Who owns the rain?
 

"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has put
city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the middle of
competing water users and advocates, often from within their own agencies,
of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy of
wetting.

It's for the children.

Who owns the rain?
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the middle
of competing water users and advocates, often from within their own
agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy of
wetting.

It's for the children.



If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my land,
let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!

Who owns the rain?
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the middle
of competing water users and advocates, often from within their own
agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy of
wetting.

It's for the children.



There's a long discussion in progress about this subject in rec.gardens, in
case you're interested in adding your scholarly thoughts. Subject line:
Making Rainwater Harvesting Illegal

Who owns the rain?
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the middle
of competing water users and advocates, often from within their own
agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy of
wetting.

It's for the children.

there's lots of water rights issues and laws in the southwest US. there's
all sorts of laws about what happens if you disturb the natural water course
to redirect water onto your neighbor's property; these are also written such
that you can't prevent natural watercourses from their track to NOT have
that water run onto neighboring property. if these laws weren't available,
then the colorado river would be diverted and massive parts of the southwest
would become uninhabitable, perhaps starting another water war.

Who owns the rain?
 

Sanity wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the middle
of competing water users and advocates, often from within their own
agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy of
wetting.

It's for the children.



If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my land,
let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!


A construction company dug a foundation somewhere and
when it rained, the excavation was filled with water.
The Feds stepped in and forbade the construction firm
from pumping out the water because it had now become
a wetland and had to be protected. I may have to look
it up on Snopes but that's about how I remember the
news story. People with lots of guns can do all sorts
of asinine things to you.

TDD

Who owns the rain?
 

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
Sanity wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the
middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within their
own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy
of wetting.

It's for the children.



If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my land,
let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!
A construction company dug a foundation somewhere and
when it rained, the excavation was filled with water.
The Feds stepped in and forbade the construction firm
from pumping out the water because it had now become
a wetland and had to be protected. I may have to look
it up on Snopes but that's about how I remember the
news story. People with lots of guns can do all sorts
of asinine things to you.

TDD


That sounds like complete bull****.

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
Sanity wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the
middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within their
own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy
of wetting.

It's for the children.


If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my land,
let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!
A construction company dug a foundation somewhere and
when it rained, the excavation was filled with water.
The Feds stepped in and forbade the construction firm
from pumping out the water because it had now become
a wetland and had to be protected. I may have to look
it up on Snopes but that's about how I remember the
news story. People with lots of guns can do all sorts
of asinine things to you.

TDD


That sounds like complete bull****.


I know but I swear it was a news story I came across.
Many news stories turn out to be little more than male
bovine droppings but gain mileage because it sounds
like something that could happen. snopes.com is a good
source for checking out odd stories. I think I'll go
look it up.

TDD

Who owns the rain?
 

On Apr 23, 1:52*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in ...





Sanity wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has
put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the
middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within their
own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy
of wetting.

It's for the children.

If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my land,
let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!
A construction company dug a foundation somewhere and
when it rained, the excavation was filled with water.
The Feds stepped in and forbade the construction firm
from pumping out the water because it had now become
a wetland and had to be protected. I may have to look
it up on Snopes but that's about how I remember the
news story. People with lots of guns can do all sorts
of asinine things to you.

TDD

That sounds like complete bull****.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It is bs, first the Army corp is so backed up they take 6 months or
more to come out. I had land surveyed by the Army Corp of Engineers to
see if it was a wetland, flooding was not the critera they went by for
this piece of land, it was what was growing there, types of trees and
plants. Certain types grow, and many others wont if its wetland.

Who owns the rain?
 

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
Sanity wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This
has put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the
middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within their
own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate
the water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um,
worthy of wetting.

It's for the children.


If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my
land, let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!
A construction company dug a foundation somewhere and
when it rained, the excavation was filled with water.
The Feds stepped in and forbade the construction firm
from pumping out the water because it had now become
a wetland and had to be protected. I may have to look
it up on Snopes but that's about how I remember the
news story. People with lots of guns can do all sorts
of asinine things to you.

TDD


That sounds like complete bull****.
I know but I swear it was a news story I came across.
Many news stories turn out to be little more than male
bovine droppings but gain mileage because it sounds
like something that could happen. snopes.com is a good
source for checking out odd stories. I think I'll go
look it up.

