On 1/1/2013 7:30 PM, wrote:
On Jan 1, 4:29 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

So where are the pictures of your shop. Machine tool are those used
to machine.

Dan

A much better question to ask of yourself is what happened to your
brain and will it ever again function normally.

Still wondering where your shop pictures are.

Dan


He'd just post pix of somebody ELSE'S shop...like he has done already.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:52:49 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 01 Jan 2013
19:36:10 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 01 Jan 2013
16:44:39 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Larry Jaques wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2013 14:00:02 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Larry Jaques fired this volley:
PDFTFT, Lloyd.

Sometimes, you just GOTTA, Larry! G

Filtering is much more fun. They still think they have an audience
when they don't.

Trolls don't live on eating our responses, they live purely on ego.(not
that anything anyone could say would ever reduce their intake...)

Think about it. Wouldn't feeding 'em be a function of YOUR ego? Any
response gives them more fodder. Just like voting gives DC
inspiration. I'm still holding out for a None of the Above button on
my ballots.

I've moved on to wanting "You've got to be kidding!" and "No way in
hell will I vote for any of these fools!!!" choices on ballots.

Vote "Present".

They are rarely present.

That is my opinion of all those who make a Principled Vote for a
third party - they are just voting "Present" indicating that they're
good with whatever the majority decides. Left, Right - matters not.
They "voted". Usually not to keep the politician who is "wrong" out,
but keep the candidate who is not "pure enough" from getting in.

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the
Rep or Dem party? I found myself disgusted with both major
candidates, so how do you suggest doing this? How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.

--
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering WTF happened.

Larry Jaques wrote:

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the
Rep or Dem party? I found myself disgusted with both major
candidates, so how do you suggest doing this? How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.


Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.

We have a chance to try here in NH where dozens of candidates register
for the primaries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...blican_primary

The state is small and much of the population is concentrated enough
that it's practical to campaign in person by holding meetings in
rental halls and parks rather than spending big money on the media.
McCain used the VFW when his money ran low. I've talked to some at
private parties.

I can't say that I've been highly impressed by a single one of them.
Some like Romney and Huntsman appeared to be competent administrators
but none would make an inspiring leader. I remember realizing as a
little kid back in '58 that the country was hungry for one, and would
probably ignore their flaws as long as (s)he made us all feel
comfortable. Then along came JFK pretending to be King Arthur.

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
news:woGdnc2jg5RF-
...How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

OK, but I'm too blunt and honest to win an election. My parents were
both in state government, my father quite high up, so I know what's
required, and that I could never put up with it.

For a while I was the repairman for the NH State House voting
computer. They didn't notice a problem unless the legislature was in
session, so when they called me I had to wait in the back rooms until
they adjourned. Representatives and lobbyists mistook me for someone
influential and tried to convince me to support their positions, and I
always played along, which was easy since they rarely gave me an
opening to say otherwise.

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 06:00:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Larry Jaques wrote:

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the

Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

Running for a public office requires a lot of money. Do you think the
special interest groups with the money will ever fund a candidate who
will oppose their agendas in any way?

On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 06:51:47 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.

We have a chance to try here in NH where dozens of candidates register
for the primaries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...blican_primary

The state is small and much of the population is concentrated enough
that it's practical to campaign in person by holding meetings in
rental halls and parks rather than spending big money on the media.
McCain used the VFW when his money ran low. I've talked to some at
private parties.

I can't say that I've been highly impressed by a single one of them.
Some like Romney and Huntsman appeared to be competent administrators
but none would make an inspiring leader. I remember realizing as a
little kid back in '58 that the country was hungry for one, and would
probably ignore their flaws as long as (s)he made us all feel
comfortable. Then along came JFK pretending to be King Arthur.


The big question at the moment is...do we NEED an inspiring leader?

Or do we need a damned good, savy administrator?

Id say the latter at the moment.

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
news:woGdnc2jg5RF-
...How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

OK, but I'm too blunt and honest to win an election. My parents were
both in state government, my father quite high up, so I know what's
required, and that I could never put up with it.

For a while I was the repairman for the NH State House voting
computer. They didn't notice a problem unless the legislature was in
session, so when they called me I had to wait in the back rooms until
they adjourned. Representatives and lobbyists mistook me for someone
influential and tried to convince me to support their positions, and I
always played along, which was easy since they rarely gave me an
opening to say otherwise.


