I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to follow
what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students - 3.8 on a
4.0 scale.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo


Bob-tx

On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!

Wherein Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why the Arizona statute is
unconstitutional, suggests legal means that Arizona can employ to
protect its borders, notes that no president since Richard Nixon has
wanted to restrict illegal immigration (because both political parties
benefit from it), and points out that being an illegal immigrant is
not a criminal offense, though Arizona wants to make it so.

(Silver lining: the more OT crap gets posted here, the more it plays
merry hell with the Homeowner's Hub site.)

"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you want
people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!


No, I did not 'forget' to include the rebuttal link!!!
I wasn't aware of it.
Bob-tx

On 1/25/2011 5:41 AM, Bob-tx wrote:


"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!


No, I did not 'forget' to include the rebuttal link!!!
I wasn't aware of it.
Bob-tx


The judge makes a very good point about the specific powers of the state
and federal government but the federal government will not
enforce the law and protect the people of the states as it is required
to do. So what is the individual state to do? The feds tell the state
"Those are our criminals leave them alone." It makes no sense.

TDD

On Jan 25, 7:49*am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 1/25/2011 5:41 AM, Bob-tx wrote:







"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip..

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!

No, I did not 'forget' to include the rebuttal link!!!
I wasn't aware of it.
Bob-tx

The judge makes a very good point about the specific powers of the state
and federal government but the federal government will not
enforce the law and protect the people of the states as it is required
to do. So what is the individual state to do? The feds tell the state
"Those are our criminals leave them alone." It makes no sense.

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nobody gives a rat's ass what Judge Napolitano or anybody else thinks
about Arizona's new law. The opinion that counts will be coming soon
enough from the Supreme Court.

On Jan 24, 12:25*pm, Hell Toupee wrote:
On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:







I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!

Wherein Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why the Arizona statute is
unconstitutional, suggests legal means that Arizona can employ to
protect its borders, notes that no president since Richard Nixon has
wanted to restrict illegal immigration (because both political parties
benefit from it), and points out that being an illegal immigrant is
not a criminal offense, though Arizona wants to make it so.

(Silver lining: the more OT crap gets posted here, the more it plays
merry hell with the Homeowner's Hub site.)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It’s a criminal offense if you trespassed on land that my family owns
and we would prosecute.
The citizens of the United States are the owners of the territories of
The United States.
If a majority of United States citizens decide that trespassing on The
United States is a criminal offense and they want to prosecute then
they can, and at this rate if it isn’t a United States majority yet it
soon will be.

On Jan 25, 10:40*am, Molly Brown wrote:
On Jan 24, 12:25*pm, Hell Toupee wrote:





On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip..

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!

Wherein Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why the Arizona statute is
unconstitutional, suggests legal means that Arizona can employ to
protect its borders, notes that no president since Richard Nixon has
wanted to restrict illegal immigration (because both political parties
benefit from it), and points out that being an illegal immigrant is
not a criminal offense, though Arizona wants to make it so.

(Silver lining: the more OT crap gets posted here, the more it plays
merry hell with the Homeowner's Hub site.)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It’s a criminal offense if you trespassed on land that my family owns
and we would prosecute.
The citizens of the United States are the owners of the territories of
The United States.
If a majority of United States citizens decide that trespassing on The
United States is a criminal offense and they want to prosecute then
they can, and at this rate if it isn’t a United States majority yet it
soon will be.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If the US were a democracy where people voted directly, that would be
true. With a republic, you have the little problem of the law having
to
pass the House, Senate and be signed into law by the president.

On 1/25/2011 7:49 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 1/25/2011 5:41 AM, Bob-tx wrote:


"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!


No, I did not 'forget' to include the rebuttal link!!!
I wasn't aware of it.
Bob-tx


The judge makes a very good point about the specific powers of the state
and federal government but the federal government will not
enforce the law and protect the people of the states as it is required
to do.

That makes it sound like the current administration is doing nothing.
Deportations are up under Obama and so is border enforcement.

So what is the individual state to do? The feds tell the state
"Those are our criminals leave them alone."


In fact ICE and Arizona share arrest data and have since 2010. A good
part of the reason why deportations are up.

