ACORN Sting Operatives Pose with White Supremacist
Charles Johnson Politics • Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 9:24 am PST • Views: 241
White supremacist blogger Robert Stacy McCain continues to be welcomed in Republican circles; here he is posing at the American Spectator dinner with the two videographers who filmed the ACORN sting tapes: An O’Keefe/Giles Victory Lap.
Comments do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.
He's just like that little creep Kyle Bristow, but much less honest. Pols need to have their folks watching out for this guy wanting photo ops, one day that's going to be totally damning. It's probably not now, but not far from now either.
What happened to Stacy's eyebrows? Singed off in the flame of truth?
I can see how that chick made a convincing prostitute for the sting tapes, but the dude? C'mon, how could even the dumbest ACORN worker take him for an actual pimp?
Kid on the right there (youngish fellow) reminds me of the son of a dentist with whom I went to high school. Looks about like what he'd look like if he were a bit taller, had taken to drink, and were particularly pleased with himself.
What happened to Stacy's eyebrows? Singed off in the flame of truth?
I can see how that chick made a convincing prostitute for the sting tapes, but the dude? C'mon, how could even the dumbest ACORN worker take him for an actual pimp?
He bought some clothes at a Dennis Rodman yard sale.
They've threatened to release more tapes just before the 2010 elections if the AG doesn't start an investigation.
In case you were wondering how pure their motives are.
And who's surprised? No one. Question is, though, do they have enough to warrant an AG investigation? Holder appears to have fairly high standards for proceeding with investigations of this class, and it's likely he would find nothing objectionable at all in what ACORN had done.
Because a whole lot of right wing bloggers and politicians DO know about McCain's white supremacist and neo-Confederate opinions, and none of them care.
Because a whole lot of right wing bloggers and politicians DO know about McCain's white supremacist and neo-Confederate opinions, and none of them care.
It would definitely be quite shocking if they did care, and the "pimp" in the duo has an er, interesting history of holding "affirmative action back sales" (where baked good cost different depending on whether you're black or white ha ha ha ha), and also protested lucky charms (because they are offensive to the Irish).
It would definitely be quite shocking if they did care, and the "pimp" in the duo has an er, interesting history of holding "affirmative action back sales" (where baked good cost different depending on whether you're black or white ha ha ha ha), and also protested lucky charms (because they are offensive to the Irish).
A good suit, a nice quiet tie, and a glib and likely demeanor with just a tinge of aristocratic weltschmertz can get anyone in anywhere.
Yeah, but I can't seem to hide my crazy pirate eyes. The bouncers see that and the suit turns into a square-tailed coat with big gold buttons and a brace of pistols sticking out of the pockets. I might as well wear a Jolly Roger pin.
Yeah, but I can't seem to hide my crazy pirate eyes. The bouncers see that and the suit turns into a square-tailed coat with big gold buttons and a brace of pistols sticking out of the pockets. I might as well wear a Jolly Roger pin.
Trick with those is to get a good pair of glasses. Ya got the pirate eyes, so ya wanna wear the horn-rimmed spectacles, not the plastic frames but the real black buffalo horn ones. The eyes immediately lose their crazed and piratical character.
Me? I've got shifty little beady eyes. So, I go with the smallish round spec's with silver frames.
Trick with those is to get a good pair of glasses. Ya got the pirate eyes, so ya wanna wear the horn-rimmed spectacles, not the plastic frames but the real black buffalo horn ones. The eyes immediately lose their crazed and piratical character.
Me? I've got shifty little beady eyes. So, I go with the smallish round spec's with silver frames.
I've yet to have a passport where I didn't look like a gun runner. I'm not a tough guy, I just look like one when I don't smile. It's cool tho, I love repacking my bags every time I go through customs.
Well, the 'stingers' are not proceeding in any way that would be in the least bit useful to a criminal prosecution. They are themselves breaking the law when they do their 'sting', at least in California.
Well, the 'stingers' are not proceeding in any way that would be in the least bit useful to a criminal prosecution. They are themselves breaking the law when they do their 'sting', at least in California.
Didn't Jerry Brown do the same thing, or am I remembering something else?
They've threatened to release more tapes just before the 2010 elections if the AG doesn't start an investigation.
So they are trying to blackmail the Attorney General of the United States?
(btw, I do think ACORN should be investigated for whatever laws they may have broken, just prefer the outrage dial be turned down a bit from the right)
See, now look. The dentist's son on the right of the picture is committing one of the most footling errors. His pocket square matches his tie. Makes him look even more foolish than otherwise he might have. Probably came with the tie, which is a dead giveaway that that's not the tie you want, by the way. Shoulda been a simple white square, folded into a neat rectangle protruding not more than about a half inch (if that) over the top of the pocket.
Knot on the tie is all wrong - probably the same knot he used on the tie at his first frat mixer.
Shirt's got the oxford collar, which is OK with the sports coat, but a no-no with a suit. Stripes on the shirt & a patterned tie probably don't work in this case - too many angles.
