PDA

View Full Version : Union thugs in Michigan



luvmylabs23139
12-11-2012, 06:28 PM
What a bunch of thugs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=u_F3oev06i0

mngundog
12-11-2012, 06:57 PM
Who got hit first? The video got stopped at about 36 seconds (edited), then at 37 seconds the guy who is bent over comes back up throwing punches. I would love to see why the guy was slumped over in the first place before the edit. Is there an unedited version?

murral stark
12-11-2012, 07:02 PM
Who got hit first? The video got stopped at about 36 seconds (edited), then at 37 seconds the guy who is bent over comes back up throwing punches. I would love to see why the guy was slumped over in the first place before the edit. Is there an unedited version?

Probably not.

HPL
12-11-2012, 09:24 PM
Check out Fox News. Apparently the guy getting smacked is one of their reporters.

mngundog
12-11-2012, 09:33 PM
Check out Fox News. Apparently the guy getting smacked is one of their reporters.
The guy is Steven Crowder, go to you-tube and look at his videos, that will explain enough, he went in looking to provoke a fight. With the editing can't tell who got hit first.

murral stark
12-11-2012, 09:34 PM
He's talking about the guy that smacked the dude in the face. He was bent over like he had been kicked or punched or something, then comes up swinging. It appears he was provoked, but that was edited out to make it look like the union guy just punched him for no reason.

HPL
12-11-2012, 09:57 PM
As a Michigan resident, I am embarrassed by the behavior of the people at our capitol. If you want to protest, fine. Protest. Civilly.

I love the guy yelling in the background about killing people with a gun, and having done so before. Classy.

How about the big guy who keeps politely asking crowder to back up. Wonder if he kisses his children with that mouth.

mngundog
12-11-2012, 10:00 PM
Anyone have the unedited video yet?

road kill
12-12-2012, 06:22 AM
So, it's all right with you that this man was physically assaulted because he disagrees with DA UNION??????


Nuff said.............

BonMallari
12-12-2012, 06:55 AM
where are the police in all of this...just like in Wisconsin, how many of those that are protesting are actually Michigan residents...I think that most of the RTF'ers here agree in individual states rights, BUT when a state decides thru a legal process (vote or legislation), why cant everyone just leave them alone...I mean if you don't like that Washington state allows same sex marriage, then stay the heck away from that state, if Michigan wants to be a RTW state then let them be, and if you dont like it dont move there

Franco
12-12-2012, 07:33 AM
Bon, over 500 Michigan State Police troopers were mobilized to prevent the protesters from causing too much damage, and to prevent loss of life. The protesters' actions of violence have now endangered other citizens by reducing the police force in other localities. How selfless of them.

Had the protesters not become violent and unruly, the State Police would not have mobilized the way they did. Peaceful protests are simply policed by Lansing PD and local officers.

And, to answer the other question, I read about a group from Baltimore who bussed in, as well as the Rev. Jesse Jackson. Michael Moore is also throwing his substantial weight around.


As well as Obama was there to agitate, sticking his nose in the state's business.

Daniel J Simoens
12-12-2012, 10:01 AM
"No way union guys took that tent down that fast."

road kill
12-12-2012, 10:14 AM
"No way union guys took that tent down that fast."
Unless tips were involved!!!!:cool:

mngundog
12-12-2012, 10:20 AM
http://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/official_portrait_of_president_reagan_1981.jpg?w=4 68

Ken Bora
12-12-2012, 10:24 AM
So hard to keep up with the ever changing platforms of today’s political parties.
All this time I thought the Democratic Party was pro-choice. Silly me!

road kill
12-12-2012, 10:28 AM
So hard to keep up with the ever changing platforms of today’s political parties.
All this time I thought the Democratic Party was pro-choice. Silly me!
Good morning Mr Ken.
Yes, the secular progressives are PRO-CHOICE, as long as your choice is what they want it to be.......


Just tryin' to help!!!

Ken Bora
12-12-2012, 10:40 AM
http://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/official_portrait_of_president_reagan_1981.jpg?w=4 68


so true, the guy that led the actors is the same that "poop canned":cool: (pc edit) the air traffic controlers.

Buzz
12-12-2012, 10:47 AM
Oh no! The horror!

mngundog
12-12-2012, 11:02 AM
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd138/eeberry/unionmembers.jpg

Pals
12-12-2012, 11:09 AM
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd138/eeberry/unionmembers.jpg

And who did they punch in the face? (Excluding the Stooges~as they enjoyed beating on each other) I can't not even believe that ANY of you are condoning this behavior. Civilized people do not punch each other in the face, they do not destroy property and THEY DON'T BAWL LIKE BABIES ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE STARTING IT. Grow up.

menmon
12-12-2012, 11:13 AM
This RTW stuff effects all of you....don't have to be a union worker to be effected by it. Can let you go for no reason at all.

road kill
12-12-2012, 11:22 AM
This RTW stuff effects all of you....don't have to be a union worker to be effected by it. Can let you go for no reason at all.
And with the union, you CAN'T be let go, even with good reason.

Lot's of people used to do lots of things, then they learned better and moved on.
What's your point?

menmon
12-12-2012, 11:39 AM
You just voted away your rights.....in other words gave more right to the employer. Why would you do that? Not very smart if you work for a company. If you own the company...makes it easier for you to terminate good folks...not just deadbeats

mngundog
12-12-2012, 11:40 AM
And who did they punch in the face? (Excluding the Stooges~as they enjoyed beating on each other) I can't not even believe that ANY of you are condoning this behavior. Civilized people do not punch each other in the face, they do not destroy property and THEY DON'T BAWL LIKE BABIES ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE STARTING IT. Grow up.
http://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/crowder.jpg
Fox news reporter punches union member, the missing frame. :D

menmon
12-12-2012, 11:41 AM
I actually know why...you have been spun this story that the unions have destroyed your jobs and you believe it.

zeus3925
12-12-2012, 12:02 PM
Back to the days of the robber barons. Hope you all will enjoy your minimum wage jobs and debt to the company store.

Daniel J Simoens
12-12-2012, 12:05 PM
an extended arm doesn't indicate a punch, sorry

mngundog
12-12-2012, 12:15 PM
an extended arm doesn't indicate a punch, sorry
Maybe the fact that the guy got knocked down might help, sorry, if your a reporter and start swinging don't be surprised if the guy swings back.

Daniel J Simoens
12-12-2012, 12:53 PM
Maybe the fact that the guy got knocked down might help, sorry, if you're a reporter and start swinging don't be surprised if the guy swings back.
another baseless claim of swinging. we have no idea why the guy got 'knocked down.' for all we know he was drunk and/or stoned.

at the 0:39 mark you can hear Crowder say 'You just assualted me.'

mngundog
12-12-2012, 01:58 PM
another baseless claim of swinging. we have no idea why the guy got 'knocked down.' for all we know he was drunk and/or stoned.

at the 0:39 mark you can hear Crowder say 'You just assualted me.'
Not baseless when its a still frame shows Chowder with one fist extended the other fist protecting his face, standing over top of a hunched over guy. Reasonable logic leads be to believe that the guy in the boxers stance probably hit the guy doubled over at the waste who came back swinging, based on the video.

