Re: Spoiled union fat cat thugs kill 2 people!

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Disbelief, Jan 2, 2011.

  1. Disbelief

    Disbelief Guest

    Jane_Galt wrote:
    > http://townhall.com/columnists/KyleOlson/2011/01/01/charge_nyc_union_leader
    > s_with_negligent_homicide
    >
    > Well, it turns out that the slow snow removal process in New York
    > City was the act of childish adults protesting budget cuts.
    >
    > According to the New York Post:
    >
    > "[Unionized city workers] sent a message to the rest of the city
    > that these particular labor issues are more important," said City
    > Councilman Dan Halloran (R-Queens), who was visited yesterday by a
    > group of guilt-ridden sanitation workers who confessed the shameless
    > plot.
    >
    > On Wednesday, MYFOXNY.com reported that two people died, including a
    > new born baby, because emergency crews couldn’t navigate the unplowed
    > streets.
    >
    > Plain and simple: the union leaders who called for the job action
    > should be charged with negligent homicide. Let them prove that their
    > actions did not result in the unfortunate deaths of these New Yorkers.
    >
    > For too long, Big Labor has been allowed to hold taxpayers hostage in
    > order to get their way at the bargaining table. And this time, their
    > utter selfishness may have contributed to the deaths of two innocent
    > people.
    >
    > Jeopardizing the health and safety of innocent New Yorkers in order
    > to make a cheap political statement is reprehensible, and must be
    > denounced in the strongest possible terms.
    >
    > New York citizens need to know if the willful inaction of municipal
    > employees contributed to nine-hour wait for emergency crews that
    > tragically resulted in the death of a newborn child.
    >
    > This is America – such behavior cannot be acceptable.
    >
    > Or are we turning into Germany and France and willing to sit idly by
    > as the actions of Big Labor result in death and chaos?


    And now you know what happens if you choose to upset the public workers who
    help unappreciative fat yanks to move around in all weather conditions.

    Give 'em the cash and/or the conditions they want - or get off your fat
    "fanny" and go do the job yourself for their pay, the exercise will also
    make you lose some of that fat from your spare tyres.

    I betcha you won't get your hands dirty though?
     
    Disbelief, Jan 2, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jane_Galt <> pinched out a steaming pile
    of<Xns9E61D684D2629JaneGaltthegulchxyz@216.196.97.142>:

    >"Disbelief" <disbelief@diilly-daally....invalid.com> wrote :
    >
    >> Jane_Galt wrote:
    >>>

    http://townhall.com/columnists/KyleOlson/2011/01/01/charge_nyc_union_le
    a
    >>> der s_with_negligent_homicide
    >>>
    >>> Well, it turns out that the slow snow removal process in New York
    >>> City was the act of childish adults protesting budget cuts.
    >>>
    >>> According to the New York Post:
    >>>
    >>> "[Unionized city workers] sent a message to the rest of the city
    >>> that these particular labor issues are more important," said City
    >>> Councilman Dan Halloran (R-Queens), who was visited yesterday by a
    >>> group of guilt-ridden sanitation workers who confessed the

    shameless
    >>> plot.
    >>>
    >>> On Wednesday, MYFOXNY.com reported that two people died, including

    a
    >>> new born baby, because emergency crews couldn’t navigate the

    unplowed
    >>> streets.
    >>>
    >>> Plain and simple: the union leaders who called for the job action
    >>> should be charged with negligent homicide. Let them prove that

    their
    >>> actions did not result in the unfortunate deaths of these New

    Yorkers.
    >>>
    >>> For too long, Big Labor has been allowed to hold taxpayers hostage

    in
    >>> order to get their way at the bargaining table. And this time,

    their
    >>> utter selfishness may have contributed to the deaths of two

    innocent
    >>> people.
    >>>
    >>> Jeopardizing the health and safety of innocent New Yorkers in order
    >>> to make a cheap political statement is reprehensible, and must be
    >>> denounced in the strongest possible terms.
    >>>
    >>> New York citizens need to know if the willful inaction of municipal
    >>> employees contributed to nine-hour wait for emergency crews that
    >>> tragically resulted in the death of a newborn child.
    >>>
    >>> This is America – such behavior cannot be acceptable.
    >>>
    >>> Or are we turning into Germany and France and willing to sit idly

    by
    >>> as the actions of Big Labor result in death and chaos?

    >>
    >> And now you know what happens if you choose to upset the public

    workers
    >> who help unappreciative fat yanks to move around in all weather
    >> conditions.
    >>
    >> Give 'em the cash and/or the conditions they want - or get off your

    fat
    >> "fanny" and go do the job yourself for their pay, the exercise will

    also
    >> make you lose some of that fat from your spare tyres.
    >>
    >> I betcha you won't get your hands dirty though?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Unions should be ban<SLAP>


    Unions created the Middle Class for america, you ignorant fascist
    piglet.

    ^_^

    --
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COaoYqkpkUA
    cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
    _____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
    / __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
    _\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
    /___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
     
    §ñühw¤£f, Jan 3, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Disbelief

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 22:05:16 -0600, Jane_Galt wrote:

    > Unions should be banned from government and busted from the private
    > sector.