TDD


Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some of the
students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might think journalists
would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not true. Always double check what
you read in the news if a story sounds even microscopically inaccurate.

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
Sanity wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This
has put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the
middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within their
own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate
the water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um,
worthy of wetting.

It's for the children.


If the government says that I can't keep the water that falls on my
land, let the government keep the water from falling on it!!!!!
A construction company dug a foundation somewhere and
when it rained, the excavation was filled with water.
The Feds stepped in and forbade the construction firm
from pumping out the water because it had now become
a wetland and had to be protected. I may have to look
it up on Snopes but that's about how I remember the
news story. People with lots of guns can do all sorts
of asinine things to you.

TDD

That sounds like complete bull****.
I know but I swear it was a news story I came across.
Many news stories turn out to be little more than male
bovine droppings but gain mileage because it sounds
like something that could happen. snopes.com is a good
source for checking out odd stories. I think I'll go
look it up.

TDD


Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some of the
students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might think journalists
would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not true. Always double check what
you read in the news if a story sounds even microscopically inaccurate.


Well, the supermarket tabloids only publish the truth.
*snicker*

TDD

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some of
the students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might think
journalists would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not true.
Always double check what you read in the news if a story sounds even
microscopically inaccurate.

Graffiti on a college restroom wall:

"If you're a history major, this is the only job you'll ever have."



On the other hand, George Bush has a degree from Yale. In history.

Who owns the rain?
 

charlie wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This
has put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in
the middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within
their own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate
the water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um,
worthy of wetting.

It's for the children.

there's lots of water rights issues and laws in the southwest US.
there's all sorts of laws about what happens if you disturb the
natural water course to redirect water onto your neighbor's property;
these are also written such that you can't prevent natural
watercourses from their track to NOT have that water run onto
neighboring property. if these laws weren't available, then the
colorado river would be diverted and massive parts of the southwest
would become uninhabitable, perhaps starting another water war.

So the chap who complained about his neighbor's gutter-water being diverted
to his property should bone up on New Mexico's Property & Conservation Code,
Article 32, Section 56, Paragraph (c)iii (or whatever's applicable in his
state)?

Who owns the rain?
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some of
the students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might think
journalists would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not true.
Always double check what you read in the news if a story sounds even
microscopically inaccurate.

Graffiti on a college restroom wall:

"If you're a history major, this is the only job you'll ever have."



On the other hand, George Bush has a degree from Yale. In history.


No, he doesn't really. If he did, he would not have repeated it.

Onward:

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...f?t=1240516583

Who owns the rain?
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
charlie wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This
has put city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in
the middle of competing water users and advocates, often from within
their own agencies, of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate
the water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um,
worthy of wetting.

It's for the children.

there's lots of water rights issues and laws in the southwest US.
there's all sorts of laws about what happens if you disturb the
natural water course to redirect water onto your neighbor's property;
these are also written such that you can't prevent natural
watercourses from their track to NOT have that water run onto
neighboring property. if these laws weren't available, then the
colorado river would be diverted and massive parts of the southwest
would become uninhabitable, perhaps starting another water war.

So the chap who complained about his neighbor's gutter-water being
diverted to his property should bone up on New Mexico's Property &
Conservation Code, Article 32, Section 56, Paragraph (c)iii (or whatever's
applicable in his state)?

yep. in my area, any water entering a property can be diverted anywhere else
on the property, but the amount and exit location from the property has to
be (roughly) the same.

then again, my neighbor has a wash running through it, which every now and
then floods about 3' deep, and runs maybe 15000gps after a heavy long rain.
i'd be pretty upset if it got diverted anywhere over my property instead.

Who owns the rain?
 

On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:15:11 -0700, "charlie"
wrote:

there's lots of water rights issues and laws in the southwest US. there's
all sorts of laws about what happens if you disturb the natural water course
to redirect water onto your neighbor's property; these are also written such
that you can't prevent natural watercourses from their track to NOT have
that water run onto neighboring property. if these laws weren't available,
then the colorado river would be diverted and massive parts of the southwest
would become uninhabitable, perhaps starting another water war.

Living in Arizona, I see this insanity every day.

