dorifto240

Disclaimer: I am not a LEO, or a lawyer.

My understanding is you have to have some sort of illumination on there. If the cop wants to be a dick, I believe he can write you a fix-it ticket (or a full out citation) if it's not there.

This is correct, I was pulled over outside of Cincinnati because my bulb had burned out.

If anything, it's grounds to pull you over (under the whole not properly displaying tags thing), and then search for any other illegal, or potentially illegal, goodies.

Also, I think when you get your camera, on Monday; you should post some pics.

In '87 when I took out my first mortgage, the banks were giving me numbers they said I could "afford" based on their "ratios". But I knew there was no way the monthly payment they quoted was in my budget.

Those jokers get paid for deal flow. Always think about what the guy on the other side of the desk wants. It's intimidating, I know, but ask questions and do some math and decide what makes sense for YOU.

True, but unfortunately many people have bought into the marketing image that banks can be trusted. Yes it's "buyer beware" but the only time that's ever used to justify an action; is when some is doing something borderline illegal or immoral.

We should ask questions, but if the "experts" are working to hide the truth, then what's an average, less enlightened person to do.

The whole thing is just wrong. It's not illegal, but it's still wrong.

I should say I boiled all the metal parts: bowls, bodies, throttles, jets, etc. Everything not rubber or plastic went in the mix

Alright, my carbs were awful. The bike wouldn't idle right, wouldn't stay on, wouldn't take any throttle. It was terrible. And slightly embarrassing. A big hit to my masculinity.

I stumbled onto a forum discussion over at ZX Forums (dot com) that mentioned heating your carbs in lemon juice would help dislodge any junk and/or rust that had built up.

Some more research led me to vinegar. And if one combines the two ingredients with heat, it becomes a ridiculous super cleaner.

So today I tried it, a liter of lemon juice ($3.00) and a liter of vinegar ($0.89) two liters of water, and a half teaspoon of salt. I stripped my carbs down to bare metal and boiled them for about 20 minutes.

After reassembling everything, the bike started right up, held its idle, didn't need the choke on, and generally behaved like it should.

So for five bucks and 20 minutes, I avoided having to rebuild my carbs (for now of course, eventually they'll need to be rejetted and all the fun stuff).

A note of caution though: It will cause steel to rust, and stainless steel doesn't react well with lemon juice.

Here.... This one seems perfect for today....

"Help, HELP!!.... I'm being repressed!"

Come see the violence inherent in the system! Come see the violence inherent in the system!

Also, check out http://classicjapanesemotorcycles.com/ they've got some ready to go.

I KNEW IT! Hes got a mangina!

Somebody get him some cranberry juice stat

Well, it would be nice of a bank performed a service. But instead it's more of a "method of parting you with your money". So don't think a bank is doing you any favors, they never are.

Wish I knew that when I was 18... Damn student loans

Don't take a loan you can't afford.

That's a bit difficult when the banks themselves were telling people they could afford the loan.

Goldman was the middleman. The Abacus deal in the article was arranged among institutional investors, the smallest of which kicked in $175 million. It wasn't granny that got duped with that one. If you put $175 million into something and you don't do your due diligence, your a dumbass. Period.

That's the lesson. Do the homework. Read the financials. If it sounds too good to be true... well you know..

True, but what they were selling (and what they were allowing a few to short against) were peoples mortgages.

Yes these institutions should have performed due diligence, however: trading and selling a large part of a persons life? There's something not right about that.

And I don't get the moar reference... sorry

Rice Paddy has plenty of frames and parts, might also be a good place to start for a new project.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/business/16goldman.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

To sum it all up: One of the key companies that caused the Great Recession, is being allowed to settle out of court for a pathetically small amount.

How wonderful is this? Their actions have lead to people losing their jobs, homes, families... Greece is embroiled in protests and austerity, and we have the largest national debt in the history of the world; and it can all be traced back to a few businesses and organizations: And it includes Goldman Sachs.

Fun side fact: Goldman Sachs informed Moody's and Standard & Poor's on how to rate the derivatives they were selling. Which is why even at the end, all the really shitty derivative packages were still being labeled as AAA.

Ridiculous. Obama got elected on change and hope, and it looks like things are shaping up to be just as shitty as always.

After further investigation about being legal..........No. I assumed i could just use hand signals. I will have to patch those in front and rear. All the parts for the signals were gutted when i got the bike. Except the actual lights.

Ha! I know the feeling, you should have seen the wiring on my bike when I brought it home.

Democrats attending Tea Party rallies are required to carry racist signs, duh!

According to some, that's exactly what some of the more radical members of the left did. In an attempt to defame the Tea Party

Facts don't matter anyway if they threaten a preconceived worldview .

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=1

That statement is as true as it gets.

Great, thanks. So are you just another one of those people who are "just asking questions" and just building up impotent rage or are you actually doing something to change the political climate in America?

Yes and yes. Yes I am active trying to change the political climate, and i'm active in a few different groups. And yes I'm asking questions and building up impotent rage.

