The rebels had it right (on some things)

Been reading Shelby Foote's Civil War book[s]. Right after secession, the Confederate government wrote a Constitution for the Confederacy. As one might expect, it borrowed heavily from the US Constitution but there were some worthwhile improvements.
Each bill brought before the Confederate Congress must address only one subject, announced in the title of the bill. That should eliminate those scummy "riders" attached to important bills. And, the Confederate President had the line item veto, he could cross out porky items in appropriation bills without vetoing the entire thing.
Things never change much. These issues from 1860 still resonate in 2008.

Whither GM, and whose fault is it anyway?

Megan McArdle offers this gloomy forecast for GM's future. She thinks they will be bankrupt inside of ten years. She may well be right. Skimming thru the raft of comments, and finger pointing following her post, I find a couple a things missing.
Most important cause of GM's trouble is simple; lousy cars. They have small sedans, but who wants 'em?. Styling varies between drab and ugly. Gas mileage no better than my 99 Caddy DeVille. Mostly painted grey. Reputation for breaking down often, followed by GM's reputation for gouging on repair part prices. Same car sold under multiple names which dilutes the effectiveness of advertising and blurs the brand names together. Cars sold under new made up silly sounding names that nobody has ever heard of. Awful dealer service. Lousy resale value. Everyone would rather buy a Toyota Corolla or a Honda Accord than anything in GM's lineup.
This is management failure, the union doesn't control this. GM needs a real car guy like old Lee Iacocca. He is the guy that invented the Mustang, the K cars, and the minivan. Revolutionary cars, that no committee would ever have approved, but Iacocca pushed them thru and they all sold like gangbusters. The few car guys at GM are doing Corvettes and Camaro's, nice enough cars, but niche markets. There aren't enough guys with Corvette/Camaro money to keep a behemoth like GM running. So, number one GM problem, crummy cars. Fix that and a lot of things get better.
Number two problem is expensive labor. UAW workers get twice as much pay and fringe benefits and Toyota and Honda workers. That's Toyota and Honda workers in the US. This is a legacy of wimpy management in the past. Back then, GM management caved to the UAW by promising rich retirements, rather than a pay hike. The retirement benefits wouldn't come due on their watch, whereas a pay hike takes money now. Back then, gutsy management would have taken a strike to hold wages down, in fact, wimpy management kicked the can down the road. That's history now. We are down the road now, and that can is right there, big as ever. GM cannot pay the rich retirement and health care deals promised in the past, one way or another the company will welsh on it's commitments. Bankruptcy is one way to skip out on your debts.

A400M, new Euro transport, twice as big as C130

Cover of the new Aviation Week shows the A400M rolled out on the ramp. It looks like a C130 only with bristly looking 8 bladed propellers. It's a join Euro project finally coming into production. Hasn't made it's first flight yet, but that's scheduled shortly. About time too.
The A400 project started 26 years ago and still has a ways to go. Lockheed was originally a member of the consortium, got tired of all the delay and dropped out to do it's own C-130J project.
Interesting thing about the A400M is the size. It's roughly twice the aircraft that a C130 is, twice the engine power, twice the payload, longer and wider. Now the 50 year old C-130 is one damn big airplane, even today. You gotta wonder about the market for one twice as big. They have commitments for 200 aircraft from the various European airforces. Whereas, Lockheed has already delivered some 180 C-130Js by now. No interest from USAF, who has plenty of C17 jets, and plenty of C130's. That won't help the A400m sales effort, lot of countries think USAF service is a good house keeping seal of approval, if the Americans fly it, it must be OK.
The A400m reminds me of the big old C133, a troubled aircraft. It looked like a C-130 but was twice as big, with 10,000 hp turboprop engines swinging humongous 18 foot three bladed propellers. The 133 was such a maintenance nightmare that USAF retired them all thirty years ago. I'm sure Lockheed is secretly hoping the same fate overtakes the A400M.

Where is Obama coming from?

