Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Nonsense. Unions haven't bashed people over the heads with violence for decades.
You falsely characterizing the current crop of Wisconsin school teachers, firefighters and police as physically violent is purposely disingenuous and nasty on your part.
Or you just don't know what "thugs" really means when you use the term "union thugs"?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Yes - those people could be called union "thugs", during that action, couldn't they?
But what does that have to do with non-violent Wisconsin teachers, firefighters and police men?
Nothing.
I suppose the point that I was making, that unions are no longer rooted in violence and intimidation, was simply too nuanced for you to grasp? Or, because one union in one action in 2011 was violent, you want to use that to disprove the simple truth that unions today are not violent?
|
The Queen of changing parameters. You said plainly that Unions have not bashed people over the heads with violence for decades. That is a patently false statement. You then proceeded to unfairly attack another poster for even suggesting Unions use thug tactics to accomplish their goals.
I suppose as usual you read only the part you want but ignore the inconvenient truth, the same game plan as your beloved President. 9,000 reported acts of violence since 1975 is no small number particularly when the actual number is over 10 times that. Indeed, one violent act is intolerable IMO. You never read about it because it is ignored by the liberal media that you swear by.
Here is an example of what happens when someone tries to hire non-union workers.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/nasty...ry?id=14572790
Union's haven't bashed people over the heads with violence for decades? Maybe in the United Fantasyland of Riot, but in the United States of America the Union tactic of using violence and destruction of property to send their message is alive and well.