User Profile: JRook


Member Since: March 16, 2011


123 To page: Go
  • December 19, 2014 at 11:00am

    While I find the lifestyle creepy and would not want to be around a transgender individual for any length of time. Employers should not be allowed to discriminate against any person who is able and willing to perform the job duties as defined. It is no business of the employers to investigate or take a position on an employees private life, unless they have been tried and convicted of a crime. The Rice situation in the NFL is a perfect example. No charges were filed and he was not found guilty of anything. The NFL should not be allowed to deny him the opportunity to work. Saying that playing in the NFL is a privilege puts an interest status on the players with respect to the owners and the league. Players are not owned by the owner and the league should do something other than merely protect the economic and political interests of the owners. Don’t remember the owner of the Cleveland Browns having his ownership interest taken away because his company was indicted and found guilty of fraud. And the notion he wasn’t aware of a practice that resulted in huge bonuses for the VP of Marketing and Sales, as well as the sales force is absurd. And if your going to speak of character, then explain to me why a Coach who was caught cheating by spying on the other team while in their stadium didn’t get run out of the league.

  • [1] December 19, 2014 at 10:49am

    Oh right because the communist regime in China is much better and should be trusted more than the people in Cuba. If you don’t think China and now Cuba isn’t be driven by big money interests more so than ideology or being a good US citizen than you really have no clue. No doubt the proximity to the US is driving the wealthy to seek out labor they can exploit and goods they can make more money on at the expense of the US worker and consumer. Just look at the gasoline price gauging going on right now. Gasoline should be regarded as a utility just like electric, gas, etc. And the price should be closely watched and regulated. And spare me the free market nonsense as OPEC and the purposeful manipulation of supply by the large oil companies clearly shows there isn’t and never has been a free market for oil or gasoline.

  • [3] December 19, 2014 at 10:37am

    “Douglas’ column resulted in her receiving threats to her life and personal safety, according to an editor’s note now attached to her article.” How is this possible as we all know that conservative republicans are not filled with hate and would never threaten anyone with violence for accessing their first amendment rights? Must be liberal imposters just trying to make republicans look violent. Like when that guy Garner in NYC died just to make the cops who choked him look bad.

    Responses (4) +
  • December 19, 2014 at 10:27am

    Actually, during a bankruptcy proceeding most contracts are null and void with determination of where creditors are placed being based on the determination of the presiding judge. So you followed up with the bond holders and investors to make sure they lost everything. Not sure how that would have happened to the all the shareholders. My guess would be the wealthiest and most powerful shareholders ended up doing much better than if the company went out of business.

  • [-1] December 19, 2014 at 10:23am

    Pretty stupid post just for the sake of showing the sign again and again and again. But then again it was a equally stupid sign.

  • [6] December 19, 2014 at 10:20am

    Oh right and I’m sure no one in Nebraska every drives drunk in their home state or in Colorado. Which do you think is the bigger problem, driving under the influence of alcohol or every other drug combined. Hint: not even close.

  • [8] December 19, 2014 at 10:17am

    “the Deaths are starting to skyrocket” As usual from this individual, this statement is completely fabricated. Either that or there is a learning disability with respect to the definition of skyrocket.

  • [20] December 19, 2014 at 10:14am

    Agree and isn’t it interesting to see conservative states who bang the drum about doing the will of the voters, even when it violates the civil rights of others, saying that what the voters in Colorado decided should be overturned. The gateway argument is a unfounded worn out argument. If these AGs really want to reduce hard drug use in their states they should ban prescription pain killers and anti-inflammatories which have been PROVEN to lead to Heroin use. They might also want to take a serious look at the problems related to alcohol use and abuse in their state. They might find out they dwarf those of all the other drugs of concern combined.

    Responses (3) +
  • [-5] December 16, 2014 at 1:59pm

    Ok the banking industry which at the end of the day are close bedfellows with the central banks don’t benefit from uncertainty or war. So please provide some rational as to why an action by a central bank to stabilize its currency is really aimed at forcing a war. And at the end of the day what real power do you think the central bank of Saudi Arabia has? And for that matter the Russian central bank outside of Russia. Perhaps Russia is merely responding to the pressure being placed on it by economic sanctions in addition to the price of oil. And just like the US, Russia is not to keen on having the world or the US tell it what to do or not do. It is the fool who sees situations only through a lens that justifies their actions.

  • [-6] December 16, 2014 at 1:55pm

    Oh ok and you don’t think that the oil companies didn’t participate in driving up the price of oil to help convince people that fracking was necessary, or have you forgot the Drill Baby Drill argument that quickly became jobs, jobs, jobs when it was learned that despite a federal ban, both oil and gasoline was being exported from the US. Its time to focus on our economy as a whole, not merely the oil industry. And the US economy will do better if the price of gasoline was at $2. And yes both oil companies and gasoline suppliers can make a reasonable profit at $2 a gallon.

    Responses (2) +
  • [-5] December 16, 2014 at 1:52pm

    Well said and of course no one would react to anyone saying a severe drop in oil prices will help the US and the world. A lot of very wealthy people are loosing a truck load of wealth due to the drop in oil prices. I’m more concerned about what they will push the politicians they own into doing. No doubt the wealthy oil money in the US is trying to make sure it sounds as bad and scary as possible. If we are smart and as resilient a country as we say we are, let’s do whatever is necessary to bring the price down to $30, subsidize our oil companies in the short terms and take back as much of the market as possible. So GB thinks Russia is going to attack the Saudis? And perhaps glen should include the impact of the economic sanctions against Russia as being a added incentive.

  • [-6] December 16, 2014 at 1:46pm

    You really think GB is the first one to identify the results of the price of oil dropping below $75 a barrel. Let’s wait and see if he actually adds something new to the predictions. There were books written about the potential for wars over oil in the 1980′s.

