He broke the law. He deserves to be in jail?

[IWS]

What I don't get, is why this topic took a political spin in the first place.

Come on, just admit it, your happy someone finally stood up to their bullshit.

.

.

Did he?

George Vogel drove his Ford pickup truck toward a group of people he thought were the infamous Westboro Baptist protesters.The 62-year-old Omahan's trigger finger rested on a can of potent pepper spray that can cause temporary blindness and vomiting. His grandson rode in the passenger seat.

But what Vogel saw as he leaned out the driver's side window and twice sprayed the crowd outside the Saturday funeral of Marine Staff Sgt. Michael Bock is a 40-year-old memory he can't shake, his wife says.

In the memory, Vogel is himself a young Marine. He has just climbed off the ship that has brought him back to the United States from a brutal tour of duty in Vietnam. And he encounters a group of anti-war protesters, young adults his own age, waving signs and screaming at him.

?He kept saying, ?All I could think of was when I got off the boat,'? Marlene Vogel said Monday of the lone phone conversation she has had with her husband since he was jailed Saturday on suspicion of 16 counts of misdemeanor assault.

The charges stem from the 16 people ? none of whom are believed to be Westboro Baptist members ? who were allegedly harmed by Vogel's bear repellent, a Mace-like chemical that burned their eyes, turned their stomachs and sent several to the hospital.

http://www.omaha.com...S97/708319913/0

First. I don't like what the WBC people are doing. I'm offended by it but they have the right to do so. The First Amendment isn't there to protect kind or polite speech.

So, let's say your wife is murdered in your home by a bunch of whacked out PeTA people because your wife wears leather shoes.

A few years later PeTA buys the property next to where you live (assuming no zoning violations) and intends to build an "information center" to share with the community all the good their organization does, on the property right by where PeTA people slaughtered your wife, because of their radical PeTA beliefs.

Seeing how you don't have any reason to be offended by this, at what point do you bring over the basket with "welcome to the neighborhood" baked goods?

It's really amazing how many times I can argue your point (this specific one you keep making) into oblivion, and you still act like it's fact.

So that first PETA group are actually not really part of it, they're just nutcases who are using PETA to feel justified in killing your wife.

PETA comes out and says that person was wrong. Anybody who targets civilians is wrong. 9 years later, they build an information center two blocks away from your house, where you can't even see it. Are you offended?

I think it's pretty clear who I was talking to and it wasn't you.

 

[jokersarewild]

What I don't get, is why this topic took a political spin in the first place.

Come on, just admit it, your happy someone finally stood up to their bullshit.

.

.

Did he?

George Vogel drove his Ford pickup truck toward a group of people he thought were the infamous Westboro Baptist protesters.The 62-year-old Omahan's trigger finger rested on a can of potent pepper spray that can cause temporary blindness and vomiting. His grandson rode in the passenger seat.

But what Vogel saw as he leaned out the driver's side window and twice sprayed the crowd outside the Saturday funeral of Marine Staff Sgt. Michael Bock is a 40-year-old memory he can't shake, his wife says.

In the memory, Vogel is himself a young Marine. He has just climbed off the ship that has brought him back to the United States from a brutal tour of duty in Vietnam. And he encounters a group of anti-war protesters, young adults his own age, waving signs and screaming at him.

?He kept saying, ?All I could think of was when I got off the boat,'? Marlene Vogel said Monday of the lone phone conversation she has had with her husband since he was jailed Saturday on suspicion of 16 counts of misdemeanor assault.

The charges stem from the 16 people ? none of whom are believed to be Westboro Baptist members ? who were allegedly harmed by Vogel's bear repellent, a Mace-like chemical that burned their eyes, turned their stomachs and sent several to the hospital.

http://www.omaha.com...S97/708319913/0

First. I don't like what the WBC people are doing. I'm offended by it but they have the right to do so. The First Amendment isn't there to protect kind or polite speech.

So, let's say your wife is murdered in your home by a bunch of whacked out PeTA people because your wife wears leather shoes.

A few years later PeTA buys the property next to where you live (assuming no zoning violations) and intends to build an "information center" to share with the community all the good their organization does, on the property right by where PeTA people slaughtered your wife, because of their radical PeTA beliefs.

