp and low torque and torque makes you go slow so thats good heck A civic with a type R sticker has 300hp and that like 150hp per liter!!!.
And yes I do think the Civic is great car (and far more attractive than those hideous looking boxes that Chrysler calls cars). Motortrend, Edmunds, and most of Detroit seems to agree with me. I have never seen a Civic with a type R sticker, but the Civic Si does have a VTEC and a very low curb weight, which is why this little hatchback is able to attain the o to 60 times it has. How do you get 150 hp per liter? Did I catch you trying to think logically again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
Yeah and if i asked you you would say that if civic made a 5.0 car that it would have 750hp.
Umm...no. There are no 5.0L cars that have 750 hp that I know of, but since you seem to have a kung-fu grip on the physics of automobiles (sarcasm meter pegs), maybe you can figure out how to manage that one. Let me know how it turns out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
You would be wrong and wrong.
Based on the automotive knowledge and brains you have shown in your post, you must hear that often.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
Jessica simpson is more knowledgable than you.
Umm...whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aondor
So have fun with your ugly car(its ugly for the shear fact that you own it, if you even have a car since you are 12)
I vented
I didn't write a dictionary like Vwhobo and ChrisV do but I think i got my point across.
Do the world a favor-- next time you want to say something...DON'T. Everytime you talk(write) you get dumber and dumber.
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 07:47 PM   #47
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
Im going to try a different tactic in this thread...

I'll give you a little demographic on me, a PT Cruiser owner...

I've been playing with cars for 27 years. I've owned over a hundred, from most major manufacturers worldwide. I've also dabbled in most hobby genres, from sports cars and SCCA racing, to street rods, to 50's/60 customs, to musclecars, to lowriders, to mini trucks, to custom VWs, to sport compacts. I apprenticed in a shop doing vintage auto restration, doing a lot of work on the cars in the Harold LeMay collection. Then, for a decade, I had a shop building customs and street rods, and doing race and restoration work on sports cars. I'v ebeen an SCCA member since 1980, doing slalom racing, a bit of road racing, and autocross driver's instruction for both SCCA and BSCC.

For personal cars (not customer cars) I've built everything from a 600 hp autocrossing 460 powered Fox Mustang and a 400 hp V8 powered RX7 slalom racer, to a rotary powered MG midget, custom lowrider classic minitrucks, custom VWs bugs, restored Porsches, etc. Right now, besides the PT Cruiser, I've got the Fiat in my sig that I restored from a $100 rusty hulk, 2 Range Rover classics, and a 1963 Mercury Comet convertible that is becoming a full custom using a Lexus 4 liter DOHC V8 and Supra 5 speed custom adapted, sitting on a custom frame with air ride suspension.

This thread shows the cars I find the prettiest: http://www.car-forums.com/talk/showthread.php?t=19102

This shows the restoration of the Fiat: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/fiat_spider.htm

So you can see my automotive background and tastes.

I'm a trained graphic designer, and have spent decades studying what works as design and what doesn't, as I was paid to know. But cars have been my passion since birth, and there are NO cars I hate as a group. Maybe individual examples that have stranded me, but I woudn't even use that to damn a type, make or model.

I loved the PT when it was first introduced, but didn't want to pay inflated prices for the first couple years, since it wasn't going to be a limited edition car. I got my 5 speed Touring edition PT in April '02, and have put 68k miles on it, including a season of autocross (where it competed well with MINI coopers and the like). It has been comfortable for long trips (like the 17 hours to Orlando), versatile, carrying HUGE amounts of stuff. It has been perfectly reliable, more fun to drive than it needed to be, and even now, after all teh years of driving it, still as rattle free as new, and as solid as the day I bought it. I'm extremely impressed with the actual quality of construction that shows up in durability, not panel gaps.

And I love the style. The overtones of '37 Ford and Chrysler Airflow mixed with modern detailing and form. They make great basis for building customs from, and stand out from a sea of boring econoboxes and hatchbacks. As a designer and custom car builder, I find them far from hideous. And considering who else in the industry likes them (like Chip Foose, and I doubt anyone can accuse him of having bad taste in cars) I'm in pretty good company.





