RowdyRebel

Welp, game 1 ensured Wrigley Field will host 3 games in the series... Silver linings.

There is no need to raise fuel taxes to pay for infrastructure...just stop spending the money ALREADY COLLECTED for that purpose on other, unrelated budget items. "But the CHILDREN will suffer!" Bullshit. Before raiding funds collected for a specific purpose, there are plenty of "pet" projects that can be cut or reduced...bureaucracies that can shrink or be eliminated altogether...plenty of places to find the revenue OTHER than schools, police, and fire services. Schools, police, and fire services are most visible, and the easiest to use to tug at heart strings...which is WHY the left uses them in their efforts to unnecessarily raise taxes by placing them at the top of the list to receive their budget cuts FIRST. For the Democrats who always claim to stand up "for the CHILDREN", they sure are quick to make them suffer. If they REALLY cared about "the CHILDREN", the schools and first responders budgets wouldn't get cut until everything else in government had been slashed to bare bones. So I don't want to hear this "we need to raise taxes" bullshit. The ONLY thing government has ever been good at is WASTING money. Giving them more doesn't help the economy in any way. In fact, history has proven time and time again that when you CUT the government's take on every dollar that is earned, people take home more (and therefore have more to spend), which spurs the economy and stimulates growth, which increases the size of the labor force (number of tax payers) and the government collects MORE revenue as a result. That smaller piece of a larger pie always works out better than demanding a larger piece of a smaller pie.

Yeah, but that was 2015.

I used to play baseball every summer, watch the Cubs and made it to at LEAST 1 or 2 games @ Wrigley every year, even had quite a few baseball cards we'd collect and trade. Then they went on strike in '95 and I lost interest. I just couldn't understand why a bunch of guys who get paid a ton of money to travel the country doing something millions of kids would give their right arm for the chance to do just for a day...why they'd go on crying about how they weren't getting paid enough. When the strike ended, I didn't return to the game. Now it's just memories from my childhood...but it's always good to see the Cubbies do good. I'll probably double the number of games I've watched in the past 20 years over the next week...

...the last time was right after he got back from the war. Cubbies are going to the World Series! If they beat the Indians, I'll get to see something in my lifetime that he never got to see in his. I haven't really followed baseball since the strike of '95, but was always a Cub fan. Used to LOVE going to games @ Wrigley, and still pull for 'em despite not being familiar with anyone on the roster these days. GO CUBS!

...and what Nixon did is nothing compared to what the media has covered up for the Clintons and Obama.

Meanwhile, thanks to a CORRUPT press, you have Hillary's transgressions (mishandling classified info, dead ambassador, etc...not to mention HER treatment of women 30 years ago that were raped and abused by her husband...) swept under the rug to make room for something completely irrelevant that Trump may or may not have done 30 years ago with or to some women he may or may not have known. Hell, they're making a big stink over Trump stating he'll wait and see how the elections go before accepting or challenging the results...meanwhile ignoring the fact that Hillary disclosed highly sensitive (if not classified) info right there on the debate stage when she stated how long the underlings have to put a nuke in the air after the president gives the order. If the press wants to be "free", then they need to apply equal treatment to ALL sides. As long as the press acts as the media wing/attack dogs for the Democrat party, they shouldn't expect too many "rights and privileges" afforded to them.

Hey, I'm just hanging out INSIDE my home. The ONLY way they would've known I had a gun pointed in their direction was if they were peeping...which is a crime in and of itself. Had I stepped out onto the porch and aimed at them, sure, there may have been some issues...but sitting on the couch in my living room, well, I have the right to do as I please.

Back when I was renting, I looked out my front window and saw a car on the street taking pictures of my house. So, INSIDE my house, I picked up my rifle and aimed it out the window. I was pretty certain they were looking in through the window, because they peeled out getting the F out of there in quite the hurry. I don't take kindly to folks sticking their nose in my business.

Go here http://www.eia.gov/state/maps.cfm?v=Petroleum and remove everything but the pipelines from the map. They're already all over the place. If they were "poisoning the water" we'd already be dead.

A journalist is still a member of the public, with all of the rights AND RESPONSIBILITIES that go along with that. If somebody is going to rob a bank and calls their local CBS affiliate to record the incident, CBS is likely to show up...AFTER notifying the local law enforcement. If they just show up and document, they become accessories to the crime and face the same criminal liability as those who actually committed the act. Point is, if the "reporter" had prior knowledge that a crime was going to occur, and showed up to "document" it anyway WITHOUT notifying the police first, they are guilty. If the reporter called the cops and said "this is going down" with the date & time, then showed up to film, then they are "just exercising their Rights under the 1st Amendment". One way they are a PARTICIPANT in a crime. The other a responsible citizen documenting an event.

