Fascar Does It Again

[rusty47711]

race wasnt bad
we put the lead in and qualifie 14 th
elected to start last for the reason i am trying to sell the car not wreck it
worked back up to about 13 or 14 started to get beat around and parked it(like i said trying to sell not wreck)if i would have stayed out and not been involved in anything would have definately finished top ten
the deal with the weight FROM MY OPINION is that the extra 50 lbs was not needed even though a crate car finished 3rd and 5th they could not keep up with the top two cars
watched the end of the race pretty exciting finish
Rusty Ebersole
driver #36 mp motorsports

[OLD STYLE RACER 2]

Thanks Rusty for the update. Would love to hear from FRED23 as to what happened to him.

[AJ14]

I understand the need to add weight if car and engine types need to be balanced out , but so far i don't see where there was a drastic , 24 hour notice type need to make a change . I do hope FRED jumps back into this thread and gives us some more info . By the way FRED , sorry about helping run this thread off the cliff with political stuff .
I do think adding and subtracting weight is the only sensible way to equalize competition . Carbs and cams and gears and heads are pretty expensive to change . You just have to make sure lead is specified . Otherwise the rich guys use tungsten and such .

[rusty47711]

same team but i will call him and have him post his thoughts
rusty

[Todd McCreary]

You can not say Bush was a jerk off. You know he was but yet you will never admit it. Instead you blame the Dems for what Bush did.

who is blinded by ideology? you two are smoking crack.

i just gave you a fricking LIST of things Bush did wrong and all you can do is tell me that i can't say he was wrong?

Bush acting like a Democrat doesn't mean Bush was right, it means that the Democrat-like policies he chose to enact are wrong. ergo, Bush was wrong.

would you like another? refusal to enforce the borders . Jeb was good for that too. and that's another one straight out of the orthodox Democrat playbook. hell, last year several of the Dem presidential candidates were trying to come out in support of Drivers Licenses for known illegal aliens until they got their fingers burned so bad they had to take it all back.

the Republicans are the only one of the two major parties that's even partially on board with enforcing the borders and trying to deport known illegals ( instead of giving them free medical services and a chance to birth an American citizen ). and too many of them are like McCain, pretty fricking unreliable on simple enforcement of the law.




Social Security was designed to be self funding,

on a year over year basis. and due to the demographic fall off after the Baby Boomers stopped having kids, it's been known since 1970s that the Boomers were going to bankrupt Social Security. that's why politicians have been talking about it since the 1970's. it just wasn't expected to happen until 2040 or so.

attempting to say otherwise demonstrates ignorance on par with AJ's description of Fascism.

[Winger]

I may be ignorant but I know that if you take 2 cookies out of my cookie jar and I only put one in each day, I'm going to be out of cookies soon. Previously more cookies were put in so there would be an abundance in the future. Can't you see the same thing works with the Social Security fund. It would have been fine if it had been left alone.
Same deal with state lotteries. They were approved so the money could be used for education. That's why they were approved in most states by the voters. That money is now used for education. What politicians didn't and don't tell you, is that the money that use to fund education paid out of the general funds isn't allocated any longer. It's a game the politicians play.
I may be ignorant but I know some of this stuff because I lived through them or worked with them. All I can say is get involved yourself, so you really know what you're talking about. Stop listening to the talk show pundits and the party line. Use whatever intelligence you have and think for yourself. Let experience teach you. Just my advice but you can ignore it, as I'm sure you will. After all, I'm just an ignorant idealist.

[Todd McCreary]

I may be ignorant but I know that if you take 2 cookies out of my cookie jar and I only put one in each day, I'm going to be out of cookies soon.

you know what's going to happen if you put 100 cookies in the jar, and then after you retire you take 150 cookies out?

you've got three options:
a - find lots more younger people to put more cookies in ( which is the Ponzi scheme that SocSec was originally designed to be, only the Boomers decided they'd only have 2 kids per family which put the kibosh on that )
b - the cookie jar runs out
c - massive inflation which permits oldsters to pull out all the cookies they want but renders those cookies worth pennies on the dollar compared to what they put in

this issue has been known since the 1970s. the "lock box" was never going to do anything but push the bankruptcy date back 10-15 years. you can put up all the smoke up you want, it's not going to change reality.

and there's not a single one of those 50 year olds running around on a $20 thousand dollar Harley instead of providing for their own retirement who is getting any sympathy from me.