Seeing how you don't have any reason to be offended by this, at what point do you bring over the basket with "welcome to the neighborhood" baked goods?

It's really amazing how many times I can argue your point (this specific one you keep making) into oblivion, and you still act like it's fact.

So that first PETA group are actually not really part of it, they're just nutcases who are using PETA to feel justified in killing your wife.

PETA comes out and says that person was wrong. Anybody who targets civilians is wrong. 9 years later, they build an information center two blocks away from your house, where you can't even see it. Are you offended?

I think it's pretty clear that I am uptight and reptitive.

I know who you quoted. I figured I'd jump in, since I do so enjoy trying to curb your obsession with how wrong people of other opinions are.

Also, in case you didn't get it: Your analogy is quite backwards. And, you know, incorrect. But hey, your inability to represent facts is impressive, man.

 

[IWS]

I know who you quoted. I figured I'd jump in, since I do so enjoy trying to curb your obsession with how wrong people of other opinions are.

Also, in case you didn't get it: Your analogy is quite backwards. And, you know, incorrect. But hey, your inability to represent facts is impressive, man.

No prob. We'll just go back to your hypocrisy where you think people who do something you think is offensive should expect being met with violence but someone else who does something someone else might find offensive shouldn't even be able to voice their opinion against it.

Double standard, much.

Your inability to admit what a hypocrite you are is impressive, man.

Where as I have continually said that I think that both the WBC people and the GZM people have the right to do what hey want, without violence, but also support the right of people to be offended by what these people do, and their right to voice that opinion, as long as it doesn't infringe anyone's rights, should be respected.

Difference between me and you is that I see both sides of the issue, doesn't depend on the issue and can differentiate between what is right and wrong and what is a Right and a violation of said Right. Hypocrite.

 

[jokersarewild]

I know who you quoted. I figured I'd jump in, since I do so enjoy trying to curb your obsession with how wrong people of other opinions are.

Also, in case you didn't get it: Your analogy is quite backwards. And, you know, incorrect. But hey, your inability to represent facts is impressive, man.

No prob. We'll just go back to your hypocrisy where you think people who do something you think is offensive should expect being met with violence but someone else who does something someone else might find offensive shouldn't even be able to voice their opinion against it.

Actually, that's not true at all. I said that when people deeply offend someone, there is a chance that person will resort to violence. I never condoned it. I never said it was right. And I think it's perfectly OK to voice your opinion to something. Some people just don't respect that fact, hence the guy with the pepper spray.

Double standard, much.

Nope.

Your inability to admit what a hypocrite you are is impressive, man.

I'm a hypocrite by admitting that people tend to get violent when offended? Hm.

Where as I have continually said that I think that both the WBC people and the GZM people have the right to do what hey want, without violence, but also support the right of people to be offended by what these people do, and their right to voice that opinion, as long as it doesn't infringe anyone's rights, should be respected.

As have I. I never once said they didn't have the right and that it shouldn't be respected. I fully endorse that. I completely agree with you there. Doesn't mean the GZM won't get blown up by some butt hole. Doesn't mean the WBC people won't get maced. Those acts aren't legal, no matter what your opinion is. And yes, I don't like the WBC one bit. And if they picketed a funeral I was going to, I would buy megaphones for everyone at the funeral to loudly tell them to fornicate themselves. Which is a great use of my rights.

Difference between me and you is that I see both sides of the issue, doesn't depend on the issue and can differentiate between what is right and wrong and what is a Right and a violation of said Right. Hypocrite.

IWS, where did I say I condone violent responses to this? Yes, I would love to see the WBC the the holy hell beat out of them. Would I do it? No, because it's illegal, and it wouldn't be worth my time. Do I enjoy hearing stories about them getting maced? Yes. Yes I do. The same way people enjoy bad things happening to people they think deserve it. But it's illegal, and they have no right at all to do it, and the people who do it should go to jail, because they not only assaulted them, but because they tried to violate the rights of American Citizens by silencing them.

I know their rights, and I would uphold them. Granted, I don't think I'd be able to defend them in a court of law (bias would be a factor), but they have rights. That would be an ACLU thing, if it ever were taken to court, they'd probably jump in.

