twitter: rec.crafts.metalworking - 26 new messages in 16 topics

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

rec.crafts.metalworking@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Docs to Chimpbama: You drink too much!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/3f4c5be11e10a39a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:22 pm
From: Hawke

>> People who drink like what you and Curly describe consume so little
>> alcohol that you just about fit in the non drinker category. My point is
>> that people who drink do it a lot more often and drink a lot more than
>> you lightweights. I used to drink every day. Now I never drink. Not
>> because I think it's bad or I have to but I just would rather be a non
>> drinker. When you are a regular drinker you put away a good deal of
>> alcohol even if you never get drunk or aren't abusing it. Even if you
>> have several beers two or three times a week that isn't considered a lot
>> of drinking but compared to you it is. I think that there is a point
>> where some people drink so little that even though they have a drink now
>> and then I'd still call them non drinkers. I mean, if you have a
>> cocktail on New Years and two beers on the Fourth of July are you really
>> a drinker? I'd say no.
>
> Then you need to get with my doctor. He said that I have a fatty
> liver and really need to cut out those New Years and July 4 drinks or
> it could kill me.

My mom has a "fatty" liver too and she doesn't drink either. So I'd say
if you suffer from that condition then it's not from over use of
alcohol. You need to be on a low fat diet with lots of cardio work to
reduce overall bodyfat levels. I'd say six months in a Serbian refugee
camp ought to do the trick for you. Either that or spend a lot more time
in the gym.

Hawke

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:16 pm
From: Curly Surmudgeon

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:48:09 -0800, Hawke <davesmithers@digitalpath.net>
wrote:

>>> You're correct. What doctors call moderate alcohol intake is one drink
>>> a couple of times a week. Personally, I never met anyone who drank
>>> that little. Anybody that drinks has more than one and more than once
>>> or twice a week. If you drink less than that you don't drink at all.
>>
>> There are a few of us. I drink a six-pack of beer per year and a
>> bottle of wine lasts me a week with meals. That's it. There really
>> are a few of us who drink in moderation.
>
> Sorry to have to tell you this but you are not a "moderate" drinker.
> What you describe is virtually a non drinker. I used to be a heavy
> drinker and now I am a non drinker, have been for I don't even know how
> long, maybe a decade. Anyone that consumes as little as you do doesn't
> even amount to moderate as far as drinking goes. You're in the "hardly
> ever" group. Which is better than moderate.

You just defined a "moderate drinker" above as: "What doctors call
moderate alcohol intake is one drink a couple of times a week." A bottle
of wine every 7-14 days qualifies by that definition, 14 proof, 7%, by
750 ml is about 3oz of alcohol, no?

"Moderation" is in the mouth of the drinker...

--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republicans: Party Without a Conscious
Democrats: Party Without a Spine
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT - Most states kick blue asse
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/d00573543954f95d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:29 pm
From: Hawke

On 3/2/2010 5:07 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
> In article<hmfd55$9gk$2@speranza.aioe.org>,
> Hawke<davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/28/2010 5:30 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
>>> In article<hm6njd$v23$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
>>> Hawke<davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> look at the record . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I did, and it shows that the booming economy correlated with Republican
>>>>> control of Congress and the tanking economy correlated with Democrat
>>>>> control of Congress.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> snicker.
>>>>
>>>> You're full of crap. Just look at the record of the economy under Bush
>>>> and his republican congress.
>>>
>>>
>>> I looked at the economy under the Republican Congresses (1995 until
>>> 2007). It boomed. After the DemocRATs seized control in 2007 the
>>> economy started to tank.
>>>
>>>
>>> Snicker.
>>
>>
>> After hearing that explanation it's abundantly clear that you don't know
>> the first thing about statistics. Tee Hee
>
>
> After hearing that response it's abundantly clear that you can't refute
> any of my statements. Tee Hee
>

The period of congress you say you looked at is to short to be
considered statistically significant. But aside from that methodological
error there are far too many other variables that could account for what
you asserted. But if you knew the first thing about statistics you would
know that. You didn't. You seem to think that there is some kind of
causal relationship between the majority in congress and economic
productivity. No one has shown this relationship exists. So the bottom
line is that your assertion is bunk and you don't know what you're
talking about. Like I said right from the start.

