Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[The God of Odd Statements]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 18:14:33 -0500, John Fields did most oddly state:

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:07:33 GMT, The God of Odd Statements wrote:
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 16:53:19 -0500, John Fields did most oddly state:
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 20:57:29 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" wrote:

Hmmm, and what has happened to the servicemen injured saving Kuwait?
The ones who are in wheel chairs or blind living in run down trailers?
Any money for them?

---
Nope. That wasn't part of the deal.

Gee, why am _I_ not surprised? Of course, who cares what happens to a
bunch of worthless, lowlife grunts who were lucky enough to visit the
Middle East on the taxpayer's dime?

---
Their families and friends do, and their country does. ---

No, their country doesn't -- not meaningfully. There may be lots of
verbiage to that effect, but it's all hot air. I don't mean individual
citizens (who aren't in a position to do anything significant), I mean
your government and military.

They were just lower-income types
anyway, right? Not useful people, like the rich. Not anyone who
_matters_. Well, aside from the rich people who volunteered, but they
were silly. Leave the actual fighting to the little people, the cannon
fodder -- it's what they're for.

Right?

---
Kinda. When you join the service as enlisted, (just for example, let's
say the Army Infantry) the presumption is that if you have to go to war
you're going to be a grunt, you're going to be put in harm's way, and
you're the one who's going to have to do the dirty work. There's no
mystery about that, and it's just the way it works.

And then get dumped on the sidewalk, with a "So long, sucker!"

Certainly there's no presumption that a grateful foreign nation which you
helped will repay you in monetary terms, since that's not part of the
deal.

Considering how your government and military tend to prefer that someone
else look after vets with Gulf War Syndrome, I don't see why not. I
support the individual troops, you see, not merely the idea of them, as
the wingnuts do.

Simple-

minded, yes.

--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
<Xns98355D29419B9HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

 

[Lostgallifreyan]

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in
news:7aj0i2hruogq6bj4ht388jsj01998impqh@4ax.com:

So now you'd have the countries we've helped making payments to
individual servicemen/women for the services they performed? That
would be OK, except that we don't run a mercenary Army.

I don't think the point was about services performed, but about
compensation for loss. If one soldier or marine gets luckier than another,
they're more likely to do well for themselves later as it's a hell of a
thing to put on the CV for those who value such things.

Is there an insurance against loss of limbs or other faculties in war? As
far as I know there isn't, everyone from the government right down to the
smallest private insurance companies expressly exclude such losses on the
grounds that war is hell, basically.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:7aj0i2hruogq6bj4ht388jsj01998impqh@4ax.com...

So now you'd have the countries we've helped making payments to
individual servicemen/women for the services they performed? That
would be OK, except that we don't run a mercenary Army.

Explain the "campaign contributions" from the oil companies then.

And yet I am SO much better informed than you.

Filling your head with shit doesn't mean you're better informed, it
just means you're thinking what somebody else wants you to.

I know you are but what am I?

I should cut down, but every time I post something for you I have to
take one so I can dull my wits and write at a level you can
comprehend.

Odd. I have to have a four year old translate for me because you write so
far below my level.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsrk0i2dpc854lkk5ihcv2eld1k45q1d9uj@4ax.com...

That may be what you _like_, but right now _you're_ the one with
the hook in his mouth.

Not on this planet. What color is the sky on your world?

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:27:32 GMT, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in
news:2uh0i252qdlp09ji8ioi7de6esq0228jjp@4ax.com:

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:07:33 GMT, The God of Odd Statements
godofodd@statements.likeyours> wrote:

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 16:53:19 -0500, John Fields did most oddly state:
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 20:57:29 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" wrote:

Hmmm, and what has happened to the servicemen injured saving Kuwait?
The ones who are in wheel chairs or blind living in run down
trailers? Any money for them?

---
Nope. That wasn't part of the deal.

Gee, why am _I_ not surprised? Of course, who cares what happens to a
bunch of worthless, lowlife grunts who were lucky enough to visit the
Middle East on the taxpayer's dime?

---
Their families and friends do, and their country does.


No it doesn't. That wasn't part of the deal, as you said yourself and now
appear to contradict. The sooner people take some personal responsibility
instead of displacing and enshrining it in some kind of veneer of
patriotism, the sooner people will stop dying stupidly for nothing.

---
That's not what I said.

