Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

That's consistent with what Jeff and I have been saying all along.  The instant someone initiates violence, responding to that to protect others is valid self defense.  Pre-emptively initiating violence to deny them the ability to gather and speak ( which is what I think you and many others are advocating)  is not.   
I feel like I'm telling the same story over and over again, but, the Patriot Guard Riders interaction w/the WBC kooks is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.  

When has AntiFa initiated violence? Cite examples please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RKoch said:

When has AntiFa initiated violence? Cite examples please.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad-antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/?utm_term=.d5b8841cb613

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/30/how-liberal-portland-became-americas-most-politically-violent-city-215322

Here's a couple, I'm intentionally excluding the instances in Charlottesville that were reported, because both "sides" initiated skirmishes.  


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Payback's a bitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

So the fascists came to Berkeley and Portland with clubs and shields and it's antifa's fault that violence erupts. Wow. Joey Gibson even told his supporters to bring guns and it's antifa's fault that violence erupts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2018 at 7:29 PM, Shortforbob said:

not for long apparently

seems like the mods don't care for free speech

You truly don’t comprehend the concept of “free speech”. 

Mare there any limits to what you can say in Australia?  There are limits, here in the US. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

So the fascists came to Berkeley and Portland with clubs and shields and it's antifa's fault that violence erupts. Wow.

When will the moderate white nationalists around here state that their side should march unarmed and non-violently, even if it means taking a beating from antifascists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Ok, good.

I take your point to be: Nazis committed some violence, that's bad. Antifa committed some violence, that makes them worse.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

So the fascists came to Berkeley and Portland with clubs and shields and it's antifa's fault that violence erupts. Wow. Joey Gibson even told his supporters to bring guns and it's antifa's fault that violence erupts.

SO - you read nothing and form an opinion based upon that?  Cool.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Paywall on the WaPo article, couldn't read. The Politico article cites no example of AntiFa initiating violence, only AntiFa threats of preemptive violence (which apparently never subsequently occurred). The article does cite many instances of the RW groups (Nazis, KKK, etc) initiating violence. Tnx for confirmation of what had already been my observation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, lasal said:

When will the moderate white nationalists around here state that their side should march unarmed and non-violently, even if it means taking a beating from antifascists?

Why should they?  You can carry anything you want that's legal.  The minute you misuse that thing?  You've stepped across the "free speech" line. 

 

7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Ok, good.

I take your point to be: Nazis committed some violence, that's bad. Antifa committed some violence, that makes them worse.

-DSK

More spin....  Refuting the claims that Antifa are justified in initiating violence, pointing out that when they do - they're wrong, is exactly the same as saying "The Nazis are better".  You really need to try harder or quit, you're embarrassing yourself. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why won't white nationalists march peacefully and non-violently, taking a beating if necessary? Why are they so often guilty of initiating violence? Why do they talk about violence constantly? Why do they engage in para-military drills? For free speech?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

SO - you read nothing and form an opinion based upon that?  Cool.   

Since I went to Berkeley and since I live not far away, I've read a shit ton more than you. And while I didn't visit the most recent protest, I did visit one last year. As far as on the ground knowledge of Berkeley, I know vastly more than about said city than you ever will. Condescend elsewhere.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Paywall on the WaPo article, couldn't read. The Politico article cites no example of AntiFa initiating violence, only AntiFa threats of preemptive violence (which apparently never subsequently occurred). The article does cite many instances of the RW groups (Nazis, KKK, etc) initiating violence. Tnx for confirmation of what had already been my observation. 

Sorry - I'm still in my "Free" WaPo consumption: 

An excerpt - and no, it doesn't confirm what has already been your "observation"

Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley

 
 
 
 
By Kyle SwensonAugust 28, 2017Email the author
 0:48
 
Berkeley emonstrations turn violent

Left-wing counterprotesters clashed with right-wing protesters and Trump supporters on Aug. 27 in Berkeley, Calif. (The Washington Post)

 

Their faces hidden behind black bandannas and hoodies, about 100 anarchists and antifa— “anti-fascist” — members barreled into a protest Sunday afternoon in Berkeley’s Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park.

Jumping over plastic and concrete barriers, the group melted into a larger crowd of around 2,000 that had marched peacefully throughout the sunny afternoon for a “Rally Against Hate” gathering.

Shortly after, violence began to flare. A Trump supporter was smacked to the ground with homemade shields. Another was attacked by five black-clad antifa members, each windmilling kicks and punches into a man desperately trying to protect himself. A conservative group leader retreated for safety behind a line of riot police as marchers chucked water bottles, shot off pepper spray and screamed, “Fascist go home!”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:
20 minutes ago, lasal said:

When will the moderate white nationalists around here state that their side should march unarmed and non-violently, even if it means taking a beating from antifascists?

Why should they?  You can carry anything you want that's legal.  The minute you misuse that thing?  You've stepped across the "free speech" line. 

