Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Detroit_News)   Union members in Michigan engage in polite discussion with those who have an opposing viewpoint. Just kidding, they beat a Fox News reporter, sucker punch him, then collapse a tent on top of women and old people   ( detroitnews.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, sucker punches, Fox News  
•       •       •

7934 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Dec 2012 at 3:44 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



431 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-12-11 09:47:49 PM  
Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.
 
2012-12-11 09:49:18 PM  

video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.


I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.
 
2012-12-11 09:53:35 PM  
Some people don't want to participate in your little scam, you stupid unions.
 
2012-12-11 09:54:09 PM  

homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.


I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.
 
2012-12-11 10:02:21 PM  
Workers had to die to get union protections to begin with. May as well return the favor.
 
2012-12-11 10:20:21 PM  
Consider the sustained attack against worker's rights to organize and negotiate for a better station in life vs. owners, this is a logical progression. We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.

People probably will end up dying for their rights again before this is settled. And, we'll probably come back to it again in another 80 years.
 
2012-12-11 10:25:18 PM  
Iron & coal police ring any bells?
 
2012-12-11 10:33:03 PM  
I'm of two minds on this:

You shouldn't hit people just for being annoying.

OTOH, I come from a long line of coal miners on both sides of the family and damn near lost a great uncle during the whole Matewan debacle. I know what happened in the mines pre-union. Unions can be irritating but I firmly believe that they are much better than the alternative.

OK, union guys, stop hitting people unless they hit you first.
 
2012-12-11 10:38:13 PM  

trivial use of my dark powers: OK, union guys, stop hitting people unless they hit you first.


Especially guys with cameras who are intentionally trolling you so you'll hit them.
 
2012-12-11 10:42:38 PM  

Elandriel: Consider the sustained attack against worker's rights to organize and negotiate for a better station in life vs. owners, this is a logical progression. We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.

People probably will end up dying for their rights again before this is settled. And, we'll probably come back to it again in another 80 years.


The problem is that back in the day the companies ultimately didn't have any options. The workers could pressure their local area with what video man calls old-school tactics and effectively shut down an entire industry on a grand scale. These days it's difficult, if not impossible, to get that kind of coordination. Retail and fast food is particularly difficult to coordinate because if one problem area refuses to settle, the company can just close off that small portion of the market. Industrial unions still have some clout because they can shut down an entire product line. Smaller retail/food stores? The company (nationwide) can just shut down the problem stores until the employees cry uncle. Moreover, you can't get nationwide coordination because employees in right to work states, if they actually went on strike to support employees in other states, would be summarily fired.

It COULD happen, but not like the old days. You'd need a nationwide, subversive campaign to have every worker at every store walk off the job at the same time and stay away for an extended period of time without pay or benefits and the possibility of a lost job. Given the "spreading out" of Americans over the last half-century you would also need a support network for those workers when push came to shove. Back in the early days of union building people had family to fall back on. That isn't the case anymore.

So I wouldn't call it impossible, but it's in the realm of extremely unlikely.
 
2012-12-11 11:04:59 PM  
Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.
 
2012-12-11 11:10:09 PM  

GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.


Technically in the slide show:

img651.imageshack.us

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.
 
2012-12-11 11:20:01 PM  

Lsherm: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

Technically in the slide show:

[img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.


Lsherm: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

Technically in the slide show:

[img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.


More likely to be true then, but until I see people vouching that this guy is a member of that union, I still refuse to completely believe it. I have no trouble believing that Fox would stage that to discredit the protesters.
 
2012-12-11 11:59:39 PM  
House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall, has said the state police's constitutional autonomy prevents the Legislature from making financial support of the troopers' union optional.

That's... convenient.


"I'm going to jail today!"

It's good to have goals.
 
2012-12-12 12:03:27 AM  
People should punch Fox news reporters every single chance they get.
 
2012-12-12 12:05:20 AM  
I guess this proves that unions should be destroyed.
 
2012-12-12 12:08:04 AM  

HakunaMatata: People should punch Fox news reporters every single chance they get.


The second amendment specifies "arms"

Buckets of low temperature roofing tar and chicken feathers could easily fall under that category.

Ask a stupid question, get tarred and feathered.
 
2012-12-12 12:17:57 AM  
Video of the dude getting punched.

1. He was trolling the crowd.

2. another union member stopped the first guy.
 
2012-12-12 12:19:27 AM  
Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.
 
2012-12-12 12:35:35 AM  
When people's livelihoods are on the line, don't expect them to give up without a fight. Gun-waving Rascal-bound retarded Randroids should at the very least possess enough capacity for human empathy to understand that.

But they don't. Hence tardmitter, or more likely trollmitter.
 
2012-12-12 12:41:04 AM  
May the Walton children and their ilk eat ALL the cocks, and the tidal waves of cum wipe them from the pages of history.
 
2012-12-12 12:52:00 AM  

log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.


DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.
 
2012-12-12 01:09:03 AM  

Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.


I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.
 
2012-12-12 01:18:26 AM  
Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

And I suppose they were literally hanging from the rafters too?
 
2012-12-12 01:18:49 AM  

GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.


I think you can and do sometimes.
 
2012-12-12 01:19:43 AM  

Relatively Obscure: DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.


yeah, you're completely right. I misread it .
 
2012-12-12 01:23:50 AM  

Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.

I think you can and do sometimes.


Was it smart? Was it appropriate? Of course not. But fark it, those people need punched in the face for what they're doing to the country. I wouldn't hesitate to convict the guy for assault, but these people are the enemy of the country. They are a big force in driving all this shiat that is also driving this country straight into the gutter. A punch to the face is well deserved.
 
2012-12-12 01:28:12 AM  
Divide and conquer, always say.
 
2012-12-12 01:28:54 AM  

GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.

I think you can and do sometimes.

Was it smart? Was it appropriate? Of course not. But fark it, those people need punched in the face for what they're doing to the country. I wouldn't hesitate to convict the guy for assault, but these people are the enemy of the country. They are a big force in driving all this shiat that is also driving this country straight into the gutter. A punch to the face is well deserved.


You could have c/p'd that from a Freep post about a different article.
 
2012-12-12 01:29:22 AM  

GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.

I think you can and do sometimes.

Was it smart? Was it appropriate? Of course not. But fark it, those people need punched in the face for what they're doing to the country. I wouldn't hesitate to convict the guy for assault, but these people are the enemy of the country. They are a big force in driving all this shiat that is also driving this country straight into the gutter. A punch to the face is well deserved.


so what you are saying is, you can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy, so long as it's your enemy as well. which is all well and good, but be honest about it.
 
2012-12-12 01:37:35 AM  

Relatively Obscure: You could have c/p'd that from a Freep post about a different article.


No you couldn't have. No Freeper would have said that it wasn't appropriate or would consider it assault. I'm not demanding we round people up and put them into camps. Fox went there to gloat about taking people's rights away. You gloat in someone's face about how they just beat you, people tend to punch you in the face. That's a normal, though overly aggressive, response in dozens of scenarios.

log_jammin: so what you are saying is, you can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy, so long as it's your enemy as well. which is all well and good, but be honest about it.


See above. And yeah, if I went to an anti-gay marriage rally and gloated to someone's face about how gays were going to get married and they couldn't stop it, I'd expect to be punched in the face too.
 
2012-12-12 01:55:36 AM  

GAT_00: See above. And yeah, if I went to an anti-gay marriage rally and gloated to someone's face about how gays were going to get married and they couldn't stop it, I'd expect to be punched in the face too.


Oh the dude was without a doubt trolling the crowd, But I don't think "he had it coming". I don't make excuses for bad behavior.
 
2012-12-12 02:03:23 AM  

violentsalvation: Some people don't want to participate in your little scam, you stupid unions.


this has nothing to do with unions. want someone to blame? yell at the GOP. their dirty tricks created this mess. of COURSE it was gonna turn ugly. what did you expect would happen?

i'm not condoning violence but I am saying that this entire disaster was easily avoidable.
 
2012-12-12 02:18:46 AM  

GAT_00: No you couldn't have.


Yes I could have. Sure, many would be as you say, but there are always some who would sound exactly like you just had.
 
2012-12-12 02:25:06 AM  

Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: No you couldn't have.

Yes I could have. Sure, many would be as you say, but there are always some who would sound exactly like you just had.


except that GAT has a point - fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse. the local MI Republicans already antagonized the unions and pissed off the local Democrats. then along comes fox news (and a few tea baggers) to jump in and gloat about how great it was that the lame duck session was used by their hero Republicans to ramrod some unpopular legislation through congress and hey, it's just wonderful to see such dirty tricks used to great effect.

i'm actually impressed the local unions showed as much restraint as they did.
 
2012-12-12 02:29:27 AM  

Weaver95: fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse.


Not arguing that. It's still not okay to play punchadouche on some douche doing little more than being a douche. If you can't control yourself better than that, stay the fark home.
 
2012-12-12 02:31:17 AM  

Weaver95: except that GAT has a point - fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse. the local MI Republicans already antagonized the unions and pissed off the local Democrats. then along comes fox news (and a few tea baggers) to jump in and gloat about how great it was that the lame duck session was used by their hero Republicans to ramrod some unpopular legislation through congress and hey, it's just wonderful to see such dirty tricks used to great effect.


which goes right back to " you can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy, so long as it's your enemy as well."
 
2012-12-12 02:35:36 AM  

Relatively Obscure: Weaver95: fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse.

Not arguing that. It's still not okay to play punchadouche on some douche doing little more than being a douche. If you can't control yourself better than that, stay the fark home.


that's a nice theory...but here in the real world, when you piss all over people's rights, treat them unfairly and then come by and taunt 'em for trying to set things right...well, it's understandable when they lash out at the nearest target. the provocation from the GOP is/was/has been extreme. having fox news come by and piss all over the unions was only going to create even further tension.
 
2012-12-12 02:36:54 AM  

log_jammin: Weaver95: except that GAT has a point - fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse. the local MI Republicans already antagonized the unions and pissed off the local Democrats. then along comes fox news (and a few tea baggers) to jump in and gloat about how great it was that the lame duck session was used by their hero Republicans to ramrod some unpopular legislation through congress and hey, it's just wonderful to see such dirty tricks used to great effect.

which goes right back to " you can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy, so long as it's your enemy as well."


no, i'm saying emotions were already running hot. Fox news only made it worse.
 
2012-12-12 02:39:38 AM  

Weaver95: that's a nice theory


It's not a theory.

Weaver95: but here in the real world, when you piss all over people's rights, treat them unfairly and then come by and taunt 'em for trying to set things right...well, it's understandable when they lash out at the nearest target.


In the real world, speech is a right and committing battery isn't.
 
2012-12-12 02:42:18 AM  

Weaver95: no, i'm saying emotions were already running hot. Fox news only made it worse.


Yes. of course they did. but that's not an excuse.
 
2012-12-12 02:43:21 AM  

Relatively Obscure:

In the real world, speech is a right and committing battery isn't.


tell ya what sparky - you get good and liquored up and go down to your local biker bar. while there, make sure you personally insult each and every biker in the bar. Because hey - why not right? first amendment! whoopee!

After the EMTs clean you up and remove that chrome handlebar someone stuffed up your nose, i'll come by the emergency room and pick you up. then we'll discuss the difference between 'theory' and 'practice'.
 
2012-12-12 02:46:05 AM  

log_jammin: Weaver95: no, i'm saying emotions were already running hot. Fox news only made it worse.

Yes. of course they did. but that's not an excuse.


it was an entirely expected response tho. one might even conclude that a new agency had a vested interest in creating a situation that would look good on camera for the 11 o'clock news.

Personally, I think Fox New walked dangerously close to yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater, then filmed the resulting chaos for the ratings boost.
 
2012-12-12 02:46:44 AM  

Weaver95: Relatively Obscure:

In the real world, speech is a right and committing battery isn't.

tell ya what sparky - you get good and liquored up and go down to your local biker bar. while there, make sure you personally insult each and every biker in the bar. Because hey - why not right? first amendment! whoopee!

After the EMTs clean you up and remove that chrome handlebar someone stuffed up your nose, i'll come by the emergency room and pick you up. then we'll discuss the difference between 'theory' and 'practice'.


What I said still wasn't a theory, your comparison is lame, and these hypothetical 'bikers' would still be wrong while I'd be a douche for randomly insulting people. 

But hey, good job with the "sparky" jab. I can feel the burn.
 
2012-12-12 02:48:33 AM  

Relatively Obscure:
After the EMTs clean you up and remove that chrome handlebar someone stuffed up your nose, i'll come by the emergency room and pick you up. then we'll discuss the difference between 'theory' and 'practice'.

What I said still wasn't a theory, your comparison is lame, and these hypothetical 'bikers' would still be wrong while I'd be a douche for randomly insulting people. 

But hey, good job with the "sparky" jab. I can feel the burn.


you really don't think Fox News might have ramped up the violence on purpose? because I certainly wouldn't put it past 'em to taunt a bunch of already pissed off union workers just so they'd have something to run in their next news segment.
 
2012-12-12 02:50:31 AM  

Weaver95: Relatively Obscure:
After the EMTs clean you up and remove that chrome handlebar someone stuffed up your nose, i'll come by the emergency room and pick you up. then we'll discuss the difference between 'theory' and 'practice'.

What I said still wasn't a theory, your comparison is lame, and these hypothetical 'bikers' would still be wrong while I'd be a douche for randomly insulting people. 