Previously more cookies were put in so there would be an abundance in the future.

no, no retiree who has survived more than 10 years has put in enough funds to cover their benefit payout. and with the percentage of old farts living to their 90's, that's a LOT of people taking a LOT of cookies out of the jar that they never paid in for.

that's okay though, Obama is going to take care of this issue with his mandatory "End of Life Counseling" panels.



They were approved so the money could be used for education. That's why they were approved in most states by the voters.

wait, wait. aren't you the same guy who was just explaining to me how SocSec was "solvent"? and now you're telling me the politicians are running a bait and switch? i am SOOOOO confused. i'm supposed to trust the people who aren't trustworthy? *head splits open*

state lotteries are a tax on the poor ( it's odd how often Dems implement taxes on the poor like Liquor, Tobacco, minimum wage increases and Lotteries ) and the stupid. the voters who were dumb enough to vote for this got exactly the government they deserve.

you'll not find me among that group.




Stop listening to the talk show pundits and the party line.

i tell you Bush was wrong, that the Republicans need to be Whigged, that i did NOT vote for McCain and i throw up news references from hard left and international sources and this libel is all you've got?

it's not true when AJ says it. it's not true when Chris says it. and it doesn't make it true because you jumped on the bandwagon.

i'm the one who isn't following the party line here.

i'll even give you an opportunity to prove it:
which Obama policies are you against, Mr. FreeThinker?

all you bozos who keep telling me i'm being programmed by talk radio, feel free to prove your bonafides right here and now.

[Winger]

wait, wait. aren't you the same guy who was just explaining to me how SocSec was "solvent"? and now you're telling me the politicians are running a bait and switch? i am SOOOOO confused. i'm supposed to trust the people who aren't trustworthy? *head splits open*

Nope, wasn't me. I said SS was DESIGNED to be solvent. It hasn't been solvent since the politicians started taking money out of the account. Sorry you're so confused. I can't believe you don't think they're running a "bait and switch". I certainly didn't say you should trust them. I insinuated just the opposite. As far as me following the party line: If I did that I'd be doing the same thing you are. I'd be bashing Obama now and praising Bush. Sorry, I can't praise Bush. I do try to keep an open mind and I'm willing give something a chance to work if I think it's possible. I don't agree with the so called health plan in it's entirety, however I do believe the health care system in the US is broke and needs revamping. Maybe it's because I'm personally affected by it. My retirement fund, and almost everything I earned in my life, is gone because of health care issues. I don't have a $50,000 Harley either. I don't agree with total gun control but I don't have a problem with having to register guns that are only designed to kill people. I never met anyone that hunted with a fully automatic "machine" type gun. Does the average citizen really need a "zip" gun? I didn't say take them away. I think collectors and others may be allowed to own them but they should be registered and availability limited. Personally I wasn't in favor of bailing out the auto companies. However, it's probably a good thing we did or GM and MOPAR would be gone now. I believe we will recoup that bailout money and possibly make money in the long run. I don't know, but it appears we will sooner than later. I wasn't in favor of the "cash for clunkers" program. I still don't like it. I think that may hurt in the long run. Those are a few examples of things I disagree with. However, I'm not totally opposed to them all. There is a middle ground that intelligent people with common sense should support. However, both parties are so opposed to each other that they refuse to work together for that middle ground. I hate politics and I don't know why I start discussing it. I was involved in it for about 6 years and it was one of the most discouraging things I ever did. All issues are much more complicated that they appear. Present laws, unions, insurance companies, special interests, financial concerns, citizens, compromises, and different values and opinions make it hard to get things done. Our system needs positive change and it wasn't going to happen with the administration we had. At one time I was a McCain supporter. I finally decided he wasn't capable of implementing the changes we need. I don't think Obama is either but he has a better chance than any of the other viable candidates. I will support him, as I did President Bush, until he gives me a reason not to.

[AJ14]

Todd , i don't know if anyone has ever mentioned this to you before , but you aren't very good at debating . I know you pride yourself on your dogmatic abilities , but that isn't what debating is . You have to realize that people are going to check facts , and thats where your bloviating falls down . I do agree completely with you on the fact that you are SOOOOO confused .