There are countless studies and newspaper articles
about how population is putting pressure
on our dwindling water supply.

Yet, we have MORE GOLF COURSES per capita
that are heavily watered ( acre-feet ) per day.

I'll believe there is a water problem
when they stop watering the golf courses.

Who owns the rain?
 

"RJ" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:15:11 -0700, "charlie"
wrote:

there's lots of water rights issues and laws in the southwest US. there's
all sorts of laws about what happens if you disturb the natural water
course
to redirect water onto your neighbor's property; these are also written
such
that you can't prevent natural watercourses from their track to NOT have
that water run onto neighboring property. if these laws weren't available,
then the colorado river would be diverted and massive parts of the
southwest
would become uninhabitable, perhaps starting another water war.

Living in Arizona, I see this insanity every day.

There are countless studies and newspaper articles
about how population is putting pressure
on our dwindling water supply.

Yet, we have MORE GOLF COURSES per capita
that are heavily watered ( acre-feet ) per day.

I'll believe there is a water problem
when they stop watering the golf courses.

almost every golf course is watered with non-drinking water, most likely
effluent from the water treatment plants, or groundwater that has too much
arsenic to meet the new water standards (at least in my area).

the outgo from the sewage plants has to go somewhere, and it's against the
law to pump it down into the aquifer in most places.

regards,
charlie
cave creek, az

Who owns the rain?
 

RJ wrote:
....
I'll believe there is a water problem
when they stop watering the golf courses.

Oh, there's a water problem w/o a doubt; the issue is there's more money
behind the golf courses than sense in modifying policy until the problem
becomes an insurmountable crisis.

They'll always presume they can steal yet more from others until those
being taken from finally get fed up.

It took almost 50 years to finally win the court case(s) (eventually to
US Supreme Court) but KS finally beat CO on draining the Arkansas before
it left their borders. It's still in litigation w/ NE from the north
although there has been some movement by NE that may eventually resolve
that case.

--

Who owns the rain?
 

On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:43:13 -0700, "RJ" wrote:

I'll believe there is a water problem
when they stop watering the golf courses.

A man visits the ocean shore for the first time. Far as he could see
was ocean.

His comment: "Somehow, I imagined it would be bigger than that!"

AZ, CA and NV just went through negotiations over the water war.

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some
of the students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might
think journalists would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not
true. Always double check what you read in the news if a story
sounds even microscopically inaccurate.

Graffiti on a college restroom wall:

"If you're a history major, this is the only job you'll ever have."



On the other hand, George Bush has a degree from Yale. In history.


No, he doesn't really. If he did, he would not have repeated it.


Heh! Here's an example of "Google is not ALWAYS your friend!"

I'm sitting in the living room of an attractive lady watching the TV news.
I'm waiting for her to skin a muskrat or whatever women are doing when they
say "I'll be ready in a minute." When, apparently hearing the news and
reaching a stopping point on the muskrat project, she suddenly bursts into
the room and scream: "That goddamn Bush should learn some history!"

I reply: "Uh, he has a degree from Yale. In history." (note similarity to my
comment above).

She: "That's a goddamn lie!"

Me: (tappity-tappity on her computer) "Ah, here it is. He also has an MBA
from Harvard."

She: "THE ****IN' REPUBICANS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE INTERNET!"

Thinking quickly, I concocted a complicated, but believable, excuse for
leaving. I think it was "I have to go." Anyway, I learned two things:

1. Google is not always your friend.
2. Use caution when dating someone who is bi-polar (used to be called
"manic-depressive").

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a hundred
dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what would have
happened if, say, two years down the road and happily married, I'd found out
then that she was a liberal.

Who owns the rain?
 

HeyBub wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some
of the students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might
think journalists would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not
true. Always double check what you read in the news if a story
sounds even microscopically inaccurate.
Graffiti on a college restroom wall:

"If you're a history major, this is the only job you'll ever have."



On the other hand, George Bush has a degree from Yale. In history.

No, he doesn't really. If he did, he would not have repeated it.


Heh! Here's an example of "Google is not ALWAYS your friend!"

I'm sitting in the living room of an attractive lady watching the TV news.
I'm waiting for her to skin a muskrat or whatever women are doing when they
say "I'll be ready in a minute." When, apparently hearing the news and
reaching a stopping point on the muskrat project, she suddenly bursts into
the room and scream: "That goddamn Bush should learn some history!"

