Saturday, January 16, 2010

Open Thread: What is on your mind

Video: Massachusetts Miracle

The following is a partial transcript of Senator Barack Obama’s appearance at the Center For American Progress and SEIU’s Healthcare Forum, held in March 2007:

(Part 2, part 3)
And then this report on ensuing events from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and YouTube:

Dueling protesters disrupt Carnahan forum on aging

 You Might Be A Democrat If...

* You own something that says, "Dukakis for President, " and still display it.
* You've ever said, "We really should call the ACLU about this."
* You believe that a few hundred loggers can find another career, but the defenseless spotted owl must live in its preferred tree.
* You ever based an argument on the phrase, "But they can afford a tax hike because..."
* You keep count of how many people you know in each racial or ethnic category.
* You believe our government must do it because everyone in Europe does.
* You can't talk about foreign policy without using the word conspiracy.
* You think Ralph Nader makes a lot of sense.
* You don't understand why anyone was bothered by Jane's trip to Hanoi.
* You think solar energy is being held back by those greedy oil companies.
* You've never been mugged.
* You actually expect to collect Social Security.
* You think the State of Florida should have tried to reform Ted Bundy.
* You think the Great Society has actually worked.
* You don't see the similarity between WONK and WANK.
* You got teary-eyed during the film "The American President."
* You think Ayn Rand is an African currency.
* Your house smells like a garbage dump because of your commitment to recycling.
* You think political patronage describes the Kennedy family.
* Your High School Year Book goals included the words "help people."
* You think the Free Market is where they hand out Government cheese.
* You think Carter should be on Mt. Rushmore.
* You believe personal injury lawyers when they say they are just trying to defend the little guy.
* You know that those profit mongering drug companies could find a cure for AIDS if they really wanted to.
* You actually believe the NY Times and Washington Post.
* You know at least one Vegan.
* You trust Teddy Kennedy when he said that she was driving.
* You'd rather own Birkenstock than Merck Stock.
* You think public housing is great, but just NIMBY.
* You think the anti-war protestors from '60s are the real heroes.
* You think that Supply Side Economics refers to your dope dealer's stash.
* You think Michael Jackson is a great example of diversity.
* You actually think that poverty can be abolished.
* You think that Joan Baez had something to say.
* You admire the Swedish welfare system.
* You know that Jefferson really meant to say "Entitled to Happiness."
* You think the Flat Tax should be at 95%
* You go to Gay Pride Day parades so that no one can call you homophobic.
* After looking at your pay stub you can still say, "America is undertaxed."


  1. Those SEIU people are brave. God bless 'em!

  2. MSNBC's Ed Schultz admits he would cheat to win in Taxxachusetts. Finally a Hypocrat LIEberal tells the truth:

    Ed Schultz on Brown: “I’d cheat to keep these bastards out”
    JANUARY 16, 2010

    What do you expect? Defeat would, after all, mean “the end of change as we know it.” I’m leery of very short audio clips when the content is as incendiary as this is, but Brian Maloney re-checked the tape and assures me that it’s not taken out of context. Has it really come to this?

    The call to cheat comes, incidentally, just as the fine folks of SEIU are rolling into town. What could go wrong? Click the image to listen.

    I wonder if he's upset because Scott Brown can't turn on the negro dialect whenever he wants?

  3. I like Ed Schultz, but I think he stepped over the line. I agree about the bastards, but not about cheating to win.

    I want to win fair and square and just beat Scott Brown's ass.

  4. Chris -

    I visited the Henry Ford Estate today. One of the most interesting things that I saw was a newspaper article proclaiming that Henry Ford was sharing $10,000,000 with 25,000 workers (profit sharing).

    He raised worker's pay to $5/day, which was double the average wages at that time. He lowered the work day from 9 hours to 8 hours.

    His innovations changed the manufacturing of cars by going from a system where a skilled laborer moves from station to station performing their task to one in which the car moves past an unskilled worker performing one task. This resulted in: the time to build a car from an average of 12 -1/2 hours down to 1-1/2 hours. The price of the average Model T to drop from about $860 to $265. This, coupled with the higher wages, allowed his workers to be able to afford the product they made.

    All of this, Chris, without the union. Can you imagine, higher wages, fewer hours, less skill required, affordable product .... without paying for some useless organization to keep the lowlife scum-suckers and cheats in a job that would be better off going to someone who is interested in working for a living?!?!

    The people were lining up for jobs. Thousands, tens of thousands. (Contrast that to today, when thousands in Detroit lined up for their "Obama Money" and ... on second thought, don't think about that ...)

    Yet it still wasn't good enough for the union, as they forced their way into Ford Motor Company. They were the last of the big 3 to unionize, and when they did Henry Ford gave his workers better packages than the other two!

    My wife and I were talking about it, she still can't imagine what good the union did or does. I have a hard time explaining it. In fact ... I can't. And my father was in the union. If people don't like their job, they can't go find another one?! What a pathetic bunch of losers. Seriously.

    Well anyway, I just thought I would share that little bit with you. Oh, one more thing. This man, who took such good care of his workers and failed with two businesses before he finally succeeded, who worked hard and studied and never stopped being curious, whose motto was carved into his fireplace mantle "chop your own wood and it will warm you twice" ... this man had two volumes that I personally saw, in two different rooms. The books that caught my eye: The History of the Republican Party".

  5. Well Chris you ask what is on MY mind,OK;

    Why is it that so-called republicans support people such as Pete Hoekstra and Mike Cox?

    Both talk a good game but at the same time are inextrnictably linked at the hip to the same party that failed it's founding and Conservatives by caving into the socialist agenda.

  6. Greed John greed did it. Like I have said in the past it was Henry Ford that made the middle class not the unions. The munions are what are distroying the middle class. Today obama is going to Mass. and help out Coakley. If she looses now it will look even worse for the President. This is an impossable thing to do and Brown is doing it. The people really are starting to show their hate for the liberal agenda the Democrats are pushing. If this is even a close race it will be a huge victory for we the conservative people. We just need to pray that the Democrats don't get violent like they usually do. Liberals are so volitial and this is what might set them off. Mass. might be the epicenter for the next Tea Party revolution just like it was for the first one.

  7. Silverfiddle,it is amazing that those SEIU members are going against their unions wishes. I hope the liberal thugs don't do anything to them. I still can't believe that after 33 years of not having one Republican in the Senate that now it is even close says it all. The liberals are distroying the Democrat party like they did the Republican party. And like Christopher said in the past we need to point out the liberal agenda in the RINO's or it will happen to the Republicans again.

