Geeto67

nope they pretty much are lies, and let's not forget they are still like 2 months away also. Tim you can vote based on lies and fiction and fear all you want, but don't expect any of us to respect a position grounded in fiction and your own closet racism. Also, you'd have to be pretty stupid to put those viewpoints out into the public discourse (like sharing on a message board) and not expect someone to point it out. honestly, I do worry about your mental health sometimes, the combination of living in fear of being a cultural outsider, and being gullible can't be good for your psyche.

This is a pretty bold statement to make in a state famous for an event where the military killed people for the very same thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings I mean, if you wanted me to lose respect for you, devaluing human life is a pretty good shortcut to it. I guess the good news was, it was on the decline anyway. If you are advocating the military open fire against unarmed civilians, you are pretty much on the wrong side of history, regardless of national status. I should also point out that using the military to intentionally kill unarmed civilians is considered a war crime under the Geneva Convention. As much as I hate the guy even I don't want to see him tried as a war criminal, but because the massive loss of life it would take for that to happen.

Just to tag on to your excellent post greg, let's not forget that Trump, and many many many republicans, and republican supporters are also trying to end birthright citizenship for a lot of the same reasons, and are telling wild lies about it. Prior to the 1990's when this issue arose tied to immigration policy, It was mostly discussed in the context of excluding Native Americans and the children of imported slaves from being conferred citizenship. Both parties have owned this substantially bad idea, and both have been soundly rejected by the supreme court and federal jurisprudence. Why it will never work is that it cannot be uncoupled from the issue of racial discrimination - there is no policy that can be put into place that has a permissible exception to disparate impact or disparate treatment of a particular racial group. or in other words - 100s of years worth of judges, lawyers, and scholars, have said this is both unconstitutional and racist and just because YOU don't think it is, doesn't change that fact.

There are limits and controls, very good ones. Just because you don't know what they are doesn't mean they don't exist.

asylum is part of the process. It's a legal way to enter the country. The original pilgrims were asylum seekers fleeing england - they found it in this country so it has always been a part of the make up of the US. Modern asylum requirements date back to 1951 and the international treaty on refugees. It's been a long established law. Thinking asylum seekers are illegal aliens is factually incorrect. Tim, just stop being full of shit and own your xenophobia. You hate foreigners, esp ones who don't look like you and you have a hard time communicating with. Hell, you even dislike Americans who don't speak your language or "assimilate" as you often say - this isn't about the "bad" of granting asylum to vulnerable people, it's just you being uncomfortable with people who don't look and sound like you and your paranoia that they are talking about you when they are talking in a foreign language near you.

Is that a known thing? I have never once seen any data to support this assertion - just the movie scarface which is fiction and was xenophobic to begin with (and based on an even more xenophobic anti Italian movie from the 1930's). It is a fact that asylum seekers, and immigrants in general tend to commit less crime than domestic borne citizens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime#United_States less likely to use social programs: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/4/16094684/trump-immigrants-welfare and actually add to the success of natural borne citizens and have for hundreds of years http://cmsny.org/from-the-archive-immigrants-make-americans-successful/ https://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Pages/The-Many-Contributions-of-Immigrants-to-the-American-Economy.aspx https://www.unidosus.org/issues/immigration/resources/facts so where do you get this idea from Tim? I mean honestly, you just sound like the dude who bitches about cab drivers not being able to speak perfect English, and that is why we shouldn't let anybody in to the country.

Don't feed the Nazi.

ballotpedia also does issues by state: https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_2018_ballot_measures In the upcoming, I am only aware of issue 1 coming down the pike and there is a long discussion somewhere on this board about that.

Sort term yes, but for every peak there is a valley. I just hope that the GOP isn't keeping this gravy train rolling and not scaling back for short term gains and then we see a crash in the future. Normally, a fiscally cautious approach to this kind of prosperity requires some measure of reigning in so when the economy shifts again the free fall isn't tragic.

Not remotely news (and yes I felt I had to state that just for Brandon's sake), but I found it both hilarious and topically relevant.

It's not though. It was the heart of Don's point, even if his words were less than eloquent. This smacks a little bit of a double standard. Lemon's point is pretty clear - white men commit the most domestic terrorist acts, and yet we hear all but naught about efforts to curtail that. The exact reason you didn't like the muslim ban is the same one as why he is upset that nothing is done to curtail domestic terrorism from white nationalists. and yet you are ready to condemn him because he points it out. Come on man pick a lane, here - if you are in favor of a race neutral approach to terrorism, then that means addressing the blind spot in white nationalist terrorism. You don't have to like the way he said it (I really don't), but in the context he isn't wrong.

