Nebraska - The Next Arizona

As is the case with most days, I am confused. I'm confused because of a little town called Fremont, Nebraska. There aren't a lot of people in Fremont (and that's probably for good reason). Maybe around 26,000 is all. But when they went to the polls on Monday, at least 57% of the voters voted yes on a measure to help control illegal immigration. Hmm. That sounds vaguely familiar...

According to something called WOWT (which appears to be some sort of NBC affiliate), the measure does a couple of things. Thing One: "Before landlords can rent any home to a person in Fremont, that person must show a certificate obtained from the city. In order to get the certificate the person will have to prove they are in the United States legally." Ahhh. I like it. And I like Thing Two as well, which is that "The ordinance also requires Fremont employers to verify the legal residency status of people they hire." Sweet!

Way to go Fremont, Nebraska! You certainly are a plucky little town! What was the driving force behind such legislation? You liked won't be shocked to learn that "Supporters said they wanted the city to act because the Federal Government has failed to enforce immigration laws and because it has failed to secure the nation's borders." Hmmm. That sounds vaguely familiar as well...

In case you're missing the obvious correlation here, the Fremont, Nebraska law sounds surprisingly like what they're doing in Arizona. It's just making sure that there is some sort of verification of a person's legal residence in this country. And just like the rationale behind the Arizona law, Fremont, Nebraska is fed up with the Federal Government doing absolutely nothing to enforce immigration laws and secure our borders. And just like in Arizona, these things are FAR from crazy notions. However, what makes the Fremont, Nebraska law stand out from the Arizona law is that the Fremont, Nebraska law was voted on by the people.

That is the part that people who are against the Arizona law need to really pay attention to. So far, they've done a really good job of trying to ignore that, according to polling, 60% of the country and 70% of people in Arizona are all for these sorts of laws. And they could kind of trick themselves into thinking that those numbers didn't hold any weight because the Arizona law wasn't put to the voters. But the Fremont, Nebraska law was put to the voters. And the results were surprisingly close to what the poll numbers showed about the Arizona law; about 60% were in favor of it.

That brings me to my confusion. Why was there all of the hooplah and uproar over the Arizona law, but there isn't that same kind of outcry over the Fremont, Nebraska law? How come I haven't heard of people wanting to boycott Fremont? (Granted, there probably isn't much there to boycott in the first place, but I'm operating on the principle of thing here, so stay with me!) How come there aren't city council meetings far and away where they discuss boycotting Fremont, Nebraska? How come I haven't heard all of the cries of racism over Fremont, Nebraska? Is it because their law only requires some sort of documentation if someone wants something (ie, a place to rent), whereas the Arizona law allows for a general suspicion of someone being in this country illegally to warrant a request to see identity documents? I don't know. I don't get it.

If I had to guess, however, I would guess that it was because the law was enacted through a vote. It's hard to argue with what the voters want. Just look at South Carolina and ol' Alvin Greene, the Democratic Party's candidate for the Senate. The voters voted for him and he appears to be dumb as a post. That's apparently what they wanted (though it's extremely unclear as to why). Fremont, Nebraska passing this law simply reflects what the national polls do, and that is that people are frustrated with the federal government not doing anything to curb illegal immigration and so they're willing to vote on measures that will allow individual states to try and save themselves. And perhaps one of the best things that it can accomplish is maybe all of those people who continually complain about the Arizona law will start to pipe down. I'm all for any law that silences morons.

Sphere: Related Content

That's A Cheeky Nickname

If you're one of those criminals who can go for an extended period of time without getting caught or if you have some sort of gimmick that goes along with your crime, you're going to find yourself with some sort of nickname. The Barbie Bandits. The Cell Phone Bandit (who also could have been named "The Dumbass Chick Who Robs A Bank Whilst Talking On Her Cellphone. My God, Woman, Don't You Ever Put That Thing Away?" But that seems wordy.) The Dinnertime Bandit. The Leprechaun Bandit. And the list of 'bandits' goes on.