Daniel J Simoens
12-12-2012, 02:05 PM
you need a better still frame than the one you posted above to make any possible reasonable observations.

mngundog
12-12-2012, 02:12 PM
you need a better still frame than the one you posted above to make any possible reasonable observations.
Great point to show that the guy in the boxers stance didn't hit the guy doubled the entire clip should have been shown, instead Fox only played an edited version, wonder why that is? I also wonder who they chose to cover the bottom part of the screen.
http://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/crowder.jpg

HPL
12-12-2012, 02:30 PM
With all the folks there I guarantee that if Crowder had actually thrown the first punch or even the second, someone would have gotten it on their iPhone ad it would be all over the net.

Daniel J Simoens
12-12-2012, 02:34 PM
what's mr union guy's side of the story?? has he come out and said he was provoked/pushed/punched????

JS
12-12-2012, 03:58 PM
And with the union, you CAN'T be let go, even with good reason.

Lot's of people used to do lots of things, then they learned better and moved on.
What's your point?

Now, Come on. That's a crock and you know it.

JS

JS
12-12-2012, 04:07 PM
Did you guys hear there was yet another mass shooting last night? A guy with a weapon in an Oregon shopping mall. I don't know all the details but we gotta do something about these guns. Something about it in the news every day. Despicable. I was in Chicago 2 weekends ago and there were seven (7) deaths by gunshot that weekend.

Oh, wait. We know there are hundreds of thousands of hunters using guns every day in a responsible way, that never make the news. Guess that wouldn't BE news.

I wonder if, day in and day out, unions conduct business in an orderly manner without incident. Or do they always picket and riot on the street and get out of hand? That's what I saw on the news so that must be what they're about.

JS

Uncle Bill
12-12-2012, 04:26 PM
Here's another source for what happened. Might be a little cleaner photography. Let's see if it will copy and then work.

UB


Union Thugs Shout “I’ll Kill a Mother F***** With a Gun!” While Assaulting Opponents

By: Ben Howe (http://www.retrievertraining.net/users/aglanon/) (Diary (http://www.retrievertraining.net/aglanon/)) | December 11th, 2012 at 03:44 PM | 69 (http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/11/union-thugs-shout-ill-kill-a-mother-f-ker-with-a-gun-while-assaulting-opponents/#disqus_thread)
RESIZE: AAA

http://www.redstate.com/files/2012/12/Screen-Shot-2012-12-11-at-3.43.07-PM.png (http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/11/union-thugs-shout-ill-kill-a-mother-f-ker-with-a-gun-while-assaulting-opponents/screen-shot-2012-12-11-at-3-43-07-pm/)
*UPDATE* Dana Loesch (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/twitter.com/dloesch) has set up a donation page (http://danaloeschradio.com/donors-offers-for-info-leading-to-arrest-of-union-thug/) to help put together a reward to locate the perpetrator of the assault so that he may be reported to the proper authorities.
Steven Crowder (https://twitter.com/scrowder) is in Michigan recording the protests that are taking place. At some point, as Moe Lane noted earlier (http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/11/union-michigan-violence/), the crowd started tearing down the AFP tent that was there. When Crowder attempted to intervene, he was assaulted by multiple protestors with one protestor even shouting that he would “kill a mother f__ker with a gun.”
See the incredible video below:

Obviously the video didn't make the trip. Let's try this approach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_F3oev06i0&feature=player_embedded


That played quite clearly for me, and from what I saw, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone at fault other than the unionista with a chip on his shoulder.

UB

mngundog
12-12-2012, 04:49 PM
Interesting UB according to another report it was the fox camera man that shouted that phrase about killing with a gun.


In the background, Fox News cameraman is heard screaming: “I’ll kill twenty %$##@’s, I gotta gun….”

Uncle Bill
12-12-2012, 05:12 PM
Interesting UB according to another report it was the fox camera man that shouted that phrase about killing with a gun.

As a union sympathizer, you may wish to believe that, but having been in the broadcasting profession for over 50 years, I'd be willing to bet a large sum, that was NOT the case.

Back in the time when I covered some "REAL" unionistas...like during the milk dumping era and the thugs the Farmers Union had "picketing"...I had to bite my tongue on several occasions. We were educated to not allow the crude antics of a frothing-at-the-mouth batch of fools to drag us into the fracas, for we knew the 'public' eye would treat us far more harshly than some of the proletariat hurling the epithets, objects, and threats.

UB

murral stark
12-12-2012, 05:49 PM
And with the union, you CAN'T be let go, even with good reason.

Lot's of people used to do lots of things, then they learned better and moved on.
What's your point?

BRAVO SIERRA!!!!!

If there is good reason to terminate someone, they get terminated, even in a union environment.

mngundog
12-12-2012, 05:59 PM
As a union sympathizer, you may wish to believe that, but having been in the broadcasting profession for over 50 years, I'd be willing to bet a large sum, that was NOT the case.

Back in the time when I covered some "REAL" unionistas...like during the milk dumping era and the thugs the Farmers Union had "picketing"...I had to bite my tongue on several occasions. We were educated to not allow the crude antics of a frothing-at-the-mouth batch of fools to drag us into the fracas, for we knew the 'public' eye would treat us far more harshly than some of the proletariat hurling the epithets, objects, and threats.

UB
Some news organizations still hold that sentiment, and some entertainment channels (Faux news for one), will send in a comedian to try to insight violence. In this case it backfired because the comedian started the brawl, so am I going to blindly trust the word of a comedian trying to pick a fight, hardly.
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd138/eeberry/unionmembers.jpg

Daniel J Simoens
12-12-2012, 06:00 PM
BRAVO SIERRA!!!!!

If there is good reason to terminate someone, they get terminated, even in a union environment.

I guess smoking pot and drinking on the job aren't good enough reasons.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hzyRjX_pX5c/0.jpg

http://now.msn.com/chrysler-reinstates-workers-fired-for-drinking-smoking-weed-on-the-job

murral stark
12-12-2012, 06:14 PM
I guess smoking pot and drinking on the job aren't good enough reasons.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hzyRjX_pX5c/0.jpg

http://now.msn.com/chrysler-reinstates-workers-fired-for-drinking-smoking-weed-on-the-job

Trust me, we have terminated people here for a lot less than that. And yes it is a union plant. I can't speak to the other industries, only the one I work in. I work right in your back yard just so you know.

road kill
12-13-2012, 07:49 AM
Who is Clint Tarver?????

BuddyJ
12-13-2012, 07:52 AM
BRAVO SIERRA!!!!!

If there is good reason to terminate someone, they get terminated, even in a union environment.

I guess smokin dope and drinking during lunch break doesn't count since Chrysler had to reinstate the employees it fired for that not so long ago.

jacduck
12-13-2012, 08:48 AM
I guess smokin dope and drinking during lunch break doesn't count since Chrysler had to reinstate the employees it fired for that not so long ago.

Probably in the contract so you should not be surprised at anything union people do particularly in MI. Then when sales slow down and a staffing cut is dictated the union people get 95% of wages.... come on how can that be? No wonder the cost of vehicles and quality went in opposite directions. No wonder most of the US is buying foreign cars.

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 09:10 AM
Good morning Mr Ken.
Yes, the secular progressives are PRO-CHOICE, as long as your choice is what they want it to be.......


