Driver to drive?

Paul wrote:
OH MY GOD, no wonder McCain is dropping in
the polls:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8moOxzlGQ
Click to expand...
The debate this week will be fun.




-- Posted on news://freenews.netfront.net - Complaints to news@netfront.net --
 
"Jasen Betts" <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote in message news:gbn2p0$u8c$3@gonzo...
On 2008-09-28, Robert Blass <blame@messenger.xcx> wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 10:26:53 -0700 (PDT), JeffM <jeffm_@email.com
sayd the following:

(x) Laws already exist that forbid your neighbor from being a jerk

I fear retaliation if I were to report the noise to the police.
Someone who is already violating a noise ordinance law won't be to shy
from violating yet another law.

so instead you propose to violate a different law in retalliation?

you'd do better to throw a brick with a note through his window.
it's cheaper and you have less chance of being caught.

Bye.
Jasen
Click to expand...

Use a microwave oven with door removed, placed at the end of your driveway.
Check for pacemakers in the neighborhood first. Use only in short bursts as
local radio and Tv interference will be severe.

If you can't figure out how the door interlock switches work by yourself,
then you don't have the skills to pull this off.
 
In <MPG.234a124af0ae16bb98a231@news.individual.net>, krw wrote in part:

Do you blame them? If Congress wanted to stem that tide
(withdrawals of money from banks)
it would be easy. Simply up the FDIC limit temporarily.
Click to expand...
Since that limit has been unchanged for something like 30 years or more,
should it not get a permanent raise?

If not, why not?

(* Because Americans still have low need to have over $100K in ordinary
bank accounts now that various mutual funds [including "prime" money
market funds as well as stock index funds] have a high rate of doing
better and being highly available to Americans who have $100K or even $10K
in a bank account with as little as $5K free to move to a greener pasture)

(* Because the insurance premium detracts from interest rate by some
fraction of 1% APY - banks give more-competitive interest by some
fraction of 1% when money not covered by FDIC is in their hands)

Should a permanent raise in FDIC coverage be a problem soon, I would
agree with a raise in FDIC insurance past 100K being temporary, at least
in terms of having a temporary raise that lacks increase of premium
payment at least temporarily.
And by temporary I mean having an overt expiration date. For a better
example of "temporary" being not-so, I would mention "temporary" taxes
and "temporary" tax increases that lack overt expiration dates.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
"George Jetson" <gjetson@spacely.com> wrote in message
news:BzZDk.2033$c45.1875@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
"Jasen Betts" <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:gbn2p0$u8c$3@gonzo...
On 2008-09-28, Robert Blass <blame@messenger.xcx> wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 10:26:53 -0700 (PDT), JeffM <jeffm_@email.com
sayd the following:

(x) Laws already exist that forbid your neighbor from being a jerk

I fear retaliation if I were to report the noise to the police.
Someone who is already violating a noise ordinance law won't be to shy
from violating yet another law.

so instead you propose to violate a different law in retalliation?

you'd do better to throw a brick with a note through his window.
it's cheaper and you have less chance of being caught.

Bye.
Jasen


Use a microwave oven with door removed, placed at the end of your
driveway. Check for pacemakers in the neighborhood first. Use only in
short bursts as local radio and Tv interference will be severe.

If you can't figure out how the door interlock switches work by yourself,
then you don't have the skills to pull this off.
Click to expand...
Just leave the door on & use a jigsaw or sabre saw to cut the window out.
 
<anything@contractorcom.com> wrote in message
news:eek:ac1e4d2ma79q8jk1hh0ln0oqlfkqt6lca@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:51:36 -0700 (PDT), Paul <Quiller123@gmail.com
wrote:

On Sep 28, 10:48?pm, Norman Draper <normandra...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Sep 29, 12:56?am, Norman Draper <normandra...@verizon.net> wrote:





On Sep 28, 10:27?pm, Don Bowey <dbo...@comcast.net> wrote:

On 9/28/08 7:12 PM, in article
122e105c-db0d-49b1-9cda-c5035168d...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com,
"Paul"

Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:

? ?OH MY GOD, no wonder McCain is dropping in
the polls:

? ? ?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8moOxzlGQ

? ? It's SO bad, that all Tina Fey had to do was copy
verbatim what Palin said, and it was hilarious.