So let me repeat:

1. WBC have the right to protest funerals.

2. I do believe that when they do this, they should expect people to react negatively, possibly in a physical manner. Go into a group of blacks/jews/mexicans and start using racial slurs. Same general effect.

3. I know that violent reactions are legally wrong, and such actions are trying to silence their rights as Americans, which should not be condoned at any point. If we say we can shut them up, then we can say we can shut anybody up, and we just gave up a right.

4. I never once said you shouldn't be able to voice your opinion. I'm not fully sure where you got that from, to be perfectly honest.

 

[Times]

What I don't get, is why this topic took a political spin in the first place.

Come on, just admit it, your happy someone finally stood up to their bullshit.

.

.

Did he?

George Vogel drove his Ford pickup truck toward a group of people he thought were the infamous Westboro Baptist protesters.The 62-year-old Omahan's trigger finger rested on a can of potent pepper spray that can cause temporary blindness and vomiting. His grandson rode in the passenger seat.

But what Vogel saw as he leaned out the driver's side window and twice sprayed the crowd outside the Saturday funeral of Marine Staff Sgt. Michael Bock is a 40-year-old memory he can't shake, his wife says.

In the memory, Vogel is himself a young Marine. He has just climbed off the ship that has brought him back to the United States from a brutal tour of duty in Vietnam. And he encounters a group of anti-war protesters, young adults his own age, waving signs and screaming at him.

?He kept saying, ?All I could think of was when I got off the boat,'? Marlene Vogel said Monday of the lone phone conversation she has had with her husband since he was jailed Saturday on suspicion of 16 counts of misdemeanor assault.

The charges stem from the 16 people ? none of whom are believed to be Westboro Baptist members ? who were allegedly harmed by Vogel's bear repellent, a Mace-like chemical that burned their eyes, turned their stomachs and sent several to the hospital.

http://www.omaha.com...S97/708319913/0

First. I don't like what the WBC people are doing. I'm offended by it but they have the right to do so. The First Amendment isn't there to protect kind or polite speech.

So, let's say your wife is murdered in your home by a bunch of whacked out PeTA people because your wife wears leather shoes.

A few years later PeTA buys the property next to where you live (assuming no zoning violations) and intends to build an "information center" to share with the community all the good their organization does, on the property right by where PeTA people slaughtered your wife, because of their radical PeTA beliefs.

Seeing how you don't have any reason to be offended by this, at what point do you bring over the basket with "welcome to the neighborhood" baked goods?

It's really amazing how many times I can argue your point (this specific one you keep making) into oblivion, and you still act like it's fact.

So that first PETA group are actually not really part of it, they're just nutcases who are using PETA to feel justified in killing your wife.

PETA comes out and says that person was wrong. Anybody who targets civilians is wrong. 9 years later, they build an information center two blocks away from your house, where you can't even see it. Are you offended?

eddo made a great point on this, Muslim leaders do not stand unified against terrorist actions so that is why your example is way, way off base.

hugo as usual tried to join your progressive side but he failed miserably because as with this specific imam in question, he completely refuses to condemn terrorists as bad or evil. When asked over and over if groups like Hamas are terrorists groups, he says he refuses to "take sides", well by refusing to caLL them what they are, he actually has taken a side, one of supporting the terrorists indirectly if not directly.

 

[hugo]

As always I support the Constitution of the United States of America as the founding fathers intended, A Constitution whose very heart is the concept of individual liberty and limited government. A Constitution that neither big government socialists or big government social conservatives hold dear.

 

[Times]

As always I support the Constitution of the United States of America as the founding fathers intended, A Constitution whose very heart is the concept of individual liberty and limited government. A Constitution that neither big government socialists or big government social conservatives hold dear.

Sure, you make those claims but then you help people like Obama get into office so the results of your actions are progressive and have nothing to do with honoring the constitution.

By the way, how exactly are you supporting the constitution by making a false claim that Muslims condemn the terrorists? You have any idea how many very prominent Muslims with real political power do not fight against terrorists besides this one imam in question?

"But after 50 years of, in many cases, oppression, of U.S. support of authoritarian regimes that have violated human rights in the most heinous of ways, how else do people get attention?"