FRASS is right about the direction this board has taken . Actually i think it was probably always like this , but then some members decided to call you and a couple of others on your very unique world views . Now , we'll likely always be able to count on you or Darren , or Edm to hi jack posts , not with any usable information , just your commercial for whatever view you guys are pushing on a given day . Then i or someone else responds to the hi jack and we're off .

[Edm]

How about this for high jack, YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bigbuck]

$35 pit pass??

Youre right about the tires and gas. I could, but won't name at least 2 teams that pay nothing, as in 0 to get in at New Smyrna. They sell tires and gas, period. Rules changes? Not more than once a month or so, heck they had a guy write a GOOD set of rules, quite fair actually, posted them on the site here, took them back down and all but booted the guy in the ass! Wont last much longer I'm afraid. Oh, Joe Lewindowski, I believe you are trying, thanks.

[Todd McCreary]

I'd be bashing Obama now and praising Bush.time for another reality check: you are now going to have to provide a quote wherein i "praised Bush" or be shown to be lying.

some other things Bush got wrong?
the Harriet Myers nomination.
the Dubai port deal.

both of which were blocked by Republicans losing their patience with Georgie boy.



I said SS was DESIGNED to be solvent.

SocSec was started in 1935. it was "designed to be solvent" when average life expectancy was <70 and there where 5-10 paying in for every person cashing out, yes.

rising life expectancy broke half of that equation and the Boomers dropping their child per family to near 2 broke the other half. sorry if basic math is causing a problem here.

oooh, even better: when originally implemented SocSec barred 1/2 of the entire labor force from even applying for bennies. that makes it REAL easy to balance the books.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_...29#Controversy
"Job categories that were not covered by the act included workers in agricultural labor, domestic service, government employees, and many teachers, nurses, hospital employees, librarians, and social workers.[12] The act also denied coverage to individuals who worked intermittently.[13][14] Exclusions exempted nearly half the working population.[13] "



I certainly didn't say you should trust them.

and yet, you DO trust them when these untrustworthy pols tell you that SocSec was "sustainable". explicitly, implicitly and without question.

because they're promising to pay you for your belief. someday, off in the future. just as long as you keep paying money in right now.

reminds me of the descriptions of Bernie Madoff investors. and Bernie made a lot of money for a lot of people. for a while.



however I do believe the health care system in the US is broke

it is broken. and for the same reason that college tuitions are "broken" ( college tuitions and medical expenses have both been tracking between 5-10% inflation every year since the 1970's, and they are the only sectors of the economy to have done this ). government regulation, government price subsidies and government granted monopolies.

the only policy which has ever been proposed that would provide a downward price pressure on medical expenses was HSA's. and the Democrats are rabidly against those.

if you aren't going to provide downward pressure on the natural inclination of physicians and hospitals to raise prices, the only remaining means of price control is rationing. which is exactly what Obama is trying to get too.


I don't have a $50,000 Harley either.

i'm not sure anybody has a $50,000 Harley? maybe after it's fully dressed out and custom modded?

anyways, i never said that you had one. nor is a Harley the only item of personal excess that people engage in rather than providing for themselves and their own retirement. i was simply using "$20,000 Harley" as a proxy for the irresponsible way so many people have indebted themselves over the last 20 years.

if you wanted a Harley and you paid for it in cash? more power to you. not too many non-millionaires running around with $20k in pocket change though.

another proxy that could be used is motor homes/RV's. that market has also collapsed since the easy money from home refi dried up.



I don't agree with total gun control

Obama hasn't ( yet ) made any moves on gun control legislation. the only thing we have to go on is his comments such as "not having the votes to pass anything if I wanted too" and "clinging to their guns or religion". ( i know these quotes are not exact but they're close enough for gov'mint work )


I don't have a problem with having to register guns that are only designed to kill people. I never met anyone that hunted with a fully automatic "machine" type gun. Does the average citizen really need a "zip" gun?


you don't "get" the 2nd Amendment at all, do you? the 2nd has nothing to do with hunting or collecting. it has to do with making sure that the citizenry has guns that are suitable for killing people. specifically, government people who would try to usurp the rights of the citizenry. i'm sorry if that scares you. the Revolutionaries were not only willing to kill to defend their rights, quite a few British soldiers and Hessian mercenaries did die. nasty, brutish people the forefathers were, eh? i sure would hate to be like them....




Personally I wasn't in favor of bailing out the auto companies.

ah, a point of agreement between us. skoal!

next you'll be agreeing with me that Bush and Obama shouldn't have propped up those banks.




