Messages

16

The Lounge / Re: TAH

« on: July 29, 2015, 07:11:03 AM »

Why did people like snail so much? I thought he was a fucking dickbag. Clever as shit but still a dickbag.

17

The Bike Shop / Re: About those dick sprockets

« on: July 28, 2015, 06:39:08 AM »

I made a solidworks model a while ago and put it on here. Can't seem to find it though.

18

The Lounge / Re: Discussion: US 2016 Elections

« on: July 25, 2015, 12:24:15 PM »

I don't trust the guy at all, don't want a celebrity for president, and I reaaally don't like some of his opinions, but what specifically do you think is wrong with what he's (Trump) saying?

I can think of a few things. (Note: He does also say things that are occasionally sane and good ideas, but he is honestly just riding the wave of popularity. My guess is he is either 1) attempting to make the other republican candidates look less crazy or 2) alienate voters from republicans to give the democrats the upper hand. It is hard to say since he has switched voting affiliations several times over the years)

• The people coming here from Mexico are rapists/drug dealers/criminals (link)
  
• He claims he will be the greatest jobs president ever created by God (link)
  
• He will build a "great wall of Mexico," to be paid for by Mexico, and it will be "inexpensive" (link)
  
• He claims that having a black president has lead to riots (link)
  
• Talked shit about McCain, who spent 5 years as a POA when he could have left after 1 week because he refused to violate a code of honor and leave his fellow airmen behind (his family had the power to pull him out, he refused)
  
• He is pro-life (maybe not a negative to some . . .) but he switched from pro-choice in 2011, which conveniently put him at odds to ObamaCare abortion funding. He wants to repeal ObamaCare, due to its expensiveness and high deductibles, which is fine and a good idea if there was another system in place (expanded Medicare, cough cough), but there is not.
  
• He was opposed to providing benefits to gay couples
  
• He has said a 0% tax on corporations would increase jobs (because trickle-down works so well. . .). He thinks a high corporate tax rate will move jobs overseas (probably right) but he also wants to implement a 35% import tax, so . . . 
  
• He wants to cut the Dept. of Education way down and remove teacher unions (which makes total sense when you look at how much teachers are paid and the quality of the US education system. . .)
  
• He thinks climate change is a hoax
  
• He thinks China is our enemy, and that only Trump can beat China since he has been fucking them on trade deals for a while (I agree that we depend too much on cheap Chinese goods but to declare them the enemy???).
  
• He wants to send American troops overseas to battle ISIS. He also thinks one of the biggest blunders of the US is not seizing all the oil in the middle east when we were over there, but also claims we should not have attacked Iraq
  

19

The Lounge / Re: post BG redux PAPOY

« on: July 21, 2015, 06:08:41 PM »

You could've photoshopped on a few extra inches?

Edit... Unless you already have? 

Do you mean height or dick size? Either way I guess it hurts.

20

Bike Gallery / Re: T1 SFA

« on: July 21, 2015, 03:02:00 PM »

I'd be pretty pissed if my Beringers broke. Probably end up with some Slams.

21

Bike Gallery / T1 SFA

« on: July 19, 2015, 07:34:10 PM »

Link to images with larger size.

Frame: T1 SFA

Bars: S&M OG Beringers
Grips and bar ends: ODI
Brakes: Odyssey monolever, linear slic, evolver 2's, kool stop salmons

Forks: Sunday Morning
Stem: S&M Redneck XLT
Headset: Campagnolo

Front wheel: Marmoset to a 7KA, BSD hubguard, j-peg lite
Back wheel: Federal v1 11T coaster to g-sport ribcage, gland hubguard, animal peg
Tires: Animal GLH, 2.1 front, 1.95(?) rear

Cranks: Odyssey 41 thermals
Pedals: ODyssey JC Al looseball
Sprocket: 33T standard

Seat: FBM
Post: Animal

22

The Lounge / Re: post BG redux PAPOY

« on: July 19, 2015, 07:17:08 PM »

Post-workout snacks.



PS Beer was on sale for $4 per sixer of tall boys

23

The Lounge / Re: Discussion: US 2016 Elections

« on: July 13, 2015, 10:49:03 AM »

When are primaries typically held?

It varies greatly depending on your state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016#Schedule_of_primaries_and_caucuses

24

The Lounge / Re: Gay Marriage

« on: July 07, 2015, 05:31:52 PM »

What isn't right is when a group decides they can deny people one of the most meaningful events of their lives because they happen to be the same gender.

The views of people should not matter at all when they infringe on the lives of people that have nothing to do with their views.

Let us say, as an example, that you and your friends think it is morally wrong to eat shellfish because shellfish are stated as unclean in your your particular religious text. You see a man eating shellfish. You demand he stop eating shellfish because it is not in line with your religious belief on morally acceptable food items.

