twitter: rec.crafts.metalworking - 26 new messages in 9 topics

rec.crafts.metalworking
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking?hl=en

rec.crafts.metalworking@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Great idea to help "military intelligence"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/acec89491b7abbdf?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 7:33 pm
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

Ignoramus3181 wrote:
>
> On 2010-01-15, Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > Ignoramus3181 wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2010-01-14, Bill Noble <nobody@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
> >> > if you want to be much more helpful, spend time working to trace the chinese
> >> > sourced malware and deal with it. This will do more harm to us than all the
> >> > insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan combined.
> >>
> >> I already won the war against malware. I installed Linux.
> >
> > No, you surrendered. White flags, and all.
>
> I would have surrendered if I allowed malware to take over. In fact,
> the opposite is the case and malware is completely eliminated. Who
> won?

The malware. It forced you to change operating systems. It's like
buying a new car, to keep from packing the wheel bearings with fresh
grease. You waved your white flag and gave in.

--
Greed is the root of all eBay.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 7:36 pm
From: technomaNge

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> Ignoramus3181 wrote:
>> On 2010-01-14, Bill Noble <nobody@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
>>> if you want to be much more helpful, spend time working to trace the chinese
>>> sourced malware and deal with it. This will do more harm to us than all the
>>> insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan combined.
>> I already won the war against malware. I installed Linux.
>
>
> No, you surrendered. White flags, and all.
>

Michael, you forgot to put a smiley on there!

If I didn't know better, I'd say you don't have a sense of humor. :)

technomaNge
--
All my home computers are Linux.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 7:37 pm
From: Ignoramus3181

On 2010-01-15, Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Ignoramus3181 wrote:
>>
>> On 2010-01-15, Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > Ignoramus3181 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 2010-01-14, Bill Noble <nobody@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
>> >> > if you want to be much more helpful, spend time working to trace the chinese
>> >> > sourced malware and deal with it. This will do more harm to us than all the
>> >> > insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan combined.
>> >>
>> >> I already won the war against malware. I installed Linux.
>> >
>> > No, you surrendered. White flags, and all.
>>
>> I would have surrendered if I allowed malware to take over. In fact,
>> the opposite is the case and malware is completely eliminated. Who
>> won?
>
>
> The malware. It forced you to change operating systems. It's like
> buying a new car, to keep from packing the wheel bearings with fresh
> grease. You waved your white flag and gave in.

If a new car was free, in your example, it would be a victory -- to
get a well running car for free.

Same here, I have a great OS that costs me nothing and keeps me secure.

It is a win-win in all respects.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: What is it? Set 319
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/e2189d263d034ee8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 8:04 pm
From: Cydrome Leader

In rec.crafts.metalworking Rob H. <rhvp65@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 1829 looks like an ultrasonic fogger (or humidifier).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks! Looks like this is correct.
>>
>> Anybody ever touch one that's running?
>>
>> they really hurt, and it's a really weird type of pain.
>
> I've never touched a fogger that was running, but this review of one
> describes how hot it can get (the descriptions starts at around 1:25 of the
> video):

they don't actually get hot.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Horrible accident with an amazing end. Warning: OT
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/3b65d88c38812725?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 8:12 pm
From: "Bill Noble"

"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:o7muk59hb1ghn5delgdhvoo42jt37uepun@4ax.com...

> He's lucky:
>
> A) it was a soft-sided truck
> and
> B) it wasn't filled with heavy machinery that day.
> C) they didn't deport the illegal son of a bitch.

are you aware that it is possible to be in the USA and speak a language
other than english and still be legal? One can be born here and not speak
much english, one can have a legal visa of any number of types, or one can
have a permanent resident card. In this country, as opposed to whatever
country you are actually from, we believe in the rule that you are innocent
until proven guilty, not the napoleonic code. How would you like it if it
were you, and you were accused of being illegal because someone thought you
looked foreign or had an odd accent - maybe you sounded canadian or
newzeelandish?

