12 v. power source

[Steve B]

Every once in a while, I need a 12 v. DC power source to trouble shoot
something. I have been using a battery charger, 12 v. around 6 amp.

Is that okay, or is there a dedicated power source for this purpose? Maybe
one of those power rescue jumper battery pack thinguses? Kinda spendy, but
sure I could score one at a yard sale. How do they last? Very
rechargeable?

Something with variable connectors for the times when you need a clamp, or
just a probe to put the juice at the right place.

Steve

[Pete Keillor]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:20:09 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I have a 30 amp-hr or so agm battery in a small Pelican Storm case
with a cigarette lighter receptacle mounted in the side of the case.
Stiff foam is jammed around the battery. It makes a compact and
portable (if heavy) power source for the goto telescope, for fishing
lights, and for the gps-sonar on the little jon boat. I charge it
with a little Deltran 800 mA waterproof battery tender.

You could go with a 7 amp-hr or so for a lighter weight setup.

Pete Keillor

[Gunner]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:20:09 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Why not use an old computer power supply? They have decent clean
power and are a couple bucks at the swap meet if you dont have old
computers around.

http://www.playtool.com/pages/psuconnectors/connectors.html

Lots of old AT style power spplies kicking around.

Remember..its Yellow (+`12) and any black

Gunner

One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not
agree that "violence begets violence." I told him that it is my
earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure
- and in some cases I have - that any man who offers violence to his
fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy.

- Jeff Cooper

[Erik]

In article <126m289ameuaugtkt...@4ax.com>,

Run a Google search on '12V Power supply' (sans quotes), you'll get a
ton of hits.

Even Radio Shack used to carry them, and might still for all I know.

Erik

[Existential Angst]

"Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:k0f4h7$3ge$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

Battery chargers are usually charging at about 14 V, iirc. And proly have
considerable ripple.
How bout an ole car/motorcycle battery, kept on a trickle charger when not
using it as a power supply?
--
EA


>
> Steve
>

[Existential Angst]

"Erik" <sp...@this.com> wrote in message
news:spam-FE9FBC.2...@news.dslextreme.com...

Could also use a variac+ fw rectifer+caps -- 0-120V dc.
--
EA


>
> Erik

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-08-15, Steve B <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Every once in a while, I need a 12 v. DC power source to trouble shoot
> something. I have been using a battery charger, 12 v. around 6 amp.

Hmm ... most battery chargers don't have any filtering -- they
just feed rectified AC to the battery to charge it. Fine, for a
battery. Terrible to power electronics circuits -- unless you add some
serious capacitors across the 12V out of the charger.

How much capacitance you need is a function of what kind of
current load you have. I would pick say 10,000 uF for a typical load on
a battery charger -- and perhaps up to say 80,000 uF for higher loads.

Of course -- if you have a *good* battery connected across the
charger, that will do just as well as a capacitor -- and actually be
closer to what automotive electronics are expecting anyway.

> Is that okay, or is there a dedicated power source for this purpose? Maybe
> one of those power rescue jumper battery pack thinguses?

For a short time only with the likely load from the brakes.
While they are heavy, they are a tiny subset of what the car's battery
normally provides. Mine suggests that you wait six minutes after a
failed start attempt -- to keep the battery from overheating -- before
the next try.

> Kinda spendy, but
> sure I could score one at a yard sale. How do they last? Very
> rechargeable?

Depends on the quality of the things. The one I have has a
regulated trickler charger built in -- running from a wall wart -- and
it is designed to be connected full time so the battery is at optimum
charge when you need it. (Mine even has a cigarette lighter socket in
it, which I expect to use to recharge my cell phone and my Nook e-reader
until power comes back. It was gone four days (minus a few hours)
earlier this year -- the longest which we have had, though other areas
have had longer outages. (And this is in various areas outside the
Beltway -- you would expect them to have better power around the center
of the government. :-)

> Something with variable connectors for the times when you need a clamp, or
> just a probe to put the juice at the right place.

Well ... as I said, my jump start box has both the battery
cables and the cigarette lighter socket. Anything else and you need to
make your own adaptors. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

[David Lesher]

Gunner <Gunner Asch> writes:


>Lots of old AT style power spplies kicking around.

>Remember..its Yellow (+`12) and any black

I can't recommend that. PC supplies are highly optimized
for one task - being as cheap as possible.

Most of them will not function without minimum loads on one
or more of their outputs. (They regulate all the outputs
based on one output voltage.)

That said, it won't cost you much to try one.


--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Erik" <sp...@this.com> wrote in message
news:spam-FE9FBC.2...@news.dslextreme.com...

He is too lazy and stupid to use Google and so he just comes here instead...

I'm surprised he can even take a shit without consulting the group...then
again , he's so full of it I coulda missed...

[Lloyd E. Sponenburgh]

"Existential Angst" <fit...@optonline.net> fired this volley in
news:502b1f8b$0$11553$607e...@cv.net:

> Battery chargers are usually charging at about 14 V, iirc. And proly
> have considerable ripple.

No! Really?

Do you mean by that that they have NO filtering, and only supply un-
regulated full-wave rectified power?

Do you mean by that that they might regulate so poorly as to put out 18-
20 V to a small load? Do you mean that the "ripple" might be "all there
is", and there is no continuous DC being supplied?

Do you mean that typical lead-acid battery chargers are completely
unsuitable as power supplies for electronics?

If that's what you meant... you're right!

:p
Lloyd

[Jim Wilkins]

"Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:k0f4h7$3ge$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

I use these lab supplies:
http://www.caswellplating.com/electroplating-anodizing/power-supplies/5-amp-constant-current-rectifier.html
http://www.microdaq.com/lascar/psu130.php
and an old Schauer battery charger to which I added a 3A Variac to set
the voltage and a 24,000uF filter cap. The original 6V/12V switch puts
the cap in the circuit when I need 12VDC and removes it for battery
charging, to avoid a spark and maybe blown fuse when I connect.

You could make an equivalent to the Lascar from an LM317 adjustable
regulator, but might not save much if you buy the meters etc new.

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:20:09 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com>
wrote:

As others have said, it's only marginally more suitable than cutting
off a power cord and plugging it directly into the wall.

Don't you have a left-over 12VDC regulated wall-wart or brick you
could use? Wall wart up to 2 or 3A and 6A should be available easily
in a brick. Chinois ones are quite available, but of dubious pedigree
and safety-agency-approval status.

Just don't use the ones that say "electronic transformer" or are
advertised for LED power supplies.

[nob...@nowhere.net]

My local thrift store has a shoe box filled with miscellaneous
wallwart power supply's. Big uns, little uns, your choice, $ !.00
each.

[Existential Angst]

<nob...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:nfcn28h2hkbsq6dl1...@4ax.com...

I must have a milkcrate full.... it's like an addiction.
Some of the older ones are pretty hefty, as well. You'd have to TAPE them
to a wall outlet... LOL
--
EA

[Steve W.]

How many amps would you like?

I have units from small 1 amp up to the 50 amp on the bench. Both
adjustable and fixed output.

You can buy them online easily.
B&K, Astron, Pyramid, Tripp Lite,

http://www.astroncorp.com/
http://www.pyramidcaraudio.com/products/Power-Supplies
http://www.tripplite.com/en/products/product-series.cfm?txtSeriesID=841

--
Steve W.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:20:09 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com>
wrote:

MOST battery chargers (good ones, anyway) will not put out power into
a "dead" circuit. How much power do you want??? I've used PC power
supplies for years. I also usually have several AGM batteries around
in various states of charge.

The chargers also have very poor regulation if voltage control is an
issue.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:54 +0000 (UTC), David Lesher
<wb8...@panix.com> wrote:

>Gunner <Gunner Asch> writes:
>
>
>>Lots of old AT style power spplies kicking around.
>
>>Remember..its Yellow (+`12) and any black
>
>
>I can't recommend that. PC supplies are highly optimized
>for one task - being as cheap as possible.
>
>Most of them will not function without minimum loads on one
>or more of their outputs. (They regulate all the outputs
>based on one output voltage.)
>
>That said, it won't cost you much to try one.

Only the +12 needs a load - and that's the one he'll be loading.
I've used them for years.Clean, accurately regulated power - and I'm
always scrapping computers, so there are always several around. I used
to just plug an old hard drive on one Molex plug if I wanted to use
the 5 volt output, or needed 12 volts for a low current application.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-08-15, Existential Angst <fit...@optonline.net> wrote:

[ ... ]

>>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:20:09 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Every once in a while, I need a 12 v. DC power source to trouble shoot
>>> >something. I have been using a battery charger, 12 v. around 6 amp.