I reply: "Uh, he has a degree from Yale. In history." (note similarity to my
comment above).

She: "That's a goddamn lie!"

Me: (tappity-tappity on her computer) "Ah, here it is. He also has an MBA
from Harvard."

She: "THE ****IN' REPUBICANS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE INTERNET!"

Thinking quickly, I concocted a complicated, but believable, excuse for
leaving. I think it was "I have to go." Anyway, I learned two things:

1. Google is not always your friend.
2. Use caution when dating someone who is bi-polar (used to be called
"manic-depressive").

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a hundred
dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what would have
happened if, say, two years down the road and happily married, I'd found out
then that she was a liberal.


In her defense, Bush *appears* completely ignorant of history,
especially that immediately concerning his father.

If I were Yale, I'd be mortified.

You don't have to be a liberal to realize and accept that while W may
have excellent credentials, he certainly appears to be a ****ing idiot.
And I don't mean that as an exaggeration; I truly believe that Yours
Truly would have made a better President than W.

What's sad is, probably a lot of people voted for Bush not because they
liked him but because they felt the same way about "the other guys."

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Who owns the rain?
 

Before you know it, it will be illegal to take a ****.

Rotten ****in politicians, **** um all.

Who owns the rain?
 

Mark D wrote:

Before you know it, it will be illegal to take a ****.

Rotten ****in politicians, **** um all.

I wouldn't **** one of them, not even with your dick. The only thing
politicians are good for is compost.

Who owns the rain?
 

Nate Nagel wrote:

Heh! Here's an example of "Google is not ALWAYS your friend!"

I'm sitting in the living room of an attractive lady watching the TV
news. I'm waiting for her to skin a muskrat or whatever women are
doing when they say "I'll be ready in a minute." When, apparently
hearing the news and reaching a stopping point on the muskrat
project, she suddenly bursts into the room and scream: "That goddamn
Bush should learn some history!" I reply: "Uh, he has a degree from Yale.
In history." (note
similarity to my comment above).

She: "That's a goddamn lie!"

Me: (tappity-tappity on her computer) "Ah, here it is. He also has
an MBA from Harvard."

She: "THE ****IN' REPUBICANS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE INTERNET!"

Thinking quickly, I concocted a complicated, but believable, excuse
for leaving. I think it was "I have to go." Anyway, I learned two
things: 1. Google is not always your friend.
2. Use caution when dating someone who is bi-polar (used to be called
"manic-depressive").

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a
hundred dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what
would have happened if, say, two years down the road and happily
married, I'd found out then that she was a liberal.


In her defense, Bush *appears* completely ignorant of history,
especially that immediately concerning his father.

If I were Yale, I'd be mortified.

You don't have to be a liberal to realize and accept that while W may
have excellent credentials, he certainly appears to be a ****ing
idiot. And I don't mean that as an exaggeration; I truly believe
that Yours Truly would have made a better President than W.

What's sad is, probably a lot of people voted for Bush not because
they liked him but because they felt the same way about "the other
guys."

Oh I agree; Bush was not my first choice! The best person for the job wasn't
running (me).

William F. Buckley (I think) said that we could be governed better by the
first 500 names in the Boston 'phone book than by a cadre of professional
politicians.

In defense of Bush, however, it's hard to argue with 22 consecutive quarters
of economic growth. Then the Democrats took control of Congress and, in a
mere 18 months, managed to peg the needle on the economic ****-up meter.

Right now, the aforementioned meter has died of shame. Obama's budget
deficit for the first year alone eclipses the eight years of Bush combined.
And we haven't even gotten to universal health care, Social Security reform,
and free breast implants.

Who owns the rain?
 

In article ,
(Mark D) wrote:

Before you know it, it will be illegal to take a ****.

Rotten ****in politicians, **** um all.

In some cities there is a fine for spitting on

the sidewalk. But generally you can puke for free.

--
"Distracting a politician from governing
is like distracting a bear from eating your baby."

--PJ O'Rourke

Who owns the rain?
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Nate Nagel wrote:

Heh! Here's an example of "Google is not ALWAYS your friend!"