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:27 pm
From: Larry Jaques

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:58:48 -0600, the infamous Ignoramus3181
<ignoramus3181@NOSPAM.3181.invalid> scrawled the following:

>On 2010-01-14, Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:18:22 -0600, the infamous Ignoramus21235
>><ignoramus21235@NOSPAM.21235.invalid> scrawled the following:
>>
>>>Reminds me of my own collision with a moving train.
>>
>> You hit a train? Whuffo? More info and pics, please!
>
>It was a crossing without a warning light or a gate.
>
>It was dark, I was tired, the train was slow, and I did not notice
>it passing in front of me. I had about 1 year of experience driving.
>
>I did hit the brake, but it was too late.

OMG! You ran right into a large, moving train?!? So you had only 1
year driving experience, but how many years riding and watching?
Man, that's a bad one, Ig. You literally "hit the broad side of a
barn" with that one. Glad you made it! How slow was slow?

>I was lucky because I hit the wheel carriage in the middle of the
>train, and my car was thrown out instead of getting dragged under the
>train.

You bet you were lucky. Had the wheel ridden up on the car, it would
have smashed it down and cut right through it, probably taken your
legs, at minimum, in the process.

>I had a couple of small scratches on my knees. The car was totaled.
>
>No pics.

No, I guess not.

--
The greatest fine art of the future will be the making
of a comfortable living from a small piece of land.
--Abraham Lincoln

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:33 pm
From: Larry Jaques

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 13:37:30 -0600, the infamous Ignoramus3181
<ignoramus3181@NOSPAM.3181.invalid> scrawled the following:

>On 2010-01-14, Jim Wilkins <kb1dal@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 14, 12:58?pm, Ignoramus3181 <ignoramus3...@NOSPAM.3181.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> It was dark, I was tired, the train was slow, and I did not notice
>>> it passing in front of me. I had about 1 year of experience driving.
>> ...
>>> i
>>
>> An article in the paper here some years ago wondered why so many
>> people drove into slow trains at crossings.
>
>Very interesting.
>
>In my case, admittedly, I could pay more attention, and it was my
>fault 100%, but what was in front of me did not fit a stereotype of a
>train that existed in my mind.
>
>The brown/grey, dirty train blended very well with brown/grey, dirty
>background, it was moving slowly, so I did not notice empty spaces
>between cars, etc. I did not really see a "moving object".

Right, so you drove smack dab into a 10' high SOLID WALL. Good one,
Ig. <g> How much had you had to drink/smoke/drop?

>A very simple measure could help, which is to install reflectors on
>the sides of the train cars. Should cost under $20 per train car.

Until the kids break them all off. Y'know, those who are already there
tagging the cars at night.

>Yes, our ability to notice things is very limited if those things are
>somehow masqueraded.

Hence the caveat "Drive Defensively!" is driven into our skulls by our
parents, teachers, driver's ed pamphlets, DMVs, and the media.

--
The greatest fine art of the future will be the making
of a comfortable living from a small piece of land.
--Abraham Lincoln

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:34 pm
From: Larry Jaques

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:33:30 -0600, the infamous F. George McDuffee
<gmcduffee@mcduffee-associates.us> scrawled the following:

>On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:19:34 -0800 (PST), Jim Wilkins
><kb1dal@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 14, 2:37 pm, Ignoramus3181 <ignoramus3...@NOSPAM.3181.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>> ...
>>> A very simple measure could help, which is to install reflectors on
>>> the sides of the train cars. Should cost under $20 per train car.
>>> i
>>
>>http://www.anytimesign.com/3m_conspicuity_tape.htm
>how about a simple white stripe on a diagional on the sides of
>the cars?

Both "tagged over" in seconds.

--
The greatest fine art of the future will be the making
of a comfortable living from a small piece of land.
--Abraham Lincoln

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:40 pm
From: "Bill McKee"

"F. George McDuffee" <gmcduffee@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote in message
news:7s6vk5hqp9odiu52v8k7gr179n008tr32n@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:19:34 -0800 (PST), Jim Wilkins
> <kb1dal@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 14, 2:37 pm, Ignoramus3181 <ignoramus3...@NOSPAM.3181.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>> ...
>>> A very simple measure could help, which is to install reflectors on
>>> the sides of the train cars. Should cost under $20 per train car.
>>> i
>>
>>http://www.anytimesign.com/3m_conspicuity_tape.htm
> how about a simple white stripe on a diagional on the sides of
> the cars?
> Unka George (George McDuffee)
> ..............................
> The past is a foreign country;
> they do things differently there.
> L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
> The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

Most of the railcars these days are moving art displays.

