Thank you so much for the letter informing us that we have to repay the unemployment that you already sent us. This makes complete sense, because we already went through a dispute and won, because the employer didn’t have any evidence. But since the employer was able to MANUFACTURE evidence after the fact, I can see how you would take his word for everything. That makes total sense.

Of course, employers never lie… only employees do that. Employers are truthful by their very nature. Just because the person who trained my wife in the job was the one who showed (by her example) her what was acceptable and what wasn’t. But that isn’t the employers problem, even if he IS sleeping with the person who trained my wife. I’m sure that had nothing to do with the double standard.

I’m sure your decision to only talk to the employer and not the employee was based on a completely fair set of criteria. Our legal system is based on an accuser being able to say whatever they want, and the accused not being allowed to be present. Right? Sure, you can lean on your thin argument of technical difficulties, but that hardly makes a one-sided legal decision fair, don’t you think?

Yes, Kansas, your decision to reverse the unemployment will definitely help the economy. The scumbag employer will save a few hundred bucks. Your unemployment fund will save a few thousand. And you don’t have to worry about what happens to the citizen you’re taking the money away from, because that’s not your problem.

I blame the employer for being a lying scumbag who has one set of standards for normal employees and another set for employees he sleeps with. But it’s you, Kansas, that I blame for having a ridiculous, arbitrary, and moronic system in place that allows decent people to be screwed by lying scumbags.

Keep up the good work!

Your loyal taxpaying citizen,

Pete

Click here to donate to the Pete & Jenna Unemployment Replacement Fund. Sorry, donations are not tax deductible. But they are appreciated.

This is really not smart on his part, since I could post anything I felt like on his website. However, the businessman in me says “Pete, you are running a business, you can’t be unprofessional, even to a turbotool like this guy.” So rather than potentially give my business a black eye, it gave me great pleasure to write the following letter, terminating his hosting with my company (click to enlarge):

Against the advice of my dad, I decided to write him a refund check for the unused portion of his hosting. I probably don’t have to legally, and I definitely don’t have to morally, but I still want to keep my business totally on the up-and-up. Unlike him. The main benefit of writing a refund check to this bozo is that I got to write the letter you just read. It just wouldn’t have the same flair if I wasn’t sending him money.

I think of it as a payment on continuing education… I learned never to work with Chiropractors. Legitimate medicine has been proving over and over that Chiropractic Subluxation is total BS for the past 110 years. Why would I think that someone who charged people money to do something that doesn’t fix what he claims it fixes while also risking serious injury or death (strokes, etc.) is a good person? Don’t take my word for it:

Don’t Let Chiropractic Fool You

He terminated her for violating a policy which he did not have, had never mentioned, and made up only AFTER she pushed him to explain his reason for terminating her. He lost the initial dispute for unemployment because he didn’t have any documentation.

Then, as if by magic, he produced a photocopied page from “a” policy manual, which Jenna had never seen, and another page from somewhere else (that didn’t even have the same font or font size) that he ALSO claimed was part of his policy manual. Jenna was never given a copy of this document (probably because it didn’t exist), and EVEN IF THE DOCUMENT DID EXIST, HE DIDN’T FOLLOW THE DISCIPLINE STEPS IN THE FRIGGIN DOCUMENTS! It said two written warnings would be given, then possible termination. Well, he didn’t give written warnings.

His other point in his appeal was that Jenna had a job and was, in essence, scamming the unemployment system. He was referring to Jenna being on the radio… which she is. However, what he didn’t know (since it was none of his damn business) was that she is a volunteer. She’s killing time while she looks for work. She’s never been paid a cent.

He sent a page from her blog on the radio station’s website claiming it proved that she was working.

The fact that he won this appeal only proves that he must have lied through his teeth to the judge. There’s no other way he could have won. The facts were not on his side. He couldn’t produce one solid piece of evidence that she violated a policy, and he didn’t even follow the policy that he submitted (which was apparently downloaded from the Internet) to the judge as evidence. And his second claim of her being employed was just bunk. He assumed.

If you just go by the “facts” that were presented in the documentation, he can’t win. He must have just lied and lied and lied.

We could fight it, but frankly it wouldn’t help. The next appeal step doesn’t allow any new information to be added, a panel just reviews the current file to make sure the JUDGE didn’t break any rules with the judgment. Which I’m sure she didn’t.

