Geeto67

didn't see this last week. The numbers I am referencing are the % of education spending out of the federal budget. In that first link, if you turn off state and local spending, options you'll see a part of them. I would say who cares, but we know who cares, it's the person that keeps making the loudest noise about it. Also, apparently DJT loves to welsh on a bet - but we knew that already since he apparently doesn't even pay the people who legit do work for him.

He hit a telephone pole. IT's in shadow in the video so it's hard to spot. Turn the brightness all the way up and you'll see it. The thing that baffles me is that the vid makes it look like he hit the pole head on off center to the right side, but the damage looks like he struck it broadside. maybe the car turned when it hit the grass and I just can't see it. either way, dude is lucky.

I didn't demonize all the republican presidents, Eisenhower was a republican and I praised him for not only being the guy who got the ball rolling on educational spending but also recognizing education is ESSENTIAL to national security. I also didn't say anything about Nixon and Ford because while both had education policies they didn't do a whole lot (except for Nixon's anti discrimination policy in public education) We are talking about one specific issue, and it is an issue that the GOP has been historically weak on since the 1960's. It's not "demonizing", it's a fact that Reagan cut federal education spending by half, which means it was actually less than it was before Eisenhower took office. GHW Bush cut further. You want to call it demonizing but that's part of Reagan's legacy and one we are still living with today. here read this, it was written by an ohio state professor: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/09/02/my-students-pay-too-much-for-college-blame-reagan/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a79afb896b17 If you want me to say something nice about GOP presidents, fine - W was probably the least worst one of the last three GOP presidents when it came to education. Although he shared the same despicable idea that the states shouldn't get federal education funding, he actually tried to use the government as a lever to force standardization and reform in the state education systems. The "No child left behind act" reauthorized Lyndon Johnson's ESEA, except authorizing it on a state level (and in a way dooming it). In the end W Bush didn't succeed with what he wanted to do, but at least he tried which is more than you can say about Reagan or his Father. They tried, but for clinton and obama, both inherited large federal deficits from their predecessors, which means any tax increases need to go to fixing that. Clinton had the largest increase but was only able to increase by 20% (Reagan had cut 50%) and he had to cut federal spending in other areas to do it. All of his increases were promptly cut under W. Obama faced the same situation inheriting W's deficit for the massive Iraq, Afghanistan military operations, and wasn't able to increase funding in education as much in his first term. In his second term the republican congress cut all his education spending. Furthermore Trump cut the budget back to the amount we saw under Reagan. Reagan during his first term enjoyed a Senate Republican majority from 1981-1983. Only the HOR had a democratic majority and it was a thin margin. President of the Senate was George HW bush (after Mondale stepped down). Tipp O'Neil was speaker of the House. In Reagan's second term the Senate was a larger republican majority and the house a larger democratic majority. It is not a correct statement to say he faced a congressional democratic majority - because he didn't. He also managed to make these cuts over 8 years, not all at once. This was also the height of pork barrel politics which has a tendency to get some bills through by giving the other side things they needed locally to sway votes in the HOR. Look I am not saying the democrats have all the answers on education either, they don't. But they certainly have a stronger platform than the GOP and have done more with it.

:gabe:

Increase federal funding for education. We did it in the 1950's and 60's and went from propeller planes to the moon in less than a decade and had the number 1 educational system in terms of overall quality and efficiency. If you ask how we do that without raising taxes? the answer is we don't. Reagan's tax breaks to the rich in the 1980's were made possible at the expense of education. It was the single largest cut in educational spending in history and it has never been replaced. And now thanks to "W"'s presidency and Trump's incompetency any tax increase is going to have to go to reducing the deficit before it goes to education. So maybe we also need a shift in defense spending toward education, esp in the computer sciences. If you re asking about some other redistribution of wealth - well stop listening to Alex Jones or Info wars or whatever conspiracy nutjob is pumping you full of their crazy seed. That shit ain't real.