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:48 pm
From: Ignoramus3181

On 2010-01-15, Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:58:48 -0600, the infamous Ignoramus3181
><ignoramus3181@NOSPAM.3181.invalid> scrawled the following:
>
>>On 2010-01-14, Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:18:22 -0600, the infamous Ignoramus21235
>>><ignoramus21235@NOSPAM.21235.invalid> scrawled the following:
>>>
>>>>Reminds me of my own collision with a moving train.
>>>
>>> You hit a train? Whuffo? More info and pics, please!
>>
>>It was a crossing without a warning light or a gate.
>>
>>It was dark, I was tired, the train was slow, and I did not notice
>>it passing in front of me. I had about 1 year of experience driving.
>>
>>I did hit the brake, but it was too late.
>
> OMG! You ran right into a large, moving train?!? So you had only 1
> year driving experience, but how many years riding and watching?

Also one year.

> Man, that's a bad one, Ig. You literally "hit the broad side of a
> barn" with that one. Glad you made it! How slow was slow?

I would say, the train was going 10-15 MPH at most.

>
>>I was lucky because I hit the wheel carriage in the middle of the
>>train, and my car was thrown out instead of getting dragged under the
>>train.
>
> You bet you were lucky. Had the wheel ridden up on the car, it would
> have smashed it down and cut right through it, probably taken your
> legs, at minimum, in the process.

I think that my chances would be rather slim, as the car would be
dragged along with the train.

>
>>I had a couple of small scratches on my knees. The car was totaled.
>>
>>No pics.
>
> No, I guess not.
>

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:50 pm
From: Ignoramus3181

On 2010-01-15, Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 13:37:30 -0600, the infamous Ignoramus3181
><ignoramus3181@NOSPAM.3181.invalid> scrawled the following:
>
>>On 2010-01-14, Jim Wilkins <kb1dal@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jan 14, 12:58?pm, Ignoramus3181 <ignoramus3...@NOSPAM.3181.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> It was dark, I was tired, the train was slow, and I did not notice
>>>> it passing in front of me. I had about 1 year of experience driving.
>>> ...
>>>> i
>>>
>>> An article in the paper here some years ago wondered why so many
>>> people drove into slow trains at crossings.
>>
>>Very interesting.
>>
>>In my case, admittedly, I could pay more attention, and it was my
>>fault 100%, but what was in front of me did not fit a stereotype of a
>>train that existed in my mind.
>>
>>The brown/grey, dirty train blended very well with brown/grey, dirty
>>background, it was moving slowly, so I did not notice empty spaces
>>between cars, etc. I did not really see a "moving object".
>
> Right, so you drove smack dab into a 10' high SOLID WALL. Good one,
> Ig. <g> How much had you had to drink/smoke/drop?

I was not drunk. I was tired after a work day and gym.

> Hence the caveat "Drive Defensively!" is driven into our skulls by our
> parents, teachers, driver's ed pamphlets, DMVs, and the media.
>

I think that I have learned that, right then.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: thrust bearings
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/b685d252b7abd10e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 8:26 pm
From: Ned Simmons