? ? What's NOT hilarious, is the thought of this true
barbie doll getting a heart beat away from the
Presidency. ?At first I thought McCain was brilliant
choosing her, but now that we are seeing who she
really is, it's downright scary. ?Almost comical. ?A
political Farce really. ?Is this what the USA has been
reduced to?

? ? In fact, even the more intelligent Republicans
can now see how bad of a choice she is as a running
mate.

? ? ?My god, even her incredible beauty is NOT
going to save her come the debate this Thursday.

? ? ?She is GORGEOUS physically. ?No argument
there. ?And she no doubt loves America. ?But let's
get serious here......there is no way she's gonna
be fit for the white house.

? ? ? For the Love of Sweet Jesus, PLEASE
vote for Obama.

How about you display at least some low-level intelligence, and tell
us just
what was so funny about what she said.

Can't do it can you? You're just a smear-monger idiot.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Don,

I agree... It's not funny. ?It's both sad and pathetic, but it's not
funny. ?If you need to have what's sad and pathetic about her
response, get back to me. ?But if you really don't understand it now,
there may not be a way for me to put it into terms you could
understand.

You REALLY didn't see any humor in her response???

Norman (Not Even A Little Bit??) Draper- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here's a longer version of the interview......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gj6KviFGzng&feature=related

I have another adjective: scary.

Here main theme seems to be that the world should be as we want it to
be. Take note of the question that begins at 6:10.... ?It's right
after her statement about how we have to continue our nation building
effort. ?I think the cat is out of the bag as far as her lack of
knowledge of.... hell, practically everything.

Norman (It's Still Sad) Draper- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Oh My. Very scary indeed.

She can barely put a coherent sentence together,
with dangling catch phrases like "freedom" and "democracy",
strung together.

Someone described her as a high school
student who didn't study enough, struggling to
bullshit her way through a test. Good description
in my book......WOW

Heh...when I was a kid we used to live on the orther side of the road
from a guy who was head of personnel (as it was then called) for ICI.

He turned down Margaret Thatcher for a job because he thought she was
OK but 'not too bright'.

Plus ca change...
Click to expand...
these types are the sort of morons that worked for Decca and hollered that
guitar bands were a thing of the past when The Beatles walked in and asked
to be signed.
 
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Man, no wonder we're so messed up. Do you like the result of the last 8
years with 2 non-lawyers in charge?

So, you want to elect someone who doesn't know that a president signs
bills into law, they don't 'pass laws'. The only thing Obama could pass
is for an idiot. Wasn't he part of the group that pushed for the banks
to have to give loans to people with bad credit, and low income? The
same group that has cause the current meltdown?
Click to expand...
The fact is that this bail-out will never work in the long run. It will
cost far more than the $700 billion claimed as is with most government
plans, possibly three times that amount. The ones with bad credit will
still roll along with the Democrats blessings (aka Paulson and Barney
Frank). The mortgage people will love this plan as will the shills
surrounding Obama in Chicago. This is no more than a governmentally funded
Ponzi scheme.

People rant and rave about incumbents, but never vote them out. No one but
incumbents seem to recapture office. If an outsider comes along, they are
always "unqualified for the office." And so the problem continues.

There appears to be a third party called Corporacrats (aka Spendocrats) of
which Cheney and Bush seemed to have created by themselves.

I'm voting for whoever says no to this bail-out nonsense. So far neither
party seems to be able to say "No."

B~
 
Do you really want to put our nukes at the discretion of someone who thinks
the world is 6000 years old and man walked with the dinosaurs
who thinks foreign policy is being able to see Russia?
do you want to put her in negotiations with Putin when she can't debate
Connie Chung?
This woman is scary,
no sorry Scary with a capital S
if she gets to the throne(not just vp) I think I will have to leave as I am
afraid to live in a land under her rule
George
 
DorkyGrin wrote:
Or would this project be easier with some sort of PIC?
Click to expand...
Much easier if you can use them. Maybe a picaxe, but I've never used one.
I'd write the code for you, but I'm still kinda busy cleaning up from the
hurricane. I haven't touched a PIC in about a year so I'm kinda rusty.
 