But hey, good job with the "sparky" jab. I can feel the burn.

you really don't think Fox News might have ramped up the violence on purpose? because I certainly wouldn't put it past 'em to taunt a bunch of already pissed off union workers just so they'd have something to run in their next news segment.


And again. If you're the sort of clown who reacts to hurt feelings with violence, stay home and don't get married.
 
2012-12-12 02:52:00 AM  

Relatively Obscure:
And again. If you're the sort of clown who reacts to hurt feelings with violence, stay home and don't get married.


And again, that's 99.99% of the human race. to include you, I might add.
 
2012-12-12 02:54:05 AM  

Weaver95: Relatively Obscure:
And again. If you're the sort of clown who reacts to hurt feelings with violence, stay home and don't get married.

And again, that's 99.99% of the human race. to include you, I might add.


Boy, I remember the last time I started a fight by taking a swing at someone who had not attacked me.

Grade school.
 
2012-12-12 02:55:34 AM  
Not even posted yet, and this thread already has the neighborhood fat kids and overnight IT guys acting pretend tough.

This will just be an epic goddamn cluster fark when all is said and done.
 
2012-12-12 02:57:47 AM  

Relatively Obscure: Weaver95: Relatively Obscure:
And again. If you're the sort of clown who reacts to hurt feelings with violence, stay home and don't get married.

And again, that's 99.99% of the human race. to include you, I might add.

Boy, I remember the last time I started a fight by taking a swing at someone who had not attacked me.

Grade school.


properly provoked, you'll take a swing at people too. and if you don't believe that, then you're lying to yourself. especially if everyone in the crowd around you is doing the same thing.

that said, we're moving away from the topic at hand. I think it's likely that Fox News went there to provoke the union workers in order to catch some footage for their evening news segments...then got more than they expected. now...you can yell at the union workers for that, but you'd damn well better slam fox news reporters for making a tense situation even worse. think you can do that?
 
2012-12-12 02:58:06 AM  

BSABSVR: Not even posted yet, and this thread already has the neighborhood fat kids and overnight IT guys acting pretend tough.


Heyyyyy, I'm neither of those, but I can pretend to be tough :'(

Though, I guess it's probably not my fault I'm not fat.
 
2012-12-12 02:59:19 AM  

Relatively Obscure: BSABSVR: Not even posted yet, and this thread already has the neighborhood fat kids and overnight IT guys acting pretend tough.

Heyyyyy, I'm neither of those, but I can pretend to be tough :'(

Though, I guess it's probably not my fault I'm not fat.


so you're saying that you're the fat IT guy pretending to be tough?
 
2012-12-12 02:59:37 AM  

Weaver95: you really don't think Fox News might have ramped up the violence on purpose?


dude. this is really simple. The guy who took a swing is a douch for taking a swing. It has nothing to do with fox news, unions, or whatever. The guy farked up, and now the submitter has a nice trolltastic headline that all the other trolls get to masturbate to once this goes green.

stop excusing douchy behavior.
 
2012-12-12 03:01:01 AM  

BSABSVR: this thread already has the neighborhood fat kids and overnight IT guys acting pretend tough.


shut up or I'll kick your ass.
 
2012-12-12 03:01:42 AM  

Weaver95: properly provoked, you'll take a swing at people too. and if you don't believe that, then you're lying to yourself. especially if everyone in the crowd around you is doing the same thing.


If by "properly provoked" you mean "threatened with imminent violence," then yeah.

Weaver95: but you'd damn well better slam fox news reporters for making a tense situation even worse. think you can do that?


Like I said, that dude was a Grade A douchebag.
 
2012-12-12 03:01:43 AM  

log_jammin: Weaver95: you really don't think Fox News might have ramped up the violence on purpose?

dude. this is really simple. The guy who took a swing is a douch for taking a swing. It has nothing to do with fox news, unions, or whatever. The guy farked up, and now the submitter has a nice trolltastic headline that all the other trolls get to masturbate to once this goes green.

stop excusing douchy behavior.


you really don't think Fox News might have pushed things even a little...?
 
2012-12-12 03:02:18 AM  

Relatively Obscure:
Like I said, that dude was a Grade A douchebag.


so is Fox News...
 
2012-12-12 03:03:06 AM  

Weaver95: so you're saying that you're the fat IT guy pretending to be tough?


No :( I'm neither IT nor fat. But I do have a vivid imagination. I'm picturing you with breasts right now.  It brightens the conversation.
 
2012-12-12 03:03:42 AM  

Weaver95: Relatively Obscure:
Like I said, that dude was a Grade A douchebag.

so is Fox News...


Fox news isn't a douchebag. It employs them.
 
2012-12-12 03:04:46 AM  

Weaver95: you really don't think Fox News might have pushed things even a little...?


I said he was trolling the crowd, but that's irrelevant.
 
2012-12-12 03:12:07 AM  

log_jammin: now the submitter has a nice trolltastic headline that all the other trolls get to masturbate to once this goes green.


It's a union thread, why should things be any different? 

Let's get things started in the other direction:

Overzealous staffer
Republican plant
 
2012-12-12 03:13:18 AM  
With alllll of that said, I would like to see a less edited down version of events. It's quite possible that something very significant got snipped out of the video log_jammin linked to.
 
2012-12-12 03:21:24 AM  

Relatively Obscure: With alllll of that said, I would like to see a less edited down version of events. It's quite possible that something very significant got snipped out of the video log_jammin linked to.


indeed.
 
2012-12-12 03:21:47 AM  

Weaver95: violentsalvation: Some people don't want to participate in your little scam, you stupid unions.

this has nothing to do with unions. want someone to blame? yell at the GOP. their dirty tricks created this mess. of COURSE it was gonna turn ugly. what did you expect would happen?

i'm not condoning violence but I am saying that this entire disaster was easily avoidable.


If it has nothing to do with unions then this whole thread is one big threadjack. I'm not opposed to unions, I think they can do and have done many great things for the working class. I'm against forced participation. If the union is so great then the people will surely join it. And if that union isn't worth joining then perhaps a stranglehold is alleviated.

I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union, all I hear is that the GOP is up to some dirty tricks and is lint-deep into someone's pocket. And this is a travesty sh*tting all over workers everywhere. So we all owe some coal miners from 100 years ago, lest they put us all back in the mines.
 
2012-12-12 03:27:52 AM  
We shouldn't be punching Fox News reporters.

We should be burning them alive in the public square - pour encourager les autres.
 
2012-12-12 03:31:08 AM  

violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,


part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.
 
2012-12-12 03:48:09 AM  
I thought poor uneducated whites were te fox news base?
 
2012-12-12 03:50:40 AM  

Lsherm: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.


If it prevents the kind of misery and death we saw until the 1920s and '30s in non-unionized labor, then it's well worth it. The Right wing idiots would do well to remember that people fought and died to get the union rights they have now, and would do it again.
 
2012-12-12 03:52:30 AM  

log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.


Arrrggghhhh!!!

"Right to Work" doesn't mean that. Jebus. LOOK IT UP
In a "Right to Work" state you may not be forced to join a union or forced to pay dues to a union in order to get a job. It has absolutely nothing to do with 'firing at anytime'
 
2012-12-12 03:54:38 AM  
So after the tent fell, did the unions

a) go out on strike
b) go on break
c) filed a grievance

?
 
2012-12-12 03:55:19 AM  
If it was Hannity they'll never get a conviction.
 
2012-12-12 03:55:22 AM  
www.kansasheritage.org
Pleased
 
2012-12-12 03:57:07 AM  

NobleHam: "Lsherm: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.

If it prevents the kind of misery and death we saw until the 1920s and '30s in non-unionized labor, then it's well worth it."



Yeah - that's totally what workers are threatened with today.


NobleHam: "The Right wing idiots would do well to remember that people fought and died to get the union rights they have now..."


...which have since been permanently enshrined as law in the labor code and are guaranteed. So, what precious rights is the Proletariat violently fighting for now? (Note: being able to force people to join a union and pay dues before they can get a job is not a right.)
 
2012-12-12 03:57:12 AM  

CujoQuarrel: "Right to Work" doesn't mean that. Jebus. LOOK IT UP
In a "Right to Work" state you may not be forced to join a union or forced to pay dues to a union in order to get a job. It has absolutely nothing to do with 'firing at anytime'


And North Korea is a democracy. It says so right in the title. LOOK IT UP.
 
2012-12-12 03:57:35 AM  

CujoQuarrel: log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.

Arrrggghhhh!!!

"Right to Work" doesn't mean that. Jebus. LOOK IT UP
In a "Right to Work" state you may not be forced to join a union or forced to pay dues to a union in order to get a job. It has absolutely nothing to do with 'firing at anytime' enjoy the rights a union negotiates for, without any of the responsibility.


FTFY, leeches.

/Of course, that's just what the lazy right-to-work moochers think. If every worker in a shop isn't compelled to join the union, the union has almost no negotiating power.
//But hey, lazy right-to-work moochers, like most Republicans, have no foresight.
 
2012-12-12 03:59:26 AM  
so... the people protesting are simply protesting because they dont like their right to be able to force other people to join them being removed?

Are these people americans or communists?
 
2012-12-12 04:00:58 AM  

log_jammin: reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all,


You're thinking of an "at will" state.

The two tend to go together but they don't have to be mutually inclusive.
 
2012-12-12 04:01:00 AM  

Relatively Obscure: Weaver95: Relatively Obscure:
Like I said, that dude was a Grade A douchebag.

so is Fox News...

Fox news isn't a douchebag. It employs them.


Are you sure? Corporations are people too, after all.
 
2012-12-12 04:06:20 AM  

GAT_00: But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.


And don't forget: lame-duck session too. This was a brazen, deliberate fark-you to the people of Michigan.
 
2012-12-12 04:06:25 AM  
Put down your farking pearls, nancies. People get punched sometimes. It's not the end of the world.

You'd be pissed too if a group of shady politicians just gave you a $5,300 a year paycut AFTER they had been voted out of office. And then to be harassed by some corporate stooge from a propaganda arm that convinces millions of Americans that you're the reason for everything that's wrong with this country...let's just be thankful that no guns or knives were involved.
 
2012-12-12 04:07:43 AM  
"Right-to-work" is better than Unions anyway.
 
2012-12-12 04:07:59 AM  

Snapper Carr: You're thinking of an "at will" state.

The two tend to go together but they don't have to be mutually inclusive.


Snapper Carr: log_jammin: reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all,

You're thinking of an "at will" state.

The two tend to go together but they don't have to be mutually inclusive.


You're right, I am.

apologizes CujoQuarrel
 
2012-12-12 04:09:08 AM  

kvinesknows: so... the people protesting are simply protesting because they dont like their right to be able to force other people to join them being removed?

Are these people americans or communists?


You can always work somewhere that doesn't have a union; as far as I know, there are no states where non-union shops are banned. Sure, the pay and benefits will suck, and you have no real protection from higher-ups shiatting on you, but you'll have stuck it to those darn unions!
 
2012-12-12 04:10:48 AM  

Lsherm: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

Technically in the slide show:

[img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.



Thank you.
 
2012-12-12 04:11:37 AM  

Weaver95: except that GAT has a point - fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse. the local MI Republicans already antagonized the unions and pissed off the local Democrats. then along comes fox news (and a few tea baggers) to jump in and gloat about how great it was that the lame duck session was used by their hero Republicans to ramrod some unpopular legislation through congress and hey, it's just wonderful to see such dirty tricks used to great effect.

i'm actually impressed the local unions showed as much restraint as they did.


Agreed. The Fox News people are lucky they didn't get killed. I'm not even exaggerating. Killed. You have an angry mob that was just told to go fark itself and they go in there telling the country how great it is that the mob got farked over? They could have been torn limb from limb. And a less restrained group of people very probably would have done it, too.

The guy who got punched in the face is lucky to even be alive.
 
2012-12-12 04:14:42 AM  

BSABSVR: Not even posted yet, and this thread already has the neighborhood fat kids and overnight IT guys acting pretend tough.

This will just be an epic goddamn cluster fark when all is said and done.



It sucks to see people acting like animals, but somehow, I still just can't bring myself to feel sorry with anyone associated with fux news.

jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com
/oblig.
 
2012-12-12 04:15:51 AM  

Weaver95: violentsalvation: Some people don't want to participate in your little scam, you stupid unions.

this has nothing to do with unions. want someone to blame? yell at the GOP. their dirty tricks created this mess. of COURSE it was gonna turn ugly. what did you expect would happen?

i'm not condoning violence but I am saying that this entire disaster was easily avoidable.


How many times do i have to tell you i love you?

/And how many times are you and GAT on the same page, i wonder?
 
2012-12-12 04:20:17 AM  
the man in the union jacket deserves a medal
 
2012-12-12 04:20:57 AM  

spmkk: NobleHam: "Lsherm: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.

If it prevents the kind of misery and death we saw until the 1920s and '30s in non-unionized labor, then it's well worth it."


Yeah - that's totally what workers are threatened with today.


NobleHam: "The Right wing idiots would do well to remember that people fought and died to get the union rights they have now..."

...which have since been permanently enshrined as law in the labor code and are guaranteed. So, what precious rights is the Proletariat violently fighting for now? (Note: being able to force people to join a union and pay dues before they can get a job is not a right.)


Is this really what republicans now believe? That a massive, unelected regulatory apparatus is GOOD for the country? Anything for The Cause, I suppose.