Yes, it's a tall, small wagon. That's what I bought it for, but it's been one of the best vehicle purchases I've had in the last 27 years, as far as a regular car goes. If it's not for you, that's fine. But don't be insulting about it as though it's stupid. Because that just says you're an ignorant, intolerant kid.
It's nice to hear from someone intelligent. Props to your extensive devotion to cars. I feel the same way; I just don't have the time to put into cars right now that I would like, with school and work.
No, I didn't say the PT Cruiser was stupid-- I just thought that it was ugly. I guess I am just biased because I just am not stirred by the old-style look. One of the reasons they stopped making cars that look like the retro styled cars of today is because Detroit was getting its ass handed by Toyota and other foreign car companies that were making smaller, more graceful looking cars (in laymen's terms).
But, no, many of these "ugly" cars aren't stupid by any means, I hope that wasn't the impression I gave; THEY ARE GREAT CARS.
I would probably love the Dodge Charger, Magnum, 300 series, etc. if they looked like a 350Z. Again, this thread was only to talk about aesthetics, not performance.
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 08:20 PM   #48
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSpirit
No, I didn't say the PT Cruiser was stupid-- I just thought that it was ugly. I guess I am just biased because I just am not stirred by the old-style look.

So just say it's not for you, don't use an inflammatory word like "ugly." It'd be like me coming up to you and saying your girlfriend was ugly, when I really mean, she's not exactly what I'd be looking for.

Quote:
One of the reasons they stopped making cars that look like the retro styled cars of today is because Detroit was getting its ass handed by Toyota and other foreign car companies that were making smaller, more graceful looking cars (in laymen's terms).

? the PT was patterned after a car from the '30s, way before there was any Japanese competition, and when ALL cars pretty much looked like that regardless of country of origin. The cars that the new retro cars emulate are all from the '60s and older, WELL before Detroit was getting it's ass handed to it.

The fact that the imports started kicking Detroit ass was build quality more than anything else. In fact, during the '70s, when Japan started building cars that more people bought, some of the more desireable were derivative of American cars, simply built better with better fuel economy. Cars like the RX2 (which emulated the '67-68 Camaro) the RX3 and Celica GT (which emulated the '69-70 Mustang) and others. In the '80s when Japan really started taking off, Detroit had long since given up on the stylish cars from the '60s and earlier, and were making boxes like the Ford Granada and Fairmont, Chevy Citation and caprice, and the like.

No, Detroit didn't stop making cars like the '70 Mustang, '71 Challenger, or '65 Lincoln because they wanted to keep up with the Japanese, they couldn't keep up with the Japanese because they stopped making cars like those. The instant success of the PT Cruiser, new Mustang, and 300C show exactly that fact to be true. Had they retained their distinct American style AND been built better, the Japanese may have found themselves in a real uphill battle for market share. I grew up in the 60s and '70s and saw this firsthand.

BTW, the Japanese and Europeans have also done many retro cars to good effect (though we haven't seen as many of the Japanese versions on our shores, like the Nissan Be-1 and Figaro, or the Daihatsu Mira Gino)


Quote:
I would probably love the Dodge Charger, Magnum, 300 series, etc. if they looked like a 350Z.

But then they'd simply BE Japanese cars. The point is they are distinctly NOT generic Japanese cars, and they garner critical praise and fanatical followings due to not being generic modern blandmobiles. If you WANT generic Japanese cars, they are available. They already exist. Buy one of them. But just because you are incapable of appreciating the design of them merely means that they are not for you, not that you need to start threads using inflammatory and insulting descriptive terms.

These are the cars that lost it for the domestics:







Not the cars that the PT, Mustang, 300C and Prowler emulate. Your reasoning is based on mistaken facts. Doesn't mean you have to LIKE the cars or buy them. But just try to understand them better before calling them ugly (which, as I said, is an inflammatory and insulting word, designed to denigrate not only the cars, but the people that designed them and bought them).