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:03:03 -0800 (PST), mark <markhabbi@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Jan 14, 12:37 pm, Ned Simmons <n...@nedsim.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:42:34 -0800 (PST), mark <markha...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I want to mount a 2' long 1.5" shaft with 2 pillow block bearings but
>> >I would also like to have a thrust bearing because the shaft will have
>> >a load from one end. I assume this is not good for the pillow block
>> >bearings. How do I go about this. Can you buy off the shelf thrust
>> >bearing assemblies the way pillow block bearings are sold? Thanks
>>
>> Normal ball bearing pillow block bearings can carry thrust loads. If
>> the thrust is less than 20% of the dynamic load rating of the bearing
>> you probably don't have to worry. If it's more than that you should go
>> thru the procedure in the bearing mfr's catalog to calculate the
>> equivalent load using your anticipated radial and thrust loads.
>>
>> You can get tapered roller bearing pillow blocks, but they're larger
>> and much more expensive.
>>
>> When applying thrust loads to a pillow block you do need to consider
>> the strength of the housing, its mounting, and the means for
>> transferring the thrust between the shaft and bearing.
>>
>> How much load, radial and thrust, are we talking about?
>>
>> --
>> Ned Simmons
>
>I did some checking and it seems the HC208-24 bearing that these
>pillow blocks use have a dynamic C load rating of 30000 (N) and a
>static Co load rating of 20000 (N). What does this mean?

C is the load that 90% of the bearings in a sample will support for 1
million revolutions before failure. Life and load are linked by an
inverse 3rd power relation. In other words, if you reduce the load by
half, the life will increase 8 times. (2x2x2=8)

Co is the load that will permanently deform the bearing some very
small amount. I don't remember the amount off the top of my head.

30000N equals 6700 pounds force.

--
Ned Simmons

==============================================================================
TOPIC: TV problem
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/d7b4a83f4e4e2773?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 8:30 pm
From: Joseph Gwinn

In article <Sf6dnWdRF7TtR9LWnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Joseph Gwinn wrote:
> >
> > In article <GOednXNvDNCSfNDWnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> > "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph Gwinn wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <JLednY6Wgbr8J9DWnZ2dnUVZ_vNi4p2d@earthlink.com>,
> > > > "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Joseph Gwinn wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <esidnVTeycczndHWnZ2dnUVZ_jhi4p2d@earthlink.com>,
> > > > > > "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Joseph Gwinn wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The FCC is run by lawyers. They did away with the
> > > > > > > > > engineers
> > > > > > > > > in charge, a long time ago.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Umm. I worked for the FCC in the early 1970s, in The Office of
> > > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > Chief Engineer. The FCC was run by lawyers back then too. Nor
> > > > > > > > could it
> > > > > > > > be otherwise for any regulatory agency, as whatever the Agency
> > > > > > > > does
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > loser always takes the agency to Federal Court. Plaintiffs are
> > > > > > > > usually
> > > > > > > > billion-dollar companies, so they can afford to take it to the
> > > > > > > > Supreme
> > > > > > > > Court, and always do.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Earlier, the FCC was the domain of engineers. By the '70s the
> > > > > > > lawyers
> > > > > > > had completed the transition into 'The Vast Wasteland'.
> > > > > > > Decisions
> > > > > > > made
> > > > > > > for political reasons, instead of sound engineering.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When did you work at the FCC?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Given the political and legal environment of a regulatory agency, I
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > a lot of trouble believing that any federal regulatory agency was
> > > > > > *ever*
> > > > > > really run by non-lawyers.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Have you ever read the 'early' history of the FCC?
> > > >
> > > > I learned it from my engineering colleagues the oldtimers who joined
> > > > the
> > > > FCC during the Depression.
> > > >
> > > > But perhaps you have a URL or reference to offer.
> > >
> > > I had access to a private library in the '70s at what had been a
> > > Crosley plant. It held their archives, including FCC documents, in get
> > > this: REAL BOOKS where they described the work required to straighten
> > > out the AM broadcast mess, their early work on TV standards and the
> > > issues of Amateur radio. How many of your old timers were there in the
> > > first few years of the FCC
> >
> > All of them, I think. The FCC was founded in 1934.
> >
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission>
> >
> > > > But I bet that the official history differs from that recounted by
> > > > those
> > > > oldtimers in precisely the most telling areas.
> > >
> > >
> > > BTW, Joseph, tell us what you know about 'Courtesy' Radio & TV
> > > broadcast licenses. Specifically the power specifications and
> > > expiration dates, and how they differ from commercial broadcast
> > > licenses.
> >
> > Nothing. I was not in the Broadcast Bureau, I was in the Office of the
> > Chief Engineer.
> >
> > But I can guess - Courtesy licenses had far better terms than other
> > kinds of license. The Broadcast Bureau was easily the most political
> > part of the FCC, because Congress cared deeply what the broadcasters
> > thought. Something about the power of the press and don't get into
> > fights with people who buy ink (or by extension electrons) by the
> > barrel. What Congress did *not* care abut was technical issues.
> >
> > And you have proven my point that engineers have never and will never be
> > running regulatory agencies.
>
>
> Courtesy license were issued to military radio & TV stations. They
> were issued for place keeping only, and to prevent a commercial station
> being licensed on the same area and frequencies. It had nothing to do
> with politics. The differences in the two licenses were: Power level:
> The license stated the initial power at the time it was issued, with the
> disclaimer, "OR AS DEEMED NECESSARY". The expiration date was: "UNTIL
> NO LONGER NEEDED". There are a lot of old records in the online FCC
> database, but no record of the stations I engineered at, at Ft. Greely
> in the early '70s.