    Responses (1) +
  • [-6] December 16, 2014 at 1:44pm

    And why assume that it costs more than $40 a barrel from a fracking well. And keep in mind a 50% return on investment is not part of the cost of production. If the industry is going to yell foul in terms of the same managed market that provided them with a windfall at $105 a barrel than let them open their books and prove it. And yes it would be advantageous for the government to subsidize this production if it lowers our dependence on SA. As far as Saudi Arabia looking to start a war with Russia, well that’s about as illogical as it gets. I’d spend more time looking at the wealthy individuals across the world who are giving up some wealth over the price. As one thing is known for sure since the beginning of time. The wealthy care little about the country they are parking their money in at the time. Let’s remember we had an individual who ran for President who parked his money offshore to avoid paying taxes most americans pay.

    Responses (3) +
  • [-2] December 16, 2014 at 12:09pm

    You most probably have not read the book and the only information you have regarding the chick, as you so respectfully refer to her, you got from the biased accounts presented by billy. So from that solid foundation and expert knowledge you were able to discern that the situations, level of suffering, prognosis and discussions with their individual physicians was analogous. Wow, perhaps those with terminal diseases should seek you out before making any decisions regarding treatments, living wills or end of life decisions. How exactly is what the woman did any different that individuals who refuse medical treatment, some on religious grounds, explicitly state that no life sustaining or resuscitation procedures be used? And no doubt many who refuse medical treatment or have living wills are as solid a christian as those who provide little if no dignity to a woman who suffered no less than any of them at the end of her life. And let’s be clear billy providing pictures of the woman when she was not suffering in order to support a bias is anything but an honest account of what occurred.

  • [-2] December 16, 2014 at 11:58am

    Ah yes let’s be sure to label and discredit the hardened zealot who might ask what the physicians treating this inoperable tumor attest his recovery to. Inoperable because it was close to his heart doesn’t mean chemo would not work. And let’s see some figures regarding similar patients treated in the same manner. And please explain much larger amount of christians and individuals who turn to god when confronted with a terminal illness that suffer and die. There are 5,000 plus individuals that will say that the herb doctor in Mexico cured the cancer that traditional medicine didn’t? Medical researches have studied and confirmed the healing power of a positive attitude, regardless of the source. Is it not important to note that this individual did not discontinue his chemo treatments based on faith and his prayers. Seeking the same level of statistical support that the medical community or the FDA would seek for the chemo, radiation or antiviral treatments is what is necessary. Not a snapshot book of individuals who attribute their recovery to their beliefs or level of faith. Are they wonderful and positive stories yes. Are they an indication that people should forgo traditional treatments in lieu of a pentecostal faith healer. Don’t think anyone other than an extreme religious zealot would bet their life on it.

    Responses (4) +
  • [1] December 16, 2014 at 11:39am

    A good number of the comments here do nothing more than clearly show that those who constantly reference the constitution have either never read, can’t understand it or accept GB revisionist view. Regardless of the case, it merely makes you low information citizens. Read the federalist papers and become clear that the founding fathers, regardless of whether they were christians or not, clearly set up a fire wall so that what occurred with the Church of England could never happen again. It doesn’t say freedom of christianity, it says freedom of RELIGION, which means any and ALL religions. And they made it perfectly clear that the government should not restrict or promote religious expression. And of course they clearly forbid the government from establishing christianity as the state religion. So no majority or mob rule really doesn’t apply with respect to interpreting or respecting the constitution and the INDIVIDUAL liberty, freedom and self determination that are at its core. Self determination, not government determination and certainly not church/religious determination. So express you religion anyway you see fit within the confines of the constitution. And lets leave it up the Supreme Court not GB or Rush to remind us what it say and means.

    Responses (3) +
  • [-4] December 16, 2014 at 11:30am

    My boy scout troop did the same at the Methodist Church that sponsored us. And on the church grounds is where it belongs.

    Responses (3) +
  • [-3] December 16, 2014 at 11:28am

    Not true, as I don’t see anything about this group taking action against the private auto shop? Actually read the federalist papers and you will find that one of the contexts the founding fathers were clear about was government/religious tyranny that was the Church of England. Its freedom of religion away from any and all government interference or promotion. And they were also clear that individual freedoms and religious expression were more important then the interests or beliefs of the majority. To interpret what they were saying is to just plain lie. And you know it.

    Responses (19) +
  • [-5] December 16, 2014 at 11:23am

    Perhaps like most of North Carolina the residents place more emphasis and resources on their school systems which are among the worst in the country. And have become significantly worse under the current republican leaders who would rather fund nativity scenes than their schools. Schools need the best teachers they can find and the best teachers should be paid as much as possible. When the small business man who owns the local car wash makes more than the best teachers, priorities are indeed screwed up.

    Responses (10) +
  • December 16, 2014 at 11:13am

    Seriously, individuals like you really need to branch out from fox and rush. In the 1980′s managed care companies like Kaiser worked with companies to access members health, track their fitness and treatment compliance to reduce costs tot he plan and thus the employers through lower premiums. And aggressive employers have been taking actions since the early 1990′s to utilize health habits within their hiring and employee relations programs. Some actually will not hire individuals who smoke. So Champ, like everything else it has been and will continue to be driven by companies who want to control their health care expense to optimize profits. If you actually read and understood the Affordable Care Act you would see that its main thrust was to insure health insurance for everyone, including the those that employers and private insurance companies were kicking to the curb. Which of course meant those of us with good coverage and the means to pay subsidized those costs. And by the way almost all the studies show that corporate fitness programs do not significantly reduce health care costs.

123 To page: Go