  8. John, All great thoughts and essentially propaganda. the real Herny Ford story is a abit deeper.

    The five dollar a day for workers is a bit of a fallacy. There were rules for this potential windfall, rules that went outside of the workday and into the homelife.

    First was that women and single men did not qualify.

    Second was that you had to let ford's Sociological Department visit your home and interview you about meeting their expectations in your life. Also he was having trouble keeping workers do to the grueling pace of the lines. Turnover at Ford was around 70 percent weekly. This wasn't a one time interview as they came around many times. All this to meet his expectations of efficiency at work. Nothing was more important than making his system work faster.

    While, all that seems well and good to some, i don't care for that level of intrusion into my lifestyle.

    Then we look into other aspects. Ford was a known anti-semite and Hitler supporter, having been given the Grand Cross of the Supreme Order of the German Eagle in 1938. Hitler sent a personal note of congratulations to him.

    But lets look at your statment that they forced their way in. nothing could be further from the truth. The UAW was not the one using force during the attempt to organize.

    You could look up the "battle of the overpass" for yourself and find out how the UAW organisers which consisted of men, Women and clergy were attacked by Ford's servicemen and how the brutality of the attacks, which included breaking a mans back, throwing Walter Ruther down a flight of steps.

    So in the end you find his fascination with the Republican party interesting to say the least, i say its par for the rightwing course. He cared little for his workers, humanity and of course Jews, lets not forget about that.

  9. Nobama Going to Massechuettes to Protect Ted Kennedys Legacy and Nobama Care SAYS Volumes for the LIBERAL Agenda in that BLUE State, GOOD part of it ALL is the WHOLE Country has seen this Administration for WHAT it Is Socialist in Nature with Saul Alinsky the Architect!

    Bruce Never answered MY Question Who Signs YOUR paycheck a POOR person OR a EVIL Rich ONE!

  10. LOL ... one of the greatest philanthropists ever caring little for humanity ... that's a rich one Joey. I would say people like Al Gore, who use propaganda to promote their lies about AGW in order to get rich are the ones that care little for humanity.

    Thanks for the information on Ford's anti-semitism though. It is definitely important to remember that nobody is or was perfect and indeed had their flaws. People like the sitting Hypocrat Senator Robert Byrd, being a member of the KKK, I'm pretty sure you could fit him in that mold. And that guy never did anything near what Henry Ford did for humanity. Now THAT is par for the course for Hypocrats. Jimmy Carter, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cynthia McKinney ... why the list goes on and on, and I'm just listing current anti-semites in the Hypocrat party!

    It's interesting that you have a problem with intrusion into private lives, when you indeed would advocate exactly that from the government. If it's Ford's company, Ford can do as he pleases. If people didn't like the arrangement, they can move on down the road. They could even start up their own company and pay their workers whatever they want, and treat them any way they want! LOL ... Joey, when does someone's business and how they run it become anybody's business but the owners?

    Aw, the poor union organizers. Well if the union wasn't forcing their way in, are you telling me that Ford's guys just went over to some union-organizer's houses and attacked them?!?! LOL ... sure, whatever Joey. The fact is, if there was 70% turnover, then people were finding out how bad the conditions were and were free to leave to seek other employment, correct? And if you constantly are training 70% of your workforce, even for their non-skilled jobs, then in short order you will be changing your methods in order to retain those workers. You don't need the friggin' union to do that.

    The perfect union, they never used force?!?! ROFLMAO ... THAT is a rich one too Joey. Not to mention their involvement in organized crime ... wow, that's quite an organization you got there Joey.

  11. BOSTON (AP) — For much of her campaign, Martha Coakley steered clear of the Kennedy mystique, methodically crafting a low-key campaign to fill the late Edward Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat the way the seasoned prosecutor would build a case in court.

    But with the wheels threatening to come off the campaign and a double-digit lead eroding to a dead heat in the polls, Coakley, the state's attorney general, is banking that a deep-seated loyalty to Kennedy among Massachusetts Democrats will be enough to propel her to victory.

    Coakley has publicly accepted the endorsement of Kennedy's widow, Vicki Kennedy, and nephew, the former U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy. Vicki Kennedy has also made a fundraising appeal and cut a television ad on Coakley's behalf.

    Some Democrats are worried Coakley has been too methodical in the six-week sprint to Tuesday's special election.

    Once thought to have a lock on the seat in a state that last elected a Republican to the Senate in 1972, Coakley is suddenly fending off a strong challenge from GOP state Sen. Scott Brown in what's turning out to be her hardest-fought campaign.

    Coakley, hoping to become the first woman elected to the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, said she always expected a tough election.

    "Scott's come after me. I'm going to respond and voters will choose," Coakley said after a recent debate. "I'm not going to let anyone distort my record."

    Polls showing the race closer than expected have helped energize national Republican activists, and money has poured into both camps. In a recent 24-hour Internet fundraising drive, Brown collected about $1.3 million.

    Coakley also has benefited from a strong fundraising effort and the endorsement of Vicki Kennedy. But critics have faulted her for mounting a low-key effort and largely disappearing from the campaign over the holidays.

    Coakley said she's been working hard since wrapping up a decisive win in a four-way primary, claiming 47 percent of the vote. Coakley said she's bringing the same passion to the campaign that she's put into her work.

  12. It's a drive Coakley said she learned early on, growing up one of five children in western Massachusetts and pursuing a legal career at a time when women still faced significant hurdles.

    "I come from a big family. My mother was youngest of 10," Coakley said. "My dad owned his own insurance agency and actually didn't have much use for politics, but I think he'd be proud of the work I've done."

    She went to nearby Williams College, graduating cum laude in 1975. In 1979, she received her law degree from Boston University. Coakley began her career in civil litigation at two Boston law firms before joining the Middlesex District Attorney's office in 1986.

    After working for the U.S. Justice Department in its Boston Organized Crime Strike Force, she returned to the DA's office and became head of its child abuse prosecution unit in 1991.

    In 1998, she was elected district attorney in Middlesex County. She made her first statewide run in 2006 and became the first woman elected attorney general.

    The race to fill Kennedy's seat is the culmination of a decade's long quest for Coakley, 56, who grabbed the public's attention with the high-profile prosecution of Louise Woodward, a British nanny charged with shaking to death a Newton couple's infant son in 1997.

