Revitalized Malibu Takes on Accord and Camry

On Apr 21, 7:26*pm, "Sharx35" > wrote:
> "cavedweller" > wrote in message
>
> ...

>
> > ....exclaimed he, without a single clip. *But anyway, "from whence" is
> > incorrect..."whence" already includes the "from".
>
> Oh? That is open to debate and I quote:
>
> Q] From Marty Robinson: Last week you quoted Sir Christopher Wren as
> referring to 'The Ailes, from whence arise Bows or Flying Buttresses to the
> Walls of the Navis.' I'm sorry to learn that Sir Christopher used the
> redundancy from whence.
>
> [A] This is another of those grammatical shibboleths, like avoiding a plural
> verb with none or not splitting one's infinitives, that are open to
> linguistic debate, to put it mildly. The argument against this form is that
> whence already includes the idea of coming from some place, so that
> including from makes it tautological.
>
> The debate is complicated by the fact that whence is not that common a word
> these days, being rather literary; I had trouble finding a modern example
> that wasn't prefixed by from. This is from Newsday of 11 November 2004: "He
> is a legendary figure in his native England, whence I have just returned."
> That's a good example of the "proper" use.
>
> Objectors to from whence have support in logic, but logic doesn't feature
> much in English constructions, especially idioms, which is how one perhaps
> should regard the phrase these days. One newspaper archive I consulted,
> hardly comprehensive, contained more than 250 cases of from whence just in
> 2004. It succeeds because it is informal and colloquial compared with whence
> used alone, a construction that is unusual enough to force readers to stop
> and work out the meaning.
>
> And even a brief look at historical sources shows that from whence has been
> common since the thirteenth century. It has been used by Shakespeare, Defoe
> (in the opening of Robinson Crusoe: "He got a good estate by merchandise,
> and leaving off his trade, lived afterwards at York; from whence he had
> married my mother"), Smollett, Dickens (in A Christmas Carol: "He began to
> think that the source and secret of this ghostly light might be in the
> adjoining room, from whence, on further tracing it, it seemed to shine"),
> Dryden, Gibbon, Twain (in Innocents Abroad: "He traveled all around, till at
> last he came to the place from whence he started"), and Trollope, and it
> appears 27 times in the King James Bible (including Psalm 121: "I will lift
> up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help").
>
> Though Dr Johnson objected to it in his Dictionary of 1755, calling it "A
> vicious mode of speech" (he meant it was reprehensible, not depraved or
> savage), most objections to it are no earlier than the twentieth century.
> One reason may be that its critics are unaware of its long pedigree.
>
> World Wide Words is copyright © Michael Quinion, 1996-2009. All rights
> reserved. Contact the author if you want to reproduce this piece, but first
> see my advice page, which also has notes about linking. Your comments and
> corrections are welcome
>
> ******
> BTW, "troglodyte" is a better alias than "cavedweller".

Perhaps, but what would YOU ever do without Google?

Nate Nagel wrote:
> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> Sharx35 wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Grumpy AuContraire" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sharx35 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Grumpy AuContraire" > wrote in
>>>>>> message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just don't ask your question of anybody in the "collector" auto
>>>>>>>>> circle. To
>>>>>>>>> them, anything under 50 years-old is "modern", and they will
>>>>>>>>> sneer at you
>>>>>>>>> aggressively for your impertinence.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Antiques and Classics are a whole different story. A 17 year
>>>>>>>> old Honda or Toyota is not either one of those. It's just a 17
>>>>>>>> year old car.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But then there are the 1st and 2nd generation Civics of which two
>>>>>>> are notable...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1983 Civic 1500 "S" which was the forerunner of the early CRX
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1982-83 1300 Civic FE which was the forerunner of the early
>>>>>>> CRX(s) that got great fuel economy.... 40+ MPG City and 55 MPG
>>>>>>> Highway in actual real world tests..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> JT
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Take your Honda **** to the Honda newsgroup, PLEASE.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ahhhh, I see you reveal yourself for what you are... Uneducated,
>>>>> intolerant and just a general doofus!
>>>>>
>>>>> Congratulations!
>>>>>
>>>>> JT
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suck dick, cumwad. I don't go to a Toyota newsgroup to read about
>>>> ricer junk aka Honda products.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You do realize that he's probably posting from r.a.m.honda, yes? Or
>>> are you really that refreshingly clue-free?
>>>
>>> nate
>>
>>
>>
>> Heh heh... Clue free is rampant these day!
>>
>> BTW, Howz JP doing???
>>
>
> Still alive and kicking, and buying Avantis against his better judgement
>
> I on the other hand have been listening to his advice and passing on all
> of them...
>
>



Yep, good time to bury your money in the back yard and keep at least 90
days of supplies on hand...