You were important. You could have rigged all the votes, if you were
honest.

wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 06:00:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Larry Jaques wrote:

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the

Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

Running for a public office requires a lot of money. Do you think the
special interest groups with the money will ever fund a candidate who
will oppose their agendas in any way?


Do you think they would fund anyone who had no chance of winning?

Gunner wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 06:51:47 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.

We have a chance to try here in NH where dozens of candidates register
for the primaries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...blican_primary

The state is small and much of the population is concentrated enough
that it's practical to campaign in person by holding meetings in
rental halls and parks rather than spending big money on the media.
McCain used the VFW when his money ran low. I've talked to some at
private parties.

I can't say that I've been highly impressed by a single one of them.
Some like Romney and Huntsman appeared to be competent administrators
but none would make an inspiring leader. I remember realizing as a
little kid back in '58 that the country was hungry for one, and would
probably ignore their flaws as long as (s)he made us all feel
comfortable. Then along came JFK pretending to be King Arthur.


The big question at the moment is...do we NEED an inspiring leader?

Or do we need a damned good, savy administrator?

Id say the latter at the moment.


Rather than a half assed singer & part time duffer? Hell, YES!!!

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Jim Wilkins wrote:


For a while I was the repairman for the NH State House voting
computer. ...

You were important. You could have rigged all the votes, if you
were
honest.

The company I worked for took it on as a temporary favor when the
existing service company lost their contract, and I was relatively
computer-literate for 1975.

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Jim Wilkins wrote:


For a while I was the repairman for the NH State House voting
computer. ...

You were important. You could have rigged all the votes, if you
were
honest.

The company I worked for took it on as a temporary favor when the
existing service company lost their contract, and I was relatively
computer-literate for 1975.


Those early systems were realy fun, with so many propritary parts,
and even ICs made in house. I still have an old Burroghs computer
sitting in the shed that I need to scrap. It came with boxes & binders
of source code & instructions for an accounting package that weighed
almost as much as the computer.

I was just barely familiar with the 8008 in '75. I had just left the
military, where the only logic I saw was RTL.

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 12:03:40 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 06:00:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Larry Jaques wrote:

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the

Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

Running for a public office requires a lot of money. Do you think the
special interest groups with the money will ever fund a candidate who
will oppose their agendas in any way?


Do you think they would fund anyone who had no chance of winning?

And that should be WE, THE PEOPLE'S next item on our agenda: Get the
money out of politics so it is manned by people who wish to be of
service to their country, not drunken, druggie, greedy ****s who want
to rape the nation for power and money.

(Pardon my French. That's a big button.)

--
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering WTF happened.

Larry Jaques wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 12:03:40 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 06:00:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Larry Jaques wrote:

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the

Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

Running for a public office requires a lot of money. Do you think the
special interest groups with the money will ever fund a candidate who
will oppose their agendas in any way?


Do you think they would fund anyone who had no chance of winning?

And that should be WE, THE PEOPLE'S next item on our agenda: Get the
money out of politics so it is manned by people who wish to be of
service to their country, not drunken, druggie, greedy ****s who want
to rape the nation for power and money.


Cut off secret service protect for former politicians and they'll
behave a hell of a lot better while in office.

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 07:02:13 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote
And that should be WE, THE PEOPLE'S next item on our agenda: Get the
money out of politics so it is manned by people who wish to be of
service to their country, not drunken, druggie, greedy ****s who
want
to rape the nation for power and money.


The money pays for the media coverage to spread their message. Would
you silence them, or have the government mandate free air time for
"authorized" candidates, which puts the party in power even more in
charge of free speech than it is now?

http://www.opendebates.org/washingto...interview.html

That's a really good article!

--
I’ve long been passionate about protecting and expanding democracy,
which is really the only viable mechanism to preserve liberty and
distribute power from kings to the rest of us.
--George Farah

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

ALL candidates should get the same airtime, regardless of their
popularity. What they did to Perot, Paul, and Johnson is criminal.
Perot polled at 7% but took 21% in the election.


Good thing you couldn't pass yourself off as a clever campaign
strategist, if that were the law both sides would flood the others'
primary with shills. I already posted the list showing dozens of
Presidential candidates on both sides.

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:28:49 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

ALL candidates should get the same airtime, regardless of their
popularity. What they did to Perot, Paul, and Johnson is criminal.
Perot polled at 7% but took 21% in the election.


Good thing you couldn't pass yourself off as a clever campaign
strategist, if that were the law both sides would flood the others'
primary with shills. I already posted the list showing dozens of
Presidential candidates on both sides.