    Deborah Eappen, whose son Matthew died, said she appreciated Coakley's work on her family's behalf.

    "I felt like we couldn't have been in better hands," she said of Coakley, then head of the Middlesex District Attorney's child abuse unit.

    Perhaps Coakley's biggest case as attorney general was her handling of a fatal 2006 tunnel ceiling collapse in the newly opened Big Dig.

    The incident gave a focal point to public outrage over the massive project's delays and soaring costs, but instead of pursuing jail terms, Coakley reached a settlement with the project's top contractor.

    Coakley blamed weak state liability laws, noting she won nearly $500 million.

    In the closing days of the campaign, Coakley has turned her prosecutorial eye on her GOP opponent, grilling him to the point where Brown turned to her at a recent debate and said, "I'm not a defendant. I'm not in your courtroom."

    Coakley also faulted Brown for filing an amendment in 2005 that would have allowed doctors and nurses with religious beliefs to deny emergency contraception to rape victims.

    "He needs to stand on his position," she said. "If that's his position, that's great, then voters can decide. But don't pretend that's not his record."

    Despite a reputation as a serious-minded prosecutor, Coakley insists she has a funny bone and enjoys her life outside of work with her husband Thomas F. O'Connor Jr. and her two Labrador retrievers.

    "I love to cook. I love to downhill ski," she said. "I really feel very blessed that I get to work every day on behalf of the public and have a great personal life with a husband who loves me."

    We need every Democrat to come to Mass.Forget Haiti the Democrats need you and your money. We havn't come this far to loose it all. I don't caqre if the Black Panthers come to control the flow of Republican voters we just need to win this for the good of the party.

  13. Cigar Asstray Bill Clinton17 January, 2010 10:12

    Here in Massachusetts, it turns out Bill Clinton will make not one but two appearances tomorrow on behalf of Democratic candidate Martha Coakley.

    The Coakley campaign, struggling against surging Republican Scott Brown, has been touting Clinton's appearance for several days, but in the last 24 hours there have been questions about whether the former president would actually appear. Clinton is the United Nations special envoy for Haiti and has taken a high-profile role in rescue and relief efforts following the disastrous earthquake there. But he is also the man who could possibly help save Coakley, and thus the Democratic national health care plan, from defeat on Tuesday. So the confluence of events presented the spotlight-loving Clinton with a difficult choice: save health care, or save the world? He chose to head to Massachusetts.

    Clinton will appear, along with Sen. John Kerry, at a Coakley rally in Boston tomorrow afternoon, followed by a second rally a couple of hours later in Worcester, that one with Rep. Jim McGovern. Rumors of an appearance this weekend by President Obama don't seem to have panned out.

  14. Browns Winning would be Great Victory BUT even in Defeat,as CLOSE as this Race has Become it WILL be a LOSS for the Libs with the Entire Nation Looking On! Clinton and Nobama NOW have to go and TRY and Snatch Victory from Defeat! Libs What Happens if with ALL this Horse Power, BROWN were to WIN or STAY as Close as it seems to BE Now! Lose Lose for LIBS and Most of ALL Nobama!
    Still beleive if Brown does Happen to WIN Libs will find a WAY to EXCLUDE his Vote.

    Do the DEAD VOTE in Massachusettes or is that JUST a Chicago THINGY!

  15. John, okay so now that you've tried deflection and straw mans can we get back to Ford. When you went to the home did you find a copy of his book on the shelf, "the International Jew, THE WORLD'S FOREMOST PROBLEM" or just the one about the republican party?

    About his humanity. Lets find the real Henry Ford.

    Ford is quoted as saying, "These are really good times, but only if you know it. . . The average man won't really do a day's work unless he is caught and cannot get out of it." during the 30's.

    A march organized by local unemployment councils and the UAW ended in violence when Dearborn police and FORD SERVICEMEN SHOT at the protesters.

    He invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in japanese war bonds after the Rape of Nanking came to light.

    He willfully violated the right to organize.

    You can love the man, he's your type of guy, but not mine.

    There are only two different political systems in the world. One is the oldest which is where the elite few rule the many. That has been around since man first walked on the earth. These are the Chiefs, Kings, Emperors, Sultans, Caliphs and dictators, regardless of labels. The other has been around for almost 400 years in one place, America. Ayn Rand is one of the best describing how we work. It is where individual interests are more important than community interests, where the people rule themselves through constitutions, charters, elected representatives and law. The value of individual life is greater in the newer system, primarily because it rises out of religious beliefs, mainly Judeo-Christian teachings. Look at who gives the most help to Haiti, and who the least. For those nations that do not value individual life, the help provided is mainly for image, while America actually helps. America is condemned for it because that help is seen as unnecessary in saving lives deemed worthless.

  17. Wow Joey, talk about straw men. I merely mentioned the good that Ford did, and you bring up his anti-semitism. Did you want me to fall on a sword for him or something? You must be the only person on the face of the earth to not have any racism in their past. Are you a descendent of Jesus Joey? At least Ford did some good. All you racist Hypocrats do is more damage, like Detroit.

    I never said I loved him, but I did say nobody is perfect. People believe all kinds of things. The good that Henry Ford did far far far exceeds anything else. As I understand it, it's not illegal to have an opinion. Although it sure looks like you are trying to change that. Henry Ford never wore a KKK hood like Robert Byrd did. He was friends with George Washington Carver, a black man, who ate dinner with him. But I guess that's not good enough for you. You're trying to pin the Holocaust on Ford?!?! ROFLMAO, whatever Joey. You get so rabid about this stuff, just when I think I can have a civil conversation with you you go off the edge.

    And now Ford is responsible for the Detroit Police, who also shot? Hmmmm .... you are losing it Joey. Obviously those UAW members were out of control. We know how unions are Joey, just like unions have been from the beginning up until today. Look at the violence that the SEIU has perpetrated. Sounds to me like you are trying to justify today's union violence because anti-semitism existed. People that cross picket lines can reap some real wrath. Oh, but the unions are such peaceful protesters, right?!?! LOL Come on Joey. Let's be realistic now.

    Funny how union workers complain about violence instigated by themselves in the old days, but have no compunction about perpetrating violence and rigging elections now.