[ ... ]

> Could also use a variac+ fw rectifer+caps -- 0-120V dc.

Beware of this -- it does not float free of ground, and
depending on the wiring of the power cord, might have the whole circuit
running about 120 VAC above ground. Having a transformer in there to
isolate things is beneficial. (Granted, you might not recognize a high
frequency transformer in a switching power supply -- they look kind of
strange compared to the 60 Hz power transformers.

[Michael A. Terrell]

cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>
> And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
> measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
> ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.

How do you 'half wave regulate' something?

[Gunner]

Run it through a bridge rectifier only.


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

[Michael A. Terrell]

Gunner wrote:
>
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

> ?mike.t...@earthlink.net? wrote:
>
> ?
> ?cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> ??
> ?? And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
> ?? measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
> ?? ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.
> ?
> ?
> ? How do you 'half wave regulate' something?

>
> Run it through a bridge rectifier only.

That has nothing to do with regulation. :)

[Lloyd E. Sponenburgh]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> fired this volley in
news:5aidnRwLIdeBbfLN...@earthlink.com:

>
> That has nothing to do with regulation. :)

And if it's being "run through a bridge", it doesn't have much to do with
"half-wave", either.

Lloyd

[Gunner]

blink blink....ROFLMAO! You are most absolutely correct.

That one caught me flat footed indeed.

"half wave rectified"

Very nice catch!!

Gunner

--
Adde cruorem stultitiae, atque ignem gladio scrutare:
To your folly add bloodshed, and stir the fire with the sword (Horace)

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

With a diode. Googlit.

--
Doctors prescribe medicine of which they know little,
to cure diseases of which they know less,
in human beings of which they know nothing.
--Francois-Marie Arouet Voltaire, about 250 years ago

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 04:18:54 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 04:47:18 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Gunner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>> ?mike.t...@earthlink.net? wrote:
>>>
>>> ?
>>> ?cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>>> ??
>>> ?? And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
>>> ?? measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
>>> ?? ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.
>>> ?
>>> ?
>>> ? How do you 'half wave regulate' something?
>>>
>>> Run it through a bridge rectifier only.
>>
>>
>>
>> That has nothing to do with regulation. :)
>
>
>blink blink....ROFLMAO! You are most absolutely correct.
>
>That one caught me flat footed indeed.

Oops, me, too.

>"half wave rectified"
>
>Very nice catch!!

Bbbut, it started with an R...

--
You never hear anyone say, 'Yeah, but it's a dry cold.'
-- Charles A. Budreau

[Stormin Mormon]

Only regulate the negative side, maybe?
(ha, ha!)

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:K6-dnSvS2oUVS_LN...@earthlink.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

I've got strains of "bridge over troubled watters"
floating through my unregulated head.

Good thing I'm ohm, now.

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

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" <lloydspinsidemindspring.com> wrote in message
news:XnsA0E448973F209ll...@216.168.3.70...

[Gunner]

Indeed it did!

Ever see one of those thingies where they ask if you can read this and
half the letters are missing and some are turned around backwards?

Takes my brain a second or two to shift gears and then I read right
through it

http://danalookadoo.com/psychology/jumbled-text/ as an example.

Funny how the mind corrects flaws in words or the wrong words
sometimes. As I get older..its easier...but sometimes it certainly
bites me in the ass..as the regulator thingy did. Saw half wave and
the following Re....and the brain changed it to rectifier
subconciously

My room mate just looked at the above link...and is still sitting
there trying to figure out what it says, even after I just read it out
loud to her.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Gunner" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0gk07850qbsd7iork...@4ax.com...
> ...

> Ever see one of those thingies where they ask if you can read this
> and
> half the letters are missing and some are turned around backwards?
>
> Takes my brain a second or two to shift gears and then I read right
> through it
>
> http://danalookadoo.com/psychology/jumbled-text/ as an example.
>
> Funny how the mind corrects flaws in words or the wrong words
> sometimes. As I get older..its easier...but sometimes it certainly
> bites me in the ass..as the regulator thingy did. Saw half wave and
> the following Re....and the brain changed it to rectifier
> subconciously
>
> My room mate just looked at the above link...and is still sitting
> there trying to figure out what it says, even after I just read it
> out
> loud to her.
>
> Gunner

If you speak French here's another.
http://www.amazon.com/Mots-dHeures-Luis-dAntin-Rooten/dp/0140057307
The title is "Mother Goose Rhymes" pronounced in a thick French
accent.

When you study languages you realize when groups of letters finally
become words. I'm part way there with Russian; some words pop out but
I have to read most letter by letter.

The communications theory I encountered at Mitre explores the pattern
recognition process in considerable mathematical detail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matched_filter
As I understood it, you compare the jumbled word to possible choices
that might make sense in context and pick the closest match. But first
you have to synchronize yourself with something you recognize. I began
with 'can'.

http://www.usna.edu/Users/math/wdj/reed-sol.htm
"Minimum distance, or d, is the minimum number of information
differences between each codeword."
An English example of inadequate distance is Affect vs Effect, affect
meaning to cause, effect being a result.
jsw

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

And a Bridge rectifier is GENERALLY referred to as a
full wave" rectifier.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> I've got strains of "bridge over troubled watters"
> floating through my unregulated head.
>
> Good thing I'm ohm, now.

Ohm, Ohm on the range.

Where the Volts & Amps play...

[Michael A. Terrell]

Larry Jaques wrote:
>
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> >>
> >> And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
> >> measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
> >> ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.
> >
> >
> > How do you 'half wave regulate' something?
>
> With a diode. Googlit.

You still don't see it. :)

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> Only regulate the negative side, maybe?
> (ha, ha!)

D-

[Lloyd E. Sponenburgh]

> Stormin Mormon wrote:
>>
>> Only regulate the negative side, maybe?
>> (ha, ha!)

FWIW, some of the projects I work on even have ground plane "regulation"
issues. (not that it's called regulation, or anything like that...)

LLoyd

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-06, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 06:03:06 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 04:18:54 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 04:47:18 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Gunner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>>>> ?mike.t...@earthlink.net? wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?
>>>>> ?cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>>>>> ??
>>>>> ?? And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
>>>>> ?? measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
>>>>> ?? ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.
>>>>> ?
>>>>> ?
>>>>> ? How do you 'half wave regulate' something?

I almost posted a long reply (also reading it as "rectify"),
until I noticed who had posted the question, and then I went back and
read it more carefully and spotted what was really asked, so I blew away
the reply and went on to see what else was said.

[ ... ]

>>>"half wave rectified"
>>>
>>>Very nice catch!!
>>
>>Bbbut, it started with an R...
>
> Indeed it did!
>
> Ever see one of those thingies where they ask if you can read this and
> half the letters are missing and some are turned around backwards?
>
> Takes my brain a second or two to shift gears and then I read right
> through it
>
> http://danalookadoo.com/psychology/jumbled-text/ as an example.
>
> Funny how the mind corrects flaws in words or the wrong words
> sometimes. As I get older..its easier...but sometimes it certainly
> bites me in the ass..as the regulator thingy did. Saw half wave and
> the following Re....and the brain changed it to rectifier
> subconciously

The main trick with the above web site is to *not* look at it
closely. :-)

> My room mate just looked at the above link...and is still sitting
> there trying to figure out what it says, even after I just read it out
> loud to her.

Interesting. I wonder what will happen when I show it to my
wife?

[Don Foreman]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

Tell a lefty that it has to do with guns so a mere half-wave at the
populace will start a movement to regulate it.

[Michael A. Terrell]

They won't hear _anything_ after the word GUN! ;-)

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 08:51:28 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 06:03:06 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

--much snippage--

>>Bbbut, it started with an R...
>
>Indeed it did!
>
>Ever see one of those thingies where they ask if you can read this and
>half the letters are missing and some are turned around backwards?
>
>Takes my brain a second or two to shift gears and then I read right
>through it
>
>http://danalookadoo.com/psychology/jumbled-text/ as an example.
>
>Funny how the mind corrects flaws in words or the wrong words
>sometimes. As I get older..its easier...but sometimes it certainly
>bites me in the ass..as the regulator thingy did. Saw half wave and
>the following Re....and the brain changed it to rectifier
>subconciously

I love those, and I'm amazed at how funky they can get before we stop
being able to grok 'em.

>My room mate just looked at the above link...and is still sitting
>there trying to figure out what it says, even after I just read it out
>loud to her.