Thanks.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 08:20 PM   #49
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
steelspirit, i've seen two mistakes you've made. one, you failed to find the other thread about ugly cars. but we've talked about that, and we've moved on.

two, is you honored aondor with a response... he may have said one reasonable thing, this: "AND OH BTW THE NEW MUSTANG IS AWESOME THE 300C is the best chrysler inovation in years!!!".

and even then, i dunno about it being the best inovation, because i dont really keep up on chrysler's doings... point is, i dont see why you responded to something that idiotic and so blatently obviously not though out in the least...

other then that,


chrisV-
would it be acceptable to you for me to say "that car isnt visually appealing to me"? just trying to get a bearing on your thoughts.
__________________
-two great sources to combat ignorance-
google
wikipedia
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 08:45 PM   #50
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
chrisV-
would it be acceptable to you for me to say "that car isnt visually appealing to me"? just trying to get a bearing on your thoughts.

Yup.

I'd usually say, "I understand where the designer was coming from, but I might do something like this..." or "I like much of it, but I'd change this and this to suit my tastes."

And even to me, stock mass produced vehicles are rarely perfectly styled. They are usually compromises. Even the PT wasn't finished the way Brian Nesbitt originally penned it. And I'd change certain things about it were I to have the money to do it in MY style. The main thing is that it's actually pretty easy to say you like one thing better than another without saying the other is necessarily bad.

My gripe usually comes from people that really don't have much in the way of knowledge of automotive history taking a cheap pot shot at a successful modern car (often one with much critical acclaim for it's style) as the "ugliest car ever." To me it's more of a knee jerk reaction to popularity, like hating on any other thing that becomes popular. It's less about the thing itself but the person's relationship with popular culture.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 10:28 PM   #51
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
So just say it's not for you, don't use an inflammatory word like "ugly." It'd be like me coming up to you and saying your girlfriend was ugly, when I really mean, she's not exactly what I'd be looking for.
I see your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
? the PT was patterned after a car from the '30s, way before there was any Japanese competition, and when ALL cars pretty much looked like that regardless of country of origin. The cars that the new retro cars emulate are all from the '60s and older, WELL before Detroit was getting it's ass handed to it.

The fact that the imports started kicking Detroit ass was build quality more than anything else. In fact, during the '70s, when Japan started building cars that more people bought, some of the more desireable were derivative of American cars, simply built better with better fuel economy. Cars like the RX2 (which emulated the '67-68 Camaro) the RX3 and Celica GT (which emulated the '69-70 Mustang) and others. In the '80s when Japan really started taking off, Detroit had long since given up on the stylish cars from the '60s and earlier, and were making boxes like the Ford Granada and Fairmont, Chevy Citation and caprice, and the like.

No, Detroit didn't stop making cars like the '70 Mustang, '71 Challenger, or '65 Lincoln because they wanted to keep up with the Japanese, they couldn't keep up with the Japanese because they stopped making cars like those. The instant success of the PT Cruiser, new Mustang, and 300C show exactly that fact to be true. Had they retained their distinct American style AND been built better, the Japanese may have found themselves in a real uphill battle for market share. I grew up in the 60s and '70s and saw this firsthand.
Yeah, I was just making a very bland generalization in the interest of not writing a book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
BTW, the Japanese and Europeans have also done many retro cars to good effect (though we haven't seen as many of the Japanese versions on our shores, like the Nissan Be-1 and Figaro, or the Daihatsu Mira Gino)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
But then they'd simply BE Japanese cars. The point is they are distinctly NOT generic Japanese cars, and they garner critical praise and fanatical followings due to not being generic modern blandmobiles.
Well, there is more to a car than the body style, I acknowledged that. A 300C wouldn't be a Japanese car if you put a 350Z body on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
If you WANT generic Japanese cars, they are available. They already exist. Buy one of them. But just because you are incapable of appreciating the design of them merely means that they are not for you, not that you need to start threads using inflammatory and insulting descriptive terms.
I have owned mostly foreign cars, but of late, I have decided to take a stand and only buy American made cars. Our national deficit grows annually and foreign cars definitely contribute greatly towards that end. But seriously, do you really think a PT Cruiser looks better than a Nissan 350Z or an RX-8? Neither of those cars looks anything close to bland, by any standards.
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 10:58 PM   #52
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
Yup.