I suppose I should have said "IF they're going to be giving away free
airtime, all should have equal access." I don't watch TV so I don't
care. All of TVs channels are flooded with pure, unadulterated ****
99.9999% of the time anyway.

Anyway, with equal money between them (I guarantee it would be
considerably less than there is today) there would be less crap and
more "I want your vote and here's why.", I would hope.

And I'd pass on the job of campaign strategist even if you liked my
thoughts.

--
Intuition isn't the enemy, but the ally, of reason.
-- John Kord Lagemann

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:28:49 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

Anyway, with equal money between them (I guarantee it would be
considerably less than there is today) there would be less crap and
more "I want your vote and here's why.", I would hope.

The option of public matching funds, with attached restrictions, is in
place now if they choose to follow it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1417948.html

The problem is that they are the grand masters of deception and
manipulation who know how to get what benefits them while deceiving
you that they feel your pain and are on your side, you and all the
other proles in the Great Unwashed.

Amateurs haven't a prayer of blocking them in ways they can't
outmaneuver. Remember the Golden Rule? Well they have the gold and
they make the rules.

Iowa and New Hampshire are the last places a candidate with little
money can present themselves to the voters in person. How many
presidential candidates have signed your copy of the Constitution?
jsw

Jonathan Banquer fired this volley in
:

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

On Jan 4, 4:42*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jonathan Banquer fired this volley :

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it. When someone refuses to treat their mental illness very bad
things can and do happen.

On Jan 4, 4:42*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jonathan Banquer fired this volley :

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

Simplistic people always have simplistic answers for complex problems.
More often than not they are wrong with their simplistic suggestions/
solutions. In your case, your simplistic answer was hidden in the form
of a question. A step up from your previous attempts but not really
much progress.

jon_banquer fired this volley in news:f74104c5-29a3-
:

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it.

Yeah... some people think they're machining experts, and they've never cut
metal. Was that what you meant by "Metal" illness?

Lloyd

On Jan 4, 5:10*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
jon_banquer fired this volley in news:f74104c5-29a3-
:

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it.

Yeah... some people think they're machining experts, and they've never cut
metal. *Was that what you meant by "Metal" illness?

Lloyd

Right. You're clearly one of them. Nice to see that you know who and
what you are.

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 16:52:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Jan 4, 4:42*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jonathan Banquer fired this volley :

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it. When someone refuses to treat their mental illness very bad
things can and do happen.

Ah... you are thinking of the non-metalworking folks who contaminate
the site.

On Jan 4, 5:39*pm, F.K. wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 16:52:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer









wrote:
On Jan 4, 4:42*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jonathan Banquer fired this volley :

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it. When someone refuses to treat their mental illness very bad
things can and do happen.

Ah... you are thinking of the non-metalworking folks who contaminate
the site.

Yes, I am.

On Jan 4, 5:39*pm, F.K. wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 16:52:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer









wrote:
On Jan 4, 4:42*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jonathan Banquer fired this volley :

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it. When someone refuses to treat their mental illness very bad
things can and do happen.

Ah... you are thinking of the non-metalworking folks who contaminate
the site.

Yes, I am.

On Jan 4, 5:39*pm, F.K. wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 16:52:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer









wrote:
On Jan 4, 4:42*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jonathan Banquer fired this volley :

Getting falsely arrested and having all charges dropped while the
party making the false charges ends up doing years in prison (for
other crimes) is the kind of fact that escapes a moron and a liar like
Tom Gardner

Not allowing one's self to be in a relationship with a person who'd do
that is the kind of fact that escaped whom?

Lloyd

Metal illness can appear in those who previously have shown no signs
of it. When someone refuses to treat their mental illness very bad
things can and do happen.

Ah... you are thinking of the non-metalworking folks who contaminate
the site.

I was referring to a woman I was with for 3 years who developed severe
mental illness. She refused to treat her mental illness and ended up
destroying her life. At one point she had me falsely arrested for
domestic violence. The prosecutor finally realized she was full of
**** and the state of Florida tossed the case. She spent many years in
prison in Florida for other crimes after she pulled this crap. ****
happens in life. At the time I was physically very sick and would have
left sooner if I wasn't so sick. I learned from the experience and it
has made me stronger.

On 1/1/2013 11:59 AM, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:


Starve the trolls!

On Jan 4, 7:50*pm, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:
On 1/1/2013 11:59 AM, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:

Starve the trolls!

