Frugal Living: 25 new messages in 6 topics

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* vacuum sealers or vacuum packagers - 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/be6f2a6eae059fa6?hl=en
* Frugal air travel tips - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f74cce039262a897?hl=en
* an amazing video - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/3e09fd58ae86d8bd?hl=en
* Bush To Let Illegal Aliens Get $40 Digital TV Coupons - 10 messages, 3
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f941e4a655a77d3f?hl=en
* Freebies, samples, bargains, and More! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/2576183ec5a395bc?hl=en
* Ugly Dish Antennas Nauseate Me - 4 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/8fd795758fa3f8c5?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: vacuum sealers or vacuum packagers
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/be6f2a6eae059fa6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 9:41 am
From: Dennis

On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:51:54 -0500, dhouston wrote:

>Just wondering if those vacuum sealers/packagers really work or should
>I say really preserve frozen food as they advertise? Anyone have
>experience with them?

I have one. Maybe it's the bags I use -- I got a continuous roll of
bag material, so each "bag" requires two sealing operations -- but I
have trouble getting a reliable vacuum seal. It will appear to be
sealed, but often when I later go to use the package it is no longer a
vacuum.

Dennis (evil)
--
The honest man is the one who realizes that he cannot
consume more, in his lifetime, than he produces.

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 10:39 am
From: turtlelover

dhouston wrote:
> Just wondering if those vacuum sealers/packagers really work or should
> I say really preserve frozen food as they advertise? Anyone have
> experience with them?

I have a Magic Vac Maxima, purchased from an eBay vendor. Magic Vac is made in Italy, by the original maker of the Foodsaver (before they changed to Chinese manufacturing). It's a great machine. I also use it for sealing mason jars of dry, dehydrated, or refrigerated foods.

A different eBay vendor sells bags inexpensively (compared to Foodsaver brand), and she also has the Maxima on sale for ... get this ... $99. (I paid $158 at a different vendor's store.)

I have no affiliation with either vendor. If someone wants the store info, let me know. Just remove "the obvious" to reply.

Cheers,
Turtlelover

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 10:45 am
From: "Don K"

<dhouston> wrote in message news:inf1h3t2thj7nv6safc1c9iale6qmjfm5m@4ax.com...
> Just wondering if those vacuum sealers/packagers really work or should
> I say really preserve frozen food as they advertise? Anyone have
> experience with them?

In my single days, I had a simple one that just had a pair of heated wires that
squeezed together, without the vacuum option.

It worked ok, but it wasn't worth the hassle of buying special rolls of
plastic, IMO.

The neat part about it was that it could be used to reseal packaging
that came with various products (like bread, bagels etc.) if they
used the right kind of soft plastic that could be re-melted.

I wouldn't bother buying another one, but if I ever come across my old
sealer again, I wouldn't mind using it again.

Don

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 11:22 am
From: Logan Shaw

Don K wrote:
> <dhouston> wrote in message news:inf1h3t2thj7nv6safc1c9iale6qmjfm5m@4ax.com...
>> Just wondering if those vacuum sealers/packagers really work or should
>> I say really preserve frozen food as they advertise? Anyone have
>> experience with them?
>
> In my single days, I had a simple one that just had a pair of heated wires that
> squeezed together, without the vacuum option.

Was it called the Seal-a-Meal? When I was a kid, our family got one of those
(it was mustard yellow), and you had to count to 10 seconds, I think it was,
for the plastic to melt together. The instructions advised counting by saying
"one seal a meal, two seal a meal, ...", so my sister and I made up a dumb
little song (with those lyrics) you could sing while you were waiting for it.
Frugal entertainment, or something.

- Logan

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:17 pm
From: "Don K"

"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:47110ce3$0$11086$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Don K wrote:
>> <dhouston> wrote in message news:inf1h3t2thj7nv6safc1c9iale6qmjfm5m@4ax.com...
>>> Just wondering if those vacuum sealers/packagers really work or should
>>> I say really preserve frozen food as they advertise? Anyone have
>>> experience with them?
>>
>> In my single days, I had a simple one that just had a pair of heated wires that
>> squeezed together, without the vacuum option.
>
> Was it called the Seal-a-Meal? When I was a kid, our family got one of those
> (it was mustard yellow), and you had to count to 10 seconds, I think it was,
> for the plastic to melt together. The instructions advised counting by saying
> "one seal a meal, two seal a meal, ...", so my sister and I made up a dumb
> little song (with those lyrics) you could sing while you were waiting for it.
> Frugal entertainment, or something.
>
> - Logan

Yes, that's it!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Frugal air travel tips
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f74cce039262a897?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 9:41 am
From: George Grapman

A. Nonymoose wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:11:43 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> <TheKillingOfSisterGeorge@mercycroft.net> wrote:
>
>
>> Don K wrote:
>>
>>> On long flights I like to take along an MP3 player. Mine has an
>>> FM tuner built-in and sometimes I'll listen to the various stations
>>> you can tune in at 20-30K feet.
>>
>> It's *strictly* against FAA regulations for passengers to operate radio
>> receivers in - flight, it could potentially interfere with the navigational
>> electronics...
>
> No it's not. I just got back from a week long vacation, which (to save
> money) had 3 separate flights on each end of the trip. On all 6 flights,
> they specifically told us to turn off MP3 players, etc turning take off and
> landing, but once in the air, they allowed everything except cell phones,
> laptops (IF you couldn't turn off the wireless feature) and pagers.
>
> And yes, I did use my FM radio, but didn't hear anything worth listening
> too.

