On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:31:55 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Ignoramus27711 wrote:

I am also thinking, how did the guy free himself, did not tell anyone,
and did not need medical attention?


A nail wouldn't have to go through a bone or muscle to keep someone
from moving. It wouldn't even have to be a large nail. A lot of tools
can remove a nail, if the head isn't buried. These days a small tube of
crazy glue would be better. No permanent damage, and not easy to remove
in a hurry.
Especially when applied between the scrotum an the corner of a
workbench.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

Gerald Miller wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:31:55 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Ignoramus27711 wrote:

I am also thinking, how did the guy free himself, did not tell anyone,
and did not need medical attention?


A nail wouldn't have to go through a bone or muscle to keep someone
from moving. It wouldn't even have to be a large nail. A lot of tools
can remove a nail, if the head isn't buried. These days a small tube of
crazy glue would be better. No permanent damage, and not easy to remove
in a hurry.
Especially when applied between the scrotum an the corner of a
workbench.


Their lips are good, too. They can't yell for help.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

On Jun 17, 12:34*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"AndrewVK3BFA" wrote in message

...
On Jun 13, 4:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:


And that's why you've gone off on a no-facts, all-emotion, old-man's rant..
d8-)

--
Ed Huntress (another old man, but I try not to get old any faster than I
have to)

Well, yes Ed - I was in no doubt you would comprehensively demolish
any different views from those you propound - But us peasants, every
now and then, get cranky and say "Hang on - Liberal Romanticism - that
didn't work either "
I never saw any of that. Would be Nice if it twas true.... And yes, I
knew it was a RANT. Like a good rant, know and then, do I....

I cant read all your quotes - its just mind bogglingly difficult to
make sense of all that lot, let alone the sheer number of words. (And
their much Bigger words than mostly I use. Makes it a bit difficult)

But thats OK, - a national tradition here of yelling "Bull****" on an
instinctive, gut level, usually at totally inappropriate times... g

Andrew VK3BFA

"Andrew VK3BFA" wrote in message
...
On Jun 17, 12:34 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"AndrewVK3BFA" wrote in message

...
On Jun 13, 4:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:


And that's why you've gone off on a no-facts, all-emotion, old-man's rant.
d8-)

--
Ed Huntress (another old man, but I try not to get old any faster than I
have to)

Well, yes Ed - I was in no doubt you would comprehensively demolish
any different views from those you propound - But us peasants, every
now and then, get cranky and say "Hang on - Liberal Romanticism - that
didn't work either "

Andrew, let me just clarify some key points. The misconception about
"industrial arts" teaching in the United States is that it all grew out of a
more practical time, when there was a track for kids destined for further
academic studies, and another one for kids destined to work at trades and
industry. But that's a myth, as those historical accounts explain. Shop
classes in most of the US were useless for industrial training. They were
more like hobby-shop training. The US educational pedagogy is still based
mostly on the socializing/citizenship-training ideas of the
early-20th-century progressives. Or it was, until the past couple of
decades, when we started to worry that kids in the US were falling behind
the rest of the world in math and language. That's just a historical fact.

But there was always a thread of vocational training in the teaching, which
dominated in certain areas, particularly where there was a lot of industry.
I have personal experience with one of the most extensive such programs ever
employed in the US. It was spending time with my uncle (I now own his SB
lathe, bandsaw, table saw, jointer, and three basement walls full of hand
tools) and in his shops at school that got me interested in industry and
drove me to seek a writing position with _American Machinist_. Those real,
vocationally oriented shop programs motivated and helped many thousands of
kids to pursue industrial careers. But there never were that many of them.

You're right that many kids took shop as an escape from more abstract
academics. It did attract kids who were interested in manual skills. But it
was always, in most areas, a half-assed system that was like teaching all of
history, geography, and English in a single class, making brass candy dishes
and walnut-stained pine corner shelves.

Many folks on this NG grew up in industrial areas so they probably have had
a better experience with their school shops than most kids in the country.
In some places we had vocational, industrial training that was as extensive
as the system in Germany, for example. But that's not typical of the US as a
whole.