Because it's “the only morally and practically sound method open to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom” (Papers 4:478) MLK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

...    ....     ....   You really need to try harder or quit, you're embarrassing yourself. 

 

Embarassed? By what? Drawing up false equivalents so I can weasel around my choices of political associates?

 

1 minute ago, lasal said:

Why won't white nationalists march peacefully and non-violently, taking a beating if necessary? Why are they so often guilty of initiating violence? Why do they talk about violence constantly? Why do they engage in para-military drills? For free speech?

Because Antifa is worse

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olsonist said:

Since I went to Berkeley and since I live not far away, I've read a shit ton more than you. And while I didn't visit the most recent protest, I did visit one last year. As far as on the ground knowledge of Berkeley, I know vastly more than about said city than you ever will. Condescend elsewhere.

Read the fuckin' articles - and respond to what's written there - if you weren't there, you DON'T know anymore than anyone else, do ya? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Read the fuckin' articles - and respond to what's written there - if you weren't there, you DON'T know anymore than anyone else, do ya? 

 

Fake NEWS!  Didn't you get the memo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

The FBI has a long, sad history of being on the wrong side of history--  just like they targeted civil rights leaders and vietnam war protesters. 

They should be working with the antifa against nazis

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

The FBI has a long, sad history of being on the wrong side of history--  just like they targeted civil rights leaders and vietnam war protesters. 

They should be working with the antifa against nazis

Yes, and unfortunately the alt-right not only has some police and FBI sympathizers, they have many military veterans supporting them. My feeling is that any support within the police or military is an artifact of the larger culture, to state the obvious. The good thing is that it's within law enforcement and the military that so much progress has been made rooting out ignorance. The story behind the new film BlackKKlansman is a good example. It's no panacea but it's progress and it's good to remember the positive moments.

Good luck alt-right, it's not the government that's against you, it's God. God hates your guts, and he's generally not a hater. Get back on his good side before it's too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clove Hitch said:

The FBI has a long, sad history of being on the wrong side of history--  just like they targeted civil rights leaders and vietnam war protesters. 

They should be working with the antifa against nazis

That was mostly Hoover rather than the FBI as a whole. Mark Felt redeemed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans hate Mark Felt almost as much as they hate Hillary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"They should be working with the antifa against nazis"

They won't, partially because they lost in 1987 (Fort Smith) trying to show the connections between the white power movements and thereafter, unofficially, didn't look closely at the interconnections between the different groups.  The contacts between McVay and Eloheim City, for example.  Mix in the backlash to the report linking active and retired military to the groups and finish with the losses in the Bundy trials and it's understandable, from a political standpoint, why they don't look to closely at Nazi's. POTUS, their boss, says some of them are good people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

"They should be working with the antifa against nazis"

They won't, partially because they lost in 1987 (Fort Smith) trying to show the connections between the white power movements and thereafter, unofficially, didn't look closely at the interconnections between the different groups.  The contacts between McVay and Eloheim City, for example.  Mix in the backlash to the report linking active and retired military to the groups and finish with the losses in the Bundy trials and it's understandable, from a political standpoint, why they don't look to closely at Nazi's. POTUS, their boss, says some of them are good people.

The SPLC actively tracks them. And AntiFa is pretty effectively doxxing the members. Quite a few Nazis have been fired or kicked out of universities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top Dog is a local hot dog restaurant in Berkeley. It's rather libertarian. When you walk in, the place is plastered with libertarian aphorisms and posters. There's always free cheese ... in a mousetrap. The folks who work there are pretty libertarian as well. But when it came to their attention that one of their workers had gone to Charlottesville, he was gone immediately. Technically, he resigned.

https://www.berkeleyside.com/2017/08/13/berkeleys-top-dog-fires-employee-went-white-nationalist-rally

But he was gone. California is an at will employment state. Have a bad hair cut? You're gone. Go to a racist rally on the other side of the country? You're gone.

image.thumb.png.c46fe13e52c9b9ea574f1a7fd6418a45.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's wrong...employees should be able to do what they like in their free time as long as they don't involve their employers in any way...like wearing a company logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. Mr. White is absolutely free to do as he likes in his free time. But his employment is not guaranteed. BTW, you can't fire someone in California because they're gay but you can fire someone because they're an asshole. Your 1A rights are with respect to the government and not with respect to your employer. Most states, 42 states, are at will.

Similarly, a Marine was kicked out of Marine Corps (after a court martial for disobeying orders and making false statements) for his role in Charlottesville. Booted. See ya.

https://wtop.com/virginia/2018/08/marine-kicked-out-of-marine-corps-for-role-in-charlottesville-white-supremacist-march/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amerika must be proud.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do our local red tailed elk have to say about this development?  Is West a fiscally conservative small government nazi? A heritage not hate southerner?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

What do our local red tailed elk have to say about this development?  Is West a fiscally conservative small government nazi? A heritage not hate southerner?