http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/91-21_1.html

4. BACKGROUND. FAR Section 91.21 (formerly 91.19) was initially
established in May 1961 to prohibit the operation of portable
frequency-modulated radio receivers aboard U.S. air carrier
aircraft and U.S.-registered aircraft when the very high
frequency omnidirectional range was being used for navigation
purposes. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) subsequently
determined that other portable electronic devices could be
potentially hazardous to aircraft communication and navigation
equipment if operated aboard aircraft. Amendment 91-35 amended
the scope of former FAR Section 91.19 to prohibit the use of
additional portable electronic devices aboard certain U.S. civil
aircraft. Earlier studies conducted by RTCA, Inc. (RTCA),
Special Committee 156, Document No. RTCA/DO-199, Volumes 1 and 2,
entitled "Potential Interference To Aircraft Electronic Equipment
From Devices Carried Aboard," have contributed greatly to an
understanding of the operational effects of portable electronic
devices aboard aircraft. (See paragraph 7b for obtaining
copies.)

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 9:56 am
From: "Don K"

"George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message
news:Qy6Qi.4721$y21.2471@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
> A. Nonymoose wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:11:43 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
>> <TheKillingOfSisterGeorge@mercycroft.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Don K wrote:
>>>
>>>> On long flights I like to take along an MP3 player. Mine has an
>>>> FM tuner built-in and sometimes I'll listen to the various stations
>>>> you can tune in at 20-30K feet.
>>>
>>> It's *strictly* against FAA regulations for passengers to operate radio
>>> receivers in - flight, it could potentially interfere with the navigational
>>> electronics...
>>
>> No it's not. I just got back from a week long vacation, which (to save
>> money) had 3 separate flights on each end of the trip. On all 6 flights,
>> they specifically told us to turn off MP3 players, etc turning take off and
>> landing, but once in the air, they allowed everything except cell phones,
>> laptops (IF you couldn't turn off the wireless feature) and pagers.
>>
>> And yes, I did use my FM radio, but didn't hear anything worth listening
>> too.
>
> http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/91-21_1.html
>
> 4. BACKGROUND. FAR Section 91.21 (formerly 91.19) was initially
> established in May 1961 to prohibit the operation of portable
> frequency-modulated radio receivers aboard U.S. air carrier
> aircraft and U.S.-registered aircraft when the very high
> frequency omnidirectional range was being used for navigation
> purposes. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) subsequently
> determined that other portable electronic devices could be
> potentially hazardous to aircraft communication and navigation
> equipment if operated aboard aircraft. Amendment 91-35 amended
> the scope of former FAR Section 91.19 to prohibit the use of
> additional portable electronic devices aboard certain U.S. civil
> aircraft. Earlier studies conducted by RTCA, Inc. (RTCA),
> Special Committee 156, Document No. RTCA/DO-199, Volumes 1 and 2,
> entitled "Potential Interference To Aircraft Electronic Equipment
> From Devices Carried Aboard," have contributed greatly to an
> understanding of the operational effects of portable electronic
> devices aboard aircraft. (See paragraph 7b for obtaining
> copies.)

Translation: when the stewardess says it's ok, you can turn on your
mp3 with the FM tuner.

Don

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:25 pm
From: gheston@hiwaay.net (Gary Heston)

In article <ttednRX3s8tYZY3anZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com>,
Don K <dk@dont_bother_me.com> wrote:
>"George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message
>news:Qy6Qi.4721$y21.2471@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>> A. Nonymoose wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:11:43 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
>>> <TheKillingOfSisterGeorge@mercycroft.net> wrote:

>>>> Don K wrote:

>>>>> On long flights I like to take along an MP3 player. Mine has an
>>>>> FM tuner built-in and sometimes I'll listen to the various stations
>>>>> you can tune in at 20-30K feet.

>>>> It's *strictly* against FAA regulations for passengers to operate radio
>>>> receivers in - flight, it could potentially interfere with the navigational
>>>> electronics...

>>> No it's not. [ ... ]

>> http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/91-21_1.html
>>
>> 4. BACKGROUND. FAR Section 91.21 (formerly 91.19) was initially
>> established in May 1961 to prohibit the operation of portable
>> frequency-modulated radio receivers aboard U.S. air carrier
>> aircraft and U.S.-registered aircraft [ ... ]

>Translation: when the stewardess says it's ok, you can turn on your
>mp3 with the FM tuner.

What do they have to say about crystal radios? They don't have an
"off" switch.

Gary

--
Gary Heston gheston@hiwaay.net

http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/

Yoko Onos' former driver tried to extort $2M from her, threating to
"release embarassing recordings...". What, he has a copy of her album?

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:42 pm
From: "Don K"

"Gary Heston" <gheston@hiwaay.net> wrote in message
news:13h26tned5k9a57@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <ttednRX3s8tYZY3anZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Don K <dk@dont_bother_me.com> wrote:

>>Translation: when the stewardess says it's ok, you can turn on your
>>mp3 with the FM tuner.
>
> What do they have to say about crystal radios? They don't have an
> "off" switch.

