Motorcycle Forums banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Original Article:
K&P Engineering's Reusable Oil Filter

Please discuss the Motorcycle.com article K&P Engineering's Reusable Oil Filter in our Motorcycle Forums below. Use the reply button to let others know your comments or feedback on the article. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, along with your thoughts and personal opinions on the bikes and products we have tested.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,117 Posts
Here we go again.
Regarding your signature, from dictionary.com. My italics:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
lib·er·al
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.

pro·gres·sive

1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.
2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.

3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.
4. (initial capital letter) of or pertaining to any of the Progressive parties in politics.
5. going forward or onward; passing successively from one member of a series to the next; proceeding step by step.

con·serv·a·tive

1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.
3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.
4. (often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.
5. (initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism.
6. having the power or tendency to conserve; preservative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,488 Posts
Most "Liberals" seem to favour freedom and Lassaiz-faire so long as you believe only as they do.

Ergo, I've largely quit calling Demonrats "Liberal".

Same goes for the Republicrats.
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
Interesting, but immaterial. A govt loving totalitarian collectivist is a govt loving totalitarian collectivist whether you call him a liberal or a progressive or a conservative.

Who defines "progress" anyhow? The descent into a totalitarian society might be progress to the 'progressives' but it isn't to me.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
I think some of the liberal people on the board are real crybabies. Maybe if they were half as 'progressive and open-minded' as they think they are, they wouldn't cry about Bush every chance they got.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,117 Posts
I think some of the liberal people on the board are real crybabies. Maybe if they were half as 'progressive and open-minded' as they think they are, they wouldn't cry about Bush every chance they got.
WHAT? GASP!!! You mean there are LIBERALS on this board? WHO? WHERE?? LET'S LYNCH THE F'ERS!!!

If we let this go by, the next thing you know we'll have a bunch of whiners crying about Al Gore every fourth post. It has to stop HERE!
 

·
Aging Cafe` Racer
Joined
·
8,715 Posts
I think some of the liberal people on the board are real crybabies. Maybe if they were half as 'progressive and open-minded' as they think they are, they wouldn't cry about Bush every chance they got.
Liberals are as open minded and accepting of others as they come....as long as you agree with them. Working at the U-W for 13 years and being browbeaten once a year by "Diversity Training" classes taught me two things,

1. as a middle class white male I was responsible for every evil thing in the world, every transgression from appearing to have any kind of pride for doing well for myself in life to actually having the gall not to want to hand over my part of my paycheck for the "United Way" to support "art" such as a picture of a Crucifix in a jar of piss.

2. As a white male I and my family were directly responsible for slavery, genocide against Native Americans, Nuking the Japanese when they refused to surrender..basically starting WW2 in the first place by forcing the Japanese to attack us, various and sundry offences against immigrants like not wanting Vietnamese refugees to eat all the god dam* squirrels in the park along with their neighbors cats and dogs...After I pointed out that I myself was an immigrant and couldn't possibly have had anything to do with 200 years of oppression since I only moved here in '67, I was pretty much called a liar and racist and that I would be forced to leave the class (and thereby loose my job) if I was disruptive again....

I don't think much of bible banging right wing tub-thumpers either but at least they're consistant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,117 Posts
I didn't mean you Kenneth! :-D
I didn't mean you, LR! :D

Like I said, we hunt them lib-rails down like the commie scum they are, rip their balls off with plastic forks and feed 'em to 'em, then we lynch 'em. Then we nuke the f'ing Japs a couple more times just to be sure; while we're there we'll even it up with the slopes in Ko-ree-er an The Nam. How 'bout them sand-pounders too... they need more glass in them deserts don't they? As for the ******, we done took care of them back when a man was a man and Sam Colt did the talkin.

When we're done, THEN we KILL ******!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Liberals are as open minded and accepting of others as they come....as long as you agree with them. Working at the U-W for 13 years and being browbeaten once a year by "Diversity Training" classes taught me two things,

I don't think much of bible banging right wing tub-thumpers either but at least they're consistant.
I'd call myself liberal. But I don't fit your description very well, so I think one of us isn't using the term right?

I'm sure your just stereotyping based on your own experiences, fair enough. I really wish people would stop using liberal and conservative in such twisted ways though. Like the neo-cons they don't seem that conservative, except maybe socially.

Anyway, I'd just like to point out I consider myself liberal but I don't think your responsible for any of those things. Especially things that happened when you weren't even alive.