West is a deplorable.  Yes I used that word.  Most of Trump's supporters are deplorables.  Hillary was right.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Then there is this asshole who won the GOP primary in Ill. For a congressional seat

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/us/politics/arthur-jones-illinois.html

This is a heavily Democratic district so his chances of winning are very remote, but another Republicsn Nazi sympathizer, Holocaust denier.

And in WI, NC, VA and California:

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/9/17525860/nazis-russell-walker-arthur-jones-republicans-illinois-north-carolina-virginia

So the GOP is running Nazis and Russia helped Trump win.  YCMTSU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RKoch said:

I'm guessing this is one of the elections KellyAnn was bragging about this morning, where she said Trumpettes have won 8 out of 9 elections this year, or something. I figured it was 100% bullshit since the Trumpier-than-thou candidates that I know about have all lost, maybe it was only 85% bullshit

This guy was beating other Republican candidates in a primary, this wasn't the general election.

(quoted from above link) "A Missouri Republican who has made anti-Semitic and other bigoted statements handily won a primary for the state’s House of Representatives.

Steve West, who promotes anti-Semitic conspiracy theories on a radio show he hosts, defeated three other candidates Tuesday in the bid for a seat representing Clay County. He won with 49.5 percent of the vote; the second-place finisher had 24.4 percent.

“Looking back in history, unfortunately, Hitler was right about what was taking place in Germany. And who was behind it,” West said on KCXL radio in January 2017, The Kansas City Star reported Thursday.

He has spoken of “Jewish cabals” that are “harvesting baby parts” from Planned Parenthood, abuse children and control the Republican Party. West also has a YouTube channel on which he has made homophobic, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic and racist statements, according to The Star.

West will face Democratic incumbent Jon Carpenter in November.

On Thursday, the Missouri Republican Party denounced West’s “shocking and vile” comments.

“West’s abhorrent rhetoric has absolutely no place in the Missouri Republican Party or anywhere. We wholeheartedly condemn his comments,” the party told The Star.

Reached by The Star, West said his comments were taken out of context, but went on to criticize both Judaism and Islam.

“Jewish people can be beautiful people, but there’s ideologies associated with that that I don’t agree with,” he said. “Jews today are a remnant of the tribe of Judah that rejected Christ.”

The local chapter of the Anti-Defamation League said it was not sure why West’s comments had not been publicized earlier.

“I’m trying to get a sense of why he flew under the radar, and I’m not sure I have a great answer,” said Karen Aroesty, who directs the organization’s operations in Missouri, Southern Illinois and Eastern Kansas.

“What is a person who is elected into a position of power going to do with beliefs like this?” she asked.

West’s campaign platform does not mention Jews, but contains a section titled “Islam is a Problem for America”  and says that “most parents don’t want their children recieving (sic) alternative sex ed, or having to deal with or be around the LGBT clubs.” "( end quote)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

So the GOP is running Nazis and Russia helped Trump win.  YCMTSU

And a large majority of Republicans think he's doing a great job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

And a large majority of Republicans think he's doing a great job.

I wonder what my dad and 6 uncles who fought in WW2 would think of all this.  This is surely not the GOP of Eisenhower or even Ronnie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

And a large majority of Republicans think he's doing a great job.

You know, I have to question that. I think most GOP supporters are like our primary example in the forums (Dog) - keenly aware that Trump is doing an awful job but unwilling to actually say so, even anonymously, because doing so would be the first step to admitting they were responsible for giving him the power to fuck up so badly. Even some of our more reasonable conservatives are loathe to bite down on that bullet.

Trump has to be someone else's fault because no-one wants to own that train wreck. Putting the blame on those that voted for him and the party that helped pay for his campaign is a little too objective & logical... so let's blame the other side that didn't vote for him and campaigned against him. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, Trump's not that bad really, they don't support him but think he's doing a great job, and Hillary was worse, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

You know, I have to question that. I think most GOP supporters are like our primary example in the forums (Dog) - keenly aware that Trump is doing an awful job but unwilling to actually say so, even anonymously, because doing so would be the first step to admitting they were responsible for giving him the power to fuck up so badly. Even some of our more reasonable conservatives are loathe to bite down on that bullet.

Trump has to be someone else's fault because no-one wants to own that train wreck. Putting the blame on those that voted for him and the party that helped pay for his campaign is a little too objective & logical... so let's blame the other side that didn't vote for him and campaigned against him. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, Trump's not that bad really, they don't support him but think he's doing a great job, and Hillary was worse, 

Well, the old definition of a Libertarian is a Republican too ashamed to admit they voted for W...twice. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Well, the old definition of a Libertarian is a Republican too ashamed to admit they voted for W...twice. 

And the new definition is someone that says "Don't blame me - I voted for this guy!"