Nothing.
They don't address passive electronic devices.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: an amazing video
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/3e09fd58ae86d8bd?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 10:10 am
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/10/13/amazing-wildlife-metaphor-of-how-you-can-make-a-difference.aspx

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bush To Let Illegal Aliens Get $40 Digital TV Coupons
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f941e4a655a77d3f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 11:28 am
From: "Jerry Okamura"

You are concentrating on the faulures and not the successes. Do you for a
second believe that regardless of the birrthrate in the United States, that
this country could not have absorbed that rate?

>> While some countries have not.
>
> Like the entire third world, which just happens
> to be where the illegals are mostly coming from.

Well, I do not know if I would clasify Mexico as a third world country, but
it may be. When I think of third world countries I think of places like
Africa. But regardless, if you look at the problems that all third world
countries have, they have sone things in common. They all have incompetent
governments, who cannot seem to adopt polices or don't want to adopt
policies, which would actually make the lives of the people in their
countries much better. Africa seems to have another major problem, they
don't seem to be able to produce enough food for their population. You can
abosorb as many people as you want, "if" you can figure out how to provide
your people with what are the necessities in life.
>
>>>>> And it clearly didnt work with Iraq anyway.
>
>>>> No one can say it will not work in Iraq.
>
>>> Corse anyone with a clue can say that.
>
>> Only someone who knows what will happen in the futrre can do that.
>
> Wrong. Its perfectly possible to notice that full civil war doesnt just
> stop by
> itself and that what the US is doing in Iraq isnt going to stop it any
> time soon.
>
>>>> All we can say is that it is not working yet.
>
>>> And it wont, you watch. Replacing the govt produced the inevitable
>>> result, a full civil war, and those dont just go away by wishing that
>>> would happen.
>
>>> Some have lasted for hundreds of years effectively, like with Ireland.
>>
>> Yep, and there is no civil war in Ireland now, because the english did
>> not give up.
>
> Nope, because the Irish eventually came to their senses, after CENTURYS.
>
> There isnt a shred of evidence that the stupid rag heads
> in Iraq will be giving up on their civil war any time soon.
>

== 2 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 11:32 am
From: "Jerry Okamura"

"Thanatos" <atropos@mac.com> wrote in message
news:atropos-5F30CC.19540512102007@news.giganews.com...
> In article <470fc3af$0$32517$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> "Thanatos" <atropos@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:atropos-995849.19110211102007@news.giganews.com...
>> > In article <470e6d4e$0$20581$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
>> > "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Thanatos" <atropos@mac.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:atropos-3D6BE2.23071010102007@news.giganews.com...
>> >
>> >> > Don't forget cutting off all federal funding to any
>> >> > city, county or state that undermines federal law by
>> >> > implementing "sanctuary" policies.
>> >>
>> >> and if they won't be intimidated by such tactics, then what?
>> >
>> > Then we've saved a lot of tax dollars that can be used for something
>> > else (or, heaven forbid, refunded to the citizens) and the problem is
>> > no
>> > worse than it was before.
>>
>> But you haven't solved the problem then have you?
>
> Haven't made it worse, either, and the federal government gets the
> benefit of saving a few billion dollars.

The Federal government NEVER saves money. Whatever money they do not spend
in one area, they spend in another area. It is like one of my wifes
favorite saying when she comes home from a day of shopping. "See how much
money I saved" by buying these things on sale?
>
> Besides, the states and cities are so chronically addicted to federal
> money if the federal government cut it off, you'd see every one of these
> sanctuary policies dry up and blow away like tumbleweeds in the blink of
> an eye. These mayors and city councilmen would have riots on their hands
> if they suddenly had to either drastically cut city services or hike
> taxes through the roof to make up for the shortfall in their budgets
> where the federal money used to be.

Do you for a second believe that the elected members of Congress from these
states are going to go along with that idea?

== 3 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:00 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Jerry Okamura <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Jerry Okamura <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Jerry Okamura <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote

>>>>>>>> Trouble is that there are no 'solutions' that will actually do that.

>>>>>>> There is "always" a solution.

>>>>>> Nope.

>>>>> Then if there is no solution, learn to live with the problem?

>>>> Or just deal with the parts of the problem that are feasible to deal with.

>>> What parts of the problem is that?

>> One obvious area that can be dealth with is the anchor baby part of the problem.

>> All that would take is a constitutional amendment and there
>> isnt any doubt that that would get overwhelming support.

>> Most modern first world countrys have binned that stupidity for a long time now.

>>>>>>> There "may not be the will", but there is a solution.

>>>>>> Nope.

>>>>>>> For instance, the government in Mexcio is one big part of the problem.

>>>>>> Nope, no govt of mexico can actually do anything about the real
>>>>>> problem, they pump out FAR more kids than the economy can
>>>>>> possibly sustain with decent living standards, so there are
>>>>>> inevitably hordes who notice that the living standards in the US
>>>>>> are much better than in mexico and so they move to US if they can.