If it has tits or tires, you're gonna have trouble with it. ;)

My latest book from the library is The Book of Codes: Understanding
the World of Hidden Messages. You'd like it and roomie'd like the
nice pictures. Anyway, it's an interesting read and is very evocative
of thought. It might stir something inside your mind which would help
you sort out some of your jumble since the stroke.


P.S: Are you going to write-in Ron Paul with me? Rummy and Obummer
just ain't got it. Otherwise, allowing Obummer to hasten TGC isn't a
bad idea, either. Hmm, Paul might be the easier pill to swallow and
send fewer countries to their demise (including ours!)

[DoN. Nichols]

Should that bridge be a "Wheatstone bridge"? :-)

And for some reason, I feel that that should be "Milliamps play",
perhaps it scans better with the original song?

[Michael A. Terrell]

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> >
> > Stormin Mormon wrote:
> >>
> >> I've got strains of "bridge over troubled watters"
> >> floating through my unregulated head.
> >>
> >> Good thing I'm ohm, now.
> >
> >
> > Ohm, Ohm on the range.
> >
> > Where the Volts & Amps play...
>
> Should that bridge be a "Wheatstone bridge"? :-)
>
> And for some reason, I feel that that should be "Milliamps play",
> perhaps it scans better with the original song?

Could be. I've seen about five versions, since the mid '60s. One was
over a photo of an electric 'range'. :)

[Larry Jaques]

Home, home of deranged.
Where the beers and the antelope play.
Where seldom is heerd,
A discouraging wierd,
and the scows are not clydey all day.


When the chips are down, the buffalo's empty.

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:38:57 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>Larry Jaques wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>> >>
>> >> And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
>> >> measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
>> >> ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.
>> >
>> >
>> > How do you 'half wave regulate' something?
>>
>> With a diode. Googlit.
>
> You still don't see it. :)

Like Gunner, I had to have it pointed out to me. I instantly got it
once I saw the word "rectified". I plead "lack of use". I've done
hardly any electronics work in the past 20 years, and I only worked as
a test tech from '88-91 (right after a Computer Electronics Technology
course at Coleman College in '87-88.) I never really learned the biz
in that short time. I sure wish SKS hadn't bought Palomar Technology
where I worked. They moved everyone down to Kearney Mesa and I didn't
want to drive 2 extra hours in rush-hour traffic every day for a
$10/hr job, thankyouverymuch. Had they stayed in Carlsbad, CA, I
might have turned into a decent tech. But self-employment was in my
blood then. I've had a smile on my face and been broke ever since.
(That means: I love my boss, the cheap bastid.) <g>

[Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:40:12 -0700, Larry Jaques

<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 08:51:28 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 06:03:06 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>--much snippage--
>
>>>Bbbut, it started with an R...
>>
>>Indeed it did!
>>
>>Ever see one of those thingies where they ask if you can read this and
>>half the letters are missing and some are turned around backwards?
>>
>>Takes my brain a second or two to shift gears and then I read right
>>through it
>>
>>http://danalookadoo.com/psychology/jumbled-text/ as an example.
>>
>>Funny how the mind corrects flaws in words or the wrong words
>>sometimes. As I get older..its easier...but sometimes it certainly
>>bites me in the ass..as the regulator thingy did. Saw half wave and
>>the following Re....and the brain changed it to rectifier
>>subconciously
>
>I love those, and I'm amazed at how funky they can get before we stop
>being able to grok 'em.

You have to be able to shift into "Proofreader Mode" and be looking
for those goofs. Now the harder part - turning it OFF again.

>>My room mate just looked at the above link...and is still sitting
>>there trying to figure out what it says, even after I just read it out
>>loud to her.
>
>If it has tits or tires, you're gonna have trouble with it. ;)
>
>My latest book from the library is The Book of Codes: Understanding
>the World of Hidden Messages. You'd like it and roomie'd like the
>nice pictures. Anyway, it's an interesting read and is very evocative
>of thought. It might stir something inside your mind which would help
>you sort out some of your jumble since the stroke.
>
>
>P.S: Are you going to write-in Ron Paul with me? Rummy and Obummer
>just ain't got it. Otherwise, allowing Obummer to hasten TGC isn't a
>bad idea, either. Hmm, Paul might be the easier pill to swallow and
>send fewer countries to their demise (including ours!)

Every vote for Ron Paul or Gary Johnson is taking a vote from Romney
and giving it to Obama. Can you survive four more years of this? Can
the nation survive four more years of this?

Obama has dug a debt hole so deep that even if we stop borrowing on
Inauguration Day 2013 and start paying it down, we'll be 20 years /or
more/ filling in the hole just to where we can see daylight between 11
AM and 1 PM local.

If you really want to fix that, change the voting process - IN BETWEEN
elections. For now, Romney is the only sane vote.

[Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>

Run it through a Zener Diode? ;-)

You can use a single diode and a huge electrolytic capacitor (hence
the half-wave) then run it through a LM-series regulator.

[Ignoramus14555]

On 2012-10-07, Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable) <bruceNOSP...@gmail.INVALID> wrote:
> Obama has dug a debt hole so deep that even if we stop borrowing on
> Inauguration Day 2013 and start paying it down, we'll be 20 years /or
> more/ filling in the hole just to where we can see daylight between 11
> AM and 1 PM local.

This is a common misconception.

Growth of federal spending under Obama administration was the lowest
since Eisenhower administration.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

It is lies like that that made me disgusted with the Republican party.

> If you really want to fix that, change the voting process - IN BETWEEN
> elections. For now, Romney is the only sane vote.

I would not call voting based on fiction and wishful thinking, to be
exactly "sane".

I am a realist, a business owner, and I have to evaluate whether I am
being lied to, or not, on a daily basis as part of my money making
activities. I tend to stay away from liars when conducting my
business, as well as when voting.

i

[Michael A. Terrell]

Larry Jaques wrote:
>
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:37:17 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Stormin Mormon wrote:
> >>
> >> I've got strains of "bridge over troubled watters"
> >> floating through my unregulated head.
> >>
> >> Good thing I'm ohm, now.
> >
> >
> > Ohm, Ohm on the range.
> >
> > Where the Volts & Amps play...
>
> Home, home of deranged.
> Where the beers and the antelope play.
> Where seldom is heerd,
> A discouraging wierd,
> and the scows are not clydey all day.
>
> When the chips are down, the buffalo's empty.

You can't rollerskate in a buffalo herd...

[Michael A. Terrell]

I still spot things like that from too many years of writing &
cleaning up technical documents. By the same measure, I can't drive
down a road and not spot damaged CATV, phone or electrical hardware.

> You never hear anyone say, 'Yeah, but it's a dry cold.'
> -- Charles A. Budreau

He was never at Ft. Greely, Ak. where -40°F and 0% humidity was a
warm day. In winter.

[Michael A. Terrell]

"Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:58:11 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> >>
> >> And MANY of them are also totally unregulated and unfiltered. I've
> >> measured in excess of 18 volts open circuit, with over 4 volts AC
> >> ripple. Some are even only HALF WAVE regulated.
> >
> >
> > How do you 'half wave regulate' something?
>
> Run it through a Zener Diode? ;-)

Zeners conduct in both directions, once the voltage reaches the knee
voltage.

> You can use a single diode and a huge electrolytic capacitor (hence
> the half-wave) then run it through a LM-series regulator.

Still, that's not a 'half wave regulator'.


I did regulate a very low power switching supply with four output
voltages by putting a Zener across one output. Not something I'd
recommend, but it was a temprary supply to test a homemade 1 GHz 10
digit VFD for a frequency counter I was building back in the '80s.

[Gunner]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:40:12 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>
>P.S: Are you going to write-in Ron Paul with me? Rummy and Obummer
>just ain't got it. Otherwise, allowing Obummer to hasten TGC isn't a
>bad idea, either. Hmm, Paul might be the easier pill to swallow and
>send fewer countries to their demise (including ours!)

A vote for Ron Paul is a vote against Romney.

I take it you havent read my postings on 3rd party votes in the last
week?

Paul doesnt have a chance in hell of winning. Period. End Program.
Full Stop. EnditEnditEndit.

We have a dozen choices..from the Obamassiah to the American Communist
Party. candidates.

While Romney may not be what we all want...he is the ONLY candiate
that has a chance against the Obamassiah.

So to get Barry out of office..Im going to vote for Romney. And Im a
Democrat.

Now if you want 4 more years of Barry...vote for whoever you wish.
And id suggest keeping your head down when the Great Cull starts.

[John B.]

If you are a realist yuo certainly know that the single largest
increase in Federal Debt, denoted in U.S. dollars, was in 2010 - some
12.5%
--
Cheers,
John B.