Loud can't resist. Neither can you.

on Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:07:24 -0500 typed in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 06:00:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:
Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the

Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

Running for a public office requires a lot of money. Do you think the
special interest groups with the money will ever fund a candidate who
will oppose their agendas in any way?

Two other issues: political contributions were capped in 1974.
They have not been increased since then for inflation. $2,500 Dollars
in 1974 would be $11, 600 dollars in 2012. What that means is that a)
you can't give a candidate a million dollars (or 4 million) with the
expectation of a visit to the White House, or maybe an Ambassadorship.
B) it takes longer to raise a million bucks 2,500 dollars at a time,
than 11,000 dollars at a time. Which is why candidates spend so much
time at fund raisers.
Secondly, the PACs have had a bad effect on party structures. Why
give money to the Party, when you can give it to the Candidate, or to
a PAC for the Candidate? With SUperPACs, now you can spend all you
want, as long as you do not co-ordinate with the campaign, wink, wink,
nudge, nudge, say no more, eh?
--
pyotr filipivich
Question for the gun Control advocates, "Do you agree with
this statement?"
"I would rather have a society without guns, even if it
means that people cannot defend themselves against murder
(with other weapons), rape, robbery, and assault. I would
rather make everyone defenseless than have to endure the
mass shootings that occasionally occur. If that means that
many more people, (particularly the old, the weak, and the
infirm) are subjected to these violent crimes, then so be
it. They'll just have to suffer more. I do claim the power
to dictate whether or not others are able to defend themselves."

Larry Jaques on Wed, 02 Jan 2013
21:18:38 -0800 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:52:49 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 01 Jan 2013
19:36:10 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 01 Jan 2013
16:44:39 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
[snip]
I've moved on to wanting "You've got to be kidding!" and "No way in
hell will I vote for any of these fools!!!" choices on ballots.

Vote "Present".

They are rarely present.

That is my opinion of all those who make a Principled Vote for a
third party - they are just voting "Present" indicating that they're
good with whatever the majority decides. Left, Right - matters not.
They "voted". Usually not to keep the politician who is "wrong" out,
but keep the candidate who is not "pure enough" from getting in.

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the
Rep or Dem party? I found myself disgusted with both major
candidates, so how do you suggest doing this? How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.

Perot was a nut case, and while close is good, Bill Clinton won
the part which mattered. Bill Clinton was also the Democrat candidate
because other possible candidates decided not to run in the Primaries,
because who could defeat President H. W. Bush? {Bill Clinton, it
seems}. Abe Lincoln was elected because the Democrats had two
candidates, and Woodrow Wilson won election because The Bull Moose
Party split the conservative vote.
Note well, Ron Paul got elected and reelected as a Republican. And
his most note worthy quote was to propose "compromise" of cutting the
DoD by 50%, while only allowing half the tax increase the Democrats
wanted. How is he different than Nancy Pelosi?

In other words, the system is rigged in favor of the two major
parties. As Canada Bill replied after being told the Faro game he'd
was in was rigged: "Of course, I know the game is rigged. But it's the
only game in town."
Which means, you are going to have to take over a party. The
Progressives/Leftists did that to the Democrats, starting in 1968, the
Conservatives have started doing that to the GOP, starting in 2010. As
Senator LB Johnson said "You have to go to the meetings."

Specifically, if you want a better Republican candidate, you are
going to have to work for it. [in the interest of full disclosure, I'm
a long time Conservative who leans Republican.] Go to the meetings.
Precinct, County, caucus, and the primaries. That also means that
after the primaries, you stay involved. Because I'm sure a lot of the
Democrats would feel very proud of you, were you to stay true to your
principles, and not work/vote against their candidate.
That includes down ticket as well. Romney not conservative
enough? Send him a conservative Congress to deal with. Work/Vote
against the progressive candidate for Governor, state legislature, and
county board.

But realize this: in round numbers 1/3 of the populace will vote
for Frank N. Furter if he was the GOP candidate, another third would
vote for Brad Majors if he was the Democrat candidate. Of the
remaining third, one third leans Dem, one third Rep, and one third
"undecided" - they're not going to say until the exit poll.

The problem isn't just Governmental or the Legislature. It is
cultural, and political. How many American feel that there is a need
to have a government agency making sure people are not defrauded? Air
and water is not polluted? Cars are made safer, more fuel efficient?
etc, etc, etc. How any people, left and right, are convinced that
there must be a public school system? (Public education is enshrined
in Washington States Constitution). That there must be a Department
of Transportation at even the county level?
Remember also, that the progressive take over of the culture was
not an overnight thing. It truly was the "long march through the
academy" and other institutions, starting in the gay nineties (1890s).
"Just one drop.." and no one individual did any more than add "just
one drop".