What happens when a Republican gets back in the White House and starts dismantling protections and pro-labor enforcement? Hell, even under Democratic administrations, agencies like OSHA are woefully undermanned and under-funded to prosecute all violations nationwide. Are you comfortable with the idea that all of your contracted rights are subject to the whims of an opaque political process? I'm certainly not.
 
2012-12-12 04:25:29 AM  
Never mind punched, the Fox guy should be fired. Last I checked, being a "reporter" meant you were supposed to cover the news, not tell protesters to stop breaking stuff. When douches like him make it ok for reporters to be hit, it means stuff won't get covered and we as a people will be less informed.

Its Fox, I should know better than to have expectations...
 
2012-12-12 04:26:51 AM  
Also, let's stop pretending like this has anything to do with "right and wrong.". This was a political hit job and nothing more. Unions support The Enemy, and must be destroyed at all costs. Everything else is just marketing BS.

Or is someone here dumb enough to try to argue that if unions were strongly supportive of the GOP, they'd still be doing this because of "freedom"?
 
2012-12-12 04:27:18 AM  

fusillade762: log_jammin: now the submitter has a nice trolltastic headline that all the other trolls get to masturbate to once this goes green.

It's a union thread, why should things be any different? 

Let's get things started in the other direction:

Overzealous staffer
Republican plant


I was wondering if I was the only one reminded of the Parlock family shenanigans.
 
2012-12-12 04:31:19 AM  

log_jammin: Video of the dude getting punched.

1. He was trolling the crowd.

2. another union member stopped the first guy.


I do find it interesting (given the recent history of Republicans and strategically edited videos), that the video never reveals what Crowder said to set the crowd off.

/Not that mob violence needs a justification - it can just happen but I'm not totally trusting of a FNC employed journalist's side of the story
 
2012-12-12 04:33:05 AM  

spmkk: NobleHam: "Lsherm: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.

If it prevents the kind of misery and death we saw until the 1920s and '30s in non-unionized labor, then it's well worth it."


Yeah - that's totally what workers are threatened with today.


NobleHam: "The Right wing idiots would do well to remember that people fought and died to get the union rights they have now..."

...which have since been permanently enshrined as law in the labor code and are guaranteed. So, what precious rights is the Proletariat violently fighting for now? (Note: being able to force people to join a union and pay dues before they can get a job is not a right.)


Who knows what the plutocrats will try next. I'd like to have strong unions in place when the corporations come out with their next great idea to cut costs and increase profits at the expense of their workers' welfare. "Right-to-work" laws are intended to break unions. I hope they won't, I hope there won't be any scabs, that people will voluntarily join unions and pay dues, but their intent is to destroy worker's rights.
 
2012-12-12 04:36:55 AM  

spmkk: NobleHam: "Lsherm: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.

If it prevents the kind of misery and death we saw until the 1920s and '30s in non-unionized labor, then it's well worth it."


Yeah - that's totally what workers are threatened with today.


NobleHam: "The Right wing idiots would do well to remember that people fought and died to get the union rights they have now..."

...which have since been permanently enshrined as law in the labor code and are guaranteed. So, what precious rights is the Proletariat violently fighting for now? (Note: being able to force people to join a union and pay dues before they can get a job is not a right.)


After all, it's not like laws can be changed, or that there's a huge chunk of the working class willing to vote against their best interests, just to spite 'the libs', or that most of our government is in the pocket of big businesses....
 
2012-12-12 04:37:22 AM  

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: Also, let's stop pretending like this has anything to do with "right and wrong.". This was a political hit job and nothing more. Unions support The Enemy, and must be destroyed at all costs. Everything else is just marketing BS.

Or is someone here dumb enough to try to argue that if unions were strongly supportive of the GOP, they'd still be doing this because of "freedom"?


Oh. Ok.

/-1 no trolltasticness there.
 
2012-12-12 04:38:50 AM  

Snapper Carr: but I'm not totally trusting of a FNC employed journalist's side of the story


If you look at the guys youtube channel, this seems to be his sort of thing.
 
2012-12-12 04:43:52 AM  
For some reason, I can't imagine any of the union defenders extending the same benefit of the doubt to TEA Party protesters had they been goaded by reporters and exchanged punches.

Maybe it's just me, but assaulting people for asking questions that annoy you is a douche thing to do and political affiliation should not influence that in any way.
 
2012-12-12 04:43:53 AM  

homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.


YEAH! screw those people who want a right to work without being forced to pay to be in your club!
 
2012-12-12 04:45:09 AM  

Relatively Obscure: 'm picturing you with breasts right now. It brightens


Don't do that, I've always had this idea that Weaver is kind of up there in years, and when I read that I had a flashing image of wrinkled hanging bags. eeww
/sorry weaver
 
2012-12-12 04:45:19 AM  

super_grass: to TEA Party protesters had they been goaded by reporters


do you have video of that?
 
2012-12-12 04:45:47 AM  

I sound fat: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

YEAH! screw those people who want a right to work decent wages and working conditions without being forced to pay to be in your club working for them!


FTFY
 
2012-12-12 04:46:54 AM  
What is this about?
/Sorry I am clueless
 
2012-12-12 04:46:55 AM  
Righties: Ya know how unfair it feels when the Lefties tell you that you are racist because they saw a picture of a Rightie being racist?

Well, saying :union members" punched a reporter because one did.....
 
2012-12-12 04:47:03 AM  

I sound fat: YEAH! screw those people who want a right to work without being forced to pay to be in your club!


odd how the only workers the GOP cares about are the ones who don't want to pay union dues.
 
2012-12-12 04:47:59 AM  

video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.


Just like Papa Joe used to use. Like in the good old days when it was acceptable to kill hundreds of millions because college professors agreed with you.
 
2012-12-12 04:48:05 AM  

log_jammin: I sound fat: YEAH! screw those people who want a right to work without being forced to pay to be in your club!

odd how the only workers the GOP cares about are the ones who don't want to pay union dues.


So, its okay to force people to be in your club?
 
2012-12-12 04:48:06 AM  

I sound fat: Righties: Ya know how unfair it feels when the Lefties tell you that you are racist because they saw a picture of a Rightie being racist?

Well, saying :union members" punched a reporter because one did.....


....and one broke it up. so I guess that means all union members break up fights.
 
2012-12-12 04:48:27 AM  

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: "What happens when a Republican gets back in the White House and starts dismantling protections and pro-labor enforcement?"



Tell me more about how Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. dismantled union protections (especially in Michigan) and sent the labor landscape back to 1920.
 
2012-12-12 04:49:43 AM  

Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.

I think you can and do sometimes.


If you ever retort against GAT, he will cry to the fat mods and they will ban you. It's happened before.
 
2012-12-12 04:49:48 AM  

I sound fat: So, its okay to force people to be in your club?


So you think the GOP is upset that people are being "forced to join a club" and decided to put a stop to it?
 
2012-12-12 04:50:26 AM  

I sound fat: Righties: Ya know how unfair it feels when the Lefties tell you that you are racist because they saw a picture of a Rightie being racist?

Well, saying :union members" punched a reporter because one guy in a union jacket did.....


FTFY. In a world where Republicans champion scum like James O'Keefe, I'm taking this with several grains of salt. Seriously, someone seems to live up to the 'Union thug' stereotype in front of a Fox News camera? Not impossible, but definitely suspicious.
 
2012-12-12 04:50:42 AM  

log_jammin: super_grass: to TEA Party protesters had they been goaded by reporters

do you have video of that?


I think you're trying to not get the point and instead is trying to bring up a red herring.
 
2012-12-12 04:52:29 AM  

log_jammin: I sound fat: So, its okay to force people to be in your club?

So you think the GOP is upset that people are being "forced to join a club" and decided to put a stop to it?


Well, im not GOP, but I know I dont want to be in a union.

Why does everything have to be D v R?
 
2012-12-12 04:53:58 AM  

log_jammin: I sound fat: So, its okay to force people to be in your club?

So you think the GOP is upset that people are being "forced to join a club" and decided to put a stop to it?


Again, so its OKAY to require someone to think like you to work in your shop?
 
2012-12-12 04:54:29 AM  

LordJiro: I sound fat: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

YEAH! screw those people who want a right to work decent wages and working conditions without being forced to pay to be in your club working for them!

FTFY


If people are upset with lab or conditions, they can join a union, if not they can choose not to.

If you can't see how government mandated labor cartels can have unintended consequences, then there is no hope for you.
 
2012-12-12 04:55:18 AM  
Cause if its OKAY for someone to HAVE to join the union and most union members *ARE* Democrats, are you saying its OKAY to force someone to have the same political views as you to work with you?
 
2012-12-12 04:55:49 AM  

super_grass: I think you're trying to not get the point and instead is trying to bring up a red herring.


so that DIDN'T happen. Ok then. glad we cleared that up, and you recognize that you are comparing something that actually happened to a hypothetical that hasn't actually occurred outside of your own mind.
 
2012-12-12 04:58:54 AM  
So the argument here is anti-choice. Instead of punching people and reinforcing a stereotype, how about the unions do a better job of convincing workers to join? If giving people the choice to opt-out is a threat to their existence, then perhaps they don't deserve to survive.
 
2012-12-12 04:59:15 AM  

super_grass: LordJiro: I sound fat: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

YEAH! screw those people who want a right to work decent wages and working conditions without being forced to pay to be in your club working for them!

FTFY

If people are upset with lab or conditions, they can join a union, if not they can choose not to.

If you can't see how government mandated labor cartels can have unintended consequences, then there is no hope for you.


You aren't forced to work in a union shop; no state MANDATES unions. But if you CHOOSE to work in a union shop, there are certain responsibilities that come with the benefits.
 
2012-12-12 04:59:19 AM  

I sound fat: Well, im not GOP, but I know I dont want to be in a union.

Why does everything have to be D v R?


so don't join a union.

And because that's what the whole thing is about. R's doing what the can to squash unions. as they've done for decades. Yet they try to pass it off in this case that suddenly it's not about helping business, it's about protecting those poor exploited workers forced to join a union.


I sound fat: Again, so its OKAY to require someone to think like you to work in your shop?


to "think like you"? wtf are you talking about?
 
2012-12-12 04:59:56 AM  

I sound fat: Cause if its OKAY for someone to HAVE to join the union and most union members *ARE* Democrats, are you saying its OKAY to force someone to have the same political views as you to work with you?


LOL!
 
2012-12-12 05:02:59 AM  

I sound fat: Cause if its OKAY for someone to HAVE to join the union and most union members *ARE* Democrats, are you saying its OKAY to force someone to have the same political views as you to work with you?


I think it's OK for two private entities to make and keep a contract without the state interfering.
But then, I'm a REAL conservative, and not one of you fake ones.
 
2012-12-12 05:08:48 AM  
My job requires me to wear certain cloths on the job. Those items are only sold by business owners. Most business owners are republican. therefore, my job is forcing my to have the same political views as them and the republican party.

ta-da!
 
2012-12-12 05:11:15 AM  

log_jammin: super_grass: I think you're trying to not get the point and instead is trying to bring up a red herring.

so that DIDN'T happen. Ok then. glad we cleared that up, and you recognize that you are comparing something that actually happened to a hypothetical that hasn't actually occurred outside of your own mind.


You either have to be in denial or be partisan enough to lack any self awareness to seriously think that there isn't a double standard here.

The TP has been accused of being violent over people with legal firearms and musket replicas yet union members get a pass on assault. If you can't put two and two together than I recommend asking for a refund from your school.
 
2012-12-12 05:15:49 AM  
Freedom and democracy, the two things so called progressives fear the most.
 
2012-12-12 05:17:07 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Freedom and democracy, the two things so called progressives fear the most.


People who actually work for a living: One of many things Republicans can't stand.
 
2012-12-12 05:19:20 AM  

super_grass: You either have to be in denial or be partisan enough to lack any self awareness to seriously think that there isn't a double standard here.


I'm more than willing to consider if there is or isn't a double standard. That's why I asked if you had video of a reporter harassing tea party protesters, and getting punched over it. I mean, that was the example you gave.

super_grass: yet union members get a pass on assault.


1. It was one guy, not "members".
2. he was not given "a pass".
 
2012-12-12 05:19:57 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Freedom and democracy, the two things so called progressives fear the most.


weak.
 
2012-12-12 05:23:06 AM  

LordJiro: david_gaithersburg: Freedom and democracy, the two things so called progressives fear the most.

People who actually work for a living: One of many things Republicans can't stand.

.
.
blah, blah, blah The Republicans are the one's passing laws allowing people to work, the unions are fighting to prevent people from working unles they pay shake down money. I have many friends with small companies that have been kicked off of jobs because their 3-4 man company wasn't paying dues to union lawyers.

Fark you buddy.
 
2012-12-12 05:25:07 AM  

david_gaithersburg: the unions are fighting to prevent people from working unles they pay shake down money.


well aren't you stupid
 
2012-12-12 05:27:01 AM  
its not reporting when you go incite a riot and then make a video of it.


FOX has no shame and no sense and just panders to idiots who cant think for themselves.
 
2012-12-12 05:27:48 AM  

david_gaithersburg: LordJiro: david_gaithersburg: Freedom and democracy, the two things so called progressives fear the most.

People who actually work for a living: One of many things Republicans can't stand.
.
.
blah, blah, blah The Republicans are the one's passing laws allowing people to work, the unions are fighting to prevent people from working at workplaces that have a union unles they pay shake down money. I have many friends with small companies that have been kicked off of jobs because their 3-4 man company wasn't paying dues to union lawyers.