[Stormin Mormon]

I get a charge out of electrical humor. Sadly, most
people, it just flows through in one ear, out the other.
Some jokes are not conductive to good humor.

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:4aydnZten4adCu3N...@earthlink.com...

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 20:51:01 -0700, "Bruce L. Bergman (munged human
readable)" <bruceNOSP...@gmail.INVALID> wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:40:12 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

--snip--

>>I love those, and I'm amazed at how funky they can get before we stop
>>being able to grok 'em.
>
>You have to be able to shift into "Proofreader Mode" and be looking
>for those goofs. Now the harder part - turning it OFF again.

We can turn it off? !

>>P.S: Are you going to write-in Ron Paul with me? Rummy and Obummer
>>just ain't got it. Otherwise, allowing Obummer to hasten TGC isn't a
>>bad idea, either. Hmm, Paul might be the easier pill to swallow and
>>send fewer countries to their demise (including ours!)
>
>Every vote for Ron Paul or Gary Johnson is taking a vote from Romney
>and giving it to Obama.

It's this type of idiotic thinking which has made third party
candidacy impossible in this country. Just stop it! People, vote for
whomever you identify with, not who you think has the best chance of
winning. The latter only continues the non-progress we make in taking
our country back from the corrupt: damned attorneys and career
politicians who don't give a shit about us OR the country. Remember
the words "...all enemies, foreign or domestic" and hold these jerks
_accountable_ to it.

>Can you survive four more years of this? Can
>the nation survive four more years of this?

Let's hope we don't have to, but a vote for Romney would only prolong
it.

I cannot, in good conscience, vote for Romney. I wouldn't, even in a
drunken stupor, vote for Obama. I neither like their ideas nor their
personalities. If the idiots who thought Perot couldn't win in 1992
had given him a chance, America (even the world) would be a much, much
better place today, and I'd be willing to bet that there wouldn't be
any recession.

>Obama has dug a debt hole so deep that even if we stop borrowing on
>Inauguration Day 2013 and start paying it down, we'll be 20 years /or
>more/ filling in the hole just to where we can see daylight between 11
>AM and 1 PM local.

While he certainly added to it, he didn't start it and he won't be the
last to add to it, damnnit. <sigh> In addition to a $17T debt, the
$1.3T deficit is a godawful mess.

>If you really want to fix that, change the voting process - IN BETWEEN
>elections. For now, Romney is the only sane vote.

Not if Paul wins. Do you actually -like- Romney? Who here does?
I haven't heard anyone say they did, only that they were voting
against Obama. <sigh>


I'd love for Ron Paul to win, but if he doesn't, it will almost
certainly be Obama. And that will hasten any cull which might happen.
I feel that in my bones. Hang on. The end of 2012 will surely be a
very bumpy ride unless we get a new face in office. Paul's new face
is not in lockstep with the Reps or Dems. Make it him, please.

Hurrah for the real Tea Party folks, not the talking faces on teevee
who purport to represent them/us.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> I get a charge out of electrical humor. Sadly, most
> people, it just flows through in one ear, out the other.
> Some jokes are not conductive to good humor.

Such are 'insular' people. ;-)

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 23:00:30 -0500, Ignoramus14555
<ignoram...@NOSPAM.14555.invalid> wrote:

>On 2012-10-07, Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable) <bruceNOSP...@gmail.INVALID> wrote:
>> Obama has dug a debt hole so deep that even if we stop borrowing on
>> Inauguration Day 2013 and start paying it down, we'll be 20 years /or
>> more/ filling in the hole just to where we can see daylight between 11
>> AM and 1 PM local.
>
>This is a common misconception.
>
>Growth of federal spending under Obama administration was the lowest
>since Eisenhower administration.
>
>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1
>
>It is lies like that that made me disgusted with the Republican party.

Figure in Obamacare, which was carefully constructed to defer the
heart-wrending deficits it will bring until he was either out of
office or in a lame-duck period. That will quickly reverse your
spending chart there, old buddy.

Besides, how much would he have spent if he hadn't been opressed by
the looming recession?

>> If you really want to fix that, change the voting process - IN BETWEEN
>> elections. For now, Romney is the only sane vote.
>
>I would not call voting based on fiction and wishful thinking, to be
>exactly "sane".
>
>I am a realist, a business owner, and I have to evaluate whether I am
>being lied to, or not, on a daily basis as part of my money making
>activities. I tend to stay away from liars when conducting my
>business, as well as when voting.

http://tinyurl.com/dx9rbja Watch this 1 minute video and take notes
as you do. Now tell me how many of the things he said he was going to
do actually got done in his first 4 years? Enlighten me, please.

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html Interesting, da?

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 23:54:47 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:40:12 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>P.S: Are you going to write-in Ron Paul with me? Rummy and Obummer
>>just ain't got it. Otherwise, allowing Obummer to hasten TGC isn't a
>>bad idea, either. Hmm, Paul might be the easier pill to swallow and
>>send fewer countries to their demise (including ours!)
>
>
>A vote for Ron Paul is a vote against Romney.

You might also say it was against Obama, but I don't. You cannot vote
against anyone. You can only vote FOR someone. Buy a clue, all you who
talk of waste. Stop listening to the spin teams, fer chrissake.
Romney and Obama scare me, I don't like them, and I don't want them in
office anywhere. Why the hell would I vote for one of them?

>I take it you havent read my postings on 3rd party votes in the last
>week?

Glossed over.

>Paul doesnt have a chance in hell of winning. Period. End Program.
>Full Stop. EnditEnditEndit.

That's what they said about Perot, but we almost pulled it off.

Why don't you guys understand that my vote is my vote? Everyone who
disagrees with me says my vote is wasted, but that's absolutely not
true. Only an -uncast- vote is wasted. Otherwise, it represents the
views of the voter. Period. Fullstop.

[Gunner]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 09:19:16 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>
>>If you really want to fix that, change the voting process - IN BETWEEN
>>elections. For now, Romney is the only sane vote.
>
>Not if Paul wins.

The chance of Paul winning is infintismal.

Get real.

The only way Paul could win is if an asteroid hit the next
presidential debate square on at high speed straight in.

Might as well hope that will happen to Congress in session.

Or pray really hard.

Really really really hard.

[Gunner]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 10:17:28 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>
>>Paul doesnt have a chance in hell of winning. Period. End Program.
>>Full Stop. EnditEnditEndit.
>
>That's what they said about Perot, but we almost pulled it off.

"almost"

"almost" doesnt count except for horsehoes, handgrenades and nuclear
strikes.

And it was a long way from "almost".

Frankly...I DONT want to see the Second American Revolution playing
out across the nation and all those little parks where countless
leftwingers were dozed into ditches. Seriously. Thats bad juju.


http://www.examiner.com/article/ron-paul-still-a-factor-re-electing-obama

When Ross Perot ran as a third-party candidate, he took just enough
votes to guarantee a Bill Clinton presidency. Today, the Ron Paul
supporters who refuse to vote for Mitt Romney because he’s not “pure”
enough may well guarantee an Obama re-election.

Today’s polling tells us that the election is going to be close. While
one can interpret the polling data and the sampling methods to show a
variety of results, there can be no disputing that the outcome is far
from pre-determined and decided.

Given that reality, the votes of that contingent of rabid Ron Paul
supporters are quite capable of being a deciding factor of the outcome
of November’s contest. So Ron Paul’s supporters must ask themselves a
number of questions:

Is the “principle” involved in casting a libertarian vote versus a
vote for Romney worth another four years of Obama? How would an Obama
re-election affect the liberties and constitutional republic you hold
so dear? Can America, as you know it, survive an Obama second term? Is
a Romney presidency a worse eventuality than an Obama re-election?

If one performs an honest analysis and assessment, libertarian
principles will be further set back if Obama is granted another term
to pursue his agenda. While Romney may not push forward the
libertarian agenda as far, fast or forcefully as a Ron Paul… is it
better to guarantee the election of one who would move it backwards?

Even 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential Candidate Wayne Allyn Root has
recognized that the best hope for an America protective of the
constitution and our liberty is currently Mitt Romney!

http://www.examiner.com/article/ex-libertarian-wayne-allyn-root-endorses-mitt-romney-for-president?no_cache=1348571292

http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneallynroot/2012/09/17/why_this_exlibertarian_is_voting_mitt_romney/page/full/

What would another Obama term look like? Is it something a Ron Paul
supporter would/should wish for?

Economic policy: Expect 4 more years of deficits exceeding a trillion
dollars and ballooning debt. Expect further empowering of the Fed and
another 4 years of Bernanke monetary policy.