Kid's a train-wreck right outta the box, and that's without knowing anything about him or what he stands for. If he can't even project the image of importance and seriousness, how the hell can he expect to be taken seriously? This little thing (his sartorial foul-ups) shows me that he's got no manager or minder to keep RSM et al away. He'll screw up royally. Just wait.
Didn't Jerry Brown do the same thing, or am I remembering something else?
Well, recording someone without revealing that you're recording them is criminal in Cali-- I forget if consent is necessary, but you have to state that you're recording them. I don't follow the Brown Rice Golden Boy's doings all that carefully, so I have no clue if Brown did or not.
It just reinforces this idea that they're not about ideas but rather about take-downs. It's a society of who can we defeat not how can we do it better.
Dammit, there was a time when our politicians and parties fought over who had the better idea. Now it's a game over who can force the other team to accomplish the least.
I think it may be a chicken/egg thing... they were unknown before the ACORN thing, and now they are being welcomed by those who would find their work uhhh, useful.
Thing is, if the group you're up against is half way intelligent than racial profiling just wont work. Like usual, Israel learned this the hard way decades ago in their own WoT, so I'll just link accordingly:
As pictured, I see you're wearing a plain white crew-necked undershirt - very much the correct and appropriate undergarment - with a long-sleeved, shirt. Collar is open, but I am unable to determine collar type. From what I can discern of the color of the shirt, it appears to be a solid color of some tightly-woven spun material.
From lighting and the position of your hand, I can tell that you have just awakened in a room you've never seen before and are listening to a recording telling you that the key to the safe that contains the antidote is implanted in one of four surgical wounds on your back, that there is a grapefruit spoon on the table before you, and that you have ten minutes before the poison takes effect.
I think it may be a chicken/egg thing... they were unknown before the ACORN thing, and now they are being welcomed by those who would find their work uhhh, useful.
O'Keefe wasn't exactly an unknown. He exposed what some would call rank racism at Planned Parenthood about three years ago.
If only you had known my collar type you would have known that there are actually 5 surgical wounds in my back! But everything else was pretty dead-on.
Ctrl + a on my photo to see my collar type.
While this is unsettling and I don't think McCain should be getting into any GOP events, I don't think this necessarily reflects bad on these two.
There was no doubt quite a line of people waiting to get their picture taken with this pair, and posing for a picture at events like this is just sort of normal.
As many of you will be aware, a large number of emails from the University of East Anglia webmail server were hacked recently (Despite some confusion generated by Anthony Watts, this has absolutely nothing to do with the Hadley Centre which is a completely separate institution). As people are also no doubt aware the breaking into of computers and releasing private information is illegal, and regardless of how they were obtained, posting private correspondence without permission is unethical. We therefore aren’t going to post any of the emails here. We were made aware of the existence of this archive last Tuesday morning when the hackers attempted to upload it to RealClimate, and we notified CRU of their possible security breach later that day.
Nonetheless, these emails (a presumably careful selection of (possibly edited?) correspondence dating back to 1996 and as recently as Nov 12) are being widely circulated, and therefore require some comment. Some of them involve people here (and the archive includes the first RealClimate email we ever sent out to colleagues) and include discussions we’ve had with the CRU folk on topics related to the surface temperature record and some paleo-related issues, mainly to ensure that posting were accurate.
Since emails are normally intended to be private, people writing them are, shall we say, somewhat freer in expressing themselves than they would in a public statement. For instance, we are sure it comes as no shock to know that many scientists do not hold Steve McIntyre in high regard. Nor that a large group of them thought that the Soon and Baliunas (2003), Douglass et al (2008) or McClean et al (2009) papers were not very good (to say the least) and should not have been published. These sentiments have been made abundantly clear in the literature (though possibly less bluntly).
More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the hackers also being in on the plot though.
What happened to Stacy's eyebrows? Singed off in the flame of truth?
I can see how that chick made a convincing prostitute for the sting tapes, but the dude? C'mon, how could even the dumbest ACORN worker take him for an actual pimp?
I've seen pictures of those two in their get-ups. No one who works in an urban area thought they were genuine. I really can't speak to what was going on there, but no one thought they were for real.
I've seen pictures of those two in their get-ups. No one who works in an urban area thought they were genuine. I really can't speak to what was going on there, but no one thought they were for real.
I wonder if the ACORN people thought they were on Candid Camera and just played along...
Does this mean he cares deeply about exposing racism among lefties, but either has no clue or does not care about racism among the righties?
Not necessarily. We don't know what he knows about McCain. As astronmr noted in No. 77, these kinds of photographs are par for the course at such gatherings.
Not necessarily. We don't know what he knows about McCain. As astronmr noted in No. 77, these kinds of photographs are par for the course at such gatherings.
And it's a lot harder to discern Stacy's agenda since he shaved off the Hitler mustache.
I've seen pictures of those two in their get-ups. No one who works in an urban area thought they were genuine. I really can't speak to what was going on there, but no one thought they were for real.
It would definitely be quite shocking if they did care, and the "pimp" in the duo has an er, interesting history of holding "affirmative action back sales" (where baked good cost different depending on whether you're black or white ha ha ha ha), and also protested lucky charms (because they are offensive to the Irish).
When the Whig party gets around to thinking about them?