  18. Joey's "type of guy", murderous, corrupt, organized criminal, violent unionists:
    Since 1975, the National Institute for Labor Relations Research has collected more than 9,000 reports of union violence. These incidents are recorded and electronically maintained in the Institute’s Violent Event Data File.
    Union Violence Escalates
    The Daily Citizen in Searcy, Arkansas reports that “[v]iolent incidents at the Kohler factory in Searcy escalated over the weekend after the labor union withdrew three of four charges before the Federal Labor Relations Board. Members of the United Auto Workers Local 1000 rejected a proposed contract Dec. 9 and went on strike at the stainless steel sink factory. Replacement workers have been hired by Kohler. One of those new workers, Jon David Hicks, was injured by what he said were the actions of a union member walking the picket line.” The article continues at link ...
    Labor Union Fraud, Corruption, and Violence
    A Brief Introduction

    One of the most damaging large-scale frauds in the United States is the misuse of union endorsements and mandatory union membership dues to fund the political campaigns of the most extreme socialist and even Marxist political candidates without written permission from each union member. Even though a substantial percentage of union members are Republicans or conservative Democrats and oppose socialism and Marxism, their First Amendment rights are violated and their hard-earned money is taken by force to support opposite views and political agendas.

    By the way Joey, unions are traditionally racist as well. Even your hero Andrew Sullivan was surprised that the unions were voting for Obummer:
    Union Leader Confronts White Racism: "Vote Obama"

    Labor unions in America have not always been friendly to Black men and women or other people of color.

    Too often, as my friend and mentor Herbert Hill demonstrated and fought against, unions forged white working class solidarity by using the existing prejudices of racial identity and the ideology of white superiority.

    That's why the recent speech by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka at the United Steelworkers convention, confronting and denoucing racism against Barack Obama is so powerful and so significant.

    As Andrew Sullivan points out, "To see a white union man take on racism this way is very moving. Something truly profound could happen in this election, if we want it to."

    BWAAAAHAHAHAHA ... maybe the unions didn't hear Obummer use his negro-dialect. Or maybe he was such a light-skinned negro that they didn't realize he was black, they must have thought he just had a dark tan.

  19. Point being Joey, if I have to pick between racism in my past, or racism in my present, I pick it in the past. You obviously pick it in the present. Your type of guys. Not mine.

  20. Great work John !
    The line "they must have thought he just had a dark tan", is that not what Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi more or less said about B. Hussein.

  21. John, once again you go off-topic and deflect. This conversation is and was about Henry ford, not unions, not robert byrd or anything else you wish to throw in the mix. You brought him up and i corrected you on your obvious mistakes about Henry. You then delfected and started talking about everything else under the sun.

    Now you want to make it about everything else and misqoute the evidence i presented.

    So lest look at what i presented.

    He was a known Nazi sympathzier.
    He was a known supprter of Japan's attack of china
    His servicemen fired on the Ford hunger march (not just the cops)and killed marchers
    His servicemen beat and and killed one lawful UAW organiser in the battel of the overpass.
    His servicemen attacked women and clergy on the same day.
    He blamed the poor for the depression

    The organization of Ford happened despite the attacks on the organisers, the willful violations of thier rights and other issues.

    That was what we are talking about. Now if you want a seperate discussion on strike violence then we can have one, but thats not what this was about.

    And the same people in the unions that dislike obama and have racist views are the same people who voted for McCain in the last election. their are plenty of bigots in the union and most of them vote republican. I know i work with the bigots.

  22. JoeC Bet you DONT Drive a Ford!

    Men who have Done GOOD will more than Likely have some BAD in their PAST except Probablly Jesus BUT JoeC, If You Look Hard enough JoeC NO Doubt in MY Mind YOU ll TRY to FIND it! Republican Democrats Consevatives and EVEN Liberals ALL have Past JoeC! Time to Move ON or You Name BAD Guys, Others name BAD GUYS and there is NO end or POINT that Makes Sense! Sorta like Play MY Way or Joe You Will take YOUR Ball and GO Home!

  23. BWAAAAHAHAHAHA ... Joey, I see you like to talk about changing the subject and deflection. If you go back to my original post, I was talking about Ford's accomplishments, and all that he did WITHOUT UNIONS. So yes, Joey, this discussion was about FORD and UNIONS. You bring up that he was an anti-semite ... What one has to do with the other only you know Joey. Sounds like the definition of a strawman argument to me. So I go with it Joey, I say hey, anti-semitism isn't good, and if you want to call the kettle black by all means go ahead and here are a few pots in your party Joey. But apparently that isn't enough for you Joey. So you mention some idiot rioting organizers who got shot by the Detroit police, and I mention how racist, corrupt, evil, violent, and useless the unions are, and now it's NOT about unions?!?! I'm confused here Joey, because my original comment WAS about Unions, but now you are trying to re-write history on just this blog alone. BWAAAAHAHAHAHA ... Joey, are you trying to make me laugh to death!??! WTF ... why don't you try re-reading what was written. YOU change the subject Joey, YOU introduce your strawmen because YOU cannot defend this useless corrupt union. No deflection going on here Joey, except by YOU and your CURRENT RACIST UNION and HYPOCRAT PARTY!!

    Funny Joey, I didn't hear of any unions protesting, or quitting work knowing that they were working for an anti-semite. Al is spot-on Joey, you're driving a FORD, the product of an old dead anti-semite. Drive it proudly Joey, I have a feeling the other "bigots" that you work with think the same thing about you.

  24. And Joey, Reid was talking about the Democrats being able to hold their nose and vote for the light-skinned negro. You can project your racism all you want, but the fact is you are a member, part and parcel, of a Hypocrat party spawned by the KKK. Were you even able to vote for a black man Joey? And what about all the racist blacks who only voted for Obama because he was a black man. I suppose that is acceptable to you for some reason. You stay classy racist.

  25. It's interesting too Joey the point you brought up long ago before you were foaming at the mouth. The point about Ford's $5/day policy being only for married men. It's interesting that that policy allows women to stay home and not have to work, probably quite a rare thing at that time. It's also interesting that this encouraged marriage. Quite the opposite of your chosen policies, in which a single mother can make more on welfare than if she married her baby daddy. Out of the two policies, it's clear that your policy has led to the destruction of the black family in particular, and family unit in general. And again, as far as I'm aware Ford was not a "slave-owner", forcing people to work for him. They were free to apply and work for him, and leave if they found the work too difficult or if they thought they could run a business better.

