The move is rapidly approaching. This weekend we signed all the loan documents for our new house, and we are hoping to close escrow this friday. That will allow us some overlap time to make sure everything is ready to move. Currently we are planning to move the weekend of April 8-9. Anyone want to help? As soon as we get moved in and the weather warms up some, we'll throw a pool party for all to enjoy and see our new house.
As far as selling our house, we received a lowball offer on our condo this weekend. We also received word of another potential offer but it hasn't shown up on the fax yet. We sent back a counter to the original offer today standing firm on the price. We certainly can't afford to go as low as the lowball is asking. We'll see what happens from here. There have been more showings of our house this week than we've had the entire past month.
Monday, March 27, 2006
How the illegals justify themselves
They believe the proposed legislation unfairly targets Latino immigrants.
This is baloney. We aren't targetting Latinos as a group. It doesn't matter where you are from, Mexico, China, Canada, Cuba or Iraq, you can't come to this country illegally. There is a process for coming to this country legally. We have nothing against immigrants who follow the legal process, we are against people who short circuit that process and come here illegally.
This is a country of immigrants, and this country would not be possible without us.
This is a country of legal immigrants. Law abiding individuals who contribute to our society.
We work hard to get here and we work hard after we're here, but this bill is trying to take all that away.
This bill will take nothing away from you if you are here legally, and it will do nothing to stop more legal immigrants from entering the country. Other immigrant groups are not protesting, why is it that Latino immigrants both legal and illegal are the only ones protesting?
We may be illegal immigrants, but we are human. We deserve the same rights as everyone else, not be treated like criminals.
If you are here illegally, you broke the law. Simple as that. Lawbreakers are punished when caught. Why should we make exceptions and not treat a group of lawbreakers as criminals.
This is baloney. We aren't targetting Latinos as a group. It doesn't matter where you are from, Mexico, China, Canada, Cuba or Iraq, you can't come to this country illegally. There is a process for coming to this country legally. We have nothing against immigrants who follow the legal process, we are against people who short circuit that process and come here illegally.
This is a country of immigrants, and this country would not be possible without us.
This is a country of legal immigrants. Law abiding individuals who contribute to our society.
We work hard to get here and we work hard after we're here, but this bill is trying to take all that away.
This bill will take nothing away from you if you are here legally, and it will do nothing to stop more legal immigrants from entering the country. Other immigrant groups are not protesting, why is it that Latino immigrants both legal and illegal are the only ones protesting?
We may be illegal immigrants, but we are human. We deserve the same rights as everyone else, not be treated like criminals.
If you are here illegally, you broke the law. Simple as that. Lawbreakers are punished when caught. Why should we make exceptions and not treat a group of lawbreakers as criminals.
Saturday, March 25, 2006
More Moronic Politics
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11964167/
"In reaction to the crack epidemic of the 1980s, laws creating drug-free zones around schools spread nationwide. Now, hard questions are being raised — by legislators, activists, even law enforcement officials — about the fairness and effectiveness of those laws."
What? establishing a drug free zone is not fair?
"such laws, which generally carry extra-stiff mandatory penalties, have done little to safeguard young people and are enforced disproportionately on blacks and Hispanics."
Who says so? Anyone who possesses drugs near schools or parks should be punished severly. These are our kids we're trying to protect. Zero tolorance is a great policy, why get rid of it? enforced disproportionately on blacks and Hispanics The law is colorblind. If more blacks and hispanics are getting picked up for this, then has any one considered the possibility that more black and hispanics are using drugs in or near schools and parks that whites?
but ample evidence that the laws hurt communities of color
It seems to me that any attempts to get drugs off the streats will actually help communities. If communities of color have a larger drug problem, then larger enforcement will only help those communities and not hurt them.
Instead of declining, drug arrests in the zones have risen steadily since the law took effect in 1987
Instead of looking at drug arrests, why don't you compare drug use statistics. Have they gone up as well? Perhaps cops are just enforcing the law more stringintly now trying to crack down on drugs in high use areas.