I'm sitting in the living room of an attractive lady watching the TV
news. I'm waiting for her to skin a muskrat or whatever women are
doing when they say "I'll be ready in a minute." When, apparently
hearing the news and reaching a stopping point on the muskrat
project, she suddenly bursts into the room and scream: "That goddamn
Bush should learn some history!" I reply: "Uh, he has a degree from
Yale. In history." (note
similarity to my comment above).

She: "That's a goddamn lie!"

Me: (tappity-tappity on her computer) "Ah, here it is. He also has
an MBA from Harvard."

She: "THE ****IN' REPUBICANS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE INTERNET!"

Thinking quickly, I concocted a complicated, but believable, excuse
for leaving. I think it was "I have to go." Anyway, I learned two
things: 1. Google is not always your friend.
2. Use caution when dating someone who is bi-polar (used to be called
"manic-depressive").

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a
hundred dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what
would have happened if, say, two years down the road and happily
married, I'd found out then that she was a liberal.


In her defense, Bush *appears* completely ignorant of history,
especially that immediately concerning his father.

If I were Yale, I'd be mortified.

You don't have to be a liberal to realize and accept that while W may
have excellent credentials, he certainly appears to be a ****ing
idiot. And I don't mean that as an exaggeration; I truly believe
that Yours Truly would have made a better President than W.

What's sad is, probably a lot of people voted for Bush not because
they liked him but because they felt the same way about "the other
guys."

Oh I agree; Bush was not my first choice! The best person for the job
wasn't running (me).

William F. Buckley (I think) said that we could be governed better by the
first 500 names in the Boston 'phone book than by a cadre of professional
politicians.

In defense of Bush, however, it's hard to argue with 22 consecutive
quarters of economic growth. Then the Democrats took control of Congress
and, in a mere 18 months, managed to peg the needle on the economic
****-up meter.

Right now, the aforementioned meter has died of shame. Obama's budget
deficit for the first year alone eclipses the eight years of Bush
combined. And we haven't even gotten to universal health care, Social
Security reform, and free breast implants.



It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong country,
rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best way for us) an
unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place while we deal with the
right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a diploma, but he has no knowledge of
history. He's one of many fools who think that once soldiers begin dying, it
makes the cause a noble one, even if the cause is a complete mistake like
Iraq (or Vietnam).

Who owns the rain?
 

HeyBub wrote:
"By capturing rainwater, some homeowners are breaking the law. This has put
city and state governments in an awkward position-smack in the middle of
competing water users and advocates, often from within their own agencies,
of conserving water to protect supplies."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/4314447.html

Some say rainwater should follow its natural course instead of being
diverted by homeowners so that the homeowner's betters can allocate the
water based on need - or political pressure - to those more, um, worthy of
wetting.

It's for the children.


Hmmm,
The who owns sun shine, air?

Who owns the rain?
 

In article , Tony Hwang wrote:
The who owns sun shine, air?

The United States Federal Government owns the air.

It must be true because they're planning to tax us
all for using it (cap and trade).

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Who owns the rain?
 

HeyBub wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Our colleges are full of illiterate students and instructors. Some
of the students manage to graduate and get real jobs. You might
think journalists would be exempt from illiteracy, but it's not
true. Always double check what you read in the news if a story
sounds even microscopically inaccurate.
Graffiti on a college restroom wall:

"If you're a history major, this is the only job you'll ever have."



On the other hand, George Bush has a degree from Yale. In history.

No, he doesn't really. If he did, he would not have repeated it.


Heh! Here's an example of "Google is not ALWAYS your friend!"

I'm sitting in the living room of an attractive lady watching the TV news.
I'm waiting for her to skin a muskrat or whatever women are doing when they
say "I'll be ready in a minute." When, apparently hearing the news and
reaching a stopping point on the muskrat project, she suddenly bursts into
the room and scream: "That goddamn Bush should learn some history!"

I reply: "Uh, he has a degree from Yale. In history." (note similarity to my
comment above).

She: "That's a goddamn lie!"

Me: (tappity-tappity on her computer) "Ah, here it is. He also has an MBA
from Harvard."

She: "THE ****IN' REPUBICANS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE INTERNET!"