Of course this specific imam is not alone, most of the Muslim leadership also show a great deal of support for terrorists in how they see their actions as a religious sacrifice:

Palestinian suicide bombers are sacrificing "their souls for freedom." "When young men and women offered their souls for the sake of freedom and independence and in defense of their religion, dignity, self and family, the United States could not find anything to describe these great sacrifices except to say they are terrorist, criminal actions."

"What's the difference between the taking of innocent lives in New York and Washington and the taking of innocent lives in Ramallah and Bethlehem?."

-- Amhed al-Tuwaijri, member of the Consultative Council of Saudi Arabia, in a letter to President George W. Bush and members of Congress. April 16, 2002

"Tell Ayat*, the bride of loftiness ? She embraced death with a smile while the leaders are running away from death. Doors of heaven are opened for her."

"We complained to the idols of a White House whose heart is filled with darkness"]

--

, the Saudi Ambassador to the U.K. and noted poet, in a poem titled "Martyrs." The poem appeared on the front page of the London-based pan-Arab newspaper Al Hayat. April 12, 2002

(*Reference to Ayat Akras, an 18-year-old Palestinian female suicide bomber who attacked a Jerusalem supermarket on March 29, killing two and injuring 25).

A "UNIFIED" voice against terrorist activities is what is needed. As eddo pointed out, all religious leaders speak out against anything that can be even slightly connected to their faith but only the Muslims hedge their bets and some speask against while other more powerful leaders either speak to support the terrorist actions or claim to not want to be political and refuse to take sides.

But that refusal to take sides is actually taking sides, it is a choice to not be against the terrorists and that is a kind of support.

*****************

But, the Muslims are not alone, it seems even many Libertarians like you and Ron Paul feel the same way, Ron Paul even admitted in a public debate that it was the policies of America that caused the terrorists to attack us.

But at the same time even more attacks have been done in places like France who bend over backwards for Muslims and they certainly never invaded their Countries so how is it you Libertarians believe you can draw a connection between our policies and their attacks? Just looking at the facts of all the different targets these Islamic followers have selected over the years, we see that they attack people who help them just as much as those they claim have harmed them.

Why?

Progressives and now even Libertarians have gotten fooled by the idea that these terrorists are being honest about their motives. Why is it you believe someone who is willing to kill a child on purpose for 'shock value' is also at the same time someone who would not lie to you?

More and more hugo, you prove you have more in comon with the progressives than real conservatives.

 

[wez]

Sure, you make those claims but then you help people like Obama get into office so the results of your actions are progressive and have nothing to do with honoring the constitution.

Progressives and now even Libertarians have gotten fooled by the idea that these terrorists are being honest about their motives. Why is it you believe someone who is willing to kill a child on purpose for 'shock value' is also at the same time someone who would not lie to you?

More and more hugo, you prove you have more in comon with the progressives than real conservatives.

​

 

[hugo]

There is no unifird voice among Muslims because as I have stated before a significant percentage of Muslims around the globe support terrorism. Muslims are also, like Christians, divided among differents sects. Once again, there is a civil war within Islam that we need the moderates to win. There is no pope of Islam to provide a unifying voice.

The fact is Muslims have the same 1st Amendment and 4th Amendment rights as Christians. It is the bigots, like TJ, who believe biracial children should never be born, who have ran off economically conservative minorities and have all but insured the Republicans will be a permanent minority party within 20 years. I am a Barry Goldwater conservative, not a George Wallace conservative.

What made our country is the Constitution. Those who attack it for some perceived temporary gain are scum.

More and more, TJ, you prove you have more in commom with Stalin and Hitler than Jefferson and Madison.

Unlike liberals and conservatives I support all ten amendments in the Bill of Rpghts.

 

[wez]

More and more, TJ, you prove you have more in commom with Stalin and Hitler than Jefferson and Madison.

Don't forget Ted Bundy and Dennis Rader..

 

[jokersarewild]

Sure, you make those claims but then you help people like Obama get into office so the results of your actions are progressive and have nothing to do with honoring the constitution.

Progressives and now even Libertarians have gotten fooled by the idea that these terrorists are being honest about their motives. Why is it you believe someone who is willing to kill a child on purpose for 'shock value' is also at the same time someone who would not lie to you?