>>>>>>> They cannot seem to adopt policies that will actually
>>>>>>> dramatically improve the lives of their citizens.

>>>>>> There are no such policys. Even a very draconian approach like
>>>>>> the chinese adopted of forcing most to only have one brat STILL
>>>>>> didnt fix the problem that the living standards in the US are MUCH better than in china, and so hordes would
>>>>>> prefer to leave china.

>>>>>>> One solution (though I am not saying we should do it) is to forcibly change the government in Mexico.

>>>>>> Wont do a damned thing about the fundamental problem.

>>>>> what is the "fundamental problem"?

>>>> I told you, they pump out FAR more kids than their economy
>>>> can ever support and thats what produces so many that find
>>>> that moving to the US will improve their personal living standards.

>>> you have got to be kidding me.

>> Nope.

>>> Societies have managed to take care of their people, regardless of their birth rate.

>> Have fun listing a single one thats got a birth
>> rate like Mexico has thats actually done that.

>> And like I said, even when china did fix the birth rate problem, that
>> STILL didnt stop the other fundamental problem, that the living
>> standards are STILL so far below what they are in the US that
>> hordes of people STILL want to leave that country and migrate to
>> another one, and that many of them are prepared to do that illegally.

> You are concentrating on the faulures and not the successes.

Nope, just rubbing your nose in the FACT that while ever there is such
a gross difference in the living standards between the worst of the third
world and the US, there will inevitably be hordes that are prepared to
risk even the death of their kids to move to the US and that your proposal
for a jail that consists of tents in the desert isnt going to make any real
difference deterrence wise when they are prepared to take that sort of risk.

Even the sort of gung ho approach to jails that the chinese
have STILL doesnt have any real effect on the North Koreans
prepared to risk death for a better standard of living.

> Do you for a second believe that regardless of the birrthrate in the United States, that this country could not have
> absorbed that rate?

Corse it could, but it clearly chooses not to let anyone
who wants to move to the US to do that anymore.

>>> While some countries have not.

>> Like the entire third world, which just happens
>> to be where the illegals are mostly coming from.

> Well, I do not know if I would clasify Mexico as a third world country, but it may be.

That term always was rather wooly. Strictly speaking there is no second world.

> When I think of third world countries I think of places like Africa. But regardless, if you look at the problems that
> all third world countries have, they have sone things in common.

And the most obvious difference they have in common is MUCH lower
standards of living, particularly for the dregs of their society in their
slums etc. And that is what is driving the hordes of illegals that have
decided that their economic prospects are MUCH better in the US.

Its what drives North Koreans into china too.

> They all have incompetent governments, who cannot seem to
> adopt polices or don't want to adopt policies, which would actually
> make the lives of the people in their countries much better.

The VERY fundamental problem is that while ever the birth rate is so
much greater than economy can ever provide decent living standards
for, there is nothing any govt can actually do about that policy wise.

And even when a particular govt does adopt an extremely gung
ho approach to that problem like the chinese did, with what is
essentially compulsory abortion when you already have one brat,
that STILL doesnt produce living standards anything like what the
US has, and so there is STILL an immense number of the dregs
of any society that will move to the US if they can do that.

So the govts while hopeless are essentially irrelevant to
the fundamental problem of illegal immigrants in the US.

> Africa seems to have another major problem, they don't seem to be able to produce enough food for their population.

They could if things were organised properly. And
again, the fundamental problem is the birth rate.

Even HIV/AIDS isnt having much real effect on that.

> You can abosorb as many people as you want, "if" you can figure out how to provide your people with what are the
> necessities in life.

There's no one starving in Mexico, so thats irrelevant to what
is being discussed, ILLEGALS who decide that their prospects
are much better in the US than in the country they are leaving.

Thats true in spades of the Cubans who are
prepared to risk death to move to the US.

The real world is about a hell of a lot more than JUST the necessitys of life.

>>>>>> And it clearly didnt work with Iraq anyway.

>>>>> No one can say it will not work in Iraq.

>>>> Corse anyone with a clue can say that.

>>> Only someone who knows what will happen in the futrre can do that.

>> Wrong. Its perfectly possible to notice that full civil war doesnt just stop by
>> itself and that what the US is doing in Iraq isnt going to stop it any time soon.

>>>>> All we can say is that it is not working yet.

>>>> And it wont, you watch. Replacing the govt produced the inevitable result, a full civil war, and those dont just go
>>>> away by wishing that would happen.

>>>> Some have lasted for hundreds of years effectively, like with Ireland.

>>> Yep, and there is no civil war in Ireland now, because the english did not give up.

>> Nope, because the Irish eventually came to their senses, after CENTURYS.

>> There isnt a shred of evidence that the stupid rag heads
>> in Iraq will be giving up on their civil war any time soon.