Fark you buddy.


FTFY. You're free to work a non-union job. But if your workplace has a union and you aren't a part of it, you're a parasite. Unless, of course, you sign a waiver preventing yourself from receiving the wages and benefits a union negotiates for.
 
2012-12-12 05:27:56 AM  

david_gaithersburg: I have many friends with small companies that have been kicked off of jobs because their 3-4 man company wasn't paying dues to union lawyersthey're scabs.

 
2012-12-12 05:27:57 AM  
Bbbbbut Gox News was trolling them!

Get real.

What if I decked somebody in real life for something he said on Fark? Do I get to use his trolling as an excuse?
 
2012-12-12 05:28:11 AM  

CujoQuarrel: log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.

Arrrggghhhh!!!

"Right to Work" doesn't mean that. Jebus. LOOK IT UP
In a "Right to Work" state you may not be forced to join a union or forced to pay dues to a union in order to get a job. It has absolutely nothing to do with 'firing at anytime'


I normally dont weigh in on the politics tab because its much more fun to read the threadshiatters insane comments and laugh at the childish trolling all over the spectrum, however having worked in a right to work state, and one that is fairly backwards even by that standard (Arizona) I feel I have a compelling reason to weigh in here.

Having worked in Arizona for 17 years I can say definitively that right to work means exactly what the gentlemen you quoted said it means, and the employees remind you of that both when you are first hired and if you ever get written up or disciplined on the job.

They have the right to:
A) fire you at any time
B) fire you for any reason
C) fire you for no reason what so ever

The employers remind you of these facts. What is happening in Michigan is a special case. In Arizona, a right to work state, union dues must be payed by people who are not part of the union regardless (see the teachers union, of who my mother was a teacher, not part of the union and still had to pay dues to). What the Michigan legislator did was strip the mandatory dues payments because it breaks the very structure that gives the unions so much leverage and power. And anyone who tells you this was for economical reasons is lying through their teeth. This was a simple power play for politics and nothing more. Unions overwhelmingly support democrats and fund democrats as one of if not the top donors in most local elections and national elections. Break up unions and you break their political power. The Michigan legislator simply wimped out and called it a "right to work" bill instead of calling what it really is "bust union power so we can win elections easier" bill.

I have no problem with republicans TRYING to put such measures to the public vote, assuming they are legitimately put to public vote. That is how democracy works. However, them ramming it through, on a lame duck session, after most of those guys have been voted out of office, in a closed door shady way, and also using loopholes that make it so that the public cant overturn it on a ballot referendum is just disgusting.

I try to see things from the republican perspective so that I can get a better rounded opinion and I would like to have a true center right and center left party divide but sadly all the republicans seem to be doing lately is going farther and farther out into the deep end of the pool and making me even more ardently democrat then I already was and stifling any real debate. Its very sad. I wonder how many life long democratic voters they are creating with all this nonsense behavior.

Also I fully expect that the next Michigan legislative session's first agenda goal will be to straight up repeal this, and I think that is great. A race to the bottom gets everyone to the bottom and then we all lose. Thank you republicans for once again proving that you are completely incapable of seeing the bigger longer term picture.
 
2012-12-12 05:29:22 AM  

Elandriel: Consider the sustained attack against worker's rights to organize and negotiate for a better station in life vs. owners, this is a logical progression. We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.

People probably will end up dying for their rights again before this is settled. And, we'll probably come back to it again in another 80 years.


Yeah, interestingly enough, the industrial revolution is probably too young for us to have observed any cyclical events yet, but yes we may be heading back to another violent conflict over workers rights.

Personally, I find it the logical and likely due to the fact that there is only so much stress you can apply to the middle and lower classes before their only recourse is violence. Even in primitive societies, worker uprisings were relatively common - the only difference is that today, it's unlikely that the military in a democracy could be leveraged to supress it and keep society in event.

Essentially we may be looking at another french revolution like event, except on a scale that would dwarf the original one.
 
2012-12-12 05:32:13 AM  

drjekel_mrhyde: What is this about?
/Sorry I am clueless


A guy got punched. If this was a bar at 2 am no one would care.
 
2012-12-12 05:34:19 AM  

Maximum Snark: the employees remind you of that


employees = employers

/sorry missed that one
//even proof read this TWICE before posting
///curse these fingers for not moving as fast as my brain!
 
2012-12-12 05:34:22 AM  

log_jammin: david_gaithersburg: I have many friends with small companies that have been kicked off of jobs because their 3-4 man company wasn't paying dues to union lawyersthey're scabs.


True story, idiot. Friend of mine was hired to paint doors at the Coke bottling plant. Kicked off the property because his two man operation was'nt paying dues to rich lawyers in NY. How the fark is painting a farking door at a farking bottling plant being a scab. We The People demand the basic human right to work. Fark you you piece of shiat.
 
2012-12-12 05:35:59 AM  
img651.imageshack.us

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")
 
2012-12-12 05:38:05 AM  

david_gaithersburg: was'nt paying dues to rich lawyers in NY.


LOL!
 
182
2012-12-12 05:38:09 AM  

log_jammin: Video of the dude getting punched.

1. He was trolling the crowd.

2. another union member stopped the first guy.


hahahahahahaha!
 
2012-12-12 05:38:59 AM  

GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.


assets.nydailynews.com

"We have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it"
 
2012-12-12 05:40:09 AM  

3StratMan: [img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")


comments like this do nothing to further this "typical exchange" you are talking about. If anything all these comments do is make incidents like this more common. But yes one's political leanings has a direct correlation to ones inclinations of punching someone in the face. I'd love to see a peer reviewed and published study proving such a link

/flame on threadshiatter
//grow up and join the rest of us educated civilized citizens you ape
 
2012-12-12 05:42:34 AM  

182: log_jammin: Video of the dude getting punched.

1. He was trolling the crowd.

2. another union member stopped the first guy.

hahahahahahaha!


feel free to point out what I said that was inaccurate.
 
2012-12-12 05:46:31 AM  

GAT_00: Lsherm: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

Technically in the slide show:

[img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.

Lsherm: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

Technically in the slide show:

[img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.

More likely to be true then, but until I see people vouching that this guy is a member of that union, I still refuse to completely believe it. I have no trouble believing that Fox would stage that to discredit the protesters.


Yeah, and the incident where Chrysler UNION workers got caught on camera toking and drinking on their lunch break, got fired, and 2 years later got their jobs back (with back pay, do doubt) was probably all staged by FOX2 as well.
 
2012-12-12 05:49:25 AM  
I live in Michigan and I work in an industry that is not union and I still think what Snyder did should be illegal. He has been a disaster for our economy and for our future. The good thing though is that if republicans continue to push these unpopular measures through without getting public opinion let alone a Vote they will not be in power for long. Poor people tend to care more about what their leadership is doing than the wealthy. If a governor believes that supporting owners and not workers is the best way to stay in power they will be swiftly and loudly reminded of how wrong they are. The owner will give you 1 vote to the workers 100.
 
2012-12-12 05:52:34 AM  

Maximum Snark: 3StratMan: [img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")

comments like this do nothing to further this "typical exchange" you are talking about. If anything all these comments do is make incidents like this more common. But yes one's political leanings has a direct correlation to ones inclinations of punching someone in the face. I'd love to see a peer reviewed and published study proving such a link

/flame on threadshiatter
//grow up and join the rest of us educated civilized citizens you ape


Good thing this exchange isn't happening in person. The "tolerance" shows up immediately, as usual. Don't really feel like getting injured today.
 
2012-12-12 05:54:14 AM  

3StratMan: Maximum Snark: 3StratMan: [img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")

comments like this do nothing to further this "typical exchange" you are talking about. If anything all these comments do is make incidents like this more common. But yes one's political leanings has a direct correlation to ones inclinations of punching someone in the face. I'd love to see a peer reviewed and published study proving such a link

/flame on threadshiatter
//grow up and join the rest of us educated civilized citizens you ape

Good thing this exchange isn't happening in person. The "tolerance" shows up immediately, as usual. Don't really feel like getting injured today.


I'm sure you realize that the first bolded bit was obvious sarcasm. I mean, otherwise, you'd be a complete dipshiat!
 
2012-12-12 05:54:42 AM  
ah yes

3StratMan: Maximum Snark: 3StratMan: [img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")

comments like this do nothing to further this "typical exchange" you are talking about. If anything all these comments do is make incidents like this more common. But yes one's political leanings has a direct correlation to ones inclinations of punching someone in the face. I'd love to see a peer reviewed and published study proving such a link

/flame on threadshiatter
//grow up and join the rest of us educated civilized citizens you ape

Good thing this exchange isn't happening in person. The "tolerance" shows up immediately, as usual. Don't really feel like getting injured today.


ah yes, keep baiting. And nice bolding one your part and not actually address any of the things either in the comment or that you bolded. Pretty typical from a threadshiatter. Your troll-fu is weak young man. Needs more disiprin.
 
2012-12-12 05:56:51 AM  

LordJiro: 3StratMan: Maximum Snark: 3StratMan: [img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")

comments like this do nothing to further this "typical exchange" you are talking about. If anything all these comments do is make incidents like this more common. But yes one's political leanings has a direct correlation to ones inclinations of punching someone in the face. I'd love to see a peer reviewed and published study proving such a link

/flame on threadshiatter
//grow up and join the rest of us educated civilized citizens you ape

Good thing this exchange isn't happening in person. The "tolerance" shows up immediately, as usual. Don't really feel like getting injured today.

I'm sure you realize that the first bolded bit was obvious sarcasm. I mean, otherwise, you'd be a complete dipshiat!


nah man, im sure he isnt a dip shiat at all. I am sure he is a well educated, well rounded, and probably well spoken (in a real face to face conversation) individual who doesn't immediately jump to illogical and irrational conclusions without hearing any differing facts or opinions and taking them into consideration.
 
2012-12-12 05:59:05 AM  

cassapolis: I live in Michigan and I work in an industry that is not union and I still think what Snyder did should be illegal. He has been a disaster for our economy and for our future. The good thing though is that if republicans continue to push these unpopular measures through without getting public opinion let alone a Vote they will not be in power for long. Poor people tend to care more about what their leadership is doing than the wealthy. If a governor believes that supporting owners and not workers is the best way to stay in power they will be swiftly and loudly reminded of how wrong they are. The owner will give you 1 vote to the workers 100.


Except you probably don't want to have a vote on RTW either. The vote on the bridge proposal didn't work out so well for the unions either. Considering only about 18% of workers in Michigan are union, I'd bet that RTW would pass at the ballot boxes as well, especially after the way the union people conducted themselves in front of the whole nation yesterday.
 
2012-12-12 06:01:37 AM  

GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: You could have c/p'd that from a Freep post about a different article.

No you couldn't have. No Freeper would have said that it wasn't appropriate or would consider it assault. I'm not demanding we round people up and put them into camps. Fox went there to gloat about taking people's rights away. You gloat in someone's face about how they just beat you, people tend to punch you in the face. That's a normal, though overly aggressive, response in dozens of scenarios.

log_jammin: so what you are saying is, you can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy, so long as it's your enemy as well. which is all well and good, but be honest about it.

See above. And yeah, if I went to an anti-gay marriage rally and gloated to someone's face about how gays were going to get married and they couldn't stop it, I'd expect to be punched in the face too.


It's the same concept as Epic Beard Man/Amberlamps: regardless of who is less of a douchebag here, you have to exercise common sense. Antagonizing someone who's on the breaking point is a great way to have that person stomp a mudhole through you.
 
2012-12-12 06:01:50 AM  

3StratMan: cassapolis: I live in Michigan and I work in an industry that is not union and I still think what Snyder did should be illegal. He has been a disaster for our economy and for our future. The good thing though is that if republicans continue to push these unpopular measures through without getting public opinion let alone a Vote they will not be in power for long. Poor people tend to care more about what their leadership is doing than the wealthy. If a governor believes that supporting owners and not workers is the best way to stay in power they will be swiftly and loudly reminded of how wrong they are. The owner will give you 1 vote to the workers 100.

Except you probably don't want to have a vote on RTW either. The vote on the bridge proposal didn't work out so well for the unions either. Considering only about 18% of workers in Michigan are union, I'd bet that RTW would pass at the ballot boxes as well, especially after the way the union people conducted themselves in front of the whole nation yesterday.


Then why not put it up for a public vote then if you are SO SURE it would pass at the ballot level? Why ram it through on a lame duck session? Why use a provisional loop hole to prevent the voters from putting up a repeal ballot initiative? Why do all of this in a close door session and do it as fast as possible (the fastest a bill has ever been passed in Michigan history btw)? Why do all this if you are SO SURE that it would pass at the ballot?
 
2012-12-12 06:04:41 AM  
What a bunch of thugs. Good job beating up the fox guy.
 
2012-12-12 06:05:09 AM  

log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.


That's "at-will employment" that you are describing. Admittedly, most "right to work" states are also at-will, but it IS a different thing. One typically paves the way for the other.
 
2012-12-12 06:06:36 AM  

spmkk: NobleHam: "Lsherm: homelessdude: video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.

I was just about to say the same thing. Enough is enough.

I agree. Beating people you disagree with is the best way to get the point across that you won't make a good employee. The arrest records should keep them out of the job pool long enough for more qualified people to join in.

If it prevents the kind of misery and death we saw until the 1920s and '30s in non-unionized labor, then it's well worth it."


Yeah - that's totally what workers are threatened with today.