More and more hugo, you prove you have more in comon with the progressives than real conservatives.

​

This made me laugh.

Also, have you noticed that everyone who argues against Times is a progressive?

Progressive: favoring or promoting progress; "progressive schools"...

So arguing against Times is promoting progress? Sounds about right...

 

[Times]

WEll hugo, I am sure you will do your usual part in trying to tear down anyone who can stand up to the progressives so you can by default help those progressives win just like you always do.

Have you noticed how the woman you blindly hate, sarah palin, is helping even some libritarians do well in elections? You spend all your time attacking anyone who is not 100% in your mind and that mentality actually helps those your supposed to be fighting against.

Then as usual you take the exact same possition Obama and the rest of the progressive take on something like this, tell me something hugo, where does it say in the constitution that we have to look the other way while Muslims support terrorists? Where in the Constitution does it say we have to be politically correct even when it will most likely cause the death of more Americans? There is no gurantee in the Constitution to have the ability to build religious structures on any specific location. You sir are trying to insert rights that are not there.

At the end of the day our American system was supposed to serve the people, not individual political figures. The people have spoken clearly against things like Government takeovers of healthcare and this Mosque at ground zero and yet your on the side of the progressives to ignore the voice of the people and do what is 100% political correct games.

Pretty funny how your in line with the administration more often then not hugo.

***************************

Joker, while you guys love to pretend your supporting progress, not all progress is good and you progressives push for change for the sake of change even if there is no logical reason to make the change.

We are not running out of money, we have been out of money for a long time and at some point reality must step in before all of America ends up like California. They have been broke for a very long time and still they are in denial, they just finished the most expensive public school in America during a time they have been completely broke, now where is the logic in that?

Progressives have some idea I would agree "sound good" on the surface, but we have to temper these ides with reality, and reality is something you guys can't seem to grasp. The recent news of company, after company running from California to get away from their our of control taxing should show even the most stubborn person that the answer is not to tax, tax, tax, tax.........

 

[jokersarewild]

Joker, while you guys love to pretend your supporting progress, not all progress is good and you progressives push for change for the sake of change even if there is no logical reason to make the change.

We just like mixing it up, you know. Change the colors on the CIA name badges, make our President black instead of white, etc, etc.

We are not running out of money, we have been out of money for a long time

One of the only things you've said I can agree with.

and at some point reality must step in before all of America ends up like California.

I'm offended. I live in California, and we send out the best looking IOUs, thank you!

They have been broke for a very long time and still they are in denial, they just finished the most expensive public school in America during a time they have been completely broke, now where is the logic in that?

There is no logic there. I won't argue that. I was quite perplexed when I found out that was happening.

Progressives have some idea I would agree "sound good" on the surface, but we have to temper these ides with reality, and reality is something you guys can't seem to grasp. The recent news of company, after company running from California to get away from their our of control taxing should show even the most stubborn person that the answer is not to tax, tax, tax, tax.........

Nope, we can't cope with reality. Like the reality that California is pro-employee, which tends to make a lot of companies want to go elsewhere to avoid such things. Yes, taxation is part of it. But every business owner I talk to (I am a cashier at Wal-mart...I speak to quite a few) say that their problems stem from the fact that California seems to hate businesses.

Now, one thing here: Is it possible that the laws were made so big bidniz can't screw over their employees, and small businesses just get the ass end of it? Also, Utah (where Ebay, among others, is relocating to) is a Right To Work state, which means they aren't going to protect employees near as much, and give the business free reign. Is it possible that they moved to avoid having to cater as much to their employees? They can't complain as much if they have fewer rights, which creates fewer legal issues for the company.

 

[Times]

We just like mixing it up, you know. Change the colors on the CIA name badges, make our President black instead of white, etc, etc.

While your trying to be slick, your closer to the truth than you know, that change of color implies a greater connection to their progressive agenda to push "social Justice" legislation.

One of the only things you've said I can agree with.

And if you agree with it, why are the progressives spending even more of this money we don't have?

There is no logic there. I won't argue that. I was quite perplexed when I found out that was happening.