It is not a new problem. I think it was Plato who said that those
who feel themselves to smart to be involved in politics, were of
necessity ruled by those who were not as smart as they. Sorry I
cannot give you a simple "take this majic pill and all will be clear
to you." answer.

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich.
"I wish you wouldn't use the mind control device - I get
these terrible migranes until it's finished." Jonathon

"Michael A. Terrell" on Thu, 03 Jan 2013
06:00:31 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Larry Jaques wrote:

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the
Rep or Dem party? I found myself disgusted with both major
candidates, so how do you suggest doing this? How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.


Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

That would also reduce our chances to Slim and Fat.

What is going to have to be done, is much better job of explaining
the issues. As in "Right now, Congress has done Robin Hood one
better. They've robbed from the young and unborn, to give to the
Middle Aged and Seniors."

"I'm not spending my kids inheritance, I'm spending the
inheritance that the kids think they are going to be leaving for the
grand kids."

"If the government can decide how much fat or salt is allowable in
the food you buy, or how large the soft drink may be sold - why should
it also decide with whom you may have sex, and when?"

"IF the government is going to pay for your college, shouldn't
they get to decide what classes you'll take?"
.... why can't they pay for my car? ... my house? Vacation home
in the Bahamas?
--
pyotr filipivich
Question for the gun Control advocates, "Do you agree with
this statement?"
"I would rather have a society without guns, even if it
means that people cannot defend themselves against murder
(with other weapons), rape, robbery, and assault. I would
rather make everyone defenseless than have to endure the
mass shootings that occasionally occur. If that means that
many more people, (particularly the old, the weak, and the
infirm) are subjected to these violent crimes, then so be
it. They'll just have to suffer more. I do claim the power
to dictate whether or not others are able to defend themselves."

Endangered species?

What's the bag limit? What kind of guns, or traps?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
news On 1/1/2013 11:59 AM, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:


Starve the trolls!

On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 23:06:09 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Larry Jaques on Wed, 02 Jan 2013
21:18:38 -0800 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:52:49 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 01 Jan 2013
19:36:10 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 01 Jan 2013
16:44:39 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
[snip]
I've moved on to wanting "You've got to be kidding!" and "No way in
hell will I vote for any of these fools!!!" choices on ballots.

Vote "Present".

They are rarely present.

That is my opinion of all those who make a Principled Vote for a
third party - they are just voting "Present" indicating that they're
good with whatever the majority decides. Left, Right - matters not.
They "voted". Usually not to keep the politician who is "wrong" out,
but keep the candidate who is not "pure enough" from getting in.

Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the
Rep or Dem party? I found myself disgusted with both major
candidates, so how do you suggest doing this? How do we break the
hold the two totally corrupt parties have on the nation by voting in
someone else? We got close with Perot.

Perot was a nut case, and while close is good, Bill Clinton won
the part which mattered. Bill Clinton was also the Democrat candidate
because other possible candidates decided not to run in the Primaries,
because who could defeat President H. W. Bush? {Bill Clinton, it
seems}. Abe Lincoln was elected because the Democrats had two
candidates, and Woodrow Wilson won election because The Bull Moose
Party split the conservative vote.
Note well, Ron Paul got elected and reelected as a Republican. And
his most note worthy quote was to propose "compromise" of cutting the
DoD by 50%, while only allowing half the tax increase the Democrats
wanted. How is he different than Nancy Pelosi?

Do you believe the Wars on Drugs, Poverty, Terrorism, (OK, not DOD
funded) Iraq, or Afghanistan are working, even as much as 10%? Me,
neither. DOD could lose some ducats and still be effective. Bring our
boys home from Afghanistan. Imperial hubris (aka Building Democracy
or Winning Hearts and Minds) isn't effective.

In other words, the system is rigged in favor of the two major
parties. As Canada Bill replied after being told the Faro game he'd
was in was rigged: "Of course, I know the game is rigged. But it's the
only game in town."
Which means, you are going to have to take over a party. The
Progressives/Leftists did that to the Democrats, starting in 1968, the
Conservatives have started doing that to the GOP, starting in 2010. As
Senator LB Johnson said "You have to go to the meetings."