If you go back and read what I said, I didn't actually say I had "good parenting" as a privilege full stop. I had parents who had certain skills to help me when I needed them. In terms of my academics I had a few teachers that inspired me more than my folks did (although, to be fair my parents did pay cash for good grades and gave me a job delivering reports for their business when I was 14). I had friends that got that same assistance I got from my parents from other programs and people helping them and went on to do just as well. For the most part, I was a latchkey kid growing up. I was about 8 years old when their business took off, and they worked long hours 6 days a week. I didn't see them till bed time most days and then Sunday we would do something as a family. I am not about to go out and say my parents were bad parents - but I will say from personal experience that this notion of "good parents" is highly over rated, and when it comes to academics is less effective in some circles than role models at school who have more experience than other people's parents at certain things. If you are a parent and you have never applied to college, it doesn't matter how "good" a parent you are considered - you aren't going to have the skills necessary to be competitive in the admissions market for getting your child into college. You parents could be "great parents" and very involved and even be college educated, but if you are poor or live in a rural area, you just aren't going to get the same quality of education from the public school system for college prep than someone living in a rich suburb, and therefore won't be competitive in the admissions process. I am not saying good parenting vs bad parenting is not a factor - it certainly is, esp when we consider "bad parenting" to include abusive relationships, but after a certain level of "good" it just gets to be less and less important. thinking all of the problems in the US education system can be substantially improved by "good parenting" is just straight up bullshit. yeah and what's your point? we are talking about the US and it's problems. This drivel is no more relevant to the conversation than discussing how to colonize the moon. Yeah there are worse places in the world, but using that as an excuse for why we shouldn't continue to improve our existing system is not just stupid, it's straight up lazy.

People choose from the options available to them. There are some people who don't have certain options because of factors beyond their control and the work of people in the past to keep suppressing them. The least we could do is undo the suppression we no longer believe in and speed the plow on equal opportunity. Things are also the way people make them. Most people believe discriminating against other people is wrong, but there are a whole subset of those people who will stop short of doing something about it - either by pretending the discrimination no longer exists, or to fight against measures that seek to remove those old discriminating measures under some specious moral argument. We like to think that, but it's not a true statement, hence why transportation and school nutrition have been hot button issues lately. Also quality of education is also a problem. federal funding has been stripped out of public schooling leaving it subject to the wealth inequality of local taxation funding. I need that statement to be true, which it isn't. Let's work on making it true though.

It's not an ME109 but it's still cool: https://toledo.craigslist.org/cto/d/1953-messerschmitt-kr17-bmw/6705449050.html

I don't particularly like using those terms because they tend to be used pejoratively in our society. Some things are in fact a privilege, but you don't always have to think of them as a negative. Well I don't usually think of anybody as being an asshole unless they are....you know....actually being an asshole. Just inheriting wealth doesn't make someone an asshole - but being born on third base and pretend you hit a triple, and then using that narrative to shit on other people because they didn't get that? yeah that's an asshole move. I went to law school because when I was growing up in queens, I had the privilege of not being hounded by the police state like my classmates and peers of skin color, I had the privilege of having parents who appreciated education, I had the privilege of living in a city that values education and provided a high quality one, I had the privilege of having parents who knew how the college admission process worked and could help me (and a lot of my other class mates), I had the privilege of money and a neighborhood with good schools. I had the privilege of being eligible for government financial aid, grants, scholarships and other state sponsored programs that made it possible to afford a very expensive private college and law school. I had the privilege of attending schools that received government grants that allowed them to attract a high quality faculty. I had the privilege of attending schools that received government funding that helped them to diversify their student body and offer their students a rich multicultural, multiracial, multi-sociological experience. I had a lot of privileges, and I am appreciative of each one, and I know that I owe my success to everyone who provided that to me, and not just my parents but government financial aid that allowed me to go to school, the public school system that helped me grow academically, the government programs that allowed my peers from other backgrounds to go to college and law school with me to contribute to a diverse school experience. I appreciate all these privileges and am boundlessly grateful for them, and I find no value about being elitist about it. You know what is elitist? thinking your privilege is just they way things are, and then use that to deny others access to the same opportunity by ignoring institutional discrimination. I don't want the same outcome, but the same access to opportunity would be nice. Let people at least have the choice to do certain things, and to get that it's going to require some government intervention. That doesn't exist right now, and a big part of it was just good old fashioned discrimination baked right into our public and private institutions by our forefathers, but part of it is also blocking progress with this bullshit "self made" narrative because of some vague moral pretzel logic, tribalism, and some desire to feel special.