Foreign policy: Expect weak leadership and kowtowing to unfriendly
foreign powers, while doing little to protect US vital interests or
strengthen traditional alliances… but don’t expect a Ron Paulian
isolationism or non-interventionism.

Energy: Count on furtherance of America’s energy dependence and higher
costs.

Constitution and liberty: Direction determines destination. Do you
want to ARRIVE where Obama’s been heading on these issues?

Supreme Court: Can you say Attorney General Eric Holder?

Obama has made clear that this election is a stark delineation between
two world views. Romney represents a conservative, capitalist, smaller
government position, which, while not as “pure” as Ron Paul’s vision,
is clearly not the assault on liberty and the constitution that the
Obama presidency has been. And without a future re-election campaign
to consider, how much more extreme could Obama become.

Obama has been the most anti-constitution, anti-liberty president
since Woodrow Wilson. Are you prepared to unleash him for another 4
year term just to withhold your vote from Mitt Romney? Isn’t a 70% win
better than a 100% loss?

Please, Ron Paul… Come out and speak to your supporters and throw your
endorsement to Mitt Romney. For the good of the country, use your
influence to prevent further assault on the Constitution you claim to
love, defend and protect. Sure, Romney isn’t the perfect candidate,
and there are many who supported other candidates during the
primaries. But “anyone but Mitt” didn’t win. And while Mitt may not
move the ball as far forward as you wish, Obama will carry it back to
your own goal line. It’s time to Punt.

[Larry Jaques]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 10:51:47 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 10:17:28 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>Paul doesnt have a chance in hell of winning. Period. End Program.
>>>Full Stop. EnditEnditEndit.
>>
>>That's what they said about Perot, but we almost pulled it off.
>
>"almost"
>
>"almost" doesnt count except for horsehoes, handgrenades and nuclear
>strikes.
>
>And it was a long way from "almost".
>
>Frankly...I DONT want to see the Second American Revolution playing
>out across the nation and all those little parks where countless
>leftwingers were dozed into ditches. Seriously. Thats bad juju.
>
>
>http://www.examiner.com/article/ron-paul-still-a-factor-re-electing-obama
>
>When Ross Perot ran as a third-party candidate, he took just enough
>votes to guarantee a Bill Clinton presidency.

So you're saying that all TWENTY MILLION of us were wrong? Bullshit.
We all wanted REAL fucking change, not some hype from an airhead who's
from one of two totally corrupt parties. $250k is middle class?
47% of us don't step on our dicks so badly on teevee. ;)

>Today, the Ron Paul
>supporters who refuse to vote for Mitt Romney because he’s not “pure”
>enough may well guarantee an Obama re-election.

Not pure enough? What's that all about? He's a relidjified nut who is
out of touch with everything American. He lives in a whole 'nother
world than we do. (All CONgresscritters appear to.)

[Gunner]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 11:14:57 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>>
>>Frankly...I DONT want to see the Second American Revolution playing
>>out across the nation and all those little parks where countless
>>leftwingers were dozed into ditches. Seriously. Thats bad juju.
>>
>>
>>http://www.examiner.com/article/ron-paul-still-a-factor-re-electing-obama
>>
>>When Ross Perot ran as a third-party candidate, he took just enough
>>votes to guarantee a Bill Clinton presidency.
>
>So you're saying that all TWENTY MILLION of us were wrong? Bullshit.
>We all wanted REAL fucking change, not some hype from an airhead who's
>from one of two totally corrupt parties. $250k is middle class?
>47% of us don't step on our dicks so badly on teevee. ;)

You lost.

And in doing so...you gave us Bill Clinton

You lost.

Endgame. Full stop.

And in doing so...you gave us Bill Clinton.
Deal with it. Feel the guilt. Feel the shame. You gave your
best...and in doing so, you killed many hundreds of thousands of
people all across the planet who would be alive today if your making
it possible for Bubba Clinton to not have 9 wars going with American
troops all across the planet., along with bin Ladin and Co.

You fucked up.

Badly.

All because of your ego and unrealistic world view.

Rather..WE fucked up..because I voted for him too.

But that wont happen ever again. My ego is big, but my common sense
is bigger. I learn from my mistakes.

Perhaps you should try that too?

>
>>Today, the Ron Paul
>>supporters who refuse to vote for Mitt Romney because he’s not “pure”
>>enough may well guarantee an Obama re-election.
>
>Not pure enough? What's that all about? He's a relidjified nut who is
>out of touch with everything American. He lives in a whole 'nother
>world than we do. (All CONgresscritters appear to.)

Odd how most of the Nation tends to disagree with your opinion on
this. Or do you simply suck on the Glass Teat and its MSM udder?

But..once again...your opinion is noted. Shrug.

Now if it would help...we can both sacrifice a fatted calf, or pray
really really hard for that asteroid to smash DC during a session of
Congress.

But thats the only thing besides a realistic viable plan to replace
them that will actualy work.

No matter how hard you stamp your feed in disgust or anger....Voting
for Ron Paul/et al isnt going to do a damned thing but give us 4 more
years of the most damaging president since FDR. FACT.

Deal with it, or find a cave and bundle up until Nov ...2016

Romney isnt my first choice. Or even my second. But in this game...he
is the ONLY choice with a chance.

Maybe the next time the powers that be will give us a better
candidate. We can only hope..and put those people in Congress/GOP so
they are smarter the next time.

Reality check time. Take it or leave it.

Gunner

>
>--

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-07, Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Larry Jaques wrote:

[ ... ]

>> You never hear anyone say, 'Yeah, but it's a dry cold.'
>> -- Charles A. Budreau
>
>
> He was never at Ft. Greely, Ak. where -40°F and 0% humidity was a
> warm day. In winter.

And how does that differ from -40 C ? :-)

[Larry Jaques]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 12:04:48 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Hayseuss Crisco, mon! If you really believe that, you're _sick_. Seek
psychological help today! Voting is our patriotic duty. We both
fulfilled that. Voting for our choice of candidate is our personal
duty to ourselves. We did that. There IS no shame in our actions.
Get over it.

>Rather..WE fucked up..because I voted for him too.

<g>

>But that wont happen ever again. My ego is big, but my common sense
>is bigger. I learn from my mistakes.

Do you? You present only two candidates for me to choose from. One
you dislike as much as I do. The other is as corrupt and will give us
the changes we need to keep this country strong...just as much as the
other corrupt guy will. Net return: Zilch. Where's the moral high
point in that?

>Perhaps you should try that too?

I often do.

>>>Today, the Ron Paul
>>>supporters who refuse to vote for Mitt Romney because he’s not “pure”
>>>enough may well guarantee an Obama re-election.
>>
>>Not pure enough? What's that all about? He's a relidjified nut who is
>>out of touch with everything American. He lives in a whole 'nother
>>world than we do. (All CONgresscritters appear to.)
>
>Odd how most of the Nation tends to disagree with your opinion on
>this. Or do you simply suck on the Glass Teat and its MSM udder?

Most of the nation is addicted to the Glass Teat and can't do anything
without it, including THINK. They need to have their opinions handed
to them by the Teat. I watch no TV at all, and haven't for almost 6
years now. So, do you believe that Romney, Obama, or any of the
CONgresscritters live in the same world we do? They have no concept
whatsoever about how to live on $60k or less per year, let alone $15k.
How can they relate to us at all?

>Romney isnt my first choice. Or even my second. But in this game...he
>is the ONLY choice with a chance.

I'm hopeful.

>Maybe the next time the powers that be will give us a better
>candidate. We can only hope..and put those people in Congress/GOP so
>they are smarter the next time.

We've been doing that.

>Reality check time. Take it or leave it.

Odd. That's what the liberals said about Obama. Hmm...

--
Energy and persistence alter all things.
--Benjamin Franklin

[whoyakidding]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 13:11:25 -0700, Larry Jaques

<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 12:04:48 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 11:14:57 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>>>>When Ross Perot ran as a third-party candidate, he took just enough
>>>>votes to guarantee a Bill Clinton presidency.
>>>
>>>So you're saying that all TWENTY MILLION of us were wrong? Bullshit.
>>>We all wanted REAL fucking change, not some hype from an airhead who's
>>>from one of two totally corrupt parties. $250k is middle class?
>>>47% of us don't step on our dicks so badly on teevee. ;)

>>You fucked up.
>>
>> Badly.
>>
>>All because of your ego and unrealistic world view.
>
>Hayseuss Crisco, mon! If you really believe that, you're _sick_. Seek
>psychological help today!

Arf arf. You've been reading his horseshit for how many years and you
only figured this out now? Then you're as stupid as Gunner claims.

[Stormin Mormon]

I just can't connect with people like that.

