VOTE: Shrub in 04

"None" wrote in message hlink.net...
"me" wrote in message
om...

Now, look beyond governmental borders and just view the geographic
regions in which people choose to live. Pick regions with the
same surface area as Texas and see where it ranks. As I suggested,
if you look at a region of land between DC and Boston you'll blow
Texas away in terms of population.

Not to mention brain cells!

Ha ha, so original.

I suppose it's dummies working in the nation's largest medical center
district, which contains some of the top-ranked hospitals, right?

"jjp" wrote in message
om...
"None" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"me" wrote in message
om...

Now, look beyond governmental borders and just view the geographic
regions in which people choose to live. Pick regions with the
same surface area as Texas and see where it ranks. As I suggested,
if you look at a region of land between DC and Boston you'll blow
Texas away in terms of population.

Not to mention brain cells!

Ha ha, so original.

I suppose it's dummies working in the nation's largest medical center
district, which contains some of the top-ranked hospitals, right?

Hmmmm, I wouldn't care to know. However, I would suppose you would have to
find out just how many of them were born IN Texas, or came to it's rescue
from somewhere else.

Everytime when running into some idiot somewhere, my grandmother once said .
.. . "someone left the gate open at that damn trailer park again!" I once
replied . . ."What trailer park?" To which she rather matter of factly
stated . . . TEXAS!

(jjp) wrote in message om...
(me) wrote in message . com...
(jjp) wrote in message . com...
(me) wrote in message . com...
[snip]
If one wants to talk about "most" it is sorta illustrative to
realize that something like 25% of the population lives in two
relatively narrow strips in this country. One strip runs roughly
between Boston and DC including virtually of all New Jersey plus
Baltimore and Philly. Then the other strip is between San Diego and
the Larger LA area. I saw some statistic once that some incredible
percentage of the population lived between the Applalations and the
eastern seaboard, or between some California Mountian range and
the Pacific. (These were rough lines which extended the full
height of the country north and south, virtually all of Florida
was included). The discussion was related to the electoral college
and popular elections, but it struck me how much of the population
for one reason or another chooses to live in some of the
highest population regions. And in the context of this discussion,
That's only about 1/3 of the states, which would imply the other 2/3
"suck" to most people.

Then Texas must not "suck" that much, considering it's the second most
populous state after CA, and has three of the country's top ten
largest cities...


Now, look beyond governmental borders and just view the geographic
regions in which people choose to live. Pick regions with the
same surface area as Texas and see where it ranks. As I suggested,
if you look at a region of land between DC and Boston you'll blow
Texas away in terms of population.

Which still doesn't mean that those areas in Texas aren't highly populated...


However, what it means is that if one wants to discuss any concept
of "most", it doesn't even begin to truly qualify. The "single
largest minorities" don't live anywhere near Texas. It's a running
competition between the Northeastern Seaboard, and the southern
California coast. I'm struggling to think of the 3rd which would
be anything but a vastly distant 3rd to boot I suspect. These areas
are hard to quantify because they don't necessarily follow governmental
boundaries. My guess would be #1) a larger Chicago area, extending
upwards towards Milwaukee plus around the southern portion of Lake
Michigan through Indiana and potentially into Michigan, not to mention
well south of Chicago. #2) The larger San Fransico/Oakland area,
potentially reaching as far east as Sacramento and upwards towards
Portland (although that's a stretch because there's a fair amount of
rural land in between there). #3) Jacksonville to Miami is
an extremely densely populated strip of land, ableit only for about
20 miles inland. And none of these areas cover anywhere near
the acreage of Texas. Allow any of these regions to include populations
in an area the size of Texas and save maybe the last one, they'd
blow it away. Heck, around Chicago, such a map would probably include
Detroit, Indianapolis, all of Wisconsin AND Illinois. Depending upon
how I want to center it, I could include virtually include 5 of the
industrial midwest states. Similarly, if I try to cobble together
states in the Northeast to equal the land mass of Texas, I can
basically combine Penn, NY, Conn, DC, Maryland, Mass, Delaware, and
New Jersey. You wanna compare "popularity" now?

"me" wrote in message
om...

