Geeto67

Part of my Job involves reading a lot of government issued bulletins on specific financial market issues, so a good amount of my time is researching stuff related to that and the various rabbit holes I fall down while doing that. However, I do have a running list of sources I tend to trust better than anybody and a few that I read regularly. Sources I consume regularly and for the most part trust: - NYTimes - WSJ - NPR - BBC - The Atlantic - The Economist - Kipplingers - Bloomberg - Forbes - Politico - ontheissues.org (when I am working with a particular political district and I need a starting place to see what the environment is and can look up the sitting politicians there and then research more). Sources I consume regularly and distrust or understand that it is opinion or has bias: - Fox news (via website) - Anything political Jalopnik cross posts - the New Yorker (although unlike the others here I respect) - Any Paper's editorial section - The National Review Online I tend to look at sources and how they handle and enforce the Society of Professional Journalists Code of ethics: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I don't consume CNN regularly because I don't have cable, so my exposure is limited to what I find on the web and the TV in the cafeteria at work. I tend to take them on a case by case basis because even despite the recent scandal it doesn't invalidate everything they do and overall they still have more credibility than other sources like Fox News, Drudge, Brietbart, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, or The Blaze (all of whom top polls for most trusted sites among conservatives). This is just the stuff I read parts of regularly to tell me what's going on, not connected to issues that I am researching, those are different (Snopes, Debunking Denialism, etc). I wholeheartedly agree with Clay that a responsible citizen has to read multiple sources and will go one further and say they have to seek out multiple viewpoints as well, not just those with whom they align. The problem I run into is that when it comes to conservative based news sources, there is a real credibility problem among the more popular sources (more people listen to Rush than read The National Review) and it makes it hard to get a well rounded viewpoint. In my mind slamming CNN is just noise. There are tons of other news sources, read or watch something else. Big fucking deal that the cable news network produces a lot of infotainment - it's a distraction from the "fake news", or rather "the highly biased news" problem that permeates conservative news consumption. so here is an analogy as to why I asked this question: Let's assume CNN is Mcdonalds, and you are bitching about McDonalds because of the taste wile at the same time eating wendy's, taco bell, Arby's, and out of that dumpster behind the local chinese restaurant on the day they throw out the old ingredients, it doesn't have the same impact as being a healthfood nut that ignores CNN I mean McDonalds because it's just flat out unhealthy for you. Feel me? CNN may suck but if your other sources aren't any more credible and the reason is because don't like that it doesn't confirm your bias, that's not really "sucking". What I want to know is - If I want a credible, trustworty, conservative news opinion, where do I get that? or do I already have that and that is just all there is?

ok...so you are assuming that buy consuming from several different sources you are bound to get at least one that is credible? what if you don't? how do you know? Also how do you find out about the thing you google for? or do you just google "trump" and see what's trending and go from there?

I guess it was too much to ask generally "where do you get your news from"? but if I must narrow it down: what sources do you rely on to stay informed of the political environment, and how do they not suck as compared to CNN? what makes you think a news source is trustworthy? And whom do you regularly read and trust? If CNN sucks, what doesn't "suck"? and how do you know it doesn't suck?

Well that is all pretty despicable, but to be expected I guess. People love being worked up into a frothy foam even if it is a racist one in undertone. So what "media" is not a joke to you? seriously - besides facebook, where do you get your actual news? I'm not defending CNN here, they are big boys and girls and can look after themselves, but all I ever hear about "liberal media" is how bad CNN is. So what's good? where does the conservative person who doesn't trust any mainstream reporting get their information?

you know, I never really understood that whole meme/gif. All someone did is post the CNN logo over Vince McMahon's face. It isn't like our current president didn't once appear as a heel (or himself) on WWE. It's actually kind of fitting. Literally nobody got the irony that because it was an original WWE clip, much like everything else in the the current president's life even his violence is fake. you done effed up when the guy who created the meme calls your judgement into question for re-tweeting it: http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

Some-days I really worry about people.... http://gizmodo.com/trump-supporters-cry-bias-after-npr-tweets-the-declarat-1796633566 I get that this is unhelpful and just stirring up partisan shit by pointing out the flaws of the ignorant only on one side of the fence (because ignorance does exist on both sides) but I'm bored and this made me laugh a little, esp the comments section at the end.

It's a challenger so to complete the whole retro theme you need a furry dash mat, the furry-er the better - it should look like a gorilla shed on top of your dash, a pistol grip shifter (bonus points if it is one of the aftermarket ones with a trigger guard), and a pair of fuzzy handcuffs hanging from the rear view mirror. Also it must smell like either the black ice air freshener tree or patchouli oil all the time, and heavy. Don't forget to get a foghat or Rush CD jammed in the CD player on repeat (esp fly by night). Do this and you'll really be living the retro challenger expirence in 2017! Or you can do what Brian says and paint the brake calipers.

I've heard a couple different theories as to why ranging from some of the optional wheels are too wide for the assembly line to dealers can order them when they sell and aftermarket tire and rim package so as not to get stuck with a factory alloy. They are 22" rims so I don't know how much a height is a factor.