Though intended to deter drug sales to youths, the laws have been applied mostly to adult-to-adult transactions
So don't use this as an excuse. The transactions are still going on. If it were up to me, the zones would encompass the entire city and violators would get stiffer punishment and treatment. Besides, most youth sales occur on campus in areas where a patrol or under cover officer wouldn't normally be able to observe.
"In reaction to the crack epidemic of the 1980s, laws creating drug-free zones around schools spread nationwide. Now, hard questions are being raised — by legislators, activists, even law enforcement officials — about the fairness and effectiveness of those laws."
What? establishing a drug free zone is not fair?
"such laws, which generally carry extra-stiff mandatory penalties, have done little to safeguard young people and are enforced disproportionately on blacks and Hispanics."
Who says so? Anyone who possesses drugs near schools or parks should be punished severly. These are our kids we're trying to protect. Zero tolorance is a great policy, why get rid of it? enforced disproportionately on blacks and Hispanics The law is colorblind. If more blacks and hispanics are getting picked up for this, then has any one considered the possibility that more black and hispanics are using drugs in or near schools and parks that whites?
but ample evidence that the laws hurt communities of color
It seems to me that any attempts to get drugs off the streats will actually help communities. If communities of color have a larger drug problem, then larger enforcement will only help those communities and not hurt them.
Instead of declining, drug arrests in the zones have risen steadily since the law took effect in 1987
Instead of looking at drug arrests, why don't you compare drug use statistics. Have they gone up as well? Perhaps cops are just enforcing the law more stringintly now trying to crack down on drugs in high use areas.
Though intended to deter drug sales to youths, the laws have been applied mostly to adult-to-adult transactions
So don't use this as an excuse. The transactions are still going on. If it were up to me, the zones would encompass the entire city and violators would get stiffer punishment and treatment. Besides, most youth sales occur on campus in areas where a patrol or under cover officer wouldn't normally be able to observe.
Stupid Illegals
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11442705/
What are these people thinking? 200,000 people marching in downtown LA to protest the pending legislation to make being in this country illegally a felony. They must all be on drugs or something. Can't they see we're not against LEGAL immigration? I fully support anyone who comes to this country legally. What we are against is illegal immigration. And no one seems to get the distinction. Illegal immigrants violate the law to get here, pose potential terror risks since they haven't been properly screened, and most importantly, they cheapen the status process that all the legal immigrants went through to come to this country. This country is a country of immigrants, but those immigrants entered the country through legal means rather than overstaying a tourist visa, hopping a border fence or paying off a smuggler. I would think that any immigrant who came here legally would fully support attempts to curb illegal immigration, but that does not seem to be the case. Sad story.
Costa mesa is passing an ordinace to allow it's police to check the immigration status of people they pick up for other felonies. People are protesting that as well and business is down 20% in the city since that was announced even though it hasn't passed yet. Latinos are scared that they'll be stopped while driving through the city and not happen to have the right paperwork with them. Is everyone a criminal or do they just not understand the law? If the cop just happens to pull you over, he won't check your immigration status. Now if it's a felony stop, he'll do a background check on you and find out your immigration status. Legal residents have nothing to worry about, come back. Illegals also have nothing to worry about here unless they are planning on commiting a felony in which case we don't want them anyway.
What are these people thinking? 200,000 people marching in downtown LA to protest the pending legislation to make being in this country illegally a felony. They must all be on drugs or something. Can't they see we're not against LEGAL immigration? I fully support anyone who comes to this country legally. What we are against is illegal immigration. And no one seems to get the distinction. Illegal immigrants violate the law to get here, pose potential terror risks since they haven't been properly screened, and most importantly, they cheapen the status process that all the legal immigrants went through to come to this country. This country is a country of immigrants, but those immigrants entered the country through legal means rather than overstaying a tourist visa, hopping a border fence or paying off a smuggler. I would think that any immigrant who came here legally would fully support attempts to curb illegal immigration, but that does not seem to be the case. Sad story.
Costa mesa is passing an ordinace to allow it's police to check the immigration status of people they pick up for other felonies. People are protesting that as well and business is down 20% in the city since that was announced even though it hasn't passed yet. Latinos are scared that they'll be stopped while driving through the city and not happen to have the right paperwork with them. Is everyone a criminal or do they just not understand the law? If the cop just happens to pull you over, he won't check your immigration status. Now if it's a felony stop, he'll do a background check on you and find out your immigration status. Legal residents have nothing to worry about, come back. Illegals also have nothing to worry about here unless they are planning on commiting a felony in which case we don't want them anyway.