Similarly, if I try to cobble together
states in the Northeast to equal the land mass of Texas, I can
basically combine Penn, NY, Conn, DC, Maryland, Mass, Delaware, and
New Jersey. You wanna compare "popularity" now?

I don't know about "popularity" but I do know that the majority of the
deadbeat dads in the country tend to flee to Texas. I wonder why that is.
Wouldn't have anything to do with Texas law preventing divorce decrees
containing alimony and/or child support from being enforced against Texas
residents, would it?

Hmmmmmmmm. Yeah, Texas is a GREAT state!

"None" wrote in message hlink.net...
"jjp" wrote in message
om...
"None" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"me" wrote in message
om...

Now, look beyond governmental borders and just view the geographic
regions in which people choose to live. Pick regions with the
same surface area as Texas and see where it ranks. As I suggested,
if you look at a region of land between DC and Boston you'll blow
Texas away in terms of population.

Not to mention brain cells!

Ha ha, so original.

I suppose it's dummies working in the nation's largest medical center
district, which contains some of the top-ranked hospitals, right?

Hmmmm, I wouldn't care to know. However, I would suppose you would have to
find out just how many of them were born IN Texas, or came to it's rescue
from somewhere else.

And how many New Yorkers are natives? Few of the big cities in present
times are composed of natives.

Everytime when running into some idiot somewhere, my grandmother once said .
. . "someone left the gate open at that damn trailer park again!" I once
replied . . ."What trailer park?" To which she rather matter of factly
stated . . . TEXAS!

The only thing funny about that is the ignorance, which obviously runs
in the family.

"None" wrote in message hlink.net...
"me" wrote in message
om...

Similarly, if I try to cobble together
states in the Northeast to equal the land mass of Texas, I can
basically combine Penn, NY, Conn, DC, Maryland, Mass, Delaware, and
New Jersey. You wanna compare "popularity" now?

I don't know about "popularity" but I do know that the majority of the
deadbeat dads in the country tend to flee to Texas. I wonder why that is.
Wouldn't have anything to do with Texas law preventing divorce decrees
containing alimony and/or child support from being enforced against Texas
residents, would it?

Hmmmmmmmm. Yeah, Texas is a GREAT state!

Yeah, I guess that just explains it all, right?

Come back when you have have something intelligent to say.

"jjp" wrote in message
om...
"None" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"me" wrote in message
om...

Similarly, if I try to cobble together
states in the Northeast to equal the land mass of Texas, I can
basically combine Penn, NY, Conn, DC, Maryland, Mass, Delaware, and
New Jersey. You wanna compare "popularity" now?


Part of the allure of Tx is the open spaces, and low taxes. I visited El
Paso in March and was moderately impressed.


I don't know about "popularity" but I do know that the majority of the
deadbeat dads in the country tend to flee to Texas. I wonder why that
is.
Wouldn't have anything to do with Texas law preventing divorce decrees
containing alimony and/or child support from being enforced against
Texas
residents, would it?

Hmmmmmmmm. Yeah, Texas is a GREAT state!

Don't blame men for the money not getting to the children; blame those who
broke up the nuclear family: the single mom culture, the abortionists -
don't get me started.

your analysis is a bit flawed - the breakup of the nuclear family had more
to do with necessity of 2 incomes in the family than anything else

"Mike" wrote in message
...

Don't blame men for the money not getting to the children; blame those who
broke up the nuclear family: the single mom culture, the abortionists -
don't get me started.

"Mike" wrote in message ...
[snip]
Don't blame men for the money not getting to the children; blame those who
broke up the nuclear family: the single mom culture, the abortionists -
don't get me started.

Women as the root of all evil went out as a literary device sometime
in the '50s or so. It was done to death in the bible anyway. Those
men need to take responsibility and not blame it on the women. It
takes two (baby).

"DALing" daling43[delete]-at-hotmail.com wrote in message
...

your analysis is a bit flawed - the breakup of the nuclear family had more
to do with necessity of 2 incomes in the family than anything else

Not to mention the fact that Texas decided to give safe haven to deadbeats
who didn't want to face up to the responsibilities involved with not being
able to keep their dick in their pants!

But that's Texas!




"Mike" wrote in message
...

Don't blame men for the money not getting to the children; blame those
who
broke up the nuclear family: the single mom culture, the abortionists -
don't get me started.