Dude, people died in the non-union Massey coal mine disaster pretty farking recently.

You might also want to google modern slavery convictions in Florida.
 
2012-12-12 06:07:59 AM  

Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.

I think you can and do sometimes.


Of course he does. He's the biggest hypocrite on here. He wines and cries when things don't go his way. He says he hates guns and violence, but it's ok when it's for things he supports.
 
2012-12-12 06:08:45 AM  
If only more trolls in life got punched. Helpful? No, but I'd imagine it feels really good.
 
2012-12-12 06:08:54 AM  
Huh, the Phelps clan seems to work at Fox News now.
Exploit terrible events by goading and gloating until the target's emotions override their logic.
Collect your reward.
 
2012-12-12 06:12:09 AM  
stay classy unions!
 
2012-12-12 06:14:46 AM  

3StratMan: [img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

What a typical exchange between a person with a right-leaning opinion (guy on left) and a FarkLib (guy on right) probably would look like if they met in person. (Based on most Fark political "conversations")


I like to think REAL right wingers aren't shallow, amoral, blow-dried pussies. Heck, there's a few on this site that are pretty smart.

I DO hope you're not confusing Fox-Republican with conservative...it's a common mistake.
 
2012-12-12 06:15:52 AM  
So where were the little old ladies and such?
 
2012-12-12 06:20:31 AM  

Fish_Fight!: stay classy unions Fox News plants!


FTFY. Fox News is not credible, and far right-wingers in general have a proven history of fabricating 'incidents' to make groups of political opponents look bad.

I'll need a lot more evidence than "He's wearing a jacket" before I think of this as anything but yet another O'Keefe/backwards B dumbshiat stunt by the right.
 
2012-12-12 06:20:53 AM  

KrmtDfrog: So where were the little old ladies and such?


They got crushed by the truck full of dead nuns and puppies that were tossed over them.
 
2012-12-12 06:21:06 AM  

Tigger: We shouldn't be punching Fox News MSNBC reporters.

We should be burning them alive in the public square - pour encourager les autres.


fun game is fun
 
2012-12-12 06:22:31 AM  
Union rant:

Look, there is a time and a place for unions. No one can look at the history of coal mining and not see that they've done a lot of good. BUT, unions get out of hand farking fast. You know what the east coast ILA is threatening to strike over, effectively shutting down the entire east and gulf coasts shipping? Labor guarantees. Union members literally get paid a minimum of 8 hours per company.
So if you show up to work, work 1 hour unloading 1 ship then work a full 8-hour shift on another ship in a day you get paid for 16 hours. Why? Because they keep shutting down the damn ports to get their way.

When unions are needed, they're great. Unfortunately, unions are rarely NEEDED.
/rant
 
2012-12-12 06:22:50 AM  

BSABSVR: trivial use of my dark powers: OK, union guys, stop hitting people unless they hit you first.

Especially guys with cameras who are intentionally trolling you so you'll hit them.


I didn't realize that Khalisah Bint Sinan al-Jilani had joined Fox News.
 
2012-12-12 06:23:51 AM  

3StratMan: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

[assets.nydailynews.com image 485x323]

"We have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it"


I still can't figure out how Skeletor got elected to Congress
 
2012-12-12 06:24:18 AM  

cassapolis: I live in Michigan and I work in an industry that is not union and I still think what Snyder did should be illegal. He has been a disaster for our economy and for our future.


^^^^^^^^
Now that is funny. Yeah, Michigan, especially Detroit, were booming so called progressive utopian paradises up till yesterday.
 
2012-12-12 06:27:12 AM  
2 scenarios:

1. Who wouldn't want to punch FOX news in the face?

2. Fox News would certainly pay for someone to punch them in the face for more derpitude......

3. Farkwads would actually like to work harder for less money so that CEO's and the like have a bigger christmas bonus.
 
2012-12-12 06:29:06 AM  

mike_d85: Union rant:

Look, there is a time and a place for unions. No one can look at the history of coal mining and not see that they've done a lot of good. BUT, unions get out of hand farking fast. You know what the east coast ILA is threatening to strike over, effectively shutting down the entire east and gulf coasts shipping? Labor guarantees. Union members literally get paid a minimum of 8 hours per company.
So if you show up to work, work 1 hour unloading 1 ship then work a full 8-hour shift on another ship in a day you get paid for 16 hours. Why? Because they keep shutting down the damn ports to get their way.

When unions are needed, they're great. Unfortunately, unions are rarely NEEDED.
/rant


Republicans are already trying to break unions so they can further skullfark the workers. If unions went away when they 'weren't needed', they would never be able to reform when they ARE needed.
 
2012-12-12 06:39:55 AM  
If you are a part of/acting for a funded and supported arm of ALEC (or one of their supporters), the last place you want to be is in the middle of the constituency that opposes your presence. They were setting themselves up to be an attractive nuisance by doing everything to invite a fight.

If anything, this should bring out required transparency for private organizations that deal with the government. In addition, it should invite a discussion on whether multi-state coalitions that exert control over individual states(ALEC/AFP) should be required to disclose everything they do to any interested party.

/States rights never was intended to support a multi-state coalition that acts like its own country
//it was meant for states to act individually
///states dont secede, they just get taken over by ALEC
 
2012-12-12 06:41:47 AM  
So... we're back to this weird argument where a bunch of people think the victim of a crime being a moron and the perpetrator of the crime being responsible for the crime are mutually exclusive when both are clearly simultaneously the case?
 
2012-12-12 06:46:31 AM  

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: Put down your farking pearls, nancies. People get punched sometimes. It's not the end of the world.

You'd be pissed too if a group of shady politicians just gave you a $5,300 a year paycut AFTER they had been voted out of office. And then to be harassed by some corporate stooge from a propaganda arm that convinces millions of Americans that you're the reason for everything that's wrong with this country...let's just be thankful that no guns or knives were involved.


THIS.

Not something to advocate, but when the legislature is effectively an unaccountable high-speed vehicle for passing undesirable legislation, pissing off the governed is not the best thing to do.

Now how long until you start seeing firms like Strom Engineering expand into Michigan to Southernize the work force and labor relations firms like Jackson Lewis to ensure that unions die even when wanted?
 
2012-12-12 06:52:50 AM  

Jim_Callahan: So... we're back to this weird argument where a bunch of people think the victim of a crime being a moron and the perpetrator of the crime being responsible for the crime are mutually exclusive when both are clearly simultaneously the case?


Given Fox' track record, until they can prove otherwise, we may be justified in assuming their reporter hit the union guy first, and then they faked the footage.

We ARE talking about the network that was basically blaming the workers killed overseas in that recent garment factory fire.

Loss of credibility is a hard thing to overcome :)
 
2012-12-12 06:52:50 AM  

I sound fat: Cause if its OKAY for someone to HAVE to join the union and most union members *ARE* Democrats, are you saying its OKAY to force someone to have the same political views as you to work with you?


If you look at places like Free Republic, you'll find them advocating on how to not hire people aligned with the wrong party or union beliefs, even if both are protected activities.

Are you sure that you want to invite that kind of logic - where your livelihood depends on patronage?
 
2012-12-12 06:55:14 AM  
from another article "They were trying to tear down the tent and people were trying to pull them off. ... And as they did that, a few people tripped," he told the website. "This guy tripped over a tent peg and then got up and hit me."


some guy gets knocked over and comes up swinging
 
2012-12-12 06:58:47 AM  
Did you see how fat those asshole union douchebags were?
LOL Unions are slugs and thugs
 
2012-12-12 06:58:59 AM  

GAT_00: Relatively Obscure: log_jammin: Crowder said "Dana, they literally would have killed me where I stood if I'd of fought back and defended myself after the sucker punch. They literally would have torn me limb-from-limb."

I'd love for someone to point to where in the video that he valiantly fought back to save his life.

DNRTFA or whatever, but I think your quote is him specifically saying he did NOT fight back valiantly and WHY he may appear to be a huge wimpoid to Red Blooded America.

/Shouldn't really attack this guy. It's at best akin to attacking WBC clowns.

I can't really blame someone for attacking their enemy.


So then if I consider you my enemy, you can't blame me for attacking you. Good to know...
 
2012-12-12 06:59:42 AM  
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2012-12-12 07:00:31 AM  
Here's a truth for the union hacks: Right to Work laws give workers a choice between whether or not one joins a union. Many times the absence of such laws means workers are forced into unions and required to pay dues against their will, eliminating their choice. Since choice = freedom, then Right to Work laws are more American than forced coercion. No wonder why unions get the "commie" label......
 
2012-12-12 07:02:59 AM  

Weaver95: Relatively Obscure: GAT_00: No you couldn't have.

Yes I could have. Sure, many would be as you say, but there are always some who would sound exactly like you just had.

except that GAT has a point - fox news went there and made an already difficult situation worse. the local MI Republicans already antagonized the unions and pissed off the local Democrats. then along comes fox news (and a few tea baggers) to jump in and gloat about how great it was that the lame duck session was used by their hero Republicans to ramrod some unpopular legislation through congress and hey, it's just wonderful to see such dirty tricks used to great effect.

i'm actually impressed the local unions showed as much restraint as they did.


Just because legislation is unpopular to the unions doesn't make it unpopular in general.
 
2012-12-12 07:03:44 AM  
There is something that has been edited out of this video. Not a conspiracy theory or anything, BUT the guy who does the punching is seen coming up from a position that looks as if he has been pushed or tripped up. This is Fox's video, I'm guessing. Wonder where the rest of it is. Not saying throwing a punch is right -- just that I'm interested to know what immediately preceded it.

And previous posters are right -- something of this magnitude should be voted on by the public. Not ram-rodded through in a closed door session of lame-ducks. This just stinks to high heaven.
 
2012-12-12 07:04:52 AM  
look for the union label
 
2012-12-12 07:05:50 AM  

mwfark: Here's a truth for the union hacks: Right to Work laws give workers a choice between whether or not one joins a union. Many times the absence of such laws means workers are forced into unions and required to pay dues against their will, eliminating their choice. Since choice = freedom, then Right to Work laws are more American than forced coercion. No wonder why unions get the "commie" label......


Gotta love these people who call theselves "conservatives" these days - they claim to oppose government meddling in the private sector - until it's a matter of having the governemnt arbitrarily abrogate a contract between two private parties to obtain a result they deem desirable.
So much for "moral consistency" on the part of "conservatives".
 
2012-12-12 07:08:39 AM  
ok. now we just have actual trolling.

I'm out.
 
2012-12-12 07:09:16 AM  
img37.imageshack.us
 
2012-12-12 07:11:48 AM  
*sigh* Its ok when democrats use violence but when a republican does it is extremeism. The double standard continues.

/Stay strong Snyder. fark THE UNIONS!
//Keep it up Michigan. I may move back
 
2012-12-12 07:13:36 AM  
Interesting. Normally, when so-called "conservatives" hear anybody express dissatisfaction with the way their employer treats them, their response is "Go get a better job somewhere else!".
But in this instance they respond 'Go crying to nanny-government to make a special law forbidding two groups of adults from making a legal contract."
The many faces of the American right.
 
2012-12-12 07:16:17 AM  

LordJiro: mike_d85: Union rant:

Look, there is a time and a place for unions. No one can look at the history of coal mining and not see that they've done a lot of good. BUT, unions get out of hand farking fast. You know what the east coast ILA is threatening to strike over, effectively shutting down the entire east and gulf coasts shipping? Labor guarantees. Union members literally get paid a minimum of 8 hours per company.
So if you show up to work, work 1 hour unloading 1 ship then work a full 8-hour shift on another ship in a day you get paid for 16 hours. Why? Because they keep shutting down the damn ports to get their way.

When unions are needed, they're great. Unfortunately, unions are rarely NEEDED.
/rant

Republicans are already trying to break unions so they can further skullfark the workers. If unions went away when they 'weren't needed', they would never be able to reform when they ARE needed.


I never said anything about going away, I just want them to not be completely retarded, bloated, due gobblers. Stop making idiotic demands and just make sure everyone is safe and reasonably paid.

For example, last I heard you had to pay a union fine (bribe) if you wanted to install flushless urinals in a bathroom in Massachusetts. Why? Because a union plumber could have installed the running water and flush nozzle. That is idiotic. That is a minute portion of the labor involved in a functioning public bathroom and the 2 hours of so of labor they lost wouldn't have damaged the worker's pocketbook.
 
2012-12-12 07:16:57 AM  
Interesting thread. Seems the pro-union folks don't really know squat about the laws that were just signed but that doesn't prevent them from ranting on about them.

Neither of these laws; either the one focused on public sector unions or the one focused on private sector unions, prevents anyone from joining a union. Neither does anything to prevent unions from collective bargaining in any company where unions are present. Neither attempts to de-certify a single union. All these laws do is make union membership an option instead of a mandate.

Early in my working career, I was a member of two different labor unions. Even back in the 70s, it was painfully obvious to me that the union did not have my best interest nor the best interest of any worker in the shop at heart. When it was time for contract negotiations, the union reps spent scant time and effort on wages and benefits for workers while spending endless hours fighting for tweaks to contract language that would enhance the union's control over work rules and grievance processes. 40 years ago, it was obvious to me that unions had ceased to care about workers. They cared only about their own power and influence.