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:gdydnQcXS-_mMuzN...@earthlink.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

Oh, -40F is so, so much colder.

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

"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:slrnk73mlu.bh...@Katana.d-and-d.com...

On 2012-10-07, Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> He was never at Ft. Greely, Ak. where -40°F and 0% humidity was a
> warm day. In winter.

And how does that differ from -40 C ? :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email:

<ENVIRONMENTALREGULTIONSdnic...@d-and-d.com> |

[Stormin Mormon]

I talked to Army guy, one time. From Alaska. Asked how they can even live
in -40F. We get near zero, in NYS, and it's miserable. He says the wet cold
blowing off the lake feels much worse.

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

"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:slrnk73mlu.bh...@Katana.d-and-d.com...

On 2012-10-07, Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:


>> You never hear anyone say, 'Yeah, but it's a dry cold.'
>> -- Charles A. Budreau
>
>
> He was never at Ft. Greely, Ak. where -40°F and 0% humidity was a
> warm day. In winter.

And how does that differ from -40 C ? :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail

Email: <[government]dnichols[government]@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all

[Michael A. Terrell]

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:
>
> On 2012-10-07, Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > Larry Jaques wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> >> You never hear anyone say, 'Yeah, but it's a dry cold.'
> >> -- Charles A. Budreau
> >
> >
> > He was never at Ft. Greely, Ak. where -40°F and 0% humidity was a
> > warm day. In winter.
>
> And how does that differ from -40 C ? :-)

By where you are, when you measure it. ;-)

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> I talked to Army guy, one time. From Alaska. Asked how they can even live
> in -40F.

You can't, without being fully prepared. The proper clothes. Keep
active, and NEVER drink alcohol outdoors. It can freeze your lungs and
kill you before they can get you indoors to thaw out.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> I just can't connect with people like that.

Sad thing is, they don't care.

[Gunner]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 13:11:25 -0700, Larry Jaques

Get over Bill Clinton? Blink blink....blink?

>
>
>>Rather..WE fucked up..because I voted for him too.
>
><g>
>
>
>>But that wont happen ever again. My ego is big, but my common sense
>>is bigger. I learn from my mistakes.
>
>Do you? You present only two candidates for me to choose from. One
>you dislike as much as I do. The other is as corrupt and will give us
>the changes we need to keep this country strong...just as much as the
>other corrupt guy will. Net return: Zilch. Where's the moral high
>point in that?

Sorry Larry..I dont present ANY candidates for you to vote for. And
besides...Im a Democrat.

<VBG>

>
>
>>Perhaps you should try that too?
>
>I often do.
>
>
>>>>Today, the Ron Paul
>>>>supporters who refuse to vote for Mitt Romney because he’s not “pure”
>>>>enough may well guarantee an Obama re-election.
>>>
>>>Not pure enough? What's that all about? He's a relidjified nut who is
>>>out of touch with everything American. He lives in a whole 'nother
>>>world than we do. (All CONgresscritters appear to.)
>>
>>Odd how most of the Nation tends to disagree with your opinion on
>>this. Or do you simply suck on the Glass Teat and its MSM udder?
>
>Most of the nation is addicted to the Glass Teat and can't do anything
>without it, including THINK. They need to have their opinions handed
>to them by the Teat. I watch no TV at all, and haven't for almost 6
>years now. So, do you believe that Romney, Obama, or any of the
>CONgresscritters live in the same world we do? They have no concept
>whatsoever about how to live on $60k or less per year, let alone $15k.
>How can they relate to us at all?
>
>
>>Romney isnt my first choice. Or even my second. But in this game...he
>>is the ONLY choice with a chance.
>
>I'm hopeful.

Shrug...me too.

>
>
>>Maybe the next time the powers that be will give us a better
>>candidate. We can only hope..and put those people in Congress/GOP so
>>they are smarter the next time.
>
>We've been doing that.
>
>
>>Reality check time. Take it or leave it.
>
>Odd. That's what the liberals said about Obama. Hmm...

Indeed they did. And between their massing the children and all the
fraudulant votes they managed to truck in...he won.

We are hoping this time...we will catch them at it. And simply
outvote them from the gitgo.

If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.

Bank on it.

Gunner

[Larry Jaques]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:00:17 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>

No, get over your insane guilt trip. You/we did nothing wrong.
Seriously, Gunner.

>>>Rather..WE fucked up..because I voted for him too.
>>
>><g>
>>
>>
>>>But that wont happen ever again. My ego is big, but my common sense
>>>is bigger. I learn from my mistakes.
>>
>>Do you? You present only two candidates for me to choose from. One
>>you dislike as much as I do. The other is as corrupt and will give us
>>the changes we need to keep this country strong...just as much as the
>>other corrupt guy will. Net return: Zilch. Where's the moral high
>>point in that?
>
>Sorry Larry..I dont present ANY candidates for you to vote for. And
>besides...Im a Democrat.
>
><VBG>

And I'm a RINO, since nothing they're doing today resembles anything I
was brought up to respect.

I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.

[Gunner]

Never happen, not in a million years.

They have to go.

[priyanka patel]

Happy Mr. White Arrives

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syU5VPpdces

Subscribe for more footage.

[Stormin Mormon]

Yes, alcohol is vasodialator. I wonder why drunken Eskimos don't have this
problem? They just know to stay drunk indoors?

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ceWdnWWE0oZdvu_N...@earthlink.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

Some people have no capacity for connection? That's a shame.

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:ceWdnWSE0oZ_vu_N...@earthlink.com...

[Jim Wilkins]

"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:C3Acs.2127$2g7...@fe20.iad...

> Yes, alcohol is vasodialator. I wonder why drunken Eskimos don't
> have this
> problem? They just know to stay drunk indoors?
>
> Christopher A. Young

A Micmac woman showed me that a pinch of her skin was nearly 3/4"
thick, while mine is about 1/8". She and her kids needed half the
clothing I did to stay warm, and I have a good Northern European cold
tolerance.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> Yes, alcohol is vasodialator. I wonder why drunken Eskimos don't have this
> problem? They just know to stay drunk indoors?

It's WHERE they drink. Think about it. It's below freezing, for
water but not for alcohol. You take a swig of whiskey, and that hits
your stomach. The cold spreads quickly through your guts, including
your lungs which are already dealing with the low temperatures.

Indoors, at or near room temperature alcohol doesn't have that effect
but some fools think of whiskey as 'human antifreeze'. Then they die.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> Some people have no capacity for connection? That's a shame.

Some have a high ESR, and are hopeless. Their SRF is so low, you
have trouble believing that they're alive.

[Stormin Mormon]

That sure sounds like she is equipped for cold.

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

"Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:k4ul70$dkf$1...@dont-email.me...

[Stormin Mormon]

I've heard of people drinking, as a naval vessel sinks into the water. "Keep
me warm" booze sends blood to the surface, they die faster.

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:O72dnUWtu_kLQe_N...@earthlink.com...

[pyotr filipivich]

Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>>If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>
>>>Bank on it.
>>
>>I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>
>Never happen, not in a million years.

Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?
And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?

And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?


--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

[pyotr filipivich]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012
10:00:45 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>
>Stormin Mormon wrote:
>>
>> Yes, alcohol is vasodialator. I wonder why drunken Eskimos don't have this
>> problem? They just know to stay drunk indoors?
>
>
> It's WHERE they drink. Think about it. It's below freezing, for
>water but not for alcohol. You take a swig of whiskey, and that hits
>your stomach. The cold spreads quickly through your guts, including
>your lungs which are already dealing with the low temperatures.

It starts in your mouth, and throat. Fluid below the freezing
point of water "suck the heat" out of the tissue surrounding the
fluid, and will cause"frostbite" as it goes.
Think of an ice cream brain freeze, only with more "freeze".

>
> Indoors, at or near room temperature alcohol doesn't have that effect
>but some fools think of whiskey as 'human antifreeze'. Then they die.

People think booze is "warming" when the actuality is that booze
opens surface blood vessels, and the body heat "exported" from the
core born by the blood, makes the skin feel warm. As the body dumps
heat to the cold air - at least you feel good.

[Gunner]

On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:51:10 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
>in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>
>>>>Bank on it.
>>>
>>>I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>>might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>>lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>
>>Never happen, not in a million years.
>
> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?

Correct

> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?

Damned little

>
> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?

Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
Order btw.

> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?

Evidently not.

Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.

