Union thugs were at their best yesterday as they beat up several bystanders in Michigan. It's funny how the networks portrayed this event:
1) Fox showed the video and called it what it was ... violence by union thugs.
2) MSNBC (miraculously) showed most of the video, but I believe their approach was "boys will be boys".
3) The other networks didn't mention the violence. Instead, they portrayed the unions as great crusaders for the common man, with a lot of "we shall overcome" and "kum ba yah".
Unions suck.
I don't understand why unions are upset. If they are so great this law will mean nothing because people will still join and pay dues. So if unions are so great, why are they afraid?
(12-12-2012 11:59 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote: [ -> ]Union thugs were at their best yesterday as they beat up several bystanders in Michigan. It's funny how the networks portrayed this event:
1) Fox showed the video and called it what it was ... violence by union thugs.
2) MSNBC (miraculously) showed most of the video, but I believe their approach was "boys will be boys".
3) The other networks didn't mention the violence. Instead, they portrayed the unions as great crusaders for the common man, with a lot of "we shall overcome" and "kum ba yah".
Unions suck.
Did they mention the Koch brothers thugs were there trying to instigate the violence? Did they tell how the Koch brothers thugs knocked down their own tent trying to make it look like "union thugs" did it? I am sure that was covered extensively on Faux News.
(12-13-2012 02:12 AM)Paul M Wrote: [ -> ]You so funny Rob.
Not trying to be funny.
Btw, how is Boomer taking the bowl news?
I noticed you didn't respond to my PM. I was trying to be nice and wish OU luck but since you didn't even respond, I will no longer be the "nice guy".
(12-13-2012 02:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 01:47 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]Did they mention the Koch brothers thugs were there trying to instigate the violence? Did they tell how the Koch brothers thugs knocked down their own tent trying to make it look like "union thugs" did it? I am sure that was covered extensively on Faux News.
Source?
Well, the tent part was an eyewitness.
(12-13-2012 02:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 02:23 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 02:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 01:47 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]Did they mention the Koch brothers thugs were there trying to instigate the violence? Did they tell how the Koch brothers thugs knocked down their own tent trying to make it look like "union thugs" did it? I am sure that was covered extensively on Faux News.
Source?
Well, the tent part was an eyewitness.
Who? Quoted where?
A guy at the rally and on the radio.
(12-13-2012 02:39 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 02:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 02:23 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 02:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 01:47 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]Did they mention the Koch brothers thugs were there trying to instigate the violence? Did they tell how the Koch brothers thugs knocked down their own tent trying to make it look like "union thugs" did it? I am sure that was covered extensively on Faux News.
Source?
Well, the tent part was an eyewitness.
Who? Quoted where?
A guy at the rally and on the radio.
Obviously an impeccable source.
There have been reports where the guy who was punched was instigating a fight. Being a loud mouth jerk in the middle of a union gathering. Guy is lucky he escaped with his life. The guy would be dead or a vegetable for the rest of his life if this happened in the 70s or 80s. Honestly the unions have gone soft.
(12-13-2012 07:53 AM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]There have been reports where the guy who was punched was instigating a fight. Being a loud mouth jerk in the middle of a union gathering.
And gullible isn't in the dictionary.
Quote: Guy is lucky he escaped with his life. The guy would be dead or a vegetable for the rest of his life if this happened in the 70s or 80s. Honestly the unions have gone soft.
That's why I'd like to see these union gatherings used as rifle target practice. Americans have gone soft.
Mach,
You tend to be a reasonable guy, and I'm not directing this toward you or any one person. But it's endlessly amusing how liberals and the MSM paint Tea Party gatherings as "violent" over the past four years with hardly a shred of evidence, yet either ignore or offer excuses whenever these Occupy or Union rallies descend into violence and thuggery.
A state Democratic leader announced "there will be blood." Hoffa yearned for "civil war" in Michigan. Now, where is the holier-than-thou Paul Krugman in all this? No column lambasting violent imagery and the level of discourse?
If this was a Glen Beck hosted rally and some MSNBC contributor found himself in the midst of people taking punches at him, it'd get splashed on every front page and would be the lead comedy bit on Stewart and Colbert. And there's no way you'd be saying, "man, honestly those conservatives have gone soft, that MSNBC dude was just being a jerk, etc."
(12-13-2012 12:19 AM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand why unions are upset. If they are so great this law will mean nothing because people will still join and pay dues. So if unions are so great, why are they afraid?