Over the years, I managed or consulted with several union shops. During that time I negotiated with locals of UAW, Teamsters, Foundry workers, Machinists' union, and a couple other unions. In every situation, it was abundantly clear to me that I was much more concerned about fair employee compensation and benefits than any union negotiator was. There were numerous instances where a change in work rules would have put more money in workers' pockets but eliminated the reason for grievance procedures that the company wasn't even going to try to challenge. The unions always opted to keep grievance procedures in place to justify the existence of more union stewards and other time and productivity wasting items rather than just agree to pay workers and eliminate the union from the process.

With unions, it's all about how much money they can extract from workers. When Obama came to Michigan, he claimed that these laws were all about a political agenda instead of economics. He's right. But it's about the liberal Democrat political agenda, in lockstep with unions. Unions have become little more than a vehicle for taking money out of the pockets of union members and funneling it to the DNC. In return, Democrats support union efforts to extract more money from the workers and the public.

These laws simply give workers a choice - to send their hard-earned wages to the DNC or not.  Of course, in union minds, that translates to justification to violent protest.
 
2012-12-12 07:17:32 AM  

video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.


I agree. What's your address? We need to have a chat.
 
2012-12-12 07:19:07 AM  
Union guy was assaulted and provoked, but the correction wont come out until all the idiots have secured their opinion on the matter.
 
2012-12-12 07:20:44 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Freedom and democracy, the two things so called progressives fear the most.


Really?

sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

Seems that it's the extremist RW Repukes who are afraid of freedom & democracy.
 
2012-12-12 07:23:15 AM  
What do you expect from a coward? Here, have a Twinky...too soon?
 
2012-12-12 07:27:35 AM  

Fifi Le Pew: And previous posters are right -- something of this magnitude should be voted on by the public. Not ram-rodded through in a closed door session of lame-ducks. This just stinks to high heaven.


1. We elect Representatives to pass these laws. That's their job. Not throw everything to the public for a vote.

2. These two laws have well over 50% approval in the polls. There are even several union members who support these laws while stating that they will maintain their own union membership.

3. If these laws stink to high heaven, wouldn't anything done by a lame duck session? Would you advocate that lame duck sessions be eliminated completely? And wouldn't that suggest that anyone term-limited is, in effect, a lame duck and should not be allowed to legislate?
 
2012-12-12 07:33:08 AM  

festoon: Really?


That certainly raises the question of why this wasn't done 2 years ago? (Making an assumption on the length of State House terms.)
 
2012-12-12 07:33:54 AM  
There is a time and a place for violence. Here and now seems good.
 
2012-12-12 07:36:07 AM  
So, if some southern town said you had to join the KKK in order to work for the city, that would be OK, right?

There's really no difference. Well, except that unions are more prone to violence than the KKK.
 
2012-12-12 07:37:42 AM  

Elandriel: Consider the sustained attack against worker's rights to organize and negotiate for a better station in life vs. owners, this is a logical progression. We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.

People probably will end up dying for their rights again before this is settled. And, we'll probably come back to it again in another 80 years.


What about the rights of workers who choose not to be in a union? How is forcing people to join a union and pay union dues against their wishes supporting their rights?
 
2012-12-12 07:37:44 AM  
Had the reporter been a liberal who was attacked by a group of conservatives you farklibs would have cried foul.
 
2012-12-12 07:38:02 AM  
This is good news. The propagandists are generally the first to get pummeled. You choose to be the face and voice of the entity pushing to take away people's livelihoods and you might catch a fist. Consider yourself lucky too, it will be worse for the next guy.
 
2012-12-12 07:38:45 AM  
Oh my God, people will not be FORCED to pay union dues and fund Democrat's campaigns!!!!


Can't believe liberals agree with union thuggery. Thought you were about freedom of choice? Disgusting people, all of you.
 
2012-12-12 07:38:56 AM  

BillCo: So, if some southern town said you had to join the KKK in order to work for the city, that would be OK, right?

There's really no difference.


This is what teabaggers actually believe.
 
2012-12-12 07:40:48 AM  

log_jammin: Video of the dude getting punched.

1. He was trolling the crowd.

2. another union member stopped the first guy.


Is there another video of this that shows what happened right before the punch? Because this one has been conveniently edited to right before the protestor threw the punch, and the protestor seems to be picking himself up off the ground while Crowder is saying "you just assualted me" in an apparent explanation for why, I assume, Crowder pushed the proster or punched him.

Very suspicious. But it wouldn't be the first time guys like this have manufactured violence at protests.
 
2012-12-12 07:41:28 AM  

xmasbaby: Elandriel: Consider the sustained attack against worker's rights to organize and negotiate for a better station in life vs. owners, this is a logical progression. We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.

People probably will end up dying for their rights again before this is settled. And, we'll probably come back to it again in another 80 years.

What about the rights of workers who choose not to be in a union? How is forcing people to join a union and pay union dues against their wishes supporting their rights?


Easy. One guy can do nothing vs a billionaire or cartel of billionaires. Nothing, He's their biatch. A thousand or more guys have some power to negotiate. In order to make sure everyone has power you need to make sure as many people as possible join. If you don't like it, find another job without a union.
 
2012-12-12 07:41:57 AM  

log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.


I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.
 
2012-12-12 07:44:35 AM  

Thunderpipes: I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.


There's the nugget. You're jealous of their success. Your inability to negotiate shouldn't make you hate unions.
 
2012-12-12 07:46:01 AM  

Thunderpipes: log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.

I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.



why yes, our tax dollars do go to members of Congress
 
2012-12-12 07:47:23 AM  

swankywanky: Thunderpipes: log_jammin: violentsalvation: I have yet to see a sensible or reasonable argument for forced participation in a union,

part of a company is union, part is not. The part that is union negotiates a new contract for higher wages, holiday pay, and healthcare. The company agrees and gives all the workers those benefits. Those who didn't pay union benefits still get the rewards of that unions work and its members.

and I don't know if you work in a "right to work" state, but if you do when you get constantly reminded that it's a "right to work" state and that they can fire you at anytime for no reason at all, you'll then realize just who the beneficiaries of that law really is. And it's not guys who are "forced" to pay union dues.

I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.


why yes, our tax dollars do go to members of Congress


Whom we elected and continue to elect.

So who's more terrible? Them or us?
 
2012-12-12 07:47:56 AM  

Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.


You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.
 
2012-12-12 07:50:08 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

There's the nugget. You're jealous of their success. Your inability to negotiate shouldn't make you hate unions.


Who are the idiots who say individuals somehow can't negotiate with their employers? You never got a raise from asking?

You would not be so pleased if a company or a city forced workers to join a conservative club and pay $1,000 a year to fund George Bush's campaign, and you know it. You just want taxpayer funded election money for your homeys, nothing more, nothing less. It is time it stops, and the public is waking up.

Look at how union employees act. Oh, you are butthurt? Lets cancel school for 26,000 kids. Fark you, union members. It is a great day when those criminal bastards get beat down.
 
2012-12-12 07:50:35 AM  

hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.



They also raided peoples' pensions for operating costs while giving themselves raises.

But I'm sure business will regulate itself just fine if we just get out of the way!! I mean, there's nothing in history indicating that business runs amok and tramples peoples' rights and lives if left unchecked, is there? Only proven success stories where the "free market" = government!! Derp!!!
 
2012-12-12 07:51:42 AM  

hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.


The top 1% aren't the ones out on their ass without a job, now are they?

What is that, the sound of union membership declining? Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could? Those 40% of rank and file workers = the 1%?

Moron.
 
2012-12-12 07:52:11 AM  
People who do not understand the reasons for unions and strikes should not talk about economics, at all.

Yes, unions get out of hand like all organizations, but you don't throw out innovations because they're misused in some cases. Let's stop practicing medicine completely because malpractice exists! Diggity derp!!
 
2012-12-12 07:52:29 AM  

BillCo: So, if some southern town said you had to join the KKK in order to work for the city, that would be OK, right?

There's really no difference. Well, except that unions are more prone to violence than the KKK.


This is what, the 10th time someone has come up with this retarded bs in the same thread???? THIS IS NOT HOW UNIONS WORK YOU DUMB SHIAT. Not now, not ever. You don't want to join a union? Don't get a job at a union company you ignorant dolt. Noone is forcing you to get a job at a union company. Oh, yeah, that's right, the union companies have better wages and benefits for some reason, and you want to leech off of that without having a part in negotiating. Fark off.
 
2012-12-12 07:52:39 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: BillCo: So, if some southern town said you had to join the KKK in order to work for the city, that would be OK, right?

There's really no difference.

This is what teabaggers actually believe.


Their forefathers fought a war to keep people in slavery. Of course they're scum. Sometimes genocide serves a noble purpose. The North should have cleaned up after themselves.
 
2012-12-12 07:52:50 AM  

Lsherm: GAT_00: Funny, none of that is in the link. Nothing about hitting a reporter, and I saw the video of the tent earlier. Didn't look like anyone was in it.

But hey, protesting is bad, but passing a bill in a locked session in the middle of the night without telling anyone is good. That's real democracy - Republican democracy.

Technically in the slide show:

[img651.imageshack.us image 640x438]

With the caption:

A man in an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union jacket punches Fox News reporter Steven Crowder in the face outside the pro-Right-to-Work tent of Americans for Prosperity, an organization funded by wealthy private donors.


what was AFP doing there in the middle of the protest anyway? I smell an agent provocateur setup here. they are famous for this kind of shiat.
 
2012-12-12 07:54:27 AM  

video man: Good. It's about time we start using old school tactics.


Wow that is word for word what I was going to write
 
2012-12-12 07:54:31 AM  

log_jammin: super_grass: I think you're trying to not get the point and instead is trying to bring up a red herring.

so that DIDN'T happen. Ok then. glad we cleared that up, and you recognize that you are comparing something that actually happened to a hypothetical that hasn't actually occurred outside of your own mind.


Please tell me more about how this reporter "goaded" union members into punching him in the face. Is there a video of the "goading?"
 
2012-12-12 07:56:18 AM  
"He was a plant!"

"I mean, he was provoked and therefore justified!"

So which is it? Can't have it both ways.
 
2012-12-12 07:56:28 AM  

trivial use of my dark powers: I'm of two minds on this:

You shouldn't hit people just for being annoying.

OTOH, I come from a long line of coal miners on both sides of the family and damn near lost a great uncle during the whole Matewan debacle. I know what happened in the mines pre-union. Unions can be irritating but I firmly believe that they are much better than the alternative.

OK, union guys, stop hitting people unless they hit you first.


Only your government can do this.
 
2012-12-12 07:56:43 AM  
It just amazed me how many people are cheering on America's race to the bottom, blind to the fact that lower wages and benefits for their brother workers means less leverage for them too. a receding tide lowers all boats.
 
2012-12-12 07:57:04 AM  

hitlersbrain: HotWingConspiracy: BillCo: So, if some southern town said you had to join the KKK in order to work for the city, that would be OK, right?

There's really no difference.

This is what teabaggers actually believe.

Their forefathers fought a war to keep people in slavery. Of course they're scum. Sometimes genocide serves a noble purpose. The North should have cleaned up after themselves.


So if the South would have won the war, would the noble purpose be to kill off all the abolitionists?

Genocide is noble?

Go away you troll.
 
2012-12-12 07:57:45 AM  

Wise_Guy: "He was a plant!"

"I mean, he was provoked and therefore justified!"

So which is it? Can't have it both ways.


those are two of several possibilities.
 
2012-12-12 07:58:36 AM  

Thunderpipes: hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.

The top 1% aren't the ones out on their ass without a job, now are they?

What is that, the sound of union membership declining? Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could? Those 40% of rank and file workers = the 1%?

Moron.


Calling what the 1% do a 'job' is hilarious! They're only 'job' is to make sure they use the massive wealth they stumbled upon to keep others employed.

See how those 40% feel when they're shopping at the company store again and making below poverty wages.

Most people could sit their fat arse on a plush office chair and NOT destroy a massive company. Most of the 1% in America right now should not have jobs.
 
2012-12-12 08:00:33 AM  

Thunderpipes: HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

There's the nugget. You're jealous of their success. Your inability to negotiate shouldn't make you hate unions.

Who are the idiots who say individuals somehow can't negotiate with their employers? You never got a raise from asking?


Never said individuals couldn't, just pointing out that you're painfully jealous of their deal. It drives you insane, you think you should be getting that kind of money.

You would not be so pleased if a company or a city forced workers to join a conservative club and pay $1,000 a year to fund George Bush's campaign, and you know it.

This is why you're dumb. You actually, honestly believe that Unions are some hotbeds of liberal activity and have no republicans members. Conservatives made an enemy of unions, so they generally don't benefit from them come election time. You know, like how conservatives hate black people, tell them that all the time, but can't comprehend why they won't vote for their preferred candidates.

You just want taxpayer funded election money for your homeys, nothing more, nothing less. It is time it stops, and the public is waking up.

Herp.

Look at how union employees act. Oh, you are butthurt? Lets cancel school for 26,000 kids

That's how it works. It's kind of like looting a company, then trying to force the staff in to taking 30% pay cuts, then just shutting it down when they tell you to go screw.
 
2012-12-12 08:01:13 AM  

Sm3agol85: BillCo: So, if some southern town said you had to join the KKK in order to work for the city, that would be OK, right?

There's really no difference. Well, except that unions are more prone to violence than the KKK.

This is what, the 10th time someone has come up with this retarded bs in the same thread???? THIS IS NOT HOW UNIONS WORK YOU DUMB SHIAT. Not now, not ever. You don't want to join a union? Don't get a job at a union company you ignorant dolt. Noone is forcing you to get a job at a union company. Oh, yeah, that's right, the union companies have better wages and benefits for some reason, and you want to leech off of that without having a part in negotiating. Fark off.



www.majhost.com
 
2012-12-12 08:02:22 AM  

hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.