DorkyGrin <jchickering@gmail.com> wrote in news:f3cc2516-8d75-4f1e-9708-
db9b4915ff08@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

I've got a digital camera that I am trying to connect to a motion
sensor. I've disassembled it and have the wires available to wire into
a circuit. I have three relays. I need a circuit to trigger the camera
in this fashion:

1. Receive signal, activate Relay A and hold for 10 seconds
2. Same signal, after a couple of seconds, activates Relay B for 5
seconds
3. Same signal, after a couple of seconds, activates Relay C for 2
seconds
4. Then reset all relays for next event

These steps simulate Power, Focus and Shutter.

It's been awhile since I've worked with 555 timers, but I think tying
them together in a circuit might be the simplest way to make this
happen. I believe a 555 timer configured as a monostable one-shot
could be used for Relay A. What I'm not sure about is steps 2 and 3,
maybe a 556 timer that has some sort of startup delay?

Or would this project be easier with some sort of PIC?

Open to ideas.

Thanks
Click to expand...
You're trying to implement a state machine, and need some memory
components-- flip flops and such. Not terribly difficult if you have a
basic understanding of digital circuits. Much easier to put together
with a small PIC, assuming all your development tools are in place. If
not, its a great small project with which to learn the environment.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply
 
In article
<96e742a4-2180-4456-a2f3-42eeb5aba455@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>,
Paul <Quiller123@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sep 28, 9:56?pm, Norman Draper <normandra...@verizon.net> wrote:
On Sep 28, 10:27?pm, Don Bowey <dbo...@comcast.net> wrote:





On 9/28/08 7:12 PM, in article
122e105c-db0d-49b1-9cda-c5035168d...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com, "Paul"

Quiller...@gmail.com> wrote:

? ?OH MY GOD, no wonder McCain is dropping in
the polls:

? ? ?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8moOxzlGQ

? ? It's SO bad, that all Tina Fey had to do was copy
verbatim what Palin said, and it was hilarious.

? ? What's NOT hilarious, is the thought of this true
barbie doll getting a heart beat away from the
Presidency. ?At first I thought McCain was brilliant
choosing her, but now that we are seeing who she
really is, it's downright scary. ?Almost comical. ?A
political Farce really. ?Is this what the USA has been
reduced to?

? ? In fact, even the more intelligent Republicans
can now see how bad of a choice she is as a running
mate.

? ? ?My god, even her incredible beauty is NOT
going to save her come the debate this Thursday.

? ? ?She is GORGEOUS physically. ?No argument
there. ?And she no doubt loves America. ?But let's
get serious here......there is no way she's gonna
be fit for the white house.

? ? ? For the Love of Sweet Jesus, PLEASE
vote for Obama.

How about you display at least some low-level intelligence, and tell us
just
what was so funny about what she said.

Can't do it can you? You're just a smear-monger idiot.- Hide quoted text
-

- Show quoted text -

Don,

I agree... It's not funny. ?It's both sad and pathetic, but it's not
funny. ?If you need to have what's sad and pathetic about her
response, get back to me. ?But if you really don't understand it now,
there may not be a way for me to put it into terms you could
understand.

You REALLY didn't see any humor in her response???

Norman (Not Even A Little Bit??) Draper- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Maybe Don is even dumber than Palin, as
intelligence is all relative, right?

True, the answers of many interviewees don't
look too good verbatim; spontaneous sentences can
be unfinished and awkwardly constructed; but consider
this answer to Couric's question on the relevance of
Alaska's proximity to Russia to her foreign policy experience:


"We have trade missions back and forth, we do.
It's very important when you consider even national security
issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into
the air space of the United States of America, where do they
go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska
that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being
kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they
are right there, they are right next to our state."


So just because you can see the edge of a country,
that gives you foreign policy experience?

Lord Help the USA.......
Click to expand...
I can see the moon from my yard...
 
In article <0vs1e4drdc4tt9a0ilqht5i49t0qdlr7lb@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:12:08 -0700, Jenn <jennconducts@mac.com> wrote:

In article <52h0e4llhibq4echvob4s1rmiu75o944i1@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:12:44 -0700 (PDT), Paul <Quiller123@gmail.com
wrote:


OH MY GOD, no wonder McCain is dropping in
the polls:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8moOxzlGQ


It's SO bad, that all Tina Fey had to do was copy
verbatim what Palin said, and it was hilarious.