Just tryin' to help!!!


ahhhh, I am pickin up what your layin' down now. so they are kinda like the national workers party in Germany in the early 1920's? pesky grade school history classes. Yes Mr. Carter you were right, I am using what you taught and I complained about having to learn, all those years ago. Now what was that other name the German national workers party went by? hhhmmmmm ? ? ?

road kill
12-13-2012, 09:16 AM
Who is Clint Tarver?????
All these knowledgable people, no one knows who Clint Tarver is????

Why doesn't this surprise me????

C'mon Murral, tell us about him..........

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 09:25 AM
did you see Stan, just now on the morning news (fair and balanced) a fund has been set up for him to help replace what was smashed to bits??
a cool you tube link so the union fans can see who your ilk thumpulated -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzfwj7Eb8cA&feature=player_embedded

road kill
12-13-2012, 09:26 AM
did you see Stan, just now on the morning news (fail and balanced) a fund has been set up for him to help replace what was smashed to bits??
a cool you tube link so the union fans can see who your ilk thumpulated -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzfwj7Eb8cA&feature=player_embedded#!

YABUTT!!!!:cool:


C'mon you progressives, tell us how this is OK..............blame it on someone else.........you know the old

HhhHhEEeEeeSSsSSsSTTtTtTtAaaAaarrRrrRrrRrTttTtTtTT ttEeEeeEeeDdDdDDDd IiIiittTttT whine.

Hey Ken, did you hear the names they called him as they destroyed everything he owned?

Pathetic.

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 10:11 AM
..... Now what was that other name the German national workers party went by? hhhmmmmm ? ? ?


Hey Ken, did you hear the names the called him as they destroyed everything he owned?

Pathetic.


underlined,
anyone?
cant be just me :rolleyes:

zeus3925
12-13-2012, 10:16 AM
A blast from the past--
10015

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 10:25 AM
A blast from the past--
10015


and this is the perfect time line example of how a political party can evolve in a short dozen years. a "workers" union you had to pay to join morfed into the nazi.

menmon
12-13-2012, 10:28 AM
A blast from the past--
10015

See they are jealous of their union working friends good fortune....Hitler also was jealous of the jews good fortune.

road kill
12-13-2012, 10:31 AM
See they are jealous of their union working friends good fortune....Hitler also was jealous of the jews good fortune.
Using your logic (or lack of) did the union guys destroy the hot dog vendors livelihood because they were jealous that he did it on his own?

I knew you guys wouldn't address it.
Just try to marginalize anyone who sees things different than you.

Racist, nazi etc.
It's all you got....................

JS
12-13-2012, 10:50 AM
Using your logic (or lack of) did the union guys destroy the hot dog vendors livelihood because they were jealous that he did it on his own?

I knew you guys wouldn't address it.
Just try to marginalize anyone who sees things different than you.

Racist, nazi etc.
It's all you got....................

Possibly it's because none of US were there?

Speaking only for myself, I am more interested in learning all the facts around a situation rather than just "filling in the blanks" in order to voice an opinion. ;-)

Helps me make fewer mistakes. :cool:

Maybe someone can fill us in on all the details???

More than one side to most stories regards,

JS

menmon
12-13-2012, 10:52 AM
Using your logic (or lack of) did the union guys destroy the hot dog vendors livelihood because they were jealous that he did it on his own?

I knew you guys wouldn't address it.
Just try to marginalize anyone who sees things different than you.

Racist, nazi etc.
It's all you got....................

How did a hot dog vendor become part of it.....usually hot dog vendors benefits from higher union wages...instead of buying one they buy two

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 10:57 AM
How did a hot dog vendor become part of it.....usually hot dog vendors benefits from higher union wages...instead of buying one they buy two

did you see the news at all? they totaly destroyed his cart on the same day they smacked the carp out of that fox news contributor. when the new law was pased. they guy was just on his spot selling wienies. did you watch my vid above. just a regular nice guy. they wrecked his buggy and called him racist names. and he was just on his spot selling wienies. that is how a vendor became a part of it. Gosh man try and keep up!!!!!

road kill
12-13-2012, 11:02 AM
Possibly it's because none of US were there?

Speaking only for myself, I am more interested in learning all the facts around a situation rather than just "filling in the blanks" in order to voice an opinion. ;-)

Helps me make fewer mistakes. :cool:

Maybe someone can fill us in on all the details???

More than one side to most stories regards,

JS
Well then, why don't you search it your self and tell us the facts!!!:D

Or are you waiting for someone to do it for you????;-)

menmon
12-13-2012, 11:03 AM
missed it...sorry

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 11:17 AM
missed it...sorry

this guy, on his normal spot was set up under a HUGE tent.
http://img.youtube.com/vi/jzfwj7Eb8cA/0.jpg

and so the union fellers who were a bit miffed thought he might have been at fault instead of the local government and turned him into this
http://www.ironicsurrealism.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/clints-hot-dog-stand-lansing-michigan-decimated-by-union-thugs-dec-2012.jpg

this local news break brung to you by wet nose retrievers and RTFox News :cool:

road kill
12-13-2012, 11:20 AM
this guy, on his normal spot was set up under a HUGE tent.
http://img.youtube.com/vi/jzfwj7Eb8cA/0.jpg

and so the union fellers who were a bit miffed thought he might have been at fault instead of the local government and turned him into this
http://www.ironicsurrealism.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/clints-hot-dog-stand-lansing-michigan-decimated-by-union-thugs-dec-2012.jpg

this local news break brung to you by wet nose retrievers and RTFox News :cool:
Oh, but Ken, this wasn't reported on the state run media, say it ain't so????


Let me ask our progressive friends, is this news worthy or not?

If so, why was it ignored?????:cool:
(rhetorical question, I already know why and so do you!)

menmon
12-13-2012, 11:21 AM
Looks like a wrong to me

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 11:21 AM
note how they all have hands in pockets, not a one would even help him pick up his gear.
I just saw on the news feed a politition with an "H"name?? is going to pay for all his stuff?
do not know local or national? it was the scrawl and I am typing right now, so crap. but some politition is gonna.
cool!

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 11:25 AM
Looks like a wrong to me
I very much like it when you and I agree on stuff.

road kill
12-13-2012, 11:29 AM
Looks like a wrong to me
Gotta check the "Daily Koz" talking points first?????:D

caryalsobrook
12-13-2012, 11:41 AM
Possibly it's because none of US were there?

Speaking only for myself, I am more interested in learning all the facts around a situation rather than just "filling in the blanks" in order to voice an opinion. ;-)

Helps me make fewer mistakes. :cool:

Maybe someone can fill us in on all the details???

More than one side to most stories regards,

JS

It takes my wildest dreams to come up with other sides to the story.
1. Maybe a moon beam came down and destroyed it.
But let's get real.
2. George Bush did it!

Maybe you can add to the list.

Ken Bora
12-13-2012, 11:57 AM
Maybe a moon beam came down and destroyed it..

it is so easy to type LOL but gosh that is genius!!! :D

menmon
12-13-2012, 12:15 PM
I'm pretty sure there are two sides but even if the vendor was wrong they should not have done that

HPL
12-13-2012, 12:46 PM
I'm pretty sure there are two sides but even if the vendor was wrong they should not have done that

I would REALLY LOVE to hear the thugs' side of why they destroyed a "workingman's" livelihood. Perhaps, since he owns his own business, they view him as part of the evil plutocracy.

