User Profile: KJGreen


Member Since: July 03, 2012


  • December 19, 2014 at 7:49pm

    This is but another example of the government establishing well-meaning legislation that creates unintended consequences. It is hard to argue with the premise of protecting workers from truly unfair labor practices, however, when it sweeps a whole bunch of other activities under the same umbrella it loses all sense of rationality. Add in a dose of bureaucrats whose livelihood depends on them justifying their existence by enforcing regulations in letter and not spirit, and you end up with an out of control government exactly like the one we currently have.

    As more of a theoretical question, what is the difference between my giving hours to a non-profit in volunteer status and doing the same with a for-profit? Isn’t it my decision to give my time to whomever a choice that I should be able to make? (I know .. the government isn’t confident of my ability to do so and it must protect me).

  • [5] December 9, 2014 at 7:52pm

    Maybe if Washington hadn’t ****** spent the SS taxes collected they would not have to rely on “the way Social Security works is the current work force pays for the retiring work force.”

    They call it a Ponzi scheme in the private sector and jail those who perpetuate this kind of fraud.

    And what will happen when the government decides that all of these illegal immigrants can start drawing their own SS benefits because they paid into the system?

  • December 1, 2014 at 10:35am

    To paraphrase our AG, I don’t “condone” her comments.

  • [8] November 28, 2014 at 1:20pm

    So, let me understand this correctly. We not only have to pay the inflated benefits that get negotiated as part of the union contracts, we also have to pay the salaries of those who are doing the union work (and not the work we are supposedly paying them for)? Talk about a great example of heads the union wins, tails the taxpayer loses.

    These activities should be paid for by the union. If that results in higher dues, so be it. Maybe the members having to fund more out of pocket to support these activities would open their eyes a bit to the waste of the unions.

    It would be truly interesting to see how many members continued paying dues if right-to-work legislation got enacted. (But I’m not holding out hope on the “if” becoming “when”).

  • [8] November 23, 2014 at 4:15pm

    Classic government situation:
    1. “Fix” a “problem” they think exists with a solution that is not well-thought out.
    2. Wait for all the unintended consequences to pile up and the “problem” to get worse.
    3. Lobby for more funding to do things right this time.
    4. Talk about how taxes need to be raised to pay for these critical programs.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] November 21, 2014 at 12:20pm

    Carter is Obama’s biggest fan — because of Obama, he is no longer our worst president.

  • November 16, 2014 at 12:09pm

    Another d-bag who wants the freedom to do whatever he wants but takes no responsibility for his action when they get him in trouble.Where has personal accountability gone?

  • [2] November 13, 2014 at 2:43pm

    Actually, I have asked this question about McConnell and Boehner. Numerous times. Never get the right answer.

    Maybe all three of them can ride off into the sunset together.

    Responses (1) +
  • [3] November 12, 2014 at 5:35pm

    Wonder if that hospital was in her insurance plan before O-care took over…

  • [2] October 3, 2014 at 6:45pm

    Useful idiot …

  • [8] September 25, 2014 at 1:48pm

    tc: Thanks for saving me the effort of keying in the exact same sentiments. Unfortunately the resources of government have been directed without accountability toward the “recipient class” of society. Unfortunately funding for taking care of the truly needy (as the perpetrator may be), has been allocated to other uses.

  • [4] September 24, 2014 at 1:14pm

    On reading his comment “…one that sometimes causes people to be remembered as “feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic,” I thought he had offered a good self-description.

  • [9] September 21, 2014 at 11:36pm

    Actually, this was a budgetary decision. They didn’t have enough money to cover the food costs at the Council’s meetings.

  • [1] September 15, 2014 at 6:47pm

    And we should believe this rebuttal … why?

  • [2] September 13, 2014 at 7:35pm

    I feel so much better now that McCain is on top of this.

    Just curious, how does one go about “vetting” someone in this context?

    Responses (1) +
  • [9] September 13, 2014 at 7:30pm

    As I think about this situation all I can conjure up is the opening part of the original Star Wars movie with the hologram imploring “Help me Obi Wan Kenobi you’re my only hope.”

    Who will be our Obi Wan Kenobi? Our current day Churchill? It sure isn’t Obama; and it sure doesn’t appear to be any of our allies who have leaned on US leadership for decades. Unfortunately, that leadership is long gone.

    Even if other countries wanted to plug in, I would understand their reticence in not joining an Obama-led coalition since he has not been trustworthy in his support and/or commitments to others in the past.

    Responses (4) +
  • September 8, 2014 at 1:55am

    In other words, I’m sorry that you misinterpreted how I really felt based on the fact I went golfing after my statement.

    Classic politician non-apology. I’m sorry you didn’t understand what I really meant to say…

  • September 6, 2014 at 4:40pm

    Message to all campaigns!!

    You need to point blank ask your opponent if they are elected will support any immigration reform “enacted” by virtue of Obama executive action. When they claim to not be interested in answering “hypotheticals” let them know it is not a hypothetical — that Obama has undertaken a brazen political dodge by threatening executive action but waiting until after November to minimize Dem losses and that they know he will be doing this once the last vote is cast in early November.

  • [4] September 5, 2014 at 1:48pm

    Too bad the internet is forever; hope her future employers are doing internet background checks on their prospective employees.

  • September 3, 2014 at 3:44pm

    Bla bla bla.

    What’s next, a sternly worded letter to the head of ISIS?