The Party that is and always will be about the future. I can't even get detailed policy answers from their biggest supporter on LGF. Doesn't speak much to the party. Are they asking me to go from one clueless party to another clueless party?
So if you were hanging out at a party, were talking to some guy you just met, and a cameraman came by and said, "Smile!", what would you do?
Hard to say. I wouldn't be at a party put on by an organization that publishes Michelle Malkin, Ben Stein, Steve Sailer, Kathy Shaidle, and RS McCain. I would think somebody who cares deeply about racism would also not be there. Perhaps that is not an accurate description of Mr. O'Keefe.
This reads like Leonidas killing the messager of the Persians.
These two kids exposed signifant corruption with Acorn least we forget in our efforts to tarnish them.
Doesn't matter now. They brush up against RSM, appeared in a photo op with him. This makes anything they did in the past totally worthless and now one should suspect any of their motives. It is evident that there is some hidden racist reasons behind all their actions and we must distance ourselves from such scofflaws.
Not if you don't want to explain it. I can't force you. Other than that, I still wonder why. Sorry, I thought you were "conversing" with us, not talking to yourself.
Not if you don't want to explain it. I can't force you. Other than that, I still wonder why. Sorry, I thought you were "conversing" with us, not talking to yourself.
Not if you don't want to explain it. I can't force you. Other than that, I still wonder why. Sorry, I thought you were "conversing" with us, not talking to yourself.
I guess I thought it was self-explanatory. Louis Farrakhan is, well, not the kind of guy most people would want to be associated with. Still, though, I would imagine he's been around, especially in liberal circles.
California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989).
If you are operating in California, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording any conversation that common sense tells you might be "private" or "confidential." In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the California wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party. See Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
Consult The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press's Can We Tape?: California for more information on California wiretapping law.
Doesn't matter now. They brush up against RSM, appeared in a photo op with him. This makes anything they did in the past totally worthless and now one should suspect any of their motives. It is evident that there is some hidden racist reasons behind all their actions and we must distance ourselves from such scofflaws.
Dirty people... ewww.
I don't care that they were posing with McCain, unless they actually like him. I care that they're trashy, incredibly trashy, people.
I guess I thought it was self-explanatory. Louis Farrakhan is, well, not the kind of guy most people would want to be associated with. Still, though, I would imagine he's been around, especially in liberal circles.
And if Pelosi was at a party that he was at, that makes Pelosi what?
California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989).
If you are operating in California, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording any conversation that common sense tells you might be "private" or "confidential." In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the California wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party. See Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
Consult The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press's Can We Tape?: California for more information on California wiretapping law.
California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. [...]
Same in Maryland. So the Baltimore tape is pretty much worthless for the prosecution.
I WON-der how he got the idea to 'take on' Planned Parenthood. I mean, I wake up every goddamn morning and think "Hey, let me see if I can get the employees of a major women's health organization to say racist stuff on the phone. I bet I can!"
Same in Maryland. So the Baltimore tape is pretty much worthless for the prosecution.
California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation.
In the Baltimore video the doors were open and other people were in and out of the room. It was not considered a private conversation because of that IIRC. I don't know if that applies in California.
California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation.
In the Baltimore video the doors were open and other people were in and out of the room. It was not considered a private conversation because of that IIRC. I don't know if that applies in California.
The point is, they haven't been charged. If they had a case against them, they would have been charged.
I WON-der how he got the idea to 'take on' Planned Parenthood. I mean, I wake up every goddamn morning and think "Hey, let me see if I can get the employees of a major women's health organization to say racist stuff on the phone. I bet I can!"
The "affirmative action bakesale" shtick has been done by CRNC school groups. I'll check into the College Republicans' website, but it's probably down by now.
It was never their intent for the recordings to be used in court, rather to turn over the log and expose the roaches. And very effective. The real crime will be if Acorn does not get investigated as a result.
People who have committed crimes haven't done anything wrong if they're not charged with anything?
Sorry, our coffee-machine is fritzed, if this is just me not catching sarcasm.
No, this is you. You see, in this country, one is innocent until charged and proven guilty. Sorry, I can't change that, sorry if you don't like it. These two are not guilty of anything.
I don't know about the Baltimore one, but in California, that just generally extends the 'parties' rather than making it non-public. For example, recording private information inside a corporation is illegal, no matter how many people are around when you do it.
I don't know much beyond California laws on the subject, but I have not heard anything from any law enforcement agency that indicated the tapes would be in any way useful. Have you?
I WON-der how he got the idea to 'take on' Planned Parenthood. I mean, I wake up every goddamn morning and think "Hey, let me see if I can get the employees of a major women's health organization to say racist stuff on the phone. I bet I can!"
Young, dumb and full of all kinds of whacky notions? Have you read his Wiki? He's got a lot on the ball.
In the Baltimore video the doors were open and other people were in and out of the room. It was not considered a private conversation because of that IIRC. I don't know if that applies in California.
I don't know about that, but I do wonder how MSM reporters do their stings without running afoul of such laws. Are there exceptions for news organizations? And if so, how does one draw the line as to who qualifies for that protection.