What I get is that there are some Ohioans so busy patting themselves on the back that they are "self made" that they ignore all the other people who contributed to their success including the government. It's cute when someone feels it necessary to include family contribution to their success but conveniently leaves out or mis-characterizes all the other factors that also contributed to their success because it doesn't jive with the narrative of being "self made" or not needing "handouts". Let's be honest - this idea that a person is "self made" is a fantasy perpetuated by people whose vanity and ego is so fragile that they can't and often willfully refuse to see how government programs, strangers, society at large, and other factors contributed to their success. It's ok to take a free or discount program from a private corporation because it's somehow not a "hand out" even though that's exactly what it looks, talks, and smells like - but it's not ok to take financial aid, or a participate in some other education programs because some how it's a "hand out" or an "entitlement" because of the source? :dumb: I am not saying you shouldn't be proud of your accomplishments, everyone should be proud of the good work they do on this earth and the success it brings them - but to craft a narrative that makes it seem like you are somehow special and use it to deny others programs to help them to improve their lives? well that's just shitty. And here come Tim with the overtly racist statement, but he's somehow not a racist. Back to pushing this "race traitor" narrative are we Tim? It's disappointing. There is no irony acknowledging white privilege exists any more than there is acknowledging the sun exists. That's the great part about truth, Tim - it exists whether you want to lie to yourself or not. hey look everybody, Its private tough guy back from his hiatus after a meltdown and personally threatening a board member. Welcome back, Brandon, let's see how quick we can get you back to threatening to come to my house and hurting my family. I'm sure you'll get around to it right after the brakes on your car "self clearance". The only person "white shaming" here is Tim, I didn't say anything about white vs black (and I could have because we were talking about education in the 1960's). I just said it's ignoring a lot of factors, some of them government educational program related, to pretend like the government didn't have any involvement in getting an education in the 1960's in this country. And it shows a lack of character to talk shit about others as needing handouts when someone was taking them themselves.

Ok, great you paid to attend a private school (technically your parents paid so it was a handout from them to you but that's beside the point) - but to think those private schools don't benefit from federal funds is not true. Since 1965 the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) has provided money to the faculty of private schools. These funds pay for materials, salaries, and aides for the students. The school is prohibited from receiving money directly so it has to go to the staff and students. So just because you paid for school doesn't mean you didn't benefit from federal school programs - but it does mean you might not have known about it at the time. Did you pay your father interest on that loan? If you didn't then he gave you a handout, and that's not my position on it but that of the IRS that would consider the interest not charged as a "gift" for tax purposes. But wait? I thought you didn't get a handout? Also, cleaning toilets sounds like a shitty loan term (pun intended). Look, I come from small business people and I get it - anything to help succeed as a family, but don't stand there from some lofty place and pretend like you didn't get some advantages. It's OK that you did, it's not OK that you shit on other people when they are looking for something similar to what you had. Well half of it was free to you - because your work paid for it. Did you have to do "extra" work for them to pay for it or had you not gone to school would they have paid you the same salary? They benefited from you being educated but probably not in the way you think, and it really doesn't seem like you "worked" for it so much as it was an added benefit you were lucky enough to receive. I am not even going to bring up the fact that because of educational spending and low tuition rates compared to today - the education you got at the college level was a much better value overall than what most kids today face. Except that part where your parents gave you the gift of a private school education, and that part where your work gifted you with a 50% tuition discount. Actually without those parts - what education did you personally pay for? 2 years of college? well we all make mistakes. the key is not to make them twice. Nobody here is asking you to tow any party line, you do that on your own - first the democrat one and now the republican one. At some point aren't you going to tow your own line? You aren't really a moderate here, I don't know if you think you are one or not, but not a lot of the things you say are moderate positions. well at least I am relieved of the burden of having to respect you.