== 4 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:08 pm
From: "Rick"

"Thanatos" <atropos@mac.com> wrote in message
news:atropos-9969B3.09233813102007@news.giganews.com...
> In article <M5udnd-MJe1tHI3anZ2dnUVZ_tKinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Rick" <videojockey1a@yahoo.comzzzz> wrote:
>
>> "Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
>> news:fe57u4026ts@news5.newsguy.com...
>> >
>> > <copeab@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1191577694.935423.31360@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> >> On Oct 5, 2:09 am, Rob Jensen <ShutUp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:36:09 -0230, cloud dreamer
>> >>>
>> >>> <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>> >>> >Funny how guys like Bill will whine over illegal immigrants but is
>> >>> >happy
>> >>> >to buy cheap strawberries made possible only by their labour. I
>> >>> >doubt
>> >>> >he'd be willing to bend over and pick in the hot sun for their
>> >>> >wages.
>> >>>
>> >>> Well, my thing as a flaming liberal wouldn't be to slam the illegal
>> >>> immigrants with any more penalties.
>> >>
>> >> I'd be happy to see existing penalties imposed.
>> >
>> > Seing people penalized for crossing imaginary lines on a globe would
>> > make
>> > you *happy*?
>> > If it wasn't stylish to jump on the popular *illegals* bandwagon of
>> > late
>> > you'd never even know they exist.
>> >
>> Imaginary lines as you call it have been around since the beginning of
>> time.
>> Lets see how liberal you'd be if illegal's started crashing onto your
>> property.
>
> Yeah, I'd bet compassionate liberals like Streisand are all about
> enforcing those "imaginary lines" around their Malibu mansions. If half
> a dozen illegals showed up and started sleeping in her pool house, those
> "imaginary lines" would suddenly become very important, indeed.

If you removed all the gates in the gated communities I'm sure you would
find an imaginary line somewhere. And most of them would be liberal
communities.

== 5 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:11 pm
From: "Rick"

"Rob Jensen" <ShutUpRob@aol.com> wrote in message
news:08rcg3ddol60pii4r0e88b9t2vmqnrdb88@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:24:08 -0230, cloud dreamer
> <Global_Warming@is.real> wrote:
>
>>Rob Jensen wrote:
>>> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:36:09 -0230, cloud dreamer
>>> <Global_Warming@is.real> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Funny how guys like Bill will whine over illegal immigrants but is
>>>> happy
>>>> to buy cheap strawberries made possible only by their labour. I doubt
>>>> he'd be willing to bend over and pick in the hot sun for their wages.
>>>
>>> Well, my thing as a flaming liberal wouldn't be to slam the illegal
>>> immigrants with any more penalties. The only thing to do is to go
>>> after the real lawbreakers
>>
>>
>>Then you need to start at the top and export George to The Hague.
>
> OK! Let's do it! Well, the ICC will drag him, Cheney, Rumsfeld and
> Gonzales off to trials for their War Crimes sooner or later. So in a
> sense, I'm just waiting to break out the beer and popcorn and get
> ready for the inevitable drinking game.
>
I know I won't get an answer but I'll ask anyways what war crimes are you
referring to?

== 6 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:13 pm
From: "Rick"

<copeab@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1191649325.920661.121170@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 5, 11:56 pm, Rob Jensen <ShutUp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 20:51:37 -0400, Thanatos <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>> >In article <08rcg3ddol60pii4r0e88b9t2vmqnrd...@4ax.com>,
>> > Rob Jensen <ShutUp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:24:08 -0230, cloud dreamer
>> >> <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>>
>> >> >Rob Jensen wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:36:09 -0230, cloud dreamer
>> >> >> <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> Funny how guys like Bill will whine over illegal immigrants but is
>> >> >>> happy
>> >> >>> to buy cheap strawberries made possible only by their labour. I
>> >> >>> doubt
>> >> >>> he'd be willing to bend over and pick in the hot sun for their
>> >> >>> wages.
>>
>> >> >> Well, my thing as a flaming liberal wouldn't be to slam the illegal
>> >> >> immigrants with any more penalties. The only thing to do is to go
>> >> >> after the real lawbreakers
>>
>> >> >Then you need to start at the top and export George to The Hague.
>>
>> >> OK! Let's do it! Well, the ICC will drag him, Cheney, Rumsfeld and
>> >> Gonzales off to trials for their War Crimes sooner or later.
>>
>> >No, it won't.
>>
>> >The ICC has no jurisdiction in the U.S.
>>
>> That won't hold up in the eyes of the US people, much less the ICC or
>> the UN, when it happens -- the Cheney Hegemony has clearly committed
>> war crimes. And frankly, when they come for the Shrub, Cheney,
>> Rumsfeld and Gonzales, nobody but the Faux Noisehounds will even
>> attempt to stick up for them.
>
> And what clear crimes are these?
>
> Brandon

They don't have any they're smoking wacky tobacky.

== 7 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:18 pm
From: "Rick"