If you understand the real historical background it's easier to understand
why shop classes are not getting much support these days. Some people point
to the lack of qualified teachers; but there are few qualified teachers
because job prospects in that field are declining. Some point to the
"liberalization" of school curricula, but the fact is that it is the old,
progressive-era theories of socialization that have collapsed. We've shifted
towards an intense focus on the "basics": teaching to the tests, and the
(NCLB) tests are in those basics, which means math and English, with a bit
of science, history, and little else. All other courses, from metal shop to
home ec, and all of the so-called "liberal" programs, are being shoved into
a corner. This is the opposite of what many people here believe but it isn't
worth trying to explain it every time it comes up.

So one wing of the field is collapsing because the pedagogy has shifted from
socialization to basic skills. That's a DECLINE of liberalization, which no
one here seems to have noticed. The other wing is collapsing because there
are poor growth prospects in manual, industrial jobs. This is something we
bemoan here all the time but seem to forget when we start talking about
schools.

I wasn't arguing against your point that many kids took shop because they
didn't like the academics. That's quite true. I was pointing out that the
shop programs, in most parts of the country, never served those kids very
well to begin with. And that's because their origin, in terms of pedagogical
philosophy, was not intended to train them for vocations. It was to
"socialize" them into the culture. If you understand that, you understand
much of what happened. That's all I was saying.

I never saw any of that. Would be Nice if it twas true.... And yes, I
knew it was a RANT. Like a good rant, know and then, do I....

I cant read all your quotes - its just mind bogglingly difficult to
make sense of all that lot, let alone the sheer number of words. (And
their much Bigger words than mostly I use. Makes it a bit difficult)

But thats OK, - a national tradition here of yelling "Bull****" on an
instinctive, gut level, usually at totally inappropriate times... g

Well, say bull**** all you want. But if your bull**** is bull****, I may
step in and say so, if the subject is important enough. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Jun 18, 9:31*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
...
....And that's because their origin, in terms of pedagogical
philosophy, was not intended to train them for vocations. It was to
"socialize" them into the culture. If you understand that, you understand
much of what happened. That's all I was saying.
...
Ed Huntress

From my perspective shop classes introduced them to the "language" of
mechanical, visual, non-verbal thinking that was completely absent in
other classes, possibly excepting art, and physics if well taught. It
also gave them more confidence to risk failure and embarrassment if
they couldn't drill a hole straight the first time, for example.

For engineers it took them across a mental threshold between theory
and practice which was a leap outside their comfort zone, a hesitation
to lose face in front of the lowly lab tech. I really had to baby some
peoples' egos along to bring them to understand the impracticality of
what they couldn't possibly do themselves but demanded of me.

Actually they could do it if they were shown how.

In that sense the shop classes did "socialize" them into a culture,
but one not that many educational professionals have sampled
themselves. Mensa taught me a lot about the limitations of very smart
"left-brain" people, and their mechanisms of denial and
rationalization, particularly when they found that greasy-handed Jim
had a larger vocabulary than they did, in several languages. Though I
couldn't keep up with Richard Lederer or his proofreader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lederer

The group was surprisingly diverse. A reported scheduled to interview
us missed us in the restaurant because we didn't match her stereotype.
She wrote afterwards that the head of the group looked more like a
Bulgarian weight lifter than an intellectual.

Occasionally he would pop a test on us, like say "Elephant" suddenly
out of context and then ask us our first mental impression. I was the
only one of ~50 who saw both a word and an image.

How about all of you?

jsw

"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
...

Is Ala a moniker? I saw parts of a movie last night with that name in
it.



Nickname short for...

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 08:39:30 -0700 (PDT), Jim Wilkins
wrote:

On Jun 18, 9:31*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
...
....And that's because their origin, in terms of pedagogical
philosophy, was not intended to train them for vocations. It was to
"socialize" them into the culture. If you understand that, you understand
much of what happened. That's all I was saying.
...
Ed Huntress

From my perspective shop classes introduced them to the "language" of
mechanical, visual, non-verbal thinking that was completely absent in
other classes, possibly excepting art, and physics if well taught. It
also gave them more confidence to risk failure and embarrassment if
they couldn't drill a hole straight the first time, for example.