Monday, March 06, 2006
Adventures in Albertsons
First of all, I was extremely disappointed to see that the nice Albertsons-SavOn by our new house is closing. Sad...I wonder what other grocery stores are nearby.
But to get to the main point, the nice Albertsons-SavOn by our current house is also closing. The signs went up this weekend. I figgured this had to be something about the sale of Albertsons to that other company from back east and that they would eventually reopen under a new name or something, but no. I come to find out today that only the _nice_ Albertsons-SavOn by our house is closing, the _old crappy_ Albertsons across from Target is not closing. You all remember Amanda's adventure in the old Albertsons? Dread about what shopping is going to be like until we move.
Now why the hell would they close a nice large Albertsons-SavOn combo that gets decent business and keep open an old, dingy, small Albertsons whose parkinglot is always empty? My only guess is that some bean counter at corporate who never saw the stores in person decided that two Stores within 2 miles of each other couldn't coexist so lets close the one with more overhead even though it is much nicer and makes more money.
Fast forward to today. I go to buy some groceries on my way home from work. I have to go to the old Albertsons since the nice one only has clearance items and doesn't have anymore fresh meat. First, when I get there, they are out of shopping carts. After parading around the weirdly laid out store in the crowds cramming everything into my little hand cart, I'm finally able to check out. I get to the car and realize that they charged me $6 each for 2 6packs of propel that were advertised at 5/$15.
I go back in to get that adjusted and wait at the courtesy desk for 30 minutes before I am taken care of. The first 15 minutes are spent waiting for a clerk to even acknowledge that there are people waiting at the desk. The next 15 minutes are spent waiting for the 2 people in front of me to be helped. When they finally got around to helping me we walked back to the shelf and the price on the shelf certainly said 5/$15, but the deal ended on 3/3. Today is 3/6 - hello - take down your signs already then. They did refund my money and gave me the propels for free, but only after wasting 30 minutes of my time. Was that much money back really worth that amount of time?
Then when I get home, I drop and break the jar of marinade I was planning on using with the meat I just bought. Back to the store again I dreaded.
But to get to the main point, the nice Albertsons-SavOn by our current house is also closing. The signs went up this weekend. I figgured this had to be something about the sale of Albertsons to that other company from back east and that they would eventually reopen under a new name or something, but no. I come to find out today that only the _nice_ Albertsons-SavOn by our house is closing, the _old crappy_ Albertsons across from Target is not closing. You all remember Amanda's adventure in the old Albertsons? Dread about what shopping is going to be like until we move.
Now why the hell would they close a nice large Albertsons-SavOn combo that gets decent business and keep open an old, dingy, small Albertsons whose parkinglot is always empty? My only guess is that some bean counter at corporate who never saw the stores in person decided that two Stores within 2 miles of each other couldn't coexist so lets close the one with more overhead even though it is much nicer and makes more money.
Fast forward to today. I go to buy some groceries on my way home from work. I have to go to the old Albertsons since the nice one only has clearance items and doesn't have anymore fresh meat. First, when I get there, they are out of shopping carts. After parading around the weirdly laid out store in the crowds cramming everything into my little hand cart, I'm finally able to check out. I get to the car and realize that they charged me $6 each for 2 6packs of propel that were advertised at 5/$15.
I go back in to get that adjusted and wait at the courtesy desk for 30 minutes before I am taken care of. The first 15 minutes are spent waiting for a clerk to even acknowledge that there are people waiting at the desk. The next 15 minutes are spent waiting for the 2 people in front of me to be helped. When they finally got around to helping me we walked back to the shelf and the price on the shelf certainly said 5/$15, but the deal ended on 3/3. Today is 3/6 - hello - take down your signs already then. They did refund my money and gave me the propels for free, but only after wasting 30 minutes of my time. Was that much money back really worth that amount of time?
Then when I get home, I drop and break the jar of marinade I was planning on using with the meat I just bought. Back to the store again I dreaded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)