"Thanatos" <atropos@mac.com> wrote in message
news:atropos-B99C94.20215008102007@news.giganews.com...
> In article <6gkkg3pocq31s3km1lpmlt0c3eds2r4m08@4ax.com>,
> Rob Jensen <ShutUpRob@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 20:25:38 -0400, Thanatos <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Please elaborate on how you see this occurring.
>> >
>> >And note that if the USA doesn't participate in the ICC,
>> >the ICC has no legal jurisdiction over its citizens.
>>
>> I think there'll be overwhelming demand from every part
>> of the US except for the neocon and fundamentalist whackjobs
>> to hand the idiots over to the ICC anyway
>
> I don't.
>
>> and the idiots will be "extraordinarily renditioned"
>> (okay, rendered) over to the ICC as an ironic result.
>
> But as I said, if the US doesn't join the ICC, the ICC has no legal
> authority over US citizens. "Handing them over anyway" only means that
> the ICC will then be violating its own charter and operating in exactly
> the same manner as the people they're supposed to be prosecuting.
>
> And once again, the U.N. will have no credibility whatsoever.
>
>> *Somebody* will smuggle them over to the ICC before the whack-packed
>> circuit courts or Supreme Court can overturn it.
>
> Really? And just how exactly is this smuggling supposed to take place?
> Considering Bush will have full Secret Service protection after he
> leaves office, the plan will have to be both elaborate and anticipate
> the very real possibility of murdering agents who are doing nothing but
> following the law.
>
> And once the USSS has been engaged, the entire weight of the federal
> government, including military assets, will come down on these smugglers
> long before they can even come within sight of the US border.
>
> So I ask again, please elaborate on how you see this "rendition"
> occurring.
>
>> OTOH, Justice Kennedy seems inclined to side with
>> international precedents as binding
>
> Yes, in violation of his oath of office.
>
>> so he might be inclined to throw out the current, unelected
>> administration's deliberate attempts to circumvent the ICC
>
> There's been no attempt to circumvent the ICC. The U.S. has elected to
> not join the organization. That's not a circumvention. And it isn't just
> this administration that holds that position. The Clinton Administration
> did as well.
>
>> and various other treaties such as, oh, the Geneva
>> Conventions and be the tie-breaker at the Supreme Court
>> that would then hand the idiots over to the ICC.
>
> The Supreme Court has no such legal authority. It's merely an appellate
> court, nothing more.
>
> It's interesting that you seem so peeved at perceived violations of
> legal treaties and conventions by Bush and yet at the same time
> everything you advocate could only be accomplished by doing the exact
> same thing, only on a far grander scale, even to the extent of murdering
> U.S. citizens and law enforcement officers.

Fascists think like that all the time.

== 8 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:27 pm
From: "Rick"

"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:470bd495$0$11082$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> This is getting to be silly. There are some, what, 40 million of them in
> this country as we speak. What percentage of them are picking crops? Why
> complain about a problem, if you have no solution to the problem? What is
> your solution to the problem? I am willing to bet whatever "solution" you
> propose, I can poke holes into your "solution" of why it won't work.
>
>
> "RuleOfLaw" <miltonez@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1191906246.966265.44310@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> On Oct 4, 6:06 am, cloud dreamer <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>>
>>> Funny how guys like Bill will whine over illegal immigrants but is happy
>>> to buy cheap strawberries made possible only by their labour. I doubt
>>> he'd be willing to bend over and pick in the hot sun for their wages.
>>
>> Enonomists have thoroughly exploded the myth of "cheap
>> strawberries" (or is "cheap lettuce" more your hollow cliche of
>> choice?)
>>
>> First of all, the use of illegal alien laborAT MOST reduces produce
>> prices a few cents per pound.
>>
>> Secondly, the citizen taxpayers pay ENORMOUS amounts of money (and
>> sometimes with their very lives) to harbor this "cheap" illegal alien
>> labor. Right nos MY local hospital is CLOSING due to illegal aliens
>> bankrupting it!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Thirdly, it's been convincingly argued that the presence of illegal
>> aliens actually HINDERS growers' introduction of what would be LABOR-
>> SAVING automation which would TRULY LOWER prices. With so many
>> illegals around growers have little reason to further automate.
>>
Well for one none of them have a legal Social Security Card. You want a job
get a legal SSC. If you don't no employment from any business in the United
States and no Welfare either with out a SSC.

== 9 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:32 pm
From: "Rick"