JT

80 Knight wrote:

> "Grumpy AuContraire" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>>SMS wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Well, we're talkin' 25 to 26 years of age here. And, the great thing is
>>>>that they are "old school," I.E., no computer, no "check engine" light
>>>>and even lack a PCV valve. Just right for an old fart like me to
>>>>maintain and repair which really doesn't happen very often.
>>>>
>>>>Sometimes the latest and greatest ain't really so...
>>>
>>>
>>>Still lots of late 1980's to early 1990's Accords and Camrys on the road,
>>>still fetching 2-4K on the used market. You have to chuckle when you see
>>>the ads from Ford and GM trying to compare initial purchase prices of new
>>>vehicles, i.e. the Malibu, since they are forced to leave longevity out
>>>of the equation. It's not just having to purchase 2x the number of
>>>vehicles for the same time period, it's the resale value if you do choose
>>>to sell after only 8-10 years.
>>
>>
>>My neighbor who likes to fiddle with old (pre 1963) cars occasionally has
>>to work on his mother's late 1980ish Oldsmobile with a Quad Four engine.
>>Car only has about 80K on the odometer yet it runs like **** and is next
>>to impossible to diagnose or repair. Freakin' thing has been laid up for
>>months!
>>
>>Everything is in the way of everything else. Industrial engineering at
>>GM??? Not as far as I can see...
>>
>><sigh>
>
>
> Do you realize how foolish you make yourself look when you compair 2009
> vehicles to 1980's vehicles?
>


Went right over your li'l haid, eh?

JT

"cavedweller" > wrote in message
...
> On Apr 21, 7:26 pm, "Sharx35" > wrote:
>> "cavedweller" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>
>>
>> > ....exclaimed he, without a single clip. But anyway, "from whence" is
>> > incorrect..."whence" already includes the "from".
>>
>> Oh? That is open to debate and I quote:
>>
>> Q] From Marty Robinson: Last week you quoted Sir Christopher Wren as
>> referring to 'The Ailes, from whence arise Bows or Flying Buttresses to
>> the
>> Walls of the Navis.' I'm sorry to learn that Sir Christopher used the
>> redundancy from whence.
>>
>> [A] This is another of those grammatical shibboleths, like avoiding a
>> plural
>> verb with none or not splitting one's infinitives, that are open to
>> linguistic debate, to put it mildly. The argument against this form is
>> that
>> whence already includes the idea of coming from some place, so that
>> including from makes it tautological.
>>
>> The debate is complicated by the fact that whence is not that common a
>> word
>> these days, being rather literary; I had trouble finding a modern example
>> that wasn't prefixed by from. This is from Newsday of 11 November 2004:
>> "He
>> is a legendary figure in his native England, whence I have just
>> returned."
>> That's a good example of the "proper" use.
>>
>> Objectors to from whence have support in logic, but logic doesn't feature
>> much in English constructions, especially idioms, which is how one
>> perhaps
>> should regard the phrase these days. One newspaper archive I consulted,
>> hardly comprehensive, contained more than 250 cases of from whence just
>> in
>> 2004. It succeeds because it is informal and colloquial compared with
>> whence
>> used alone, a construction that is unusual enough to force readers to
>> stop
>> and work out the meaning.
>>
>> And even a brief look at historical sources shows that from whence has
>> been
>> common since the thirteenth century. It has been used by Shakespeare,
>> Defoe
>> (in the opening of Robinson Crusoe: "He got a good estate by merchandise,
>> and leaving off his trade, lived afterwards at York; from whence he had
>> married my mother"), Smollett, Dickens (in A Christmas Carol: "He began
>> to
>> think that the source and secret of this ghostly light might be in the
>> adjoining room, from whence, on further tracing it, it seemed to shine"),
>> Dryden, Gibbon, Twain (in Innocents Abroad: "He traveled all around, till
>> at
>> last he came to the place from whence he started"), and Trollope, and it
>> appears 27 times in the King James Bible (including Psalm 121: "I will
>> lift
>> up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help").
>>
>> Though Dr Johnson objected to it in his Dictionary of 1755, calling it "A
>> vicious mode of speech" (he meant it was reprehensible, not depraved or
>> savage), most objections to it are no earlier than the twentieth century.
>> One reason may be that its critics are unaware of its long pedigree.
>>
>> World Wide Words is copyright © Michael Quinion, 1996-2009. All rights
>> reserved. Contact the author if you want to reproduce this piece, but
>> first
>> see my advice page, which also has notes about linking. Your comments and
>> corrections are welcome
>>
>> ******
>> BTW, "troglodyte" is a better alias than "cavedweller".
>
> Perhaps, but what would YOU ever do without Google?

Heh, heh. Spend even MORE time on the net, using a lower level of abuse?