Lawhawk? Anyone? I really don't know, and I'm not being snarky at all for the duration of this post.
I don't think the point is necessarily to say that these two ACORN-baiting idiots are white supremacists. The photo merely illustrates a larger point that espousing Neo-Nazi viewpoints doesn't get you ostracized from the elite circles of today's GOP, it gets you invited to their cocktail parties.
The "affirmative action bakesale" shtick has been done by CRNC school groups. I'll check into the College Republicans' website, but it's probably down by now.
I don't know about the Baltimore one, but in California, that just generally extends the 'parties' rather than making it non-public. For example, recording private information inside a corporation is illegal, no matter how many people are around when you do it.
I don't know much beyond California laws on the subject, but I have not heard anything from any law enforcement agency that indicated the tapes would be in any way useful. Have you?
I think it's still an on going investigation. I am no law expert. You might want to ask a lizard lawyer.
I don't think the point is necessarily to say that these two ACORN-baiting idiots are white supremacists. The photo merely illustrates a larger point that espousing Neo-Nazi viewpoints doesn't get you ostracized from the elite circles of today's GOP, it gets you invited to their cocktail parties.
They were forced to attend. You know how that can be such a problem.
It was never their intent for the recordings to be used in court, rather to turn over the log and expose the roaches. And very effective. The real crime will be if Acorn does not get investigated as a result.
Someone yesterday referred to "people" as roaches.
Well, as a kneejerk reaction, sure I do. It also matters how you go about reducing taxation-- like, if you write legislation that's so broad that it turns out it would disqualify Boeing from receiving government contracts.
Well, that's legally true, sure. But it doesn't apply to private citizens. I can say that KSM is guilty of many crimes, without proof, and there's nothing 'wrong' with me doing so-- it just means I'm convinced that he's committed them.
They were forced to attend. You know how that can be such a problem.
You STILL can't get over your seething hatred for the enforcement of labor laws? Really? You still can't wrap your head around the fact that paying workers illegal wages by forcing them to work as "independent contractors" is wrong? And that it is not the responsibility of the worker to QUIT and LOSE THEIR JOB COMPLETELY to rectify the illegal conduct.
The "affirmative action bakesale" shtick has been done by CRNC school groups. I'll check into the College Republicans' website, but it's probably down by now.
Here's one case. I think it was considered cute for a while.
Well, as a kneejerk reaction, sure I do. It also matters how you go about reducing taxation-- like, if you write legislation that's so broad that it turns out it would disqualify Boeing from receiving government contracts.
Well, that's legally true, sure. But it doesn't apply to private citizens. I can say that KSM is guilty of many crimes, without proof, and there's nothing 'wrong' with me doing so-- it just means I'm convinced that he's committed them.
You STILL can't get over your seething hatred for the enforcement of labor laws? Really? You still can't wrap your head around the fact that paying workers illegal wages by forcing them to work as "independent contractors" is wrong? And that it is not the responsibility of the worker to QUIT and LOSE THEIR JOB COMPLETELY to rectify the illegal conduct.
You still can't get over the fact that no one forced you to sign the contract and take the job. You are implicit in their "crime." Stop whining.
Bingo. But Obicut wants to pass the blame on two people who where not charged of anything. Typical liberal.
Oooh, us typical liberals. We're so silly.
I don't think those 'stings' do anything in the least bit useful. I don't think the anti-ACORN legislation was in the least bit good, and will have unintended negative consequences. It's also going to cost us taxpayers a shitload of money, since it may be a bill of attainder.
If you seriously consider Acorn a major problem, then, well, have fun with that.
You still can't get over the fact that no one forced you to sign the contract and take the job. You are implicit in their "crime." Stop whining.
I suppose it's also a woman's fault when her husband beats the shit out of her too? She should have learned to get out of that situation before she got smacked!
You STILL can't get over your seething hatred for the enforcement of labor laws? Really? You still can't wrap your head around the fact that paying workers illegal wages by forcing them to work as "independent contractors" is wrong? And that it is not the responsibility of the worker to QUIT and LOSE THEIR JOB COMPLETELY to rectify the illegal conduct.
Oh not this again
Let me ask you, what type of gun did they have each morning when they showed up at your residence to "FORCE" you to go to work?
Did they have a black sedan with tinted windows?
Were there 2 or 3 men?
Black overcoats?? Sunglasses?? Did they put soemthing around your mouth to muffle your screams of protest?
I don't think those 'stings' do anything in the least bit useful. I don't think the anti-ACORN legislation was in the least bit good, and will have unintended negative consequences. It's also going to cost us taxpayers a shitload of money, since it may be a bill of attainder.
If you seriously consider Acorn a major problem, then, well, have fun with that.
It took you that many comments to finally realize the truth. Glad you finally came around. Acorn IS a major problem. And did you notice all that bipartisan outrage in Washington? Both sides certainly could figure out when it was time to get off the ACORN boat. Are you?
I suppose it's also a woman's fault when her husband beats the shit out of her too? She should have learned to get out of that situation before she got smacked!
Straw man... I never have seen anyone in my whole like that sign an employment contract on their own, and now blame it on everyone but themselves. Whine, whine, whine...