This is a bit of what I do think and why I consider myself liberal:
1. I think indian gambling isn't fair, I think gambling should either be legal for everyone or no one (state wise)
2. I believe we should find a way to have a universal health care system that works (or at least try!), in my mind it would be one that cut the insurance companies out completely, but I'm open to anything that would work well.
3. I think capital gains and dividends should be taxed at the same income rate as a persons salary.
4. Legalize drugs (based on age) and tax them, take the tax money and use it to pay for rehab programs, public awareness, etc.
5. Abortion, I'm against making it illegal, if we're going to focus on anything in that area I think we should make smoking and drinking illegal while pregnant (or at least focus on that first)
6. Guns - while most people think liberals are against guns that sort of goes against the definition and it's stereotyping, I would say it's maybe more correct to say the democratic party is against guns. I am for guns, I own a gun.

Just thought I'd try and show what I believe and what I think being liberal means.

Cheers - feel free to resume the pitch forking!
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
I'd call myself liberal. But I don't fit your description very well, so I think one of us isn't using the term right?

I'm sure your just stereotyping based on your own experiences, fair enough. I really wish people would stop using liberal and conservative in such twisted ways though. Like the neo-cons they don't seem that conservative, except maybe socially.

Anyway, I'd just like to point out I consider myself liberal but I don't think your responsible for any of those things. Especially things that happened when you weren't even alive.

This is a bit of what I do think and why I consider myself liberal:
1. I think indian gambling isn't fair, I think gambling should either be legal for everyone or no one (state wise)
2. I believe we should find a way to have a universal health care system that works (or at least try!), in my mind it would be one that cut the insurance companies out completely, but I'm open to anything that would work well.
3. I think capital gains and dividends should be taxed at the same income rate as a persons salary.
4. Legalize drugs (based on age) and tax them, take the tax money and use it to pay for rehab programs, public awareness, etc.
5. Abortion, I'm against making it illegal, if we're going to focus on anything in that area I think we should make smoking and drinking illegal while pregnant (or at least focus on that first)
6. Guns - while most people think liberals are against guns that sort of goes against the definition and it's stereotyping, I would say it's maybe more correct to say the democratic party is against guns. I am for guns, I own a gun.

Just thought I'd try and show what I believe and what I think being liberal means.

Cheers - feel free to resume the pitch forking!
Liberals have a long history of involving us in wars (WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Korea) and account for 90% of the dead US troops in foreign wars. So their pacifism claims are pure BS. Owning guns is not a liberal problem, it's a Liberal problem. The south was dominated by the Democrats for a Century and used guns liberally against blacks. Being young you have probably been brainwashed into believing that it was Democrats who brought about the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60's. It was quite the opposite.

There's the rub. Political Liberals are not liberal at all, but believe in using govt to punish everyone who disagrees with them. Since you believe in imprisoning women who maybe have a beer once in a while if they are pregnant you definitely are in the running to be a liberal. Especially if you believe the fiction that the govt can provide free healthcare (or free anything) to everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Since you believe in imprisoning women who maybe have a beer once in a while if they are pregnant you definitely are in the running to be a liberal. Especially if you believe the fiction that the govt can provide free healthcare (or free anything) to everyone.
Thanks for pretending to know what I believe. I never said ANYTHING about imprisoning women for any reason. Yes being liberal on the subject of drinking while pregnant would mean leaving it alone, let them do what they will. I'm not sure where I stand as far as making it illegal, I'd say leave it my point was more than if they trying to do thinking about making abortion legal I think they should try and do something about chain smoking mothers first. It was just on my mind since I read about Britan's youngest mother - 11, chain smoking.

Obviously the government can't provide anything truly for free it all comes from taxes, etc. But I think we could still and should provide health care for everyone besides just the hospitals. Currently I believe current government spending per person on health care is more than many countries who have universal health care.

As far as pacifism claims I'm not really sure what your talking about. Being a pacifist and a liberal are two seperate things neither inclusive or exclusive. I never claimed to be a pacifist, though I was against the war I wouldn't call myself a pacifist.
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
Thanks for pretending to know what I believe. I never said ANYTHING about imprisoning women for any reason. Yes being liberal on the subject of drinking while pregnant would mean leaving it alone, let them do what they will. I'm not sure where I stand as far as making it illegal, I'd say leave it my point was more than if they trying to do thinking about making abortion legal I think they should try and do something about chain smoking mothers first. It was just on my mind since I read about Britan's youngest mother - 11, chain smoking.

Obviously the government can't provide anything truly for free it all comes from taxes, etc. But I think we could still and should provide health care for everyone besides just the hospitals. Currently I believe current government spending per person on health care is more than many countries who have universal health care.