The question was: "Who cares what happens to a bunch of worthless,
lowlife grunts who were lucky enough to visit the Middle East on the
taxpayer's dime?"

I think it's pretty clear that their families and friends will care
about what happens to them, don't you?

As far as the country is concerned, (or let's say the government,
instead) the care there will be financial. A soldier who comes back
unhurt won't have to use the VA's medical facilities or cause the
government to spend anything else (with some exceptions) once the
soldier goes back to civilian life.

I agree with the taking personal responsibility part, BTW.
Unfortunately, not everyone is capable of taking responsibility for
themselves, and I suppose that's where cannon fodder comes from.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[The God of Odd Statements]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 18:45:31 -0500, John Fields did most oddly state:

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:14:02 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" wrote:
"John Fields" wrote...

Hmmm, and what has happened to the servicemen injured saving Kuwait?
The ones who are in wheel chairs or blind living in run down trailers?
Any money
for them?

---
Nope. That wasn't part of the deal.

Right. Use the Yanks when you must and ignore them the rest of the time.

---
So now you'd have the countries we've helped making payments to individual
servicemen/women for the services they performed? That would be OK,
except that we don't run a mercenary Army. ---

No, you(r leaders) run an Imperial Army/Navy/Air Force/etc., though they
have yet to admit it, after more than a century of doing so.

<snip spelling/typo lames>

--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
<Xns98355D29419B9HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

 

[Richard The Dreaded Liber]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:49:43 -0500, John Fields wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 02:32:38 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message

Consider the blind - who listen to Usenet. They have to wade through a
mountain of crap to hear one line - or sometimes none.

So we should all carry white canes?

You're an American. I don't expect you to give a damn about your fellow
citizens - or anyone else on earth.

It's not a question of any of that, it's a question of not forcing
the many to conform to the needs of the unfortunate few.

True, but doesn't that go hand-in-hand with not forcing the few to
conform to the limitations of the many?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:04:59 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:7aj0i2hruogq6bj4ht388jsj01998impqh@4ax.com...

So now you'd have the countries we've helped making payments to
individual servicemen/women for the services they performed? That
would be OK, except that we don't run a mercenary Army.

Explain the "campaign contributions" from the oil companies then.

And yet I am SO much better informed than you.

Filling your head with shit doesn't mean you're better informed, it
just means you're thinking what somebody else wants you to.

I know you are but what am I?

I should cut down, but every time I post something for you I have to
take one so I can dull my wits and write at a level you can
comprehend.

Odd. I have to have a four year old translate for me because you write so
far below my level.

---
Excellent! It's working!


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Homer J Simpson]

"Richard The Dreaded Libertarian" <null@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2006.10.01.17.17.21.578732@example.net...

It's not a question of any of that, it's a question of not forcing
the many to conform to the needs of the unfortunate few.

True, but doesn't that go hand-in-hand with not forcing the few to
conform to the limitations of the many?

I just watched a show on Portugal. I saw outside a famous museum an
obviously new and added ramp for wheelchairs. It made me happy to see that
in Portugal they recognize basic fairness.

It's much harder to add these ramps than to trim Usenet posts but people in
many countries do the first. What is the problem with the second?

 

[Homer J Simpson]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:99n0i2tlva50m2js94l8evvbpgfble21bb@4ax.com...

Odd. I have to have a four year old translate for me because you write so
far below my level.

Excellent! It's working!

Yes. I can sometimes follow your demented ramblings.

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:05:00 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsrk0i2dpc854lkk5ihcv2eld1k45q1d9uj@4ax.com...

That may be what you _like_, but right now _you're_ the one with
the hook in his mouth.

Not on this planet.

---
Really? Disengage, then.
---

What color is the sky on your world?

---
Depends...


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[The God of Odd Statements]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:29:38 +0000, Homer J Simpson did most oddly state:

"Richard The Dreaded Libertarian" wrote...

It's not a question of any of that, it's a question of not forcing the
many to conform to the needs of the unfortunate few.

True, but doesn't that go hand-in-hand with not forcing the few to
conform to the limitations of the many?

I just watched a show on Portugal. I saw outside a famous museum an
obviously new and added ramp for wheelchairs. It made me happy to see that
in Portugal they recognize basic fairness.

It's much harder to add these ramps than to trim Usenet posts but people
in many countries do the first. What is the problem with the second?