Gm has this same problem with yukons, Tahoe, and suburbans....that's why they ship them with these transport steel wheels that now the sport truck guys go nuts for.

in case anybody gets inspired here is the 2017 rule book: http://www.ppihc.com/wp-content/uploads/2017-PPIHC-Rulebook.pdf I am sure one or two of you have caged road race track cars that would pass inspection....

those g3sse kwakers are pretty neat little tiddlers. a buddy of mine had one a long time ago, it's a fun little 100cc smoker. I think the 1975 and up bikes are interchangeable with the KE100 where as 73 and earlier are interchangeable with the G3/G5.

I hadn't noticed this till this thread, but really fuck those guys. I can't even imagine the end game here. been a PB member since 2004. BTW, it's $399 if you pay yearly, it's $40 a month if you pay monthly on renew so it's $480 if you sign up that way. I have to be honest, I still have an old web hosting account with Go-Daddy and I might just use that to house and link photos since it's cheaper and I can get higher resolution images posted. Sure it isn't free like Imgur but no adds, no spam, and free and clear of the other garbage.

In the article it discusses the overheating problems he had with the car. Part of it was from having removed the ducting in the nose, so air wasn't flowing through the radiator. One of the fixes they used was to hook the windshield washer to spray the radiator through the run. There were other challenges too, like how removing the steering wheel prevented the TC from being turned off. It's really a good series of articles, you guys should read it.

Look how smooth he is. Amazing.

No.... collaborative = good, uncooperative = bad. Right now that is the small group of people inside the Republican Party who are enabling trump and have the reigns (Ryan, McConnell, et al.) They are not the moderate republicans and they don't represent America. You want to save the Republican Party, it starts with those assholes.

Remind me again what political office Jill Stein currently holds? none? yeah I think that counts as already gone. You seem to be confused about what "gone" means. She can run all she wants if she will never get elected she isn't a factor for this discussion because she wields no political power. As for Bernie...How extreme do you think he is? I know you conservatives get all "frothy" at the mere mention of "socalisim" (despite the fact the good majority don't understand socialism or how they participate in it every day), but you know there is actually a difference between "socalism" and "social democracy" and for the most part Bernie is a Social Democrat. not exactly the same thing as workers own the means of production socialism. So let's talk about Republican "Extremism" and how it differs from Liberal extremism. There is one particular area where they are night and day different and that is bi-partisan collaboration. Bernie was head of the Veteran Affairs Committee 2013-2014 and oversaw the reform following the health admin scandal which he worked on closely with John McCain. This is one example of his willingness and bi-partisan collaboration, there are other smaller ones but this is the biggest (he's a junior senator so there isn't a long record). Does he vote democrat position on the majority of items, sure but that doesn't make him more extreme than any other democrat. Let's put this up against Mitch McConnell, who yesterday said, either Republicans come together, or he would have to work with Democrats to shore up the deteriorating health law. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/28/us/politics/as-affordable-care-act-repeal-teeters-prospects-for-bipartisanship-build.html He didn't mean that as a statement of fact - it was a threat to the moderate republicans to get in line. He was the leader of the charge of obstructionism under the Obama administration and has set a record for frustrating the effectiveness of congress: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/mitch-mcconnell-record-senate-213921 So on one hand we have a highly visible liberal, who if you are moderate isn't that far out there but if you are a far right conservative is only slightly less socialist than jesus (because he is reasonably pro-second amendment), who participates in bi-partisan collaboration and works to make sure congress is effective and at least benefits americans through compromise; and on the other we have an obstructionist republican whose biggest legacy is going to be that he managed to make congress function worse than it ever has before. see how they are different? Sure Bernie is screamingly liberal, but he's not that effective and he works with Conservatives to find middle ground. This Helps Americans. Mitch McConnell is screamingly Republican (not conservative - party first republican) and he works to make sure no middle ground is found and that congress is not effective unless he gets his uncompromised way. Which do you think is better for America? I'll give you a hint, it isn't the uncompromising douchebag.

Anybody following this story on Jalopnik? http://jalopnik.com/my-salvage-z06-is-the-fastest-corvette-ever-to-go-up-pi-1796489202 I'm kind of impressed at both the time frame and how much of the street car is retained in this run. I love Pikes peak because like Bonneville it is top tier racing that is still accessible to anybody who wants to participate.