JS
12-13-2012, 03:01 PM
Well then, why don't you search it your self and tell us the facts!!!:D

Or are you waiting for someone to do it for you????;-)

If I WERE going to voice an opinion, it certainly WOULD be my responsibility to search for the facts.

In the first place, I don't choose to spend all of my day on the interweb running down something to argue about. I normally only comment on something I can discuss somewhat intelligently. Otherwise, I read it and move on.

Secondly, I don't believe all the facts are available to ANY of us, anywhere we could search. I know that runs against human nature ... saying "I don't know" is a sign of weakness ingrained our culture, so we often tend to form opinions on whatever we DO know. What the video shows is ugly. We don't know what the video doesn't show.

For example, do we know for certain those guys were actually union guys and not just a bunch of thug, gangbanger bystanders out for a "good time"??? It wouldn't be the first time something was different than it appeared, now would it? These kind of things attract all kinds of spectator riff-raff and can easily get out of hand.

If I wanted to take the time to go back through POTUS posts over the past 3 or 4 months, I could probably come up with hundreds of claims and accusations that were subsequently debunked, but only after dozens of you had already jumped onto the dogpile.

Having said all that, let me be clear about MY feelings. What I saw on the video was disgusting and criminal regardless who the perps were and they should be prosecuted. BUT if I'm on the jury, I am going to listen to the facts before I decide.

Yes, of course there are jerks who carry union cards. There are sex offenders who coach and teach school. There are poachers who call themselves hunters. There are priests who molest little boys. There are cops who take bribes. There are bankers who will steal your money.

But I'll guarantee you one thing. If those ARE union guys, you will not see the UAW defending their actions. All this rhetoric that implies that unions exist to protect the slackers and the discipline problems is incorrect. Those type members are a bigger PITA to their union reps than they are to the company.

I don't know anything about the guys in someone's post who were smoking pot and got their jobs back. (neither do any of you, BTW) But I have been involved in enough disciplinary hearings to know that employees who warrant dismissal get dismissed. Period. Maybe a second chance, but rules are rules and are agreed to by the union.

On that note, I've also seen plenty of cases of an employee getting railroaded. Seeing that doesn't happen IS a role of the union; but not protecting thugs.

JS

road kill
12-13-2012, 03:36 PM
If I WERE going to voice an opinion, it certainly WOULD be my responsibility to search for the facts.

In the first place, I don't choose to spend all of my day on the interweb running down something to argue about. I normally only comment on something I can discuss somewhat intelligently. Otherwise, I read it and move on.

Secondly, I don't believe all the facts are available to ANY of us, anywhere we could search. I know that runs against human nature ... saying "I don't know" is a sign of weakness ingrained our culture, so we often tend to form opinions on whatever we DO know. What the video shows is ugly. We don't know what the video doesn't show.

For example, do we know for certain those guys were actually union guys and not just a bunch of thug, gangbanger bystanders out for a "good time"??? Stop, you're killin' me!! http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu294/saltydog235/ROFLMAO.jpg It wouldn't be the first time something was different than it appeared, now would it? These kind of things attract all kinds of spectator riff-raff and can easily get out of hand.

If I wanted to take the time to go back through POTUS posts over the past 3 or 4 months, I could probably come up with hundreds of claims and accusations that were subsequently debunked, but only after dozens of you had already jumped onto the dogpile.

Having said all that, let me be clear about MY feelings. What I saw on the video was disgusting and criminal regardless who the perps were and they should be prosecuted. BUT if I'm on the jury, I am going to listen to the facts before I decide.

Yes, of course there are jerks who carry union cards. There are sex offenders who coach and teach school. There are poachers who call themselves hunters. There are priests who molest little boys. There are cops who take bribes. There are bankers who will steal your money.

But I'll guarantee you one thing. If those ARE union guys, you will not see the UAW defending their actions. All this rhetoric that implies that unions exist to protect the slackers and the discipline problems is incorrect. Those type members are a bigger PITA to their union reps than they are to the company.

I don't know anything about the guys in someone's post who were smoking pot and got their jobs back. (neither do any of you, BTW) But I have been involved in enough disciplinary hearings to know that employees who warrant dismissal get dismissed. Period. Maybe a second chance, but rules are rules and are agreed to by the union.

On that note, I've also seen plenty of cases of an employee getting railroaded. Seeing that doesn't happen IS a role of the union; but not protecting thugs.

JS

OK..........

http://i717.photobucket.com/albums/ww173/prestonjjrtr/Smileys/SleepYawn03.gif

JS
12-13-2012, 04:06 PM
OK..........

http://i717.photobucket.com/albums/ww173/prestonjjrtr/Smileys/SleepYawn03.gif


Awesome! :lol: :lol: :lol:

How do I get that guy to hold still for a minute so I can look in his mouth? I think I got a glimpse of some feet in there from some previous discussions. ;-)

No I'm not going to go back and look it up regards, :cool:

JS

JS
12-13-2012, 04:14 PM
OK if you insist, here's just one:

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?89754-Last-Night-s-Debate

rboudet
12-13-2012, 04:42 PM
I dont get it, why would someone who took the risk to start a company not have the right to hire and fire who they want? Y'all make it sound like owners/bosses are looking for reasons to can people. It cost them a lot of money and time to hire and train new people. If you are a good employee and contribute to the company why do you need to be protected by union rules? You make it sound like upper mangement enjoys firing people for no reason. You dont get successfull in any business with a high turnover rate. If you can't do the job you should be sent down the road.

road kill
12-13-2012, 05:12 PM
OK if you insist, here's just one:

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?89754-Last-Night-s-Debate

That was a great one, thanks, that was the highlight of the Romney campaign.
I truly enjoyed that first debate.

Your issue with that is what, that I made the post???
Dude, I have lots of great posts, keep digging around, I appreciate a man trying to improve himself.

You should read all the stuff I posted about Governor Walker and all that ensued.
To the bitter dissapointment of many, I was dead nutz on!!!


BTW---surely a man of your stature has better things to do........or not!
I am flattered though!:D


Originally Posted by JS

If I WERE going to voice an opinion, it certainly WOULD be my responsibility to search for the facts.

In the first place, I don't choose to spend all of my day on the interweb running down something to argue about. I normally only comment on something I can discuss somewhat intelligently. Otherwise, I read it and move on.

Secondly, I don't believe all the facts are available to ANY of us, anywhere we could search. I know that runs against human nature ... saying "I don't know" is a sign of weakness ingrained our culture, so we often tend to form opinions on whatever we DO know. What the video shows is ugly. We don't know what the video doesn't show.

For example, do we know for certain those guys were actually union guys and not just a bunch of thug, gangbanger bystanders out for a "good time"??? Stop, you're killin' me!! http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu294/saltydog235/ROFLMAO.jpg It wouldn't be the first time something was different than it appeared, now would it? These kind of things attract all kinds of spectator riff-raff and can easily get out of hand.

