Geeto67

My point was that your business model is not "traditional". A lot of artists similarly make a living using a non-traditional business model, albeit not the same as yours. yet some how your version of entrepreneurship is "superior"? You are living your dream, she's living hers. You both are doing well at it, so why be that dude that craps all over someone else that also found another way to get there while not driving straight? I would have thought this would have been obvious to you but...I guess not. the desk job comment was not specific to you, just more a comment on what people think traditional "employment" means.

Actually I believe the term is "self employed" as in makes money and pays taxes. Just because she doesn't go to a soul crushing desk job or sell boxes of ammo doesn't mean she doesn't make a living. You own a mail order subscription service for customers who don't even get to choose their product, who are you to shit on anybody else's business model?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/hurricane-harvey-antifa-texas-flooding-antifacist-storm-relief-efforts-a7921846.html first. google. hit. You aren't even trying. Way to be classy, Tim. /sarcasm.

It wouldn't be a political thread with out Tim's special brand of hatred.... Tim, BLM and AntiFa "pussies" are there too...because they live there. Do you think that Texas is some sort of conservative stronghold where the evicted everyone who didn't vote for Bush in 04? This affects everyone, everyone in that area is doing what they can. Stop trying to claim "but my team is doing more" like this is some sort of political competition. Stop being tacky. Only you would find the angle of division in something that is unifying.

She rode to Columbia South America by herself on a KLR 650 with nothing but a back pack and a set of saddlebags. She also put 38,000 miles riding cross country on a yamaha XT250. She's harder than your candy ass.

Serious question: do you really think that being of a particular political affiliation means you don't dress a certain way, or own a pickup truck, or a bass boat? Like no "liberal" on the planet owns an F150 or a bass boat? doing the right thing isn't about political affiliation, it's about being in a position to help and doing it. My friend Heather is in Houston right now. She's an artist and lives there, rides across the country on a KLR, and is as liberal as they come. Spoke to her the other night, she's been running around her neighborhood helping out as much as she can, including going out on rescues in boats. Has nothing to do with any political affiliation. My friend and old roommate Hector is there too, drove in from Louisiana, owns both a boat and an F150 and again not really anything like what you describe politically but he considers himself part of the cajun navy and he's out there. My Sister in law went to dallas, but my brother in law stayed in Houston (they live there) to help. I think he's probably best described as a "Woody Harrelson type" but he's out in his boat and truck helping where he can. This is a national tragedy, EVERYBODY is doing their part, it's not political. For that piece of flotsam that you read to co-opt a tragedy for political propaganda by enforcing a stereotype is sad and despicable. For you to believe it makes you a sucker. Also it's disappointing that you seem to think the "entire left" is a transgender person in a resistance t-shirt.

Just keep ignoring your friends cries for help and enabling his self destructive behavior. I'm sure it will all work out fine.

Sigh..... Grant, it's not hard to see what's going on here. Something bad happens to you in your real life and you come here and look up any thread I have posted in (which there are admittedly many) even if it is days or weeks old, not because you have anything to say on the subject matter but really because you feel shitty about your own life and for some reason you feel some form of superiority making cheap 3rd rate fat jokes. You use this forum as a form of therapy to cope with what I can only assume is an undiagnosed and unmedicated mental illness. When for some reason I catch an edge in my reply, you cyber stalk me and plan...something... until I assume your reason returns or your friends talk you out of it. speaking of your friends by the way, they probably enable this behavior because they pity you - they excuse your poor behavior and tantrums because of some horrible trauma in your own life thus absolving you of responsibility for your own actions. You think it's ok to act this way because everyone around you is enabling you to do so. "Oh, grant he's just angry and young - he'll get over it", or "poor grant, he's got a lot to deal with so don't listen to his Grantrums". I am not your friend so I don't really care if you get treated for it or not, and honestly your constant unprovoked hostility has pretty much absolved me of feeling pity for you anymore. But as a human being with a soul I do implore you to seek some form of treatment. This end game you are playing - it isn't going to lead you to a good place. You feel superior now because I have things you don't, an education, options, a family, an interesting life...and you make all sorts of mental justifications that you are some how better and attacking me proves this, but at some point you are going to realize that none of that is true. I am not some great evil, I am not your rival, and that you are not the good guy you think you are. And then what? Then yenner's fears about you aren't so displaced. Say what you will man, you know all sorts of information about me from stalking me and I don't even know your last name - you can lie to yourself for only so long, but at some point you are going to have a come to Jesus moment and if you aren't prepared for it I shudder at what's next.

so..this is kinda weird.... https://detroit.craigslist.org/okl/cto/d/romneys-rambler/6280321268.html

And why can't they stand you? All the people who actually are your friends and co-workers and such talk shit about you when you aren't around. This is a small community, did you think they had nice things to say? Still don't know why you have such a hard on for me, or why it throbs so often. I just post some things online you don't agree withand then I have to contend with your internet stalking and IP theft. It's unhealthy dude.

wait I have something for this out of your playbook.... http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/362/718/a9c.png I love how you keep trying to paint yourself as if you have some moral high ground....that crap went out the window the moment you decided to follow me around this forum just because you don't like me. You are just another guy with a shitty opinion just like everyone else on this forum trying to pretend you don't care when you actions clearly show butt hurt. whatever dude.