Is this acceptable behavior on your part? Should the man stop eating shellfish?

25

The Lounge / Re: Discussion: US 2016 Elections

« on: July 07, 2015, 05:04:40 PM »

Either way, this is the first election I'm participating in (shameful, I know) and I'm throwing my hat in for him

Not shameful, that is great! If more people think the same thing then it is possible the young voters and other disillusioned voters might go out in force and really push Sanders through.

Just make sure you vote in the primaries, that is the one that is going to matter for Sanders.

26

The Lounge / Re: Gay Marriage

« on: July 07, 2015, 08:20:47 AM »

Because of equality, fuck face. It's like saying "hey guys, you can come to our schools, and businesses and even use our public transit! Buuuuuuuut, you'll need to use different bathrooms and water fountains and also be sat in a different area from the straight people".

No, its nothing like that. Its like saying; we recognise the history of marriage that it has always been between two people of opposite sexes. Sooooo instead of antagonise a large amount of the population we will give you exactly the same thing, but call it a union instead of a marriage because of the history etc. of that word. If its just the name then why does it matter so much to people?

If it is only a word, why don't the religious folk just go back to calling it בָּעַל (baal), the Hebrew word for marriage? What's the big deal? Why does it matter, if it's only a word? Or are there perhaps connotations to the word marriage, and no matter how equal a civil union is, people still wouldn't hold it in as high regard as marriage?

Also, the history of marriage has not always been between a man and a woman. Often, it was (and still is some places) between a man and a few women.

Calling a gay marriage a civil union to avoid pissing off religious people means the views and beliefs of those religious people outweigh the views and beliefs of other people. That isn't right.

27

The Lounge / Re: Gay Marriage

« on: July 05, 2015, 08:14:02 AM »

It comes down to semantics, some people see 'marriage' as having innately religious connotations. Perhaps one of the easier ways of doing it would to simply make civil-partnerships and marriages have the same legal equal footing. Some people say marriage is religious, some say it is legal. Let religion decide what they want to do.

I bolded your text that says "some people." The views of "some people" based on what is in a religious book absolutely should not influence what other people can do if it does not harm anyone. And spare me the drivel about gays undermining the sanctity of marriage in the US. I think the 40%+ divorce/remarry rate, which is a much greater fucking sin and and is mentioned about a million more fucking times in the bible than gay marriage, is a little bit  more of an issue to Americas moral code.

I also bolded "let religion decide what they want to do." This is because religion can still decide what they want to do. A devout catholic male does not have to marry another dude. An ultra-conservative christian church does not have to marry two girls.

But why should they have any say whatsoever if people of a different religion (or lack there of) decide marriage is a union between two people that wish to express their love and devotion towards one another INDEPENDENT of gender? They shouldn't, no more than a Muslim should be forced to abide by Christian religious values.

28

The Lounge / Re: Gay Marriage

« on: July 03, 2015, 01:58:35 PM »

I agree with this, but have been called homophobic so many times that I have stopped saying it. I just have a problem in having the government involved in church is a slippery slope to start on. Saying this I don't disagree with gay marriage per se, just that the government shouldn't interfere with the church/what ever religious institution. But I know how you guys feel about religion sooo...

The government absolutely should not be involved in religion. That is why this ruling was so good.

If two people want to get married, they should be able to. It is a union with many different aspects that change your rights, tax brackets, etc. Who is anyone to say that two people can't enter into this agreement because of their plumbing? Not allowing two people to get married because of what the bible says is allowing religion into law. By saying anyone can get married, that is taking religion out of it.

Gay people are not going to walk into a super-religious church and demand the church marry them. The church would be well within their rights to refuse. The pastor that married my wife and I said that she would refuse to marry couples she thought "wouldn't work." So anti-gay churches need not be involved. Gays can go to the city clerk, or they get a more open minister, or they get someone licensed to perform marriages to marry them. You can get a license to marry people through an online course. . . .

The fact is, this is not the government stepping into a church. This is the government saying that marriage is a union between two people. They are not re-writing the bible.

This ruling does not affect churches in any way, except for perhaps pissing them off that their definition of marriage can no longer be forced on other people.

29

The Lounge / Re: Back on track

« on: July 03, 2015, 01:48:06 PM »

Yeah, I was stoked when I saw it. Reminded me of cruising around the streets with a few buds, riding fast, hitting curb cuts, stuff like that. Just enjoying riding. It's good to see this dude back on a bike.

30

The Lounge / Back on track

« on: July 03, 2015, 11:42:17 AM »

This is something I think that everyone that rides (or rode) bikes should see.

Martyn Ashton - Back on track

It's obviously more of an inspirational/motivational piece which is why I stuck it here.