"grossly oversized, overcapable and overpriced, as well as dodgy to drive, fuel-inefficient, unreliable, not particularly crashworthy and politically incorrect"

 

Funny, that's exactly what I've always said about The New York Times.

 

Isn't that what they said about the Excursion and most recently the H2? Since when is "overcapable" a strike against a truck?

 

The author of that piece prolly tools around in an Excursion...Kevin

 

Consider the source! Didnt this so called newspaper say Saddam and the UN were good? Blow me I dont give Damn what the Liberals think!


https://www.f150online.com/galleries....cfm?gnum=4104

 

The New York Times owners are also part owners of the Boston Red Sox, so they are continually shotting themselves in the foot. I wouldn't believe much that they print.

 

I'd expect no less from a bunch of posey sniffing tree hugging liberals

 

Phew....I was afraid they would have liked it. That would have contradicted everything I believe in. If I every agree with that rag I'll be in trouble....

Jim

 

vader716 posted;

"Phew....I was afraid they would have liked it. That would have contradicted everything I believe in. If I every agree with that rag I'll be in trouble...."

Ditto.


Of course if it's in the Times, it's not true so the trucks must be better than I thought.
Chris

 

The new york times ( they don't deserve the respect of Capital Letters) is the U.S. version of AL-Jazerra TV.They exist purely to tear apart all that is good in this Country. It wouldn't suprise me a bit if it came out that they are secretly supporting terrorism.......

Sorry, done with my rant now........

 

I'm getting so damn sick of hearing that

 

Hey now, you could have left the comments out about the Red Sox's.
haha

 

I'm just saying that they contradict many of there opinions and tha tis just an example of one way they do.

No offense to any BOSOX or YANKS or METS out there.

 

The NY Times can lick my nine.

 

If the NY Times is "against" it, I'm "for" it!