Conservatism = ideology, conservatives = people. You have to talk about ideologies in generalizations because they are abstract concepts. It doesn't mean you are generalizing people. Anti-intellectualisim and it's partner in crime populism is invasive to the modern conservative ideology and it's become a real problem - it's chased a lot of the more intelligent and idealistic republicans out of the parts and left you with people like Rick Perry and Mitch McConnell. I can't help it if you read the word for ideology and think people, but at the same time it's not really my problem. liberalism = ideology, leftists = people. When you generalize in terms of people you are just gonna be wrong. Had you said Liberalism is suffering from a superiority problem I probably would have agreed with you and we could have talked about everything from the influence of pop culture on this to what it means in terms of party platforms. But instead you read conservatism, got butt hurt because you felt marginalized, and write this nonsense. Stop looking for where people are insulting you. I'm just going to come out and say this now: I think people who think it is funny to call Hillary some variation on the word Hitler are obnoxiously stupid. It's worse when you can't spell it right either. You don't really deserve for anyone to take you seriously when this comes out. If you are tired of feeling marginalized, then stop giving people an excuse to do it to you. Personally, I don't think highly of people who are willing to "burn it down" if it means the other side doesn't "win". It doesn't help anyone, and it goes against the core American value of compromise.

And I genuinely think the problem with most conservatism is not just a lack of education but a contempt for it. You are a smart person, you work in an intellectual field, at some point you must have questioned your own knowledge on words you use to describe things right? or did you just buy the line about all socialism is bad all the time every time? I was having a discussion with someone today and he couldn't wrap his head around the idea that the American securities market is a form of market socialism. Its not a pure socialist construct, mostly because not all businesses are listed as publicly traded, but it does present everyone and anyone who has money, including the workers of a particular company to purchase ownership of their employer. Some of the more socialist aspects: employee stock purchase plans, trading of government backed securities, index funds, the dow jones industrial average, etc...Some of the less socialist aspects: the conveyance of private title, different classes of stock representing different distributions of wealth....you get the idea. Point is, things aren't always what they seem on the surface and often they are a mix of things that you wouldn't expect. Having an outright contempt for something is well...only hurting you.

If I were just you in general I would be outright embarassed. I suddenly get why yenner was so sensitive about me telling you to kill yourself as a joke...there's a chance you might actually do it. just to be clear about what though? I'm lost. Are you still holding a grudge about something? seems like an awfully long time. grantrum...they gave it a name. you have no idea how funny that is to me at the moment.

I'm sure that helps you sleep at night.

grantrum....lol...I thought these people liked you....

First off, Fascism and Socialism are not linked, it is incorrect to say that someone with socialist economic values is inherently fascist. Social equality is not one of the tenets of fascism, in fact it doesn't care for wealth equality at all, and moreover usually relies on extremely protectionist laws for private property. The main tenant of fascism is superiority of the overall nation state. Last I checked Superiority is not a synonym for equality. Socialism's main tenant on the other hand is the protection of equal rights and equal wealth distribution to the individual. Socialism as a political or economic theory has no interest in the overall idea of nation building or superiority are absent from the concept. the two ideologies are incongruous at their core. "but...but...but soviet Russia..." I hear you stutter There are some similarities which often causes confusion among those who aren't really familiar with the concepts in theory and maybe only in practice: - Both are very strong ideologies, esp given the nature of most modern governments - both require active and heavy government involvement - both oppose free markets - both require a singular leader and robust governmental framework for enforcement What most people think of socialism isn't actually socialism, it's the political communism of former Soviet Russia, and the continuing adopters of that paradigm like China and Cuba. Although the ruling classes in those countries marketed themselves as socialists, they put very little socialist theories into practice, instead choosing an oligarchic structure which lead to unchecked corruption with an overarching dictatorship for enforcement. Or..to put it more simply, those in power robbed the people blind and told the people the shortages were their fault for wanting to share scarce resources. Fascism was able to take root in the Soviet Era during Stalin (often referred to as red fascism) in the tactics he used to control the people. Interestingly enough, Germany, Italy, and Japan at the height of their fascist regimes rejected soviet Russia's political social ideology, but embraced Stalin's nationalism as an evolution of fascism into communism. Mussolini himself called it "Slavic Fascism". 50 years of a cold war and related propaganda did not help most Americans have a clearer understanding. I have to ask, doesn't ohio's education system cover this stuff in high school history? Anyway....Let's talk about "suppression" of their opposition. Their opposition is NAZIs. We can agree on that at least right? They are using their constitutionally protected right to free speech to express displeasure with their opposition's publicly expressed viewpoints. so what's wrong with that? it's not illegal. Protection of free speech is limited only to government interaction, private citizens have every right to disagree with each other publicly and nobody can say shit about it. In fact to argue against it is basically to argue against free speech. They aren't calling for the government to intervene every time they counter protest - the tactic is to make an equal amount of noise so as to drown out the others message and render it ineffective. So the thing I disagree with and I am sure you do too is...the "alt right" is spoiling for a fight. The groups that loosely associate under that banner have an overwhelming history of violence that continues to this day as a form of domestic terrorism. Promoters for their rallies encourage people to come armed for conflict and to not shy away at the opportunity. I do not think it is the wisest tactic for some individuals opposing the alt right to meet this challenge with violence. A violent riot only pushes the state toward a dictatorship as emergency powers are not very democratic. ok...your turn.