I believe we will recoup that bailout money and possibly make money in the long run.

odd, GM and Chrysler have already been back to the trough for more money. and considering the debt and real estate overhangs coupled with the worsening employment figures, the prospects for significant recovery overall and in new car sales in particular are very slim.

this also avoids the obvious point. instead of picking up a bunch of new business, now Ford ( which was/is still viable ) is going to have to compete against a couple of government run zombie corporations who will simply beg Congress for more money every time they f something up. i'm not saying Ford can't make it without turning into a third zombie corp, but it's not making it any easier on them.

considering the debt overhang you want to hear some scary news? the FDIC is out of money. has been since the middle of August. nobody outside of government knows exactly how they're still going but the general consensus is that the Fed or Treasury is propping it up with back door loans.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...9-fdic-is.html

thanks for at least showing a little nuance to your discourse instead of just coming in here and sliming people who don't agree with you. it's a pleasant change.



but you aren't very good at debating .

i'm not trying to make friends with you, AJ.

i'm calling you out on your bad logic, abysmal ignorance and your total reliance on ad hominem tactics. of course you aren't going to like that.

that i don't make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside doesn't mean i'm an ineffective debater.



You have to realize that people are going to check facts , and thats where your bloviating falls down .

then please DO check a SINGLE one of my facts, AJ.

i am well aware that calling Fascism an "ideology of the Left" is not academic "consensus". it appears, however, that i would not be the first academic to do so ... if i was an academic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism...tical_spectrum
"Stanley Payne ... contends that German Nazism was closer to Russian communism than to any other non-communist system. [35]"

much of the difficulty with categorizing Fascism is that Fascism explicitly exalts the irrational, emotional and exuberant. given that they prize irrationality, there is practically no limit to what a Fascist might claim or say or even do at any given time. "If it feels good, Do it" could be said to be the Fascist motto.

the Fascist exaltation of the irrational is another point of philosophical difference with the Marxists, who pretend to exalt rationality. not that any of this would mean anything to you as you couldn't define Fascism if your life depended on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Economic_policies
"While fascists support the unifying of proletariat workers to their cause along corporatistic, socialistic, or syndicalistic lines, fascists specify that they advocate a nationalized form of such economic systems such as corporatism, national socialism, or national syndicalism which promotes the creation of a strong proletarian nation, but not a proletarian class. Fascists also make clear that they have no hostility to the petite bourgeoisie (lower middle-class) or to small businesses and promise these groups protection alongside the proletariat from the upper-class bourgeoisie, big business, and Marxism. "

all the rest of your "debating" thus far has consisted solely of accusing me of incompetence and bias. without, of course, ever bothering to actually show up with facts, figures or references. your naked assertions are supposed to be good enough for everyone here. only problem is, you're showing yourself to be completely incompetent.

since it's only people on the right who are blinded by ideology, i'm still waiting for you to show up and tell us which parts of the DNC ideology and plans you disagree with.

i see you still can't even meet that minimal challenge, AJ. have you ever heard of the term "projection" before?

ps - if you don't know what i mean by "Whig the Republicans", just ask. at this point, i'm fairly sure that this comment is going right over your head and making a whooshing sound.

[AJ14]

I wasn't planning to mention that your number 2 source ( after FOX )for all of your information is Wikepedia , but you just let that out of the bag . And using Wikepedia as anything more than a forum is like using the aforementioned blogger in his underwear . Anyone , and i do mean anyone , can add to or change any entry . You do know that don't you ??? Heres a tip . As you obviously refuse to do actual research , keep these deep wellspring references to yourself . I'll pretend i don't know where they come from and you won't have to be embarrassed when people find out .

[ronabneysr]

can you go to race track and race one car for less than 1000.00

please tell me how cut hole in fence steal your tires and fuel and tow truck runs on water -- and you pack your lunch i ain't trying to be funny

also next time you have a crate motor drive by your built motor on out side i suggest you take that motor out and look at it or learn how or were to buy a motor i ain't seen a crate motor yet that that all i here is what we had to go inside it and do to it yeah i know you got crate motor spent 3500.00 to 5000.00 and out runs 20;000 30.000 dollar engine yeah and i'm superman

[Todd McCreary]

can you go to race track and race one car for less than 1000.00

easy. run a Street Stock or lower class.

yeah, not very helpful, i know.