bottlecap

yeah i'm not ok with that. mainly because it opens the door to the gov't drug testing whoever they want whenever they want. how would like to take a drug test every time you need a permit for something? or every time a cop pulls you over for whatever reason. or every time you take your car for inspection. before you get your tax return. on and on. it has little to do with if i'd pass. i just don't think it isn't any of the gov't god damn business. there are plenty of drugs you can do that have minimal impact on your life with certain use. the drugs are not the problem. it's how people use them. addiction and dependency on the drugs can lead to issues with work or life etc. but if i want to get high as hell in my house on a fri night and not come out until monday morning when i go to work (or the wellfare office) sober, what exactly have i done wrong? should i be fired or lose benefits for failing a drug test even though it hasn't impacted anything about my professional life and i haven't done anything to endanger anyone else? i don't think so. if someone is enough of an addict that it is impacting their ability to function in society, then people are going to notice, and those impacts should be more than enough cause to fire them or kick them off social programs. you don't need to have them fail a drug test. at the very least, the drug test is a search, and there ought to be cause for it. so if you really want your smoking gun test result, then get a warrant to test someone who is exhibiting signs of addiction/dependency. -mike

according to the article the cop could have written "refuses to sign" on the ticket and given it to the guy and that would have been that. instead, the cop decided to escalate the situation. the reason he chose to do that was obviously to prove to this guy that he was the one in charge and that he could make this guy do whatever he wanted. that's complete bs. cops should NEVER escalate a situation. all that accomplishes is to put both the citizen and the officer in greater and unnecessary danger. the cop also could have explained to the guy that signing only means he agrees to show up in court and acknowledges receipt of the ticket, and not that he admits guilt. it was also pretty obvious that the guy was completely willing to cooperate with the officer. he wouldn't have gotten out of the car if he wasn't, he would have tried to drive off. the bottom line though is that the cop chose to put everyone's safety at risk to make a point to this guy instead of just giving him the ticket. that is not professional, and it is way below what i expect of police officers. -mike

how does this comment have anything to do with this discussion? i asked you for clarification, not a bunch of off topic bs. -mike

what? how about you clarify your own post there big guy. i didn't summerize anything about taxation and spending, i asked you what you got for the taxes you pay. the answer is pretty much nothing. i didn't suggest we pay more taxes, i suggested that the gov't use the money i do send them to better my life instead of ripping me off, and i said that if i could, i would send my money to a competing gov't that actually met my demands as a consumer (of gov't services). -mike