...and if he doesn't win? A legal challenge wouldn't be unprecedented. In fact, contested US Presidential elections go back to 1824 when John Q. Adams won the electoral college despite Andrew Jackson's popular vote win. Rutherford B. Hayes over Samuel Tilden in 1876 came down to a compromise being reached among electors, handing Hayes the 185/184 victory. In 2000, there was the whole Bush v Gore thing, and we know how that turned out. Then in 2004, John Kerry was the sore loser. Funny thing is, the common denominator in ALL of these contested elections is that a Democrat came out on the losing end. No wonder the Democrats are so scared of Trump contesting the results.

My previous best was $7.70/loaded mile. That one was a 6.5 mile haul from the rock quarry, across the river to the state highway they were widening. Do that 14-15 times, throw $100 worth of fuel in the tanks, and be home 8-9 hours after I left. Sure do miss jobs like that...pay great and close to home. I guess I'll find out what my new personal best is in a couple weeks when I get paid for it.

P/U @ 4946 Del @ 4680 on the same street Odometer @ pickup = 64082.2 Odometer @ delivery = 64082.7 I think that's a new record for me. Anything shorter has always been intra-plant. This was a shipment to an outside company. Hell, they could've saved the truck freight charges and just made the delivery with their forklifts. Oh well...I guess if they'd done that, I wouldn't have had anything to do today.

So are the Roosevelts examples of what you're looking for? Or examples of what we DON'T need? FDR ignored the Constitution when he stripped Americans of Japanese decent of their liberty and property, placing them in the internment camps without due process. He also packed the court with activist justices who would approve his UNCONSTITUTIONAL agenda. And Teddy? He's the reason the feds own and control so much federal land. Perhaps you've missed the news in the last few years where the BLM, USFS, NPS, and others change policies and ranchers get screwed out of the land they've been using for generations...long before the feds took control over the land. Let's not forget the decrees and executive orders vastly expanding these lands or wiping away decades of traditional use for political purposes by presidents thinking they have to shore up support with "environmentalists". The feds have mismanaged that land since they took it over, and it all goes back to Teddy. It all boils up to the surface every couple years when a rancher protests or a forest fire runs rampant. F*ck the Roosevelts. Both of 'em. We'd be better off had they NOT been President.

...so in this "critical time", you trust Hillary? One of the architects behind the Arab spring? Overthrowing dictators who were at least personable with the US and could keep control over their country in favor of regimes ran by the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, etc? You'd put the woman, who as Secretary of State IGNORED 600+ requests from one of her ambassadors for increased security...and then he was killed as a result? And then she went on to blame a stupid internet video nobody had seen that had absolutely NOTHING to do with anything in order to protect Obama in the weeks leading up to the November 2012 elections? Has that film maker ever been released from prison? Or is he still a political prisoner of the Obama administration? Hillary has disqualified herself by her own actions. NOTHING that Trump may or may not have done 30 years ago as a private citizen can compare. Like it or not, that is the choice we have. Hillary or Trump. NOBODY ELSE has a chance in Hell of becoming the next president. To vote against Trump or to "sit this one out" is 1/2 a vote for Hillary, because your vote isn't cancelling out the residents at the cemetaries, illegals, felons, and anyone else the democrats bus in to vote for them early and often. That is why they fight so hard against voter ID laws, despite needing ID to bank, buy cigarettes, alcohol, fly, cash a check, along with so many other things in life.

Until such time as the politics of personal destruction is put to an end, we will NEVER have the type of candidates you desire. As I explained earlier, the people who would be BEST suited for any elected office value their good name and reputation more than the power of whatever office they might otherwise be inclined to seek. They DON'T seek office, despite being highly qualified and being of good moral character because they don't want to have their good name and reputation destroyed with lies and half-truths. The people who DO run for office are those who couldn't care less about their name and reputation as long as they get to wield the power that comes with the office they seek. They will do whatever is necessary to get that power, at whatever cost. Ends justify the means, so long as they get the power. I don't think Trump cares as much about the power of the office as he does saving what's left of the country. He's already a fairly powerful guy, running a huge corporation with tens of thousands of employees. Hell, he OWNS the 757 he's currently flying around on...same basic plane as Air Force 1. He's sitting there in his own personal position of power, after having played the game for so many years, and he sees what is happening to the country which afforded him the opportunity to do what he has done...and he wants to stop the destruction, end the corruption, and restore the country to the greatness it once was. Sure, he's eccentric...made for great TV. Sure, he comes off as a bit of a clown. If you told me 6-8 months ago, I'd be supporting him for President, I would've called you crazy. Times change, though. While I didn't vote for him in the primaries, he'll get my vote next month. Why? Hillary would be NOTHING without the power. Never has been anything, never will be anything. That's why she so desperately wants it.