Thinking quickly, I concocted a complicated, but believable, excuse for
leaving. I think it was "I have to go." Anyway, I learned two things:

1. Google is not always your friend.
2. Use caution when dating someone who is bi-polar (used to be called
"manic-depressive").

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a hundred
dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what would have
happened if, say, two years down the road and happily married, I'd found out
then that she was a liberal.



I know a nice gal who is a raving Liberal. When she
hears certain radio talk show hosts, she transforms
into something out of "The Exorcist". I like her
anyway because she's fun to tease, just like my
Southern Baptist cousins, only different buttons to
push. Anyway she has adopted several dogs and cats
and one day I started talking to her about cat juggling.
I explained that cats can't handle end over end flips
when you pick them up behind the shoulders and toss
them into the air whilst imparting a spin, the look on
her face was priceless. The jaw dropping stare of abject
horror she exhibited had me about to bust a gut laughing.
I could see the color quickly draining from her face so
I had to gently explain that I was only kidding. I get a
similar vein popping reaction from my Southern Baptist
friends when I state that my doctor told me I could no
longer have children because they contain too much sugar
and I could choke on the small bones. People are fun to
tease.

TDD

Who owns the rain?
 

In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:


I had to gently explain that I was only kidding. I get a
similar vein popping reaction from my Southern Baptist
friends when I state that my doctor told me I could no
longer have children because they contain too much sugar
and I could choke on the small bones. People are fun to
tease.

TDD

Humans are the only animals that have children on purpose with the
exception of guppies, who like to eat theirs.
P. J. O'Rourke

--
"Distracting a politician from governing
is like distracting a bear from eating your baby."

--PJ O'Rourke

Who owns the rain?
 

clipped

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a hundred
dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what would have
happened if, say, two years down the road and happily married, I'd found out
then that she was a liberal.



If she was a liberal, she would attend you on your death bed -
moistening your dry lips, holding your hand, wiping your butt (not all
at the same time, of course).

If she was a conservative, she would hire an ex-felon to do the above
while she was out shopping and attending fund-raisers for the next Bush
or for Katherine Harris.

Who owns the rain?
 

Who owns the rain?
 

On Apr 23, 5:19*pm, Oren wrote:


AZ, CA and NV just went through negotiations over the water war.

Ditto for GA, AL, FL. GA wants to keep all the water flow in their
state rather than let it flow south to AL & FL. Several recent years
of severe drought bought the water war to a head.

Red

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Nate Nagel wrote:
Heh! Here's an example of "Google is not ALWAYS your friend!"

I'm sitting in the living room of an attractive lady watching the TV
news. I'm waiting for her to skin a muskrat or whatever women are
doing when they say "I'll be ready in a minute." When, apparently
hearing the news and reaching a stopping point on the muskrat
project, she suddenly bursts into the room and scream: "That goddamn
Bush should learn some history!" I reply: "Uh, he has a degree from
Yale. In history." (note
similarity to my comment above).

She: "That's a goddamn lie!"

Me: (tappity-tappity on her computer) "Ah, here it is. He also has
an MBA from Harvard."

She: "THE ****IN' REPUBICANS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE INTERNET!"

Thinking quickly, I concocted a complicated, but believable, excuse
for leaving. I think it was "I have to go." Anyway, I learned two
things: 1. Google is not always your friend.
2. Use caution when dating someone who is bi-polar (used to be called
"manic-depressive").

It was only our second date, so I didn't have more than about a
hundred dollars invested in the endeavor. I shudder to think what
would have happened if, say, two years down the road and happily
married, I'd found out then that she was a liberal.

In her defense, Bush *appears* completely ignorant of history,
especially that immediately concerning his father.

If I were Yale, I'd be mortified.

You don't have to be a liberal to realize and accept that while W may
have excellent credentials, he certainly appears to be a ****ing
idiot. And I don't mean that as an exaggeration; I truly believe
that Yours Truly would have made a better President than W.

What's sad is, probably a lot of people voted for Bush not because
they liked him but because they felt the same way about "the other
guys."
Oh I agree; Bush was not my first choice! The best person for the job
wasn't running (me).

William F. Buckley (I think) said that we could be governed better by the
first 500 names in the Boston 'phone book than by a cadre of professional
politicians.