If I wanted to take the time to go back through POTUS posts over the past 3 or 4 months, I could probably come up with hundreds of claims and accusations that were subsequently debunked, but only after dozens of you had already jumped onto the dogpile.

Having said all that, let me be clear about MY feelings. What I saw on the video was disgusting and criminal regardless who the perps were and they should be prosecuted. BUT if I'm on the jury, I am going to listen to the facts before I decide.

Yes, of course there are jerks who carry union cards. There are sex offenders who coach and teach school. There are poachers who call themselves hunters. There are priests who molest little boys. There are cops who take bribes. There are bankers who will steal your money.

But I'll guarantee you one thing. If those ARE union guys, you will not see the UAW defending their actions. All this rhetoric that implies that unions exist to protect the slackers and the discipline problems is incorrect. Those type members are a bigger PITA to their union reps than they are to the company.

I don't know anything about the guys in someone's post who were smoking pot and got their jobs back. (neither do any of you, BTW) But I have been involved in enough disciplinary hearings to know that employees who warrant dismissal get dismissed. Period. Maybe a second chance, but rules are rules and are agreed to by the union.

On that note, I've also seen plenty of cases of an employee getting railroaded. Seeing that doesn't happen IS a role of the union; but not protecting thugs.

JS

caryalsobrook
12-13-2012, 05:24 PM
If I WERE going to voice an opinion, it certainly WOULD be my responsibility to search for the facts.

In the first place, I don't choose to spend all of my day on the interweb running down something to argue about. I normally only comment on something I can discuss somewhat intelligently. Otherwise, I read it and move on.

Secondly, I don't believe all the facts are available to ANY of us, anywhere we could search. I know that runs against human nature ... saying "I don't know" is a sign of weakness ingrained our culture, so we often tend to form opinions on whatever we DO know. What the video shows is ugly. We don't know what the video doesn't show.

For example, do we know for certain those guys were actually union guys and not just a bunch of thug, gangbanger bystanders out for a "good time"??? It wouldn't be the first time something was different than it appeared, now would it? These kind of things attract all kinds of spectator riff-raff and can easily get out of hand.

If I wanted to take the time to go back through POTUS posts over the past 3 or 4 months, I could probably come up with hundreds of claims and accusations that were subsequently debunked, but only after dozens of you had already jumped onto the dogpile.

Having said all that, let me be clear about MY feelings. What I saw on the video was disgusting and criminal regardless who the perps were and they should be prosecuted. BUT if I'm on the jury, I am going to listen to the facts before I decide.

Yes, of course there are jerks who carry union cards. There are sex offenders who coach and teach school. There are poachers who call themselves hunters. There are priests who molest little boys. There are cops who take bribes. There are bankers who will steal your money.

But I'll guarantee you one thing. If those ARE union guys, you will not see the UAW defending their actions. All this rhetoric that implies that unions exist to protect the slackers and the discipline problems is incorrect. Those type members are a bigger PITA to their union reps than they are to the company.

I don't know anything about the guys in someone's post who were smoking pot and got their jobs back. (neither do any of you, BTW) But I have been involved in enough disciplinary hearings to know that employees who warrant dismissal get dismissed. Period. Maybe a second chance, but rules are rules and are agreed to by the union.

On that note, I've also seen plenty of cases of an employee getting railroaded. Seeing that doesn't happen IS a role of the union; but not protecting thugs.

JS

Two points I will make about your post. Not surprised at your line that it may have been some thugs just looking for trouble and not union members. True so let's take it as fact that it was a bunch of thugs looking for trouoble and not union members. If so then there were an awful lot of union members standing around watching it happen. MY opinion is that they are just as sorry as those that destroyed his property. You are certainly entitled to yours.

I understand your position that if both the company and the union agree that the employee should be terminated, then termination is justified. If union dissagrees then the employee was being railroaded. This definitely shows your unbiased and level handed judgement. I guess that if NYC would listen to you, they would not have teachers sitting in a room playing video games waiting to retire but not allowed into a classroom for fear of improper actions and to fire them would cost more, than keeping them til retirement, paying them a pension. I'm sure you think the system is worth it.

murral stark
12-13-2012, 07:08 PM
I guess smokin dope and drinking during lunch break doesn't count since Chrysler had to reinstate the employees it fired for that not so long ago.

I can only speak to my industry. What a person does when they are off work is their business, but when they are at work, no drinking or drugs will be tolerated. They would've been terminated on the spot where I work. It is clearly stated in the employee handbook that no alcohol or drugs are allowed on company property and will result in immediate termination. We terminated a guy for shooting off fireworks in the parking lot at break time. we don't tolerate bad behavior where I work. the union supported our termination and didn't even file a grievance because it was clearly a violation of the work rules expressly stated in the employee handbook. we have terminated people for coming in to work still hung over/drunk from the night before and the union supports our stance and doesn't fight the termination. That is only where I work that I have spoken of.

murral stark
12-13-2012, 09:16 PM
I don't think that part time employees should be required to pay union dues either. Since they are not reaping the beneifts of the union, full-time employees, they shouldn't have to pay the dues.

JS
12-13-2012, 10:01 PM
I understand your position that if both the company and the union agree that the employee should be terminated, then termination is justified. If union dissagrees then the employee was being railroaded. This definitely shows your unbiased and level handed judgement. I guess that if NYC would listen to you, they would not have teachers sitting in a room playing video games waiting to retire but not allowed into a classroom for fear of improper actions and to fire them would cost more, than keeping them til retirement, paying them a pension. I'm sure you think the system is worth it.

No, that is not at all what I meant to say.


I don't know anything about the guys in someone's post who were smoking pot and got their jobs back. (neither do any of you, BTW) But I have been involved in enough disciplinary hearings to know that employees who warrant dismissal get dismissed. Period. Maybe a second chance, but rules are rules and are agreed to by the union.

I have never heard of an instance where the union had to agree that an employee could be fired! When I said "the rules are agreed to by the union", I was referring to the working conditions agreed to in the negotiated contract. Those rules are accepted and anything that is not specifically addressed in the contract, or by law, is the discretion of the management.

When an employee violates a company rule that merits firing, the company fires the dude! The employee ... in our environment ... is entitled to a hearing with a union rep present, but the union has no say. That guy gets walked to the gate.

By being railroaded, I mean not guilty, set up, etc. in which the union would investigate and a grievance could be filed if it's felt the case has merit. The grievance would then eventually go before an arbitrator to be argued by the union rep and the company lawyer, much like a court trial. The arbitrator decides, just like a judge would. The union has no power other than to act as "attorney" and argue the case.

JS

zeus3925
12-13-2012, 11:27 PM
Permit me to echo what JS said. As a union local president and also as a steward, I had no power over firing an employee. When an employee screwed up we would go into a meeting with the employer and hear what the concern was. Often times if it was an egregious fault of the employee I would counsel the employee to voluntarily leave. I would then try to ease the person out with as smooth a process as possible. Angry people file law suits and I was not interested in provoking one of those. If the matter was not really that egregious, I would try to negotiate for a less severe consequence, thus saving a valued employee in the process. My function was to be an advocate for the member, but the right to fire rested solely with the employer.

caryalsobrook
12-14-2012, 07:57 AM
No, that is not at all what I meant to say.