    Once again, this is just typical of you LIEberals being jealous of a successful person. You let someone become successful and then you want to worm your way in with your destructive unions. Interesting how the prices of cars went DOWN before the unions, and then UP UP UP ever since! Brilliant Joey, thanks for making cars cost everyone thousands more than they should. Keep up the good work racist.

    Yeah yeah, we know, nobody can run a business as successfully and efficiently as the government or the unions. Tell it to your kids Joey, but spare us your nonsense.

  26. JoeC I work at the plant with you and you and I both know it's not the Republicans that are the racists. I lost all respect for you. And not driving a Ford is low.

  27. She has to win.If we don't get free health care I'll be pissed off and looking for revenge. I'm not the only one. You neo-cons go to hell.

  28. Liberals tend to think that conservatives are either stupid or evil. They see George W. Bush as a buffoon and Dick Cheney as a nefarious architect of doom. These two options strike liberals as the on1y possible explanations for why someone would adopt a conservative agenda. Conservatives must be either be confused about what morality demands of us in the political sphere, or they must recognize the demands of morality and simply ignore those demands, in pursuit of power or lucre. Conservatives have no more a flattering conception of liberals. For their vantage point, liberals either look hopelessly naïve (read "stupid") or dangerously corrupted (read "evil"). Liberals are either tree-hugging fools or calculating agents of moral degeneracy. Why is this?

    One answer is that liberals and conservatives each make the same false assumption about the other side: they assume that their opponents share the same basic moral values. Suppose you and I share the same basic values, but you advocate some policy that I oppose. That means one of us is either making a mistake about what our shared values entail or willfully pursuing something we know to be immoral. One of us is stupid or evil. But there is another possibility: perhaps we have some different basic values. Perhaps we are both pursuing exactly what our values demand of us, but, since those values differ, we are pursuing different political agendas.
    The idea that liberals and conservatives have some different basic values gains support from recent psychological research. For example, in a recent issue of Science, psychologist Jonathan Haidt reports that conservatives are deeply concerned about factors that fall outside of liberal morality. For liberals, morality is pretty much about harm and justice. To decide whether a policy is wrong, they want to know whether any one will be hurt by it and whether it will be fair to all those affected. Conservative care about harm and justice too, but they also care about three things that liberals tend to ignore: purity, respect for authority, and loyalty to the ingroup. Consider gay sex. A liberal will say, as long as no one is harmed, we should not prohibit gay sex; indeed such a prohibition would be unfair. A conservative might say that gay sex can be prohibited on the grounds that it is impure ("an unnatural act"). Or consider flag burning. A liberal will again say: no one is harmed, and everyone has the right to self-expression. Conservatives will say that flag burning is an act of desecration that disrespects the authority of this great nation. Or take preemptive war and regime change. Liberals will caution that it is bad to harm others and unjust to threaten the autonomy of other nations. Conservatives will focus on the threat that others pose to us here at home, and they will plaster their cars with stickers that say "support our troops," showing deep concern for the ingroup. The political agendas of liberals and conservative differ, because conservatives have some core values that are not part of liberal morality. Political disputes are not the result of ignorance or iniquity. Both sides are advocating policies that follow logically from their divergent moral values.

  29. Other researchers have found further examples of divergence. The Berkeley linguist George Lakoff argues that liberals and conservatives base their political views on fundamentally different metaphors of how to run a society. For both, a government should be like a family, but for liberals, the ideal family is one that is run by a nurturing parent who forgives mistakes and wants all of her children to flourish and have new experiences. For conservatives, the ideal family is run by a stern parent, who emphasizes accountability and self-reliance, not self-expression. Think June Clever vs. Ward Clever. When people stray, liberals offer second chances and cite external influences; conservatives favor discipline and say three strikes and you're out. Lakoff argues that these different ideals inform many political debates. To liberals, conservatives appear inconsistent when they oppose abortion and favor the death penalty. In reality, both views derive from the same conservative principle: if a person does something imprudent (getting pregnant or committing a capital crime), that person should deal with the consequences. The abortion debate does not hinge on a scientific or theological debate about the beginning of life; it reflects different conceptions of responsibility.

    Findings like this have important implications for understanding politics. Liberals and conservatives never seem to convince each other. They incessantly present arguments for their views on television and talk radio, but it's rare to see anyone getting persuaded to join the opposing side. The arguments used by spinners and editorialists serve more to rally the base than to convince the opposition. Liberals and conservatives are equally intelligent and they have access to the same facts, but they arrive at opposing views because they value different things. To this extent, cross-party political debate is a bit of a charade. There can be no consensus if the sides value different things. At best, the sides can look for some overlapping values and find rare islands of agreement or they can compromise and agree to tolerate policies that favor the opposition, provided the concessions aren't too great.

    The findings also have important philosophical implications. Philosophers have traditionally assumed that there is a single morality shared by all people. Some philosophers think that morality has a rational foundation that can be discovered by intelligent reflection, while others presume it is hard wired into human nature. The fact that liberals and conservatives fail to agree, despite their intelligence, moral concern, and access to information, suggests that the traditional philosophical picture is mistaken. There are multiple moralities. Some moral values may have biological roots, but experience determines which values get emphasized, and, as in the case of liberals, some biologically rooted dispositions (such as preferential treatment of the ingroup) never become central aspects of morality. Most likely, we catch values from those around us, through processes of social conformity, emotional conditioning, imitative learning, and mere exposure. Moral values correlate with demographic and geographic variables. If morality reflected something more universal or rational, there wouldn't be red states and blue states. Once acquired, moral values are resilient to change through argument (when was the last time Rush Limbaugh convinced a liberal?). As a result, liberals and conservatives live in somewhat different moral worlds, and none of the arguments used in political discourse will bring us to total consensus. Failure to appreciate this simple fact leads to confusion and name-calling on both sides.

  30. Violets Are Blue17 January, 2010 22:02

    Another element restraining Liberals from dispensing real justice is that they don't want to kill "their own." Who of us can doubt that the inhabitants of death row are default constituents of the political Left? Are Conservatives filling the bunks of America's "death rows"? Empirical evidence says "no." If they were, is there anyone who thinks there would be Liberal protest over it? Likely not, and herein is the greater hypocrisy.

    Conservatives are willing to die for their causes. Liberals are willing to kill for theirs. However, Liberals aren't willing to commit suicide. As long as there are helpless, brainless, soulless, pathetic individuals out there, Liberals will do all they can to stay the hand of justice from them so they can be paraded in front of the media as another "crisis" at which to throw money.