The top 1% aren't the ones out on their ass without a job, now are they?

What is that, the sound of union membership declining? Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could? Those 40% of rank and file workers = the 1%?

Moron.

Calling what the 1% do a 'job' is hilarious! They're only 'job' is to make sure they use the massive wealth they stumbled upon to keep others employed.

See how those 40% feel when they're shopping at the company store again and making below poverty wages.

Most people could sit their fat arse on a plush office chair and NOT destroy a massive company. Most of the 1% in America right now should not have jobs.


Now this I actually agree with. Everyone but them pays for their lack of vision and creativity by losing their jobs to massive layoffs.
 
2012-12-12 08:02:48 AM  

Thunderpipes: Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could?


They can at any time. Also, cite a source for that.
 
2012-12-12 08:05:21 AM  

Mr. Right: Interesting thread. Seems the pro-union folks don't really know squat about the laws that were just signed but that doesn't prevent them from ranting on about them.

Neither of these laws; either the one focused on public sector unions or the one focused on private sector unions, prevents anyone from joining a union. Neither does anything to prevent unions from collective bargaining in any company where unions are present. Neither attempts to de-certify a single union. All these laws do is make union membership an option instead of a mandate.

Early in my working career, I was a member of two different labor unions. Even back in the 70s, it was painfully obvious to me that the union did not have my best interest nor the best interest of any worker in the shop at heart. When it was time for contract negotiations, the union reps spent scant time and effort on wages and benefits for workers while spending endless hours fighting for tweaks to contract language that would enhance the union's control over work rules and grievance processes. 40 years ago, it was obvious to me that unions had ceased to care about workers. They cared only about their own power and influence.

Over the years, I managed or consulted with several union shops. During that time I negotiated with locals of UAW, Teamsters, Foundry workers, Machinists' union, and a couple other unions. In every situation, it was abundantly clear to me that I was much more concerned about fair employee compensation and benefits than any union negotiator was. There were numerous instances where a change in work rules would have put more money in workers' pockets but eliminated the reason for grievance procedures that the company wasn't even going to try to challenge. The unions always opted to keep grievance procedures in place to justify the existence of more union stewards and other time and productivity wasting items rather than just agree to pay workers and eliminate the union from the process.

With ...


That sounds to me more like the UAW of the mid-80's and not the mid-70's... My dad was a Union negotiator for UAW in the 70's and 80's. During that time GM was pushing for for changes that would halt wage increases for workers with seniority and lower the wages of starting workers.

Then, sometime in the mid-80's GM figured out that in order to get the contracts they wanted, they had to get a Union president that was on their side. GM financially backed a particular person, can't remember the guy's name off the top of my head, but my dad knew the writing was on the wall. With corporate campaign backing he knew the guy would win and things would change and he was right. After the elections, my dad went back to work in the factory. It wasn't long after that that starting wages at GM were cut in half.

They had a program where family or friends could put in a recommendation for someone to get hired on, and that's how they got a lot of their workforce back then. When i was old enough to get hired on, my dad put in a recommendation and within a couple of weeks i was called in for an interview. By the 90's the wages and benefits for new workers were SO bad, i actually turned down the job because they were starting me out at $9.00/hour at a plant that was over an hours drive away, and no benefits for the first 6 months. The pay cap was $20.00/hour after 10 years, just a couple of dollars an hour more than their starting wages of the 80's. I was making more money as a shift manager at Wendy's than i would have as a GM laborer...

It was just a matter of time before GM and others found a way of completely busting unions... It just got a lot easier when the people who benefited the most from Unions started voting for their Corporate Sponsored Bible, instead of for their own interests and protection...
 
2012-12-12 08:05:40 AM  
Police officers and firefighters are exempted from the right-to-work legislation because of their special collective bargaining rights to prevent strikes.

This is BS.

Weaver95: that said, we're moving away from the topic at hand. I think it's likely that Fox News went there to provoke the union workers in order to catch some footage for their evening news segments...then got more than they expected. now...you can yell at the union workers for that, but you'd damn well better slam fox news reporters for making a tense situation even worse. think you can do that?


I can't.

There are lots of "tense" situations that are made worse by what is protected speech.

I haven't seen the video, but I am guessing he is not in their face shouting "fighting words" and barring that the opinion of what he is doing being reporting, using his protected speech, or "stirring shiat up" is contingent on your point of view.
 
2012-12-12 08:06:44 AM  

Elandriel: Consider the sustained attack against worker's rights to organize and negotiate for a better station in life vs. owners, this is a logical progression. We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.

People probably will end up dying for their rights again before this is settled. And, we'll probably come back to it again in another 80 years.


The unions are so attractive, they have to force people to join them and pay dues as a condition of employment in states without right-to-work.

If the unions provide a valuable service, they will be utilized in right-to-work states. The right-to-work laws that allow people to opt out won't be a deterrent.
 
2012-12-12 08:06:49 AM  

Void_Beavis: Genocide is noble?


Do you feel bad about the millions of native Americans white Europeans slaughtered? I doubt it.

What do you do with someone who will fight for slavery? Let them commit even more horrible crimes for another hundred years? The south did terrible things to black people long after the war. Today, they still stand for the most horrid things, threatening to drag the country into the third world. One native American is worth 10 southerners IMO. I think, in a republican 'ends justify the means' kind of way, America would be a much better place if the North had cleaned up the south.
 
2012-12-12 08:08:42 AM  
Make the world a better place, punch a Fox News reporter in the face.
 
2012-12-12 08:09:48 AM  
Interesting thread so far. I guess it shouldn't surprise me that fark's violently rabidly pro-union gimme gimme crowd supports and condones this.  This is the side of liberalism that disgusts me and makes me ashamed to be liberal.
 
2012-12-12 08:11:23 AM  
Yesterday - Change, it's something Republicans can't and won't accept.

Today - Change, it's something Democrats can't and won't accept.
 
2012-12-12 08:11:24 AM  

liam76: Police officers and firefighters are exempted from the right-to-work legislation because of their special collective bargaining rights to prevent strikes.

This is BS.

Weaver95: that said, we're moving away from the topic at hand. I think it's likely that Fox News went there to provoke the union workers in order to catch some footage for their evening news segments...then got more than they expected. now...you can yell at the union workers for that, but you'd damn well better slam fox news reporters for making a tense situation even worse. think you can do that?

I can't.

There are lots of "tense" situations that are made worse by what is protected speech.

I haven't seen the video, but I am guessing he is not in their face shouting "fighting words" and barring that the opinion of what he is doing being reporting, using his protected speech, or "stirring shiat up" is contingent on your point of view.


Not to be nit picky but protected speech prevents the government from retaliating to your speech.

It doesn't neccesarily protect you from getting punched by a private citizen who disagrees with you.

I suggest watching the video. The reporter was definitely trolling the crowd.
 
2012-12-12 08:11:58 AM  

hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.


If that's true, the all those years on union dues didn't do those Hostess workers any good after all, did it? As for "fear being the mother of morality"... I gotta say, that doesn't make any sense at all, unless you are particularly religious.
 
2012-12-12 08:12:48 AM  

Thunderpipes: hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.

The top 1% aren't the ones out on their ass without a job, now are they?

What is that, the sound of union membership declining? Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could? Those 40% of rank and file workers = the 1%?

Moron.


Why are you championing the supposed right of people making hundreds of times what you make, to enforce third world working conditions on workers, just because they have no other options elsewhere?
And yes, union membership is declining, mostly because the Republican party has made anti-union/anti-worker an actual platform, and their media company has force fed that so hard that being Republican is almost synonymous with anti-union, despite it actually being against the self-interest of most people.

Who are the idiots who say individuals somehow can't negotiate with their employers? You never got a raise from asking?

This is........amazing. You are employee 6572 to most huge companies, you have literally zero negotiating power. Most will tell you, "This is what you're getting; you don't like it, there are 50 people waiting in line." You have nothing else to say, there is nothing else you can do. They can make you work 12 hours a day with no OT, no vacation, no retirement, while feeding all of the profit from all that labor directly into their pocket, and there is nothing you can do but leave. In some places, you have other options, so you can't really get away with this as a company. But what tends to happen is companies that squeeze every last drop out of their employees tend to put companies that actually treat their employees well, out of business, like Walmart. And then they freely get away with treating their employees like crap, because they have the employees by the balls. There is nowhere for them to go, and they can't live without money. In situations like this, you have zero negotiating power, but together, as a whole, a "union" as it were, can get together and tell that company to go fark itself. In the Republican mind, this is a bad thing, because they are the party of the uninformed, voting on the behalf of the unethical, who feed off of the labor of the unfortunate.
 
2012-12-12 08:13:11 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Interesting thread so far. I guess it shouldn't surprise me that fark's violently rabidly pro-union gimme gimme crowd supports and condones this.  This is the side of liberalism that disgusts me and makes me ashamed to be liberal.


You've been conned in to conflating liberalism with unionism.
 
2012-12-12 08:13:29 AM  
I'm confused. I thought being pro choice was good
 
2012-12-12 08:14:32 AM  

xmasbaby: hitlersbrain: Thunderpipes: I am sure Hostess former employees agree. I am sure the taxpayers that fund lavish pensions for terrible workers agree as well.

You realize the union took deep pay cuts at Hostess while the management gave themselves huge raises? You know that is very, very typical in America today, right? It's time the top 1% learn to be afraid again. Fear is the mother of all morality.

If that's true, the all those years on union dues didn't do those Hostess workers any good after all, did it? As for "fear being the mother of morality"... I gotta say, that doesn't make any sense at all, unless you are particularly religious.


Except for all those years that they enjoyed union wages and benefits you might have a point. IF you can prove that the union wages and benefits was the cause of the company's demise and not bad management.
 
2012-12-12 08:14:44 AM  
As the unionized troopers marched down Capitol Avenue in single file, some union members shouted "traitors" at the officers.

"They need them today - that's why they're being exempted," said Terry Jones, a UAW member who works in General Motors' Delta Township plant. "Those guys are next."


You know, this is exactly how military dictatorships get started. Incentivise the military/police forces to be loyal to the government by giving them special allowances or exemptions from the law. The police caste, now seeing themselves as a separate, higher class of society, then has no problems stomping the lower class peasants into the ground for daring to challenge the establishment. Meanwhile, the ruling class sits back and lights cigars with $100 bills.
 
2012-12-12 08:18:23 AM  
Why not do something else somewhere else? Buncha babies. Rarely have I seen so many people that I thought deserved to be put back through elementary school. Sad bunch but they hopefully will keep paying into the rest of Detrizzle's welfare coffers. There was one guy they kept showing on Channel 2 that literally looked like George Wendt as a superfan. Had a Ditka stache and late 70s era windbreaker that he stole from BB King's bass guitarist lol.
 
2012-12-12 08:18:25 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could?

They can at any time. Also, cite a source for that.


ya, they can leave, but they still have to pay dues,.

once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Nope.

CA alone is over 300 billion underfunded in their pension plans, because of unions. Nationwide that number dwarfs the deficit. How is that working for you? You want free stuff, government funded campaign money, and don't care how much you hurt the country.
 
2012-12-12 08:18:48 AM  

Joe Blowme: I'm confused. I thought being pro choice was good


Sure. As long as you choose what I want.

Hypocrisy is a biatch ain't it?
 
2012-12-12 08:19:57 AM  

Joe Blowme: I'm confused. I thought being pro choice was good


it's always been pro choice. no one is forced to take a union job. and they can quit their job when they please. you just can't obtain the benefits of a union job w/o paying your dues is all.

How well would a business work if paying for their goods/services were a choice? What if your health insurance company had a policy that covered you if you paid your premiums or not,how long would they stay in business?

get real.
 
2012-12-12 08:20:11 AM  

log_jammin: Video of the dude getting punched.

1. He was trolling the crowd.

2. another union member stopped the first guy.


At :35 you can clearly see him push his way into the middle of an article by two other guys. Then there is a cut to a guy pushing him. I wonder what happened in the missing footage? Probably the evidence that he deserved a beating.
 
2012-12-12 08:21:41 AM  

Thunderpipes: HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could?

They can at any time. Also, cite a source for that.

ya, they can leave, but they still have to pay dues,.


No, they can quit whenever they like.

once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Nobody is forced to fund Democrats. You don't get to torture the word "forced" to make your hack point.

CA alone is over 300 billion underfunded in their pension plans, because of unions. Nationwide that number dwarfs the deficit. How is that working for you? You want free stuff,

Free? They negotiated a contract and performed their end of the bargain. Again, your jealousy shines through.
 
2012-12-12 08:21:43 AM  

Thunderpipes: HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could?

They can at any time. Also, cite a source for that.

ya, they can leave, but they still have to pay dues,.

once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Nope.


CA alone is over 300 billion underfunded in their pension plans, because of unions. Nationwide that number dwarfs the deficit. How is that working for you? You want free stuff, government funded campaign money, and don't care how much you hurt the country.


bullshiat. you're lying because right now you're supporting the management that spends it's dough on Republicans. Unlimited amounts of untraceable money. And you're behind them 100% to the detriment of your fellow American workers.
 
2012-12-12 08:22:34 AM  
They Never Sleep.
 