While that is a big example, there are millions of other examples as well, all showing how progressives have no real respect for money, they run out, no biggie, just increase taxes again.

Nope, we can't cope with reality. Like the reality that California is pro-employee, which tends to make a lot of companies want to go elsewhere to avoid such things. Yes, taxation is part of it. But every business owner I talk to (I am a cashier at Wal-mart...I speak to quite a few) say that their problems stem from the fact that California seems to hate businesses.

Now, one thing here: Is it possible that the laws were made so big bidniz can't screw over their employees, and small businesses just get the ass end of it? Also, Utah (where Ebay, among others, is relocating to) is a Right To Work state, which means they aren't going to protect employees near as much, and give the business free reign. Is it possible that they moved to avoid having to cater as much to their employees? They can't complain as much if they have fewer rights, which creates fewer legal issues for the company.

Tell me this, is the employee more screwed with a job or without a job?

Yes, one of the big factors in California is they are one huge Union, they try to force employeers to provide more and more services and pay to employees and give over more control of their companies to the employees but all of these things also cost money, it is another form of tax. If the Government taxes a dollar or they force the company to spend a dollar, it is still considered a imposed tax on business for the bottom line.

California slowly milks every drop of money out of the business and eventually either drives them away, puts them out of business, or they make the untimate sacrifice and give the company away to the employees as Obama has given GM to the Unions.

The kind of retreat California is seeing will happen to all of America if we are not careful. Actuallu it is already happening, almost all of the production jobs we have lost is because of pressure from Unions to offer more benefits and pay while Government was increasing regulations and imposing more restrictions on these businesses. Combined it caused the companies to consider relocating to places that were not so hostile to them.

 

[jokersarewild]

I completely agree. I think unions were necessary at one point, when people like Rockafeller were treating their employees like dirt. However, they've grown hungry for the power they can get now, by forcing companies to do their bidding. I think we need to figure out a way to get their powers down quite a bit. Mind you, I'm an employee, and I'm all in favor of us, but there will be fewer of us if businesses can't operate. Go figure. Hell, amusingly enough, I have a friend who's a cashier at Safeway. He makes 15 bucks an hour because he's unionized. (I make just under 9.) He only works 15 hours a week, or less. My guess is that Safeway can't afford that crap. Granted, I would LOVE to make 15 an hour. But he makes less than I do a paycheck (I work around 32 hours a week), because he doesn't work as much.

If you'll notice: Wal-Mart HATES unions. At one of the Dist. Centers near here, they have a 4 hour Anti-Union video. I've heard they'll shut down a store if too many people unionize themselves. Wal-Mart understands that they can't operate, or make much of a profit, if their employees become unionized. They have the right idea. And fortunately for them, they can afford to do it.

 

[Times]

I completely agree. I think unions were necessary at one point, when people like Rockafeller were treating their employees like dirt. However, they've grown hungry for the power they can get now, by forcing companies to do their bidding. I think we need to figure out a way to get their powers down quite a bit. Mind you, I'm an employee, and I'm all in favor of us, but there will be fewer of us if businesses can't operate. Go figure. Hell, amusingly enough, I have a friend who's a cashier at Safeway. He makes 15 bucks an hour because he's unionized. (I make just under 9.) He only works 15 hours a week, or less. My guess is that Safeway can't afford that crap. Granted, I would LOVE to make 15 an hour. But he makes less than I do a paycheck (I work around 32 hours a week), because he doesn't work as much.

If you'll notice: Wal-Mart HATES unions. At one of the Dist. Centers near here, they have a 4 hour Anti-Union video. I've heard they'll shut down a store if too many people unionize themselves. Wal-Mart understands that they can't operate, or make much of a profit, if their employees become unionized. They have the right idea. And fortunately for them, they can afford to do it.

Well we agree on at least one thing and that is the Unions used to have a great purpose.

Today Unions commend even our President to do their bidding, they have become a legal Mafia.

Your friend making more money does seem unfair on the surface, but that kind of overhead is difficult to maintain and that business must compete against other places who don't have that kind of overhead, this is another big reason we have lost a lot of industry to other Countries.

Again, I understand the 'theory' why progressives do these thing, but the reality is, business cannot survive as long as they are seen as the enemy and constantly attacked for more, and more, and more until we kill them off.