Shrug

Gunner

>
>
>--
>pyotr
>Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
>you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
>question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
>does it take to change a lightbulb.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/8/2012 1:04 PM, Gunner wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:51:10 -0700, pyotr filipivich
> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
>> in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>> On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques
>>> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bank on it.
>>>>
>>>> I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>>> might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>>> lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>>
>>> Never happen, not in a million years.
>>
>> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?
> Correct
>
>> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?
>
> Damned little
>
>>
>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>> as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>> of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>
> Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
> Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
> Order btw.

It's a stupid and idiotic question, of course. Libertarians (small l)
are under no illusion that a libertarian-minded president can dictate
policy. What they quite sensibly want is someone who isn't going to
initiate bad policy, as Republicans and Democrats alike do, and who will
try within constitutional limits to thwart bad policy emerging from
whichever party controls Congress.

>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>> three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>> are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>
> Evidently not.
>
> Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
> is possible.

They don't. You're whacking at a straw man, as usual.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/8/2012 10:51 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
> in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>> On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques
>> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>
>>>> Bank on it.
>>>
>>> I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>> might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>> lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>
>> Never happen, not in a million years.
>
> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?

He is, but his leanings are very much libertarian (small l) on most
issues. He falls off the path to libertarian rightness on some issues.

> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
> as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
> of the US?

They don't.

> Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?

No.

> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
> three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
> are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?

They understand that full well.

[Stormin Mormon]

That sounds like a positively cruel thing to happen, to anyone.

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

"pyotr filipivich" <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:gb4678l2ouoso4h3p...@4ax.com...

[whoyakidding]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques

Oh look, it's a married pair of idiot cullers having a squabble but
finding out that they're still in love. Too fucking funny.

[Larry Jaques]

On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:04:31 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:51:10 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
>>in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques
>>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>>
>>>>>Bank on it.
>>>>
>>>>I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>>>might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>>>lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>>
>>>Never happen, not in a million years.
>>
>> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?
>Correct

Yes, but he's a Libertarian at heart.

>> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?
>
>Damned little

As a co-worker. But he is being felt and listened to more now.

>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>>as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>>of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>
>Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
>Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
>Order btw.
>
>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>>three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>>are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>
>Evidently not.

Kennedy gave us the moon... He had the people behind him.

>Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.

Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
from constituents to the CONs help, too.

[pyotr filipivich]

Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012
16:42:53 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:04:31 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:

>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:51:10 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
>>>in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>>>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:
>>>>>>If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Bank on it.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>>>>might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>>>>lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>>>
>>>>Never happen, not in a million years.
>>>
>>> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?
>>Correct
>
>Yes, but he's a Libertarian at heart.

So why doesn't he run for Congress as a Libertarian?

Bernie Sanders runs as a Socialist, and he gets elected and
re-elected. Of course, he is the only openly Socialist in the
Democrat caucus (the rest just are too bashful to admit it.)

>>> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?
>>
>>Damned little
>
>As a co-worker. But he is being felt and listened to more now.

Because of his efforts, or because the TEA party has caused a sea
change in the GOP in regards to "conservative values"?

>>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>>>as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>>>of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>>
>>Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
>>Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
>>Order btw.
>>
>>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>>>three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>>>are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>
>>Evidently not.
>
>Kennedy gave us the moon... He had the people behind him.

Nice response, but it does not answer the questions: Do these
Libertarians not understand the Constitution, that the three branches
of Government are co-equal? Or that budgets and laws are to originate

in the Congress, not the Executive branch?

It was not Kennedy who appropriated the money to buy the real
estate, buy the parts, or pay the engineers. That had to happen in
the House.

>>Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>
>Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>from constituents to the CONs help, too.

So, what you want is a Libertarian Obama, who will rule by
executive order, send bills to the Congress for their approval,while
the Supreme Court finds the legal reasoning why beloved leaders
actions are Constitutional?

Does anyone else recall Nehemiah Scudder?

tschus
pyotr

[Larry Jaques]

On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:54:58 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012
>16:42:53 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:04:31 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:51:10 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>>Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
>>>>in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:
>>>>>>>If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Bank on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>>>>>might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>>>>>lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>>>>
>>>>>Never happen, not in a million years.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?
>>>Correct
>>
>>Yes, but he's a Libertarian at heart.
>
> So why doesn't he run for Congress as a Libertarian?

He ran for President in '88 as a Libertarian.

> Bernie Sanders runs as a Socialist, and he gets elected and
>re-elected. Of course, he is the only openly Socialist in the
>Democrat caucus (the rest just are too bashful to admit it.)
>
>>>> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?
>>>
>>>Damned little
>>
>>As a co-worker. But he is being felt and listened to more now.
>
> Because of his efforts, or because the TEA party has caused a sea
>change in the GOP in regards to "conservative values"?

Probably both. Tell me about this "sea change".

>>>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>>>>as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>>>>of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>>>
>>>Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
>>>Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
>>>Order btw.
>>>
>>>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>>>>three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>>>>are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>>
>>>Evidently not.
>>
>>Kennedy gave us the moon... He had the people behind him.
>
> Nice response, but it does not answer the questions: Do these
>Libertarians not understand the Constitution, that the three branches
>of Government are co-equal? Or that budgets and laws are to originate
>in the Congress, not the Executive branch?

I think they do. People in high places influence others, especially
when The People are behind them.

> It was not Kennedy who appropriated the money to buy the real
>estate, buy the parts, or pay the engineers. That had to happen in
>the House.

Right.

>>>Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>>is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>>thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>>
>>Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>>He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>>concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>>from constituents to the CONs help, too.
>
> So, what you want is a Libertarian Obama, who will rule by
>executive order, send bills to the Congress for their approval,while
>the Supreme Court finds the legal reasoning why beloved leaders
>actions are Constitutional?

What a scary mind you have, Pete! <g>

> Does anyone else recall Nehemiah Scudder?

I didn't read that particular Heinlein book series. Sounds like a
terror novel with the relidjus wrong at the helm. <shudder>

[pyotr filipivich]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012
10:00:45 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>
>Stormin Mormon wrote:
>>
>> Yes, alcohol is vasodialator. I wonder why drunken Eskimos don't have this
>> problem? They just know to stay drunk indoors?
>
>
> It's WHERE they drink. Think about it. It's below freezing, for
>water but not for alcohol. You take a swig of whiskey, and that hits
>your stomach. The cold spreads quickly through your guts, including
>your lungs which are already dealing with the low temperatures.

It also has to do with the fact that whiskey doesn't freeze until
it get really, really cold. So you think "It can't be that cold, it
still sloshes". Yep. and it is now extremely well 'chilled' Five,
ten, twenty degrees of frost?
"Over the lips,
over the gums
Look out stomach
-- oh damn, your throat just froze!"
And frostbite of the mouth, palate, tongue, and the dangly bit in the
back of your mouth - is not pleasant.

>
> Indoors, at or near room temperature alcohol doesn't have that effect
>but some fools think of whiskey as 'human antifreeze'. Then they die.

[Gunner]

On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:42:53 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>
>
>>Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>
>Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>from constituents to the CONs help, too.

Reallty? Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

They concede to it eh? Sure they do. Which is why the housing market
is still falling down around our ears..10 yrs later

And given that the Democrats controlled Congress for the last 2 YEARS
of the Bush administration...exactly the time period that things went
completely into the toilet....care to try that line again?

Hummmm?

Gunner

"The best government is a benevolent tyranny tempered
by an occasional assassination." --Voltaire

[Gunner]

On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:39:57 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:54:58 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012
>>16:42:53 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:04:31 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:51:10 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>>>Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:13:10 -0700 typed
>>>>>in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>>>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:50:58 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:
>>>>>>>>If Obama wins...we WILL have the Second American Revolution.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Bank on it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm certain it -will- happen. That's why I want Ron Paul to win. It
>>>>>>>might circumvent the bloodshed...if he can hammer some sense into the
>>>>>>>lying, cheating, thieving bastards we call CONgress.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Never happen, not in a million years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't Ron Paul being reelected as a Republican?
>>>>Correct
>>>
>>>Yes, but he's a Libertarian at heart.
>>
>> So why doesn't he run for Congress as a Libertarian?
>
>He ran for President in '88 as a Libertarian.

And lost by a landslide

>
>
>> Bernie Sanders runs as a Socialist, and he gets elected and
>>re-elected. Of course, he is the only openly Socialist in the
>>Democrat caucus (the rest just are too bashful to admit it.)
>>
>>>>> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?
>>>>
>>>>Damned little
>>>
>>>As a co-worker. But he is being felt and listened to more now.
>>
>> Because of his efforts, or because the TEA party has caused a sea
>>change in the GOP in regards to "conservative values"?
>
>Probably both. Tell me about this "sea change".

We take it you didnt notice the number of Republicans that were voted
OUT of office in 2010..and their seats were taken by Tea Party
Conservatives?

