Lack of accountability is nonpartisan.

What a load of crap. If he’s failed to pay child support, then what he deserves is to lose a civil action brought by his wife to enforce his obligations.

“the dog alerted” is the most widely used lie in law enforcement.

Why do so many vote in the kinds of people they claim to hate?

“Sounding suspicious as hell”, “not trusting banks”, and “raising red flags for random internet commentators” is not, as far as I’m aware, any legal test for the seizure of assets.  

Fortunately, The State of Indiana v Timb’s has started to put some constraints on this practice.

Trigger warning to Tesla stans:

The trouble is that all the screaming and hollering about how horrible it is doesn’t jive with the reality many people experience. Where I grew up, it’s common to not just drink, then drive, but to drink while driving. Hell, a Sunday afternoon with a travel mug full of margaritas and a nice drive is really rather…

It’s pretty wild. I’m not advocating for drunk driving and never would. I am of the generation that had DARE and MADD coming into schools and I was fully convinced that drugs and alcohol were going to be the end of me if I ever ended up trying. I’ve never driven after a single drink. But this man is more discussing…

This was written pre-brainwash. That is why it seems so odd to you.

Drunk driving is bad, sure, and it’s also been demonized to the point of parody.

They don’t care if it happens, they care if they have the paperwork indicating it’s not their problem.

Can the state be culpable for providing the highway on which  the accident occurred?

Never buy a car in its first model year!

That was a good comment until the last sentence when it became a GREAT comment.

A friend of mine bought an 04 Pontiac GTO with the 5.7l in the late ‘00's. I had driven tons of Chevy Trucks with the 5.7l, so I wasn’t initially not intimidated by the car. The first time I turned off the traction control, the car grabbed 2nd gear and we went sideways, I was terrified. Just the 350hp/365 ft-lbs was…

Too accessible? Ok, I’ll bite. Most people today have not had the opportunity to drive an old ‘60's car outfitted with the largest available engine, but when I got my ‘68 Chrysler New Yorker with the 440, it was a real eye opener, me being used to common 90's cars. 350hp, but 465 ft-lbs of torque standard. On the test…

I really think the difference is in how the power is used. 300hp in a 2005 Mustang GT feels correct and adequate. 300hp in a 2005 WRX STi feels like a mountain lion is clawing your face off.

For me, it’s the recent (maybe decade-old) revelation that the Toyota Camry now has more horsepower than most of the cars in the muscle car era. I drive a 1968 Cutlass and a 1989 Firebird. I can’t tell you how many people like to point out you can get a Camry with more horsepower.

My e39 M5 wasn’t that fast by todays standards, but was fast enough that the power became frustrating. I’m a firm believer that to really get a thrill out of a sports car you need to be pushing it a bit, and pushing the M5 meant I was in go-to-jail territory pretty quickly, which also meant I didn’t get to push it…