Nice job putting words in Walter's mouth, asshole.
Explain to me how the two situations are any different? Why should a worker be responsible for the enforcement of labor laws any more than a woman should be responsible for the enforcement of domestic abuse laws. Walter's point is exactly that. You have been treated illegally, but its YOUR FAULT for putting up with it.
If you seriously consider Acorn a major problem, then, well, have fun with that.
Our tax dollars funding an organization that got caught on camera helping a couple get a loan to start a whorehouse with under aged children? Your damn right I consider ACORN a major problem.
No, that was address to Obdicut. Reading is comprehension. Try it.
Too bad your logical is invalidated when you put "typical liberal" at the end then try to pretend you didn't. Typical Walter. Owning up to your own bullshit. Try it.
Explain to me how the two situations are any different? Why should a worker be responsible for the enforcement of labor laws any more than a woman should be responsible for the enforcement of domestic abuse laws. Walter's point is exactly that. You have been treated illegally, but its YOUR FAULT for putting up with it.
Wow... that was like pulling teeth. Congratulations, you finally understand.
I've refered to my X as a "motherfucker". Does that mean I think he just that?
I have the best line ever delivered to a mother in law, but if I tell it here I might get a time-out and -200 karma. My father-in-law thought it was funny tho, i thought she was going to have a coronary on me.
Too bad your logical is invalidated when you put "typical liberal" at the end then try to pretend you didn't. Typical Walter. Owning up to your own bullshit. Try it.
Yawn. Just for you, I will back down from my point, yes, I was putting all liberals under the same rubric... and on that point, you're another typical liberal.
I have the best line ever delivered to a mother in law, but if I tell it here I might get a time-out and -200 karma. My father-in-law thought it was funny tho, i thought she was going to have a coronary on me.
The tapes are not a legal accusation or a legal judgement. If we're following Walter's line of reasoning, no crime has been committed.
/oh, fer the love of God!
I didn't use the word legal. I accuse bin laden of being an asshole, and judge him accordingly. I accuse Acorn of being corrupt and judge them accordingly, I have seen it with my own eyes.
Defend them all you want. They were exposed to the world as being corrupt.
I don't want those individuals charged with a crime, I want Acorn to clean its act up. And until they do, not get a time of tax payer money.
Straw man... I never have seen anyone in my whole like that sign an employment contract on their own, and now blame it on everyone but themselves. Whine, whine, whine...
Clearly you have never tried to get a job in New York City. That's wonderful that you live in the middle of fucking nowhere in Colorado, and can write plays that generate enough income to sustain yourself. In the real world, where the majority of Americans live, things can be a bit different.
If you are looking for a job in the television industry in New York, your options are either 1) accept the illegal contract 2) lose the job
That's all well and good that you can sit on your morality high-horse and play with hypothetical "don't sign the contract" situations. But that's not how it happens in real life. The contracts are illegal, and there are many, many, many workers who accept those contracts because the choice is between illegal contract or unemployment. How as a conservative can you oppose the enforcement of an EXISTING law?
I didn't use the word legal. I accuse bin laden of being an asshole, and judge him accordingly. I accuse Acorn of being corrupt and judge them accordingly, I have seen it with my own eyes.
Defend them all you want. They were exposed to the world as being corrupt.
I don't want those individuals charged with a crime, I want Acorn to clean its act up. And until they do, not get a time of tax payer money.
With the ammount of (our) money ACORN is dealing with I would like to see a bit more than just a cleaning up of the act, but that's just me.
Oh, my stars. You are so full of shit that it would take a month of Sundays to clear you out.
Now, I'm gonna' step back before I lose my cool.
You should step back. Considering you just pile onto other people's debates, jump in and hurl ad-hominem attacks, without actually adding anything substantive at all. Go cool off and let the adults talk this one out.
Clearly you have never tried to get a job in New York City. That's wonderful that you live in the middle of fucking nowhere in Colorado, and can write plays that generate enough income to sustain yourself. In the real world, where the majority of Americans live, things can be a bit different.
If you are looking for a job in the television industry in New York, your options are either 1) accept the illegal contract 2) lose the job
That's all well and good that you can sit on your morality high-horse and play with hypothetical "don't sign the contract" situations. But that's not how it happens in real life. The contracts are illegal, and there are many, many, many workers who accept those contracts because the choice is between illegal contract or unemployment. How as a conservative can you oppose the enforcement of an EXISTING law?
No, YOU can sit on your lack or any moral high ground. Don't blame that on CBS or me. You signed the contract.
And you don't know shit about my employment situation. I've gone from 82 thousand a year five years ago to about 8 thousand a year, and you don't see me whining.
I take care of myself without blaming life on everyone else.
In the real world, where the majority of Americans live, things can be a bit different.
Can we please stop declaring that each other do or do not live in the real world? He lives in the real world. So do you. It's not an effective argument.
You should step back. Considering you just pile onto other people's debates, jump in and hurl ad-hominem attacks, without actually adding anything substantive at all. Go cool off and let the adults talk this one out.