"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:470d7468$0$9534$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:1192060312.900181.213070@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>> On Oct 10, 1:57 pm, "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>>> "Thanatos" <atro...@mac.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:atropos-F75617.00090210102007@news.giganews.com...
>>>
>>> > In article <470c2a86$0$7506$4c368...@roadrunner.com>,
>>> > "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> I asked for what someone would suggest we do about the problem.
>>> >> Do you have a workable plan?
>>>
>>> > Not the point. You're bascially saying, "Yeah, there's a problem but
>>> > until someone tells me how it can be solved (at which point I will do
>>> > my
>>> > damndest to torpedo whatever they come up with), nothing should be
>>> > done
>>> > at all."
>>>
>>> I had a boss who told me once, you know every Tom, Dick and Harry can
>>> tell
>>> me about what they see as a problem. It does very little good to hear
>>> about
>>> a problem if they do not have a solution to the perceived problem.
>>
>>
>> Your boss was obviously an idiot. Suppose an employee came to the
>> boss and said "Every 10th widget that comes off the assembly line has
>> cracks in it and is going in the scrap pile." According to the
>> boss, that does very little good because the employee doesn't have a
>> solution to the problem.
>>
>
> Yes, because the boss may not have a solution to the problem either, so
> telling him about the problem does not solve the problem. On the other
> hand, if you told the boss "every 10th widgtet that comes off the assembly
> line has cracks in it and is going in the scrap pile" and you had a
> solution to stop that from happening, that you have not only pointed out a
> problem, but you have a way to stop that from happening. Problems cannot
> be corrected without a solution. It is not bad to point out problems, but
> it is a whole lot better, if you poitned out a problem and had a proposed
> solution.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you
>>> believe that something is a problem and you have no solution to solving
>>> the
>>> problem, then the problem will never go away....because SOMEONE has to
>>> come
>>> up with a solution.
>>
>> Regarding the illegal immigration problem, there are obvious
>> solutions. The only problem is, no one has the political will to
>> implement them. Primarily because they are all afraid of being
>> branded as racists, similar to what you see trying to be done in this
>> thread.
>
> Okay, let us talk about illegal immigration. First of all, no society has
> been very successdul at stopping people from doing what they want to do.
> People enter this country illegally because they believe they have a shot
> a living a better life here than where they come from. So, if you do not
> address that dynamic, then nothing else you do will work.
>>
>> Solutions:
>>
>>
>> Have guest worker permits that allow foreigners to work here legally
>> for a limited time. Bush proposed this 5 years ago and it got shot
>> down by everyone.
>
> that is not a bad idea.
>>
>> Then enforce penalties against employers that hire illegal aliens.
>> Increase the penalties where appropriate. Once there are no jobs for
>> illegals, they'll stop coming.
>>
>
> That also is not a bad idea, but it ain't going to solve the problem.
> First because you cannot possibly stop businesses from hiring these
> people. You can make it a whole lot more difficult on them, and you may
> stop more or most of them from hiring these illegals, but you will NEVER
> stop ALL of them from hiring illegals. But for the sake of discussion,
> let us for the moment assume that we can stop all businesses from hiring
> illegals. Will that work? No, it won't work. If you were in this
> country illegally, what you would do is work the underground economy, so
> all you have succeeded in doing is driving them to work in the underground
> economy, and then you have just made the job of finding them that much
> harder, if not impossible.
>
>> Allow and encourage police at all levels to report illegal aliens that
>> they encounter.
>
> Not a bad idea, but it won't happen.
>>
>> Deport those that are found
>
> Lousy idea. You deport them and they just turn right around and re-enter
> this country illegally again. "If" we were really serious about providing
> them with a incentive not to enter this country illegally, let them spend
> some time in prison. And if they come back into this country illegally
> again, put them in prison for a longer period of time. That alone would
> work a whole lot better.
>>
>> Get working on high tech solutions to manage the border. Surely with
>> satellites, drone aircraft, sensor on the ground and the like, we can
>> make it extremely difficult to get across the border. In fact, this
>> would solve much of our problem in Iraq. If you can secure the
>> borders, then no more explosives and terrorists would be coming in to
>> Iraq and what explosives they have would be used up in short order.
>>
>>
>
> Nothing wrong with that idea. Of course there is a whole lot of water
> surrounding the United States, and there is the northern border which is
> open.
>>
But where is the fence?
It works in Israel.

== 10 of 10 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:41 pm
From: "Rick"

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5nabtmFh94b9U1@mid.individual.net...
> Jerry Okamura <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Jerry Okamura <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote
>
>>>>>>> Trouble is that there are no 'solutions' that will actually do that.
>
>>>>>> There is "always" a solution.
>
>>>>> Nope.
>
>>>> Then if there is no solution, learn to live with the problem?
>
>>> Or just deal with the parts of the problem that are feasible to deal
>>> with.
>
>> What parts of the problem is that?
>
> One obvious area that can be dealth with is the anchor baby part of the
> problem.
>
> All that would take is a constitutional amendment and there
> isnt any doubt that that would get overwhelming support.
>
> Most modern first world countrys have binned that stupidity for a long
> time now.
>
>>>>>> There "may not be the will", but there is a solution.
>
>>>>> Nope.
>
>>>>>> For instance, the government in Mexcio is one big part of the
>>>>>> problem.
>
>>>>> Nope, no govt of mexico can actually do anything about the real
>>>>> problem, they pump out FAR more kids than the economy can possibly
>>>>> sustain with decent living standards, so there are
>>>>> inevitably hordes who notice that the living standards in the US
>>>>> are much better than in mexico and so they move to US if they can.
>
>>>>>> They cannot seem to adopt policies that will actually dramatically
>>>>>> improve the lives of their citizens.
>
>>>>> There are no such policys. Even a very draconian approach like
>>>>> the chinese adopted of forcing most to only have one brat STILL
>>>>> didnt fix the problem that the living standards in the US are MUCH
>>>>> better than in china, and so hordes would prefer to leave china.
>
>>>>>> One solution (though I am not saying we should do it) is to forcibly
>>>>>> change the government in Mexico.
>
>>>>> Wont do a damned thing about the fundamental problem.
>
>>>> what is the "fundamental problem"?
>
>>> I told you, they pump out FAR more kids than their economy
>>> can ever support and thats what produces so many that find
>>> that moving to the US will improve their personal living standards.
>
>> you have got to be kidding me.
>
> Nope.
>
>> Societies have managed to take care of their people, regardless of their
>> birth rate.
>
> Have fun listing a single one thats got a birth
> rate like Mexico has thats actually done that.
>
> And like I said, even when china did fix the birth rate problem, that
> STILL didnt stop the other fundamental problem, that the living
> standards are STILL so far below what they are in the US that
> hordes of people STILL want to leave that country and migrate to
> another one, and that many of them are prepared to do that illegally.
>
>> While some countries have not.
>
> Like the entire third world, which just happens
> to be where the illegals are mostly coming from.
>
>>>>> And it clearly didnt work with Iraq anyway.
>
>>>> No one can say it will not work in Iraq.
>
>>> Corse anyone with a clue can say that.
>
>> Only someone who knows what will happen in the futrre can do that.
>
> Wrong. Its perfectly possible to notice that full civil war doesnt just
> stop by
> itself and that what the US is doing in Iraq isnt going to stop it any
> time soon.
>
>>>> All we can say is that it is not working yet.
>
>>> And it wont, you watch. Replacing the govt produced the inevitable
>>> result, a full civil war, and those dont just go away by wishing that
>>> would happen.
>
>>> Some have lasted for hundreds of years effectively, like with Ireland.
>>
>> Yep, and there is no civil war in Ireland now, because the english did
>> not give up.
>
> Nope, because the Irish eventually came to their senses, after CENTURYS.
>
> There isnt a shred of evidence that the stupid rag heads
> in Iraq will be giving up on their civil war any time soon.
If you can get the government of Mexico to get rid of most of their govt run
companies and free up that economy we wouldn't have to build a fence.

