Heckuva job: Michigan union thugs destroyed hot dog vendor’s cart

[NYcarbineer]

Those too stupid to learn from history are doomed to relive it:


American Experience . The Richest Man in the World: Andrew Carnegie . Strike at Homestead Mill | PBS

Labor lost this battle but eventually won the right to organize. Today, the reactionary forces on the right want to deny to some the right to band together and negotiate for wages, benefits and working conditions. The same forces which met head to head in the late 19th Century, in the 30's on the piers in San Francisco and in the 70's in North Carolina (see: Crystal Lee Sutton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) depicted in the film Norma Rae are at it once again.

Q. Why does the party which lays claim to liberty and freedom want to deprive some citizens of that very right.

A. Greed and the lust for power.

Interesting that your post has nothing to do with the OP whatsoever (that being the violence that the unions are perpetrating).

It is worthy to note that the right actually is NOT removing the right to organize. They are fighting to allow people to choose to organize or not, something that the left seems to viscerally hate: choice.

There is no union violence that wasn't provoked. This is rightwing propaganda.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Seriously? Surely you're joking.
If not you're one sick mother fucker.

Joking about what? That the rightwing propaganda machine lies? That USMB rightwing nuts repeat those lies?

Are you new here? lol

Apparently you cant count.
If you think this was anything more than union thuggery you're a moron.

That's exactly the kind of thing the rightwing nuts said about the alleged attack on Kenneth Gladney by SEIU 'thugs',

who were found innocent.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Who on the right can name any way your life will get better because more Americans are going to be working for less money.

 

[saveliberty]

There is no union violence that wasn't provoked. This is rightwing propaganda.

You need to define this. I'd hate to think you excuse violence from peaceful demonstrations protected by the Constitution.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Those too stupid to learn from history are doomed to relive it:


American Experience . The Richest Man in the World: Andrew Carnegie . Strike at Homestead Mill | PBS

Labor lost this battle but eventually won the right to organize. Today, the reactionary forces on the right want to deny to some the right to band together and negotiate for wages, benefits and working conditions. The same forces which met head to head in the late 19th Century, in the 30's on the piers in San Francisco and in the 70's in North Carolina (see: Crystal Lee Sutton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) depicted in the film Norma Rae are at it once again.

Q. Why does the party which lays claim to liberty and freedom want to deprive some citizens of that very right.

A. Greed and the lust for power.

Interesting that your post has nothing to do with the OP whatsoever (that being the violence that the unions are perpetrating).

It is worthy to note that the right actually is NOT removing the right to organize. They are fighting to allow people to choose to organize or not, something that the left seems to viscerally hate: choice.

You're so full of shit I can smell it over the Internet. My post has everything to do with the violence (which was minor) in Michigan and the violence to come. To come is the point. RTW is a union busting movement and the blood spilled in our past should not be forgotten.

There will always be 'scabs', people willing to work for less - less salary, fewer or no benefits and horrible working conditions. And, there will always be people to stand their ground.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There is no union violence that wasn't provoked. This is rightwing propaganda.

You need to define this. I'd hate to think you excuse violence from peaceful demonstrations protected by the Constitution.

The Constitution does not protect protesters from others protesting the protesters. Michigan law has jurisdiction if and when a crime is committed. Keep in mind that the Freedom of Speech guaranteed in the Constitution is not absolute, and that "Fighting Words" can be used in the defense of any crime which may follow such utterances.

 

[saveliberty]

There is no union violence that wasn't provoked. This is rightwing propaganda.

You need to define this. I'd hate to think you excuse violence from peaceful demonstrations protected by the Constitution.

The Constitution does not protect protesters from others protesting the protesters. Michigan law has jurisdiction if and when a crime is committed. Keep in mind that the Freedom of Speech guaranteed in the Constitution is not absolute, and that "Fighting Words" can be used in the defense of any crime which may follow such utterances.

So your saying whoever shows up first is protected the the other group is out of luck Constitutionally?

Assault is a higher crime then and clearly that was carried out by the unions. Your defense with fighting words is going to take an audio of some type, otherwise its just hearsay and it will be thrown out in favor of an assault convction on your folks. We have the video of that.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

 

[FA_Q2]

Joking about what? That the rightwing propaganda machine lies? That USMB rightwing nuts repeat those lies?

Are you new here? lol

Apparently you cant count.
If you think this was anything more than union thuggery you're a moron.

That's exactly the kind of thing the rightwing nuts said about the alleged attack on Kenneth Gladney by SEIU 'thugs',

who were found innocent.

Your first claim that it was entirely staged and paid for. Now its provocation?

Any actual proof of that or is it conjecture? I would guess the latter here. Sorry but you don't get a pass on union thugs because of conjecture.
I remember all the bitching about the tea party with nary a shred of evidence other than a lot of clean parks and yet people attacking others is now passable.

This is wing nut hackery here, you should at the very least have condemned the use of violence. Instead, we are getting excuses and passes. That, more than anything, speaks to character in this case.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You need to define this. I'd hate to think you excuse violence from peaceful demonstrations protected by the Constitution.

The Constitution does not protect protesters from others protesting the protesters. Michigan law has jurisdiction if and when a crime is committed. Keep in mind that the Freedom of Speech guaranteed in the Constitution is not absolute, and that "Fighting Words" can be used in the defense of any crime which may follow such utterances.