In defense of Bush, however, it's hard to argue with 22 consecutive
quarters of economic growth. Then the Democrats took control of Congress
and, in a mere 18 months, managed to peg the needle on the economic
****-up meter.

Right now, the aforementioned meter has died of shame. Obama's budget
deficit for the first year alone eclipses the eight years of Bush
combined. And we haven't even gotten to universal health care, Social
Security reform, and free breast implants.



It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong country,
rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best way for us) an
unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place while we deal with the
right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a diploma, but he has no knowledge of
history. He's one of many fools who think that once soldiers begin dying, it
makes the cause a noble one, even if the cause is a complete mistake like
Iraq (or Vietnam).


the only mistake was you not being aborted.

Who owns the rain?
 

Red wrote:
On Apr 23, 5:19 pm, Oren wrote:

AZ, CA and NV just went through negotiations over the water war.

Ditto for GA, AL, FL. GA wants to keep all the water flow in their
state rather than let it flow south to AL & FL. Several recent years
of severe drought bought the water war to a head.

Red

Ga also wants their northern border moved to where it's supposed to be
so they can tap the Tennessee River.

Who owns the rain?
 

"Bill" wrote in message
.. .


It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong country,
rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best way for us) an
unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place while we deal with
the right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a diploma, but he has no
knowledge of history. He's one of many fools who think that once soldiers
begin dying, it makes the cause a noble one, even if the cause is a
complete mistake like Iraq (or Vietnam).
the only mistake was you not being aborted.


In extreme detail, tell me why you disagree with my comments. Try not to be
hysterical when you explain why you disagree.

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .


It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong country,
rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best way for us) an
unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place while we deal with
the right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a diploma, but he has no
knowledge of history. He's one of many fools who think that once soldiers
begin dying, it makes the cause a noble one, even if the cause is a
complete mistake like Iraq (or Vietnam).
the only mistake was you not being aborted.


In extreme detail, tell me why you disagree with my comments. Try not to be
hysterical when you explain why you disagree.


u 1st

Who owns the rain?
 

"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .


It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong country,
rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best way for us)
an unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place while we deal
with the right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a diploma, but he has no
knowledge of history. He's one of many fools who think that once
soldiers begin dying, it makes the cause a noble one, even if the cause
is a complete mistake like Iraq (or Vietnam).
the only mistake was you not being aborted.


In extreme detail, tell me why you disagree with my comments. Try not to
be hysterical when you explain why you disagree.
u 1st


You want me to explain why I disagree with myself?

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .


It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong country,
rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best way for us)
an unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place while we deal
with the right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a diploma, but he has no
knowledge of history. He's one of many fools who think that once
soldiers begin dying, it makes the cause a noble one, even if the cause
is a complete mistake like Iraq (or Vietnam).
the only mistake was you not being aborted.

In extreme detail, tell me why you disagree with my comments. Try not to
be hysterical when you explain why you disagree.
u 1st


You want me to explain why I disagree with myself?


y u should be aborted or not.

Who owns the rain?
 

"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .


It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong
country, rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best
way for us) an unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place
while we deal with the right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a
diploma, but he has no knowledge of history. He's one of many fools
who think that once soldiers begin dying, it makes the cause a noble
one, even if the cause is a complete mistake like Iraq (or Vietnam).
the only mistake was you not being aborted.

In extreme detail, tell me why you disagree with my comments. Try not
to be hysterical when you explain why you disagree.
u 1st


You want me to explain why I disagree with myself?
y u should be aborted or not.


Come back when you're not illiterate.

Who owns the rain?
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .


It's always easy to argue against starting a war in the wrong
country, rather than USE (and the worst way for Saddam and the best
way for us) an unsavory dictator to maintain stability in one place
while we deal with the right place (Pakistan). Bush may have a
diploma, but he has no knowledge of history. He's one of many fools
who think that once soldiers begin dying, it makes the cause a noble
one, even if the cause is a complete mistake like Iraq (or Vietnam).
the only mistake was you not being aborted.
In extreme detail, tell me why you disagree with my comments. Try not
to be hysterical when you explain why you disagree.
u 1st

You want me to explain why I disagree with myself?
y u should be aborted or not.


Come back when you're not illiterate.


ladies 1st