GA_Dave

This one might have been original to Rockville, MD.

Congratulations!

Mopar or NO car!

Do you actually believe anything that comes from the Department of Homeland Scrutiny? Nice of her to violate his right to privacy under the HIPAA laws!

Moments before that shot was taken, that Challenger was struck on the rear bumper by someone who jumped off the curb as it passed. It was going slowly when this happened, then rapidly sped up after the hit. I have seen video of this happening. The video is not clear enough to determine if the object used was a bat or a stick. Note in the above photo that the brake lights are on. I am NOT convinced that this was an intentional act, but rather a reaction to the person striking his car. Challengers are not cheap cars and every owner I have ever met treats theirs as their baby. Try semi-automatic weapons. Fully automatic weapons are highly controlled and extremely expensive, requiring a Class 3 Federal Firearms License and an expensive tax stamp to possess one. Most owners would never take one to such an event. As for the guns that were present, they would not have been "menacing" to anyone if those other people had never shown up!

I have never watched A-10's do touch and go's, but I would likely enjoy it. Back in 1979-1981, I was serving in the US Army at Fort Hood, TX. My MOS was 16P, Short Range Air Defense Artillery. I was a gunner on a Chaparral Missile system. My job was to shoot down enemy aircraft, however, the US was not at war at that time. Still, we trained. Since we were short of enemy aircraft to work with, we used what was available, friendly aircraft. For those unfamiliar with Fort Hood, it is one of the largest Army bases in the US, with a very large "impact" area, used by all branches for live fire training, aircraft included. Fort Hood was also home to the First Air Cavalry (Cobra attack helicopters). It was rare to not see something flying over Fort Hood! The variety of "targets" was spectacular - T-38's, F-4's, A-7's, A-10's, F-105's, F-14's, OV-1B's, OV-10's, UH-1's, AH-1's, CH-47's, OH-58's, C-130's and even an occasional C-5! Using a dummy missile with a live IR seeker section, we were able to acquire and track targets as they flew over or went through their attack runs. Of all the aircraft we saw, we all agreed that one presented the most challenge to us. That one was the A-10. While not as fast as some of the others, it was far more agile, zigzagging to the point of being almost impossible to get missile lock on it. None of the others making attack runs were difficult for us to track. I was always happy that those planes were on our side!

Obviously you don't understand the difference between a cross dresser and a transgender, or for that matter, reality and a TV comedy show. Klinger didn't believe he was a women, he was dressing that way in order to get kicked out of the Army, which was the actual policy in the 1950's. The comedy part was that his superiors saw right through his ploy and ignored him, regardless of how much he pushed the idea.

Engine 3, Troy, NC 1973 Mack CF 1250/750 #CF685F12-1574

Engine 2, Greenville, OH (retired/collector owned) 1971 Mack CF/1980 Pierce refurb 1250/500 #CF688F12-1287/#F-1657

Engine 1802, West Yadkin, NC 1984 Mack MC/Grumman 1250/1000 #MC688FC-1044/#18150

On a recent outing to Virginia and North Carolina, I was able to add a few Mack apparatus to my collection. This one has been posted earlier at it's original FD, but it has since been repainted and is in service in Virginia. Engine 2412, Woolwine, VA 1983 Mack CF 1500/500/40F #CF686F15-1578 x-Cranston Heights, DE

I guess I don't follow the crowd. Back in high school, I came up with a plan: 1. Get married while young. 2. Have my kids while young. 3. Work a career I enjoy doing. 4. Retire as soon as financially possible. I got married at age 19. We have been together almost 39 years. My three sons were born when I was age 20, 21 and 25. They had all moved out by the time I was 48. I landed a job in my chosen career field at the age of 26. I retired from that career at the age of 54. Life is good!