...AND ANOTHER THING! Whatever alleged indiscretions may or may not have occurred were while Trump was an ordinary citizen. He wasn't a "public figure". Whatever he did or didn't do at the time had nothing to do with politics on any level. Contrast that to the Clintons, where HIS indiscretions occurred WHILE he was the Attorney General in Arkansas...WHILE he was Governor of Arkansas...and WHILE he was President of the United States...and not only did Hillary "stand by her man" while he used and abused multiple women (to a FAR worse degree than anyone is even hinting might have occurred by Trump)...Hillary aided and abetted her husband's activities every step of the way to the point of making threats against Bill's victims in order to ensure their silence. Why? Political power. The difference couldn't be more clear. The allegations against Trump PALE in comparison to the known transgressions of the Clintons.

A story of national importance? You mean like Hillary's state department ignoring a certain now-deceased ambassador's 600+ requests for additional security? Or perhaps Hillary going out of her way to install an unsecured server for her own use in order to control WHICH official records were kept and which would be wiped "like with a cloth" to avoid having to turn them over to the state department? Or how about the fact that she's gladly accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign governments known for their abhorrent treatment of women, murder of gays, and so much more that pales in comparison to anything her husband did to women. And while we're on the topic of women, wouldn't it be a topic of national interest to know that Hillary, while campaigning for "equal pay for women" does not herself pay her own female staff members as much as their male counterparts? All of that is exponentially more important than some he-said/she-said about what may or may not have happened on an airplane 30+ years ago. If you were assaulted, you should've spoke up AT THE TIME. For as thoroughly corrupt as Hillary is, NOBODY GIVES A DAMN about the Times report. The rumors reported upon in the piece have no relevance to the issues. Like they said in regards to Bill RAPING women and Hillary THREATENING them to keep them quiet..."it's only sex". Hillary is bought & paid for by regimes which should have ZERO influence over our elected officials. When the Times prints THAT story, and stops giving Hillary veto-power over what they print about her, then I might show a little more interest. As it is now, though, they are nothing more than the media wing of Hillary's campaign and as a result, the stories they print are about as believable as she is.

With all of the problems making the news about the VA...government-run health care at its finest...why would ANYONE desire for that to be expanded universally for all? And the courts are exactly why she CANNOT be allowed to win. Replacing Scalia with a leftist with "real world experience"...not to mention 2 or 3 other likely vacancies in the next 4-8 years...kiss any "rights" specifically enumerated in the Constitution goodbye, making way for the "rights" that have to be "interpreted" into the Constitution after years of "precident". In answering a question on what she'd look for in a justice, she rambled on for several minutes AND NEVER ONCE mentioned the Constitution. Trump, on the other hand, had a short & simple answer, and one of the main things he'd look for? RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUITION! If for NO other reason, that right there should seal the deal on the election. I hate to say this, but Trump is the only thing standing in the way of the end of a great nation. John McCain and others like him are idiots, worrying about saving the "party" while aiding and abetting the destruction of the country. F*ck the party. I want my COUNTRY to be strong and prosperous.

The FBI director laid out many of the criminal acts Hillary committed in regards to her mishandling of classified documents...then said he wasn't going to recommend charges. He knew Obama's justice dept wouldn't follow through if he had, and possibly worse, if they DID follow through, it would've been a half-assed prosecution in front of a carefully selected judge that would have created enough holes for Hillary to slither through to find a "not guilty" verdict...then she'd be untouchable on those offenses due to double jeopardy. He'd be "that guy" who destroyed a major party's presidential nominee, handing the presidency to Trump virtually unopposed. The statute of limitations will not expire before the next president takes office. There has never been a trial, so there is no risk of double jeopardy having the case reexamined. Considering there are folks rotting away in prison, and many more who have lost their careers and credibility over FAR less than what the FBI director CONFIRMED Hillary has done, I don't think it is too far-fetched to say she'll be behind bars if she doesn't win. The difference between Trump saying Hillary would be in jail if he were president, and some 3rd world dictator imprisoning his political opponents is that HILLARY REPEATEDLY AND INTENTIONALLY BROKE THE LAW! The 3rd world folks just disagreed on politics. Speaking of politically motivated imprisonment, has the film maker behind the video falsely blamed for inciting the Benghazi events ever been released? Or is he still locked up as Obama & Hillary's scapegoat even though it's long since been known that his movie didn't have a damn thing to do with what happened? The left doesn't seem to have a problem with stripping liberty away from those they fear...hell, FDR locked up millions of Americans of Japanese decent. They sure don't like to see ACTUAL CRIMINALS behind bars, though...do everything they can to reduce sentences and return voting "rights" to felons. This election boils down to Clown vs Crook. One will probably screw a few things up, while getting it right on a few other things. The other should only be allowed into a government building if she's wearing an orange jumpsuit, there are bars on the windows, and the property is surrounded by razor wire. Unfortunately that is the choice we face. It is what happens when those who seek office value the power the office gives them more than their personal reputation and good name...because those who would be BEST for the job value their reputation and good name over whatever power the office might give them, and they aren't going to have their name and reputation dragged through the mud by a power-hungry opponent. So, it is what it is...Trump the Clown vs Hillary the Crook.