How do you change something that big and powerful and established and entrenched? Most of America wanted financial reform a better (more direct) stimulus package, and a better health care plan. Yet, big businesses and well heeled advocacy groups lobbied and completely neutered any real change to the system. The government blatantly ignored the will of the people; our representatives don't care/ don't listen. So option 1,: activisim and demanding change from our leaders clearly doesn't work.

Secondly, if the two established parties don't put their weight behind a candidate, no one hears about them! The paperwork and costs to file as an independent candidate are ridiculous. You need a political party just to begin the process of getting elected. So working from within the system is impossible to get started.

Option 3 of course is to revolt/rebel. Save for the fact that it would be just me, unarmed, trying to rebel. Not a choice favorite.

Show me where to start; I know what to do once I get there.

::steps down from soap box::

Sorry about that

I'm in!

It's typical. I expected no less out of our government.

The last time citizens became disillusioned with their government, a few of them got together in a pub in Boston and started tossing around radical ideas like freedom, independence, inalienable rights and representation in government.

Just throwing that one out there.

I'd bait that bear... Odds are I could stay out of her reach long enough for her to have a heart attack.

Who says britain has bad quality products?

The eighties

you guys suck with all your "knowledge" and "logic". Knock it off and bring on the lulz, geez ruining it for everyone

Babba booey babba booey Howard Sterns penis babba booey!

I think this thread is really about how to piss off conservatives by pointing out how badly they are at the memory and being a hypocrite.

finger pointing isn't getting our economy back. working together for a fix and coming up with ways to prevent it from happening again is what everyone should be doing instead.

That's just silly! Fingerpointing is so much easier!

I'll leave your opinion alone on that, since you at least acknowledged your bias.

They did?

Did Liberals Cause the Sub-Prime Crisis?

So I read the article. In all honesty, I'm not sure where it was going. It starts with subprime mortgages, and then launches into a defense of the CRA; even though subprime mortgages are the issue.

It then goes on to discuss independent mortgage companies, granted independent mortgage companies issued bad mortgages, but they were getting the money from somewhere. Secondly, many sub-prime mortgages came from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or were bought by these companies and bundled to be sold.

Had bad sub-prime mortgages not been issued period, they would not have been securitized.

Securitizing the loans proved valuable. So valuable in fact, that banks started issuing more and more, under the relatively lax CRA and federal oversight, sub prime mortgages. Creating a cycle which eventually led to where we are now.

And in regards to Social Security:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)

Notice that LBJ authorized the movement of social security from it's own trust fund, to the general fund for congress. Wilbur Mills (a democrat) authored the bill that included medicare, medicaid, and the movement of funds.

It's actually 33% of statistics.

I'll read those links and get back with my own...

I still have two strong words though:

Come on!

10 years!?

If that's true, then the major economic slump we're in now was caused by electing President Bush in 2001 and 9/11. That's what you're saying?

I get that the economy is cyclical and complex... but you have to look at the policies each President supported/implement as well as WHEN they were implemented to get an accurate fiscal analysis.

Clinton's surplus was NOT due to GHWB's "good economic policies", nor can GWBs deficit be attributed to Clinton. Money for war has to come from somewhere...

Roughly ten years, the economy had started to falter under Clinton towards the end. Of course, I lean towards the republican side, so this is my bias coming out.

Yes you do have to look at the policies, but the effects are felt years later. G. W inherited some seriously messed up policies, for example:

One of the big factors in our current recession was subprime mortgages. Who pushed subprime mortgages onto banks? Democrats; to make the American dream more "affordable" for the poor (one of their consituencies).

Secondly, look at every bill and earmark that dipped into Social Security. 9 times out of 10 it was authored by a Democrat.

Lastly, any president can affect the economy in the short term (stimulus packages, tax returns, draining federal reserves) more often than not though; the short term gain is at the expense of long term prosperity and stability.

Fun thought to consider from the middle of the road:

http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/03/12/scan.nsq023.long

The gist of the article is that we turn off our decision making centers when we perceive someone to be a charismatic leader. Similar things happen when someone is believed to be an expert.

The danger here is two fold: Someone like President Obama, who is incredibly charismatic, is above examination by his followers. No one stops to think that maybe a one term senator wasn't the best decision for our country, or that his ideas might not be the best. The same thing happened with Kennedy. Group think ruled the decisions regarding the Bay of Pigs.

And our news commentators and casters both, are presented as experts. They have access to knowledge we don't; so we tend to trust their views, and fail to examine it. Somewhere some news source highlighted that the economy was great under Clinton and awful under G.W. This is a true statement, but it doesn't reflect the economy.

So we have people we agree with (both sides), and people we like and believe to be charismatic and/or experts. As soon as they say something: It's gospel truth.

the Times and CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/22/guantanamo.order/index.html) reported that Obama had closed Guantanamo. Not true, he had actually authorized a committee to look at closing Guantanamo.

Or when Bush declared "mission accomplished" in Iraq. Our mission was to dismantle Saddam Husseins government, which we did. Our mission now is to rebuild and stabilize Iraq. "Mission Accomplished" and "War Over" are two different things.

To keep it light hearted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDhThhrd_UY&hl=en_US&fs=1