I have never heard of an instance where the union had to agree that an employee could be fired! When I said "the rules are agreed to by the union", I was referring to the working conditions agreed to in the negotiated contract. Those rules are accepted and anything that is not specifically addressed in the contract, or by law, is the discretion of the management.

When an employee violates a company rule that merits firing, the company fires the dude! The employee ... in our environment ... is entitled to a hearing with a union rep present, but the union has no say. That guy gets walked to the gate.

By being railroaded, I mean not guilty, set up, etc. in which the union would investigate and a grievance could be filed if it's felt the case has merit. The grievance would then eventually go before an arbitrator to be argued by the union rep and the company lawyer, much like a court trial. The arbitrator decides, just like a judge would. The union has no power other than to act as "attorney" and argue the case.

JS

I could only read what you ACTUALLY SAID, not what you MEANT to say. I guess only your actions would demonstrate which is the most accurate. Referring back to a previous post of mine concerning Hostess, I SHOULD have said PROXIMATE CAUSE when saying the failure of agreement between company and Baker's Union was the cause of Hostess closing.

First of all let me say that i am not against unions per se. I am against unions set up with gov. laws that attempt to create a manopoly of labor across the whole economy, AFL-CIO as an example. Companies would like to create manopolies within individual sectors of the economy and the FTC makes every effort to stop that. If manopolistic practices of companies are bad then manopolistic labor practices are bad also.

I can't imagine any company management smart enough to be competitive when it has to deal with as many as six different unions with 6 different contracts, 6 different pay scales, vacations, benefits, pensions, you name it. I will go back to the Hostess dispute. There was agreement with all other unions but not with the Baker's Union. I can't imagine management working an agreement with the rest then deliberately failing to reach an agreement with The baker's union in order to have an excuse to close the company.

I do believe a company union would have merit. A Ford union, GM union,k John Deere union, not Steel, Rubber, Baker's, Teamster, ect. unions. Even an idiot should know that no company can operate efficiently without good communication and good relations between labor and management. My practice had only a few employes. We had no scheduled break and could only go to lunch if there was no emergency and we were caught up in work. Quitting time was when the last patient's treatment was finished. Sure those rules caused difficulty for all of us at times, but we understood that was the nature of the job and did everything we could do to minnimize their frequency. Sure there was conflict but most of my former employees are my friends to this day. That I am proud of.

I don't think that anyone would deny that management-union relations are extremely low. Unless something is done, investors will not invest, companies will not be created, product will not be produced and employees will not have a job.I have never worked at a union company so I don't pretend to understand alll the reasonss of conflict. What I do know is that fewer and fewer employees They must change or go the way of the pony express. The only other choice is a socialist society.

duckheads
12-14-2012, 08:28 AM
You can paint the union in many different shades but my brother and father in law had to sleep in their new building with guns so the union guys would not vandalize it because they CHOOSE to have non union contractor build the building. They vandlized their vehicles and harassed workers as they came on the job. Police had to be called many times!

Have a friend that was voted into a union position last year and now works less than he did before. Basically he will get his 166 starts this year which is the absolute minimum he can have to get his benefits next year. Works on his house or drinks all day claiming he is doing union work. Three of us couples went out for dinner and he wanted to out it on the union CC. I refused and paid for our dinner myself.


I could go on and on as NW Indiana is a very strong union area. I have friends and family that are union and some are management. I have several friends that would not be working if it wasn't for the union because no one else would put up with the crap they pull and lack of work ethic.


I do work for a school corporation. On one particular job the union bid was 6 times higher than mine. By going with me the school corp save the tax payers a poop load of money and the job was done fast and efficiently!

RetrieverNation
12-14-2012, 10:24 AM
You can paint the union in many different shades but my brother and father in law had to sleep in their new building with guns so the union guys would not vandalize it because they CHOOSE to have non union contractor build the building. They vandlized their vehicles and harassed workers as they came on the job. Police had to be called many times!



At one time in American history these stunts could be called vandalism and harassment. With the new laws enacted after 9/11 we now call this domestic terrorism. Calling out these acts for what they are as defined by today's laws really helps get the attention of the aggressors. Lets stop giving these guys a pass by marginalizing there actions. Americans fighting Americans. Doesn't it make you proud?

zeus3925
12-14-2012, 11:19 AM
Americans fighting Americans. Doesn't it make you proud?

There are some here that are advocating just that if they don't get their way.

huntinman
12-14-2012, 11:32 AM
There are some here that are advocating just that if they don't get there way.

There are some that actually do it. They are on video... Seems they are usually libs...

thebigcat
12-14-2012, 12:01 PM
I love the guy yelling in the background about killing people with a gun, and having done so before. Classy.

That sounds like someone who needs to be protected by a union because he's certainly not intelligent enough to make it on his own.

mngundog
12-14-2012, 04:56 PM
That sounds like someone who needs to be protected by a union because he's certainly not intelligent enough to make it on his own.

Actually that was the Fox cameraman. :D

huntinman
12-14-2012, 06:06 PM
Actually that was the Fox cameraman. :D

Right, how long do you think he would have lasted in that mob, talking like that... it was one of them...

mngundog
12-14-2012, 06:23 PM
Right, how long do you think he would have lasted in that mob, talking like that... it was one of them...
It sounded like the comedian lasted most of the day trying to antagonize people till he finally assaulted the union worker because his tactics weren't working, still waiting on the unedited version.

murral stark
12-14-2012, 06:28 PM
Right, how long do you think he would have lasted in that mob, talking like that... it was one of them...

If he's telling them he has a gun, I don't think they would be willing to take the first bullet. mngundog, can you provide him with the link?

He is also claiming that the “mob” was threatening to kill him “with a gun”

Turns out, the one you hear yelling that, “I’ll kill you all with a gun” is the Fox News cameraman:

“In the background, Fox News cameraman is heard screaming: “I’ll kill twenty %$##@’s, I gotta gun….” This is considered, by Murdoch and his bloodsucking friends as media comedy. Watch Crowder saved from a well deserved beating.”

mngundog
12-14-2012, 07:14 PM
If he's telling them he has a gun, I don't think they would be willing to take the first bullet. mngundog, can you provide him with the link?

He is also claiming that the “mob” was threatening to kill him “with a gun”

Turns out, the one you hear yelling that, “I’ll kill you all with a gun” is the Fox News cameraman:

“In the background, Fox News cameraman is heard screaming: “I’ll kill twenty %$##@’s, I gotta gun….” This is considered, by Murdoch and his bloodsucking friends as media comedy. Watch Crowder saved from a well deserved beating.”
As for a link pick your poison, there's a hundred blogs or news sources (term is loosely), that will tell you THEIR way, truth is no one knows who yelled it, you had union protestors and a group trying to insight the protestors, not unlike the tea party protests. Its sad that Fox decides to MAKE NEWS instead of covering it, its even worse that the edit the footage to hide what happened.

road kill
12-15-2012, 08:30 AM
Pro-Union Activist Threatens the Michigan Governor: 'We'll Be at Your Daughter's Soccer Game'


4:04 PM, Dec 14, 2012 By MICHAEL WARREN


A speaker at a protest against Michigan's right-to-work legislation said that Republican governor Rick Snyder will "get no rest" from pro-union activists if Snyder signs the bill into law.