On TV Obama stated that it will take 10 years minimum and maybe 20 years to bring in a new oil well. This is completely false. Drill rigs make the hole deeper by tens to hundreds of feet a day. That gets down a thousand feet in ten to 100 days. Ten thousand feet (really deep) takes a hundred to a thousand days. Allow 6 months to drill the average well and another six months to put in the pipeline or tanks and loading facilities to get the oil out to the refinery. Say a year. You probably don't commit to constructing the pipeline/loading equipment until the well actually comes in. Spending all that money and then have the well turn into a dry hole doesn't make a lot of sense. But still, a well will come into production in a year or two.
Obama ought to know this. If he doesn't, he is ignorant and been listening to the wrong folk. That's a down check as far as this voter is concerned. A president ought to know a few things. Or, he knows the truth but is saying ten to twenty years because he thinks it will get him elected. That's a down check for two reasons. First 'cause saying things you know are not true is a character flaw. Second, he must figure there are more rabid greenie voters than there are plain folk who just want gasoline to drive to work and fuel oil to heat the house. If he really thinks the greenies have more votes than ordinary people, then he is out of touch with the voters. Either way it's down check.

Plus, just announcing the start of drilling will bring the price of crude down even if the well won't come in for a while.

Finger Lap joints. Without a table saw

The one weakness of the radial arm saw it that it won't do fingerlap joints. On a table saw it's straight forward, install the dado head and cut the fingers holding the work vertical against the miter gauge. It's impossible on a radial arm saw, which is what graces my shop.
So, can you do them with a router? Yes. First you need a router table, something all true router fans have or make sooner or later. Mine has a 3/4" plywood top and the router cutter pokes up thru the top. With a fence to guide the work it's a poor man's shaper. The work is 5/16" thick, a straight 3/8" cutter sticking up 3/8" makes nice 3/8" by 3/8" fingers.
For the fingerlap joints we take the top off the router table and put a 3/4" dado across the top to accept a miter gauge. Used the miter off the band saw. Needed a couple of passes and a shim before the miter gauge slide freely. Then we put a finger in the miter gauge to space the fingers and go for it. Works. Good fit. Knock off for happy hour feeling very organized and wood crafty.

Fix the fuel shortage, Drill, Its the American way

We have an oil shortage, every one agrees on that. The traditional American answer to this sort of problem is to fix it. We consume 20 million barrels per day. Reserves in Alaska and off shore are estimated in the billions of barrels. Enough to fuel our vehicles and heat our houses for generations. So why not do the obvious thing and drill for oil?
The tradition of America is to press on, and fix the problem. We have been doing this since the Revolution. Got a problem with British men '0 war blockading New York? Invent an submarine with 18th century technology and go out to sink them. Got a rebel ironclad out sinking the Union fleet? Get plans for an even more advanced ironclad from the greatest naval architect of the age and rush a vessel into action in 90 days from keel laying to combat on the Chesapeake. Want to keep California in the Union? Lay a steam railroad clear across the continent. And then dig a canal across Panama. Want to stop German subs from sinking allied ships? Lay a minefield clean across the North Sea from Scotland to Norway. Got implacable Nazi and Facist enemies? Invent a superweapon so advanced that it wasn't even in science fiction. Need to convince the world that democratic capitalism is the way to fly? Build a moon rocket and send men to the moon.
In America, when we have a problem, we fix it. We have a very simple problem now, not enough oil. So lets get cracking and fix it. We need to drill off shore, drill in Alaska, develop oil shale and get on with it.
All the "alternate energy" in the world won't fuel my car or heat my house.

Winning Iraq is bad for McCain?

I heard a couple a Sunday pundits say this. General Petraeus is thinking about (not committed to yet, but thinking about) sending more troops home 'cause things are getting better in Iraq. McCain didn't, (and isn't going to) look this gift horse in the teeth. Everyone wants the war over and the troops home as soon as possible.
The pundits take on this? "Now that McCain is talking about bringing troops home there is no difference between him and Obama." They didn't mention the little matter of who was right on the surge, which even the NY Times now admits, won the war. McCain pushed for the surge while Obama spoke against it.
Take your pick for commander in chief.