Hawke

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Glenn Beck Has Gone from Crazy Talk to Dangerous Incitement
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/03ecfef2321238cb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:35 pm
From: Hawke

>> You can't get any more "conservative" than that!
>>
>> Hawke
>
> Ah, ah. Don't make that mistake. What you're speaking of are Neocons
> and social conservatives who care not what their social programs cost.
>
> Those wackos are not "conservative" in any fiscal sense but share more
> with the altruistic liberals who also want to spend any amount of your,
> and my, tax dollars to fund their social causes. Better said, to
> *coerce* us into funding their opinion at the expense of liberty.
>
> The difference in this case is that D Murphy bitches about the next guy
> trying to balance the budget to pay for his tribes failed programs.
> Utter hypocrisy to suddenly get religion and blame Obama for contending
> with Bush's massive, multiple, fuckups.
>
> Bush didn't budget for his wars or enormous Medi-Care programs instead
> going to a spineless Congress for "Special Appropriations" for which no
> payback was tabulated. Instead Bush, and a spineless, Congress indebted
> America for generations to come while hiding the cost in plain sight.
>
> Yeah, the debt, both mounting National Debt and annual deficits are
> growing. In one case due to eliminating the deceitful accounting
> practices of Bush/Cheney and in the other to mitigate the economic
> disaster of Bush/Cheney.
>
> Fucking hypocrites...
>

I just know that all those guys call themselves conservatives. So I
accept it even though what they do when in power is in fact far from
conservative. You know the gang. They're the bunch who got this country
in the mess it's in. Just like they always do. Too bad so many Americans
are so stupid and keep giving those "conservatives" another chance to
finish us off for good.

Hawke

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT - The Supremes To Decide On A Gun Issue
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/c1a16b6a42bc4b0b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:35 pm
From: Joe

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 12:17:07 -0800, Shabtai <shabtai.evan@att.net>
wrote:

>
>You flaming socialist/liberals are amazing!!!!

Whoa, before you decide to malign me, stop and think (if you are
able). What about my comment made you think I am a
"socialist/liberal"? Methinks your knee started jerking uncontrollably
as soon as you read the subject line. That left you without the
ability to read (and comprehend) what I actually wrote. I normally try
to keep my comments civil, but when you start calling me a liberal,
well, them's fightin' words, boy!

>Don't give up your freedoms so quickly!! You don't get them back.
>I wish my grandparents had guns when the SS put a gun to my
>grandfather's head.
>
>Government don't care about your rights. Government care about their
>control over YOU.
>
>Stalin, Lenin, Mussolini, Pol pot, Marx, Engels, Chavez, etc.

Don't forget that Reagan also started talking up gun control shortly
after he got out of office. Right-wing despots also favor gun control.
(And were Marx & Engels really in favor of gun control? I hadn't heard
that, though it's possible.)

Joe

>Wake UP!
>
>Shabtai

>Joe wrote:
>> Today, the Court is supposed to take up the issue of whether or not
>> local governments have the right to restrict gun ownership.
>>
>> It will be an interesting test of the mettle of old-time
>> Conservatives, who are fond of arguing in favor of "States' Rights"
>> over the power of the Federal government. I predict that they will
>> conveniently forget the states' rights issue for the duration of this
>> decision.
>>
>> While I agree with them on the core issue of the inalienability of
>> citizens' rights to posses firearms, I can't help but think that
>> states' rights has always been a smoke screen for discriminatory
>> and/or repressive behavior.
>>
>> Since the Court is tilted in favor of Conservatives, I suppose that
>> the decision will favor gun rights, but I remain suspicious about the
>> real agenda of any politicians; despite all their populist talk, they
>> don't want too much power vested in the hands of the citizenry. Here's
>> hoping that the decision will be made in favor of freedom.
>>
>> Joe

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT: 'Puter Q-How to boot to 2 OS HDS?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/24653b355459ad9c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:41 pm
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

Steve Walker wrote:
>
> JR North wrote:
> > Have ME on C, 95 on D. Besides unplugging C (hard to get to), how can I
> > force a boot to the 95 HD? no option in BIOS to select different HDDs.
> > JR
> > Dweller in the cellar
> >
>
> DPDT switch attached to Master/Slave jumpers, one way jumpers the master
> on one drive and the slave on the other, and vice versa for the other
> switch position.

