“Take It Outside”

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

right to do bussiness — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:59:05 GMT

MRS gypsy - so you prefer the constant stream of the Communist News Network honoring that of Bill Mahr obama supporter. Now when you sit down and think of your grandchildren and that communist education they are getting is what you want for them, well that is child abuse. and the unions should be real proud of themselves for that, remember page 20 in the MEA manual.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

right to do bussiness — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:40:49 GMT

MRS. Gypsy - you have got to be drinking de-cafe You pushed and carried a sign to recall Paul scott yourself. and the people spoke putting a republican back in there, Yes they did. everyone knows the pickers well call em were paid uaw staff on furlow from the Volt plant. you see gm is on the solyndra track afterall and by the way im sending some money to Mackinac center on your behalf today. and claiming the union made it possible to make cars here only thing unions ever did was run businesses out of michigan, to indiana.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

gypsy — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:54:41 GMT

Those who watch Fox are less informed than those who watch no media news.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

TaterSalad — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:12:35 GMT

Please watch tonight on Sean Hannity @ 9:00pm on Fox - Obama racist past and his vetting process begines! Here is the first of part 1:

http://thecount.com/2012/03/07/controversial-racist-obama-full-video-leaked/

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

TaterSalad — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:59:58 GMT

Collective bargain this and quit whining! Fix this loop-hole first!

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1408988&utm_source=Enews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ARTICLE_Gov. Patrick moves to fix unemployment loophole_DATE_03-07-2012--14.26

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

gypsy — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:34:35 GMT

Sort of skipping a whole 50 years of history, aren't you Dk. The Democrats were the party of the old South, and the Republicans were the party of Lincoln. As I mentioned before, that all changed with Nixon's Southern strategy. It was Democrats John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson that passed the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964.

As for Sen. Byrd, he apologized repeatedly for his involvement with the KKK as a “sad mistake.”

African Americans overwhelminly vote Democratic.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

Dktubbs — Sat, 16 Apr 2011 13:25:35 GMT

If I recall, Robert Byrd and a number of Democratic legislators were actively involved in the KKK. I don't believe anyone who stands for individual rights and personal responsibility could support any activities that deny those same rights.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

gypsy — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:11:30 GMT

It should be hard to fire a long time employee because the employer has kept them for a long time. Kind of simple logic. If they hadn't been doing their jobs for years, why weren't they fired much earlier in their career's. Unless their has been a sudden diminishing quality in their work, the employer might have alternative motives for wanting to get rid of them. Maybe their political activity doesn't agree with their employer's?

Seems that a teacher that has been teaching for years would be the definition of a "dedicated teacher".

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

gypsy — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:04:39 GMT

Don't know of any "union paid demonstrators", and don't know of any indimidation done by moveon.org.. Please supply details if you have any. Besides, demonstrating is not indimidation. Something in the constitution about peaceful assembly.

Non union auto plants certainly wouldn't qualify for a government bailout, at least not from our government. They get plenty of help from their own governments, such as Japan, Germany, Sweden etc...

Just to clear something up too, our automakers weren't "bailed out". They were given loans, which they must pay back.

You must have a dictionary of right wing sound bites you refer to often. Do you work for Fox ?

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

albaby2 — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:05:20 GMT

Why should it be hard to fire a long time employee if they aren't doing their job? They were paid for the work they did and are owed nothing more. Tell me how many teachers have been fired in the last 10 years. The slugs remain and take up space where dedicated teachers could be teaching kids.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

albaby2 — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:01:00 GMT

I noticed the Mackinac center was the only one you described as intimidating. Never mentioned union paid demonstrators, Move On. org or anything like that. You also did not mention that the non-union auto plants are thriving and didn't need a bailout from the government.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

gypsy — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:24:32 GMT

Unions and liberal organizations, corporations, businesses, or conservative organizations, like the Mackinac Center, should not use intimidation. That's my point. Maybe you missed it.

I don't have to use the well worn conservative sound bite "union thugs", conservatives use it quite enough to portray all union members as thugs, which is as far from the truth as one can be.

Unions didn't "drive businesses out of Michigan". Unions are why workers in the south at non union auto plants are making as much money as they are. Most of those foreign auto plants are paying their union workers more in their country of origin than they pay our non union American workers.

It should be hard to fire a long time employee, but it isn't "impossible". I certainly don't have a problem with that.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

albaby2 — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:29:19 GMT

Should unions and liberal organizations intimidate those who oppose unions? Don't see you mentioning union thugs. How about unions driving businesses out of Michigan and making it impossible to fire incompetent employees-such as tenured teachers? Don't have a problem with any of that?

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

gypsy — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:34:47 GMT

And if you may recall, Nixon turned the south into Republican territory with his "southern strategy", which was based on the racist views in the south towards negroes and jews. Pretty much turned the Republican party of Lincoln inside out.

changeagent:
However, unions have a long history of using threats, intimidation and coercion to get what they want for their special interests.

It's no secret what the "special interest" of unions are. Worker's rights to a decent wage and a safe work environment. It's true the labor movement has experieced violence, the same as most social movements do. It is a sad commentary on mankind that in order to find justice, the struggle must entail violence. Labor's history shows that most of it was in reaction to corporate thugs.

I know what the political views of the Mackinac Center are. I find their tactics of indimidation repugnant.

Re: Should the Mackinac Center be trying to indimidate those who support collective bargaining?

changeagent — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:32:31 GMT

The Mackinac Center is a public policy think tank that supports individual freedom and limited government. I don't think that is any secret.

gypsy:
I also seriously doubt some wacko making threats is representative of the labor movement

Yes, if that were the only example of unions using intimidation I would agree. However, unions have a long history of using threats, intimidation and coercion to get what they want for their special interests. Furthermore, the "progressive" movement has a much deeper history of violence than the liberty movement does, except, of course, for that whole revolution against the king deal. BTW, the KKK may not be the best example since it historically is much more of a racist group than anything else and has a long history of Democrat support. As I recall, Robert Byrd was a grand wizard or some such thing.