yay for long posts... not going to happen. the democratic party is pretty much the same as the republican party. the only difference is that they don't have to pander to the religious right. they pretend to pander to progressives instead, but don't deliver any results. you won't see any kind of expansive social programs or renovation of our society, or infrastructure. nobody has the vision for it. the function of our gov't has pretty much been reduced to making corperate america and foreign investors as much money as possible while keeping the rest of us scared, distracted, and "happy." we need a real and honest debate about global warming. is it happening? yes. what we need to be debating is if we had anything to do with it, and if we can do anything to change it, and if we should change it. lots of evidence suggests that co2 has nothing to do with warming. that's why temperature increases before co2 levels historically, and is also why not a single researcher has yet to account for the water cycle. why not? because we don't yet understand the entire water cycle. until we do all the global warming models are pretty much useless. 1. it will get you continued credit and it will maintain the economy on which your life depends. at the very least, it will help those pieces of paper and the little digital numbers you call money maintain their purchasing power, and will continue to attract investment to the united states. most of all though, it'll mean we won't be completely screwed when people decide we owe them enough money and they're not giving us anymore. 2. real gov't services. what do you get for the taxes you pay now? pretty much nothing. i dunno about you, but the roads i drive on suck, there aren't enough police, the fire dept. is underfunded, the electric grid is falling apart, sewers are also falling apart. etc etc etc. i have no problem paying taxes. i just want to actually get something from the gov't in return. if i could i'd give my tax dollars to a gov't that would actually supply my demands, but it doesn't work like that. 3. it'll make you not stupid. there is no reason what-so-ever we need to be spending as much on this war as we are. we have more resources, better trained and more numerous troops. why the can't we spend as much or less money then "the terrorists?" i'm sorry, but hunting down a bunch of guys in cities and caves should not cost the u.s. military billions of dollars. we're smarter (or should be). this isn't like were fighting the russians or something... we're fighting guys in caves. CAVES! and people in cities all over the world who are in sleeper cells, and aren't going to be found or dealt with by the military anyway. 4. high taxes can be good for the economy. bill clinton raised them without a problem. it all depends on what you tax and how you spend that money. most illegals do pay taxes. they cannot get a job without false documentation, which means they get taxed. the funny thing is they do not get their taxes back like you and me, because if they file the return, they'll get deported. they also cannot claim benefits for the taxes they pay (unemployment, ss, etc.). and they do not take american's jobs. that's just silly. they work jobs americans do not want to do. and if you should desire to work as a janitor at the city bus terminal, you shouldn't have any problem getting hired over a mexican. you got an education in this country for free, you know the culture because you've lived here all your life and not just a monht, and you also speak english. if you can't get that job over a mexican, it is not the mexican's fault. it's yours. people in india and china take jobs away from americans. they take manufacturing jobs, they take design and software jobs, etc, etc, etc. they are not taking our janitorial work. and the u.s. should not have an official language. stop being a xenophobic bigot. what's it matter if we have more than one language in this country? plenty of other nations speak upwards of 10 different languages. if spanish makes you uncomfortable, deal with it. and maybe take heart in the fact that mexicans, like every immigrant population before them, speak mostly english by the third generation. -mike

...why not do it by area? that would at least let people keep aspect ratios or let people be a few px over in one dimension if they were a few shorter in the other. also, since you're making this rule, how about making another to get rid of vids and animated sigs? they take longer to load than a simple image and are much more distracting. just two ideas for your consideration, otherwise no complaints here. -mike

maybe by the end of the week it'll get better? what else am i supposed to do at work at 3am or whatever it was when i was writing that post... oh yeah... working. oooops. -mike

a quote from lewis lapham's essay in the new jan. 2007 issue of haprer's: "the constitution doesn't serve at the pleasure of representative pelosi any more than it answers to the whim of president bush, and by taking "off the table" the mess of an impeachment proceeding, the lady from california joins the president in his distate for such an unclean thing as government of the people, by the people, and for the people." i don't think it matters what your political viewpoint is... our system in its current state is broken. debate in this country, if it happens at all, is always between two policies. either this or that. there is no discussion of any course of action that does not conform to either this, or that. adding to the problem is that this and that are very often not what the majority of people want, but are instead opposing extremes. discussions of this and that are also oversimplified. the primary process is largely to blame, but so is the way congressional districts have been re-drawn. the senate is now more competitive then the house of representatives. that is not at all what was intended, nor was it the state of things for 200 years. further complicating the matter is that the political game has become a winner take all sport. compromise isn't even looked for. and then there's the money and the lobbying... there really is a question of access. the bottom line is that people in gov't don't govern anymore. special interests (industry or otherwise) write the laws and get them passed. there's also no accountability whatsoever, and no respect for the truth. there is not a man in congress or any other branch that is willing to stand up and scream on principle alone. i don't think there's a genuine leader in the entire federal government right now. the media too has failed in these areas. lies and propaganda are printed and disseminated without question. when lies are exposed, the exposure fails to reach the public and the population continues to believe mis-information even though story after story contradicts it. the media too confines its reports to this and that as opposed to opening the debate. we also have the problem of a completely ignorant population. it's hard to have a functional republic (we're not a democracy) when the people are unable to make informed decisions. this is largely do to a failing educational system, but it also has a lot to do with pop culture and also capitalism. who needs to worry about politics when you have a good job and can be a consumer whore? recent decades have seen the slow decline of federalism. state and local gov't are left with fewer and fewer responsibilities as we more and more turn to the federal gov't to solve our local problems. for all intensive purposes we have a government that, even though it was controlled completely by a single party, could not accomplish anything meaningful in the way of solving people's problems. how much more broken can it get? there are a million reasons why the liberal democratic experiment is in such a dire situation. as i said in the iraq study group thread, the two main reasons are an inability to create a marketplace of ideas and also a population unwilling to think about things rationally. you could argue though that the main reason is the strength of capitalism. global capitalism has progressed to the point of threatening democratic sovereignty. NAFTA and other trade agreements allow corporations to sue governments for what is called "takings." so if a town passes an environmental ordinance to better the public health or for whatever other reason, businesses can, have, and are continuing to sue for lost profits as a result of the new regulation. what is of paramount importance is not the will of the people, but the production of maximum capital. /rant -mike