Most of the violence in the border area is not due to illegal
immigrants, they have a lower arrest rate than legals (the reason why is
obvious), but is due to drug trafficking. Arizona's law does little to
fix that. But this isn't really about what works and what doesn't, what
is constitutional and what isn't. It's largely about throwing red meat
to the party of the terminally upset.

It makes no sense.

Because it ain't so.

Jeff


TDD

Jeff Thies wrote:

That makes it sound like the current administration is doing nothing.
Deportations are up under Obama and so is border enforcement.

Both of which are largely irrelevant. So what if deportations are double
those of prior administrations if the number of illegal immigrants increases
five-fold? More immigrants implies a greater chance of catching some, but
also implies a greater chance of more getting through.

The better metric whould be the number of illegal immigrants that manage to
avoid detection for, say, one year.


Most of the violence in the border area is not due to illegal
immigrants, they have a lower arrest rate than legals (the reason why
is obvious), but is due to drug trafficking. Arizona's law does
little to fix that. But this isn't really about what works and what
doesn't, what is constitutional and what isn't. It's largely about
throwing red meat to the party of the terminally upset.

It makes no sense.


I agree that simply catching more immigrants won't stop the flow of drug
smugglers - there are an almost infinite number of Mexicans waiting in line.

Catching more will disincentivize the "honest" illegal immigrant who merely
wants a job. That may be enough inasmuch as the drug smugglers are here only
temporarily; they drop their load beside the road and go home. By
air-conditioned bus.

On 1/25/2011 12:37 PM, HeyBub wrote:
Jeff Thies wrote:

That makes it sound like the current administration is doing nothing.
Deportations are up under Obama and so is border enforcement.

Both of which are largely irrelevant. So what if deportations are double
those of prior administrations if the number of illegal immigrants increases
five-fold?

Except that all evidence is that the illegal immigrant population has
been *falling* in AZ and has been since 2008:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...ation0730.html

More recent figures put that down another 100K.

Any stats to the contrary?


More immigrants implies a greater chance of catching some, but
also implies a greater chance of more getting through.

The better metric whould be the number of illegal immigrants that manage to
avoid detection for, say, one year.


Most of the violence in the border area is not due to illegal
immigrants, they have a lower arrest rate than legals (the reason why
is obvious), but is due to drug trafficking. Arizona's law does
little to fix that. But this isn't really about what works and what
doesn't, what is constitutional and what isn't. It's largely about
throwing red meat to the party of the terminally upset.

It makes no sense.


I agree that simply catching more immigrants won't stop the flow of drug
smugglers - there are an almost infinite number of Mexicans waiting in line.

Catching more will disincentivize the "honest" illegal immigrant who merely
wants a job. That may be enough inasmuch as the drug smugglers are here only
temporarily; they drop their load beside the road and go home. By
air-conditioned bus.

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

In spite of all the anger, all evidence is that illegal immigration
is becoming less, not more, of a problem. Stepped up enforcement and
the dismal prospect of getting a ****ty job are taking their toll.

Jeff

On Jan 25, 7:50*am, wrote:
On Jan 25, 10:40*am, Molly Brown wrote:





On Jan 24, 12:25*pm, Hell Toupee wrote:

On 1/24/2011 1:12 PM, Bob-tx wrote:

I apologize for off topic, but from what I have observed about many of
the people who frequent this NG, I thought it would be of interest to
several of you .
Bob

Please take a couple minutes to at least start to watch this vid clip.

I encourage you to forward this, but you decide.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College
(pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona.

He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he
repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to
follow what he's saying; must be why he's rated highly by his students
- 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo

Hey - you forgot to include the link to the rebuttal video. Don't you
want people to see both sides and make up their own minds?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkigY...ayer_embedded#!

Wherein Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why the Arizona statute is
unconstitutional, suggests legal means that Arizona can employ to
protect its borders, notes that no president since Richard Nixon has
wanted to restrict illegal immigration (because both political parties
benefit from it), and points out that being an illegal immigrant is
not a criminal offense, though Arizona wants to make it so.

(Silver lining: the more OT crap gets posted here, the more it plays
merry hell with the Homeowner's Hub site.)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It’s a criminal offense if you trespassed on land that my family owns
and we would prosecute.
The citizens of the United States are the owners of the territories of
The United States.
If a majority of United States citizens decide that trespassing on The
United States is a criminal offense and they want to prosecute then
they can, and at this rate if it isn’t a United States majority yet it
soon will be.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If the US were a democracy where people voted directly, that would be
true. *With a republic, you have the little problem of the law having
to
pass the House, Senate and be signed into law by the president.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That’s exactly why, like in the last election, the old dregs are being
voted out of office

Jeff Thies wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a female
passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).