Chances are that the only time you'll ever hear the word "bandit" used in day to day conversation (or just on the news) is when mentioning an aptly nickname nicknamed criminal. (This is, of course, with the exception of a mention of "Smokey and the Bandit". And really, if you're hearing about "Smokey and the Bandit" (or any other late 70s movies which star Burt Reynolds) more than, say, once every five years and it's not the answer to a Jeopardy! question, please seek professional help immediately.) If they don't have a nickname, they're simply "a bank robber". They're never "a bank bandit". Huh.

Since your nickname is derived directly from your crimes, if your "crime" is particularly odd, you're going to end up with a particularly odd nickname. Take the Illinois Enema Bandit, for example. And it's just what it sounds like. The guy would sneak into a dwelling, tie up the women and then administer enemas. Thus, the name that I'm sure, I'm positive helped him win friends and influence people in prison.

Thus, I'm sure that you'll be happy to know that they have finally, FINALLY, after TWO long YEARS of criminal activity, the folks in Valentine, Nebraska can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that at long last, the Butt Bandit has been arrested. Wait. The what? The who?

According to the Journal Star over there in Lincoln, Nebraska, "Police have arrested a man suspected of leaving greasy, graphic imprints on the windows of stores, churches and schools ." Wait. "Greasy, graphic imprints"? Of what, you ask? Think about the nickname. Think about the beginning of this post (that was just a wee bit o' foreshadowing for you there!). That's right. Of his arse. You may now commence grimacing, groaning or vomiting.

Since the freaking spring of 2007, "...a mystery vandal visited businesses at night, pressing his naked behind — sometimes his groin, sometimes both — on windows. The marks were made with lotion or petroleum jelly." (Yeah, I don't think it matters exactly what the substance WAS so much, really. The fact that there was a substance to identify in the first place is really quite disturbing.) So for a year and a half, in a little town like Valentine, which sports a population of 2,650, some dude was lubing up his ass cheeks like a couple of greased pigs at a county fair and then creating an imprint of said greasy buttocks (and/or other nether region residents) on the windows of various establishments throughout the village. (Said "mystery vandal" did cease his extra curricular activities during the fall and winter months. I'm guessing because he was afraid it would be so cold that it'd be like licking a frozen flagpole and having your tongue stick to it. That would definitely be an awkward situation when the shopkeeper arrived to open up in the morning!) Look, I know it's boring in small towns and all, but my God, man! You need a new hobby! An interest in board game, perhaps. Anything but spreading the disgusting, oily, impression of your gentials across town. You freak.

The Cherry County attorney, Eric Scott, said, "This isn’t normal behavior for Valentine, Nebraska." Um, Mister Attorney, sir? Perhaps you missed the part about how he was smearing petroleum products on his ass and other parts and then making the equivalent of a rear-end blowfish on the windows throughout your quaint little community there? I'm thinking maybe you missed that because that "isn't normal behavior" ANYWHERE! Are you telling me that had ol' Greasy Cheeks there been in some other town in America then it would have been "normal behavior"? Of course it "isn't normal behavior!" This is just a suggestion, but you really might want to consider getting out and seeing a bit more of this lovely country here if you think stuff like that is commonplace, sir. Just a thought.

Before he was caught (They're not releasing the Froot Loop's name just yet. I wonder if he's savoring the last few moments of anonymity that he has, because once that's made public along with his mugshot (please let it be only of his face), his days of never being ridiculed every time he's out in public are over. Just over!), while some residents of the town thought the incidents were funny, Police Chief Ron McBride did not think as much "It's not funny. We're worried about the next step." Well, he's right that it's not funny. It's absolutely disgusting. But I'm curious....what would be the "next step"? Leaving his mark on society during business hours? Using petroleum fuel instead of using petroleum jelly? What is the "next step" in this particular situation?

I guess I just don't understand how this could go on for a year and a half in such a small town without the obviously disturbed individual being caught. It's not like there's a ton of places to choose from. Then again, I guess that in a town of 2,650 there isn't really a bustling night life or anything, so he probably had his run of the place from the time the sun went down until the next morning. And he chose to spend that time rubbing his ass and genitalia on windows. Go figure. Actually, don't. Back to happy! Back to happy!

Sphere: Related Content