This is minor compared to some of his other twitter posts prior to being president, my favorite exposure of him as a sub par human being is this one regarding Arianna Huffington from 2012 (my second favorite is the one about Megyn Kelly from Jan 2016): Directed at those who voted for trump and not you specifically clay: You knew this was what you were signing up for when you voted for him. You were willing to overlook this pattern of misogynistic behavior because why? you didn't want more of the same career politicians? I don't buy "corrupt" because DT is turning out to be more corrupt than anybody in the history of the role...so really is this what you wanted more than literally anything else? I have to imagine there is a ton of buyer's remorse in the trump vote. At the end of the day twitter is a distraction from the fact that he is a shitty advocate of the people of this country. He has no public policy experience, his people have no public policy experience, and it shows by the continuous raging dumpster fire that is the current legislative environment. The Republicans own congress at this moment and they aren't able to bowl everything over because he is crippling them. Personally I don't mind because I like it when there is bi-partisan collaboration and compromise and anything that causes that is a positive in my book - even if it is caused by an incompetent sexist creep, but the current combative environment isn't good for America on the whole. I used to feel that way, but honestly I want him on it more now...why? It hurts him, but that's just schadenfreude. Politically it hurts Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Reince Prebius, and those extreme republicans who are enabling this garbage. It is driving the moderate Republicans toward the democrats and lifting the real republican extremists right to the top where they become visible. Even John McCain is being hurt by this because he is hedging and compromised his once great reputation for integrity. MY wish and hope is that his tweets cause the people to vote those enablers out of office and clear the far right extremists and party loyalists from the republican party so it can go back to being a functioning government and a party that actually advocates for all but a small niche group of Americans. I don't really like Marco Rubio but the party itself could benefit from more of him and less Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell. Even Mitt Romney seems sensible and moderate in this current environment.

Someone Made Their Own Jeep Grand Cherokee Hellcat And Holy Crap Is It Fast http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/someone-made-their-own-jeep-grand-cherokee-hellcat-and-1796488209 wow.

I'm not debating anything and he confirmed it. He's probably right Buster forgot to reset the trip odometer.

maybe, but there are also cars that record telemetry in their ECMs. I don't know that dodge does it but a LI buddy of mine used to tune mini coopers and he showed me once where the ECU was recording how many times he jumped his car (I think it was based on wheel speed and some other sensor metric). Plenty have event recording for liability in accidents once a specific sensor reaches its threshold. or maybe he just forgot to reset the GPS.

eh...it's the kind of car that you paint heavy flake candy blue or gold, stripe the crap out of (or panel paint), chrome everything underneath, and it spends most of its run time coming off a trailer and into an indoor car show display where it sits with 5 mirrors underneath it surrounded by angel hair. http://www.roddersjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Rodders-Journal-Issue-55-Angel-Hair-Indoor-Car-Shows.jpg ...wait....do they even have indoor car shows anymore? And can you still get angel hair? I'll bite. Market is real soft at the moment, probably somewhere between $30K and $35K.

A little tame but it has zoomies!!!!! ok they aren't real zoomie headers but still 8 straight pipes out? how can you resist? https://louisville.craigslist.org/cto/6190274309.html

no, but you really don't go out of your way to be informed on things and you pick some awful positions to back. so you see the other side as weaker? It's the tiny chihuahua? There's no other way to see it? The Problem is division and antagonism. You are one of many who add to the division and don't work toward reconciliation. It is the common item (and probably the only) you share with those who are perpetrating violence. You claim you are doing this because you are trolling and it's fun and what not, but you really believe what you say. so yes, you are adding to the problem, and you know you are adding to the problem, and you do it anyway because you are mad that people don't see things your way and that's it. I give no violence a pass. It's stupid, and it is a symptom of the problem. The problem that you are adding to. The one that pits Americans against each other. You don't really seem all that interested in collaborative problem solving, you just want to assign blame to someone, it's counter productive. The thing is, all you have to do is change your approach. nobody is asking you to give up your opinions, just to be open that they may not be based on what's good for everybody, or they may be based on mis-information or a lack of information. Well...maybe he doesn't. Show me one thing the president is in control of that was empirically and objectively good that Trump is responsible for. I'll wait.

I have highlighted, bold-ed, and underlined the problematic statement. I have marked in red the part which is bullshit. Does some political violence come from the left? sure. There is political violence on both sides of the aisle. Is political violence from the left increasing in volume? That may be true. Does it account for almost all the political violence? not even close. For someone who works in an engineering field, I am disappointed that it is the math you are struggling with: Rate of change is not the same metric as volume. http://www.npr.org/2017/06/16/533255619/fact-check-is-left-wing-violence-rising Also, there is something much more disturbing going on with your logic that you are overlooking. You are not excluding some pretty traditional forms of conservative extremism (like white supremacists) but are willing to include equally extreme groups on the left side because it suits your narrative. You can't really do that, at least not without sounding like an asshole. Which you do. When you say stuff like this you sound like an uninformed asshole. I know you aren't an asshole, we've met, so why go out of your way to make people think it? But this still undercuts the real problem....violence on the whole is on the rise because of the political division of this country. People like you, with your viewpoint, are adding to this problem by continuing to further the narrative that one particular group is responsible for it. You are the problem when you say things like the statement quoted at the top. You may not think you are because your moral superiority over liberals and your lack of desire to understand others' viewpoints blocks that vision, but that is the real issue. Political division is an old tactic in American politics. It exploits the differences among a particular large group to prevent those from coming to a consensus as to what's in the best interests of the whole of that group. Opposition to this division tactic has always been met with violence because the strategy itself relies on violence. It's been used for over a century to keep the fires burining in the country for racial oppression and socio-economic oppression. It's track record speaks for itself.