As far as pacifism claims I'm not really sure what your talking about. Being a pacifist and a liberal are two seperate things neither inclusive or exclusive. I never claimed to be a pacifist, though I was against the war I wouldn't call myself a pacifist.
You say you want it against the law for women to drink or smoke if they are pregnant. Therefore there must be some sort of penalty for breaking that law. In our society refusal to follow laws ends you up in jail. It's not rocket science. You can't have it both ways. That's why I use the grandmother test to measure laws. Is it worth locking your grandmother up in jail (or worse be declared incompetent and locked up in a mental ward)if she refuses to obey some law?

Jail (or worse), brute force, is ultimately the only way the govt has to enforce compliance. This is a basic libertarian viewpoint.

What gives anyone the right to make such judgments? Are you willing to undergo the same punishment you wish for others? Does a law really benefit society and is the benefit enough to outweigh the loss of freedom and wealth to individuals? Does one person really have the right to take someone else's money for some program that can't be proved to work or has even been proved destructive? I assure you I consider these things very thoroughly before I support govt action. I have no superior moral right to claim ownership of the fruits of someone else's labors. We've spent about 1/2 million dollars for every Katrina victim so far. Is that enough? Or is it just more money down the tube? All that money is extorted by force.

We can't solve every problem caused by personal irresponsibility and as our current election is showing the most crooked people in our society are those we're tasking to run it. I guarantee you when these clowns are done with healthcare it will suck for everybody. Years of observing the 'liberals' and 'conservatives' in action has driven me completely away for both failed philosophies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
You say you want it against the law for women to drink or smoke if they are pregnant. Therefore there must be some sort of penalty for breaking that law. In our society refusal to follow laws ends you up in jail. It's not rocket science. You can't have it both ways. That's why I use the grandmother test to measure laws. Is it worth locking your grandmother up in jail (or worse be declared incompetent and locked up in a mental ward)if she refuses to obey some law?
There is an alternative - fines. I think the government is much more fond of fines anyway :) If anything that's what I was thinking. If they could afford to smoke they could pay the fines, if they don't you could garner their wages or something, don't go all the way to jail.

However those are great questions to ask when making laws, I really just brought up the whole smoking while pregnant thing as a counter point to pro-life laws.

Anyway great questions. I think we have way too many laws.
 

·
Aging Cafe` Racer
Joined
·
8,715 Posts
There is an alternative - fines. I think the government is much more fond of fines anyway :) If anything that's what I was thinking. If they could afford to smoke they could pay the fines, if they don't you could garner their wages or something, don't go all the way to jail.

However those are great questions to ask when making laws, I really just brought up the whole smoking while pregnant thing as a counter point to pro-life laws.

Anyway great questions. I think we have way too many laws.
That represents the worst possible reason for creating a law and a typical Liberal mind set. Your aim is not to protect the health of an unborn child, or the health of the pregnant women for that matter, it is merely an excuse for a money grab.

If you want to create a law there has to be some justification for it. In this case it would be to counter the proven health impacts of smoking and drinking during pregnancy. An appropriate incentive would be education and assistance in quiting, with community service as the punishment for breaking the law.

Your version is "we don't care if you do it, we'll just use it as an excuse to take some money off you".....In essence the whole point of is to take money off someone, funnily enough, it is typically low education, low income people who are most likely to exhibit this behavior in the first place and they would be the least able to suffer loss of any income.

Basically you extort and feed off the very people you as a liberal claim to represent.

Do continue please.............
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
That represents the worst possible reason for creating a law and a typical Liberal mind set. Your aim is not to protect the health of an unborn child, or the health of the pregnant women for that matter, it is merely an excuse for a money grab.

If you want to create a law there has to be some justification for it. In this case it would be to counter the proven health impacts of smoking and drinking during pregnancy. An appropriate incentive would be education and assistance in quiting, with community service as the punishment for breaking the law.

Your version is "we don't care if you do it, we'll just use it as an excuse to take some money off you".....In essence the whole point of is to take money off someone, funnily enough, it is typically low education, low income people who are most likely to exhibit this behavior in the first place and they would be the least able to suffer loss of any income.

Basically you extort and feed off the very people you as a liberal claim to represent.

Do continue please.............
And if you don't pay the fines? It's still jail. It all hinges on the fear of incarceration. Or worse. You pay so you don't spend a few weeks months or years getting raped and shivved by Bubba. It's still the threat of violence to enforce laws no matter how they try to sugar coat it.

BTW. Isn't a woman's body her own business? Here we see the illogic inherent in Liberalism. A woman is to be punished if she drinks or smokes while pregnant. But it's fine for her to kill the baby... no one can tell her what to do with her body. What if she decides to sell sex? Isn't that her own decision? Why then can't she drink or smoke? My head begins to spin.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top