In spite of all the anger, all evidence is that illegal immigration
is becoming less, not more, of a problem. Stepped up enforcement and
the dismal prospect of getting a ****ty job are taking their toll.


I agree. Still, the chances of employment in the US are far greater than in
Mexico. Then, too, robbery is more lucrative in the U.S. than in Mexico.

Plus, the economy will turn around someday. Maybe.

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a female
passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:55:37 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a female
passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Were they on the bus, or were you?

Oren wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative
be? It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way,
these days few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a
female passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Horney female engineers?

It doesn't get any better than that.

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:29:25 -0600, "
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:55:37 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a female
passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Were they on the bus, or were you?

Soon to be revealed in my first best seller:

How to Get Dates: Visiting Root -n- Scoot, Hogly Woggly, Piggly
Wiggly, Laundry-Mats and Bus Stations.

I'm researching retirement village swimming pools. Any ideas?

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 06:03:43 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Oren wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative
be? It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way,
these days few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a
female passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Horney female engineers?


Gentlemen won't speak of such things.

It doesn't get any better than that.


Sure it does in one word. Contortionist!

http://growabrain.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/11/contortionist.jpg

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:19:59 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:29:25 -0600, "
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:55:37 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a female
passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Were they on the bus, or were you?

Soon to be revealed in my first best seller:

How to Get Dates: Visiting Root -n- Scoot, Hogly Woggly, Piggly
Wiggly, Laundry-Mats and Bus Stations.

I'm researching retirement village swimming pools. Any ideas?

Don't look near the drain.

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 06:03:43 -0600, "HeyBub" wrote:

Oren wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative
be? It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way,
these days few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a
female passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Horney female engineers?

It doesn't get any better than that.

....or more rare.

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:00:27 -0600, "
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:19:59 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:29:25 -0600, "
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:55:37 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:35:36 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Have you ridden in a bus lately? And what would the alternative be?
It's cheaper/easier/quicker to just send them on their way, these days
few attempt to recross.

No, but I did once in my youth. (Aside: My brother-in-law was a
long-distance driver for Greyhound. He got laid on EVERY trip by a female
passenger! He atributed it to the continual vibration...).

My secret is out. Pick up dates at the bus station.

The hot ones look blurry from vibration.

Were they on the bus, or were you?

Soon to be revealed in my first best seller:

How to Get Dates: Visiting Root -n- Scoot, Hogly Woggly, Piggly
Wiggly, Laundry-Mats and Bus Stations.

I'm researching retirement village swimming pools. Any ideas?

Don't look near the drain.

Oh no! You make it sound like the mound of pleasure is near the toxic
waste dump.

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Horney female engineers?

It doesn't get any better than that.

...or more rare.

Ugly girls get horney too!

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Horney female engineers?

It doesn't get any better than that.

...or more rare.

Reminds me of some graffiti on a restroom wall at MIT.

"Differences between MIT women and a toilet seat"

* You can get used to the looks of a toilet seat
* Toilet seats alwas go down for you
* Toilet seats take a lot of **** without complaining
* You don't have to kiss a toilet seat to use it

There were others, but you get the drift.

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:40:34 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

wrote:

Horney female engineers?

It doesn't get any better than that.

...or more rare.

Ugly girls get horney too!


Even those with pig tails.

HeyBub wrote:
zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Horney female engineers?

It doesn't get any better than that.

...or more rare.

Reminds me of some graffiti on a restroom wall at MIT.

"Differences between MIT women and a toilet seat"

* You can get used to the looks of a toilet seat
* Toilet seats alwas go down for you
* Toilet seats take a lot of **** without complaining
* You don't have to kiss a toilet seat to use it

There were others, but you get the drift.

* Holes in toilet seats don't get stretched out.
* Toilet seats don't get headaches
* You can have a conversation with a toilet seat
* Toilet seats are ready when you are
* Toilet seats warm up quickly
* Toilet seats rarely become unhinged