@garageinc.bsky.social
That means he voted for Cuomo
November 6, 2025 at 6:15 AM
That means he voted for Cuomo
Sliwa is the only honorable person among those three. He stayed true to his word and didn’t drop out of the race when he was offered a lot of money to do that, repeatedly. And I don’t doubt him when he says that.
November 6, 2025 at 6:09 AM
Sliwa is the only honorable person among those three. He stayed true to his word and didn’t drop out of the race when he was offered a lot of money to do that, repeatedly. And I don’t doubt him when he says that.
Have you told Charlie Kirk that, with his published hit list of people whose views he didn’t like, for his fans to harass, make death threats and hound out of their jobs and their homes?
& is it a “political view” that murdering kids is ok as long as 2A rights are preserved?
& is it a “political view” that murdering kids is ok as long as 2A rights are preserved?
September 12, 2025 at 2:29 PM
Have you told Charlie Kirk that, with his published hit list of people whose views he didn’t like, for his fans to harass, make death threats and hound out of their jobs and their homes?
& is it a “political view” that murdering kids is ok as long as 2A rights are preserved?
& is it a “political view” that murdering kids is ok as long as 2A rights are preserved?
What are the odds that she will be drunk on duty?
August 3, 2025 at 5:32 AM
What are the odds that she will be drunk on duty?
The guy is desperate to be oppressed. At this point, if he can’t play the victim his whole personality and reason to exist would vanish.
August 2, 2025 at 7:55 PM
The guy is desperate to be oppressed. At this point, if he can’t play the victim his whole personality and reason to exist would vanish.
Remember: if someone refuses to serve him because he’s a suit-wearing moral black hole that’s discrimination but when bakers refuse a gay wedding cake that’s 100% justified and OK.
July 31, 2025 at 9:52 PM
Remember: if someone refuses to serve him because he’s a suit-wearing moral black hole that’s discrimination but when bakers refuse a gay wedding cake that’s 100% justified and OK.
Those things were terrible when new - my best friends’ dad had one growing up. Nothing but problems from taking it home from the dealership in 1977 to when they traded it in, in 1982.
July 29, 2025 at 7:24 PM
Those things were terrible when new - my best friends’ dad had one growing up. Nothing but problems from taking it home from the dealership in 1977 to when they traded it in, in 1982.
Way to be part of the problem, Dodge. One of the reasons I bought a new truck from another automaker last week and not a new Durango is shit like this, and other Dodge owners who always seem to be half or more of every street takeover that makes the news…
July 28, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Way to be part of the problem, Dodge. One of the reasons I bought a new truck from another automaker last week and not a new Durango is shit like this, and other Dodge owners who always seem to be half or more of every street takeover that makes the news…
Promises, promises 😂
July 19, 2025 at 10:12 PM
Promises, promises 😂
No, we can’t. They’re not the same thing.
July 3, 2025 at 2:57 AM
No, we can’t. They’re not the same thing.
Lane splitting is very much NOT “weaving in and out of traffic”. And your point about insurance is irrelevant to lane splitting.
July 2, 2025 at 3:36 PM
Lane splitting is very much NOT “weaving in and out of traffic”. And your point about insurance is irrelevant to lane splitting.
Tell me you haven’t lived in California, without telling me that. Your terrible take is noted. 38 year rider here, 350,000+ miles so far.
July 2, 2025 at 3:34 PM
Tell me you haven’t lived in California, without telling me that. Your terrible take is noted. 38 year rider here, 350,000+ miles so far.
You’d have a hard time with your argument here in California, where lane splitting has been common and widespread practice for decades and it’s been shown to be safer for motorcyclists than not lane splitting.
July 2, 2025 at 2:38 AM
You’d have a hard time with your argument here in California, where lane splitting has been common and widespread practice for decades and it’s been shown to be safer for motorcyclists than not lane splitting.
Do you have anything to say other than baseless, ignorant fearmongering?
July 2, 2025 at 2:34 AM
Do you have anything to say other than baseless, ignorant fearmongering?
Yes, that the practice is safe and effective, just as it is in most of the rest of the world. Once again, California has been ahead of much of the rest of the USA for decades.
July 2, 2025 at 2:32 AM
Yes, that the practice is safe and effective, just as it is in most of the rest of the world. Once again, California has been ahead of much of the rest of the USA for decades.
California rider here. It is neither scary nor dangerous when done as intended.
July 2, 2025 at 2:30 AM
California rider here. It is neither scary nor dangerous when done as intended.
Lane splitting has been common practice in California for decades. It is much safer for motorcyclists than sitting in stopped traffic waiting to be rear ended, which has happened to me three times - never while lane splitting. I have been riding motorcycles for nearly 30 years now.
July 2, 2025 at 2:29 AM
Lane splitting has been common practice in California for decades. It is much safer for motorcyclists than sitting in stopped traffic waiting to be rear ended, which has happened to me three times - never while lane splitting. I have been riding motorcycles for nearly 30 years now.
Proof, please. Or are you just making things up to be snarky?
July 2, 2025 at 2:27 AM
Proof, please. Or are you just making things up to be snarky?
@nytimes.com -
Every time your editorial board does another dumb thing - like endorsing Cuomo, the corrupt sex pest - I am reminded yet again that canceling our family’s 40 year long print subscription to your paper in January was the correct decision.
For the love of God, do better.
Every time your editorial board does another dumb thing - like endorsing Cuomo, the corrupt sex pest - I am reminded yet again that canceling our family’s 40 year long print subscription to your paper in January was the correct decision.
For the love of God, do better.
June 25, 2025 at 11:24 AM
@nytimes.com -
Every time your editorial board does another dumb thing - like endorsing Cuomo, the corrupt sex pest - I am reminded yet again that canceling our family’s 40 year long print subscription to your paper in January was the correct decision.
For the love of God, do better.
Every time your editorial board does another dumb thing - like endorsing Cuomo, the corrupt sex pest - I am reminded yet again that canceling our family’s 40 year long print subscription to your paper in January was the correct decision.
For the love of God, do better.
Nah, not here for your bad faith dishonesty and propaganda , JD.
Blocking you is a lovely start to my day. :)
Blocking you is a lovely start to my day. :)
June 20, 2025 at 5:07 PM
Nah, not here for your bad faith dishonesty and propaganda , JD.
Blocking you is a lovely start to my day. :)
Blocking you is a lovely start to my day. :)
The OP is indulging his public humiliation kink 😂
June 4, 2025 at 5:21 AM
The OP is indulging his public humiliation kink 😂