You were connecting dots that are so far apart, not only are they not on the same page, they aren't in the same book. I would suggest that you back off too, the condescension if nothing else.
They were tried in the court of public opinion and executed by a pusillanimous Congress currying favor with same.
Far easier than going after actual criminals on, say, Wall Street.
Oh I don't know, maybe poetic justice in the end, clearly Acorn does not deserve tax payer money, as seen by all. And remember, it was two young adults who exposed them. It is those two whom I am trying to defend.
Had they gotten some mud on wall steet, would you and others here be throwing them under the bus? I think not. But that they nailed Acorn, an organization in great favor with the left, by all means, go after the messenger.
No, YOU can sit on your lack or any moral high ground. Don't blame that on CBS or me. You signed the contract.
And you don't know shit about my employment situation. I've gone from 82 thousand a year five years ago to about 8 thousand a year, and you don't see me whining.
I take care of myself without blaming life on everyone else.
Like I said before... deal with it.
I did deal with it, by selling my soul and taking a job in finance that pays much, much better. That doesn't change the fact that there are THOUSANDS of people working in those jobs as we speak, because they are attempting to live their life dream of a broadcasting career. Who the fuck are you to say that they deserve to be mistreated illegally by their employer. We are in a recession and employers are taking advantage of peoples desperation by illegally paying them substandard wages. The fact that you have no problem with this is completely indicative of your entire mindset. Basically, a huge middle finger to everyone else besides yourself.
These workers aren't on the government dole. They aren't lazy, unemployed, or asking for a handout. They simply want the FAIR WAGES that they are entitled to by law. Apparently you only support enforcement of the law when it has to do with ACORN, or brown people like Professor Gates.
You were connecting dots that are so far apart, not only are they not on the same page, they aren't in the same book. I would suggest that you back off too, the condescension if nothing else.
Quite frankly I don't think the dots are that far off at all. His entire point is that a person being subjected to illegal treatment should have no legal recourse, and that instead they should simply leave the situation. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
By Walter's logic, if your employer illegally underpays you, it's your responsibility to quit that job. How is that any different than telling a woman who is being mistreated by her spouse that she simply should leave her relationship if she does not wish to be abused further?
If you are actually working in the broadcast industry in NYC I can guarantee you that there is an entire army of illegal "freelance" contractors slaving away for your company as we speak.
You do realize of course that these employers are in a recession too? That most, if not all, are not nearly as profitable as they were just a few short years ago, and are doing what ever they can just to stay open, to employ who they can, at what ever rate they can.
You make it sound like these businesses are reaping in the profits by taking advantage of these poor employees, when in reality, the businesses are desperately trying to stay afloat.
As I am with mine. I have been laying people off and reducing salaries left and right. What? So I waller in money? Shit, open your eyes.
Quite frankly I don't think the dots are that far off at all. His entire point is that a person being subjected to illegal treatment should have no legal recourse, and that instead they should simply leave the situation. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
By Walter's logic, if your employer illegally underpays you, it's your responsibility to quit that job. How is that any different than telling a woman who is being mistreated by her spouse that she simply should leave her relationship if she does not wish to be abused further?
Two weeks ago you said you were "forced" to sign a contract. That's my only issue, and never was there any other issue for me.
You were not forced.
Whine away, I'm going to work... got a show tonight.
Mandy, I was referring to RSM, not O'Keefe. Does this change things?
Endorsing a black guy for Congress or President or whatever doesn't seem to me to be typical behavior for a raving white supremacist. If he really is one, is this a cynical attempt to rehabilitate his image (due to pressure from here?) or if he really ISN"T one (don't ask me) then perhaps he likes the candidate. (For fuck's sake, I don't know- I can't read his fucking mind! )
If you are actually working in the broadcast industry in NYC I can guarantee you that there is an entire army of illegal "freelance" contractors slaving away for your company as we speak.
CNN is a broadcast industry. They aren't based in NYC. Not everything revolves around NYC.
Mandy, I was referring to RSM, not O'Keefe. Does this change things?
Endorsing a black guy for Congress or President or whatever doesn't seem to me to be typical behavior for a raving white supremacist. If he really is one, is this a cynical attempt to rehabilitate his image (due to pressure from here?) or if he really ISN"T one (don't ask me) then perhaps he likes the candidate. (For fuck's sake, I don't know- I can't read his fucking mind! )
You do realize of course that these employers are in a recession too? That most, if not all, are not nearly as profitable as they were just a few short years ago, and are doing what ever they can just to stay open, to employ who they can, at what ever rate they can.
You make it sound like these businesses are reaping in the profits by taking advantage of these poor employees, when in reality, the businesses are desperately trying to stay afloat.
As I am with mine. I have been laying people off and reducing salaries left and right. What? So I waller in money? Shit, open your eyes.
Uh, yes these business are reaping in the profits. The company I worked for specifically was CBS. Sumner Redstone gave himself a fucking $12.3 million dollar salary in 2008. Despite the value of the company itself declining by HALF. It's indefensible.
Uh, yes these business are reaping in the profits. The company I worked for specifically was CBS. Sumner Redstone gave himself a fucking $12.3 million dollar salary in 2008. Despite the value of the company itself declining byHALF. It's indefensible.