For engineers it took them across a mental threshold between theory
and practice which was a leap outside their comfort zone, a hesitation
to lose face in front of the lowly lab tech. I really had to baby some
peoples' egos along to bring them to understand the impracticality of
what they couldn't possibly do themselves but demanded of me.

Actually they could do it if they were shown how.

In that sense the shop classes did "socialize" them into a culture,
but one not that many educational professionals have sampled
themselves. Mensa taught me a lot about the limitations of very smart
"left-brain" people, and their mechanisms of denial and
rationalization, particularly when they found that greasy-handed Jim
had a larger vocabulary than they did, in several languages. Though I
couldn't keep up with Richard Lederer or his proofreader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lederer

The group was surprisingly diverse. A reported scheduled to interview
us missed us in the restaurant because we didn't match her stereotype.
She wrote afterwards that the head of the group looked more like a
Bulgarian weight lifter than an intellectual.

Occasionally he would pop a test on us, like say "Elephant" suddenly
out of context and then ask us our first mental impression. I was the
only one of ~50 who saw both a word and an image.

How about all of you?

jsw

I seem to be new to this ego thing, within the last 5 years I've seen
way too many examples of this face value and the cost of being exposed
and trying to negotiate without it being misplaced.

I don't think that can be done in text. It would be like a cartoon
strip and not subconsciously viewing the last frame.

SW

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:18:53 -0400, "Ala"
wrote:


"Sunworshipper" wrote in message
.. .

Is Ala a moniker? I saw parts of a movie last night with that name in
it.



Nickname short for...

Thanks, just wondering.

Sw

On Jun 18, 11:31*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Andrew VK3BFA" wrote in message

...
On Jun 17, 12:34 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:



"AndrewVK3BFA" wrote in message

....
On Jun 13, 4:18 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

And that's why you've gone off on a no-facts, all-emotion, old-man's rant.

"Andrew VK3BFA" wrote in message
...
On Jun 18, 11:31 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Andrew VK3BFA" wrote in message

snip

OK, OK,...have figured it out now. Forgot where you were. Here in OZ,
the education system is run by each state, so there is a unified
curriculum in each state. All different, of course, between states.
So, when I went to school, and before they really started stuffing
around the education system, we had 2 streams - high school and tech
school. You wanna be a Rocket Scientist, go to high school. You wanna
be a plumber? - go to tech. Sorted out by academic ability in "exams"
It was factory fodder, thats all.

We never had much of that. It was more a matter of choice, although
counselors in the old days would "encourage" kids to go one way or the
other. But in most places the shop program consisted only of a few classes.

Most school shops had the usual
machine tools, so by the time they finished, they had a basic
knowledge of how NOT to wreck expensive machines and tooling, so were
likely to get an apprenticeship.

You lot, I think, with your penchant for the rights of the individual
have local education boards, run by the citizenry(?) so any rational
analysis, or organisation of resources, would be nigh on impossible.
As would agreement between groups on how to organise.....anything.....

It's mixed. We have state-by-state requirements, which set the limits of the
curriculum. Now, we have federal requirements as well, which determine
whether a particular school district gets more or less federal money.
Federal requirements are mostly based on student-performance goals set for
those "basic" subjects I discussed, and nationwide tests to measure results.
This is a highly controversial subject in US education.

Local boards also can have a big influence on the curriculum. Some states
fund schools mostly through state-wide taxes; others, like mine, base
funding on local property taxes. Local taxpayers in those states vote and
pay for most of the school funding, so if the local voters want shops, they
can have shops. Usually they don't these days.