2012-12-12 08:24:44 AM  

wombatsrus: [img37.imageshack.us image 640x438]


This made me giggle...

Mr. Right: Interesting thread. Seems the pro-union folks don't really know squat about the laws that were just signed but that doesn't prevent them from ranting on about them.

Neither of these laws; either the one focused on public sector unions or the one focused on private sector unions, prevents anyone from joining a union. Neither does anything to prevent unions from collective bargaining in any company where unions are present. Neither attempts to de-certify a single union. All these laws do is make union membership an option instead of a mandate.


You may or may not agree with the right of unions (a private organization) to come to an agreement with a company (a private organization) on people they employ being a member of the union.

Saying they no longer have that right means people who go to a union shop can get the benefit of unions without having to pay. If you don't see how that will hurt the number of union members and how that will affect their ability to collectively bargain, you are being dishonest or a moron.

I am not going to bother with the rest of your post because if you can't understand that very simple fact, or can't be honest about it there is no point reading what you have to say.
 
2012-12-12 08:25:21 AM  

SlothB77: If the unions provide a valuable service, they will be utilized in right-to-work states. The right-to-work laws that allow people to opt out won't be a deterrent.


Let's see, do I join the union shop, join the union and enjoy the benefits, or do I just skip the join the union part and continue to enjoy the benefits that I now no longer have to pay for, what to do, what to do...

That's how farking stupid you and your scenario are.
 
2012-12-12 08:25:45 AM  

log_jammin: ok. now we just have actual trolling.

I'm out.


I'm confused. Isn't the whole purpose of fark comment section to encourage trolling? If not, it sure seems like it lately.


/subtle jab at mods
 
2012-12-12 08:26:20 AM  

CeroX: It was just a matter of time before GM and others found a way of completely busting unions... It just got a lot easier when the people who benefited the most from Unions started voting for their Corporate Sponsored Bible, instead of for their own interests and protection...


GM busted the union? Is that why UAW got so much stock in GM during the bailout?

Union workers took it in the shorts during the bailout. Not the union. My point is that unions are entirely willing to throw their own members under the bus so long as the union bosses maintain their own power and political clout. I am entirely pro-worker but anti-union.
 
2012-12-12 08:27:15 AM  

Thunderpipes: once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?


Show me a conservative group that is working for better wages and workers rights.

Oh wait, you can't, because you're a farking moron and they don't exist.
 
2012-12-12 08:30:15 AM  
By the way, one of the reasons Hostess failed?

Drivers were not allowed by the union to deliver bread products, and snack cakes in the same truck. Had to be two separate trucks. Perfect example of union asshattery.

Bottom line, you guys want free, taxpayer funded money to campaign, and you don't care about quality of work, efficiency, or the education of our children. You are against choice, want people forced to join your cause. That is as unamerican as you can get. MI voters decided this matter already, but you won't let it go, you bus in criminals from all over to whine and biatch.

Wah.
 
2012-12-12 08:31:45 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: HotWingConspiracy: Thunderpipes: Oh, 40% of MI union members polled said they would leave the union if they could?

They can at any time. Also, cite a source for that.

ya, they can leave, but they still have to pay dues,.

No, they can quit whenever they like.

once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Nobody is forced to fund Democrats. You don't get to torture the word "forced" to make your hack point.

CA alone is over 300 billion underfunded in their pension plans, because of unions. Nationwide that number dwarfs the deficit. How is that working for you? You want free stuff,

Free? They negotiated a contract and performed their end of the bargain. Again, your jealousy shines through.


Jealous, of what? 20 years of wasted union dues and an unfunded pension?
 
2012-12-12 08:32:20 AM  

Elandriel: We are seeing the beginning of the modern day labor rights movement, I think.


Yeah.... the a group of the highest paid blue collar workers on the planet is just a kettle about to boil over.

Makes me wonder what is really going on that has them so violent... I always come back to "the mob doesn't want their revenue stream drying up." Rational people don't resort to assault because of some esoteric discussion about labor rights that would not affect them one way or another, and they are already making $30/hour for on a menial job, and there is a payment for their $50k Harley Davidson due next week.

Then again, my wife is a collections officer at a bank and they are constantly foreclosing on people in the "boiler maker" union because they can't like on $80k a year in their welding job, because they keep writing checks at the local internet gambling cafe.... so maybe these people aren't rational. By all means, give them what they want before they kill us all.
 
2012-12-12 08:33:30 AM  

Mr. Right: CeroX: It was just a matter of time before GM and others found a way of completely busting unions... It just got a lot easier when the people who benefited the most from Unions started voting for their Corporate Sponsored Bible, instead of for their own interests and protection...

GM busted the union? Is that why UAW got so much stock in GM during the bailout?

Union workers took it in the shorts during the bailout. Not the union. My point is that unions are entirely willing to throw their own members under the bus so long as the union bosses maintain their own power and political clout. I am entirely pro-worker but anti-union.


No not saying they were busted, i probably could have worded that better... and i for the most part i agree with you about the corruption and being pro-worker... I was just sharing personal experience... and how that experience seemed to line up chronologically to the mid-80's rather than in the 70's as you described it...
 
2012-12-12 08:33:42 AM  

StrangeQ: Thunderpipes: once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Show me a conservative group that is working for better wages and workers rights.

Oh wait, you can't, because you're a farking moron and they don't exist.


I think you missed his point. While forced union members may be all about workers rights, they may also have a stronger moral stance for being anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage.

So their moral dilemma here is to have their pay and benifits held hostage for funding a social liberal agenda.

I'm not saying I'm pro or anti abortion or gay here. All I'm saying is that the OP makes a valid point.
 
2012-12-12 08:33:48 AM  

Thunderpipes: By the way, one of the reasons Hostess failed?

Drivers were not allowed by the union to deliver bread products, and snack cakes in the same truck. Had to be two separate trucks. Perfect example of union asshattery.

Bottom line, you guys want free, taxpayer funded money to campaign, and you don't care about quality of work, efficiency, or the education of our children. You are against choice, want people forced to join your cause. That is as unamerican as you can get. MI voters decided this matter already, but you won't let it go, you bus in criminals from all over to whine and biatch.

Wah.


Holy shiat you are farking dumb. As in, not a single rational or intelligent thought even once passes through your mind before you decide to spew out your opinion for all the world to see. Why don't you go sit in the farking corner and really think about what you're saying.

/so many ignorant trolls to add to the ignore list from this thread
 
2012-12-12 08:34:09 AM  
unions relevant as buggy whips
 
2012-12-12 08:34:29 AM  
What do you think is going to happen when you take what little security working people and their families have so that you can give a little more comfort to those who have all the comfort in the world already?
 
2012-12-12 08:35:14 AM  
Interesting thing that is being missed here is that it looks like Fox News has just basically hired themselves a Fred Phelps.

Google Steven Crowder and you can see some of his other "journalism" in action. A whole lot of cherry picking and editing (a la the rest of Fox News) but now they are working the "I'm just using my First Amendment rights and I am being persecuted for it" angle.

Fox News fans should not be upset that you are watching edited propaganda trying to pass off as journalism. You should be upset you are supporting a bunch of hypocritical pussies.
 
2012-12-12 08:35:32 AM  

Thunderpipes: By the way, one of the reasons Hostess failed?

Drivers were not allowed by the union to deliver bread products, and snack cakes in the same truck.


Yeah, that's it. Go with that.
 
2012-12-12 08:35:38 AM  
Union members in Michigan engage in polite discussion with those who have an opposing viewpoint. Just kidding, they beat a Fox News reporter, sucker punch him, then collapse a tent on top of women and old people


According to TFA, basically none of that happened in the way idiotmitter presents it. Basically, a couple of protestors among thousands knocked over a tent and pulled an officer into the crowd before being pepper sprayed.

StrangeQ: That's how farking stupid you and your scenario are.


He's not stupid. He's a viciously dishonest liar. He, and all the other supporters of these union-busting measures, no damn well what's going to happen. That's the point. The unions will continue to exist briefly while a bunch of freeloaders enjoy the benefits without paying the costs until eventually the benefits can no longer be provided because there isn't funding and the union collapses.

These bills exist exclusively to collapse unions so that wealthy owners are better able to abuse and exploit their workers for even more personal gain. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's like having a store where you only have to pay if you want to. It will work until the novelty wears off and then people will overwhelm it taking free food until it collapses.

To call Sloth stupid misses the point. He's not stupid. He just hates anybody who isn't wealthy and feels its entirely unfair . Displaced by about 150 years and he'd be screaming his fool head off about how unfair to the plantation owner it is that slavery was abolished.
 
2012-12-12 08:36:55 AM  

xmasbaby: Jealous, of what? 20 years of wasted union dues and an unfunded pension?


You keep repeating this because you need it to be true. It's not, and you're jealous of their success. Don't worry about other people's money unless they have less than you.
 
2012-12-12 08:37:12 AM  
I disagree with this law, and how it was passed, however unions shouldn't be able to require people who work in a union shop to pay for their "political" actions, and you shoudl never be forced to join a union on a public job.
 
2012-12-12 08:37:51 AM  

Void_Beavis: StrangeQ: Thunderpipes: once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Show me a conservative group that is working for better wages and workers rights.

Oh wait, you can't, because you're a farking moron and they don't exist.

I think you missed his point. While forced union members may be all about workers rights, they may also have a stronger moral stance for being anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage.

So their moral dilemma here is to have their pay and benifits held hostage for funding a social liberal agenda.

I'm not saying I'm pro or anti abortion or gay here. All I'm saying is that the OP makes a valid point.


No, he wasn't thinking that far into it. I really don't think he is capable. His point was the simple and laughable "LAWL LIBRULS WULDN"T GIVE MONIES TO A REPUBLICAN WULD THEY??" To which to answer is a simple yes, they would, if the republican was taking a stance supporting their rights for once instead of feeding the 1%.
 
2012-12-12 08:41:45 AM  

StrangeQ: Void_Beavis: StrangeQ: Thunderpipes: once again, morons, would you be for unions if they forced employees to fund Republicans?

Show me a conservative group that is working for better wages and workers rights.

Oh wait, you can't, because you're a farking moron and they don't exist.

I think you missed his point. While forced union members may be all about workers rights, they may also have a stronger moral stance for being anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage.

So their moral dilemma here is to have their pay and benifits held hostage for funding a social liberal agenda.

I'm not saying I'm pro or anti abortion or gay here. All I'm saying is that the OP makes a valid point.

No, he wasn't thinking that far into it. I really don't think he is capable. His point was the simple and laughable "LAWL LIBRULS WULDN"T GIVE MONIES TO A REPUBLICAN WULD THEY??" To which to answer is a simple yes, they would, if the republican was taking a stance supporting their rights for once instead of feeding the 1%.


Which is why I hate our two party system.

You can't actually vote for the person who best represents your interests.
 
2012-12-12 08:44:44 AM  
[Dynamite Monkey.jpg]

When you run with the bulls, don't be surprised if you get gored.

/Or Gored, if this were some kind of climate change protest.
 
2012-12-12 08:45:04 AM  

Thunderpipes: By the way, one of the reasons Hostess failed?

Drivers were not allowed by the union to deliver bread products, and snack cakes in the same truck. Had to be two separate trucks. Perfect example of union asshattery.

Bottom line, you guys want free, taxpayer funded money to campaign, and you don't care about quality of work, efficiency, or the education of our children. You are against choice, want people forced to join your cause. That is as unamerican as you can get. MI voters decided this matter already, but you won't let it go, you bus in criminals from all over to whine and biatch.

Wah.


Yeah.......that's the reason they had to raid pension funds of millions of dollars to keep the company going while giving their management millions of dollars in bonuses. Holy fark you are stupid.
 
2012-12-12 08:46:07 AM  

Mr. Right: All these laws do is make union membership an option instead of a mandate.


As usual, the conservative spin is the exact opposite of reality. No one is ever legally mandated to join a union. However, RTW does initiate government force to legally dictate that the union shop employer-employee contractual relationship is off limits.
 
2012-12-12 08:46:44 AM  

liam76: You may or may not agree with the right of unions (a private organization) to come to an agreement with a company (a private organization) on people they employ being a member of the union.

Saying they no longer have that right means people who go to a union shop can get the benefit of unions without having to pay. If you don't see how that will hurt the number of union members and how that will affect their ability to collectively bargain, you are being dishonest or a moron.


Why don't you point out to me exactly how sending a couple hours' wages per month to a national union that spends a majority of that dues money on political activities that have absolutely no bearing on negotiations with the company that employs me benefits me? And then point out how not sending in that money would hinder a collective bargaining process that is going to end up being mostly local?

I have been involved in too many non-union companies that actually have employee committees that negotiate with management for wages and benefits and which, effectively, perform all the activities of collective bargaining without a dollar of union dues to believe that unions are needed by anyone in this country except the DNC.

If unions are really that valuable, have them negotiate a contract that only covers union members and allow companies to pay non-union workers whatever they want. Once companies realize that, they can force employees to work for minimum wage unless they join the union. Or unless companies realize the value of the employee without a collective bargaining agreement and pay them accordingly with or without union membership.

When I was a member of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, the union stood in the way of advancement and raises for me because seniority dictated that employees less skillful and less productive be paid more. The union actually refused to negotiate for higher wages for employees because the bargaining unit members were afraid it would jeopardize their ability to negotiate contract language requiring more company-paid time for union stewards to do nothing. I remain unimpressed with unions' idea of collective bargaining.
 
2012-12-12 08:47:44 AM