Replies

1. 
   joinerswork | Mar 04, 2011 10:52pm | #1

   Dwen,

   Your observation re the efficacy of graphite reminded me of this:

   Q: What did the new husband buy two jars of vaseline for?

   A: $1.98 each.

   But also, there is a reason most old thru tenons have wedges drove into them...

   Ray

1. 
   swenson | Mar 05, 2011 01:17am | #2

   Years later...

   Years later that same husband told a friend "I got a new Chevy for my wife."

   and the friend said "Good trade!"

   I am flairing the mortises at each end and driving wedges into kerfs cut into the tennons.  I use the pencil trick when fitting dovetails and that never happens, I wish it did.

1. 
   joinerswork | Mar 06, 2011 10:20am | #3

   Hah, first time I heard that one, it was Hillary, and she had gotten a pig for Bill.

   Ray

1. 
   swenson | Mar 06, 2011 10:52am | #4

   Temptations.

   I am so tempted to ask  "what did she need two pigs for?" But I won't do it. I won't stoop to that level. No... bad taste...I CAN'T STOP MYSELF... delete this before I strike again.

1. 
   RalphBarker | Mar 06, 2011 12:24pm | #5

   math?

   Trading one for another leaves only one. But, that does raise questions about the logic of the trade.  ;-)

2. 
   swenson | Mar 06, 2011 03:05pm | #6

   This form requires that you go back to the original meaning of the sentence.  She got the pig to give to Bill.  Then there would be two in the family.

3. 
   PSeverin | Mar 09, 2011 03:57pm | #7

   Reading skills,

   I believe substituting "Hillary" into the original post would have read "Hillary got a pig for Bill."   and not as you would have changed it to "Hillary got a pig TO GIVE to Bill."   Sometimes our long standing bias gets in the way of the simplest reckoning. 

   Peter

4. 
   joinerswork | Mar 10, 2011 08:37am | #8

   Psev,

   Ever had a kid ask when you return from a shopping trip, "What did you get for me?" Of course he isn't asking, "what did you get in exchange for me?"

   The way the joke works is thru the double meaning fo the phrase.  The speaker states the pig is "for" someone, "This Bud's for you." The hearer misinterprets the speaker's meaning, in the sense of "tit for tat", quid pro quo (as the Romans would have it), "I got this Lee Nielson #5 for $10".  The humor is on the duality of both interpretations, but especially that the second, unintended interpretation in its derogatory inference, may be more appropriate than the intended meaning.

   Someone, maybe Groucho Marx, said that as soon as you analyse humor, it stops being funny.  Mission accomplished?

   Ray

5. 
   PSeverin | Mar 11, 2011 02:03pm | #9

   Oh come on.

   joinerwork

     Lets write out the joke as you heard it.

   Hillary got a pig for Bill

   Friend's comment "good trade."

   The humor is based on Bill being valued less than a pig, not that he is a pig.  

    

   I just was poking at the bias of the man who wanted the joke to say that Bill is a pig and why would Hillary want two pigs, which I found a bad punch line, unsupported by either the logic of the joke or words in the post.   Perhaps you too accept the assumption that Bill is a pig and you may even find that humorous.   Each to his own.

   But confusing "Bill is a pig" for for "Bill is less valuable than a pig" is not much of a joke except for the bad logic it entails.   

   Peter

6. 
   swenson | Mar 11, 2011 11:54pm | #10

   The value of being Bill the POTUS.

     "The humor is based on Bill being valued less than a pig, not that he is a pig. "   

   Unless he is a pig of lesser value than the new pig.

   And don't start on Monica.

     Nit picking lite spur of the moment banter reminds me of the "a mind is a terrible thing to waste" campaign.      

   EDIT  The italic button would not turn off 'till I posted and edited.

7. 
   PSeverin | Mar 12, 2011 01:19pm | #11

   And how about Laura

   And don't get me started about Laura getting an ass for George W.    

   I was trying to gently prod a bias, but apparently I have struck a vein.  

   Remember that boards have a lot of defects.  You think the Monica is a really ugly blight but  on the other side I think Gingrich's  adultery, abandoning his second sick wife while striking a moral stance railing about Bill's blow job is far worse.

   Some woodworkers can find delight in woods defects, others try to cover them up.  We all have to deal with them.   And apparently with political stock you'll never make much anything substantial, if you try to cut all the defects out.  

   Peter

8. 
   swenson | Mar 13, 2011 03:22am | #13

   Character judgment.

    "You think the Monica is a really ugly blight ...  railing about Bill's blow job..."

   I think no such thing. In fact I really liked Monica. Her one woman show in which she took all questions and answered all questions for as long as they wanted was a class act. I wish her well. She was just a kid and got in a bit over her head. He lied to her and again and again shook his finger at us and lied right to our face. Lied under oath and got impeached.

   Despite that, on two occasions, I stood in the oval office and shook his hand and acknowledged his congratulations and pretended that I was glad to get them. Stood five feet away from the door to the private office, just off the oval office, that he used for his meetings with her. I did not rail then and I am not railing now.

   I think there is a difference between bias and character judgment.

9. 
   joinerswork | Mar 12, 2011 08:23pm | #12

   Psev,

   "I believe

   Psev,

   "I believe substituting "Hillary" into the original post would have read "Hillary got a pig for Bill."   and not as you would have changed it to "Hillary got a pig TO GIVE to Bill."   Sometimes our long standing bias gets in the way of the simplest reckoning."

   I was replying to this post of yours, which I do not see referencing two pigs.

   Is Bill a pig? Is Newt?  John Edwards?  All men are pigs.  Or so I've heard. One can find many a politician to support that assertion, on both sides of the aisle.

   Cheers,

   Ray 

10. 
    PSeverin | Mar 14, 2011 07:45pm | #14

    Oh Ray

    Ray,

    Severin, as in Severinson is an old scandinavian family name I was given.  You probably figured that out.  It just looks odd crammed into a user name with a first initial.

    To find the reference to math and two pigs or one you have to read the couple of previous posts that preceded my first comments.

    Trying to sum this up and it in the context of woodworking I suggested, that defects occur on both sides of political stock.  You seem to agree.    I  proposed that we'll never get much built cutting all the knots from political timber.  Unfortunately today we've all been trained to  take too much delight  in watching undiscovered defects cause a collapse.   

    In the end it doesn't really help to call anyone a pig or ass.   I think we agree.  And the more you attach real names, the less humorous or convincing it becomes in Knots.  Let's keep smiling.  And lets keep trying to build something, out of wood and for our common good.

    Peter