Show me legislation against white supremacist terrorism the same way the Muslim ban was sold on the back of Islamic terrorism or gun control on the back of Black Nationalism and I'll agree with you. I'll wait while you look for that, might take a while.

aw...did I trigger the hitler youth? I am pretty sure he doesn't know the meanings to lots of the terms he uses. A white apologist would be someone in support of white people, I assumed he meant it sarcastically but now I just realize he doesn't know what an apologist is.

Says the white nationalist. you do realize that basically calling someone a race traitor doesn't make your case, right?

You seem to be missing that the crucial point that these white terrorists are committing their acts because america isn't more white. It's not a political ideology, they aren't sending bombs or lynching people over the deficit, racism is at the core of their motivation for hurting/killing people. Don Lemon gets it, why don't you? How about we try to use some rhetoric that is often used against minorities in this country - the white community should take more responsibility for their people and do something to prevent this kind of activity. I mean if the black community has to take responsibility for it's people why do whites get a pass? Honestly this conversation is stupid, but I didn't think it was possible to have a dumber take on it than dismissal through being ambivalent about it and rationalizing it through numbers. bravo for going under that bar.

eh...except in this instance, historically it hasn't mattered who politically is in power because these things were tied to an ideology that has migrated from one party to the other.

If you are looking for it, the bias is subtle but there, esp if you have a non Sinclair news station reporting the same events to compare it to, or you can compile all the news reporting on national events from Sinclair stations in different markets (like John Oliver did). The monopoly is troubling on its own because it's a monopoly, but Sinclair's commitment to engineer bias into the nightly news is far more insidious. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/business/media/sinclair-news-anchors-script.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/07/media/sinclair-broadcasting-promos-media-bashing/index.html The whole thing has a very slimy "Ministry of Truth" feel to it, but as you pointed out most people our age (assuming you and I are both in that 18-40 demographic) don't consume nightly news for the most part.

That's how it used to be, but part of the problem, and why this has become somewhat complicated, has been companies like Sinclair broadcast group who seek to turn the "nightly news" into something similar to Sean Hannity http://old.seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020756844_fishersinclairxml.html In Columbus 3 of the local stations are owned by Sinclair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stations_owned_or_operated_by_Sinclair_Broadcast_Group#By_state_and_market And what do you do with places that are pretty much generally recognized as being trustworthy and neutral when the rhetoric is that they are very biased: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-biased-is-your-news-source-you-probably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28

About that, probably not, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. If you think he's wrong about the overwhelming majority of domestic terrorists being extremist right white males, then go out and do the research to prove him wrong. I can tell you he is not, but don't take my word for it.

I don't think the "media" has an accountability problem - the entire business model profits off controversy, which is mostly made up of people disagreeing and trying to disprove what is reported, which is kind of what Jon Stewart was pointing out: that you have a person that has found a way to exploit that dependence on controversy for his personal gain and has done it basically by lying his ass off. Things that Trump does are in fact his fault. Even you can't possibly ignore that there are some things he has done that aren't positive for anybody. There are some things going on here, like Trump's personal profiting from his office, which are unprecedented, but if you think the media is the enemy of Trump then you aren't inclined to see it, and that's what he wants - he want's you in the street crying that the media is so unfair to his latest brand of bullshit (revoking citizenship with an EO? give me a break), that he can rob the bank in broad daylight and have you say "well it's the bank's fault for being a bank, and the people's fault for keeping their money in it". It's dumb. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2018-03-05/how-is-donald-trump-profiting-from-the-presidency-let-us-count-the-ways Brandon, whether you like it or not you are being exploited, we all are. First by the 24 hour news cycle and punditry and second by the president himself who has figured out how to game the system. When you go out and you claim that the media is so unfair to Trump, you aren't being an independent thinker, you are his pawn. You can be both critical of the media and of Trump, you don't have to pick a side in this - but you certainly seem to have despite facts, logic, and reason to the contrary.

This is absolutely the correct take Clay. But don'e expect reasonable, intelligent, or measured political discourse in this thread. I am not usually one to say things were better way back when....but in this case, there has been a shift in how people used to consume news and how they do it now and the increased intensity has caused the focus to shift from being independent consumers of news, to contrarians of media. Rather than look at an event from all angles, there seems to be this shift where people just find fault with the source that don't reaffirm their bias and use it discredit all things from that source. Don't get me wrong, this has always been there in some form, but in the past the slower news cycle and fewer outlets made it easier to take time and overcome that initial knee jerk reaction and really process what is being said, but now with the constant onslaught, people move from knee jerk to knee jerk. Media now is mostly just as biased as it has always been, Fox news is just more of the same yellow journalism that made Hearst wealthy in the 1800's, but now it's 24 hours if you can stand to consume that much.

http://theconversation.com/the-dangerous-belief-that-white-people-are-under-attack-88622 He's not factually wrong though. However blunt he put it, the context of the conversation was on domestic terrorism and you can't ignore that there is this knee jerk reaction to ascribe a certain ethnic bias when one hears the word terrorism, when in reality that particular ethnicity isn't the biggest terrorist threat to Americans. https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2018/10/31/cnn-host-don-lemon-said-white-men-are-biggest-terror-threat-this-country/?utm_term=.27934f574df9 I am not thrilled with the inelegance of his statements, but he isn't staying all white men - just those who are radicalized far right and who have historically killed people in furthering their beliefs. If you feel attacked by these statements, maybe...I dunno....try to make an effort to understand why he is saying what he is saying. But I have a feeling, esp when it comes to you Brandon, that maybe you feel attacked because he is talking about you - and considering your history of making threats against people on this board he's not wrong.