What a letdown. By your presentation, I suspected dark undercurrents.

> The FCC replaced the DOC as the ruling agency, and their first job
> was to clean up the mess of radio stations that interfered with each
> other. Once again this was an engineering problem, not political.
> Stations had been allowed on the air with little or no control.
>
> Early TV has similar problems, requiring the realignment of channel
> and power assignments. This was an engineering problem, not politics.

Well, neither of us were at the FCC during this period, but having
worked there I have a lot of difficulty believing that they were ever
free of politics.

Joe Gwinn

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Story and news release re. cold remedy Zicam
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/abb5da2c7354a10c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 8:49 pm
From: falk@mauve.rahul.net (Edward A. Falk)

In article <hio92t$s0g$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
Doug Miller <spambait@milmac.com> wrote:
>
>And for a humorous take that does a pretty job of demonstrating what complete
>nonsense homeopathy is, see
>http://depletedcranium.com/how-homeopathy-supposedly-works-illustrated/

Cool.

Also, a couple of my favorite videos on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB_htqDCP-s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIaV8swc-fo

--
-Ed Falk, falk@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Repackaging Wingers
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/97f9854a3cb5098c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:04 pm
From: Deucalion

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:31:45 -0800, Hawke
<davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:

>Doug Miller wrote:
>> In article <8j2qk5hvienjssjc0b2n44htn2gije3j4d@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:22:48 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>
>>>> The only sitting U.S. Senator who is or ever was a member of the Klan is a
>>>> Democrat -- Robert Byrd. Look it up.
>
>
>The key words there are "sitting member". Check your history and you'll
>find that there were lots of members of congress who were Klan members,
>they're just all dead now. If Byrd wasn't 92 you wouldn't be able to use
>him. Look at the state of Indiana, back in the 20s the state government
>was full of Klanners and they were mainly conservatives. The party
>didn't matter it was whether they were conservatives or not. You can
>look at today's Klan and it's the same. You won't find any liberals in
>the group but you will find lots of conservatives.
>
>Hawke

I've heard/read that the Klan is targeting tea parties for
recruitment. Even they realize that a lot of the people attending are
easy targets for recruitment. Hell, some of the sites are even
listing when and where the tea parties are being held as a public
service for private benefit.

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:00 pm
From: Cliff

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:39:42 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

>In article <27osk5hc6doft8jrk58mfk7v9umukcs74o@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:58:45 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <j33qk5lq14nas5jeh3btk04r5qoa4h0c15@4ax.com>, Cliff
>> <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:22:48 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The 1964 Civil Rights Act had more support from Republicans than from
>>>>>Democrats -- look it up.
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
>>>
>>>Here's what it *actually* says. This is a direct copy-and-paste, not an edited
>>
>>>version like you provided -- and it proves what I said.
>>>
>>>The original House version:[9]
>>>
>>> * Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
>>> * Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
>>>
>>>Cloture in the Senate:[10]
>>>
>>> * Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
>>> * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
>>>
>>>The Senate version:[9]
>>>
>>> * Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
>>> * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
>>>
>>>The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]
>>>
>>> * Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
>>> * Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
>>
>>[
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
>> The original House version: ...
>>Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
>> The Senate version:
>>Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
>>Northern Democrats only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the
>> measure
>>]
>>
>> Need reading lessons?
>
>Not me, Cliffie -- you do. You deliberately altered the data to present a
>misleading picture. I provided the *true*unedited* data above.