That will work on a old computer, but most newer IDE drives I see are
set up as Cable Select.

--
Greed is the root of all eBay.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:34 pm
From: "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"

> Have ME on C, 95 on D. Besides unplugging C (hard to get to), how can I
>> > force a boot to the 95 HD? no option in BIOS to select different HDDs.
>> > JR
>> > Dweller in the cellar
>

Most versions of Linux have a multi-partition boot routine you can install,
even if you don't run Linux. They'll find and flag any bootable partition,
then allow you to select the partition at boot time.

LLoyd

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Obama an Alcoholic?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/6347f7148fc868ac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:44 pm
From: "Buerste"

"Steve B" <deserttraver@fishymail.net> wrote in message
news:gmb067-5bb3.ln1@news.infowest.com...
>
> "Buerste" <buerste@buerste.com> wrote
>
>>
>> I don't begrudge him beer and smokes, nobody should deprived of such
>> simple pleasures!
>
>
> Beer is proof God loves us. - Ben Franklin -
>

Swillin a Heineken at the moment, one of my monthly 12 pack. God loves me!
(Especially when used to wash down a Codeine #3 prescribed for my foot
pain.)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Largest Ever Coprolites
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/81ae4d3ff06ad686?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 5:50 pm
From: Aratzio

On 2 Mar 2010 12:58:02 -0600, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks, "Fred
B. Brown" <fredbbrown@nowhere.com> got double secret probation for
writing:

>WOW, Look at that big word.
>Betcha won a prize for spelling you name right in a 12th grade
>
>spelling bee.

Irony defined, again.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Need D1-4 Chuck, 4-Jaw
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/ab53f8cc8f8128ee?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:09 pm
From: "RogerN"

"Wes" <clutch@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:CLhjn.387$Hq1.286@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com...
> "RogerN" <regor@midwest.net> wrote:
>
>>My cheapie Enco chuck had the teeth on one of the jaws break off and now
>>it's pretty much useless unless I can get a replacement jaw.
>
> That stinks.
>>
>>Any recommendations for a 4-Jaw chuck for a 13" South Bend lathe with D1-4
>>Spindle? Bison? Ebay? Iggy's tool emporium?
>
> Iggy for sure if he has a deal at the moment.
>
> Gotta picture of the damage? I"m having a hard time trying to understand
> how you loose
> the teeth on a 4 jaw.
>
> Wes

The teeth on this cheapie chuck looks like they were cut straight through
with a slitting saw at the helix angle or there about. So the teeth on the
jaws, looking from the side, are like this:
| |
|_|

Instead of like this:

|_|

I've felt some of these teeth break before, they may tighten down good
enough for a wood lathe but not for a metal lathe.

RogerN

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:29 pm
From: "RogerN"

Thanks for the info all.

I think I'm going to buy a couple of back plates per Iggy's suggestions and
tool the lathe up with a good 4 jaw and a 3 jaw, maybe a 6 jaw if I find a
bargain.

RogerN

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bunning offers middle finger
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/780afc0aa6cecab7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:12 pm
From: technomaNge

Cliff wrote:
> http://www.examiner.com/x-20026-Pittsburgh-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2010m2d26-Bunning-offers-middle-finger-to-American-unemployed
> [
> In the latest afflicted act of callousness by the right wing, Senator Jim
> Bunning has filibustered federal extension of Unemployment Benefits.
>

I went to Bunnings senate site and sent him an email of praise.
Then I went to the sites of senators from my state.
The message to them was to stand up beside Bunning,
and show their support.

technomaNge
--
Due to anticipated high turnout in 2010's election,
the Electorial College has scheduled:

Nov. 1, 2010 All Independents vote.
Nov. 2, 2010 All Republicans vote.
Nov. 3, 2010 All Democrats vote.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:53 pm
From: Lookout

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:12:06 -0600, technomaNge <piracy@microsoft.com>
wrote:

>Cliff wrote:
>> http://www.examiner.com/x-20026-Pittsburgh-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2010m2d26-Bunning-offers-middle-finger-to-American-unemployed
>> [
>> In the latest afflicted act of callousness by the right wing, Senator Jim
>> Bunning has filibustered federal extension of Unemployment Benefits.
>>
>
>I went to Bunnings senate site and sent him an email of praise.
>Then I went to the sites of senators from my state.
>The message to them was to stand up beside Bunning,
>and show their support.
>
>
>technomaNge

But they are NOT, are they? Bunning is wrong because he didn't do the
same through all of bush's unfunded mandates and WAR. His hypocrisy
says it all.
And you wasted your time, dumbass. They WON'T listen to you because
you're just as wrong as he is.