    Hell, why not just go back to indentured servitude and sending seven-year-
    olds up fucking chimneys?



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 3, 2011
    #3
  4. Disbelief

    Aardvark Guest

    On Mon, 03 Jan 2011 08:48:02 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:

    > In message <bjkUo.26430$2>, Aardvark pondered the
    > following:
    >> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 22:05:16 -0600, Jane_Galt wrote:
    >>
    >> > Unions should be banned from government and busted from the private
    >> > sector.

    >>
    >> Hell, why not just go back to indentured servitude and sending
    >> seven-year- olds up fucking chimneys?
    >>

    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour
    >
    > During the Industrial Revolution, children as young as four were
    > employed in production factories with dangerous, and often fatal,
    > working conditions.[5] Based on this understanding of the use of
    > children as laborers, it is now considered by wealthy countries to be a
    > human rights violation, and is outlawed, while some poorer countries may
    > allow or tolerate child labor. Child labor can also be defined as the
    > full-time employment of children who are under a minimum legal age.
    > Poverty concerns millions,and affects billions. The Victorian era became
    > notorious for employing young children in factories and mines and as
    > chimney sweeps.[6] Child labor played an important role in the
    > Industrial Revolution from its outset, often brought about by economic
    > hardship, Charles Dickens for example worked at the age of 12 in a
    > blacking factory, with his family in debtor's prison. The children of
    > the poor were expected to help towards the family budget, often working
    > long hours in dangerous jobs for low pay,[7] earning 10-20% of an adult
    > male's wage. In England and Scotland in 1788, two-thirds of the workers
    > in 143 water-powered cotton mills were described as children.[8] In
    > 19th-century Great Britain, one-third of poor families were without a
    > breadwinner, as a result of death or abandonment, obliging many children
    > to work from a young age.


    Sounds like a randian heaven, eh?



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 3, 2011
    #4
  5. Disbelief

    Aardvark Guest

    On Mon, 03 Jan 2011 16:45:37 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:

    > Aardvark wrote:
    >> On Mon, 03 Jan 2011 08:48:02 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>
    >>> In message <bjkUo.26430$2>, Aardvark pondered

    >> the
    >>> following:
    >>>> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 22:05:16 -0600, Jane_Galt wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> > Unions should be banned from government and busted from the

    >> private
    >>>> > sector.
    >>>>
    >>>> Hell, why not just go back to indentured servitude and sending
    >>>> seven-year- olds up fucking chimneys?
    >>>>
    >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour
    >>>
    >>> During the Industrial Revolution, children as young as four were
    >>> employed in production factories with dangerous, and often fatal,
    >>> working conditions.[5] Based on this understanding of the use of
    >>> children as laborers, it is now considered by wealthy countries to

    >> be a
    >>> human rights violation, and is outlawed, while some poorer countries

    >> may
    >>> allow or tolerate child labor. Child labor can also be defined as

    >> the
    >>> full-time employment of children who are under a minimum legal age.
    >>> Poverty concerns millions,and affects billions. The Victorian era

    >> became
    >>> notorious for employing young children in factories and mines and as
    >>> chimney sweeps.[6] Child labor played an important role in the
    >>> Industrial Revolution from its outset, often brought about by

    >> economic
    >>> hardship, Charles Dickens for example worked at the age of 12 in a
    >>> blacking factory, with his family in debtor's prison. The children

    >> of
    >>> the poor were expected to help towards the family budget, often

    >> working
    >>> long hours in dangerous jobs for low pay,[7] earning 10-20% of an

    >> adult
    >>> male's wage. In England and Scotland in 1788, two-thirds of the

    >> workers
    >>> in 143 water-powered cotton mills were described as children.[8] In
    >>> 19th-century Great Britain, one-third of poor families were without

    >> a
    >>> breadwinner, as a result of death or abandonment, obliging many

    >> children
    >>> to work from a young age.

    >>
    >> Sounds like a randian heaven, eh?
    >>

    > Found a good article that explains the randian mindset:
    > http://ltsaloon.org/archives/7566
    >
    > How the rich think of themselves...


    So truthful, it's frightening. Bookmarked. Cheers.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 4, 2011
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Maggie

    MCNGP Thugs

    Maggie, Jul 23, 2004, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    72
    Views:
    2,306
    TechGeekPro
    Jul 26, 2004
  2. Andre Da Costa [Extended64]

    Review: Acer Ferrari 4005 spoiled by unnecessary stickers

    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Nov 20, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    940
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Nov 20, 2005
  3. Evil Bastard

    spoiled by 2Mb/s UBS

    Evil Bastard, Oct 5, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    652
    ~misfit~
    Oct 7, 2005
  4. Peter

    Re: Fat lenses can be fat targets

    Peter, Jul 3, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    589
    David Kerber
    Aug 10, 2010
  5. Robert Coe

    Re: Fat lenses can be fat targets

    Robert Coe, Jul 4, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    447
    John McWilliams
    Jul 4, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page