So, given that you had thousands of articles on hundreds(?) of school
systems, your analysis that you chose must be correct. (After all, no
point in picking ones that dont support your argument)
I humbly concede defeat.

g This isn't a battle. It's an attempt to clarify the facts. In this case,
it's just a matter of reading the historical record. And the historical
record of how "industrial arts" and vocational education evolved in the US
is not at all ambiguous. However, it was, as I said, two-tracked.

--
Ed Huntress

On 6/19/2010 10:32 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

g This isn't a battle. It's an attempt to clarify the facts. In this case,
it's just a matter of reading the historical record. And the historical
record of how "industrial arts" and vocational education evolved in the US
is not at all ambiguous. However, it was, as I said, two-tracked.


This can be muddied further. The current trend, where you and I live, is
to have vocational schools that support a particular college major.
The regular high schools assume everyone will go to some college. A
college degree is considered the starting point for any career. For
example, we have a new admin assistant at work; pretty much a
receptionist. BA in English as the cost of entry. What she makes would
cover the rent on a nice apartment a round here. There are a lot of
English and communication grads to choose from. The schools keep pushing
them out.
If your high school age kid has a glimmer of what they would like to do
when they grow up, he or she will probably head for the magnet schools
that now make up the larger part of the vocational school system. My
kids went to (different) Vo-Tech schools- one for engineering and the
other for communications (the closest thing to Theater that was available).
No music. No art(per se). No sports.
The magnet schools have characteristics of the vocational schools of
old- hands on training with what the trade demands. The engineers design
and write technical papers; the Comm kids produce TV programs, the
biotech kids pull apart DNA and the marine biology kids cut up fish. The
kids then go on to college.
My observation is that the kids that go to the magnet schools are more
involved in the arts that the kids that attend the "liberal arts" high
schools. It's in the kid.

Kevin Gallimore

On Jun 19, 3:59*am, Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
...
You lot, I think, with your penchant for the rights of the individual
have local education boards, run by the citizenry(?) so any rational
analysis, or organisation of resources, would be nigh on impossible.
As would agreement between groups on how to organise.....anything.....

Andrew VK3BFA.

What soured you so badly? That's a Marxist misrepresentation.

Local self-goverment can become contentious, I admit, but usually over
the funding of someone's new pet project like an athletic team or an
art wing. The curriculum itself is set by the State and AFAIK doesn't
vary that much across the country, I haven't met any regional group
that was uniformly deficient relative to the rest. Some pretty dumb
individuals, though.

For that matter I've worked with very capable, intelligent and well-
educated Haitian refugees.

If you've read my posts you should realize that I received a good,
well-rounded education, the majority of it in the school system that
John Irving maligns in "Garp", though it was good enough for his
sister.

The usual outcome of New Hampshire grass-roots democracy is that
projects don't go through unless the proponents can convince a
majority to support them. We filter the blatantly frivolous from the
necessary easily and then argue about the borderline cases. Reporters
seeking a conflict focus on the disputed $20,000 items and ignore that
we just quietly voted $400,000 on a fire truck.

The educational interests would love to centralize control so they
could concentrate their lobbying efforts and disassociate those who
decide from those who have to pay.

jsw

"axolotl" wrote in message
...
On 6/19/2010 10:32 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

g This isn't a battle. It's an attempt to clarify the facts. In this
case,
it's just a matter of reading the historical record. And the historical
record of how "industrial arts" and vocational education evolved in the
US
is not at all ambiguous. However, it was, as I said, two-tracked.


This can be muddied further. The current trend, where you and I live, is
to have vocational schools that support a particular college major.
The regular high schools assume everyone will go to some college. A
college degree is considered the starting point for any career. For
example, we have a new admin assistant at work; pretty much a
receptionist. BA in English as the cost of entry. What she makes would
cover the rent on a nice apartment a round here. There are a lot of
English and communication grads to choose from. The schools keep pushing
them out.
If your high school age kid has a glimmer of what they would like to do
when they grow up, he or she will probably head for the magnet schools
that now make up the larger part of the vocational school system. My kids
went to (different) Vo-Tech schools- one for engineering and the other for
communications (the closest thing to Theater that was available).
No music. No art(per se). No sports.
The magnet schools have characteristics of the vocational schools of old-
hands on training with what the trade demands. The engineers design and
write technical papers; the Comm kids produce TV programs, the biotech
kids pull apart DNA and the marine biology kids cut up fish. The kids then
go on to college.
My observation is that the kids that go to the magnet schools are more
involved in the arts that the kids that attend the "liberal arts" high
schools. It's in the kid.