oh snap! -mike

as far as the report goes... i think it's pretty amazing that nobody is talking about how remarkable it is that there had to be a study group in the first place. people in government used to be able to solve problems. instead they now make them for people outside of government to solve. it's true that most of the people who were part of the study group used to be in government... but then that's part of my point. seriously... we elect people to represent us, to solve problems, and to do their best not to make more for us. what do they do once they're elected? they pass the buck and shirk responsibility. as far as the document itself, it only subtly points out something they should have screamed from the rooftops. what is that? that we screwed up way too much and for way too long for there to be an ideal solution to the mountain of problems in and with iraq. there was a reason we supported saddam when he first came to power. we thought he'd be a stabilizing force in the region, and he was extremely good at that. he used fear and murder to maintain peace within his own very divided country, he kept iran in check, gave us leverage against saudi arabia, and also gave the arab community an arab capable of helping to balance the isreal/palistine mess, while at the same time keeping the arab community reasonably divided on almost every other issue. thinking that a new democracy was going to be able to maintain that balance was foolish and against common sense. that's what the analysts told bush I and it's why he didn't invade. bush II decided to ignore that advise and analysis and look what happened. most of their recommendations make sense. but if you ask me, we should get out of their and offer our formal apologies for screwing up the postwar occupation and transition so horribly. we should then offer the iraqi government any amount of financial and military assistance. everything we do in iraq from here out ought to be by invitation only, both military and economic actions. financial aid should go to the iraqi government and they can distribute it as needed, to american contractors or anyone else. will their be corruption? sure. but it seems our own contractors do a superb job of wasting taxpayer money so why not let the iraqis give it a try? there was recently an excellent presentation of a plan similar to this that would cut the cost of the war exponentially and save us a ton of money as well as lives. we've also got to let them fight a civil war if they want to and need to fight it. most democracies have had one. let them. the nation needs to sort out it's own identity. we should also try and bring an end to the war as quickly as possible without allowing a new dictator to control the country and then deal with the resulting situation. if you ask me, the nation ought to be split up. the kurds want no part of a national iraqi government. they've been acting as a nation themselves too long for that, so let them have one. the south should also break away due to the ethnic difference. that would likely have the added bonus of weakening iran, as the southern separatist movement in that country would want to form a unified state from the two southern territories. middle iraq could become the first real and true arab democracy, and a success story for our idiotic attempt to bring democracy to people who aren't sure they want it. ok. that's all for now. -mike

starfish do you even know or understand what the term liberal means? i'll give you a hint: it's used incorrectly by a large portion of the population of this country (YOU), and about 90% of the U.S. population, if asked to describe themselves, would wind up falling into the category. the core idea of liberalism, is that the market solves everything. liberalism is a kind of capitalism applied to thought and philosophy. the thinking is that if we create a free marketplace of ideas, where each is given equal consideration, and if we rationally process each one, then we will find the best and most truthful ideas. supply and demand of ideas so to speak. the demand for truth and knowledge will increase the use and belief of good ideas, and shun the use and belief of bad ones. the problem with liberalism as it has progressed throughout the 20th century is that you can't create a real marketplace of ideas. the world is not yet globalized enough. people of different cultures have different spheres of ideas and every idea is not given equal consideration. the other major problem is that people like you don't think rationally. to drive home this point if you answer yes to most of the following questions, congratulations, you're a liberal. -do you believe that democracy or democratic republics are the best forms of government? -do you believe that free capitalism is the best economic model? -do you believe that individuals should be autonomous (do you believe that freedom is good)? -do you believe that knowledge should be made available to everyone? yay, we're all liberals. please stop using the word incorrectly. there are plenty of other terms you could use to more accurately describe what you intended to. thank you in advance. -mike

ok so a little late but here it is none the less... and sharp i thought the included directions were helpful, but it can't hurt to have a guide like this posted up. i strongly recomend that you remove the headlight housings from your 850. it's a grand total of six bolts and it'll make your life much easier. some of the bolts are a bit of a pita but just take your time with it. so here is 1/2 the kit i chose a different method then that posted up in bay13 simply 'cause this suits me better. it allows a little more slack in the wires and it should make it easier to change the bulb if i should ever have to. also seems a little bit cleaner imo. to begin i took a half inch drill bit to the housing cap. half inch isn't large enough at all but it was the best i had on hand. i worked out the hole until i was able to pull the wires through. next you'll need to use needle nose pliers or something similar to work the gromit into the hole. you should be able to get it flush on the inside of the cap, as you can see from the pic below though, it won't look so nice on the other side due to the way the cap is constructed. anyway here's what it looks like when you're done. i'm not too worried about water getting through but should you desire you can toss some silicone sealant on there and you should be good to go. next you'll want to pry out the harness plug on the back of the headlight housing using a flathead. once you get it to pop out initially you can use a large pair of pliers to work it out the rest of the way. pull the lowbeam wires through and tuck them up through one of the slits in the snap in plug as shown in the pic below. next you'll need to drill/cut a notch in the housing below the slit you chose so that you can snap the plug back into the harness without pinching the wires. make your mark and cut away. do a test fitment and then snap the plug back in. i also used some silicone sealant around the wires to ensure that no water would get into the housing and that the wires would be held in place. the next step is to instal the bulb and cap as normal. be sure to leave just enough slack in the wires to allow the cap to turn close without putting too much tension on the wire inside. the more slack you can keep outside the housing, the more mounting options you'll have for the ballasts. the finished product looks something like this: all that's left to do is put the housings back in the car and mount the ballasts. for the driver's side i found a spot right above the slashgaurd next to where the mounting bolt for it is: the view from the top of the car, all nice and stealth like haha: the pas. side is a little bit more complicated and i've yet to come up with an ideal place. anyway i hope this helps out some people. -mike p.s. and this is what they look like with the 5000k bulbs:

oh water'll get in there. i have pics of my install that i'll post up once i'm home from work with a write up. oh and sharp, these look freakin' awesome man. thank's for the deal. install was nice and simple too once you work it out. finally had some good weather the other day to get them in and turn 'em on. it's a little more complicated than just drilling a hole because of how the housing cap is structured. actually... if you drilled it off center it'd work fine i bet. otherwise the rubber gromet thing doesn't fit correctly on the ourside of the cap, only the inside. yeah... i'm sure that makes a lot of sense right now w/o pics... anyway i found a cool place to hide the drivers side ballast too. the pas side is a little bit tricky though... not sure where it'll end up just yet. it'd be a lot easier (on both sides) if i had a right angle drill that's for sure... -mike

rockin'. thanks sharp! -mike

yeah combos as in the weitec springs with something besides the stockers. i'm just wondering how stiff a setup the springs might handle and what other options besides oem people might want to give a try. i have no experience with them so i really have no idea and while it seems no one has tried other setups, i was hoping those with weitecs might venture a guess as to what else might work well. i understand the spring is likely a very good match for the stockers if it isn't actually perfect. i was just wondering if there were other viable options also. -mike

sorry to get off topic but i'm going to anyway... ok... maybe i'm not really that sorry. since how much of a matched kit this is seems to be in doubt... anyone every try the springs on different shocks/struts? i think i might but i'd like to know if anyone else has had good/bad experiences. greg have you any thoughts on what other combos might work well? -mike

as i said in my post, that hasn't been my experience. it always seemed to get better mpg with the 90+, but i figured it might just be driving conditions. then i had the chance to drive the 9ish hours from albany, ny to sandusky, oh (woohoo cedar point) and the 90+ got much better mpg than the 87. it was ALL highway miles with the cruise on so i figure that's as close to a scientific test as you're gonna get. maybe my jerk-umption was wrong though. i guess people should find out what works for their own car. if the car isn't running well it's going to get poor mpg no matter what octane you put in there also. -mike EDIT: silly word filter pwns j00!!!... heh

mine get's better mpg on the 91 or 93. i would suspect that most others (in good shape) would also. 87 might be cheaper... but you don't get as far so what's it matter? also when you want the vroooom it isn't there... 87 is just sad. 91+ is a lot more fun - economical too. -mike

ok sharp, i just got paid sweet deal. i'm in! #) bottlecap (mike) - xtec 35 watt 5000K 9006 and h4 and 9006 are the same right? -mike

somehow i missed this thread... anyway carson that looks hot. the only thing i could see changing would be getting rid of the headlight wipers... it was said a couple pages back and i second. other than that though... looks bitchin'. -mike

my experience says get the '95. i loved my first '95 850 so much that when it got killed i went out and found another (the newer one has a turbo. weee). both have been great cars. really any high milage car is going to need a few regular things as the parts get old, but i'd say the costs to take care of these cars if you do it yourself or at an indy or pretty norm/low. my first '95 had 130k on it when i got it and 190k when it was rear ended. in all that time all i had to do was a cv joint and endlinks plus the normal oil changes, breaks, etc. the new one was bought a year ago with 140k or so and hasn't given me any issues yet other than a failed fuel pump and it needed a new evap valve and pnp switch when i first got it. all in all both cars have run solid. the only thing about the '95s is that it's a little bit of a craps shoot as to the details of the computer, obd, and some features. volvo was changing a lot after the '94s and so it really depends on where the car was made and at what point during the year. sometimes it can make getting advice a little confusing but there are only a couple things that aren't standard. it's about the only 11 year old car i'd want to buy for use as a daily driver. -mike

this guy is leading in the primary polls... and america has reached a new low... -mike

lol. well it seems like a common problem then. i was pretty amazed though because it snaps in there pretty good. maybe we should all be checking it out to make sure it is still snapped in once a month or something... and i'm sure the water came in the car as a result of this. the sunroof was the first place i checked and it's fine. since i put the strip back on i haven't had any problems. i'm guessing that some windshields may fit more tightly than others depending on how they were put in the car. anyways it wasn't a lot of water and i'm thinking it took all night for it to work its way in. not a big deal i was just wondering if it was a regular thing or not. -mike

yeah, right by the mirror. not much, just a few drops that dripped down off the cabin light and onto the center console. -mike

so it's been raining all day here in the great north east and i discovered today that the top weather-stripping on my windshield had vanished. i have no idea when or how this happened but i got into the car and noticed water coming in as soon as i pulled out of the driveway. when i got out i saw that the rubber was gone. huh. it wasn't anywhere to be found so i pulled the one off the old wrecked 850 and installed it on the t-5. problem solved but... how'd this even happen anyways? i don't want it happening again... -mike