I agree. The Michigan vote didn't ban unions, it just gave people a choice. Why are the union folks in Michigan so against given people a choice? Does it all come down to less $$ for the union coffers? IS that what they are really pissed about?
Someone on the WMU general board made a salient point:
Quote:Most of the people you see in Lansing are not rank and file members, but rather people higher up in their unions who could very well lose their cushy job.
Many of these people make six figure salaries, and if dues doesnt flow into them they face having to return to the classroom, or the factory. Trust me, most have been out of that loop for a long long time and their passion to retain the status quo has a lot to do with the fear of having to return to "real work."
(12-13-2012 08:38 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote: [ -> ]Someone on the WMU general board made a salient point:
Quote:Most of the people you see in Lansing are not rank and file members, but rather people higher up in their unions who could very well lose their cushy job.
Many of these people make six figure salaries, and if dues doesnt flow into them they face having to return to the classroom, or the factory. Trust me, most have been out of that loop for a long long time and their passion to retain the status quo has a lot to do with the fear of having to return to "real work."
Ah, thanks. If that poster is correct, then you just answered my previous question.
(12-13-2012 08:31 AM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 12:19 AM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand why unions are upset. If they are so great this law will mean nothing because people will still join and pay dues. So if unions are so great, why are they afraid?
I agree. The Michigan vote didn't ban unions, it just gave people a choice. Why are the union folks in Michigan so against given people a choice? Does it all come down to less $$ for the union coffers? IS that what they are really pissed about?
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."
Robert A. Heinlein
That's what it's about. Leftists are convinced at every level that an elite sect should guide and control others. That's what Social Studies are about in the article I linked to yesterday.
It is the common theme among the left: Gov't should control the economy. Select scientists should control the population's choices (food, driving, warmth, etc). Unions should control worker's pay. Professional educators should control what and how young people are taught.
Leftists like deferring personal responsibility, and they abhor that not everyone is as weak and cowardly as they are. So they insist that no one have a choice.
(12-13-2012 08:40 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 08:31 AM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 12:19 AM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand why unions are upset. If they are so great this law will mean nothing because people will still join and pay dues. So if unions are so great, why are they afraid?
I agree. The Michigan vote didn't ban unions, it just gave people a choice. Why are the union folks in Michigan so against given people a choice? Does it all come down to less $$ for the union coffers? IS that what they are really pissed about?
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."
Robert A. Heinlein
That's what it's about. Leftists are convinced at every level that an elite sect should guide and control others. That's what Social Studies are about in the article I linked to yesterday.
It is the common theme among the left: Gov't should control the economy. Select scientists should control the population's choices (food, driving, warmth, etc). Unions should control worker's pay. Professional educators should control what and how young people are taught.
Leftists like deferring personal responsibility, and they abhor that not everyone is as weak and cowardly as they are. So they insist that no one have a choice.
Spot on.
It's also why life in socialist paradises is misery, regardless of how well physical needs are met.
And it's why I cannot be a leftist.
(12-13-2012 08:40 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 08:31 AM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2012 12:19 AM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand why unions are upset. If they are so great this law will mean nothing because people will still join and pay dues. So if unions are so great, why are they afraid?
I agree. The Michigan vote didn't ban unions, it just gave people a choice. Why are the union folks in Michigan so against given people a choice? Does it all come down to less $$ for the union coffers? IS that what they are really pissed about?
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."
Robert A. Heinlein
That's what it's about. Leftists are convinced at every level that an elite sect should guide and control others. That's what Social Studies are about in the article I linked to yesterday.
It is the common theme among the left: Gov't should control the economy. Select scientists should control the population's choices (food, driving, warmth, etc). Unions should control worker's pay. Professional educators should control what and how young people are taught.
Leftists like deferring personal responsibility, and they abhor that not everyone is as weak and cowardly as they are. So they insist that no one have a choice.
Well said.
It's hilarious to me that our resident union lovers on here always avoid the simple question of why it's bad to give people the choice of whether or not to join a union. That's all this bill did.
They want women to have the choice to kill their baby but not let workers have the choice to join a union? The warped mindset of the left is gross. It's sad that I ceased being surprised by it decades ago.
Tell the a**wipe to release the prior 30 minutes before the altercation. Don't poke the bear and be upset when it bites. I'm saying their is a good chance this guy doesn't make it out to go on Sean Hannity 30 years ago.