Kevin Gallimore


I haven't looked into the magnet schools and I know little about them. The
students who attend them, from reports, seem to be very involved in their
studies, which is a very appealing thing.

The curriculum at the Middlesex County Vo-tech system seems to agree with
what you're saying -- they're assuming that many of those kids will go on to
college to pursue higher learning in technical fields. I've been caught up
in special education lately, because of my wife's work, so I haven't kept up
with some of the other developments.

--
Ed Huntress

On Jun 20, 2:43*am, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Jun 19, 3:59*am, Andrew VK3BFA wrote:

...
You lot, I think, with your penchant for the rights of the individual
have local education boards, run by the citizenry(?) so any rational
analysis, or organisation of resources, would be nigh on impossible.
As would agreement between groups on how to organise.....anything.....

Andrew VK3BFA.

What soured you so badly? That's a Marxist misrepresentation.


Sorry Jim - if it was Marxist, it was completely unintentional. But it
would be a bit like herding cats - more time and energy on the
politics than the project. It just seems an extra, unnecessary step,
thats all.

I aint a Communist, it was tried, didn't work, so why bother with
that particular doctrine anymore. Eastern Europe etc has gone back to
be warring tribes, dont think we have to worry too much about any of
them. The Russians have got their hands full anyway with all the
ethnic tension stuff. And ****ing themselves with laughter at what we
are doing in Afghanistan - pretty much a parallel situation, NATO/
control Kabul (sort of) and can go outside if heavily armed and that
they sleep in fortified encampments otherwise they all get killed. As
did the Russians.

Dont know if it happens there, but here we had a story a while ago
about this Australian soldier in Afghanistan. Turned out he had been
there before - in the Russian army. Same job though. Silly bugger had
enlisted in the army when he migrated here.......

Andrew VK3BFA.

On Jun 20, 9:08*am, Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
On Jun 20, 2:43 am, Jim Wilkins wrote:
[local democracy]
....But it
would be a bit like herding cats - more time and energy on the
politics than the project. It just seems an extra, unnecessary step,
thats all.....
Andrew VK3BFA.

Perhaps it depends on the local culture and expectations of the
voters. The small towns in New Hampshire that vote their annual
budgets in town meetings handle the process well enough. All have
adequate police and fire, well maintained roads, reputable schools, a
few simple parks and ball fields and not much extra, no government-
funded Millennium Domes.

The State law is that we can vote on a new budget with a limited set
of increases permitted, or if the vote fails automatically extend last
year's budget. If we want we can try to amend the dollar value of line
items. The budget committee does a good job here and usually whatever
they recommended passes. Both they and the Board of Selectmen
frequently have to explain or defend their positions.

Afterwards we discuss petitioned warrant articles, generally to add a
new position or program, and one-time expenditures like a fire truck.
Again we can amend the costs, and to some extent the language, but not
change the intent from what was publicly posted in the warrant.

All town residents present can vote, by raised hands unless three(?)
people request a secret ballot. The moderator's interpretation of
Roberts Rules of Order apply, and most of us know them pretty well by
now. like the scope and precedence of a Point of Order, not to address
people by name but rather title or The Previous Speaker, and that
every one gets to speak once before anyone can go again. And a lot of
us do stand up and speak our mind, or in my case ask pointed and
leading questions.

Most of it goes pretty smoothly; the more we argue the longer we have
to stay there and the seats aren't padded. Expensive new town
buildings take several years and some cost trimming to pass. Some
recurring pet projects never do pass and finally fade away.