TongueTiedGovGaryJohnson_ani.gif

...and actually being able to walk away thinking they did the right thing. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

And the new definition is someone that says "Don't blame me - I voted for this guy!"

TongueTiedGovGaryJohnson_ani.gif

...and actually being able to walk away thinking they did the right thing. :lol:

I'm not going to bash anyone that voted third party. It was a logical response to the two major parties that both nominated candidates unsatisfactory to many voters, the two least popular candidates in polling history in fact. The Republicans can at least claim the RNC didn't put their fingers on the scales in their primaries...the Democratic candidate was selected back in 2014 or so, and the DNC made sure it happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

I wonder what my dad and 6 uncles who fought in WW2 would think of all this.  This is surely not the GOP of Eisenhower or even Ronnie.

The current Dem's are not even the GOP of Eisenhower.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

You know, I have to question that. I think most GOP supporters are like our primary example in the forums (Dog) - keenly aware that Trump is doing an awful job but unwilling to actually say so, even anonymously, because doing so would be the first step to admitting they were responsible for giving him the power to fuck up so badly. Even some of our more reasonable conservatives are loathe to bite down on that bullet.

You give them too much credit.

 

Donald Trump Job Approval by Party Identification
Weekly averages from Gallup Daily tracking

 

  Republicans Independents Democrats
  % % %
2018  
2018 Jul 30-Aug 5 89 33 7
2018 Jul 23-29 87 34 8
2018 Jul 16-22 85 37 11
2018 Jul 9-15 90 38 8
2018 Jul 2-8 87 36 9
2018 Jun 25-Jul 1 87 36 10
2018 Jun 18-24 87 38 5
2018 Jun 11-17 90 42 10
2018 Jun 4-10 90 35 8
2018 May 28-Jun 3 87 34 11
2018 May 21-27 85 35 8
2018 May 14-20 89 38 9
2018 May 7-13 84 35 12
2018 Apr 30-May 6 88 37 13
2018 Apr 23-29 89 35 9
2018 Apr 16-22 82 32 10
2018 Apr 9-15 85 33 7
2018 Apr 2-8 89 35 8
2018 Mar 26-Apr 1 86 33 8
2018 Mar 19-25 85 34 7
2018 Mar 12-18 82 32 7
2018 Mar 5-11 87 34 8
2018 Feb 26-Mar 4 85 34 8
2018 Feb 19-25 85 35 9
2018 Feb 12-18 86 30  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RKoch said:

I'm not going to bash anyone that voted third party. It was a logical response to the two major parties that both nominated candidates unsatisfactory to many voters, the two least popular candidates in polling history in fact. The Republicans can at least claim the RNC didn't put their fingers on the scales in their primaries...the Democratic candidate was selected back in 2014 or so, and the DNC made sure it happened. 

I hold those that voted for Gary Johnson after his campaign in the same high esteem I hold those voting for Vermin Supreme. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

You give them too much credit.

Not really. I have more respect for ignorant fuckers who don't know any better than I do for those that know Trump is a train wreck but will express support for him anyway out of party loyalty. My thoughts about Trump's support, even in the GOP base, is that it's about half ignorant fuckers and half people who will support until the party tells them not to (i.e. no spine or integrity).

Seriously, which would you prefer to be thought of as? Stupidly ignorant or cravenly dishonest? I consider the latter to be a worse insult myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

You know, I have to question that. I think most GOP supporters are like our primary example in the forums (Dog) - keenly aware that Trump is doing an awful job but unwilling to actually say so, even anonymously, because doing so would be the first step to admitting they were responsible for giving him the power to fuck up so badly. Even some of our more reasonable conservatives are loathe to bite down on that bullet.

Trump has to be someone else's fault because no-one wants to own that train wreck. Putting the blame on those that voted for him and the party that helped pay for his campaign is a little too objective & logical... so let's blame the other side that didn't vote for him and campaigned against him. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, Trump's not that bad really, they don't support him but think he's doing a great job, and Hillary was worse, 

So no Republicans will admit voting for Trump? That’s DIRECT evidence the Russians infiltrated and controlled voting results! :lol:

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jerseyguy said:

I wonder what my dad and 6 uncles who fought in WW2 would think of all this.  This is surely not the GOP of Eisenhower or even Ronnie.

Luxemburg police know how to deal with Nazis. Nazis occupied Luxemburg during WW2.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuckin' A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Luxemburg police know how to deal with Nazis. Nazis occupied Luxemburg during WW2.

 

Yes they do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Amati said:

So no Republicans will admit voting for Trump? That’s DIRECT evidence the Russians infiltrated and controlled voting results! :lol:

No, the resident red tailed elk prefer to say things like Cheeto won a majority or that we should respect the office.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Luxemburg police know how to deal with Nazis. Nazis occupied Luxemburg during WW2.

 

The should have hauled Hitler when the first cop showed up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

No, the resident red tailed elk prefer to say things like Cheeto won a majority or that we should respect the office.