I'd usually say, "I understand where the designer was coming from, but I might do something like this..." or "I like much of it, but I'd change this and this to suit my tastes."
Yeah, I made some bad word choices in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
And even to me, stock mass produced vehicles are rarely perfectly styled. They are usually compromises. Even the PT wasn't finished the way Brian Nesbitt originally penned it. And I'd change certain things about it were I to have the money to do it in MY style. The main thing is that it's actually pretty easy to say you like one thing better than another without saying the other is necessarily bad.
Very true. I have been dreaming about the 2005 GTO that I am gonna purchase soon for some time and I have had to defend its look numerous times, coincidentally against friends who all own Acura TL's and Hondas. Granted they look like a cross between a Chevy Cavalier and a Mazda 6, and stock, look rather bland. In my mind though, I'll admit that muscle cars were never about looking futuristic or aesthetics, but to me, the GTO looks the way I would think that muscle cars should after another 30 years of evolution. It doesn't try to emulate something that was popular decades ago, but instead stuck to simplicity. But they look really good with some new front, back, and side fascias and some bling-bling rims.
Most stock car designs, performance-wise and aesthetically speaking are rather dull or sometimes compromised to try and appeal to the largest audience while not turning away others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
My gripe usually comes from people that really don't have much in the way of knowledge of automotive history taking a cheap pot shot at a successful modern car (often one with much critical acclaim for it's style) as the "ugliest car ever." To me it's more of a knee jerk reaction to popularity, like hating on any other thing that becomes popular. It's less about the thing itself but the person's relationship with popular culture.
Very true, but not in my case. Regardless of popular opinion, I just thought that some of the new American made cars look as though ergonomics and aesthetics were not a factor in an attempt at making them look "tough".
But does someone have to know the history of a car to think that a car is unattractive or attractive?
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 11:09 PM   #53
vwhobo
CF's Anal Orifice
 
vwhobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Redneck Hell
Posts: 8,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSpirit
I have owned mostly foreign cars, but of late, I have decided to take a stand and only buy American made cars. Our national deficit grows annually and foreign cars definitely contribute greatly towards that end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSpirit
I have been dreaming about the 2005 GTO that I am gonna purchase soon for some time...
Hey Twinkie. I know you're intellectually superior to everyone on this forum (at least in your own mind), so this should be real easy for you. Look at your two statements above, and tell us how you're contradicting yourself. Then entertain us with your tap dance attempting to justify why. This is just further proof that you are not what you claim to be, only a whiner and a post whore.
__________________
Thanks for the pic, jedimario.

"Everybody believes in something and everybody, by virtue of the fact that they believe in something, use that something to support their own existence."
Frank Vincent Zappa, 1940-1993

vwhobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:05 AM   #54
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwhobo
Hey Twinkie. I know you're intellectually superior to everyone on this forum (at least in your own mind), so this should be real easy for you. Look at your two statements above, and tell us how you're contradicting yourself. Then entertain us with your tap dance attempting to justify why. This is just further proof that you are not what you claim to be, only a whiner and a post whore.
Well, lookie-lookie who is back for round 2! I should have known that you don't have the minerals to just drop the whole stupid thing. You really lack class, VBHOMO. I tried to bury the hatchet with you and give you props where it is deserved, but I guess that was a premature decision...
I made an admirable attempt at being descent to you, only to have it thrown back in my face.
By the way, how's your kitty-cat? Do you two share the litter box or do you have your own with your name, VBHOMO, embossed on the side?

I could try to further entertain you but I must admit, I have no idea what you are blathering about this time.

Where is the contradiction in saying that I have been dreaming about having a GTO and am planning on buying one in the near future?
Where is the contradiction in saying that the popularity of foreign cars is partially responsible for the 40 trillion dollar national deficit?

Really, why do you insist on interjecting your mindless trash-talk when two people are being civil to each other and having an intelligent discussion? Do you suffer from Terrell Owens syndrome and get uncomfortable unless you are in the limelight?
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:24 AM   #55
vwhobo
CF's Anal Orifice
 
vwhobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Redneck Hell
Posts: 8,630
Because you moron, your beloved GTO is made in Australia. The last time I checked, Australia is not a part of the USA and is therefore a foreign country. As much as I love my Australian friends, GM is selling a car to simple minded individuals like you and passing it off as an American car.

