RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 5:50:28 AM)

quote:

quote:



And they can opt out of the portion used for political purposes.


Can they? I doubt that, especially since everything else you spout is bullshit


I'm pretty sure there's a federal law giving union members the right to have that portion of their dues used for political contributions to be returned to them.
I'm even more sure that any savings are more than offset by slashed tires and such.



tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 5:59:41 AM)

quote:



quote:

And they can opt out of the portion used for political purposes.



Can they? I doubt that, especially since everything else you spout is bullshit


http://www.unionrefund.org/

Seems they can.



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 6:00:20 AM)

RML, I am wrong.
DK: ditto.

When I see the word "union" I automatically think of my union, the United States of Anerica.
I see now that you meant "labor union", which is dramatically different from "a union".

Yes, I would agree that collective bargaining is one of the cornerstones of a labor union.



Hillwilliam -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 6:08:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

RML, I am wrong.
DK: ditto.

When I see the word "union" I automatically think of my union, the United States of Anerica.
I see now that you meant "labor union", which is dramatically different from "a union".

Yes, I would agree that collective bargaining is one of the cornerstones of a labor union.



Historically, I'd say that "Collective Bargaining" is a cornerstone of the USA.

Couldn't you call the Declaration of Independence "collective bargaining" between the 13 colonies and management aka England?
Don't the individual states engage in "Collective bargaining" every time congress approves a treaty with a foreign power or declares war?
The list could go to nearly infinity.

I'm no union fan, but your logic is faulty.



rulemylife -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 6:09:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

RML, I am wrong.
DK: ditto.

When I see the word "union" I automatically think of my union, the United States of Anerica.
I see now that you meant "labor union", which is dramatically different from "a union".

Yes, I would agree that collective bargaining is one of the cornerstones of a labor union.


Well, I appreciate that, even though you tried to qualify it.

There may be hope for you.

I see liberalism in your future.




mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 6:18:48 AM)

It seems pretty clear to me that this is a violation of the equal protections clause, and will not stand in any case in its current form, should it pass wisconsin.

The scotus logic would seem to have to run along the same lines of thought that allow corporations to give unlimited money to candidates of their choice.



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:01:52 AM)

quote:

Couldn't you call the Declaration of Independence "collective bargaining" between the 13 colonies and management aka England?


If your definition of "collective bargaining" includes killing people, then, sure; we can stretch the definition a little.
Of course, for most unions, violence isn't much of a stretch anyway, so again: yeah, you've got a point.



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:07:18 AM)

You really think that a SCOTUS decision allowing corporations to make political donations means that a state cannot require public approval of some collective bargaining agreements reached with some public employee unions?

Would you care to explain that fascinating logic to me?



mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:08:31 AM)

The history of violence by both unions and 'management' is well documented, so any stretch goes in all directions.



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:08:32 AM)

I think I'm immune to some things.......



Moonhead -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:10:09 AM)

Yep.
Common sense and rational debate, for a start...



mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:13:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

You really think that a SCOTUS decision allowing corporations to make political donations means that a state cannot require public approval of some collective bargaining agreements reached with some public employee unions?

Would you care to explain that fascinating logic to me?


No, I would not like to explain the equal protections clause to you in terms of caselaw, precedent and rulings.  Your ability to understand the law is non-extant.  I have explained several times illegal notions (like the judge trying to legislate from the bench in terms of the severability doctrine and many other points of law) and have been proven by events to be 100% correct in my analysis, while simultaneously you having been proven 100% wrong in yours, and you continue to cling to your incorrect ideas.

Hey, maybe 4th times a charm on the birth certificate thingie, eh?

 



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:21:12 AM)

quote:

Hey, maybe 4th times a charm on the birth certificate thingie, eh?


Sooner or later, MN. Sooner or later.
Are you aware 0bama0 uses a Ct SSAN?
Pending on that......

Wanna try the equal protection thingie? I'm desperate for amusement.




mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:22:03 AM)

Nobody is aware of what you are asserting, it is all unfounded innuendo.



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:25:18 AM)

If you're saying that I am more aware of the logic, law, and current events in the Birther universe, then: Yes, MN, I am. Among other things. Thank you.



Hillwilliam -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:27:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

Couldn't you call the Declaration of Independence "collective bargaining" between the 13 colonies and management aka England?


If your definition of "collective bargaining" includes killing people, then, sure; we can stretch the definition a little.
Of course, for most unions, violence isn't much of a stretch anyway, so again: yeah, you've got a point.

Tis an unfortunate part of the past. I have a feeling, though, that the sheer body counts is about even between management and unions or the score might even be higher for management. Check out the history of the fights to unionize the coal mines about a century ago. A truly sad era in our country's history that is all too often ignored by mainstream educators.

Unions are only an extension of "United We Stand, Divided We Fall"

They STILL managed, in a large part, to destroy the American automobile manufacturing industry.



mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:29:27 AM)

Yup, and I really fail to see the legal ramifications of possessing a Social Security Number issued from the state of Connecticut.

I have one that is issued from North Dakota, yet I live in Minnesota, so maybe you can swoop in and catch me up in your net as well.  Although I think the innuendo instead of facts and issues laws did not actually make it into the books during the last republican administration.  



truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:34:16 AM)

I am willing to bet that you were a resident of Mn, or working in Mn, when you were issued your SSAN.

I am willing to bet that 0bama0 was neither working nor living in the continental US when he was issued his.

I am willing to bet that federal law prohibits that any SSAN be re-issued to a second person.

Finally, I am willing to bet that, unlike 0bama0s, your SSAN was not originally issued toa woman born in 1897.



RacerJim -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:36:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Nobody is aware of what you are asserting, it is all unfounded innuendo.


Nobody is denying Obama's SSN was assigned to Connecticut, it's a proven fact.



mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 7:43:51 AM)

right, did you also know the fact that there is nothing in the entire universe that is wrong with that?  according to the history books I have read (and it has been some time ago so new developments may have occurred unbeknownst to me) Connecticut was in fact a state in the union, and part of the USA at the time it was issued.



Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875