It says exactly what I posted.
I altered NO "data".

>Sorry you're having so much trouble with the truth.

Hence you are in error yet again. Or lying like a winger.
You a southern rethug?
--
Cliff

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:02 pm
From: Cliff

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:46:39 -0800, Hawke <davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:

>Doug Miller wrote:
>> In article <27osk5hc6doft8jrk58mfk7v9umukcs74o@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:58:45 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <j33qk5lq14nas5jeh3btk04r5qoa4h0c15@4ax.com>, Cliff
>>> <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:22:48 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The 1964 Civil Rights Act had more support from Republicans than from
>>>>>> Democrats -- look it up.
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
>>>> Here's what it *actually* says. This is a direct copy-and-paste, not an edited
>>>> version like you provided -- and it proves what I said.
>>>>
>>>> The original House version:[9]
>>>>
>>>> * Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
>>>> * Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
>>>>
>>>> Cloture in the Senate:[10]
>>>>
>>>> * Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
>>>> * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
>>>>
>>>> The Senate version:[9]
>>>>
>>>> * Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
>>>> * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
>>>>
>>>> The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]
>>>>
>>>> * Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
>>>> * Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
>>> [
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
>>> The original House version: ...
>>> Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
>>> The Senate version:
>>> Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
>>> Northern Democrats only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the
>>> measure
>>> ]
>>>
>>> Need reading lessons?
>>
>> Not me, Cliffie -- you do. You deliberately altered the data to present a
>> misleading picture. I provided the *true*unedited* data above.
>>
>> Sorry you're having so much trouble with the truth.
>
>Why knock him for having trouble with the truth when you are the one who
>isn't being honest? You don't seem to understand that prior to the 1960s
>Democrats, mainly southern ones, were all what we today call right wing
>conservatives? They moved en mass to the republican party when liberals
>passed civil rights reforms. Your accusation about Democrats is based on
>the past when the party was the home of extreme conservatives. Even you
>know that the modern republican party is where the extreme conservatives
>now reside. So you are trying to be way too slick when you try to hang
>anti civil rights activity on the Democrats when it actually belongs on
>conservatives. You don't want to admit that it's the conservatives who
>are to blame for most of our problems so you seek to blame Democrats
>instead. I would say it's clear that you do that for a good reason.
>You're a conservative, aren't you?

He must really hate others having rights.
Typical of a winger.

>
>Hawke
--
Cliff

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:05 pm
From: Cliff

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:45:22 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

>In article <ncosk5dvh0u21phq0jgcc3sacig7k7q7et@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:04:54 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <j33qk5lq14nas5jeh3btk04r5qoa4h0c15@4ax.com>, Cliff
>> <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:22:48 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The 1964 Civil Rights Act had more support from Republicans than from
>>>>>Democrats -- look it up.
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
>>>> The original House version: ...
>>>>Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
>>>Yes, all ten of them -- whereas EIGHTY-SEVEN southern Democrats voted nay.
>>>IOW, southern Democrats opposing the Civil Rights Act outnumbered southern
>>>Republicans opposing it by a margin of nearly nine to one.
>>
>> THEN the Southern Democrats mostly became rethugs.
>
>Whether they did or didn't -- and considering that you have at best a nodding
>acquaintance with the truth, I'm *not* about to take your unsupported word for
>it -- it doesn't change the facts: The percentage of Republicans who supported
>the 1964 Civil Rights Act was a *lot* higher than the percentage of Democrats
>who supported it.
>>
>>>> The Senate version:
>>>>Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
>>>Yes, all ONE of him -- compared to TWENTY southern Democrats voting nay.
>>
>> "The original House version: ...
>>Southern Republicans: 100% Nay."
>> "The Senate version:
>>Southern Republicans: 100% Nay."
>>
>>>>Northern Democrats only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the
>>>> measure
>>>And of southern Republicans, only John Tower of Texas opposed it.
>>
>> And how did the rethugs gain Texas?
>>
>>>>HTH
>>>
>>>Oh, yes, it helps a lot -- it exposes your dishonesty, by proving that you
>>>very selectively edited the data to deliberately present a distorted picture
>>>of the truth.
>>
>> I stated what I stated. Exactly.
>
>Yes, I know that -- you very selectively edited the data to deliberately
>present a distorted picture of the truth.