The choice in this election is clear: two lawyers or two non-lawyers.

No contest: vote McCain.


John

Man, no wonder we're so messed up. Do you like the result of the last 8
years with 2 non-lawyers in charge?

I don't understand "so messed up." If you look around at real life,
and ignore shrieking headlines, things aren't bad. Some people are
stressed by economic forces, especially low-education working folks,
but that's the result of global economic events... no President is
going to, or has the power to, wave some wand and make everybody
happy.

And I don't understand "in charge." Congress passes the laws and the
budgets, and the courts have final say on what's allowed.

If you refer to the current economic blowup, that fuse was lit in the
1990's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63siCHvuGFg


John
Click to expand...
We're messed up in regard to the entire political process when we
promote not voting for someone just because they are a lawyer.
 
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:gsu1e41db99re5e9pod0p3cc0mavb9653o@4ax.com...
On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:13:31 -0700, Jamie Morken <jmorken@shaw.ca
wrote:

Hi,

Most to-220 shoulder washers I've seen only have about 0.01" plastic
material between the screw and the TO-220 metal tab, for 600VDC
operation this seems to be a bit low, there is room for thicker material
in between a 4-40 screw and the TO-220 tab, maybe 0.016" material,
anyone know of a shoulder washer that has a thicker insulation in this area?

cheers,
Jamie

Consider a TO-247 or some more modern package than a TO-220.

John
Click to expand...
Mouser 532-7721-3PPS has a material thickness of 0.019" between the screw and
the transistor tab.

--
Dave M
MasonDG44 at comcast dot net (Just substitute the appropriate characters in the
address)

Life is like a roll of toilet paper; the closer it gets to the end, the faster
it goes.
 
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Because it adds a little dynamic stability that may prevent a
death-spiral feedback loop that would hurt businesses, destroy jobs,
and devalue investments for a long time to come. There should be
followups, of course, to add long-term stability, like undoing some of
the 1990's legal changes that caused this mess.
Click to expand...
There are conflicting opinions about the potential "stability"; in fact,
some see it potentially significantly destabilizing.

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/files/documents/Final-Bailout-White-Paper
..pdf

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
 
default <default@defaulter.net> wrote:

I get so damn sick and tired of all the
idiots who believe what they hear in the media, as long as it supports
something they want to believe anyway, or gives them someone to blame,
for What Went Wrong (by default: in their lives):


Only an idiot tries to place blame in politics.

The system is designed, and works, by telling idiot A that one thing
is causing his problems and telling idiot B that another is causing
his problems. Both idiots are up in arms and "fighting injustice,"
(or high prices, low wages, high taxes, high inflation). Both idiots
are dissipating their ire and anger on the smoke and mirrors provided
for that purpose. Neither idiot is directing his wrath at the real
culprit - the game.
Click to expand...
This just reminds me of the Jerry Springer show. Put two women and a
man on stage (the latter cheating on both women ofcourse) and the
women start to fight with each other instead with the man -where the
real problem is-.

--
Programmeren in Almere?
E-mail naar nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
 
Richard Swaby <reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
news:f4a1e4hjtshv6252a64vjfepug1u06c3lo@4ax.com:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:20:04 -0500, Kris Krieger <me@dowmuff.in
wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:85gid45tefdkqvthelm9se7h7ee4sc2p53@4ax.com:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:54:18 +0100, Richard Swaby
reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:59:18 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 09:05:32 +0100, Richard Swaby
reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:


Why the hell does the US believe that it has the right to plant
anything, anywhere in the rest of the world?

That's a subject that deserves serious consideration. If one has the
power to save lives, or to promote freedom, is it a sin of omission
to do nothing? Do we respect the national soverignty of a country
ruled by an un-elected genocidal thug?

S. Hussein was indeed a genocidal thug, but well down the list of
thugs, elected or otherwise.

The probloem is that the US is selective about where it desires to
plant things. It's usually the case that the places of strrategic
usefulness are the first to be considered..


probloem?

strrategic?



BTW the correct spelling is GOERING.

Hilarious.

John



WHat I'm wondering is, How is any of the above differnt from any other
nation? The main "difference" is that the US is a huge country and has
the resources to do what every nation (or at least, government) wants to
do: project its power. Certainly the USSR had done the same, and
Russia has shown it's own desire to return to that tradition.