And, you stupid ignorant fucker, it's already over. If you watched the
news you'd know that. Your ignorance is blinding.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: building jeep frame
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/32fc57a529507b1b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:16 pm
From: John D.

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 10:31:16 -0800, Jim Stewart <jstewart@jkmicro.com>
wrote:

>John D. wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 17:52:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
>> <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Bill McKee" <bmckeespamnot@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>>> news:qZ6dnaBKsPYVoxHWnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>>>> "RAM�" <s31924.nospam@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9D2EA3292F188s31924netscapenet@74.209.131.10...
>>>>> "Bill McKee" <bmckeespamnot@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:ca6dnfBx8ZKbmxHWnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not aluminum? I have an aluminum boat trailer. Works very well.
>>>>>> 3400# boat. The Covette has an aluminum frame as well as the Cadillac
>>>>>> bodied Vette. Look at a Corvette and see what they use. Airplanes
>>>>>> have aluminum frames. And as long as you design well, the flex should
>>>>>> not be a problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Boat trailers are rarely twisted the way that off-road vehicles routinely
>>>>> are.
>>>>>
>>>>> The same thing applies to Corvettes.
>>>>>
>>>>> After all, when was the last time that you went rock-crawling with your
>>>>> 'Vette? <Grin>
>>>>>
>>>>> How about mud-bogging or bouncing around on deeply-rutted roads?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeeps are expected to do all of these and more without any ill effects.
>>>>> (Getting dirty/muddy is, for a Jeep, a good thing!)
>>>> Hell, I raced a vette, steel chassis, and it got to rock clrawing a couple
>>>> times. :>) And boat trailers are regularly towed over uneven ground.
>>> With three points taking out the loads -- hitch and suspension supports,
>>> which generally are paired but close -- there is no significant torsional
>>> load on a boat trailer. It's all simple bending. You can deal with that, but
>>> if you towed your boat 100% of the time, I think you'd develop fatigue
>>> problems in aluminum.
>>>
>>> The aluminum Corvette chassis are semi-space-frame with some shear panels.
>>> The subframes resolve their loads in three dimensions. There isn't much
>>> flexing there.
>>>
>>> The same applies to aircraft, which often are near-monocoque. If they flex,
>>> you die.
>>
>> Error.. ever see the wings on a B-52? When they taxi out for take-off
>> both outrigger wheels are on the ground; when they come back one
>> outrigger will be ten feet in the air. But not only the wings, a B-52
>> on the ground has large wrinkles on each side of the fuselage, forward
>> of the wings; flying the fuselage is smooth.
>
>For what it's worth, I was told that the fuselage
>skin on a B-52 was unwrinkled until they started
>flying them at 100ft off the ground at 500mph or
>something...

The B-52 H's that I worked on at Barksdale AFB certainly all had
wrinkles and frankly I doubt very much that the average B-52 was ever
flown at 500 MPH a hundred feet off the ground as it was deployed by
SAC, except for the "iron bomb" aircraft in Vietnam, as a high
altitude nuclear weapon delivery system.

In addition the fuel consumption would be astronomical under those
conditions as during a normal nuclear loaded mission first refueling
was very shortly after take-off, essentially as soon as the aircraft
reached cruising altitude, as so much fuel was burned getting off the
ground and climbing to altitude that the un-refueled range would be
(for a B-52) extremely limited.