Egads man! ^_^ can we both be correct?  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I saw at about 5:30 ET was roughly 10 white supremalosers starting their parade of loserdom because it looked like nobody else showed so they started marching marching looking mighty unsupreme. Nobody else showed except a thousand egalitarian counter protesters and 500 cops, 50 on horseback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lasal said:

What I saw at about 5:30 ET was roughly 10 white supremalosers starting their parade of loserdom because it looked like nobody else showed so they started marching marching looking mighty unsupreme. Nobody else showed except a thousand egalitarian counter protesters and 500 cops, 50 on horseback.

So, that's the "base".  Good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

without a megaphone turds look like turds.

With a megaphone, they're a loud fart with anal leakage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, RKoch said:

With a megaphone, they're a loud fart with anal leakage.

Kind of like guys who’ve gone for radiation treatment of their cancerous Prostates.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2018 at 9:47 PM, Olsonist said:

Top Dog is a local hot dog restaurant in Berkeley. It's rather libertarian. When you walk in, the place is plastered with libertarian aphorisms and posters. There's always free cheese ... in a mousetrap. The folks who work there are pretty libertarian as well. But when it came to their attention that one of their workers had gone to Charlottesville, he was gone immediately. Technically, he resigned.

https://www.berkeleyside.com/2017/08/13/berkeleys-top-dog-fires-employee-went-white-nationalist-rally

But he was gone. California is an at will employment state. Have a bad hair cut? You're gone. Go to a racist rally on the other side of the country? You're gone.

image.thumb.png.c46fe13e52c9b9ea574f1a7fd6418a45.png

Good for them and hooray for at-will employment.

On 8/10/2018 at 10:22 PM, Shortforbob said:

that's wrong...employees should be able to do what they like in their free time as long as they don't involve their employers in any way...like wearing a company logo.

If I worked for a guy who decided to go to a Nazi rally, I'd quit. And since he doesn't have a right to my work, that's OK.

If a guy working for me decided to go to a Nazi rally, I'd do like most any libertarian and fire him. And since he doesn't have a right to be employed by me, that's OK.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

Then there is this asshole who won the GOP primary in Ill. For a congressional seat

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/us/politics/arthur-jones-illinois.html

This is a heavily Democratic district so his chances of winning are very remote, but another Republicsn Nazi sympathizer, Holocaust denier.

illinois-nazis.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, lasal said:

What I saw at about 5:30 ET was roughly 10 white supremalosers starting their parade of loserdom because it looked like nobody else showed so they started marching marching looking mighty unsupreme. Nobody else showed except a thousand egalitarian counter protesters and 500 cops, 50 on horseback.

The GW football team loses less than those goobers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2018 at 12:31 PM, Olsonist said:

Absolutely. Mr. White is absolutely free to do as he likes in his free time. But his employment is not guaranteed. BTW, you can't fire someone in California because they're gay but you can fire someone because they're an asshole. Your 1A rights are with respect to the government and not with respect to your employer. Most states, 42 states, are at will.

Similarly, a Marine was kicked out of Marine Corps (after a court martial for disobeying orders and making false statements) for his role in Charlottesville. Booted. See ya.

https://wtop.com/virginia/2018/08/marine-kicked-out-of-marine-corps-for-role-in-charlottesville-white-supremacist-march/

 

44 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Good for them and hooray for at-will employment.

If I worked for a guy who decided to go to a Nazi rally, I'd quit. And since he doesn't have a right to my work, that's OK.

If a guy working for me decided to go to a Nazi rally, I'd do like most any libertarian and fire him. And since he doesn't have a right to be employed by me, that's OK.

I'm appalled. So you believe your boss has the right and should have the right to fire you for your personal beliefs even if they have no impact on your business?

The way to fight fascism this is not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

I'm appalled. So you believe your boss has the right and should have the right to fire you for your personal beliefs even if they have no impact on your business?

The way to fight fascism this is not. 

Sure do. I don't think it's any different from this belief:

46 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

If I worked for a guy who decided to go to a Nazi rally, I'd quit. And since he doesn't have a right to my work, that's OK.

Are you appalled that I'd quit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:
12 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

And the new definition is someone that says "Don't blame me - I voted for this guy!"

TongueTiedGovGaryJohnson_ani.gif

...and actually being able to walk away thinking they did the right thing. :lol:

Don't worry, there were only a million and a half or so of us. Or 4.4 million. Somewhere in there, but the facts don't matter much.

I didn't think anyone was really worried about you. Electorally speaking, a ballot for a presidential candidate that doesn't win a single electoral college vote is effectively indistinguishable from a ballot for Mickey Mouse.

