Hey Donny- do you still have any contact with Doug from Desert Specialties? I have 2 sets of his hubs, but the brake rotor mounting bracket is different sizes on each pair. I would love to buy a new set of brackets so they are all the same. I don't even know if he is still in business, I couldn't find anything online. Just thought I would check with you- thanks! Andrew
Thanks for the long and thoughtful reply, Donny. I don't what to say offhand, but, "I am what I am." I don't race anymore, nor plan to, so I can say what I think without worrying about a ride or sponsorship or popularity.
Most dogs and folks that meet me, like me, I usually don't like the ones that don't. C'est la vie.
I figure if I can get even just one racer, or future racer, to think about the possible consequences of their actions, and act accordingly, it will be worth whatever flack I take.
When I was racing, in a V-8 unlimited car, I never flew over jumps like the Anthill where I couldn't see the landing; still, I won races and ran at 50+ MPH averages, and would have been faster if we had a bigger budget (I was always sweating the transmission).
Here's a question I thought of a little while ago:
If the spectators are solely to blame, how come the earlier vehicles didn't hit them?
"You totally cherry picked his post and found the one part you could nitpick and make Carlos look stoopid, because he couldn't provide your 'scientific data' (disagree with me all you want DD, what you asked for was scientific) and after that you tried your best to discount his position because he couldn't provide you with what you knew he couldn't provide."
Again, your assessment, not backed by logic or reason, but instead by your emotional state and misinterpretation. It was not "scientific," but mathmatic. BTW: "biased" is not a synonym for "stoopid."
"Stop being such a d**k. (some) People here like you, but stop being such a ball-buster for no reason."
Duck? :) You're the quack, you can't even come up with a correct diagnosis (reason) for my position.
"DD, this right here (IMO) is what bothers people."
I am not responsible for your, or others', emotional reactions. We are each individually responsible for our own emotions.
"You guys were going back and forth, ...and when he interjects with his opinion...you totally get off the subject of sequestration and ask him to provide specifics that you know he can't present. Iinstead of just agreeing with him, (again, I'm sure you do agree with him that most gov't employees are overpaid for their intellignece levels....Oh, and you kind of admitted YOU DO agree, because you said unless he has a degree in the field, he's not qualified even if he has an IQ of 160), you went off and got all, well, scientific!!"
No, I do not agree with someone that has gone on to state he can learn everything he needs to know via Rush. Nor does my stating one of the requirements to be a SW show my support for his position.
On the VM you left me, as follows:
BF bailed, my reply:
DS: It's not a scientific experiment...
NBD: Here you present another classic Straw Man. I never said anything about a scientific experiment.
You're right, you did not specifially say anything about a "scientific experiment".
I knew that. :)
However, when Carlos simply states that "some people I see are half as smart making twice as much.." (not exact quote) you demanded that he provide you with data that could be analyized and interpreted...
I demanded nothing, I asked a question. You've just presented another Straw Man.
Once again Daryl, your obvious intelligence is diminished by the positions you imply that others are taking...
You present yet another Straw Man here, Donny. You inferred incorrectly, I implied nothing of the sort. I'm truly disappointed, I'd thought you were coming along with your logic.
so I could take you to task for telling me I presented another straw man...but it wasn't a straw man.
Was too! ;)
The first time you asked Carlos for a percentage of gov't employees...YOU presented a straw man!!!
Carlos DID say..."SOME of the gov't employees I have observed" (or something to that effect.) YOU, DARYL, presented a straw man argument because.....
A. You are well aware ...
B. You asked Carlos to provide you with a percentage...
C. By doing so, you've created a STRAW MAN position...
I don't believe I did: I made an observation, then asked a question, providing info that Carlos could use to answer that question, then I asked questions as to how he had made his determination as to comparative intelligence.
PS on DP: If Dorner had fired on you, or you saw him firing on a LEO, I would fully support you doing whatever was necessary to defend yourself or others - in the heat of battle. Shoot him, run him over, blow him up, I'd back you up...
In our justice system, however, I believe, that if we are to continue to exercise any death penalty, we must offer those sentenced to such every legal opportunity to prove the court was incorrect in that delivering that verdict and sentence.
I'm not too sure the DP or a life sentence serves as a deterrent, as, while most every individual knows the possible consequences, few take it to heart when committing murder.
In any case, we both agree that convicted murderers need to be removed from society until they no longer present a threat to the public, whether that be death, physical infirmaty, or exoneration.
No worries! I'm not thin skinned by any means! LOL!
I enjoy a lively conversation amongst intelligent people, it also forces me to consider opinions outside of my own... something ALL of us should do every once in a while. Just don't expect me to not be vocal about what I believe in.