Like the story of the golden goose, there are only so many eggs to go around.......

 

[jokersarewild]

I completely agree. I think unions were necessary at one point, when people like Rockafeller were treating their employees like dirt. However, they've grown hungry for the power they can get now, by forcing companies to do their bidding. I think we need to figure out a way to get their powers down quite a bit. Mind you, I'm an employee, and I'm all in favor of us, but there will be fewer of us if businesses can't operate. Go figure. Hell, amusingly enough, I have a friend who's a cashier at Safeway. He makes 15 bucks an hour because he's unionized. (I make just under 9.) He only works 15 hours a week, or less. My guess is that Safeway can't afford that crap. Granted, I would LOVE to make 15 an hour. But he makes less than I do a paycheck (I work around 32 hours a week), because he doesn't work as much.

If you'll notice: Wal-Mart HATES unions. At one of the Dist. Centers near here, they have a 4 hour Anti-Union video. I've heard they'll shut down a store if too many people unionize themselves. Wal-Mart understands that they can't operate, or make much of a profit, if their employees become unionized. They have the right idea. And fortunately for them, they can afford to do it.

Well we agree on at least one thing and that is the Unions used to have a great purpose.

Today Unions commend even our President to do their bidding, they have become a legal Mafia.

Your friend making more money does seem unfair on the surface, but that kind of overhead is difficult to maintain and that business must compete against other places who don't have that kind of overhead, this is another big reason we have lost a lot of industry to other Countries.

Again, I understand the 'theory' why progressives do these thing, but the reality is, business cannot survive as long as they are seen as the enemy and constantly attacked for more, and more, and more until we kill them off.

Like the story of the golden goose, there are only so many eggs to go around.......

That's what I was saying. Wal-Mart survives because it doesn't have that kind of overhead, and refuses to pay that much for such things. And unions, amusingly enough, help Wal-Mart in their takeover of various places because the unionized places can't afford to pay their employees retarded amounts of money and also sell products that inexpensively.

 

[Times]

That's what I was saying. Wal-Mart survives because it doesn't have that kind of overhead, and refuses to pay that much for such things. And unions, amusingly enough, help Wal-Mart in their takeover of various places because the unionized places can't afford to pay their employees retarded amounts of money and also sell products that inexpensively.

I am not a big fan of Wal-Mart being as most of their products come from China when many years ago they used to advertise how they try to buy American but it was their strict refusal to allow the Unions to take them down that made them as strong as they are today.

 

[jokersarewild]

That's what I was saying. Wal-Mart survives because it doesn't have that kind of overhead, and refuses to pay that much for such things. And unions, amusingly enough, help Wal-Mart in their takeover of various places because the unionized places can't afford to pay their employees retarded amounts of money and also sell products that inexpensively.

I am not a big fan of Wal-Mart being as most of their products come from China when many years ago they used to advertise how they try to buy American but it was their strict refusal to allow the Unions to take them down that made them as strong as they are today.

Having them come from China makes them less expensive, which is how the prices are so low in the first place. I think it would be an amusing threat to tell China that Wal-Mart will buy US products from then on if they did/didn't do something or other. China goes "OH sh*t!" and poops a little in its pants

 

[Times]

That's what I was saying. Wal-Mart survives because it doesn't have that kind of overhead, and refuses to pay that much for such things. And unions, amusingly enough, help Wal-Mart in their takeover of various places because the unionized places can't afford to pay their employees retarded amounts of money and also sell products that inexpensively.

I am not a big fan of Wal-Mart being as most of their products come from China when many years ago they used to advertise how they try to buy American but it was their strict refusal to allow the Unions to take them down that made them as strong as they are today.

Having them come from China makes them less expensive, which is how the prices are so low in the first place. I think it would be an amusing threat to tell China that Wal-Mart will buy US products from then on if they did/didn't do something or other. China goes "OH sh*t!" and poops a little in its pants

Hollow threat being as we have run our American production out of business, and they know it.

Too bad our Government and the Unions took away our ability to compete, those production jobs sure would be nice to have right now. But we can feel better knowing that the envoronment wackos and progressives are happy that the factories are shut down.