And next time, at least drag the post to a related thread. I wasn't commenting on Gary Johnson in the post you're quoting. I was commenting on those that vote for him. I suggest finding a thread about an unrealistic libertarian who thinks statistically insignificant protest votes for someone that didn't even try to win is something worth crowing about. Perhaps the 'Tom Ray' thread so it can be ignored along with the vast majority of your attention seeking there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Sure do. I don't think it's any different from this belief:

Are you appalled that I'd quit?

It's not the same thing at all.

Unless you actually believe that bosses and individual employees are on an equal footing.

All I can say that as a person (like most) who needs job security ..thank dog I don't live in the USA.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

I'm appalled. So you believe your boss has the right to fire you for your personal beliefs even if they have no impact on your business?

The way to fight fascism this is not. 

That is in fact the law. It's called at will employment. There are still illegal reasons, wrongful termination, like you're gay or too old or .... But otherwise they can fire you for a bad haircut and they can definitely fire you for being a nazi. It's not me believing it; that is the law here in CA.

However, there is another side to the coin. Most non-compete employment contracts are un-enforceable. IP is still IP but otherwise you can walk out the door and go work for big bad boss's competitor the same day.

How does this work in Australia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

That is in fact the law. It's called at will employment. There are illegal reasons, wrongful termination, like you're gay or too old or .... But otherwise they can fire you for a bad haircut and they can definitely fire you for being a nazi. It's not me believing it; that is the law here in CA.

There is another side of the coin. Most non-compete employment contracts are un-enforceable. IP is still IP but otherwise you can walk out the door and go work for big bad boss's competitor the same day.

How does this work in Australia?

all Australians are protected by law from unfair dismissal...you can't fire anyone over religion, political beliefs, sexual preference . Bad haircut? well you could try but you'd have to prove that the haircut was somehow damaging your business and youd made reasonable steps to negotiate .

You can get fired for incompetence, putting yourself or others in danger..any number of WORK RELATED reasons. You can't fire someone at will  at all.

You can't even fire someone if you cant afford to pay them..you can terminate their employment..with recompense..used to be two weeks notice plus 1 week for every year employed plus all outstanding leave credits.

Employees trade a days labour for their wages..not their minds and souls.

Sometimes I don't know how we manage without a bill of rights. 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfair dismissal

Unfair dismissal is when an employee is dismissed from their job in a harsh, unjust or unreasonable manner.

The Fair Work Commission (the Commission) external-icon.png decides on cases of unfair dismissal.

Applying for unfair dismissal

Employees have to apply to the Commission within 21 days of the dismissal taking effect. The 21 day period starts the day after the dismissal.

If you think you have been unfairly dismissed you need to contact the Commission as soon as possible. 

Visit the Commission website to learn more about unfair dismissal external-icon.png and find out how to lodge the application form external-icon.png

Minimum employment period

Employees have to be employed for at least 6 months before they can apply for unfair dismissal.

Employees working for a small business have to be employed for at least 12 months before they can apply.

If there was a change of business ownership, service with the first employer may count as service with the second employer when calculating the minimum employment period.

You can use the Commission’s eligibility quiz external-icon.png to see if you can apply for unfair dismissal.

Small business employers

Small businesses have different rules for dismissal. 

The Small Business Fair Dismissal Code (DOCX 25.5KB) (PDF 220.4KB) provides protection against unfair dismissal claims, where an employer follows the Code. The Commission will deem a dismissal to be fair if the employer follows the Code and can provide evidence of this.

A small business is defined as any business with fewer than 15 employees.

To figure out whether a business is a small business, count all employees employed at the time of the dismissal including:

  • the employee and any other employees being dismissed at that time
  • regular and systematic casual employees employed by the business at the time of the dismissal (not all casual employees)
  • employees of associated entities, including those based overseas.

The size of the business is counted the earliest of:

  • when the employee is told their employment has been terminated, or
  • when the employee is given their notice of termination.

Source reference: Fair Work Act 2009 s.23, 121 and 123 external-icon.png

Other dismissals

Employees can also apply to the Commission if they’ve been dismissed on the basis of:

  • a breach of general protections or
  • unlawful termination.

See the Protections at work page for more information.

Source reference: Fair Work Act 2009 s.383 - 384 and 394 external-icon.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

all Australians are protected by law from unfair dismissal...you can't fire anyone over religion, political beliefs, sexual preference . Bad haircut? well you could try but you'd have to prove that the haircut was somehow damaging your business and youd made reasonable steps to negotiate .

You can get fired for incompetence, putting yourself or others in danger..any number of WORK RELATED reasons. You can't fire someone at will  at all.

You can't even fire someone if you cant afford to pay them..you can terminate their employment..with recompense..used to be two weeks notice plus 1 week for every year employed plus all outstanding leave credits.

Employees trade a days labour for their wages..not their minds and souls.

Sometimes I don't know how we manage without a bill of rights. 