Of course, someone of your supreme intellectual stature would be fully aware of that and would never buy such a machine based on the fact that it is NOT American made. So once again Twinkie, you have your own foot inserted deeply into your mouth. When you're done with that delicacy, perhaps you'd like to have what my kitty accidentally dumped on the floor for a second course.

I think it's time for you to spend less time typing and more time learning. That is unless you feel the need to peg out your post whore-o-meter and entertain us with more of your inane, ignorant, imbecilic and uniformed opinions. Come back and see us in a few years when you grow some pubic hair and your balls drop... Out of your mouth.
__________________
Thanks for the pic, jedimario.

"Everybody believes in something and everybody, by virtue of the fact that they believe in something, use that something to support their own existence."
Frank Vincent Zappa, 1940-1993

vwhobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:31 AM   #56
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwhobo
Because you moron, your beloved GTO is made in Australia. The last time I checked, Australia is not a part of the USA and is therefore a foreign country. As much as I love my Australian friends, GM is selling a car to simple minded individuals like you and passing it off as an American car.

Of course, someone of your supreme intellectual stature would be fully aware of that and would never buy such a machine based on the fact that it is NOT American made. So once again Twinkie, you have your own foot inserted deeply into your mouth. When you're done with that delicacy, perhaps you'd like to have what my kitty accidentally dumped on the floor for a second course.

I think it's time for you to spend less time typing and more time learning. That is unless you feel the need to peg out your post whore-o-meter and entertain us with more of your inane, ignorant, imbecilic and uniformed opinions. Come back and see us in a few years when you grow some pubic hair and your balls drop... Out of your mouth.
And again you are wrong, ****head.
The GTO is BASED upon the chassis of the Australian made Monero, which is where Pontiac derived its inspiration from. That and the body style is where the similarity ends.
The GTO however, was adapted in 2004 for America (adding the 5.7L LS1) and is manufactured in the US by PONTIAC which is in turn owned by GM (who is an American manufacturer last I checked).
Try again, VBHOMO.
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:36 AM   #57
elchango36
WWJCD
 
elchango36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Last year @ SIUC
Posts: 2,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwhobo
Because you moron, your beloved GTO is made in Australia. The last time I checked, Australia is not a part of the USA and is therefore a foreign country. As much as I love my Australian friends, GM is selling a car to simple minded individuals like you and passing it off as an American car.
...
Come back and see us in a few years when you grow some pubic hair and your balls drop... Out of your mouth.

LOL...
__________________
elchango36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:40 AM   #58
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSpirit
And again you are wrong, ****head.
The GTO is BASED upon the chassis of the Australian made Monero, which is where Pontiac derived its inspiration from. That and the body style is where the similarity ends.
The GTO however, was adapted in 2004 for America (adding the 5.7L LS1) and is manufactured in the US by PONTIAC which is in turn owned by GM (who is an American manufacturer last I checked).
Try again, VBHOMO.
And no, I don't auto-fellate myself, but I hear that in Redneck Hell, you guys have family trees like telephone poles.
Besides get, things straight: you are the one who brought up intelligence first (reread the beginning of this thread). I have never used my IQ as a weapon in an argument unless some rat-****ed dickbrain like you brings that into the argument first.
Would you like some ketchup with that foot of yours? Oh wait, first you need to unbury your nose from Aondor's pubes.
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:42 AM   #59
chris_knows
๑۩۞
 
chris_knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada Status:Trying to find my ish
Posts: 7,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSpirit
And no, I don't auto-fellate myself, but I hear that in Redneck Hell, you guys have family trees like telephone poles.
Besides get, things straight: you are the one who brought up intelligence first (reread the beginning of this thread). I have never used my IQ as a weapon in an argument unless some rat-****ed dickbrain like you brings that into the argument first.
Would you like some ketchup with that foot of yours? Oh wait, first you need to unbury your nose from Aondor's pubes.

What's wronq with you?...You were proven wrong...give it up
__________________
chris_knows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:43 AM   #60
SteelSpirit
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris_knows
What's wronq with you?...You were proven wrong...give it up
Where was I proven wrong? Did you read my last post?
SteelSpirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.