"Just know one thing, Rick Snyder: You sign that bill, you won't get no rest," said Rev. Charles Williams II at the Tuesday rally in Lansing, according to Michigan Capitol Confidential. "We'll meet you on Geddes Road. We'll be at your daughter's soccer game. We'll visit you at your church. We'll be at your office." Watch the video below:



Snyder, who lives in a house on Geddes Road in Ann Arbor, has two daughters and a son with his wife, Sue.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/pro-union-activist-michigan-governor-well-be-your-daughters-soccer-game_666554.html

An implied threat to the Governor's daughter.
Watch the video......it's his words.

Wonder why some people dislike DA UNION's tactics????

Really????

Eric Johnson
12-15-2012, 01:44 PM
Stan-

The Rev Williams needs to be placed under arrest. Since Gov Snyder is a public figure, Rev Williams threats need to be taken much more seriously. In fact, a case could be made that they represent "terrorist acts" as well as simple threats.

mngundog
12-15-2012, 02:13 PM
Stan-

The Rev Williams needs to be placed under arrest. Since Gov Snyder is a public figure, Rev Williams threats need to be taken much more seriously. In fact, a case could be made that they represent "terrorist acts" as well as simple threats.
Did you actually watch the video? In no way shape or form would that be considered a threat outside of a political forum.

Uncle Bill
12-15-2012, 03:37 PM
Just gotta love this irony. :p

UB

Dog Bites Man. Man Bites Back: The UAW’s King made Michigan’s Right-To-Work bed.By: LaborUnionReport (http://www.retrievertraining.net/users/laborunionreport/) (Diary (http://www.retrievertraining.net/laborunionreport/))



When the union bosses and the institutional left look to assign blame for Michigan’s newly enacted Right-to-Work law, they can blame the enactment of the new law giving Michigan workers the freedom to choose whether or not to pay union dues on one particular Marxist lawyer.

[Note: No, not the one pictured on the right.]

http://www.redstate.com/files/2012/12/Bob-King-Obama.jpg (http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/13/dog-bites-man-man-bites-back-the-uaws-king-made-michigans-right-to-work-bed/bob-king-obama/)
According to the Detroit News (http://blogs.detroitnews.com/politics/2012/12/13/payne-the-war-for-worker-freedom/)‘ Henry Payne, were it not for the United Auto Workers’ top boss, Bob King, and his lust for union power at the expense of the Michigan constitution earlier this year, Michigan’s GOP-legislators and, more importantly, Governor Rick Snyder would not have taken on the fight to enact Right-to-Work legislation. However, it was King and his failed attempt to enshrine forced union payments into the state’s constitution fanned the flames of workplace freedom.

According to Payne, the UAW’s King provoked the Right-to-Work fight by by trying to bite the hand that feeds him (http://blogs.detroitnews.com/politics/2012/12/13/payne-the-war-for-worker-freedom/) one too many times:


Were it not for UAW President Bob King’s introduction of the divisive Prop 2 in November’s campaign, right-to-work would not be an issue today.

With his March announcement of a constitutional amendment to ban right-to-work and reverse Republican-led government reforms, sources say that King united a broad coalition of business, grass-roots activists and legislators in a long-term strategy to not only defeat Prop 2 – but to enact game-changing right-to-work legislation in Michigan.

Politics is about personalities as well as issues, and King’s key mistake was honking off Gov. Rick Snyder who, until King’s Prop 2 provocation, had tried to keep right-to-work on the sidelines.

So, as union bosses–like the Teamsters’ boss Jimmy P. Hoffa–begin to see their financial coffers dwindle next year, they shouldn’t blame Republicans for Michigan’s “civil war.” (http://www.humanevents.com/2012/12/11/teamsters-boss-predicts-civil-war-in-michigan/)

It was the UAW’s Bob King who fired the first shot.




By the way, just in case you’re curious about the union spin calling Right-to-Work means “right-to-work for less,” Right-to-Work states do create more jobs (http://www.redstate.com/files/2012/12/Job-Growth-RTW.gif) than forced union states.

huntinman
12-15-2012, 03:56 PM
Libs overreach every time... they will at the national level this time as well. They can't help themselves... it's in their DNA.

JS
12-15-2012, 08:27 PM
I could only read what you ACTUALLY SAID, not what you MEANT to say. I guess only your actions would demonstrate which is the most accurate.

......



OK, my fault. I acknowledge I failed to make myself clear.

But let me ask ... did you really believe beforehand, that a union actually has to approve of a company's decision to take any kind of disciplinary action on an employee????

I find some of the myths and misinformed beliefs about union/management relations here truly bizarre! There are not enough hours in the day to respond to them all. I really hope some of them are just pot-stirrers.

JS

murral stark
12-15-2012, 09:37 PM
OK, my fault. I acknowledge I failed to make myself clear.

But let me ask ... did you really believe beforehand, that a union actually has to approve of a company's decision to take any kind of disciplinary action on an employee????

I find some of the myths and misinformed beliefs about union/management relations here truly bizarre! There are not enough hours in the day to respond to them all. I really hope some of them are just pot-stirrers.

JS

Sad to say, but some here do actually believe the myths.

road kill
12-16-2012, 07:49 AM
Can you imagine if some Southern Baptist white minister announce to his "gathering" that we want Obama to know we will be at his daughters soccer games?
Or that we know where he lives??

You secular progressives are funny!!!!

caryalsobrook
12-16-2012, 10:11 AM
OK, my fault. I acknowledge I failed to make myself clear.

But let me ask ... did you really believe beforehand, that a union actually has to approve of a company's decision to take any kind of disciplinary action on an employee????

I find some of the myths and misinformed beliefs about union/management relations here truly bizarre! There are not enough hours in the day to respond to them all. I really hope some of them are just pot-stirrers.

JS
I NEVER said that aa company had a LEGAL requirement to gain approval of firing an employee. Who here does not know that Reagan fired the Air Traffic Controllers. You have heaard me say that I have a concept of a union that could be benefitial to both mgmt. and workers. I just happen to have problems with the result that has taken place. What we have today in my OPINION, doesn't benefit the company and doesn't benefit the workers in the long run. This board has a only one simple rule, be civil or be banned, no others. Frankly, the complicated,k rules and multiple unions only reduce the ability of companies to compete and result of less jobs and lower pay. this is my opinion.

On another thread, Murral asks the question, "why do people hate unions". Such a question only causes conflict. I can imagine a response such as "Because you are an SOB". the response would be "Why do you think I am an SOB", resulting in the response "because your mother is a B. such questions only cause confllict and accomplish nothing. Mural, I might suggest a question such as "What advantages do you see that a union can have and what dissadvantages and how can a union be improved. That might get civil responses.

PS
JS, we both have said that we have made mistakes and we both have agreed on some points. I have no doubt we could have a good discussion and enjoy each other's company should we ever meet.

PPS
The word "you" is used in the generic sense and refers to noone in particular.

Marvin S
12-16-2012, 10:27 AM
Such a question only causes conflict.

The exact reason it was presented in that manner - Find one thread that the OP of subject was a contributor - I don't read all of those posts as they are generally meaningless - the unsanitary foreign object in the punch bowl :p.

road kill
12-16-2012, 11:36 AM
The exact reason it was presented in that manner - Find one thread that the OP of subject was a contributor - I don't read all of those posts as they are generally meaningless - the unsanitary foreign object in the punch bowl :p.