    However, one segment of the population that it is unprofitable to throw money at is the elderly. The high cost of health care has made it very uncomfortable for the Liberal commisars who deal with elderly patients and their nursing home bills. Thankfully for Liberals, euthanasia is starting to pick up support. The growing percentage of senior citizens in this country guarantees that spending to keep them alive will far exceed the tolerance of taxpayers. To a Liberal, more government is a good thing, but even they realize that it can grow too fast to escape the notice of America's wage-earners and taxpayers.

    Euthanasia promises to cure this dilemma, allowing doctors and the families of elderly patients to end terminal patients' lives forcibly. This is billed as "compassionate" and "progressive." It is not "coming"; it is already here. Maybe not yet in your town or state, but it's not far away.

    Conservative Contradiction?

    Typically, the political Left accuses Conservatives of being hypocrites when it comes to capital punishment. Liberals cite the alleged hypocricy of Conservatives in protesting abortion while advocating the death penalty. This supposed conflict is borne of the misunderstanding of what each of these acts really is. Capital punishment is intended to be punishment. In that light, it is the ultimate punishment for the ultimate of crimes. Justice is served through capital punishment because society is then rid of individuals who completely lack respect for the most fundamental of human rights. We should not care how the murderer's family, nor even the victim's family, feels about it. Government must act to protect the whole of society, not narrow interests.

    Abortion is not what Liberals think it is either. Abortion is not like removing a mole. It is not a "right." And it most certainly is not "health care." It is, plain and simple, murder, a crime worthy of capital punishment. Were this a just society that truly valued life, capital punishment would apply to doctors administering abortions, as well as patients seeking one. (Some of you are glad I am not a legislator.) Trying to seek a comfy middle ground on the issue is a dance with the Devil, and trying to draw distinctions between embryos and fully formed adults is simply an argument of scale that doesn't hold up, logically or Biblically.

    The "Culture of Death" and the Final Solution

    What more examples do we need of the inherent evil of the political Left than the poetically Satanic bookends of abortion and euthanasia? Herod and Pharaoh went after babies to solve their problems; Hitler and Stalin concentrated on the core population for theirs. The movie Soylent Green postulated what could happen to old people in an overcrowded future society. Perhaps today's Liberals have hit upon the solution to end all "solutions"--start at both ends to squeeze the middle into submission. Readers of this column can scoff at my conspiratorial air, but it's easy to be a skeptic when you're not the one being killed.

  31. You don't need a grade book to realize that our public education system is failing to properly prepare our future leaders. With the national dropout rate at almost 30 percent (nearly 50 percent for African American and Hispanic students), the writing is on the chalkboard.

    Still, there seems little urgency in Congress to address the sorry state of our country's education system.

    Given our fiscal woes, it's easy to understand why lawmakers might be more concerned with jumpstarting the economy than with fixing the broken education system. But if policymakers continue to ignore the simple fixes that could improve education, we may be on a perilous path to even greater economic stagnation in the decades to come.

    In a compelling report, three of my colleagues at The Heritage Foundation -- Dan Lips, Jennifer Marshall and James Carafano -- argue that our country is quickly losing its global competitiveness because of our failure to produce enough scientists, engineers and mathematicians.

    According to a 2006 Program for International Student Assessment exam, 15-year-old American students placed a dismal 23rd out of 29 participating countries in mathematics. And in science, students in 16 countries outscored American students.

    This matters, of course, because our country desperately relies on mathematicians and engineers to remain at the cusp of technological advances. For example, Silicon Valley is synonymous with the iPod and iPhone, thanks to the innovative drive of countless scientists and engineers.

    Of course, we benefit from the good work of scientists, doctors and mathematicians in other ways, too. The United States leads the world in the fight to find a cure for cancer and AIDS. And thanks to our country's engineers, we are building safe and reliable roads, planes and automobiles. In short, we all benefit when our education system succeeds.

    As my colleagues write (their report is titled, "Improving U.S. Competitiveness"): "For years, the U.S.-dominated science and technology fields filed record numbers of patents, which in turn empowered its military and fueled its economy. But times are changing. China has gained ground in electrical engineering and computing."

    Thus our education system's shortcomings effectively threaten our national security.

    Unfortunately, the answer for many is to simply increase federal spending on education. That's been done again and again, including last year when the so-called "stimulus" package doubled the Department of Education's budget.

    Lawmakers need to consider other alternatives to truly bring about the necessary improvements. Money isn't the problem -- we're shelling out some $12,000 per student every year in many cities.

    The real problem is the opposition to reform and competition from so many entrenched special interests in the education sector. Teacher labor unions furiously oppose meaningful reforms that could increase competition. These include expanding school-choice options for parents.

    Increasing vouchers, for instance, would allow parents to decide where to send their children to school instead of forcing them to send their children to their neighborhood's failing schools.

    The failure to prepare tomorrow's leaders in math and science is a threat to our country's global standing. For far too long, policy makers have turned a blind eye to our crumbling public education system. This is no longer exclusively an education issue -- this is now also a national security issue.

  32. Wow great posts my friends.

  33. Al, Of course i drive a ford. Thats just nasty brother. Accusing me of not buying the company i work for.

    John, first off lets get to how little you actually read my posts. My post about the Ford Hunger March said nothing about Detroit police. It did include that Deaborn Police and Ford Servicemen shot on the crowd and killed people, but nothing about Detroit. and if you read it, then you'd know i said that. But you continue to show the people here your ignorance. Lucky for you they are just like you and think its okay.

    Bwahahahahaha you can't even read my posts and you accuse me of straw men.

    As for your constant attacks, something you hypocritically blame on the left and me, atleast i can take it, unlike diapers and the other posters who run and cry when its not a rightwing circle jerk. You with your constant liebrals and hypocrats attacks are one to talk about how ever i choose to address people. Hell you can't even call me by my name.

  34. Anon, atleast have the balls to use your name. I don't know its the left here at work. I know of plenty of righties who express their dislike of blacks daily. I bet you do to, but can't admit it.

  35. john, see the difference between you and i? You accuse me of racism though i have done nothing of the sort and you have no evidence of any sort. I accuse the party you vote for of having bigots in it. You constantly put words in my mouth and then get your panties in a twist when you think someone has done that to you.

    your a hack who constantly relies on obfuscation and deflection to hide the reality of your immense hypocrisy. Of course your rightie buddies here go along with it, because its banana style for the group, all of you in a big yellow bunch. Not a single one of the righties will call you out on it, even though i will constantly disagree with bruce and the rest of the left. Not you though.