CNN is a broadcast industry. They aren't based in NYC. Not everything revolves around NYC.
I've worked IN the broadcast industry IN New York City
(and CNN has a very large bureau there, btw)
((and no,, I don't work "for" CNN, but my company sure does lots of business with them))
Had they gotten some mud on wall steet, would you and others here be throwing them under the bus? I think not. But that they nailed Acorn, an organization in great favor with the left, by all means, go after the messenger.
Had they gotten some dirt on Wall Street, they would immediately have been prosecuted for making private conversations public, they would have been inundated with cease-and-desist letters from $1,500-per-hour lawyers, enough to paper their starter homes with, they would have been taken to the woodshed so fast we never would have heard of them. And if we had heard of them, by some chance, there is no chance Congress would have taken any action against equivalent Wall Street shenanigans, no, not if they had tapes of Goldmine Sacks CEO's offering to buy them both for hard cash and perform home sex-change operations on them without anesthesia just for bloody yucks.
But ACORN, an organization whose main goal is helping poor people (comnists! run! hide! the Reds are comin'!), gets taken down in a New York minute because of these loverly people. No trial, no inquiry, just bam! kill the whole organization based on some illegally obtained tapes.
Uh, yes these business are reaping in the profits. The company I worked for specifically was CBS. Sumner Redstone gave himself a fucking $12.3 million dollar salary in 2008. Despite the value of the company itself declining by HALF. It's indefensible.
Had they gotten some dirt on Wall Street, they would immediately have been prosecuted for making private conversations public, they would have been inundated with cease-and-desist letters from $1,500-per-hour lawyers, enough to paper their starter homes with, they would have been taken to the woodshed so fast we never would have heard of them. And if we had heard of them, by some chance, there is no chance Congress would have taken any action against equivalent Wall Street shenanigans, no, not if they had tapes of Goldmine Sacks CEO's offering to buy them both for hard cash and perform home sex-change operations on them without anesthesia just for bloody yucks.
But ACORN, an organization whose main goal is helping poor people (comnists! run! hide! the Reds are comin'!), gets taken down in a New York minute because of these loverly people. No trial, no inquiry, just bam! kill the whole organization based on some illegally obtained tapes.
They're certainly reaping in enough profits to pay their executives out millions upon millions of dollars. Nowhere did I say that I think they should be wasting money. Paying your employees a fair, legal wage is not optional. It's the fucking law. If there is enough money to pay Redstone $13 million in CASH, there is enough to pay your entry-level workers a fair wage. Christ it pains me to watch plebes defend baseless corporate greed.
No. CNN is not broadcast. Broadcasting means your signal is actually broadcast by an antenna. That means CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox.
SWINGANDAMISS
No Balls ,,, Two Strikes
CNN "broadcasts" via satellite. Their dish farm is located within 4 miles of where I work. From that location the company also broadcasts Headline News, WTBS, TNT and Cartoon Net. They send AND recieve satellite and fiber optic signals worldwide (as does the company I work for)
Hi drcordell. I'm just a bit unclear as to one of your points - I'm not sure what you mean by "illegally underpaying". I think I understand that what you're saying about the contract situation is that the employer is acting in opposition to the IRS rules as to who is defined as a full-time employee, and who is defined as a part-time employee. (Is that correct?)
But on the issue of payment, unless there is a federal statute (e.g. minimum wage for applicable companies) setting wages for the broadcast industry, I'm not sure I understand the idea of illegally underpaying. Isn't it more a "this is what I'm offering" situation?
(Please know I'm not being snarky here - I'm just not sure what you're saying in that regard. Thanks!)
They're certainly reaping in enough profits to pay their executives out millions upon millions of dollars. Nowhere did I say that I think they should be wasting money. Paying your employees a fair, legal wage is not optional. It's the fucking law. If there is enough money to pay Redstone $13 million in CASH, there is enough to pay your entry-level workers a fair wage. Christ it pains me to watch plebes defend baseless corporate greed.
CNN "broadcasts" via satellite. Their dish farm is located within 4 miles of where I work. From that location the company also broadcasts Headline News, WTBS, TNT and Cartoon Net. They send AND recieve satellite and fiber optic signals worldwide (as does the company I work for)
This isn't my own definition here. CNN is not a BROADCAST news network. They are a cable news network. Obviously they are transmitting their signal via satellite, but it's not going DIRECTLY to the end consumer. It's going to another provider, either cable or satellite, who then sends their signal out to consumers.
Semantically you can make the argument that any TV network is technically a broadcaster. But generally the term "broadcast networks" refer to the big three stations that still broadcast OTA using affiliates.
One way to do that would be to hire as salaried and then force them to work way over 40 hours a week. But even that is not illegal, ( I don't think) just unethical if the workers job description is not even slightly managerial or professional.
I'm not whining, I certainly got mine. The difference is it actually concerns me knowing that people are being illegally mistreated, and that the law isn't being properly enforced. I don't want a new law written, I don't want anyone to receive special treatment. I merely find issue with blatantly illegal conduct.