If I may harken back to yesteryear;

"Another thread, soiled."

murral stark
12-16-2012, 07:05 PM
The exact reason it was presented in that manner - Find one thread that the OP of subject was a contributor - I don't read all of those posts as they are generally meaningless - the unsanitary foreign object in the punch bowl :p.
This coming from somebody that recently posted that they don't buy from amazon any more because they choose to donate money to the "fags". By the way, that post has been reported to the admin since he doesn't come here much. And you have the audacity to call me classless. BRAVO SIERRA!!!

M&K's Retrievers
12-16-2012, 09:05 PM
This coming from somebody that recently posted that they don't buy from amazon any more because they choose to donate money to the "fags". By the way, that post has been reported to the admin since he doesn't come here much. And you have the audacity to call me classless. BRAVO SIERRA!!!

Your not classless. It just happens to be low. Go back and read your numerious posts that you eventually apologized for.

duckheads
12-17-2012, 07:58 AM
This coming from somebody that recently posted that they don't buy from amazon any more because they choose to donate money to the "fags". By the way, that post has been reported to the admin since he doesn't come here much. And you have the audacity to call me classless. BRAVO SIERRA!!!

Reported. Mommy mommy he said a bad word! Give it rest already.

murral stark
12-17-2012, 09:19 PM
Reported. Mommy mommy he said a bad word! Give it rest already.

I would've called him out in public, but then you guys would've been pizzed because I called him out. I have been chastised for saying things that some people found offensive. I figured the best plan would be to let someone else handle it. Now I'm being called a cry baby. I really don't like the double standard here.

murral stark
12-17-2012, 09:22 PM
Your not classless. It just happens to be low. Go back and read your numerious posts that you eventually apologized for.

What if I would've posted something calling people "fags"? You people would've been in an uproar. But since MarvinS said it, it's ok. What a bunch of hypocrites. BTW, what is "numerious"?

luvmylabs23139
12-17-2012, 09:39 PM
i would've called him out in public, but then you guys would've been pizzed because i called him out. I have been chastised for saying things that some people found offensive. I figured the best plan would be to let someone else handle it. Now i'm being called a cry baby. I really don't like the double standard here.

wa wa wa!!!

murral stark
12-17-2012, 10:30 PM
wa wa wa!!!

You of all people should be calling someone a crybaby. You cry and bitch about the slime and leeches taking your money, not to mention how much you complain about kids and people that have kids. So why dont you STFUB!!!

luvmylabs23139
12-17-2012, 10:37 PM
You of all people should be calling someone a crybaby. You cry and bitch about the slime and leeches taking your money, not to mention how much you complain about kids and people that have kids. So why dont you STFUB!!!

I have never once gone whining and crying to a moderator over anything!

M&K's Retrievers
12-17-2012, 10:37 PM
What if I would've posted something calling people "fags"? You people would've been in an uproar. But since MarvinS said it, it's ok. What a bunch of hypocrites. BTW, what is "numerious"?

Misspelled version of numerous. Most would have known but I'm not so sure about you.

M&K's Retrievers
12-17-2012, 10:38 PM
You of all people should be calling someone a crybaby. You cry and bitch about the slime and leeches taking your money, not to mention how much you complain about kids and people that have kids. So why dont you STFUB!!!

Wonder what "STFUB" means?

luvmylabs23139
12-17-2012, 10:49 PM
Oh and by the way Murral they are taking my hard earned money.

murral stark
12-17-2012, 11:18 PM
Misspelled version of numerous. Most would have known but I'm not so sure about you.

I know what it means, but since some here give Menmon grief about his mis-spelled words, I thought I'd join in the fun.

murral stark
12-17-2012, 11:22 PM
Wonder what "STFUB" means?

It is a common phrase we low class people use. since you are high class, you probably don't understand.

M&K's Retrievers
12-18-2012, 12:59 AM
It is a common phrase we low class people use. since you are high class, you probably don't understand.

Why don't you "splain" it, Lucy?

HPL
12-18-2012, 01:22 AM
It is a common phrase we low class people use. since you are high class, you probably don't understand.

You may have hit the nail on the head there. Although I think I got it, it certainly wouldn't pass my lips (or keyboard) in mixed company (which is what this forum is) or even in unmixed company unless I was really trying to shock someone. There actually still are folks who can make a point without resorting to vulgarities and the casual use of them really does significantly affect my opinion of someone. My question is "do you kiss your mom and children with that mouth?"

murral stark
12-18-2012, 02:29 AM
You may have hit the nail on the head there. Although I think I got it, it certainly wouldn't pass my lips (or keyboard) in mixed company (which is what this forum is) or even in unmixed company unless I was really trying to shock someone. There actually still are folks who can make a point without resorting to vulgarities and the casual use of them really does significantly affect my opinion of someone. My question is "do you kiss your mom and children with that mouth?"

Point proven. Some members can use derogatory terms about people and it's ok. When I do the same thing, you self-righteous hypocrites wanna say something to me about it. Just so you know, my Momma taught me that phrase for people like some of the snooty jerks here.

murral stark
12-18-2012, 02:35 AM
Why don't you "splain" it, Lucy?

Who the hell is Lucy? You're really trying to get me mad enough to go off on a rant aren't you? Keep it up and I just might. I have tickets for the Cowboys game Sunday, wanna tailgate?

murral stark
12-18-2012, 03:04 AM
Oh and by the way Murral they are taking my hard earned money.

WELL GET OVER IT!!! Cuz it ain't gonna change sister!!

Ken Bora
12-18-2012, 07:46 AM
...... There actually still are folks who can make a point without resorting to vulgarities and the casual use of them really does significantly affect my opinion of someone.......

Hello!:cool:

Ken Bora
12-18-2012, 07:48 AM
Who the hell is Lucy? ?

for real??? come on kid get with the pop culture referances
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bJz3jgo-v1g/T5n8xgww7gI/AAAAAAAABjs/68ZsdNzC_Xw/s1600/Splainin'ToDo-8x6.jpg

M&K's Retrievers
12-18-2012, 08:23 AM
for real??? come on kid get with the pop culture referances
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bJz3jgo-v1g/T5n8xgww7gI/AAAAAAAABjs/68ZsdNzC_Xw/s1600/Splainin'ToDo-8x6.jpg

Thanks, Ken. I was going to keep him in the dark. Didn't want this to be any different. ;)

HPL
12-18-2012, 09:50 AM
Point proven. Some members can use derogatory terms about people and it's ok. When I do the same thing, you self-righteous hypocrites wanna say something to me about it. Just so you know, my Momma taught me that phrase for people like some of the snooty jerks here.

Must be a Texas thing, but I sure wouldn't be admitting that my mom (sweet southern belle that she is) even knew what those words meant, but that does explain a lot.

luvmylabs23139
12-18-2012, 10:45 AM
WELL GET OVER IT!!! Cuz it ain't gonna change sister!!

Well I can advocate for change. I can vote or change. I can contact my legislators. It needs to change, people need to becaome responsible for themselves and their families again rather than depending on the gov't which is really the hard working taxpayers.