Nothing. See? I trimmed. If you require more trimming than that, you'll
have to wait until I feel like it.

--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
<Xns98355D29419B9HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

 

[Bart]

Homer The Homo!
Understand that?





On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:04:59 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:7aj0i2hruogq6bj4ht388jsj01998impqh@4ax.com...

So now you'd have the countries we've helped making payments to
individual servicemen/women for the services they performed? That
would be OK, except that we don't run a mercenary Army.

Explain the "campaign contributions" from the oil companies then.

And yet I am SO much better informed than you.

Filling your head with shit doesn't mean you're better informed, it
just means you're thinking what somebody else wants you to.

I know you are but what am I?

I should cut down, but every time I post something for you I have to
take one so I can dull my wits and write at a level you can
comprehend.

Odd. I have to have a four year old translate for me because you write so
far below my level.

 

[The God of Odd Statements]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:03:10 +0000, Bart did most oddly state:

Homer The Homo!
Understand that?

You mean you're a top-poasting gay-lamer? I suppose I can understand
it...

--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
<Xns98355D29419B9HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

 

[Lostgallifreyan]

The God of Odd Statements <godofodd@statements.likeyours> wrote in
newsan.2006.10.02.04.05.31.658519@statements.likeyours:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:03:10 +0000, Bart did most oddly state:

Homer The Homo!
Understand that?

You mean you're a top-poasting gay-lamer? I suppose I can understand
it...

--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
Xns98355D29419B9HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

Are you really that concerned with usenet etiquette, P's and Q's and such?
Pretty funny given the size of that sig...

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Lostgallifreyan wrote:

Are you really that concerned with usenet etiquette, P's and Q's and such?
Pretty funny given the size of that sig...

Look at some of the newsgroups you are replying to. alt.usenet.kooks
is not a place to reply to. I deleted it from my reply.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[The God of Odd Statements]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:14:44 +0000, Lostgallifreyan did most oddly state:

The God of Odd Statements wrote:
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:03:10 +0000, Bart did most oddly state:

Homer The Homo!
Understand that?

You mean you're a top-poasting gay-lamer? I suppose I can understand
it...

Are you really that concerned with usenet etiquette, P's and Q's and such?
Pretty funny given the size of that sig...

Actually, I'm more concerned with oafish stupidity and k0oKy behaviour,
such as that exhibited by "Bart". My .sig is appropriately-sized for Teh
Empire, TYVM.

--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
<Xns98355D29419B9HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken

"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'

"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt

 

[Chadwick StoneŠ]

X-No-Archive: YES
The God of Odd Statements [godofodd@statements.likeyours] has entered
into testimony
pan.2006.10.02.04.23.15.312175@statements.likeyours

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:14:44 +0000, Lostgallifreyan did most oddly
state:
The God of Odd Statements wrote:
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:03:10 +0000, Bart did most oddly state:

Homer The Homo!
Understand that?

You mean you're a top-poasting gay-lamer? I suppose I can understand
it...

Are you really that concerned with usenet etiquette, P's and Q's and
such? Pretty funny given the size of that sig...

Actually, I'm more concerned with oafish stupidity and k0oKy
behaviour, such as that exhibited by "Bart". My .sig is
appropriately-sized for Teh Empire, TYVM.

Heh... .sig envy

--

COOSN-266-06-70683
SkepticultŽ# 581-00504-208
ChadwickStone at Gmail dot com
Usenet's most helpful netizen

HoT, 03/2005
BWMDW, 08/2005, Trainer of pSylvia pSullivan
PSHL&S, 08/2006, Teh SMM II Debacle

 

[JW]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 19:25:38 GMT "Homer J Simpson" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote in Message id: <SwzTg.4937$N4.400@clgrps12>:

forkliftcontrols@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1159641646.289898.91200@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

I picked up a 15" Proview pro588 LCD PC monitor cheap; has flaws of
course. It has a few horizontal and vertical lines running straight
across the screen (entire row of pixels are non-functional) but other
than that, it displays input from a computer fine.

What would cause this? Someone told the LCD screen itself could be
making poor contact with the circuit board; is this true? TIA

Possibly a faulty zebra connector? Could be a SOB to fix.

I have never seen one of those on an LCD monitor. Most likely this is a
failure of one of the bonded driver chips on the panel. Not repairable.