johnjyuuu

Almost nothing about any reality TV show is real. It's all scripted.

He was interviewed recently about getting back into TV and movies or tour doing stand-up out of necessity since he lost a lot of money in his 2 divorces. His TV show on CBS was cancelled earlier this year and he's had issues with alcohol for a long time. I didn't know much at all about him and his marriages until I read up on him. Married his 1st wife in the 80's, got caught having affair with a waitress (who sued him for giving her herpes), got divorced, got married again (to his son's nanny who was pregnant), then divorced again in 2008. He said in an interview last year he could no longer afford his ranch http://www.trulia.com/property/3068602901-1100-Wall-Rd-Napa-CA-94558 in Napa and had to list it for sale. It was listed for $35,000,000 in 2012 and is now listed for $30,000,000. Surely he has a good chunk of equity in it (probably around $8,000,000-10,000,000) but those mortgage payments must be ridiculous ($150,000 a month). Here's his house he lived in this year http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2440-Paradise-Dr-Belvedere-Tiburon-CA-94920/19267969_zpid/. Pretty modest at 2600 square feet, even though it's worth a lot due to the location. Sadly, I think issues with $ drove him to suicide. RIP.

He was interviewed recently about getting back into TV and movies or tour doing stand-up out of necessity since he lost a lot of money in his 2 divorces. His TV show on CBS was cancelled earlier this year and he's had issues with alcohol for a long time. I also didn't know much at all about him and his marriages. Married his 1st wife in the 80's, got caught having affair with a waitress (who sued him for giving her herpes), got divorced, got married again (to his son's nanny who was pregnant), then divorced again in 2008. He said in an interview last year he could no longer afford his ranch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKWmFWRVLlU Mostly for men but the last 1:30 applies to women.

I'm not really sure about the answer to your question, but I do know a lot of information is readily available with just an internet connection and in some cases, a subscription to a background check company. I live in Pennsylvania and there is a online database called UJS (Unified Judicial System) Portal where you can look up anyone in the state and see their entire criminal history (except convictions which have been expunged). I also have a subscription to a website called BeenVerified which is a background check company (It's $39 a year). There are probably better sites out there, but BeenVerified is pretty good if you want to find information about someone. All you need is someones name and an idea of where they live or their age (assuming their name isn't John Smith, in which case you'd need a little more info to ensure you have the right person) and you can find out a lot more about them. You can find someone's addresses (present & past - including dates they lived in each place), age, relatives, associates (roommates, gf/bf, etc.) phone numbers (present & past), criminal background, liens & judgments, bankruptcy filings, social media accounts, and licenses (FAA, controlled substance, sporting permit, weapons permits, watercraft, etc.). Whenever you apply for a credit card/mortgage/car loan/etc., a credit check is performed. You are entitled to 1 free credit report a year from each of the 3 major credit reporting agencies so you could even check your detailed credit report yourself if you wanted. Credit reports are typically very detailed and can give a potential employer a lot of information about your finances and whether or not, to some extent, you are trustworthy.

Serious question: Is there any bias or prejudice involved in the process? Is there any politics involved in the vetting? Well Judges are just normal people in black robes so i'd say it depends. While Judges are supposed to be fair and impartial, in my experience, this is not always the case. In the event a Judge rules in a biased or prejudicial way, his/her ruling can be appealed from the district court to the court of appeals and in some cases, all the way up to the US Supreme Court (if the Supreme Court decides your matter is important enough to take up their time). From a historical perspective, the US Supreme Court was certainly not unbiased, as in 1857 the Chief Justice himself (the highest ranking Judge in the entire United States) ruled against an african american man and wrote that african americans were an inferior race and as such...as "beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." But then again, some of the men who founded the United States and even some who served as President of the United States owned slaves, so they were hypocritical to say the least.

I am an attorney (not that that matters to answer this). Strict scrutiny refers to the highest (most stringent) standard of review when the government takes action (law or policy) which either infringes on one's constitutional rights or when government action restricts one race (or religion/sex/etc.) more than others. In order for governmental action to survive "strict scrutiny," there must be a compelling interest for the government to take such action, the law must be narrowly tailored (no broader than necessary), and lastly must be the least restrictive means for achieving the interest. If a law/policy fails the strict scrutiny test, it is deemed unconstitutional (a violation of one's (or a group's) fundamental liberty interest) protected by the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Laws/policies/ordinances are rarely challenged as unconstitutional because the costs (attorney's fees) generally outweigh any benefit to the individual(s) challenging them and laws/policies/ordinances are usually carefully thought out to avoid potential Constitutional issues down the road.

There is no god. If there was a god, things like this wouldn't happen. http://www.lovelydisgrace.com/2011/09/just-another-victim-of-fire.html

Ya George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, why don't you ask the descendants of the hundreds of slaves they owned how great they were? If there was no oil there, the US wouldn't give a shit about Iraq. $ > morality

It's unfortunate that people died but it's people like you that unfortunately make up a large % of the US population. good old USA land of the capitalists and home of the undereducated taxpayers

There's more to September 11th 2001 than terrorism. Larry Silverstein was the guy who held the lease on the 2 towers that were hit...here's an interesting timeline July 2001 Silverstein leases 2 towers August 2001 Silverstein insures both towers September both towers are struck by planes and collapse He actually had the balls to argue in court that each plane was a separate occurrence so that he could collect double the insurance $ (a judge denied this) but he still was paid over 4 billion in insurance proceeds. Oh and he did a PBS interview where he talks about making the decision to "pull it" (WTC 7) on Sept 11th 2001. Pull it, in demolition terms, means implode. WTC7 was a building close to the 2 towers which had minor damage from the others collapsing. How is it that they setup all the explosives in a few hours? Pictures from the WTC7 rubble show a neat pile of rubble and absolutely no damage to the surround buildings, an indication of an implosion and not an uncontrolled collapse. The US Govt is tight when it comes to education/healthcare but when it comes to military/defense contractors they have a blank check, and they've spent hundreds of billions in the last decade and will continue to do so until the "war on terror" ends, which is never. Most people don't know this but there are more US defense contractors (those paid by US govt to secure/rebuild Iraq) in Iraq than actual US troops. "War" is big business and if there is no enemy there is no business. Not to mention that a little outfit called NORAD (North American Aerospace defense command) whose sole purpose is to defend US airspace launched exactly 0 planes on Sept 11th 2001. Call me a conspiracy theorist but all the evidence stinks and quite often if you follow the money you find the truth.

There's an interesting PBS interview with Larry Silverstein about (lessee of WTC towers) WTC 7. He talks about making the call to "pull it" which in demolition terms means implode it, on Sept. 11th 2001 because it was damaged (slightly) when the other buildings fell. From all the evidence i've seen WTC 7 was imploded and it's crazy to think they somehow set this up by the afternoon of Sept. 11 2001. He later backed off this comment and said he meant "pull them out" as in the firemen in WTC 7.

If you haven't already, you MUST check out a documentary called Microcosmos. It's a really incredible nature documentary primarily focused on insects.

PBR, like Natural ice/light (natty) are disgusting no matter what you put them in.

I'd be worried about this but the main equalizer for the age difference is whether or not you have a good job. If you have a good back story (good career) then you'll seem like less of a creepster at the family get together/christmas/thanksgiving dinner table but you're fighting an uphill battle either way. I'm 27 and I guess i'd date a 19 year old but just for fun as surely we'd be light years apart intellectually. I think "mature 19 year old" is an oxymoron.