We could hire an attorney and sue the idiot. But Jenna and I have already had 4 months of this guy trying to cause us sleepless nights, stress, and just general anger. I think 4 months of him upsetting us is enough, and so my decision is to let it go.

It’s not fair, in fact it may be criminal. It’s DEFINITELY jerky, for someone who acted like he was friends with Jenna up till the day he fired her then fought tooth and nail to stop her unemployment. And the thing is, it might have cost him a few hundred bucks on his unemployment rates, but the money was coming from the state, not from him. If he had any understanding of the system he’d know that it was only a few bucks to him but ten THOUSAND bucks to us.

Either he’s evil and trying to ruin us, or he’s a complete moron who doesn’t understand how the system works. Before the appeal hearing, I might have guessed moron, but after all the lies, it has to be evil.

Anyhow, we will be accepting donations, because we have to pay back the unemployment money they paid us for the last 4 months. Talk about adding insult to injury!

But truthfully, we will be fine. We will even be fine financially. It’s a temporary (and brief) setback. And in the end, I can still say that I never got a DIME from the government, ever. When I was laid off back in the 90’s, they wouldn’t let me have unemployment because I signed up for classes. Now, we’re paying back what we got for Jenna, with interest I’m sure.

I can preserve my pristine record of never getting a handout. I hope he’s happy with his 3.2% UE rate instead of it going to 3.3%.

And yes, I did tag this post in the category “Gay Stuff.” LOL

Why is federal funding of abortion wrong?

Imagine if you will a Republican majority in Congress that decided federal funds should be used to prevent homosexual couples from adopting children. Republicans are generally opposed to homosexuals being allowed to adopt, and Democrats are generally supportive of it. Democrat’s conscience tells them that this is discrimination and that it’s wrong, and they CERTAINLY shouldn’t have THEIR tax dollars going towards such an initiative.

Hmmmmmm.

Republicans, and more importantly, Christians, believe that abortion is murder of a baby. In fact, ALL scientific fact and evidence supports this belief. There is not one single scientific argument that could ever be used to prove that a “fetus” is NOT a baby. Separate blood types, DNA, heartbeats, brainwaves… fetuses don’t share any of those things with the mother. It’s a seperate entity. And by genetic definition, it is HUMAN. If it’s a seperate HUMAN entity scientifically speaking, then how can anyone think it’s ok to kill?

Well, that’s irrelevant to the Democrats, because they’ve made it a PRIVACY issue, something that has virtually nothing to do with anything. We can’t prevent abortion because that violates the mother’s privacy? What? So by that logic we shouldn’t be allowed to prevent animal cruelty or serial killing so long as it’s occurring on private property.

Regardless, abortion goes against the conscience of a MAJORITY of Americans. THUS, we shouldn’t have to PAY for it.

End of argument.

Whatever else can be said about the foolhardy healthcare reform bills they are planning to vote on at 1:00 AM the week before Christmas when everyone’s asleep (hmmm again), we can say for sure that it will change our country forever.

Those of you who are for it, are you REALLY confident that this cloak-and-dagger bill is going to make things BETTER?

Climate Summit Blizzard.

They are experiencing heavy snow and ice in Copenhagen, just in time for the hand-wringing Climate Cult’s arrival.

I love it when nature says “Neener Neener Neener.”

I don’t know about you, but my skepticism of the global warming “science” has really been bolstered by the fact they were cooking the numbers.

They keep talking about the “fact” that there is consensus, and the “need” for consensus. Isn’t consensus, BY DEFINITION, the opposite of science?

Whatever.

If you want to understand global warming, follow the money trail.

My logic was that just 30 years ago, scientists were SURE that the Earth was about to freeze into a solid chunk of ice, and they were actively attempting to MELT the polar ice caps.

Global Warming Scientists Cooking the Books

As it turns out, some prominent scientists who advocate global warming have been busted basically cooking all the numbers, trying to stifle any opposing thought, and just all around politicizing global warming. Like I’m surprised.

CRU, University of Pennsylvania, and several other prominent global warming “scientific” research centers are implicated in the scandal.

Now, in much of the mainstream media, you won’t find much on this topic. You’ll have to type in “Climategate” into Google and you’ll discover that most of the articles have been published in the UK. Hmmm. Very interesting.