The current revision of the law separated the long Saturday
deliberative session from the fill-the-oval paper ballot election to
accommodate more people at the polls. We used to have punched ballots
but we sold those miserable things to Florida long ago.

jsw

On 6/13/2010 7:37 PM, William Wixon wrote:
"F. George wrote in
message ...
On 13 Jun 2010 16:42:01 GMT,
wrote:

"William wrote in
news:Ct7Rn.30415$yx.16404
@newsfe13.iad:

naval officers, first one comes to mind is jimmy carter, a skilled
woodworker.

He should have stayed with woodworking and kept out of politics
where he
re-defined "inept".
============
You don't get to be Navy nuclear command qualified by being
a no-load dick weed.

In hindsight, Carter's major problem was that he is a
competent and honorable man, used to dealing with competent
and honorable men. Thus he was at a severe disadvantage
dealing with the Washington establishment and their
symbiotic corporations, where deceit, corruption and
deception are a way of life and an art form. He compounded
this handicap by largely surrounding himself with competent
and honorable people rather than thugs, political
operatives, and "spin-meisters."


-- Unka George (George McDuffee)


well put george.
i figured carter did'nt want to send men to their deaths (to "GO KICK
IRAN'S ASS!") because of pride or because he'd be voted out of office.
i think he did the honorable thing in iran. and calling for americans
to make sacrifice... obvious, but something you can't say in politics.

If "the honorable thing" is to micromanage a rescue attempt into
oblivion when nothing in his background or training qualified him to
plan such a thing.

On 6/20/2010 9:08 AM, Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
On Jun 20, 2:43 am, Jim wrote:
On Jun 19, 3:59 am, Andrew wrote:

...
You lot, I think, with your penchant for the rights of the individual
have local education boards, run by the citizenry(?) so any rational
analysis, or organisation of resources, would be nigh on impossible.
As would agreement between groups on how to organise.....anything.....

Andrew VK3BFA.

What soured you so badly? That's a Marxist misrepresentation.


Sorry Jim - if it was Marxist, it was completely unintentional. But it
would be a bit like herding cats - more time and energy on the
politics than the project. It just seems an extra, unnecessary step,
thats all.

I aint a Communist, it was tried, didn't work, so why bother with
that particular doctrine anymore. Eastern Europe etc has gone back to
be warring tribes, dont think we have to worry too much about any of
them. The Russians have got their hands full anyway with all the
ethnic tension stuff. And ****ing themselves with laughter at what we
are doing in Afghanistan - pretty much a parallel situation, NATO/
control Kabul (sort of) and can go outside if heavily armed and that
they sleep in fortified encampments otherwise they all get killed. As
did the Russians.

Except that so far we've lost a total of 1047 in ten years and they lost
more than 14,000.

Dont know if it happens there, but here we had a story a while ago
about this Australian soldier in Afghanistan. Turned out he had been
there before - in the Russian army. Same job though. Silly bugger had
enlisted in the army when he migrated here.......

Andrew VK3BFA.

On Jun 22, 3:41*am, "J. Clarke" wrote:
...
If "the honorable thing" is to micromanage a rescue attempt into
oblivion when nothing in his background or training qualified him to
plan such a thing.

This mentions Carter's management style at the end:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ca/1905095.stm

jsw

On Jun 22, 6:59*am, Jim Wilkins wrote:
...
This mentions Carter's management style at the end:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ca/1905095.stm
jsw

The author of that, Alistair Cooke, was the host of "Masterpiece
Theatre".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America..._United_States

jsw

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:36:12 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

When I was in school, these were every boy's favorite, and almost the
only useful education we got.

As others have suggested, in some locations in the US the liability
issue is one reason---though surely not the only reason. We're seeing
the same thing in high school chem labs. Some HSs are abandoning the
lab component because it's just too dangerous. After all, the kids
are handling CHEMICALS!! insert rolling eyes and sigh

Seriously, perceptions often drive the educational process. There is
a perception that tools and chemicals are dangerous, and
administrators are gun-shy when it comes to legal action relative to
these items. Easier to minimize their presence or remove them
entirely from the curriculum.

