Tea Party - Unions?

FreeMason
There you have it people!

Because Progressives are Hypocrites.

That's your answer...straight from the garbage can.

Precisely right.

If you have a response to Beezzer's question that explains how that isn't hypocrisy, I would love to hear it.

Meanwhile, one man's trash is another man's treasure. Which is why I will continue to pull the truth out of the garbage can after "progressives" stuff it down in there.

reply to post by Tsurugi


Based on your previous post, I find it safe to assume that you have never gone to a Tea Party rally and get your news from MSNBC.

When unions go on strike, they cause the company and it's customers to "suffer" yet management still negotiates to find a resolution.

Reagan was vilified by the left when he refused to negotiate with the Air Traffic Control Union yet Obama is lauded when he doesn't negotiate with members of congress.

The conservatives can be accused of wrapping themselves in the flag while it is progressives who use hypocrisy to keep themselves comfortable at night.

reply to post by beezzer

What..? Based on which post?

I have gone to several Tea Party rallies, and the only thing I get from pMSNBC is updates on the Liberal Narrative.

Unions are one of the biggest dampers on the American economy outside of the federal government. Don't even get me started on public sector unions.
And yes, it is the left that utilizes blatant, widespread hypocrisy. That's what I thought I said in my first post here. Perhaps I said it poorly.

Tsurugi

Why is it then, when unions strike in order to force a negotiation, it is considered to be a representation for the needs of its members, but when the Tea Party representatives hold steady for the people they represent, it is considered terrorism?

Because Union workers are just your average working Jamies (it used to be "working Joes" till that plumber guy came along; it has since been changed to a much more suitable, less mysoginistic, gender-neutral "Jamie') trying to keep their heads above water and feed their families. They are the backbone of the American economy and pillars of their communities and paragons of virtue and true patriots and when they strike they are fearlessly going toe to toe with the evil greedy super rich bankster oil baron reptilian overlords. They are the good guys.
Teabaggers are just a bunch of stupid redneck inbred brain-washed christian gun-toting bitter-clinger warmongering baby-killers unless they are protesting abortion in which case they're women-killers with too little sense and too much Fox News. They have no appreciation of the value of compromise or of working together; always running around accusing good Democrats of being Communists even though most baggers don't even know what communism really is because they're just a bunch of
far-right fascist nazi wingnut extremists and we'd be better off without them.

Hypocrisy knows no bounds because hypocrites have ways of looking at the world that blind them to their own hypocrisy.

Ummm, because of this post.

Well blast...

Progress indeed!

This is what you get when you don't think it through properly, and I pin this one squarely on Bill.

If we only had our sarcastic eyeroll smiley back on page one, none of this would have happened!

Hey, maybe we should strike.

Oh, and I have to disagree with tenth.

Severity isn't so much a factor, as the analagy is spot on.

Don't hit me!

reply to post by beezzer

The Tea Party recently has been under fire for basically "striking" for going on strike against the current administration.

So you are saying the Tea Party went on strike?

Man I wish that was true but really I think you are saying is that the elective representatives of the Tea Party went on strike not the Tea party itself.

WOW this has to be a first for me. I did not know elected representatives could strike. Doesn’t that make them total hypocrites then? Isn’t the Tea Party against unions?

Is this a double standard for them? They get cheered for striking by their group for threatening the entire country not just their constituents.

It is definitely a new world. If our founding fathers only knew a group identifying with the Boston tea party took the country hostage or used such double standards like striking from their elected position they would be turning so fast in their graves they could bore a whole to China.

You know Beez I think you called it though the Tea Party reps are a lot like Union reps.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Well you did put a different slant on things.

Would that make liberals "management" then for refusing to negotiate?

Tsurugi

Why is it then, when unions strike in order to force a negotiation, it is considered to be a representation for the needs of its members, but when the Tea Party representatives hold steady for the people they represent, it is considered terrorism?