  

If you really want some Orwellian fun, google “Right to Work”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Code

Summary Dismissal

It is fair for an employer to dismiss an employee without notice or warning when the employer believes on reasonable grounds that the employee’s conduct is sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal. Serious misconduct includes theft, fraud, violence and serious breaches of occupational health and safety procedures. For a dismissal to be deemed fair it is sufficient, though not essential, that an allegation of theft, fraud or violence be reported to the police. Of course, the employer must have reasonable grounds for making the report.

Other Dismissal

In other cases, the small business employer must give the employee a reason why he or she is at risk of being dismissed. The reason must be a valid reason based on the employee’s conduct or capacity to do the job.

The employee must be warned verbally or preferably in writing, that he or she risks being dismissed if there is no improvement.

The small business employer must provide the employee with an opportunity to respond to the warning and give the employee a reasonable chance to rectify the problem, having regard to the employee’s response. Rectifying the problem might involve the employer providing additional training and ensuring the employee knows the employer’s job expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

If you really want some Orwellian fun, google “Right to Work”.

You mean in general or the Union strangulation bill? 

I'm delighted that even in Trump country this got resoundingly defeated

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-right-to-work-missour_us_5b6cc58ce4b0bdd06207d2c1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

We live for your delightment Mel.

and I'd be delighted if your grammar was intelligible....hmm I assume you can be fired for poor grammar  in the USA?

Fuckin' ace! Fire that oik you call President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

You mean in general or the Union strangulation bill? 

I'm delighted that even in Trump country this got resoundingly defeated

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-right-to-work-missour_us_5b6cc58ce4b0bdd06207d2c1

“Right to work” is a fact of life for those of us in 28 states where it is the law. That, and at-will employment work to make sure that people stay so desperate that they will work for anything, and work through anything...because the folks at the top of the food chain can make just a wee bit more if we strangle a few more people out of the middle class and into desperation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

“Right to work” is a fact of life for those of us in 28 states where it is the law. That, and at-will employment work to make sure that people stay so desperate that they will work for anything, and work through anything...because the folks at the top of the food chain can make just a wee bit more if we strangle a few more people out of the middle class and into desperation. 

tell it brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember struggling with Right To Work as a teenager. Why wouldn't you want a right to work? My aunt struggled in explaining it to me. Because the name isn't the same as the law. I eventually understood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex Jones kicked off Vimeo.

Alex Jones flees to Vimeo, is immediately banned there as well

 
Alex Jones is trying to find a new home for his crumbling Infowars empire, but his latest encampment lasted mere days before he was banned from yet another digital platform. Late last week, Jones posted several videos on Vimeo, but by Sunday he and his videos had been removed from the service. 

Vimeo told Business Insider that it removed the videos because they “violated our Terms of Service prohibitions on discriminatory and hateful content.” The spokesperson added, “[W]e do not want to profit from content of this nature in any way.” Employees inside the company had reportedly voiced concern about the account’s existence last week. Vimeo CEO Anjali Sud plans to address the decision during a town hall meeting Monday morning. 

Vimeo’s ban follows decisions by Facebook, Apple, Spotify, and YouTube to ban or at least suspend Jones from using their services to spread his conspiracy theories and hateful rhetoric. 

One service that continues to allow Jones full access, however, is Twitter. 


https://thinkprogress.org/vimeo-banned-alex-jones-5b29ac3141fe/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

“Right to work” is a fact of life for those of us in 28 states where it is the law. That, and at-will employment work to make sure that people stay so desperate that they will work for anything, and work through anything...because the folks at the top of the food chain can make just a wee bit more if we strangle a few more people out of the middle class and into desperation. 

Combined with corporate control of health care, escape is very difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 "That, and at-will employment work to make sure that people stay so desperate that they will work for anything, and work through anything..."

Quite true, when a principal would come to me and demand I give a kid a grade for a class he didn't attend or wasn't in the catalog I could tell him to piss off because of 20 years of seniority.  So he would go to an under 3 year teacher, who is an at will employee under state law, and have them do it. Because he could.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

I remember struggling with Right To Work as a teenager. Why wouldn't you want a right to work? My aunt struggled in explaining it to me. Because the name isn't the same as the law. I eventually understood.

The name is pure Orwellian Doggy Style.  Sounds like milk and cookies, but delivers a boot in the nuts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lasal said:

Combined with corporate control of health care, escape is very difficult.

I have said for years here that medical insurance or coverage or whatever the fuck you want to call it should immediately be removed from being tied to employment.  It the one thing that has fucked up Amerika completely.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:
2 hours ago, lasal said:

Combined with corporate control of health care, escape is very difficult.

I have said for years here that medical insurance or coverage or whatever the fuck you want to call it should immediately be removed from being tied to employment.  It the one thing that has fucked up Amerika completely.  

That's exactly what ObamaCare was stepping towards, seperating job from health care.

That's a big reason Korporate Amerika hate-hate-HATED it so much. And their wholly-owned subsidiary, the Republican Party.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Shortforbob said:
13 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Sure do. I don't think it's any different from this belief:

Are you appalled that I'd quit?