Although I'm not a fan of reckless involvement in the affiars of other
nations, it's also true that a significant proportion of the complaints
against teh US are "sour grapes".

This was also IMO a valid and important question:
If one has the
power to save lives, or to promote freedom, is it a sin of omission
to do nothing? Do we respect the national soverignty of a country
ruled by an un-elected genocidal thug?

Also, even in a situation where a nation asks the US for assistance in
defending its sovereignity, the fact is that there will still be some
poeple who complain - most typically, the ones who had impinged upon
said nation's sovereignity. That's why it's important to at least *try*
to separate out the "spin".

In a way, it's similar to the saying that "Everyone in prison is
innocent" - IOW, even the guilty will try to improve their personal
situation by feigning innocence. It's human nature. And human nature
doesn't magically disappear at some specific level of organization.


As for being selective re; "planting" things and using strategic
significance as a consideration for doign so - again, in what way is
that differnt from any other nation, and for that matter, from any other
*group*? Individuals join groups becasue they see sopme benefit from
doing so, even if htat benefit is only personal enjoyment; and further
up the levels of organizational complexity, groups also act in their own
self- interest. Just look at the stupidities propagated in the name of
Party Politics.

You raise an important point, that of tribalism. It is perhaps the
most destructive aspect of human nature.
A group (tribe) exists primarily for reasons of self interest, to
defend itself against rival tribes and to extend its sphere of
influence. Even if the tribe convinces itself that its motives are
laudable, its actions usually have a negative effect not just on rival
tribes but everyone else.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I don't think it can be eliminated - even if one group could
overcome it, the other 'tribes' would take actions that'd result in that
group being annihilated (along with all of its potential creativity and
other potential positive contributions).

Examples are numerous. Christian missionaries inflicting their beliefs
throughout Africa, the British Empire, radical muslims causing mayhem,
the US invading countries to secure oil supplies and to establish
outposts etc. etc.
In fact, it usually turns out that if you can identify a tribe you can
attribute some kind of atrocity to it.
Click to expand...
No group is pure - but some groups are far worse than the average.

And therein lies the problem.

If Group (or nation) A is just going along, engages in equitable trade,
giving aid to other groups, and otherwise behaving reasonably well and non-
aggressively, it's inevitable that some other Group X will see Group A as
"weak" yet posessing something that Group X wants, and X will decide to
attack A.

Anotehr problem. Maybe Group W is beahving badly but not with overt
aggression. If Group M starts making official statements that "W better
talk to us OR ELSE", but then says "But we won't talk to W unless W does
this, that, and the other thing" and makes otehrwise generalyl belliose
sounds, that automatically puts W into a defensive position, backs W into a
corner. And a cornered adversary is a dangerous animal.

So it's all a huge mess. Even if Group A decides that the best path is to
be a peaceable nation which engages in ethical trading practices, it will
be surrounded by others groups with aggressive intentions which will have
no moral/ethical reservations abotu using infultration techniques to erode
A's independence and economy. It's all well and good to write pretty songs
that say "give peace a chance", but that only works until some agressor
starts acting up.



In the end, regardless of what the US (or any other group!) does do, or
doesn't do, *someone* will kvetch about it, simply because doing
something that benefits Group/Nation X means that less (or no) benefit
goes to Group/Nation Y. ANd "benefits" can mean everything from money,
to infrastructure, to "face"/social standing, and so on.

Furtheremore, groups tend to dislike comprimise, becasue comprimise
means relinquishing some of the benefits that a group or nation deisres.
And many see that as 'loss of face", which makes negotiation a delicate
process.


So, has the US gov.t done some things thet I think are wrong? Yup. But
nobody is perfect, and there is plenty of wrongness to go around - the
US has also been described as the most generous nation in the world.
So there ya go. Yin and yang, very, very few things are are purely any
one thing; almost all are some blend of things. That includes the US.
Click to expand...
 