So your saying whoever shows up first is protected the the other group is out of luck Constitutionally?

Read slowly, you missed the point completely.

Assault is a higher crime then and clearly that was carried out by the unions. Your defense with fighting words is going to take an audio of some type, otherwise its just hearsay and it will be thrown out in favor of an assault convction on your folks. We have the video of that.

Do you know the difference between Assault and Battery? They are two different crimes, though assault is an element of battery (but battery can be stand alone).

Fighting Words (or, Challegne to Fight: "To confront a person, either directly or through another as a second, with writing, spoken words or conduct which conveys the intention, at least somewhat formally, to duel or fight with him") in this case words spoken by the 'victim' are not heard on the video nor any of his behaviors, actions or getures seen; I don't know all the facts from the evidence I've seen.

What occured before the battery, was the 'victim's words or posture threatening, i.e. a challenge to fight? 'Do you?

 

[GoneBezerk]

Liberals get caught on video rioting and still fucking lie about what they did....they are scum of earth that should be locked in a hellhole until they die.

 

[saveliberty]

The Constitution does not protect protesters from others protesting the protesters. Michigan law has jurisdiction if and when a crime is committed. Keep in mind that the Freedom of Speech guaranteed in the Constitution is not absolute, and that "Fighting Words" can be used in the defense of any crime which may follow such utterances.

So your saying whoever shows up first is protected the the other group is out of luck Constitutionally?

Read slowly, you missed the point completely.

Assault is a higher crime then and clearly that was carried out by the unions. Your defense with fighting words is going to take an audio of some type, otherwise its just hearsay and it will be thrown out in favor of an assault convction on your folks. We have the video of that.

Do you know the difference between Assault and Battery? They are two different crimes, though assault is an element of battery (but battery can be stand alone).

Fighting Words (or, Challegne to Fight: "To confront a person, either directly or through another as a second, with writing, spoken words or conduct which conveys the intention, at least somewhat formally, to duel or fight with him") in this case words spoken by the 'victim' are not heard on the video nor any of his behaviors, actions or getures seen; I don't know all the facts from the evidence I've seen.

What occured before the battery, was the 'victim's words or posture threatening, i.e. a challenge to fight? 'Do you?

Your missing the whole point. What the union folks did is proveable with video and audio evidence. The fabrications you suggest cannot. The cowards attacked without provocation or warning.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Liberals get caught on video rioting and still fucking lie about what they did....they are scum of earth that should be locked in a hellhole until they die.

Says the moron, nevermore.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So your saying whoever shows up first is protected the the other group is out of luck Constitutionally?

Read slowly, you missed the point completely.

Assault is a higher crime then and clearly that was carried out by the unions. Your defense with fighting words is going to take an audio of some type, otherwise its just hearsay and it will be thrown out in favor of an assault convction on your folks. We have the video of that.

Do you know the difference between Assault and Battery? They are two different crimes, though assault is an element of battery (but battery can be stand alone).

Fighting Words (or, Challegne to Fight: "To confront a person, either directly or through another as a second, with writing, spoken words or conduct which conveys the intention, at least somewhat formally, to duel or fight with him") in this case words spoken by the 'victim' are not heard on the video nor any of his behaviors, actions or getures seen; I don't know all the facts from the evidence I've seen.

What occured before the battery, was the 'victim's words or posture threatening, i.e. a challenge to fight? 'Do you?

Your missing the whole point. What the union folks did is proveable with video and audio evidence. The fabrications you suggest cannot. The cowards attacked without provocation or warning.

If that's true post the evidence. Unlike the echo chamber I need something probative of what you and the moron above state.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Scum like you should be locked away for life....society would be better off the minute you left sunlight.

Liberals get caught on video rioting and still fucking lie about what they did....they are scum of earth that should be locked in a hellhole until they die.

Says the moron, nevermore.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Scum like you should be locked away for life....society would be better off the minute you left sunlight.

Liberals get caught on video rioting and still fucking lie about what they did....they are scum of earth that should be locked in a hellhole until they die.

Says the moron, nevermore.

Thank you, your posts are always enlightening (not of course in any way you might imagine).

 

[saveliberty]

If that's true post the evidence. Unlike the echo chamber I need something probative of what you and the moron above state.

Its been posted on this board. When you're needy, you need to work and fill the need.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If that's true post the evidence. Unlike the echo chamber I need something probative of what you and the moron above state.

Its been posted on this board. When you're needy, you need to work and fill the need.

Nice try. Why not admit the evidence to prove what you allege does not exist and you based your opinon on bias? It's easy to be honest, as the man said, "when in doubt tell the truth".

 

[GoneBezerk]

The hot dog guy went to help the people in the tent being attacked by union scum, then he gets attacked.....so liberals claim it's his fault that he was helping out people being attacked.

....like I said liberals are scum of the Earth that should suffer a miserable life locked in some hole.

 

[saveliberty]

If that's true post the evidence. Unlike the echo chamber I need something probative of what you and the moron above state.

Its been posted on this board. When you're needy, you need to work and fill the need.

Nice try. Why not admit the evidence to prove what you allege does not exist and you based your opinon on bias? It's easy to be honest, as the man said, "when in doubt tell the truth".

We are getting a lot more local coverage here 70 miles from the scene idiot. You're union guys are in big trouble.