"Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
. ..
> dwight wrote:
>> "Rich" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> The traditional idea of a muscle car was a stripped-down product, with
>>> power. In later years (1970-71) the muscle car version of a line
>>> became almost a luxury vehicle. Now, Ford only knows that kind.
>>> Check out the sticker on a convertible GT in Toronto, Canada.
>>>
>>> $45k, plus $3000 insurance (way more if you are younger) and $3000/yr
>>> in gas means this car costs about the same as the mortgage to a medium-
>>> priced condo or a cheap house.
>>>
>>> http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/100830683
>>
>> Is there a point here? Are you somehow mad at Ford for not putting
>> "muscle cars" in the hands of more young people?
>>
>> I don't get it.
>
> This guy resides in my kill file because he is a low grade troll. He
> posts the same worthless crap in the photography newsgroups and gets
> slapped around their too.

Yes, thanks, I know. But a weakness of mine is in trying to understand what
prompts this sort of post. And what the intended reaction was supposed to
be...

)