They were the 1970 LT-1s, the same 360hp solid lifter 350 found in the z/28 and the C3 Corvette Zr1, but in a nova. Most of the 175 deuces produced also received the COPO 9737 Sports Car Conversion package carried over from the 1969 camaro parts bin (since the nova still shared a platform with the 1969 and not the later 1970 F body) which had a gauge package, Nova SS F41 suspension option using a special rear sway bar and shocks, a special-order 4.10:1 12-bolt differential and special front coil and rear leaf springs, and 15x8 rally wheels with 70 series tires. Options included disc brakes, a hood tach (similar to pontiac's on the GTO and 67-69 firebird), and 8 different colors (all with a black bench seat interior). Yenko then added exterior stripes, interior decals, and floor mats. I think these cars ran 13's out of the box. The Deuce was a replacement for the 1969 COPO 427 "Super Nova" which Yenko sold 35 of before GM cancelled his order. the supernova was not a great car and yenko said himself it was "brutally fast and potentially dangerous" - as well drawing the attention of the big insurance companies who didn't want to insure his new super cars without massive premiums. hemmings has a good writeup on it: https://www.hemmings.com/magazine/mus/2011/03/The---Day-Two---Deuce---1970-Chevrolet-Nova-Yenko-Deuce/3697001.html

they named their reborn drag racer program COPO in homage to those 427 Camaros, Novas, and Chevelles and were pretty upfront about it in the marketing. GM's structure is pretty different than how it used to be. COPO orders used to not need executive level approval because they didn't think dealers ordering 100 taxi's at a time would violate GM policies, basically a Dealer would call and order a minumum of 100 cars, production and engineering would sign off on it, and a block of time would be allocated to production to built the 100 identical units. That is until Dick Harrell and Fed Gibb Chevrolet ordered 100 Aluminum Block 1969 Camaro ZL-1s. GM's executive management heard about the order and cancelled it after 69 units were built and shipped. GM used to have a rule that you couldn't put anything bigger than 400ci in a compact or mid size passenger car, and this skirted it. After this incident GM began to build programs and a lot of special order cars got built under those like the later 454 and ZR-1 350ci novas (which yenko rebadged as "the deuce"). This car right now is GM's special program for electric performance cars. It's testing the waters with a very specific purpose built vehicle. I have to image if GM wants to sell a street version it will start a special program for that as well and may even do a pilot or beta test. I would like to think that if this is successful then there is a chance that if this is successful they may sell the drivetrain as a conversion kit to retrofit street cars through the GM performance parts division. It's wishful thinking at the moment, but coming off a profitable 2018, it's not out of the realm of possibility. GM does already do electric vehicle fleet sales with the Volt and Bolt, NYC has a bunch of them for sanitation and parking enforcement. Ford and Chrysler had fleet electric vehicles in the past (electric ranger anyone?) but no major manufacturer has done a performance electric vehicle before. Actually before Tesla showed there was a market, nobody considered it. I just really like the idea that in an NHRA event, there is now the possibility that privateer racers with home-built electric race cars can line up against factory backed efforts on almost level playing ground. It has a very 1960's match racer feel to it.

COPO just means Central Office Production Order, it was primarily used by dealers for taxicabs, special order police cars, fleet vehicles, special color orders, trucks, hearse knock down kits, etc. It only became associated with performance when Yekno, nickey, Motion, and a few other dealers used it to order 427 camaros instead of doing the swaps in house. It still exists as fleet and commercial sales. You don't need to be a millionaire to own a COPO car, just really good at reading trim tags. Plenty of 4 door 60's sedans in special colors and options are out there for not a lot of money - esp ex police and taxi cars. I had a friend in Louisiana that owned a COPO 1962 bel air 4 door. it was a 409 single carb automatic, ordered as a fleet car for an oil company in texas. I think the COPO special order was for the company's colors and not the 409 which was available on the sedan, and wagon in single carb format. I think it was destroyed in Katrina. Good on GM for building this electronic drag racer, I really hope this gains more traction (pun intended) with the NHRA and we see more entries and more classes. Electric car and bike drag racing right now is pretty exciting and still largely grass roots, having a major mfg step up both legitimizes the sport and starts to prove to the aftermarket that the demand is there.