RINOS...had to go.

>
>
>>>>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>>>>>as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>>>>>of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>>>>
>>>>Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
>>>>Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
>>>>Order btw.
>>>>
>>>>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>>>>>three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>>>>>are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>>>
>>>>Evidently not.
>>>
>>>Kennedy gave us the moon... He had the people behind him.
>>
>> Nice response, but it does not answer the questions: Do these
>>Libertarians not understand the Constitution, that the three branches
>>of Government are co-equal? Or that budgets and laws are to originate
>>in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>
>I think they do. People in high places influence others, especially
>when The People are behind them.

Yes..and?

>
>
>> It was not Kennedy who appropriated the money to buy the real
>>estate, buy the parts, or pay the engineers. That had to happen in
>>the House.
>
>Right.

It wasnt?

>
>
>>>>Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>>>is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>>>thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>>>
>>>Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>>>He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>>>concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>>>from constituents to the CONs help, too.
>>
>> So, what you want is a Libertarian Obama, who will rule by
>>executive order, send bills to the Congress for their approval,while
>>the Supreme Court finds the legal reasoning why beloved leaders
>>actions are Constitutional?
>
>What a scary mind you have, Pete! <g>

What a realistic mind he has..and a scary mind you have.

Shrug

>
>
>> Does anyone else recall Nehemiah Scudder?
>
>I didn't read that particular Heinlein book series. Sounds like a
>terror novel with the relidjus wrong at the helm. <shudder>

Indeed it was.

[Michael A. Terrell]

pyotr filipivich wrote:
>
> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> on Mon, 08 Oct 2012
> 10:00:45 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
> >
> >Stormin Mormon wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes, alcohol is vasodialator. I wonder why drunken Eskimos don't have this
> >> problem? They just know to stay drunk indoors?
> >
> >
> > It's WHERE they drink. Think about it. It's below freezing, for
> >water but not for alcohol. You take a swig of whiskey, and that hits
> >your stomach. The cold spreads quickly through your guts, including
> >your lungs which are already dealing with the low temperatures.
>
> It also has to do with the fact that whiskey doesn't freeze until
> it get really, really cold. So you think "It can't be that cold, it
> still sloshes". Yep. and it is now extremely well 'chilled' Five,
> ten, twenty degrees of frost?
> "Over the lips,
> over the gums
> Look out stomach
> -- oh damn, your throat just froze!"
> And frostbite of the mouth, palate, tongue, and the dangly bit in the
> back of your mouth - is not pleasant.

Yet one fool in the cold weather survival class stood up & yelled,
"I'm not gonna freeze, caus' I be full of antifreeze all winter!" Then
the instructor warned about exposed skin, and that dark skin lost more
heat that light he stood up and screamed, "You @#$%^&*( racist!" even
though the instructor's skin was quite black. Maroons! What do you do
with all the maroons? Him and his roommate would fill two 32 gallon
trash cans every monday morning with empty whiskey & beer bottles. He
got really pissed when the Army told him he was alcoholic.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/9/2012 1:15 AM, Gunner wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:42:53 -0700, Larry Jaques
> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>> is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>> thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>>
>> Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>> He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>> concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>>from constituents to the CONs help, too.
>
> Reallty? Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
>
> They concede to it eh? Sure they do. Which is why the housing market
> is still falling down around our ears..10 yrs later

The housing market is recovering, slowly, in the decent parts of the
country. Taft? Uh...not so much.

[George Plimpton]

Very few tea party activists defeated other office-holding Republican
candidates and went on to represent the Republicans in the general
election. Of tea party backed candidates in general elections only 32%
- not even one third - won the election.

>>
>>>>>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>>>>>> as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>>>>>> of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>>>>>
>>>>> Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
>>>>> Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
>>>>> Order btw.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>>>>>> three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>>>>>> are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>>>>
>>>>> Evidently not.
>>>>
>>>> Kennedy gave us the moon... He had the people behind him.
>>>
>>> Nice response, but it does not answer the questions: Do these
>>> Libertarians not understand the Constitution, that the three branches
>>> of Government are co-equal? Or that budgets and laws are to originate
>>> in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>
>> I think they do. People in high places influence others, especially
>> when The People are behind them.
>
> Yes..and?
>>
>>
>>> It was not Kennedy who appropriated the money to buy the real
>>> estate, buy the parts, or pay the engineers. That had to happen in
>>> the House.
>>
>> Right.
>
> It wasnt?

He didn't disagree. Learn to read English.

>>
>>>>> Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>>>> is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>>>> thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>>>>
>>>> Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>>>> He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>>>> concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>>> >from constituents to the CONs help, too.
>>>
>>> So, what you want is a Libertarian Obama, who will rule by
>>> executive order, send bills to the Congress for their approval,while
>>> the Supreme Court finds the legal reasoning why beloved leaders
>>> actions are Constitutional?
>>
>> What a scary mind you have, Pete! <g>
>
> What a realistic mind he has..and a scary mind you have.

Nope. Larry is the realist; petey is the non compos mentis lunatic.

>>
>>> Does anyone else recall Nehemiah Scudder?
>>
>> I didn't read that particular Heinlein book series. Sounds like a
>> terror novel with the relidjus wrong at the helm. <shudder>
>
> Indeed it was.

It viewed religious fruitcake Republicans with alarm.

[Stormin Mormon]

Were you able to improve the gene pool by sending
him and a couple cases of liquor to Antarctica?

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

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:YJydnW-92arHrOnN...@earthlink.com...

[Michael A. Terrell]

Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> Were you able to improve the gene pool by sending
> him and a couple cases of liquor to Antarctica?
>

Why would they want him? He had no skills.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 01:18:34 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>

Libertarians are not well liked by the status quo.

>>> Bernie Sanders runs as a Socialist, and he gets elected and
>>>re-elected. Of course, he is the only openly Socialist in the
>>>Democrat caucus (the rest just are too bashful to admit it.)
>>>
>>>>>> And how much impact has he had on the House of Representatives?
>>>>>
>>>>>Damned little
>>>>
>>>>As a co-worker. But he is being felt and listened to more now.
>>>
>>> Because of his efforts, or because the TEA party has caused a sea
>>>change in the GOP in regards to "conservative values"?
>>
>>Probably both. Tell me about this "sea change".
>
>We take it you didnt notice the number of Republicans that were voted
>OUT of office in 2010..and their seats were taken by Tea Party
>Conservatives?
>
>RINOS...had to go.

I noticed that, and cheered it on.

>>>>>> And why do the Libertarians feel that if they elect a Libertarian
>>>>>>as President, he can dictate policy, laws and budgets to the Congress
>>>>>>of the US? Or do they expect him to rule by Executive Order?
>>>>>
>>>>>Excellent question and one they have no answer for. These same
>>>>>Libertarians (large L) piss and moan about Obummer ruling by Executive
>>>>>Order btw.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have not these Libertarians understood the Constitution, that the
>>>>>>three branches of Government are co-equal? And that budgets and laws
>>>>>>are to originate in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>>>>
>>>>>Evidently not.
>>>>
>>>>Kennedy gave us the moon... He had the people behind him.
>>>
>>> Nice response, but it does not answer the questions: Do these
>>>Libertarians not understand the Constitution, that the three branches
>>>of Government are co-equal? Or that budgets and laws are to originate
>>>in the Congress, not the Executive branch?
>>
>>I think they do. People in high places influence others, especially
>>when The People are behind them.
>
>Yes..and?

And that's our hope for Paul next month.

>>> It was not Kennedy who appropriated the money to buy the real
>>>estate, buy the parts, or pay the engineers. That had to happen in
>>>the House.
>>
>>Right.
>
>It wasnt?

I was _agreeing_, OK? ;) "Yeah, right." is indicative of
incredulous disagreement.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 01:15:00 -0700, Gunner <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:42:53 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>Now this has always left me a bit confused as to WHY they think this
>>>is possible. Perhaps its their honest furor, perhaps its wishful
>>>thinking, or perhaps its way too much pot consumed before posting.
>>
>>Because a President has more power than a co-worker CONgresscritter.
>>He can tell the worl he wants to do something and the CONgress usually
>>concedes to it. 'Course, all the press and massive amounts of letters
>>from constituents to the CONs help, too.
>
>Reallty? Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
>
>They concede to it eh? Sure they do. Which is why the housing market
>is still falling down around our ears..10 yrs later
>
>And given that the Democrats controlled Congress for the last 2 YEARS
>of the Bush administration...exactly the time period that things went
>completely into the toilet....care to try that line again?
>
>Hummmm?

P.S: Not _every_ time... cherry-pick some more, eh?