Sharx35 wrote:
>
> "Canuck57" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Sharx35" > wrote in message
>> news:FcwGl.24207$PH1.21389@edtnps82...
>>>
>>> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Mike Marlow" > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Sharx35" > wrote in message
>>>>> newsLuGl.22792$Db2.11621@edtnps83...
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmmm. My Camry is only ten years old so I won't be in the market for
>>>>>> at least another SEVEN years. Hypothetically, though, instead of the
>>>>>> 99CE 6 cyl. I have, I might go for a new, closer to the top of the
>>>>>> line Camry. To me, Honda is overpriced.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who would want to driver around in an 17 year old car?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Me, for instance. My car is 18 years old. Bought it new, too.
>>>>
>>>> Just don't ask your question of anybody in the "collector" auto
>>>> circle. To
>>>> them, anything under 50 years-old is "modern", and they will sneer
>>>> at you
>>>> aggressively for your impertinence.
>>>
>>> I'd call it something else, like a complete lack of values...no
>>> wonder the world is in a recession.
>>
>> That is why recession/depressions occur, too much fat and leach on the
>> hind, causes the economic animal to get sick. Once enough leaches are
>> off the hind, the recovery can begin. The more leaches shaken off,
>> the better the recovery. Far too many in sociaty BS their way with
>> their corrupt values.
>>
>> Sort of like GMers, it is everyone elses fault but GMs. Delusional
>> sickness for sure.
>>
>> Amazing how many in this recession do not have respect for debt.
>>
>
> Mike seems to wear it as a badge of honour. Frankly, anyone saddled
> with years and years of car payments because they INSIST on always
> trading in their vehicles is, IMHO, a loser.

Or someone who decides how to spend their own money instead of leaving
it up to you?

Canuck57 wrote:

<snip>

> I tried retirement at 51 for 3 months, it sucked, I was bored. Decided to
> go back to work, new job has low hours, lots of time off. Just wish we
> could do the 4 day work week every week.... maybe my next job. But taking
> every Friday off in the summer. I made sure of that before I started. And
> maybe do Costa Rica in December.

Now you're talking!

"Tony Harding" > wrote in message
...
> Sharx35 wrote:
>>
>> "Canuck57" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Sharx35" > wrote in message
>>> news:FcwGl.24207$PH1.21389@edtnps82...
>>>>
>>>> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "Mike Marlow" > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Sharx35" > wrote in message
>>>>>> newsLuGl.22792$Db2.11621@edtnps83...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmmm. My Camry is only ten years old so I won't be in the market for
>>>>>>> at least another SEVEN years. Hypothetically, though, instead of the
>>>>>>> 99CE 6 cyl. I have, I might go for a new, closer to the top of the
>>>>>>> line Camry. To me, Honda is overpriced.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who would want to driver around in an 17 year old car?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Me, for instance. My car is 18 years old. Bought it new, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just don't ask your question of anybody in the "collector" auto
>>>>> circle. To
>>>>> them, anything under 50 years-old is "modern", and they will sneer at
>>>>> you
>>>>> aggressively for your impertinence.
>>>>
>>>> I'd call it something else, like a complete lack of values...no wonder
>>>> the world is in a recession.
>>>
>>> That is why recession/depressions occur, too much fat and leach on the
>>> hind, causes the economic animal to get sick. Once enough leaches are
>>> off the hind, the recovery can begin. The more leaches shaken off, the
>>> better the recovery. Far too many in sociaty BS their way with their
>>> corrupt values.
>>>
>>> Sort of like GMers, it is everyone elses fault but GMs. Delusional
>>> sickness for sure.
>>>
>>> Amazing how many in this recession do not have respect for debt.
>>>
>>
>> Mike seems to wear it as a badge of honour. Frankly, anyone saddled with
>> years and years of car payments because they INSIST on always trading in
>> their vehicles is, IMHO, a loser.
>
> Or someone who decides how to spend their own money instead of leaving it
> up to you?

ANYone is free to be a complete fool and waste their money--look at all the
idiots in the U.S. who ****ed themselves financially by not practicing sane
financial practices. Betcha you were one of them.

"Tony Harding" > wrote in message
...
> Canuck57 wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I tried retirement at 51 for 3 months, it sucked, I was bored. Decided
>> to go back to work, new job has low hours, lots of time off. Just wish
>> we could do the 4 day work week every week.... maybe my next job. But
>> taking every Friday off in the summer. I made sure of that before I
>> started. And maybe do Costa Rica in December.
>
> Now you're talking!

People constantly trading in their vehicle will end up never been able to
retire.

Sharx35 wrote:
>
> "Tony Harding" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Canuck57 wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> I tried retirement at 51 for 3 months, it sucked, I was bored.
>>> Decided to go back to work, new job has low hours, lots of time off.
>>> Just wish we could do the 4 day work week every week.... maybe my
>>> next job. But taking every Friday off in the summer. I made sure of
>>> that before I started. And maybe do Costa Rica in December.
>>
>> Now you're talking!
>
> People constantly trading in their vehicle will end up never been able
> to retire.

Agreed!

I've been retired 7 years now (lived in NYC 12 years while I was working
and didn't even own a car then - it was the first time I ever felt as
though I was making a lot of money) and highly recommend it. I was
cheering the Costa Rica part of your post - definitely on my short list
of places to visit before I join the choir invisible.

Sharx35 wrote:

<snip>

> GM should have been fed to the sharks.

It's not too late, or maybe the sharks don't want it?