John D.
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:25 pm
From: mark

On Mar 2, 4:38 pm, "dcas...@krl.org" <dcas...@krl.org> wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2:52 pm, mark <markha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > My original jeep CJ-7 frame has rusted out and I was thinking of
> > building a new one from aluminum. Would 2 X 4 X 1/4 wall (if that is
> > even available) box tubing have the equivalent strength of the stock
> > 1/8" wall steel frame? I would like aluminum because it will last
> > forever, no need of any paints etc..., very easy to work with and
> > cheaper than building a steel one and having it galvanized. My second
> > choice would be stainless 1/8" box tubing.
>
> How old is your jeep? And after you put a new frame in it, how long
> will you want to keep it? The thought being that the original frame
> lasted X years. How long you want to keep it might be less than X
> years.
>
> Dan

It is 25 year old now and I want to rebuild it. I have been down the
road of sand blasting, metal prep, epoxy paints, polyurethane coatings
and as far as I am concerned nothing lasts when the roads are salted
in the winter and you live on an island surrounded by salt water. If I
am going to rebuild it and pass it down to my kids someday I am going
to do it in a way that it will last and not need to be done again. I
already have a fiberglass body. I have built aluminum aquaculture
cranes, and boats which see much more stress than a jeep frame will
ever see. If my original question was if you can build aluminum cranes
I can only imagine what the answers would be. As for the torsional
flexing, I don't think that exists, sure a frame by itself will flex
but when bolted to a body how could it flex and all body seems and
lines remain constant. A fiberglass body has no flex and it is bolted
to the frame. For the last 10 years my original frame has been so thin
you could break through it with a hammer in places and it is still
holding up, a 1/4" wall aluminum box frame has to be stronger than
that.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/30a39cd522bcf038?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:17 pm
From: ozarkheart@yahoo.com

On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 05:27:19 -0800 (PST), rangerssuck
<rangerssuck@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mar 1, 8:53�pm, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:41:15 -0800 (PST), rangerssuck
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Mar 1, 12:45 am, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:24:11 -0800 (PST), rangerssuck
>>
>> >> <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Feb 27, 11:26 pm, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:51:39 -0800 (PST), rangerssuck
>>
>> >> >> <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Feb 27, 11:51 am, Aratzio <a6ahly...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:43:05 -0500, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >> >> >> Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-dog.com> got double
>> >> >> >> secret probation for writing:
>>
>> >> >> >> >On 2/27/2010 10:37 AM, Aratzio wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 08:40:13 -0500, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >> >> >> >> Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-dog.com> got double
>> >> >> >> >> secret probation for writing:
>>
>> >> >> >> >>> What was the Basis for "intelligence" was it problem solving, Liberals
>> >> >> >> >>> are a big fat ugly zero when it comes to being problem solvers, they
>> >> >> >> >>> live in Utopia-land and they solve gas problems by riding their Unicorns
>> >> >> >> >>> to work every day.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Nothing ironical about declaring your opponent delusional by
>> >> >> >> >> describing your delusional depiction of them.
>>
>> >> >> >> >humor is powerful.
>>
>> >> >> >> I agree, nothing quite as funny as someone dumb as a stump expounding
>> >> >> >> that their *common sense* trumps actual intelligence.
>>
>> >> >> >This is reminding me an awful lot of an incident with my boss, a real
>> >> >> >winger, about 30 years ago. I was designing a rather complicated piece
>> >> >> >of computer equipment, and he was writing the manual. He asked me to
>> >> >> >read it. It was full of bad grammar and misspelled words. I pointed
>> >> >> >this out to him, trying to be diplomatic. He replied, "The New York
>> >> >> >Times is written on a sixth grade reading level." I explained to him
>> >> >> >that when they say that, they mean that the Times can be read by a
>> >> >> >sixth grader, not that it was written by a sixth grader. His response
>> >> >> >was along the lines of, "Well, you don't want to sound too smart, it
>> >> >> >will scare the customers."
>>
>> >> >> >Sheesh
>>
>> >> >> I know what you mean. I recall the leftwing nut who told me that it
>> >> >> would be eay to feed all the homeless people, just let them eat at
>> >> >> McD's and send the government the bill - and she was dead serious.
>>
>> >> >Yes, they are out there - on both sides. the same *RIGHT* wing boss
>> >> >who had the bad grammar suggested that the entire middle-east conflict
>> >> >could be solved if all the Israelis (about 3.5 million at the time,
>> >> >IFRC) would just get on planes with all there belongings and go,
>> >> >maybe, to Australia. And HE was dead serious.
>>
>> >> >Idiocy know no political boundaries.
>>
>> >> Indeed; but it seems to flourishthe best on the left
>>
>> >That's YOUR opinion.
>>
>> Yep - and that is what America is all about. Left wingers want to
>> remove that.
>
>Want to remove what? Opposing opinions?