not half, only roughly 33% believed him. BK was a republican political nominee, appointed by a republican president, and confirmed by a republican majority congress. He could have drunkenly run someone over on the way to the hearings and he still would have been confirmed. The only reason the GOP entertained the hearings is that from a stragety standpoint it helps them a little in the senate races. There is a possiblity that they may take a dip in the HOR races since they are more regional, but keeing the senate majority is key to their plans for the remainder of Trump's term. The GOP is doubling down on the angry white male as it's core constitutency and BK's little tantrum in the hearing really spoke to those voters. If there is one take away from this, regardless as to whether you believe him or believe her, his demeanor during the hearings showed a temperment that had no place on the supreme court. Justice Stevens, and a few other well respected conservate jurists certainly do not feel he has any place on the court. Plus he's kind of a piece of shit conspiracy theorist and may actually be the origin of the conspiracy theory that the Clintons killed Vince Foster (spoiler alert: they didn't). Yep, target demographic. Angry white male. ruin someone's life? hardly. Last I checked, if this didn't go through he would still have been a fairly wealthy federal judge. AS a child of the 1960's, whether you realized it or not, you enjoyed the education social programs of Eisenhauer, Kennedy, and Johnson. And I don't just mean at the college level, federal education spending affected all levels of public education. These are programs later generations did noy enjoy because Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and Trump stripped and have continued to strip away. I have no doubt you worked hard, but part of the reason your hard work had any effect was that you were lucky enough to be born at a time when social investment in education made sure that hard work mattered. But just keep telling yourself it's all you and fuck other people for wanting the same lucky break you got and don't even realize. Those who think basic human decency is something that should be waived because of an invisible political line do not deserve the same basic decency that they advocate against.

is there a rain date? weather is starting to look sketchy for this weekend.

this wouldn't be an issue if we voted for politicians that supported education funding. Really? you didn't actually buy this self made billionaire bit did you? This makes perfect sense to me, not surprised in the least. Empires are generational.

It makes sense to me. The partnership I mean, not autonomous cars. Lots of automakers run joint programs and often the results are a boon to both companies as well as the marketplace. Case in point the DSM cars of the 90's like the talon, laser, and eclipse - or the new Z4/supra platform. Honda has done good things with partnering with companies in the past, and it being an American automaker I don't see a down side esp in the economy or job sector for the US. autonomous cars for the most part can suck a fat one. Although, it would be nice to not have people stopping in the middle of a lane to merge when there is a mile of road ahead of them or not having the people who get in a right turn lane because it is the right most lane before figuring out they have to move left to go straight and then slow everyone down on the roads.... but yeah the insurance companies will fuck us who still want to drive.

I had that same thought, too many and oddly spaced. Whatever lock it fits it's proprietary to that lock. I do think it's electronic, I don't think it has data storage, too thin. Might work like one of those old "chipped" keys from the early 90's. From the shape alone I would venture it is a door or a house key of some sort.

I would wire wheel the rust bubble away, then coat with an eastwood or Por15 rust paint, then fluid film over it once that stuff cures.

I am always curious about this brand of apathy. We are still screwed how exactly? Yes there are things that don't work great, like the criminal justice system, but the alternative, like not having a criminal justice system, is usually far worse. Plus there is incremental movement to improve things occurring on a daily basis. So I am curious, how is it you feel personally screwed? What is it that you feel the government is screwing you on in particular when you say "we are screwed""? Also who is the "We"?

nice... make sure you clean the lens on your camera

Sweet!!!! Pics?

There is not much to discuss really - either you are in the majority and kind of accept we are fucked until there is a change of the guard, or you are one of these nutjobs that says "but I get to keep my money I earned so fuck the government" midterms man....this will be a discussion point for after the midterms. If we get the democratic majority people are predicting then something might get done, if not then it ain't changing - no way trump is going to suddenly say "oopsie" to something he considers one of his major wins.

corrosion in the cable is pretty easy to check - get the multimeter out measure the voltage from the positive terminal to the starter terminal - if it reads more than 0.3 volts during cranking then it's done. Same with the negative cable, measure from terminal to starter housing and while cranking if it is more than 0.3 volts it has too much resistance.

do a search for car audio sites for connectors. A lot of those guys use multiple batteries in series and if I remember correctly they use something called flag connectors that have two outputs, one on each side. There are crimp style and compression fitting style - you want compression fitting so you can just strip your cable ends and shove them in the connector.

here it is: https://www.lebanonford.com/2018-lfp-roush-supercharged-mustang-for-40995/ I'd give up 100hp and $1000 extra dollars on a warranty.

didn't their 700hp package come with a warranty? the 800hp package doesn't. It was also something like $44K?