  36. BWAAAAHAHAHAHA ... first of all JOEY, I don't think you know what a strawman argument is. Because, as I said before, my FIRST COMMENT was about FORD and the USELESS UNIONS. Next thing I know, you are talking about anti-semitism and the rape of Nanking! So Joey, everyone can see where this whole conversation started and where you took it.

    Ooooooh ... burn Joey, sorry I didn't bother to go back and read your hate-filled angry comment to note that it was DEARBORN and not DETROIT police. Big Flippin' whoop. So sorry I got that wrong Joey, it was still the POLICE trying to QUELL that rage-filled VIOLENT union MOB. So go F yourself if the biggest error you can find in my posts is I got the CITY wrong! ROFLMAO ... look at you all grasping at straws and shit!! LOL

    Gosh Joey, where did I ever deflect and obfuscate?!?! AGAIN, Joey, YOU cannot answer what good the Union has ever done! You go on about anti-semitism; what exactly that has to do with my original comment ONLY YOU KNOW DIPSHIT. See, now I spend all my time answering (NOT DEFLECTING LOSER) your ridiculous statements and strawmen, just like you planned. For instance, let's just take a little proof of you displaying your strawman argument tactics right from your last comment. The part where you say "I accuse the party you vote for of having bigots in it." Well now Joey, THAT had nothing to do with my original comment. Quite a bit off topic there Joey. Quite a STRAWMAN, and DEFLECTION and OBFUSCATION JOEY.

    YES JOEY, bigots and racists existed in the past, in BOTH parties. But now, in the present, it only exists in the HYPOCRAT party. That's a fact, and you can cram that along with a big banana, up your rectum.

    YOU CONSTANTLY DISAGREE!?!?! ROFLMAO ... oh stop it Joey. What have you losers ever disagreed on.

    Show me Joey, show me where I'm a hypocrite. Am I the one defending a racist Senate Majority Leader who was hopeful that the Hypocrats could hold their nose and vote for a light-skinned negro? Was there any Republicans or Conservatives who said that Obummer could turn his negro dialect on and off at will?!? Hypocrats. Ahhhh ... no, that was Hypocrat Joey. The most racist white man of them all.

    So Joey, what about the negros who only voted for Obummer because of his negroness and his negro dialect. Think those are racists or what?

    BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA ... look at your rage-filled rabid posts Joey. The only time I was wrong was I called the police Detroit instead of Detroit. Whoa, that's quite a Perry Mason moment for you Joey. I know that destroys all the other facts that I presented, LOL

  37. JoeC See Joe I Cant Tell What kind of Car you DRIVE, Yet YOU Say You Can Tell What I Beleive in! NEITHER Statement is CORRECT but I am MORE Right than YOU!

  38. And don't worry about anonymous ragin' racist-Joey. Anonymous LIEberals and conservatives write in here. You don't see anyone else getting their panties in a bunch. Those anger-management courses are NOT paying off for you Joey. Maybe you should try switching to de-caf.

  39. Hey Joey, how does it feel to drive a FORD, the product of an anti-semite?!?! I bet you got yourself a nice WHITE Ford F-150 truc(K) with the (K)ruiser (K)ab. BWAAAHAHAHAHA

    I bet you never refused a raise on the grounds that a racist company was giving it to you. You certainly had no plans to walk from your job once you found out how Henry Ford hated the Jews. I bet you realized that you finally found your niche in life. Think I would win that bet racist?

  40. Hey Joey, are you part of that Krew that runs out and gets donuts every morning? You know, the Krispy Kreme Krew? I bet you throw on a white smock so that you keep the Krispy Kreme Krap off of your work uniforms. ROFLMAO


  41. Relax Joe. Your acxting like the Democrats are in major trouble politically. It's not like the Republicans are taking 60th Senate seat in a Democrat state that would ruin their chances to pass a retarded health care bill. Joe you should be mad at the Democrats for screwing everything up worse then before.

  42. I'm still confused about what anti-semitism and the rape of Nanking has to do with the usefulness of the union. Joey I'm trying to piece together how that is not a strawman argument, but I'm going to need your brilliant linear logical thinking to make the connection for me. Thanks in advance Joey.

  43. John, if your confused its because your not bright. you talked about Henry ford and all the wonderful things he did and how the union "forced" its way in. I countered with the not so wonderful things he did, like support Hitler and Japan in 37 and 38. Still confused.

    He bought war bounds to help support the japanese war effort.

    He was given a medal by Germany with a personal note from Hitler.

    His security force killed people to prevent union organization, attacking women and clergy.

    that is the Henry Ford you admire.

    Now onto the fact that i work for a publically traded company, no longer owned by Herny Ford sr. and I never worked for him. It may have been founded by a bigot and an anti-semite, but it is no longer owned by him.

    As for my "alleged" racism, i have none and you have no reason to suggest i do. Its nothing more than "personal attacks" to suggest i do, but thats what your good at. always calling names and acting like a little blogger bully.

    John, i'm not even mad and yet in your attack laden posts you constantly accuse me of it, despite the fact that you sound by far much more upset. You don't need to project on me your issues, John.

    Chris, what suprise me most is that you, the christian of the group go along with this BS. You see that he makes accusations he can't back up, that he constantly calls name and attacks posters and yet nary a word from you. Atleast i have the stones to disagree with Bruce and the lefty anons that blog here. You let poor little john use this blog as a bully pulpit for his hatred and anger without even suggesting he is wrong when clearly he is. he says, "I am the racist person" based on nothing, or better yet, the name of his blog, which he changed to include me when i suggested it was wrong. You sit back and hide behind the "we're all sinners" when he makes blantantly false accusations. Yet if a lefty does the same your on him as the day is long.
    Makes me remember why i dislike religions and distrust the christian church.

  44. John, just so you know and stop the vile hatefilled attacks and accusations, i supported and voted for Obama. I'm not a racist and have never been one.

    Please stop with that bullshit. Its not true and its nothing less than a smear job. You constantly post about personal attacks and how people shouldn't put word into your mouth and yet, you do both at an extremely high rate.