not a very good imagination I see. :dumb:

"Calling me out" like you are making some noble stand...you're just another guy on this forum with a shitty opinion, same as me, same as grant, same as everyone else. Except your trigger is bad taste jokes about suicide. get over yourself like you are some moral paragon. You aren't going anywhere and neither am I, and that pretty much is where we are at. The only difference is I don't really care enough to go out of my way to comment on when you are being a shitty person when it isn't directed at me. You and Grant however, I don't know why you get these rage boners for me but you both should probably see a doctor considering how much they seem to throb. Thanks for the term "Grantrum". My mistake was not realizing how much of a joke he really is around here, but this just sold me. Hilarious.

Did you ever have occasion to fly the T34C? I am curious how the Texan II stacks up against the old military bonanza. Years ago I had a chance to fly in a civilian converted T34C and while it was a rocket on takeoff an climb out, cruise felt kind of like a regular old A35 Banana. The bubble canopy was nice though. BTW, what altitude were you at when those pics were snapped?

Please explain, and cite your sources, how the group whose core tenant is fighting facisim is fascist. You are going to have to be very specific on this one. not making any excuses. I am not condemning the non-violent aim of resisting facisim. I have been pretty clear, not in support of the violence. I have also been pretty clear that not all conservatives are white supremacists or NAZI's, although I have been critical of how slow they have been to distance themselves from those groups. Whether you like it or not the CIC is a Republican, even if not a traditional one, and his tone deafness to this issue in total (not just charlottesville) is something to absolutely be critical of. I would honestly love to be critical of democratic politicians at the moment, but really they are a non factor in this conversation. There isn't even a unified platform to be critical of, and they don't hold any majority power in congress so they really are not a factor in government. I don't think they are benefiting from the conflict either. The focus right now is on the others in the republican party and who is going to go along with Trump's nonsense and who is going to do what's right. So far there aren't a lot going against party but the number is growing. Prove that it is a "Majority". Empirically prove it, with numbers. There are groups that do track this (southern poverty law center, ADL, etc...) Information is out there. ok so there is violence on both sides. so what? It's not equal violence. And Leftist violence isn't the larger of the threat. what do you want to do about it? ok so they suck, so what. After you are done saying they suck - what's the plan? Never said there weren't bad people on the left. Never said there wasn't violence on the left. I just refuse to let you marginalize which is the larger problem. At this point though it doesn't matter, we are not near the end of these violent confrontations, more are going to come. Those seeking violence on both sides are resorting to military campaign style tactics, and the bigger concern I have is between the Private Militias (which are not government sponsored in any way despite being called a militia, and are often better armed than the police) and the larger number of armed "alt right" groups and their open encouragement of coming armed to every demonstration, it's harder to fault individuals on the other side of those protests for arming themselves as well when they come to counter protest. If you are wondering how violent insurrections in other countries start - this is how (although not all violence like this leads to a rebellion). I didn't say "Pick a side" either. I said that following Charlottesville, the "alt right" has forced people to pick a side and people saying "white supremacy is bad, but..." were going to be perceived as being apologists for white supremacy - which is exactly what is happening. it's the same as if you start a sentence with "I'm not a racist, but..." the but invalidates any point you made prior to it.

for the record I have never said any of those things. Don't push your insecurities on me if you somehow think of me as elevated in some way. just to get back on track with this topic: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/boxing/2017/08/27/mayweather-vs-mcgregor-prize-money-much-floyd-mayweather-take/ https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/08/27/youll-never-guess-how-much-money-floyd-maywhether-made-in-his/23187328/ I think everyone is still waiting on the final PPV tallies to call a hard number. Might be a month before we see an actual revenue breakdown with solid numbers.