You haven't blown up anything. What makes you think my belief system lacks data, just because I have not supplied it to you? You cite a poll. So what? Polls are very subjective and, as far as I'm concerned, highly suspect. Not just about this issue, but almost every issue that the liberals have tried to push for many years. I don't trust the results of these polls, nor the methods used to conduct them, as far as I could throw a Mack truck! When Obamacare first became law, the liberals claimed that there were about 30 million uninsured in the US. You own cited poll shows just over 11% (about 21 million) of adults are currently uninsured. I'm sure many of those adults have dependent children. So, tell me, just how many more Americans are now insured because of Obamacare? I do agree with your last statement. Not only did we not expect it, we would have bet on it!

I was referring to the current unemployment rate, the lowest in 16 years. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate I also never said the the uninsured rate didn't decrease with Obamacare. What I stated was that we were repeatedly lied to about the amount of decrease that Obamacare caused. Obama and the liberals told us that the ACA would virtually eliminate those without insurance and it never even came close. It never even met a single projection they claimed. You have obviously been Grubered!

For every person who is employed, there can be several people insured through that person's job, not just the person who got the job. Years ago, I had 5 people insured because of my job. Many who have recently become employed, or re-employed, may have family members that are now insured because of that one job. My youngest son has not had health insurance since he moved out of the house years ago. Due to a recent promotion, he now enjoys healthcare coverage as a benefit of his new position. My oldest son recently took a new job in his same career field, but this one not only paid more, it came with a benefit package that included health insurance, where his old job did not. Neither of my son's situations have had any effect on the unemployment rate, but they are now both insured. Both of the above examples show that the percentage of people recently employed or re-employed may not equal the percentage of people no longer uninsured.

Remember, pollsters are the ones who stated that Trump didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election! Is it possible that the reduced unemployment rate has anything to do with more people being insured? The number of uninsured has nothing to do with the number of people on Obamacare. Obamacare is still failing and will collapse if not replaced. It was designed to do so, so that single payer (government healthcare) could be brought in. No, thank you! The Veterans Administration is a prime example of what government healthcare would be.

You are delusional! Obamacare is falling apart. It has NEVER reached anywhere near the number of enrolled that they claimed it would. Countless insurance companies have distanced themselves from it. Every year, the premiums increase while the coverage decreases, well all except those things required that I NEVER NEEDED COVERAGE FOR! It is nothing but a scam, a wealth redistribution scam! MILLIONS of people lost insurance plans that they already had, plans that worked for them. In FACT, number-wise, over half of the number of those currently enrolled are those who "couldn't keep their plan"! I don't care how much lipstick you put on this pig, it's still a PIG!!!

Swamp Queen? She sat in front of the TV most of the evening, but I think she has gone to bed.......

Most? MOST people had insurance before this monstrosity called Obamacare became law. I'm retired and under age 65. I pay my premiums out of pocket, over $15,000/year. That only covers 3 visits to a doctor annually, covers very little for an ER visit, and only covers basic, generic medications. One med I am on costs me $5,000/year. Before Obamacare, my premiums were under $1000/month, the deductible was 1/3rd what it is now and it covered way more. Virtually everything the liberals have told us about Obamacare has been a lie!

Thanks, guys, I'm glad you enjoyed them. (I fixed the "B-86" typo). I was out today shooting apparatus, but didn't run across any Macks. They are still out there and I am sure I'll add more in time. That Jasper Aerialscope is one I just photographed in April.

This will be my last post, until I find more Mack Fire Apparatus to photograph. I hope you have enjoyed seeing them as much as I enjoyed photographing them! Truck 1, Jasper, TN 1971 Mack CF 0/0/75' Aerialscope #CF685FAP-1249 x-Bay Shore, NY

Antique Engine, Scenic Brook FD, Sonora, CA (retired/collector owned) 1960 Mack B-85 750/1000 #B-85F-1400 x-Quaker Hill, CT

"Engine 343", F.D.N.Y. (retired/collector owned) 1978 Mack CF 1000/500 #CF611F-1925 (FDNY #MP-7801)

Ladder 1, Buchanan, MI (retired/collector owned) 1951 Mack 85-LS 750/110/65' Maxim #85-LS-1525

Tower 1, Madison, NJ (retired/collector owned) 1981 Mack CF 0/0/75' Aerialscope #CF686FAP-1389