Build the Fence!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Freebies, samples, bargains, and More!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/2576183ec5a395bc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 11:45 am
From: shopstarinc@yahoo.com

Do you like freebies, bargains, coupons, samples, and a fun
community? Do you have freebies or deals to share? Then, ShopStar
Forums is the place for you!

Here are just some of the things you can expect with ShopStar Forums:

*Be one of the first 500 registered members and be placed in a drawing
for $25!
*Random contests for DVD's, books and lots more!
*Sign up for the free monthly newsletter
*A lottery system being put into place for your chance to win prizes
and cash!
*Get Paid to Post! Check out our posting rewards Forum with more
details.
*New Deals, Coupons added daily
*Get access to posting unlimited referral links or advertising your
business on our Hot Entrepreneurs Forums.

Check out this brand new community, with lots of great things in
store!

Be sure to register in order to be able to get your posting rewards
and to be eligible for contests.

See you there!
ShopStar Inc. Admin

http://shopstarinc.proboards74.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Ugly Dish Antennas Nauseate Me
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/8fd795758fa3f8c5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 11:52 am
From: "unreelistuk@aol.com"

I can't believe how many people are sticking those godawful gray
dishes on the FRONT of their otherwise beautiful homes.

I was driving to work and went past a row of old beautiful well-
maintained gingerbread homes from around, oh, 1890's, and lo and
behold, the disgusting dish was popping out on the porch of one of
them.

Jeez............

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 11:58 am
From: George Grapman

unreelistuk@aol.com wrote:
> I can't believe how many people are sticking those godawful gray
> dishes on the FRONT of their otherwise beautiful homes.
>
> I was driving to work and went past a row of old beautiful well-
> maintained gingerbread homes from around, oh, 1890's, and lo and
> behold, the disgusting dish was popping out on the porch of one of
> them.
>
>
> Jeez............
>
Mine is in the roof and can barely be seen.
I used to sell them when they were 12 feet in diameter.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:36 pm
From: gheston@hiwaay.net (Gary Heston)

In article <1192301578.122797.74120@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
unreelistuk@aol.com <user132384@aol.com> wrote:
>I can't believe how many people are sticking those godawful gray
>dishes on the FRONT of their otherwise beautiful homes.

>I was driving to work and went past a row of old beautiful well-
>maintained gingerbread homes from around, oh, 1890's, and lo and
>behold, the disgusting dish was popping out on the porch of one of
>them.

They have to be facing a certain direction; if that's the direction
the house faces, that's where the dish has to go. I suspect the
installation kit has a fairly short cable, which further limits the
subscribers' options.

Doing something fancy like a backyard pole-mounted installation can
be expensive, and is usually beyond the capability of the average
subscriber.

Gary

--
Gary Heston gheston@hiwaay.net

http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/

Yoko Onos' former driver tried to extort $2M from her, threating to
"release embarassing recordings...". What, he has a copy of her album?

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, Oct 13 2007 12:37 pm
From: "Don K"

"unreelistuk@aol.com" <user132384@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1192301578.122797.74120@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>I can't believe how many people are sticking those godawful gray
> dishes on the FRONT of their otherwise beautiful homes.
>
> I was driving to work and went past a row of old beautiful well-
> maintained gingerbread homes from around, oh, 1890's, and lo and
> behold, the disgusting dish was popping out on the porch of one of
> them.
>
>
> Jeez............

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Architectural beauty has been achieved through the ages using simple
geometric shapes such as the Golden Rectangle, circle, parabola, etc.

A hundred fifty years ago it was the fad to clutter things up with
gingerbread, which is probably the architectural equivalent of
planting flamingo statues on the front lawn.

At least the dish is based on a parabolic shape and is elegant
in its functional beauty and simplicity.

Don

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en

Frugal Living

Blog Archive

Saturday, October 13, 2007

25 new messages in 6 topics - digest

No comments: