Geeto67

When you catch a grenade with your crotch. Or you need to train a doctor to rebuild one just in case private Pyle does stop one with his crotch and you need someone to practice on.

Source?

The investigation from three months ago was about the stolen equipment. Which they are not charged for.

Generally speaking? No. https://health.mil/Policies/2005/10/25/Policy-for-Cosmetic-Surgery-Procedures-in-the-Military-Health-System However, if you read through it there is a program that does allow limited cosmetic surgery as it is necessary for military trained physicians to secure their board certification and also practice their reconstructive surgery techniques. It is space limited, so as to keep its purpose limited to physician training. The patient still pays a lot of the fees and the cost of any implants and anesthesia.

Weed what out? You don't trust any journalism that isn't coming from Facebook. You may not like vanity fair but it's a Condé Nast publication which means it follows the journalism ethics guidelines pretty closely. It also caters to a specific audience being a journal of credible opinion, and does not hide anything. Just because you don't like what it says doesn't mean it doesn't have merit.

What a snowflake.

you whine too much. let me know the name of the guy who is paying you to read my posts and I'll make sure he stops.

http://lanesplitter.jalopnik.com/maybe-i-am-too-average-to-understand-paying-1-000-for-1797263632 First Question: Why gin? Follow up Question: What the fuck?

I don't know that you need federal legalization so much as you need a better method to test for current intoxication. The thing about alcohol is that there is an established rule: as long as it is in your system above a certain BAC percentage you are considered affected, below you are not, and it leaves your system instantly. Not saying the system is accurate or inaccurate, but it plants a flag firmly as to what can be considered a factor in an accident for insurance purposes and what cannot. Give the insurance companies a bright line to work off of, and you start to address the problem. as for the illegality of it, well your company doesn't fire it's employees for having too many parking tickets or speeding tickets (unless a driver), and maybe even a DUI, so what's overlooking testing positive when there is no criminal charge, as long as not testing positive for intoxication? Also plenty of companies are now outlawing legal behavior (like smoking) because of economic incentive. You are always talking about market economics, here is a place where you can actually effect an economic solution without legislation. Find a way for employees to work while failing a drug test and not increasing your premises liability cost and you change the market.

speaking of jobs in the midwest....anybody read this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/business/economy/drug-test-labor-hiring.html

yes, and you find this conversation in those areas as well. Funny thing about art collectors though, a lot of them display their work, and tons more lend them out to museums for others to enjoy. Nobody is disputing that it's their money to spend and do with the asset what they will. I think this is more about the lament of a lost opportunity to connect to others, to be bonded emotionally. Don't hate the person, they are victims of this too, they are missing out on the utility as much as any of us, the only difference is they can make a choice to do something about it. There is another downside to this seclusion and that is it hurts the investment long term. The value of collector vehicles are established by the demand. Rare and beautiful alone does not equal value. The more people that see or know about your thing the more people connect with it, the more they desire it and the more they pay money for it. Some of this is done with movies and magazines, but some of it is seeing the thing in the flesh, confirming it is real, feeling special in a unique experience of being witness to it in action. If nobody knows about that thing - then who is going to drive the continuing market? Think about the model T. It's a cheap car that has endured 100+ years as part of the American zeitgeist. The people that own them as classics use them often. I have seen more Model T's driving around this summer than I have seen 1985 honda civics. Little kids get to see it, grown men and women get to appreciate it because it is just around, and so the value of a mass produced item that is actually really common and not all that good looking is the only real antique growing in value. Look at same year hupmobiles, lesalles, chandlers - all cars with more mechanical merit than a model T and their values are stagnant or shrinking. Why? the number of people that care about them are shrinking. If those who bought for investment really cared about investment, they would take control of the market and make the car as visible as possible, but they don't because it isn't just about money.

how is that unskilled working out for you? oh wait I think I can answer that: Unskilled isn't the same thing as career politician, although they are closely linked. There have been plenty of politicians who came from the business sector into high positions who are politically skilled and not a career politician. Robert McNamara comes to mind, he was a PWC accountant, ford Executive and then President of Ford, and jumped right into the secretary of defense. Mitt Romney, Michael Bloomberg, George W Bush, David Scott, William Keating all are skilled politicians and all came from non-political business backgrounds. People always talk about how we need non-politican business people in politics like it's a new idea never tried but really we have a lot of non-career real business people in politics already on both sides of the aisle ( https://www.bloomberg.com/news/photo-essays/2012-12-24/mbas-in-government ), and guess what? none of them are the embarrassing train wreck that is DJT. You want trumps? because not seeing the value of a particular skill set and voting for an outsider just because he is an outsider is how you get trumps.

yes but being a drug dealer doesn't make you a bank robber either. other then literally pure fantasy and speculation is there any evidence of any other crimes? I have read some of the pundit sites on this and there is a literal metric fuckton of mental gymnastics to get this to line up with hacking and other suspected crimes. Also a lot of it relies on misused information and a lack of knowledge about government processes. So I will ask again...is there anything credible that suggests that there is more here than lying to secure a personal HE loan and Michael Bluth's office chair?

Seems sensible And here is where you go off the rails. I don't think you can prove this assumption. Do you know her platform? It was fairly mainstream and leaning conservative. But more importantly, she's a professional politician. She wouldn't be a constant media embarrassment. Just knowing how to navigate Washington and not look like a complete ass is a skill that escapes our current administration. I mean, he has the majority of congress in his favor and he still can't pull off anything meaningful - a skilled politician wouldn't have had this problem.

Fundamental religious cash grab. That's usually what motivates this, appealing to religious based large donors. Strategically it's low risk for him - it's easy to do because it doesn't change the status quo, it offers an opportunity to make strong, declarative, high profile statements that are controversial and get press, and he can cite it later as an example of supporting a particular group when he's looking to pick their pockets for his re-election campaign. If you want to know what pandering looks like - this is it.

When I used to work for Team Obsolete, Rob used the business floor of his office to store a lot of his motorcycle collection. I remember walking in there and seeing Dick Mann's BSA Rocket three and being in complete awe of it....until I found out the engine cases were empty because the engine had grenaded in racing years ago and what was in there was mocked up to be more of a museum piece than a motorcycle. And there were other bikes like this. At the time in my mind motorcycles, even old racing ones with historic pedigree should be used in anger, but over time as I got to see the life cycle of a race bike I became appreciative of these museum pieces because it was preferable to them being scrapped never to exist again. A couple years ago I went to the Air and Space Museum's Udvar Hazy center at Dulles. I grew up in general aviation and there were more than a few airplanes I had seen actually flying and one or two I had actually sat in or flown as a passenger in prior to it's retirement. The whole place felt like a taxidermy museum to me, and I found myself getting quite sad. The same thing happened to me when I went to Dayton and saw Cole Palin's spad - having met cole many times and seen his workshop and that airplane as a teenager. I feel like old airplanes are a visceral experience, it isn't enough to just see one static, you have to feel the heat off them, smell the oil and musty interiors, hear the noise, watch it flex in the wind from either inside or from the ground. Otherwise they just look like a bunch of dead birds in gilded cages. oddly I don't feel closer to airplanes than racing motorcycles when it comes to restored muscle cars and classics. Pedestrian stuff that was meant to be used should be used. Do you have to DD it? no, but seriously, a hemi 'cuda convertible provides no real visceral appeal over a 318 powered basic barracuda convertible. No good historical event attached? drive the thing. 1 or 1? yeah so is a modified car. but that's old stuff.....what about new? I feel the same about new high tech stuff as I do about airplanes for a different reason. Something like a bugatti, or mclaren...it has no history, It's intrinsic value is in the technological solutions to conventional automotive performance problems. If it isn't out there being used and experienced, making history, creating a good story...it's worthless. Squandered potential. One of the things that is great about this hobby is the human connection. The cars are just things, and while they are awesome things that can stir emotions a variety of ways, they are a bridge to human experience. If they are not being used you are not getting the full experience, and others won't see it, and you can't have a shared experience. I think about my father's friend Frank who was obsessed with Cords and owned 2 because when he was 10 he saw one drive through his small home town and thought it was a ufo because of how it looked, and sounded and smelled, and I understand that because I saw him pull it in our driveway and then let me drive it. I don't hate people who buy this stuff and never use it. I am sympathetic. Something in their psyche caused them to have an emotional connection to this thing and they are trying to bottle that feeling by possessing the car. But maybe their life doesn't support using the thing as it was intended. They want control over their feelings, and cling to the physical embodiment of something that inspires it. And then something like time or financial responsibility causes them to think twice about risking that feeling by using it. they preserve the original feeling but don't create new ones. And then it just becomes a hoard. I feel sorry for them, they don't get to enrich their lives with the full experience that car has to offer. TL; DR: Use everything, but if it has a historical significance it is not the worst thing in the world to preserve it.

Does anybody have anything from a credible source that says this isn't anything more than a fraudulent rental property loan from a credit union and some stolen desk chairs and monitors? Just to be clear The daily caller is not a credible source.