Hmmm...Trump loves women, and cheating on his wife isn't anything new...he's done it before, and he'll likely do it again. NOTHING shocking about that. The extramarital affairs are between consenting adults, and his current wife knows his reputation. ...but because of that, we're supposed to FORGET about how Hillary has repeatedly destroyed the reputation of the numerous women assaulted and/or raped by her husband...who used to be President, despite having assaulted and/or raped numerous women. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. While I don't particularly agree with cheating on your spouse, there is a HUGE difference between Trump's consentual affairs and Clinton's non-consentual aggression. Since the left had NO PROBLEM looking the other way in regards to the women raped and assaulted by Bill, they don't get to claim the high road with Trump's affairs. Hell, their hero JFK was one to woo the ladies as well...

That's how the driver's door on my Mack works...gotta close it JUST RIGHT or it ain't really closed! Strap in just in case.

So I had the typical problem of the driver's side door latch handle snapping off in your hand when trying to exit the truck. The door panel was cracked on a previous repair, and so I'd welded the lever the handle bolts to onto the door panel...a fact which I had forgotten about prior to this repair. Anyway, handles kept snapping, and I looked into the matter online to see that I'm not the only one. Apparently, when Ford went to this body style, they started using a cable to reach between the release handle and the latch...which the internet was saying would "stretch", causing the lever to not move enough to release the door. Sounds plausible enough (although now, I think it's more a matter of the cable gumming up and not slipping through the cable guide as easily, causing increased pressure needed on the handle, which breaks it over time). I had even tried the 80's style chrome plated pot metal handles over the OEM 90's style plastic ones...and they, too, would break. Anyway, fast forward to last weekend, I had received through LMC the door latch, rod, and lever, along with a new handle...to retro-fit the OLD style door innards into my truck. Everything went together just fine, except for having to cut the old latch out & braze the new one in due to the prior welding. That is, until I parked it. If you try opening the door from the outside with the door locked, it sticks, and you cannot unlock the door with the key. It moves the lock mechanism about half way, but does not fully unlock the door. WONDERFUL, especially when the passenger side door lock tumbler has been froze up and non-functional for probably 7-10 years due to lack of use. So, I got to see how unbelievably simple my truck is to break into...plastic timber cutting wedge and a steel rod bent just right had me in that passenger side faster than I could've pulled my spare key from my pocket. Anyway, once I was IN the truck, the only way to open the driver's side door was to LOCK it, and then pull up on the handle to open the door. Tore the passenger side door apart, pulled the lock tumbler, and played with it for a while soaking it in brake cleaner and PB Blaster while working the key in & out and tapping on the tumbler pins. Got it working, but now carry the wedge & rod in my tool box "just in case". So today, I've got the driver's door torn apart again. A friend mentioned he had a similar thing happening with his Mustang, and it turned out to be the power door lock actuator was loose. Not the case here, as it is pretty snug in there...can't wiggle it at all. I've lubed everything up w/ silicone lube, and WHEN it works, it is the smoothest operating door I've ever worked. When it doesn't? No comment. I think I have narrowed it down, though. Seems to work great until you try to open it from the outside while the door is locked. Then it sticks, and until whatever is stuck loosens up again, you won't be able to open the door from the outside. The rod going up to the handle on the outside of the door doesn't return to where it's supposed to be, which prevents the door from being unlocked. Luckily it is a Ford, not a GM, so it pens just fine from inside. Trying to decide if it might just be a defective door latch, or if I got something in there hooked up not quite right...

The ATA pushes for elogs and speed limiters to "level the playing field", forcing independents and other smaller carriers to abide by the same bad business decisions the ATA carriers CHOSE to make placing them at a competitive disadvantage in certain aspects. So, in the interest of fairness, I propose we "level the playing field" by requiring EVERYBODY to pay full retail price for fuel, tires, trucks, parts, and everything else. None of these bulk discounts available only to the largest of the large carriers (cost MINUS in some cases...with the operating loss of those transactions passed on to EVERYBODY ELSE who may not be as big or have as many trucks on the road)...everybody pays the same, to "level the playing field". The ATA has no problem increasing MY costs, both my money with the ELD and then my time with the speed limiters (time IS money)...so let's "level the playing field" by increasing their costs as well. It's only fair...