My Recent Comments

• Bingo6, There are folks like that in every state, folks that have nothing better to do.
  1 week ago
• Gov. Brewer no CEO or head of a company can offer assurances that commit them to anything but the profitable execution of their business. If you can't see that, then you're just fooling yourself about how business works. Most politicians have no business experience otherwise they wouldn't be offering such assurances without qualifying their remarks.
  3 months ago
• The political naiveté of such an action is almost too laughable to even take seriously. Was this piece trying to be funny?
  4 months ago
• bubba, I guess you live up to your name since you're not understanding what bankruptcy means. They weren't making money. I wasn't saying they were being managed correctly. You can have idiots manage a company into the ground and it still not going to matter to the workers if it goes broke. You typify the "rich vs. poor" mentality that folks like to launch at companies. Most good companies don't do what you describe in terms of raises if they're going to exist for long. This was a no win situation. The only sad thing is that there are going to be 15,000 plus workers without a job for the holidays. And this doesn't help anyone, workers and company included.
  6 months ago
• Businesses are created and exist to make money. If they don't, they don't last long. Hostess wasn't making money because of many factors, including POOR management. As much as I wish to empathize with the its workers, the restructuring required by the management was NECESSARY in spite of how the company has been previously poorly managed. I don't know of any business that models itself after how well it takes care of its workers without FIRST considering whether they're getting the return on investment required for them to continue functioning. This is what people better start realizing because you're not going to start producing good jobs for anyone if there is NOT a business environment within the country that promotes the growth needed for businesses to make money. You can continue assailing businesses and companies for everything you don't like about the "rich vs. the poor" attitudes that have characterized the recent Presidential campaign, but it's not going to produce healthy jobs in the long run if these very businesses and companies don't make money.
  6 months ago
• This was a tighter election than last time. It's foolish to believe that President Obama has a mandate. If he does not move to compromise with the Republicans in any meaningful fashion, he will have proven once again that he's only a symbol for the many who voted for him but lacks the leadership skills to truly move things forward. And he won't move to compromise because the liberal democrats will not allow him like what happened the last four years. All you have to do is look at history to see what Presidents Reagan and Clinton did in order to be successful. Unfortunately, it will most likely be the status quo and instead of having a lame duck president for the last two years of his term, we're going to have a lame duck president for the next four years.
  6 months ago
• This is not the way to do things.
  9 months ago
• NO ON PROPOSITION 204. - Funding for schools needs to be increased but we must not tie the legislature's hands by creating more funding propositions that will create problems long-term for our government. It's up to the legislature and governor to do their jobs correctly and NOT thru propositional school-financing. If a legislator is not doing his/her job, then vote these folks out and let's put people willing to do the job of the people. I'll vote for the overrides and bonds because they're temporary and they're forced to come back to the people EACH TIME for another vote; but Proposition 204 is a one time vote that does not expire (i.e., it's permanent) and hence forces the legislature's hand each time they have to realize a budget. This is not the way to do things.
  9 months ago
• There's no doubt that Judge Roberts chose a tortuous manner by which to uphold the individual mandate. It would have been better to let Congress do their job by submitting it as a tax instead of the Court generously interpreting it as a tax when it was clearly written as a mandate. As duly noted however within the decision, the opinion states, "We do not consider whether the Act embodies sound policies." It now sets up an election year rallying cry. The GOP is going to run on this and the economy since it's now imperative to elect legislators that will undo what's been done. This law has now been saved by a big assist by Judge Roberts but I don't think we've heard or seen the last of it.
  10 months ago
• For all those clamoring that SB1070 was going to be upheld, let's hear now the excuses. For months I heard folks stating it was going to be upheld with silly illogical arguments. This law was silly from the beginning and everyone who has ever been involved in the legal application of laws of this type knew that it was going nowhere, not even the provision that was upheld just like hillstreet above has clearly noted. Let police do their work as they have always done it and don't burden them with laws that are written solely for political points even when their underwriters clearly know that these laws are constitutionally-challenged if ever someone was to take them to court. More lawsuits are just waiting to happen with this only provision that was upheld and even the Supreme Court acknowledged this reality in their ruling.
  11 months ago