Because Union workers are just your average working Jamies (it used to be "working Joes" till that plumber guy came along; it has since been changed to a much more suitable, less mysoginistic, gender-neutral "Jamie') trying to keep their heads above water and feed their families. They are the backbone of the American economy and pillars of their communities and paragons of virtue and true patriots and when they strike they are fearlessly going toe to toe with the evil greedy super rich bankster oil baron reptilian overlords. They are the good guys.
Teabaggers are just a bunch of stupid redneck inbred brain-washed christian gun-toting bitter-clinger warmongering baby-killers unless they are protesting abortion in which case they're women-killers with too little sense and too much Fox News. They have no appreciation of the value of compromise or of working together; always running around accusing good Democrats of being Communists even though most baggers don't even know what communism really is because they're just a bunch of
far-right fascist nazi wingnut extremists and we'd be better off without them.

Hypocrisy knows no bounds because hypocrites have ways of looking at the world that blind them to their own hypocrisy.

I guess unions never worked with mob? Nothing wrong with Fat Tony right?

reply to post by beezzer


No idea. To be honest the last time I worked for a Union most of my coworkers were republican. The Union wanted us to vote for Bush because of some policy then after he won Bush gave the OK for some other legislation and the trucking company I was with went under. I am sure you remember CF.

I'm a progressive, not a Democrat, so I cannot speak for Democrats, and won't attempt to speak for them. I am also not in a Union of any kind, so I won't speak for them either.

From my vantage point as a progressive, and when I say progressive, I mean it as it is intended, not as a pejorative term to demonize, but simply as one who fully believes that the sum of human progress creates for a better world, I agree that the Tea Party is very much like Organized Labor within the United States, and I'm fine with them.

In fact, I like the Tea Party Caucus, and I think they are good for the country, even though I disagree with a large portion of their ideas, and I believe their leaders are mostly moronic. The Tea Party is going to destroy the grip on power that the GOP has and will help to bring down the Two-Party system.

For far too long, the GOP has spoken with a solid voice, their message was one point, with very little variation between candidates. It really didn't matter which GOP candidate wins in any election, because they are all basically the same mouthpiece for the Party. The only difference is which mouthpiece is the most likable.

This has caused everyone else to band together to power opposition to the GOP in the form of The Democrats. Unions, Gay Rights, Women Rights, Blah blah blah, Ecological Protections, whatever... they all flock to the Democratic party to try to stop the juggernaut of monetary power that is generated by the GOP machine.

Now that the Tea Party is starting to cause a rift in the GOP, and it is causing a rift, The Democrats are going to begin to control larger portion of government. However, this will cause fractioning in the Democratic side, as infighting thickens (it's always been there).

So, This awesome "Union" of Tea Partiers is going to divide GOP and bring down both parties, and I'm excited to see it happen, because maybe we will be able to elect a true progressive to the presidency, instead of this tired rehash of each former president.

This is why unions are good, regardless of whether you like their cause or not. Collectivism has power.

Sigh.

My original post here was written satirically. It was sarcasm...which doesn't always translate well in text, I know. Usually I can overcome the failure of sarcasm to come through in text by ratcheting the level of ridiculousness to absurd levels...but that has become more and more difficult when the Left is the subject. The Left itself has become so absurd that one is hard pressed to match and surpass that absurdity in order to make the satirical nature of the writing obvious.

Explaining a joke always makes it fall flat, but at this point I'd rather the joke fail than be thought a leftist, so I will point out a few things from my original post:

...when they strike they are fearlessly going toe to toe with the evil greedy super rich bankster oil baron reptilian overlords.

I submit to you than just about anywhere else, the "reptilian overlords" part would have done the trick. But this is ATS.

...warmongering baby-killers unless they are protesting abortion in which case they're women-killers

This kind of direct contradiction is not unusual for people to make, but it is unusual for it to be in the same sentence. However, comments of leftists in blogs and news articles have these quite often now...so it doesn't work so well as a satirical device....

They have no appreciation of the value of compromise or of working together; always running around accusing good Democrats of being Communists even though most baggers don't even know what communism really is because they're just a bunch of
far-right fascist nazi wingnut extremists and we'd be better off without them.

...so I tried tripling down on it. This single sentence contains three pairs of contradictory or blatantly hypocritical statements, all of which when taken singly are familiar mantras of the left. They should be easy to see, the problem is, no one thought it was too absurd a sentence even for a leftist.

olaru12
Great, another Tea Party circle jerk.