[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
The original House version: ...
Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
The Senate version:
Southern Republicans: 100% Nay.
Northern Democrats only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure
]

Need reading lessons?

>>
>>>The TRUTH is that the 1964 Civil Rights Act was supported by four-fifths of
>>>the Republicans in Congress -- but less than two-thirds of the Democrats.
>>
>> Then the southern dems mostly became rethugs .... who the Klan supports.
>
>The only sitting member of the U.S. Congress who is, or was, a member of the
>Klan is a DEMOCRAT, Cliff.

OTOH You do NOT know that.
They like to keep secrets. Such as this.

>Your inability to accept the facts does not make
>them any less facts.

Need reading lessons?
--
Cliff

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:06 pm
From: Cliff

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:45:22 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

>>>Oh, yes, it helps a lot -- it exposes your dishonesty, by proving that you
>>>very selectively edited the data to deliberately present a distorted picture
>>>of the truth.
>>
>> I stated what I stated. Exactly.
>
>Yes, I know that -- you very selectively edited the data to deliberately
>present a distorted picture of the truth.

So Wick is lying?
Have any proof?

Need reading lessons?

HTH
--
Cliff

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:10 pm
From: Cliff

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:47:03 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lyndon_Johnson_signing_Civil_Rights_Act,_2_Ju
>>ly,_1964.jpg
>> "Lyndon B. Johnson signs the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Among the guests
>> behind
>>him is Martin Luther King, Jr."

CLUE: Johnson was a dem.
I don't know about his dog.
Was it a smart dog?
If not it was no doubt a rethug (or would be today).

>> Red States seem to be in the South, eh?
>> & full of rethugs.
>
>Congressional Republican support for the 1964 Civil Rights Act: more than
>fourh-fifths.

"fourh-fifths" ? Did they drink the rest?

>
>Congressional Democrat support for the same act: less than two-thirds.
>
>Those are the facts, Cliff, whether you can understand them or not.

Need reading lessons?

HTH
--
Cliff

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:13 pm
From: Cliff

On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:04:03 -0500, Deucalion <someone@nowhere.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:31:45 -0800, Hawke
><davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>
>>Doug Miller wrote:
>>> In article <8j2qk5hvienjssjc0b2n44htn2gije3j4d@4ax.com>, Cliff <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:22:48 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The only sitting U.S. Senator who is or ever was a member of the Klan is a
>>>>> Democrat -- Robert Byrd. Look it up.
>>
>>
>>The key words there are "sitting member". Check your history and you'll
>>find that there were lots of members of congress who were Klan members,
>>they're just all dead now. If Byrd wasn't 92 you wouldn't be able to use
>>him. Look at the state of Indiana, back in the 20s the state government
>>was full of Klanners and they were mainly conservatives. The party
>>didn't matter it was whether they were conservatives or not. You can
>>look at today's Klan and it's the same. You won't find any liberals in
>>the group but you will find lots of conservatives.
>>
>>Hawke
>
>I've heard/read that the Klan is targeting tea parties for
>recruitment.

The Neo-Nazis too. And Faux is looking for
a few good idiots too.

>Even they realize that a lot of the people attending are
>easy targets for recruitment. Hell, some of the sites are even
>listing when and where the tea parties are being held as a public
>service for private benefit.

Where do you get a bus? Who pays?
--
Cliff

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:14 pm
From: Cliff

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:50:36 -0800, Hawke <davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:

>
>>>> The 1964 Civil Rights Act had more support from Republicans than from
>>>> Democrats -- look it up.
>>>>
>>>> The only sitting U.S. Senator who is or ever was a member of the Klan is
>>>> a Democrat -- Robert Byrd. Look it up.
>>>>
>>>> Come back after you've learned the facts.
>>> Come back when you can read. Or was Hawke's post to complicated for you?
>>>
>> No, it was too full of baloney -- like nearly everything else Pigeon writes.
>>
>> Come back after you've learned the facts.
>
>
>I would like you to point out where anything I said was factually incorrect.

