6 thoughts on “Elon Musk: A Most Peculiar Test Drive”

  1. You are not the only one with your belief about the unnecessary frame up of OJ Simpson. To me that belief fits more with the claim of a fake moon landing.

    Let’s look at a similar case involving the black fellow in Florida who was pulled over in the middle of a pitch black night. He actually was a police official from a nearby jurisdiction. He ordered the officer to cease writing him up, slapped the ticket book out of the officer’s hands, and ran off. The incident was taped, and the guy was a real jackass.

    The man should have apologized and praised the officer for doing his duty despite the plea for special treatment. Instead there was a trial where the man said he was pulled over for driving while black. He held to his belief even though the windows on his car were tainted. Nobody could see who was driving the car at all. That is true of the cases on the New Jersey Turnpike too. It is nearly impossible to see the drivers as they wiz by you at 80 miles an hour.

    The stopped man held to his DWD claim after it was shown asolutely to be false.

    There was absolutely no evidence what so ever that the LA police department did anything unfair to OJ Simpson or his case. Just the contrary: DNA tests were done quickly to get the expected exoneration of Mr. Simpson as quickly as possible as celebrities are open to large losses from adverse publicity.

  2. No definite proof, but I thought it was quite obvious that he was completely guilty AND police framed him (incompetently) to bolster the case.

    If not for the set-up, Simpson would have been convicted. You do remember what people were chanting in the streets after the verdict, right? It wasn’t “OJ Innocent”, but “LAPD Guilty”

  3. Why did Broder make up the story? He could very easily have said simply that it was a mediocre trip, but the charging waits were excessive and boring, and no one should be bored in a car that costs six digits. At least Top Gear is a TV show

    This is reminiscent of LAPD framing OJ. It’s unnecessary and undermines the real case.

  4. I’d say Mr. Musk has a good case against NYT and Broder. But he is hardly innocent.

    One critical problem with electric cars is that they are severely range bound, limiting their practicality to being a second car only. Huge prices for a second car relegates them to being toys for the affluent.

    Tesla setting up a “Supercharger network” and getting noticeable people to to drive around using it is MARKETING.

    “It has traveled over 600 miles in a day from the snowcapped peaks of Tahoe to Los Angeles, which made the very first use of the Supercharger network”

    “Network” is a lie. There is ONE charger in Delaware. One in Connecticut. NINE in the entire universe.


    Notice that even on their web page they encourage a 30 minute charge, but complain about Broder charging only 47 minutes. The facts of life are that if you had been hanging around the Delaware Welcome Center for 47 minutes, you would stop charging as soon as you thought you had enough charge to get to where you are going and GET THE HE|| OUT OF THERE. Besides, there might be a line of other owners waiting to use the charger.

    Electric cars – Teslas – remain range bound. Mr. Broder busted Musk’s marketing gambit, as did Top Gear. Musk has evidence that Broder and Top Gear didn’t play it straight up in busting them, but they provided a valuable service to the public nonetheless. I forgive them, and thank them.

  5. Electric cars are going to have it tough enough with the technical challenges and public disdain. Do we really NEED false reporting to kill them? Let’s be honest – the technology would fall flat on it’s face without heavy government subsidies, and the “fuel source” is still a Coal Fired Power Plant. Add the environmental disaster that is the battery, and it’s a dead product anyway….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.