I'm not happy with the Rilidjus Wrong, either. And the folks who are
purporting to be 'Tea Party' in D.C. ain't even _close_, on any level,
to what we Tea Partiers out here are thinking/wanting/striving for.
You're right. We need to work to get those assholes thrown out of our
group and stop saying they represent us.


Specifically, if you want a better Republican candidate, you are
going to have to work for it. [in the interest of full disclosure, I'm
a long time Conservative who leans Republican.] Go to the meetings.
Precinct, County, caucus, and the primaries. That also means that
after the primaries, you stay involved. Because I'm sure a lot of the
Democrats would feel very proud of you, were you to stay true to your
principles, and not work/vote against their candidate.
That includes down ticket as well. Romney not conservative
enough? Send him a conservative Congress to deal with. Work/Vote
against the progressive candidate for Governor, state legislature, and
county board.

What we need are saner libertarians. Like I said, I'm a liberally
moderate conservative. We have too much gov't by half, at the
minimum. How do we get them to prune that damned overgrown tree?


But realize this: in round numbers 1/3 of the populace will vote
for Frank N. Furter if he was the GOP candidate, another third would
vote for Brad Majors if he was the Democrat candidate. Of the
remaining third, one third leans Dem, one third Rep, and one third
"undecided" - they're not going to say until the exit poll.

It's not that we're undecided. It's that we've definitely decided
that neither of their puppets are worth a ****, even with Dem or Rep
Shinola smeared all over 'em.


The problem isn't just Governmental or the Legislature. It is
cultural, and political. How many American feel that there is a need
to have a government agency making sure people are not defrauded? Air
and water is not polluted? Cars are made safer, more fuel efficient?
etc, etc, etc. How any people, left and right, are convinced that
there must be a public school system? (Public education is enshrined
in Washington States Constitution). That there must be a Department
of Transportation at even the county level?
Remember also, that the progressive take over of the culture was
not an overnight thing. It truly was the "long march through the
academy" and other institutions, starting in the gay nineties (1890s).
"Just one drop.." and no one individual did any more than add "just
one drop".

It is not a new problem. I think it was Plato who said that those
who feel themselves to smart to be involved in politics, were of
necessity ruled by those who were not as smart as they. Sorry I
cannot give you a simple "take this majic pill and all will be clear
to you." answer.

Damn, and I wanted that yesterday, too...
Well, as the saying goes, "Instant gratification takes too long."

Thanks for a well-stated answer. ('cept for the "Perot is a nutcase"
part. He wasn't and isn't, IMHO. Can't you hear that "giant sucking
sound" as we speak, for one instance?)

--
Intuition isn't the enemy, but the ally, of reason.
-- John Kord Lagemann

Stormin Mormon wrote:

Endangered species?


No, and they breed faster than rabbits.


What's the bag limit? What kind of guns, or traps?


Unlimited. Any weapon is allowed. Including WMMD.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
When the
economy finally shreds, are you stocked up to make it through
several
months of turmoil? I'm setting up my solar backup panels this
afternoon, finally.

Have you found a way to keep your refrigerator cold 24/7 after they
shut down the coal and nuclear power plants?

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
When the
economy finally shreds, are you stocked up to make it through
several
months of turmoil? I'm setting up my solar backup panels this
afternoon, finally.

Have you found a way to keep your refrigerator cold 24/7 after they
shut down the coal and nuclear power plants?


It'll be a great time to sell hand crank microwave ovens. ;-)

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 18 Jun 2013
09:58:02 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
When the
economy finally shreds, are you stocked up to make it through
several
months of turmoil? I'm setting up my solar backup panels this
afternoon, finally.

Have you found a way to keep your refrigerator cold 24/7 after they
shut down the coal and nuclear power plants?


It'll be a great time to sell hand crank microwave ovens. ;-)

I'm working on the designs for a steam powered crank for one of
those.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

pyotr filipivich wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 18 Jun 2013
09:58:02 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
When the
economy finally shreds, are you stocked up to make it through
several
months of turmoil? I'm setting up my solar backup panels this
afternoon, finally.

Have you found a way to keep your refrigerator cold 24/7 after they
shut down the coal and nuclear power plants?


It'll be a great time to sell hand crank microwave ovens. ;-)

I'm working on the designs for a steam powered crank for one of
those.


Why? Aren't you already cranky enough? ;-)

"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...
"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 18 Jun
2013
It'll be a great time to sell hand crank microwave ovens. ;-)

I'm working on the designs for a steam powered crank for one of
those.
--
pyotr filipivich

Is your house big enough for a steam engine?
http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.u...grange-450.jpg

jsw