In article <mm02e4poa90ei6uk52n127ahd6sbtauhmg@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:05:24 -0700, Jenn <jennconducts@mac.com> wrote:

In article <0vs1e4drdc4tt9a0ilqht5i49t0qdlr7lb@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:12:08 -0700, Jenn <jennconducts@mac.com> wrote:

In article <52h0e4llhibq4echvob4s1rmiu75o944i1@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:12:44 -0700 (PDT), Paul <Quiller123@gmail.com
wrote:


OH MY GOD, no wonder McCain is dropping in
the polls:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8moOxzlGQ


It's SO bad, that all Tina Fey had to do was copy
verbatim what Palin said, and it was hilarious.


The choice in this election is clear: two lawyers or two non-lawyers.

No contest: vote McCain.


John

Man, no wonder we're so messed up. Do you like the result of the last 8
years with 2 non-lawyers in charge?

I don't understand "so messed up." If you look around at real life,
and ignore shrieking headlines, things aren't bad. Some people are
stressed by economic forces, especially low-education working folks,
but that's the result of global economic events... no President is
going to, or has the power to, wave some wand and make everybody
happy.

And I don't understand "in charge." Congress passes the laws and the
budgets, and the courts have final say on what's allowed.

If you refer to the current economic blowup, that fuse was lit in the
1990's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63siCHvuGFg


John

We're messed up in regard to the entire political process when we
promote not voting for someone just because they are a lawyer.

I have a right to an opinion, and I'm allocated exactly one vote.
Click to expand...
Of course you do. I've not said otherwise.

I've known enough lawyers, as friends and girlfriends, to have some
insight to their world, and I prefer people who do real things to
people who live to broker power for fun and profit.
Click to expand...
You need to get to know a better quality of lawyer. ;-)
 
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:esr1e4hd81v8sn03tn3fpv13ie0fck6dq9@4ax.com:

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:32:56 -0700 (PDT), James Arthur
dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com> wrote:


FWIW, that "group" you speak of is one guy, posting under various
guises. Corbomite, Jackie Gleason, AnimalMagic, SoothSayer,
FatBytestard, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt, Achimedes' Lever, etc., =
same.  You can recognize new nyms by the potty mouth.

Pretty industrious, isn't he?

Cheers,
James Arthur

Hmm, interesting.  Does he post on sci.elec otherwise?

To sci.electronics.design, yes. Sometimes even constructively.
Sometimes.


Gosh, I missed that.

John
Click to expand...
I find it more than a little neurotic, that someone would go through all of
that "neonym"ing - demands attention, yet refuses to even try to change the
behaviors that get then plonked. Bizarre.
 
default <default@defaulter.net> wrote in
news:80qnd4lqvnqccnubfiv7fsn0cqcal9fdsr@4ax.com:

[snip]
Have you read the text of the plan, and what do you think of it?
Click to expand...
I'm reading the first draft, haven't yet gotten the link to the version that
COngress just rejected.

I'm bothered that the primary oversight committe (that's supposed to evaluate
the Treasury Secretary's actions and the effects thereof) is made of 5
political appointees - nto one elected representative. And worse!, has teh
Sec.ty as one fo the members. WTF...? I've heard ti suggeted that "it's to
be sure he shows up for meetings", btu IMO, ther needs to be some stipualtion
that he simply is *required* to attend the meetings, but has no vote or
power. That's section 104 (b) .

So, althought Section 125 does set up and describe COngressional oversight,
teh above bit still bothers me.


The Comptroller General has oversight (sect 116) but an audit as per part 9b0
should me more tahn just annully - IMO, at least quarterly. THe part
aboutJudicial REview in Section 119 is brief; it seems OK but I need to think
about it more.

There is also a provision that allows the Sec.ty to collect stocks from
distressed companies that are being taken over, I have to re-find my notation
- but ther is no explanation as to how those stocks will be handled. Does
teh Sec.ty keep them? DO they go towards paying off teh national debt...?


I don't know where I can get any questions answered, tho'.
 
"hans" <anybutbush@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:935246f2-86d9-419b-a789-958e5b040c8a@q9g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 29, 7:51 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
DavidW wrote:
Paul wrote:
OH MY GOD, no wonder McCain is dropping in
the polls:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk8moOxzlGQ

The debate this week will be fun.

The set up seems to be to declare Sarah Palin the winner if she speaks
in English.

--
Cheers,

vc

Well said.
Click to expand...
the Americans do seem to have an awful lot of trouble trying to find
presidential and VP candidates with basic English skills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top