Exactly

>I guess I never got that memo
>from headquarters

Sorry you don't keep up with things

>. On the other hand, you can look right here in this
>group and see who killfiles whom. It is virtually all right wingers
>who can't stand to read the posts of those on the left.

I did look; it's the gun control idiots that run scared.

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:20 pm
From: ozarkheart@yahoo.com

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:32:07 -0800, Hawke
<davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:

>
>>>>>>> Idiocy know no political boundaries.
>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed; but it seems to flourishthe best on the left
>>>>
>>>>> That's YOUR opinion.
>>>>
>>>> Yep - and that is what America is all about. Left wingers want to remove
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> Want to remove what? Opposing opinions? I guess I never got that memo
>>> from headquarters. On the other hand, you can look right here in this
>>> group and see who killfiles whom. It is virtually all right wingers
>>> who can't stand to read the posts of those on the left.
>>>
>>
>> More correctly the rightwingers get tired of the name calling and irational
>> ravings. One is not required under any circumstances to endure the rantings of
>> a fool. He may rant at length if that is his choice but there is no
>> requirement that I stand and listen to him. On balance there are other
>> activities that are a much better use of my time.
>>
>
>Hey, good answer. You managed to take what was a clearly true statement
>about it being the right wingers who killfile people they disagree with
>and dodged it. Instead of admitting the truth to this statement you made
>the excuse that the wingers do this because the "liberals" name calling
>and rantings are too much to bear. That was a nice try but anyone who
>has read this news group finds out real fast the no one calls more names
>or engages in irrational rants than the right wingers do.

Wrongo, partner. It's the gun control nuts that get irrational.

And they invariably try to turn it into a sexual issue (gun substitute
for a penis) LOL

> But that is
>not the point is it? The point is the right wingers can't deal with
>hearing opposing views. So they killfile people with liberal views.

Well, if you want to call the gun control nut's insults and rants as
"opposing".

> That
>is what a pussy would do. But what would you expect from the
>conservatives, who pretend to be tough guys when they are really wimps?

LOL See what I mean? In your own paragraph.........

>This is just a case of if you can't take the heat don't go in the
>kitchen. Right wingers can't take the heat so they have to use the
>killfile. Which is just what I expect from them.
>
>Hawke

Is your first name "Chicken"?

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:25 pm
From: "RogerN"

"Cliff" <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote in message
news:8lbho5dgke44ilg3bnu61g02kdltpmf7dv@4ax.com...
> http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html
> "Study: Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives?"
> [

And I'm still asking are liberals smarter than a fence post! :-)

RogerN

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:41 pm
From: Occam's Razor

On 3/2/2010 9:25 PM, RogerN wrote:
> "Cliff" <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote in message
> news:8lbho5dgke44ilg3bnu61g02kdltpmf7dv@4ax.com...
>> http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html
>> "Study: Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives?"
>> [
>
> And I'm still asking are liberals smarter than a fence post! :-)
>

At least fence posts know when to shut up....

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:45 pm
From: Aratzio

On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 20:25:48 -0600, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
"RogerN" <regor@midwest.net> got double secret probation for writing:

>
>"Cliff" <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote in message
>news:8lbho5dgke44ilg3bnu61g02kdltpmf7dv@4ax.com...
>> http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html
>> "Study: Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives?"
>> [
>
>And I'm still asking are liberals smarter than a fence post! :-)
>
>RogerN
>

And I'll bet that the irony of you even having to ask that is lost on
you.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to play with EMC2 and G code without an actual mill
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/2e32bcd27cf3bc6c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:23 pm
From: "RogerN"

"Ignoramus5280" <ignoramus5280@NOSPAM.5280.invalid> wrote in message
news:Oo6dnZncgZPW1hDWnZ2dnUVZ_vEAAAAA@giganews.com...
>I would like to somehow practice EMC2 (milling application, 3 axis),
> and G-code and other such things, without actually running a mill. It
> would be a "simulation". What kind of software can I use.
>
> Ergo, say, if I could specify the tool geometry, location, raw
> material geometry and location, then applied G-Code, I want to see
> what I would end up with AS IF I machined it.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Preferably Linux
>
>
> thanks
>
> i

There is a live CD for EMC2 that will let you boot and run EMC2 in demo mode
from the CD without installing it. At the time I was converting my mill,
PIII's had some of the better scores on latency tests, so I bought a PIII
800mHz on eBay for ~$35 with ~$35 shipping, that's my $70 EMC2 controller.