  45. JoeC You all have done name calling and cursing. I run this blog the way I wish our government would run our country. I do wish you all would not call names and attack one another but you are all adults here and no one is getting hurt. I have noticed the the liberals can dish it out but they sure can't take it. But isn't that always how it works? So Joe once again you blame religion and the Christian Church because I don't fight your fight for you. Joe I have been called every name in the book on this blog and I don't even erase it. I'm not a dictator and I'm afraid you only see one side of things Joe as you are very sensitive when you are called names. Go ahead and blame God or the Christian Church some more because someone is picking on you. Joe take a deep breath my friend and relax. I know you are mad because the Democrats aren't turning out the way you thought it would. You have to remember that we conservatiuves have been listening to you on the left bitching and attacking for a decade now. You only have heard it for less then 2 years. So Joe why would you blast the "christian church" because you have a problem with John? Did you know there are people that have a bad day at work and when they get home they take it out on their wife,kids or dog. I see why you liberals think the government should take care of you. Because you can't do it yourself. Why don't you two just ignore each other for a while? Try governing yourselves for a change.

  46. I agree with Joe that the left have been using racism as their tactic for smearing the Republicans for a long time. Joe will you promise to call out racism on your own side? John will you promise to call out racism on your side when it happens?
    By the way Joe you were the one that called the Republicans at your Ford plant racist. You have done it as many time to others as you have had it done to you. You were even called out by one of your own coworkers and you got mad and refutted him. If you can't stand being called a racist then stop calling those you appose racist.

  47. i wasn't called out by a co-worker. Whomever that was isn't a co-worker. He could be anyone? there is simply no truth to any rumor, post, suggestion etc. that i am a bigot. there's not one person who knows me who would think that. There is nothing i have done or said that would led people to believe that about me.

    As for calling the republicans i know at work bigots, i am speaking about people i work very closely with and have said such bigotted things that there is no other choice but to be honest about them.

    chris, i don't want you to remove his post, i want you to do what i do with Bruce, not support him when he is wrong. You, Al and others will just let his obvious double standards go when he posts them.

    And as far as taking it, you have to admit three or four short posts in a row of nothing but accussations of racism, being the biggest racist, etc, is overboard. nothing but attacks there.

    18 January, 2010 12:32
    18 January, 2010 12:37
    18 January, 2010 12:38

    Read those posts. are they anything other than attacks. they amount to nothing more than a chance to call me names and accuse me of things he has no evidence for.

    As for calling those a racist i think are guilty of honest racism, you bet. I have done it in the past. i told you i wouldn't vote for Byrd due to his past if he were in my state. I'm also against race-baiting and willing to call out those that do it on both sides, like Rush, Rev Al., Jesse and others.

  48. Well Joey, I was going to apologize for calling you racist, but then I come across this post by you: "Hey, be happy, do a jig, kill a muslim, discriminate against a black man, whatever it is you guys do for fun when you think things are all going your way." That's when I realized that the only thing I need to apologize for is having a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

    You are an ugly little man Joey. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Joey, quit bitching. You never castigated any LIEberal for anything they said on this blog. Get down off your cross Joey. And you ALWAYS start your bullshit hate-rants, every time. Hell, the first time I ever saw you post you introduced your strawman "homo-erotic" bullshit. From the very beginning Joey, you have been nothing but a total dirt-bag with nothing useful to say. Only your little snide remarks and then you run crying.

  49. Let's just take a look at who started what:

    John "All of this ... without the union. ... higher wages, fewer hours, less skill required, affordable product ... without paying for some useless org. to keep the lowlife scum-suckers and cheats in a job that would be better off going to someone who is interested in working for a living?!?!"

    Joey "Then we look into other aspects ... Ford was a known anti-semite and Hitler supporter, having been given the Grand Cross of the Supreme Order of the German Eagle in 1938 ... lets look at your statment that they forced their way in. nothing could be further from the truth. The UAW was not the one using force... (this is a blatant lie by Joey)

    ... So in the end you find his fascination with the Republican party interesting ... i say its par for the rightwing course. He cared little for his workers, humanity and ... Jews, lets not forget about that."

    Right off the bat we see Joey instigating and insinuating that Republicans don't care for humanity or Jews. You start right off classy as all hell Joey!

    John: "Thanks for the information on Ford's anti-semitism ... It is definitely important to remember that nobody is or was perfect and indeed had their flaws ... Robert Byrd, being a member of the KKK ... And that guy never did anything near what Henry Ford did for humanity. THAT is par for the course for Hypocrats. Carter, Jackson, Sharpton, McKinney ... the list goes on and on, and I'm just listing current anti-semites in the Hypocrat party!"

    "... it's Ford's company, Ford can do as he pleases. If people didn't like the arrangement, they can move on down the road. They could even start up their own company and pay their workers whatever they want, and treat them any way they want! LOL ... Joey, when does someone's business and how they run it become anybody's business but the owners?"

    "Aw, the poor union organizers... if the union wasn't forcing their way in, are you telling me that Ford's guys just went over to some union-organizer's houses and attacked them?!?! LOL ... sure, whatever Joey. The fact is, if there was 70% turnover, then people were finding out how bad the conditions were and were free to leave to seek other employment, correct? And if you constantly are training 70% of your workforce, even for their non-skilled jobs, then in short order you will be changing your methods in order to retain those workers. You don't need the friggin' union to do that.

    The perfect union, they never used force?!?!"

    So as we can see, I wasn't rising to your bait Joey, and I presented several points that you refuse to address. What is the union good for? Why didn't people just go work somewhere else? When does a person's business become the business of the workers to where they can dictate how the business is run?!?!

    But no, it's too tough for Joey to answer, so he keeps on with attacking Henry Ford, ignoring the fact that I said it is important to realize that nobody is perfect. That's when you attack me Joey, including these gems

    Joey: "John ... now that you've tried deflection and straw mans can we get BACK TO FORD (emphasis mine). When you went to the home did you find a copy of his book on the shelf, "the International Jew, THE WORLD'S FOREMOST PROBLEM" or just the one about the republican party? (Another classy dig by the inimitable Joey)

    Joey Re: Ford "YOU CAN LOVE THE MAN (again, emphasis mine), he's your type of guy, but not mine.

    This is allllll a product of JOEY stirring the pot. You have no answers to my questions or points, so you have to stir things up and then cry when nobody defends the guy who starts trouble. You are the perfect example of a union thug. Go back to your house of anger and leave the normals in peace. I can have a civil conversation with anyone, but if you start this bullshit up with me I will fight back.


Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.