ANYHOW, the long and the short is, the “scientists” were fudging the numbers, actively trying to prevent anti-global warming scientists from being published in scientific journals, CHEERING the death of one of the prominent anti-global warming scientists, and talking about “just how in the heck are we going to keep people from finding out that global warming stopped several years ago.”

Not making this up.

If you still think global warming is bringing on the destruction of planet Earth, you should consider looking up gullible in the dictionary. I hear that Webster decided to remove it.

So my question is this.

If Democrats want my tax money to pay for something I believe is immoral, shouldn’t the Democrat taxpayers have to pay for something for me that THEY think is immoral? I’m thinking the government should hand out fully automatic machine guns to all Americans.

I’m pro-gun, and I think an armed society is a polite society. I certainly don’t have any girly notion that guns are bad. Democrats are always whining and wussing (yes, I did make up a new word) about guns, and I’d imagine they’d be pretty ticked if their tax dollars were spent arming people.

Then I thought about it some more. I believe a “fetus” is a baby, and now they’re planning to use MY money to kill babies. The gun idea isn’t really equivalent, because they are killing people and I’m just getting a new toy.

My second plan is to have taxpayer funding of mass-killing of homosexuals. (I hope you’re smart enough to get that I’m being sarcastic) A large percentage of the country seems to have issues with them, so let’s make it fair. You get to use my money to kill babies, but Conservatives get to use YOUR money to kill gay people.

Ridiculous, right?

That’s what we’ve come to in this country. Whatever bull-headedness W had is nothing compared with what the Democrats are up to now. Republicans have been completely shut out of the process.

But Pete, W took us to war that we all disagreed with!

Wrong. W had the backing of congress, and backing of the vast majority of Americans before invading Iraq. You just forgot you were in support of it because the spin doctors have been twisting the message for so long.

Stop rewriting history. Free insurance is not going to be free, you idiots.

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are going to take this country to its knees before this is all over. I fear for our children.

A day doesn’t go by without a news editorial about how anyone who disagrees with Obama does so out of deep racial feelings. I read one recently where the guy claimed people were acting racist even though they weren’t aware they were – it was subconscious.

Are these people serious?

Obama IS the first (partially) black president.

Obama IS NOT the first president to have people vehemently disagree with his policies.

Weren’t the rest of you present the past 8 years while people called W a retard, 9/11 mastermind, terrorist, idiot, etc. etc. etc.?! Were all of the people who called Bush names racist against white people?

Obama could NEVER have been elected if a crapload of white people hadn’t voted for him.

The REST of us white people dislike Obama. And guess what? I feel EXACTLY the same way about Hillary, and John Edwards, and Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. I am against their idiotic policies, not against their color or gender.

Why can’t I disagree with a policy without being labeled (by everyone including Jimmy Carter) as a racist?

Screw you, race-baiting morons.

I know this is an outrageous idea. I hope Obama and Gates don’t gang up on Crowley and beat him senseless. You know how those gangs of Harvard grads can be.

Anyhow, the funniest part of this kegger idea (aside from the fact that Obama was an idiot for shooting his mouth off in the first place) is that it’s ticked off locals who are upset about the choice of beer.

Locals think that they should serve Sam Adams, since the incident occurred in Boston. Obama said he was going to be drinking Bud Light, which many realized is no longer a domestic brand. Should the president really be drinking foreign beer? That would be like letting Toyota make the presidential limo!

Gates has already stated that he won’t let bygones be bygones unless he gets an apology from Crowley. Crowley has already stated that he will never apologize because he is not a racist and was following police procedures perfectly. Obama is simply there because he couldn’t resist jumping on the race bandwagon.

The really funny and tragically ironic part of the whole Gates-Gate was that Gates really believes that he is above the law because he’s a Harvard professor with lots of money. He’s not really upset that he got arrested because of his race… he’s upset because he’s an elitist who got embarrassed because of his actions.

Gates really picked the wrong cop to accuse of racism (Crowley was picked by a black man to teach officers how NOT to racially profile). He picked the wrong good samaritan to accuse of racism (the woman who called in the “break-in” and NEVER mentioned race).

Basically, he couldn’t have looked like a bigger bozo unless of course he was the President of the United States and decided to shoot his mouth off, exposing his true racial feelings while commenting on a situation he had no personal knowledge about.

Let’s hope the racial harmony kegger solves 250 years of racial tension.