In a message dated 5/3/2000 4:56:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< In the interest of technical correctness, paints are not toluene-based,
 though they may be toluene-borne. The "base" refers to the primary binder,
 such as acrylic, polyurethane or pigeon crap, as the case may be. The
 solvent (which may be water, too) is not part of the finished film. So we
 could say a paint is polyurethane based and water-borne, but not vice
 versa.

 As Ralph has such a highly developed sense of technical industry terms, for
 which he is nearly famous oin BP, I was sure he would want to get this one
 right. >>

Esteemed Sir!

In da immortal woids of Anne Sullivan (AKA Teacher, not the one we know and
love in Chicagoland), "I'm an ignorant, opinionated girl, and everything I
am, I owe to you."

I "did" the toluene paint when I was in Junior High (maybe that's why they
have since renamed it "middle school".....), when I was even less technically
aware than I yam tidday.

In regard to the overshoe question, was I wrong there, too, in regard to the
cement/concrete controversy?  My first thought was that you were telling me
to use hydraulic cement rather than concrete, but were you actually
recommending the use of hydraulic cement in the fabrication of concrete
overshoes?

Which brings me to my neighbor Mr. Corzine, Jillionaire Candidate for US
Senate from Joisey, who spoke eloquently of the Jew Lawyers who get the
Italian Concrete/Cement Shoe Manufacturers Assn out of jail.  Mike, aren't we
supposed to be on the legal end of this, not the manufacturing end, according
to that theory?

Sign me,

Still waiting for Safire to retract his allegations about cement sidewalks.
Chris, you better straighten him out.