It's not the same thing at all.

Unless you actually believe that bosses and individual employees are on an equal footing.

They are in terms of having rights against one another. Employers don't have a right to a person's labor and employing a person doesn't magically give them a right to that job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:
13 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:
14 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:
On 8/13/2018 at 9:44 AM, Bent Sailor said:

And the new definition is someone that says "Don't blame me - I voted for this guy!"

TongueTiedGovGaryJohnson_ani.gif

...and actually being able to walk away thinking they did the right thing. :lol:

Don't worry, there were only a million and a half or so of us. Or 4.4 million. Somewhere in there, but the facts don't matter much.

I didn't think anyone was really worried about you. Electorally speaking, a ballot for a presidential candidate that doesn't win a single electoral college vote is effectively indistinguishable from a ballot for Mickey Mouse.

And next time, at least drag the post to a related thread. I wasn't commenting on Gary Johnson in the post you're quoting. I was commenting on those that vote for him.

Your comment seemed more related to this thread than that one to me. And yes, I still think I did the right thing.

And yet it doesn't belong there. It belongs in the thread where I made the comment, in the context of the thread I made the comment, and where people were discussing the voters and not the politicians as I did in the comment. It's dishonest to pretend otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:
On 8/13/2018 at 10:07 AM, Bent Sailor said:

I hold those that voted for Gary Johnson after his campaign in the same high esteem I hold those voting for Vermin Supreme. 

I haven't seen that applied with any consistency. Why don't you tell Sol R what you think of his vote for Gary?

Sol read this thread. I have told him what I think in the same consistent way I've told everyone else. In a public thread. That you choose not to see that consistency doesn't mean anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2018 at 12:16 AM, Steam Flyer said:

That's exactly what ObamaCare was stepping towards, seperating job from health care.

That's a big reason Korporate Amerika hate-hate-HATED it so much. And their wholly-owned subsidiary, the Republican Party.

-DSK

Moving away from it???  YGBSM. So that’s why the law made it mandatory for companies over a certain size to be forced to provide HC?  Just exactly how is that moving away from job provided HC. There a lot of things I liked about obocare, that ^^ was not one of them. In fact that was one of the main reasons I wanted it killed. 

Edit to add:  I would say Korporate Amerika hated the need to to provide employee HC long before the Kenyan showed up. That’s a huge cost burden to them and it’s a factor in offshoring jobs. The only part of corporate America that wants it is the insurance and the HC industries.  I’m betting that if that mandatory employer provided clause had not been there and all people were able to purchase  affordable HC on their own and be able to take it with them when they move, it likely would have been embraced by most of corporate America if it meant they could shed that responsibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump supporter in custody after reading Trump's "enemy of the people" tweet and threatening journalists

FBI agents arrested and charged a California man with making threats against the Boston Globe, NBC News reported Thursday. 

Robert Chain, 68, was arrested after threatening employees of the newspaper over its recent editorial decrying President Donald Trump‘s anti-press rhetoric. 

Per NBC News, Chain was recorded calling into the Boston Globe and threatening to kill employees, echoing Trump’s rhetoric about the media. 

“You’re the enemy of the people,” a transcript of the chilling call reads, “and we’re going to kill every fucking one of you.” 

“Hey, why don’t you call the F, why don’t you call Mueller, maybe he can help you out buddy. Still there faggot? Alright, why, you going to trace my call? What are you going to do motherfucker? You ain’t going to do shit. I’m going to shoot you in the fucking head later today, at 4 o’clock. Goodbye.” 

... 


https://www.mediaite.com/online/man-charged-with-sending-death-threats-to-boston-globe-after-trump-editorial-youre-the-enemy-of-the-people/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Trump supporter in custody after reading Trump's "enemy of the people" tweet and threatening journalists

FBI agents arrested and charged a California man with making threats against the Boston Globe, NBC News reported Thursday. 

Robert Chain, 68, was arrested after threatening employees of the newspaper over its recent editorial decrying President Donald Trump‘s anti-press rhetoric. 

Per NBC News, Chain was recorded calling into the Boston Globe and threatening to kill employees, echoing Trump’s rhetoric about the media. 

“You’re the enemy of the people,” a transcript of the chilling call reads, “and we’re going to kill every fucking one of you.” 

“Hey, why don’t you call the F, why don’t you call Mueller, maybe he can help you out buddy. Still there faggot? Alright, why, you going to trace my call? What are you going to do motherfucker? You ain’t going to do shit. I’m going to shoot you in the fucking head later today, at 4 o’clock. Goodbye.” 

... 


https://www.mediaite.com/online/man-charged-with-sending-death-threats-to-boston-globe-after-trump-editorial-youre-the-enemy-of-the-people/

Farst Aminmint.  Fry Spaych!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Best People.

 

Or deplorables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites