User Profile: qdllc


Member Since: June 08, 2012


  • [4] May 22, 2015 at 8:11am


    Even if you are a “victim” of someone’s bad act or life just being unfair, playing the part of the “victim” doesn’t doe anything to make your lot in life better.

  • [1] May 21, 2015 at 1:04pm

    Wow. If you think backing a trailer is “tension filled” maybe you shouldn’t be towing one?

    Another skill being handed off to machines so people can be idiots behind the wheel.

  • [1] May 21, 2015 at 8:18am

    Been there, done that.

    Grew up in a Union family, so I know both sides. Personally WOULD NOT want to work for a union shop because the presence of a union often means hostile labor/management relations from day one.

    And it IS about money and power for the union. Besides, Wal-Mart has “dumbed down” most all of their jobs to the point that a trained monkey can do the job. Those with ability who stay get into “management” who don’t qualify for union protections like the rank and file workers do.

    If you are worth more than Wal-Mart wants to pay you, find most anything else that will treat you better than staying at Wal-Mart. Even in THIS economy, you have better options if you keep looking.

  • [2] May 21, 2015 at 8:13am


    Now you’re a terrorist if you challenge the pseudo-science of “climate change?”

    Good thing this is his top priority and not the invasion of illegals coming up from Mexico.

  • [4] May 20, 2015 at 1:32pm


    I’ll worry about people posting on Twitter after we address “reverends” whipping people into raging mobs over race-based issues or what types of morons get to have syndicated opinion columns in the mass media to spew their “anything but news” views to the general public.

  • [4] May 20, 2015 at 7:45am

    Trolls like this (no, I won’t even acknowledge that she’s a woman) are disgusting.

    If you were raped, file criminal charges, otherwise you’re a liar. It’s not like you are accusing a Kennedy who has more money than God to resist a police investigation.

    Except that defamation usually has a 12-month statute of limitation and rape probably runs for years, the accused should sue the crap our of her. Hopefully nobody will know or care about this waste of flesh slinging about accusations…and bedding furniture.

  • [2] May 19, 2015 at 12:38pm

    As much as I don’t like Obama, I must concede that he can’t bear all the blame for what’s going on in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    People I know who were there said the locals being trained to defend their homelands simply were not committed to remaining free…certainly not willing to die in large enough number to repel potential attacking forces. We were going to have to stay there for 50 years or more and pay with our blood to keep what was gained. If we pulled out, their fall was inevitable.

    Now, regarding other nations and the Middle East in general, Obama has been ISIS’ best buddy in helping them gain power and territory.

    Responses (1) +
  • [1] May 15, 2015 at 9:32am

    Reminds me of the joke where a preacher is asked about the results of a recent church revival.

    He had no additions but there were some “helpful subtractions.”

    Too many go to church out of a sense of obligation or expectation, not because they want to or “believe” in the faith.

    As times get worse, you will see this natural sifting of the wheat from the chaff. People will draw closer or walk away.

  • [9] May 13, 2015 at 10:27am

    Anyone want to guess what happens if you ask to leave work early?

  • [4] May 8, 2015 at 6:44am

    Just because the LIBERAL leadership of a church embraces an idea doesn’t mean the rank-and-file approve of it.

    Possible future church split coming for the Episcopalians? I know if the United Methodist Church voted to approve of gay marriage, a whole lot of churches would exit the conference and form a new one.

    Responses (1) +
  • May 8, 2015 at 6:41am

    I remember some of that equipment in my middle school gym. It never saw any use.

  • [1] May 8, 2015 at 6:39am

    Has Mr. Yarber been paying attention to the state of America for the last decade?

  • [7] May 8, 2015 at 6:38am

    This is a lesson Americans need to wake up and learn.

    We could kill them until the streets run with their blood, but that won’t make them stop. Fanatics are willing to die for their cause. Are we as prepared to fight to defend our freedoms?

    Responses (2) +
  • [4] April 17, 2015 at 11:25am

    I said years ago that if gay marriage became legal, they would go after churches for refusing to marry them.

    Yeah, there’ll be some protection at first for “religious beliefs,” but aside from having to defend against baseless litigation, you can bet that the courts (and government) will strip unaccommodating churches of all government benefits (including tax exempt status) because they won’t compromise.

    It’s coming.

    Responses (2) +
  • April 8, 2015 at 3:38pm

    Exactly. She’s still going through with the deal. It IS her fault for not reading the contract and realizing she’d have to put up the $80K early on, but the boycott is certainly a factor here. If there aren’t enough attendees, how much is it to blame? The contract with the hotel presumes all things being equal. A mass-media “boycott” of the state right before the event is to be held would be no different than if there was a hurricane or unseasonable snowstorm the week of the event.

    I do give a +1 to having “event insurance” to cover yourself. Again, I hope enough people show up to keep her from being out the $80K.

  • [-3] April 8, 2015 at 7:47am

    Honestly, does “reading comprehension” mean nothing today?

    I’ve looked at the article three times so far. In no way did this woman “boycott” or do anything to bring what has been done to her. She planned an event. She expected it to be a success. Out of the blue, this law gets passed and a national movement to boycott the state comes on. She is being adversely affected by this development. It’s not her fault or doing. She should have an excellent case for force majeure and be able to get her money back. The state acting, or another party acting, to ultimately frustrate the purpose of a contract should not leave the harmed party holding the bag.

    Now, if she chose to cancel the event in solidarity to the boycott movement, I could see placing the blame squarely on her shoulders.

    I can only hope enough people still elect to attend her “grief and hope” convention to allow her to recoup the $80,000.

    Responses (3) +
  • [1] March 9, 2015 at 8:24am

    Planet Fitness has a fairly long history of issues of “offending” people with their policy. People who look too fit, you’re out because fat people find you intimidating. The whole gym model is geared towards out of shape people who want a cheap monthly gym membership. Serious trainers/fitness people need not bother joining. They don’t have the equipment you need and they’ll come down on you for “intimidating” the other members with the results of your hard work and dedication.

    Hell, most locations do free pizza and bagels once a month. To whom do you think that caters?

  • May 22, 2014 at 8:15am

    Here’s the bit NOT being reported or investigated.

    I had to sign up with ACA and “estimate” my income (I was between jobs at the time). I get almost $300 in subsidy based on my estimate. The insurance carrier doesn’t even get half that much in actual money from the government.

    If my subsidy changes, do I have to pay back the difference in declared subsidy or what the difference is in what the government actually paid the insurance company?

    I still don’t have an answer to this. Just as insurance companies pay a percentage of “usual and customary,” it appears the government is paying a fraction of the subsidy. What happens to the difference?

  • December 10, 2013 at 7:04am

    So true. If you don’t know what it’s like to be put under that microscope by the media, trust me…it messes you up. You’re never the same again. Frankly, I think the media is going to keep “prosecuting” him until he legitimately snaps so they can get their celluloid justice.

  • November 27, 2013 at 8:43am

    This has been the norm for a long time. It’s called “implied consent.” If you want a driver’s license, if suspected of a DUI, you either submit to a breath test or automatically have your license revoked. Refusal doesn’t end there. They can arrest you, and if you don’t cooperate, they can get a warrant to draw a blood sample to test for intoxication.

    The only argument you have against this is if you can say there isn’t sufficient probable cause to submit you to sobriety testing, and the best way to assert that is at a DUI checkpoint where they want everyone to submit to a breath test regardless of any observable behavior that indicates intoxication.

Restoring Love