(The rest is personal experience from shop in jr. high. Probably
better to skip it. )

In junior high (aka "middle school") I took three years of shop from
7th thru 9th grades, along with virtually every other male in the
school. Among other things we made sand molds in foundry in 7th
grade. Rotten teacher wouldn't let us melt and pour the aluminum; I
didn't get to do that fun stuff til after the first round of grad
school (built the Gingery lathe starting in the 80s).

8th and 9th grades moved us into power tools and more advanced wood
and metal projects. Two memorable experiences from 9th grade: we had
a choice of certain specific projects. I chose a nut bowl which I
decided to make about 10" dia x 6" tall, from walnut. The stock was
badly cupped. My plan was to cut the stock into 10" lengths and glue
them together convex-to-concave. Then plane one side flat, mount that
side on the faceplate, and go to work. The new teacher said no; glue
them cup-to-cup. Of course, as I clamped them together, every piece
split badly. "Oh, just fill that in with wood filler." I sawed it
round on the bandsaw and started to turn the monstrosity but it looked
like homemade sh!t. So I abandoned the project and failed it. :-(

Also made a cold chisel (gas forge) that was the talk of that shop
class. It was ground beautifully and it looked store-bought. Teacher
got a piece of sheet brass and a hammer, and belted the chisel a few
times on the brass. (That action partly determined your grade; I
closed my eyes when he swung the hammer.) It cut the brass with no
problem. The sonuvarip gave me a B on it. The rest of the class just
shook their heads. One kid came up and asked if he could buy it for
his dad. (Yes, I sold it; didn't need the chisel but sure needed that
dollar!) The best ego boost I ever got in school!
--
Best -- Terry

On Jun 22, 6:00*pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
On 6/20/2010 9:08 AM,AndrewVK3BFAwrote:



On Jun 20, 2:43 am, Jim *wrote:
On Jun 19, 3:59 *wrote:

* I aint a Communist, it was tried, didn't work, so why bother with
that particular doctrine anymore. *Eastern Europe etc has gone back to
be warring tribes, dont think we have to worry too much about any of
them. The Russians have got their hands full anyway with all the
ethnic tension stuff. And ****ing themselves with laughter at what we
are doing in Afghanistan - pretty much a parallel situation, NATO/
control Kabul (sort of) and can go outside if heavily armed *and that
they sleep in fortified encampments otherwise they all get killed. As
did the Russians.

Except that so far we've lost a total of 1047 in ten years and they lost
more than 14,000.

So, is that 1047 guys that wont come home. Pity about their families,
too And 14000 Afghanis - do they count? - nah, .

Has the war turned into a "Who can **** further" contest?

No one has conquered that place for 2,000 years - cut your losses,
pull out, save your (and my country) troops lives, and let the Afghans
fight it out amongst themselves. (Which is what they do when theres no
Foreign Infidel Invader to fight with)

Thats the trouble with ideologies/dogma - if you can convince enough
people its a good one, (insert name of preffered one here) then it
will just rumble along under its own inertia. Their will be repeated
episodes of it not working, but a good ideology/dogma will carry you
through. It was obvious with Communism, a rotten system that collapsed
under its own contradictions. But it had a good run for a while.

And no citizenry will see the // to their own system, their own lives,
their own "choices"...

Andrew VK3BFA.

On Jun 21, 4:55*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:

What soured you so badly? That's a Marxist misrepresentation.

While *I dont think...thinkAndrewis a Marxist...he most certainly IS a
socialist in most of his world views.

Sad really.

Gunner


Awwww Gunner - I still hold hope for the inherently rational part of
your mind to realise its been sold a pup, and admit it.
Underneath that junkpile, there is some fine machinery.
Andrew VK3BFA.