Stunning: https://flint.craigslist.org/ctd/d/rhd-corvette-zr-manual-trans/6195251845.html

math is easy....typing correctly with fat sausage fingers is hard fixed it.

consider this....the msrp of a base 2010 GT was roughly $28K in 2010. The current base is $36K. So that's about $1100 increase in the price of the car over the last 7 years. the average inflation rate between 2010 and 2016 is 1.9% which would have been about $680 per year. which means the base GT got $460 more expensive every year or $4600 since 2010. So I ask you does the new GT have $4600 worth of content over a 2010? I personally think it does but do others? for arguments sake let's assume this is a late production 2010 with the 5.0 coyote motor.

the price is kind of crack pipe, but..... https://detroit.craigslist.org/okl/cto/d/sceptre-classic-car/6209076526.html I think they still sort of make them under the Dimora Vicci name plate: http://www.dimoramotorcar.com/viccispecs.html

so it looks like ford did the right thing in the end. Although $36K is still expensive.

nothing to add here other than nutter hardware has heavy equipment rental and more collective experience under one roof than all of the home depots in the state. Might want to pop your head in there and ask them what they recommend. IIRC asphalt gets really soft when heated. might not be the worst thing to take the oxy torch out to the spot your want to drill through and hit it for a few minutes before plunging anything in. wear a mask, you don't want to breathe hot asphalt.

so I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, we live in the greatest time for car engineering and new car performance than we ever have before. The things modern cars do now is just incredible. when I was a teenager a 420hp daily driver was a big deal. It either meant you had a claptrap muscle car that you spend a ton of money on in parts, that didn't idle, got crap mileage, loaded up the plugs at stoplights, and overheated in traffic, or you had a late model pony car supercharged to the gills and maybe you had some spray on it as well to push you into the 400+hp mark. Neither were what I would call modern car reliable, and neither you could jump in and drive to Niagara falls for a weekend. Now volvo's have 400hp. Fucking volvos. Like the car your mom drives. unreal. On the other hand, I don't like that ford may be pushing the GT mustang upmarket with this move. One of the greatest things about the mustang is that it is the cheapest way to get into a rwd, v8, American modern muscle car for a lot of people. Stripper v8 stangs cost as much as mildly optioned v6s. Now ford may be pushing the GT into the price area where the shelbys are and some of the other higher options special cars are and expecting the ecoboost mustang to be the low cost performance entry. Ford is supposed to release pricing today and speculation is that it's going to be $40K (the current cheapest you can get a v8 GT stang is about $33K) which is a significant price hike. I feel like the mustang IS the embodiment of the american v8 muscle car starter car. To now expect the ecoboost to fill that role kinda loses something in translation.

Faster? no. Actually probably slower because of the increased weight. I think the later ones (3.6L) are 320hp and roughly 3200lbs empty, vs 2900lbs empty for the same 3.6L 320hp rwd coupe. There are a couple reasons why people like them better: - the car is basically a turbo Porsche widebody with a standard NA engine. The 996 turbo is also 4wd, and I believe certain options/configurations of the 4s means you get the same suspension as the turbo car. The turbo cars still carry a $20-30K premium over the NA cars and really you are only getting like 100 more HP for that. - because it is a 4wd car, Porsche stiffened up the shell. They use the same 4wd shell for the GT2 rwd cars, so some people buy them and remove the 4wd to make a poor mans GT2 track car. - It's awd. I don't know why but people in snow belts think the RWD car will be hard to handle in snow. It's actually not the case, RWD rear engine cars are excellent in low traction conditions, that's why beetles make such good dune racers. I have a friend that DD's an aircooled rwd 964, and he has no problems in snow ever. just don't be a jackass hooning it up. The other thing about AWD is people think it dampens the "snap oversteer" that Porsches are infamous for. I dunno, I still think you can't defeat the laws of physics and how weight effects a pendulum, but you can manage your adherence to the laws pretty well. Honestly, snap oversteer in a 911 is overrated, I spun my father's friends 1987 911 SC back in the 1990s at bridgehampton, you have to be really going for it to get there, and also you can't drive the thing like a front engine, rwd car. It's a different line and different throttle and braking points - learn them and snap oversteer becomes a legend. To be honest, my old '66 corvair was easier to snap spin. from most of what I hear talking to people and reading, if you want a "track car" 996 for cheap to mod, get a 1999 rwd carerra, preferrably with high mileage (the cheaper the better). The car is still analog in a lot of places (last year of an actual throttle cable) and is also the lightest of all the 996 body shells. why high mileage? chances are the IMS bearing is less likely to fail, and also nobody wants 3.4s so it's a little cheaper/easier to get used replacement parts. the downside is all the flaws of the 3.4 and there isn't much left on the table in terms of cranking up the hp, but it will be reliable. If you want a DD 996, even in snow, and you don't want to pay the insurance on a TT 911 or the premium of the 996 TT, then get the carerra 4s.