I'm union and proud of it. Both SAG and IATSE

www.sagaftra.org... www.iatse-intl.org...


Without union representation, I would have no retirement, healthcare, recourse if hurt on the job, and no access to auditions and the resulting roles=$$$.

I'm happy to belong to the same union as Ronald Reagan, Clint Eastwood, Tim Allen, Pat Boone and my friend [RIP]Dennis Hopper and many other Hollywood conservatives.

Even your messiah's Rush and Beck are union.



I see this all time, in my field of work. "Union Proud". Stickers on lunch boxes, trucks, cars.

Explain to the rest of us what "Union Proud" means, if you would.



rationalwiki.org...:Hollywood_conservatives

I know it's great fun to label all actors and movie people as libs, but it just shows your ignorance.

edit on 22-10-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

tothetenthpower
reply to post by beezzer

 

no..

It's not at all the same thing.

The buses not running, is not like the country not paying it's bills.

So any comparison to how atrocious the behavior is doesn't make any sense. Of course the Tea Party are being idiots when they shut down the government. Of course you can't compare that to a petty non public union dispute at the local or even national level.

That's not negotiating and it's not 'striking'. If they wanted to strike then all of them could take unpaid leave and sit outside our doorsteps or local businesses, requesting that we support their cause. Like the Unions you compare them to would do.

These two things are so far removed from each other.

~Tenth

You do realize that capping the debt would not stop us from paying our debts unless we intentionally chose not to do so. The fed gov brings in a lot of revenue every month, more than enough to pay the interest on the debt, but not for long if we keep on increasing the debt. So when the president says that he is lying, so what else is new.

The premise of borrowing money to pay interest on borrowed money is just plain stupid.

reply to post by Tsurugi


So true, when I read you sarcastic post it never occurred to me that you were not just another leftist because that is how ridiculous they often sound to me.

Tsurugi
Sigh.

My original post here was written satirically. It was sarcasm...which doesn't always translate well in text, I know. Usually I can overcome the failure of sarcasm to come through in text by ratcheting the level of ridiculousness to absurd levels...but that has become more and more difficult when the Left is the subject. The Left itself has become so absurd that one is hard pressed to match and surpass that absurdity in order to make the satirical nature of the writing obvious.

Explaining a joke always makes it fall flat, but at this point I'd rather the joke fail than be thought a leftist, so I will point out a few things from my original post:

...when they strike they are fearlessly going toe to toe with the evil greedy super rich bankster oil baron reptilian overlords.

I submit to you than just about anywhere else, the "reptilian overlords" part would have done the trick. But this is ATS.

...warmongering baby-killers unless they are protesting abortion in which case they're women-killers

This kind of direct contradiction is not unusual for people to make, but it is unusual for it to be in the same sentence. However, comments of leftists in blogs and news articles have these quite often now...so it doesn't work so well as a satirical device....

They have no appreciation of the value of compromise or of working together; always running around accusing good Democrats of being Communists even though most baggers don't even know what communism really is because they're just a bunch of
far-right fascist nazi wingnut extremists and we'd be better off without them.

...so I tried tripling down on it. This single sentence contains three pairs of contradictory or blatantly hypocritical statements, all of which when taken singly are familiar mantras of the left. They should be easy to see, the problem is, no one thought it was too absurd a sentence even for a leftist.

I got it the first time around T and I thought it was pretty dang funny.


"Baby killers unless they are protesting abortion in which case they are women killers"
At this point I knew it was most definitely satire.
Quad

reply to post by Quadrivium


kudos to you for recognizing it for what it was.

reply to post by Tsurugi


Then I can only offer an apology. It is sad when your sarcasm sounds exactly like a reply I see so often from the left.

reply to post by beezzer


Sorry for de-railing your thread, Beez.

Also only around 18 percent of the government was shutdown. It was (as usual) not being reported honestly on the msm.

beegoodbees
Also only around 18 percent of the government was shutdown. It was (as usual) not being reported honestly on the msm.

Honesty is generally not a character assignment I would describe the media with.