He cannot but he can lie like a winger.

>Hawke
--
Cliff

==============================================================================
TOPIC: need 'puter for momma
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/c13fba59a7fcd11e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:13 pm
From: Larry Jaques

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:15:09 -0500, the infamous "Karl Townsend"
<karltownsend.NOT@embarqmail.com> scrawled the following:

>My momma called and wants a new computer. She's an octogenarian and don't
>like new fangled ways of doing the same thing. That means I should stay with
>the operating system she knows - XP.
>
>I went to Dell and they want an extra $150 to install XP on a windows 7
>machine. She just needs a basic computer for internet, email, small
>spreadsheet, and word. For myself I'd just get a used eBay. But I know momma
>wants a new one. Any suggestions?

My new Acer came with Windows Vista Business and the fallback OS on
the drive was XP. It also came with a free upgrade to Win7, which I
installed. Check what's available at www.walmart.com . I gave $550
for a 2.4GHz minibox with 2GB ram, 160GB drive, and a 23"
monitor/kbd/mouse package. $8 to deliver it to me at home.

I'm still trying to figure out how to work with the data I brought
over from the old computer via Win7's Easy Transfer prog. Anyone BTDT?

--
The greatest fine art of the future will be the making
of a comfortable living from a small piece of land.
--Abraham Lincoln

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:03 pm
From: Tim Wescott

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:15:09 -0500, Karl Townsend wrote:

> My momma called and wants a new computer. She's an octogenarian and
> don't like new fangled ways of doing the same thing. That means I should
> stay with the operating system she knows - XP.
>
> I went to Dell and they want an extra $150 to install XP on a windows 7
> machine. She just needs a basic computer for internet, email, small
> spreadsheet, and word. For myself I'd just get a used eBay. But I know
> momma wants a new one. Any suggestions?
>
> Karl

Build her a new one from parts, install her current version of XP on it
from the install disks, and when it asks for registration tell it that
you just did a 'repair'. Be sure to install the new computer under the
old XP license sticker, so you won't be lying.

--
www.wescottdesign.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: mostly OT, tire alien "please don't litter" sign/sculpture
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/c9fcfe5468f93f7f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 10:35 pm
From: "William Wixon"

well, so, it's not like some high tech CAM produced piece of aerospace
hardware, but it's my little project that involved a small amount of
welding. and i'm proud of it. i think it came out ok. i think it's cute
and funny.

http://www.frontiernet.net/~wwixon/tirealien.jpg

i "adopted" a road near me. we do a litter pick up day in april. some
toothless inbred redneck threw 5 tires along our road. i was at a loss as
to what to do with them. wanted to make lemonade out of lemons. came up
with this "tire alien sculpture sign thingy". i used two recycled compact
discs for his wind activated "antenna" spinner thing. i originally had the
tires alternating black/white but the word "litter" was being partially
obscured so i changed it to a large-to-small arrangement, which changed the
wording and the black/white alternating. i thought instead of "please don't
litter", "litter please don't" was kinda in keeping with the alien theme,
sounds kinda yoda-ese.

b.w.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Jan 14 2010 9:58 pm
From: Winston

William Wixon wrote:
> well, so, it's not like some high tech CAM produced piece of aerospace
> hardware, but it's my little project that involved a small amount of
> welding. and i'm proud of it. i think it came out ok. i think it's cute
> and funny.
>
> http://www.frontiernet.net/~wwixon/tirealien.jpg

Cool!

If someone would just throw away a few hundred feet of conduit
and a couple basketballs, you could make your own FSM:
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/fsm.jpg

--Winston

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.crafts.metalworking"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.crafts.metalworking+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

twitter

Thursday, January 14, 2010

rec.crafts.metalworking - 26 new messages in 9 topics - digest

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

Previous Posts