On 6/23/2010 7:12 AM, Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
On Jun 22, 6:00 pm, "J. wrote:
On 6/20/2010 9:08 AM,AndrewVK3BFAwrote:



On Jun 20, 2:43 am, Jim wrote:
On Jun 19, 3:59 wrote:

I aint a Communist, it was tried, didn't work, so why bother with
that particular doctrine anymore. Eastern Europe etc has gone back to
be warring tribes, dont think we have to worry too much about any of
them. The Russians have got their hands full anyway with all the
ethnic tension stuff. And ****ing themselves with laughter at what we
are doing in Afghanistan - pretty much a parallel situation, NATO/
control Kabul (sort of) and can go outside if heavily armed and that
they sleep in fortified encampments otherwise they all get killed. As
did the Russians.

Except that so far we've lost a total of 1047 in ten years and they lost
more than 14,000.

So, is that 1047 guys that wont come home. Pity about their families,
too And 14000 Afghanis - do they count? - nah, .

In terms of comparing the US and Soviet experiences in Afghanistan, the
casualty figures _do_ count. You argument was that the US is having
problems just surviving in Afghanistan. The numbers say otherwise.

The remainder of your post is irrelevant to that point.

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:12:41 -0700 (PDT), Andrew VK3BFA
wrote:

No one has conquered that place for 2,000 years - cut your losses,
pull out, save your (and my country) troops lives, and let the Afghans
fight it out amongst themselves. (Which is what they do when theres no
Foreign Infidel Invader to fight with)

So you are claiming that the British never conquered Afghanistan?

Funny...the history books dispute your buffoonery. Took em 3
tries..but..the Brits finally did.

My but you really are an ignorant buffoon, arent you, eh wot?

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:17:07 -0700 (PDT), Andrew VK3BFA
wrote:

On Jun 21, 4:55*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:

What soured you so badly? That's a Marxist misrepresentation.

While *I dont think...thinkAndrewis a Marxist...he most certainly IS a
socialist in most of his world views.

Sad really.

Gunner


Awwww Gunner - I still hold hope for the inherently rational part of
your mind to realise its been sold a pup, and admit it.
Underneath that junkpile, there is some fine machinery.
Andrew VK3BFA.

So you are still claiming that the British empire didnt defeat the
Afghanis?

Laugh laugh laugh

Gunner


One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

Gunner Asch wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 14:50:37 -0500, "William Wixon"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 12:32:58 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:




Oh, heck, Gunner, we believe you. As I suggested, I've read
Ecclesiastes,
too, and I appreciate a good aphorism as much as the next guy.

I figure you've picked up your literary style from the Holy
Handloaders for
Buddha and Discount House of Pistol Primers. d8-)

Did he ask the guy to hold the nail while he pounded it? Or did he
hold the guy's hand down with one hand, while he held the nail with
his other hand, and swung the hammer with his third hand? Somebody
should make a movie about this school he went to, where there are
bullies who one day beat up folks, and the next stand still to get
their hands nailed to benches by nerdy 4H types. No, not what you
think, the one that's for hard-up tellers of humiliating harebrained
hogwash.

Wayne


in like 7th grade (wood)shop i had the resident tough-nut punk "bad"
kid take the bellows (from the sand casting area), pack the end with
casting sand and BLOW it into my eyes. i don't believe he got in
trouble either. me, as a kid i was trained to keep my mouth shut and
take abuse.

b.w.


Had the shop bully get his just deserts. Kid spilled turpentine on his
pants legs, and another victim,,,,,err... kid filled the bricks on the
welding bench with a nice slow flow of actylene, moments before the
bully fired up the torch and approached the bench. I understand the
smell of melting rayon mixed with the smell of burning pork is pretty
ugly.

Kid was out of class for the rest of the year, for some reason. When he
came back the next year..he was much different, and moved a lot slower
oddly enough..
He never did run real good after he came back, and you know..he stopped
picking on other kids.

Sometimes it really pays to, at the least..get along with people.


The bully in my metal shop class was caught by three of his former
victims. He would sneak up behind people with a welding hammer and slip
it up between their legs, then jerk it back while he called them names.

They waited for the teacher to leave for a minute, then two held him
down while the third hit him between the legs with the same welding
hammer he'd used on them, only harder. His attitude changed a lot,
after that.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.