When I first bought my CNC mill I bought Bobcad/cam V17 and have since
upgraded to V21. It lets you draw the part, generate the G code, and run
the code giving you a 3D view of what it cuts. You can download a demo of
BobCAD/CAM from their website but their salesmen will call. If you tell
them you're just using it for hobby use you might be able to get a cheap
price on it. There are also some free viewers I've seen years ago but
haven't looked lately.

RogerN

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Feb Factory Growth Holds At 15 - Year High
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/413a4b8ce0ad53aa?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:44 pm
From: D Murphy

Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com> wrote in
news:hmjh6k$uks$7@news.eternal-september.org:

> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:05:56 +0000, D Murphy <dmurf154@att.net> wrote:
>
>> "Ed Huntress" <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote in
>> news:4b8c8f2f$0$4976$607ed4bc@cv.net:
>>
>>> I'm curious, Dan: Why do you do things like that? Do you think that
>>> no one will follow your links, and that you can get away with saying
>>> any nonsense you want to, and that it will stick because you're
>>> implying it came from the item you're citing?
>>>
>>>
>> Manufacturing growth certainly isn't at a 15 year high per Cliff's
>> claim.
>
> Cliff did not make that claim. Reuters did basing their report on
> world economic parameters. Ascribing a lie to someone due to your
> misinterpretation doesn't hold water. If you disagree then show your
> figures to Reuters.

OK. I must have misinterpreted what Cliff was trying to say. I'm glad he
has you for a spokesman. Will you be answering for him all the time or only
when he's confused?

Since he wasn't talking about the US, and was actually talking about the
UK, then I'll accept his admission that tax cuts work better than spending
borrowed money to enrich your political cronies when it comes to
stimulating an economy based on the evidence he presented.

>
>> I linked to the article to show that manufacturing growth was not at
>> a 15 year high, and in fact growth was weakening, inventories are up,
>> and production is down.
>
> You posted a link to an article which spoke solely for the United
> States. Reuters is world-wide and larger than the United States.
>
>>> I just wonder how peoples' minds work.
>>
>> Gee, why would I want to refute a guy who uses data FROM ANOTHER
>> COUNTRY to claim that things are just wonderful HERE?
>
> Not "ANOTHER COUNTRY" but the world. That includes the United States
> ad one component. Where did Cliff make the claim you falsely
> attribute to him?

Perhaps you should actually read the article, where you would have seen
this:

[LONDON (Reuters) - The manufacturing sector expanded faster than expected
in February, matching the previous month's 15-year high rate of growth and
suggesting the economic recovery may be gathering pace, figures showed on
Monday.

The CIPS/Markit manufacturing purchasing managers' index held at 56.6 last
month, the same level as January, which was the strongest since October
1994. The index has now held above the 50.O mark, separating expansion from
contraction, for five months.

Analysts had expected a reading of 56.1 in February.

The result came hard on the heels of a survey by the Engineering Employers
Federation which showed output returned to growth at the start of 2010 for
the first time in more than a year.

"This bodes well for a good first-quarter GDP figure, but we need to
remember that manufacturing is still a small part of the UK economy," said
James Knightly, an economist at ING.]

Note the part about "the UK economy"

You can also read about the CIPS PMI index here -
http://www.cips.org/aboutcips/news/pmi/

So it isn't "THE WORLD"

>
>> Yeah, that's a tough one to figure out.
>
> True. It is tough to figure out when you make shit up.
>
>> BTW, you can have weakening growth, strengthening growth and even
>> seven months of growth, and still have the sector down over the
>> longer term. So yeah, manufacturing is getting a little better but it
>> still sucks compared to 12-18 months ago.
>
> Untrue but I understand why you'd want to blame the failure of your
> tribe's policies on someone else.
>

I don't have a "tribe" but if by "tribe" you mean people that thought tax
cuts would be more effective at stimulating the economy, then yeah, my
tribe in Great Britain seems to have failed the manufacturing sector there
nicely.