I am too lazy to look it up but about three or four pages back you said they were the greater danger. In nearly every post since charlottesville you keep saying they are an equal threat because they are violent (I believe the term you use is violence on both sides). They are not an equal threat. That doesn't mean they are not violent. I am not quite sure what to make of it at the moment since in America it is not traditionally a large movement. Generally speaking I am in support of historical Antifa movements because they opposed people who literally wanted to murder my kind. I certainly think facisim is bad for America full stop. The Majority of people who seem to comprise the meetings are not violent and don't condone violent tactics, but there is a smaller subset of groups and free associates who operate under the same banner if Antifa and have chosen as a strategy to meet the white supremacy violence with more violence. There is an even smaller group of anarchists whose approach it is to cause property damage at any rally regardless as to who is hosting, and to either do so under the Antifa banner, or intend to be labeled as Antifa mistakenly regardless as to affiliation or not. There are also infiltrators from the alt right groups whose job it is run false flag operations in everything from fake signs up to inciting violence while looking like a member of Antifa. Ideologically: I don't condone violence as a political statement, I don't think it solves any issue, I don't think it helps any situation, and I don't support individuals who think otherwise. Does this mean I condemn Antifa as a whole? no, because as we discussed they aren't violent as a whole. Personally: I am delighted anytime someone punches a nazi in the face. Not as a political statement, but as a moral one. Things you personally get wrong about Antifa: - you speak about the organization as if it is an organization and not a political ideology. It is not an organization, it has no organized structure. It is an ideology like Democracy, Libertarian-ism, communism, or anarchy. - you speak about it as if ALL members are violent or condone violence - You continually think "violence on both sides" is an acceptable response to discussions about the actions of one group. In truth White Supremacist violence is responsible for 80% of domestic terrorism in this country and has held that spot for over 30 years (with 2001 and 2016 being years when Islamic terrorism eclipsed them in body count but not incidents). Leftist extremist violence accounts for 2% in any given year. 2% does not equal 80%. - you think antifa is an "anti white" movement (there is a tirade a couple pages back as to why you think this) despite having no evidence to back this up. Yes Black Separatists are a thing that exists, and yes they are violent as well, but most of them are as critical of the left and Antifa as the white supremacists and neo confederates. They don't usually align themselves with Antifa. Again there is no singular organization since it is an ideology and the ideology is to oppose fascists. In case you forgot what facisim is - it's radical authoritarian nationalism <-- not one of those words mean white or black. I am not putting words in your mouth - if you aren't conveying the right message, then use different words. Saying there is violence on both sides in response to people more worried about the bigger threat of white supremacy is drawing a false equivalency that white supremacy is an equal threat to Antifa, and there just isn't any evidence to support it. Again you are comparing cessnas to c-130s.

You don't seem to get anything right. It's starting to get boring having these conversations because you just simply refuse to see these things in anything but all or nothing extremes, and even if in real life you don't actually view these things as that way you don't seem to know any other way to talk about it than to just be an extremist loony. how about instead of listening to another Antifa is the absolute worst (and somehow not NAZIs) rant from you we discuss something actually political - like Arpaio's pardon by the current carrot in chief, the damage it does to the rule of law in this country, and the message it sends to the country. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/26/us/politics/trump-pardon-joe-arpaio-constitution.html The legal question is actually kind of interesting and a bit of an ouroboros, it boils down to: "can the president use a constitutional power to absolve someone of a violation of the constitution itself?" Or even more simply does the constitution have the power to invalidate itself? and if so does it have that power by accident or is it intended?

Has to be a decade ago at least since I have seen one but there were a couple of guys on long island that used to convert crossfire manifolds to dual carb. They did it because 67-69 z28 cross ram manifolds were hard to source and the high plenum volume/low manifold velocity made them really good for road racers running destroked small blocks. I forget what they used to do to increase the port size but I think they just port matched to the heads. had to use a high vacuum cam to prevent pooling in the manifold. are you giving away that 350? because if it is just gonna be tossed out I am sure I can find a use for it. As far as the hood hate, eh...hot rods are always a little ugly, like junkyard dogs. however, if eventually you do want to make it pretty there are higher rise c4 hoods available in the aftermarket: http://www.grumpysperformance.com/vt23.jpg