Dan

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:59 pm
From: Winston_Smith

Cliff <Clhuprichguesswhat@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:15:22 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>hal wrote:
>>>On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 06:59:35 -0500, Cliff wrote:
>>>
>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/03/01/business/business-uk-pmi-manufacturing-britain.html
>>>> "Feb Factory Growth Holds At 15 - Year High"
>>>>
>>>>The manufacturing sector expanded faster than expected in February, matching the
>>>>previous month's 15-year high rate of growth and suggesting the economic
>>>>recovery may be gathering pace, figures showed on Monday.
>>>>
>>>>The CIPS/Markit manufacturing purchasing managers' index held at 56.6 last
>>>>month, the same level as January, which was the strongest since October 1994.
>>
>>Oh, very nice snipping and editing. You get a lying liberal award.
>
> Snipped nothing. Eited nothing.

You snipped the dateline (see below) which shows it was about the UK.

I guess you never even read what you posted because later on it talks
about the pound.

But you saw the headline and charged off with a brag on 0bama. You
even tied it to D presidents by opining it compared to Clinton.

If you did read it, then you intentionally perpetrated a fraud.

>>What you snipped was:
>>>|| LONDON (Reuters) - The manufacturing sector expanded faster than
>>>|| expected in February, matching the previous month's 15-year high rate
>>>|| of growth and suggesting the economic recovery may be gathering pace,
>>>|| figures showed on Monday.

Rest of apology and rants about how the whole world loves 0bama
snipped.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Any Homemade line boring equipment?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/f4160105c5b801d9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 6:54 pm
From: "RogerN"

Anyone make their own line boring bar/equipment? It doesn't look that hard
to make and could be handy on jobs that are too big for machine tools. Just
wondering if there are any good plans or project info on these. The stuff
looks pretty expensive to buy new for what it is.

RogerN

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Thanks 0bama!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/5d73e49003482d9e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 7:11 pm
From: "Burled Frau"

THANK GOD FOR BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA - WHY? - HERE'S WHY !
He destroyed the Clinton Political Machine - Driving a stake thru the heart
of Hillary's Presidential aspirations - something no Republican was ever
able to do. Remember when a Hillary Presidency scared the daylights out of
you!

He killed off the Kennedy Dynasty - No more Kennedy's trolling Washington
looking for booze and women wanting rides home. American women and Freedom
are safer tonight!

He is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes!
Dennis Moore had never lost a race - quit
Evan Bayh had never lost a race - quit
Byron Dorgan - had never lost a race - quit

Gov. David Patterson NY- quit

TED KENNEDY'S seat- lost to a republican
Harry Reed - will be defeated in November 2010

These are just a handful of the Democrats that whose political careers Obama
has destroyed! By the end of 2010 dozens more will be!

In December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In the last two election
cycles they had picked up 14 senate seats and 52 house seats. The press was
touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican Party. In
one year Obama put a stop to all of this and will probably give the house,
if not the senate back to the Republicans.

He has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Every
Generation seems to need to relearn the lesson on why they should never
actually put liberals in charge. He is bringing home the lesson very well!

Liberals tax, borrow and spend - check
Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America - check
Liberals want to take over the economy - check
Liberals think they know what is best for everyone - check
Liberals aren't happy till they are running YOUR life - check

Obama has brought more Americans back to Conservatism than anyone since
Reagan
In One year, Obama rejuvenated the Conservative movement and brought out to
the streets millions of Freedom Loving Americans
Name me one other time in your life that you saw your friends and neighbors
this interested in taking back America !

Barak Obama woke up these Great Americans. Power to the people, who will
take back their country!

Again, I want say thank you Barak Hussein Obama!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT - How Milton Friedman Saved Chile -- Milton Friedman gave Chileans
the intellectual wherewithal first to survive the quake, and now to build
their lives anew
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/e89a5e26123600ee?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 2 2010 7:13 pm
From: Joseph Gwinn

The title tells the story.

<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703411304575093572032665414.html>

The Wall Street Journal, 1 March 2010.

Joe Gwinn

PS: If the URL doesn't work, be sure you got the whole thing.

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

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