You however don't seem to give a shit. And are more than ready to defend the incompetent executive who received $13 million dollars in cash compensation for driving his company into the ground. Why? I don't know. But statistically I can be fairly certain that yes, you are a plebe. And yes you are defending a fabulously wealthy, failure of an executive for no apparent reason.
One way to do that would be to hire as salaried and then force them to work way over 40 hours a week. But even that is not illegal, ( I don't think) just unethical if the workers job description is not even slightly managerial or professional.
When I managed restaurants I was salary and worked 70 hours a week. But I am in Florida and only know our laws.
Had they gotten some dirt on Wall Street, they would immediately have been prosecuted for making private conversations public, they would have been inundated with cease-and-desist letters from $1,500-per-hour lawyers, enough to paper their starter homes with, they would have been taken to the woodshed so fast we never would have heard of them. And if we had heard of them, by some chance, there is no chance Congress would have taken any action against equivalent Wall Street shenanigans, no, not if they had tapes of Goldmine Sacks CEO's offering to buy them both for hard cash and perform home sex-change operations on them without anesthesia just for bloody yucks.
But ACORN, an organization whose main goal is helping poor people (comnists! run! hide! the Reds are comin'!), gets taken down in a New York minute because of these loverly people. No trial, no inquiry, just bam! kill the whole organization based on some illegally obtained tapes.
In short, it's about what you would expect.
1. Acorn is a bloated, public-teat-sucking corrupt political organization which operates under the cover of working to help the poor.
2. If Acorn was/is being summarily taken down, it is because Obama and the other political Acorn users have been too gutless and opportunistic to stick up for their pet organization...choosing instead to throw it under the bus.
So yes, it IS about what you would expect - from Obama and his ilk.
ACORN helps the needy, so we should ignore any indiscretions.
Corporations rape the workers and should be punished accordingly.
I see clearly.
Point me to exactly where I found any problems with ACORN being punished for their indiscretions? And also point me to where I said that corporations should be punished? Enforcing the bare-bones labor laws that exist in this country is now tantamount to punishment? Ooooh, CBS has to give their full-time workers an option to buy into the overpriced corporate health insurance plan THE HORROR!
Hi Claire! I see your point, but I'm with ya in that it really isn't illegal. I've worked in the defense industry (among others - including television) over the years and all the positions were salaried. LOL! Many times around ten p.m. on a Friday night I wished I was an hourly employee!
This isn't my own definition here. CNN is not a BROADCAST news network. They are a cable news network. Obviously they are transmitting their signal via satellite, but it's not going DIRECTLY to the end consumer. It's going to another provider, either cable or satellite, who then sends their signal out to consumers.
Semantically you can make the argument that any TV network is technically a broadcaster. But generally the term "broadcast networks" refer to the big three stations that still broadcast OTA using affiliates.
SWINGANDAMISS
No BALLS,, Three STRIKES
Sorry, but as you stated it's the local affiliates that broadcast OTA, NOT the "big three 'stations'" (as you erroneously call them). By your matrix, FOX would have to be in the "big three" as their local affiliates also broadcast OTA. Add in UPN, CW, PBS et al as they ALSO broadcast OTA via affiliates
The affiliates GET their newtork programming FROM the "big three stations (sic)" (as well as all the others) via satellite.
I'm not whining, I certainly got mine. The difference is it actually concerns me knowing that people are being illegally mistreated, and that the law isn't being properly enforced. I don't want a new law written, I don't want anyone to receive special treatment. I merely find issue with blatantly illegal conduct.
You however don't seem to give a shit. And are more than ready to defend the incompetent executive who received $13 million dollars in cash compensation for driving his company into the ground. Why? I don't know. But statistically I can be fairly certain that yes, you are a plebe. And yes you are defending a fabulously wealthy, failure of an executive for no apparent reason.
You have reported this "blatantly illegal" conduct to the authorities, yes?
I'm not whining, I certainly got mine. The difference is it actually concerns me knowing that people are being illegally mistreated, and that the law isn't being properly enforced. I don't want a new law written, I don't want anyone to receive special treatment. I merely find issue with blatantly illegal conduct.
You however don't seem to give a shit. And are more than ready to defend the incompetent executive who received $13 million dollars in cash compensation for driving his company into the ground. Why? I don't know. But statistically I can be fairly certain that yes, you are a plebe. And yes you are defending a fabulously wealthy, failure of an executive for no apparent reason.
I never defended the executive? And agree with you on that point. But it has little to do with operations. And don't forget, he negotiated his salary as you did yours. If anything, condem those who negotiated his compensation package.
You miss my point. The company is hurting just like you, and on a much larger scale. The difference is, that if they go under, a LOT of folks are going to be unemployed. Some times, what appears to bad for the employee, is actually saving his job. Some times.
I don't think the point is necessarily to say that these two ACORN-baiting idiots are white supremacists. The photo merely illustrates a larger point that espousing Neo-Nazi viewpoints doesn't get you ostracized from the elite circles of today's GOP, it gets you invited to their cocktail parties.
Hi drcordell. I'm just a bit unclear as to one of your points - I'm not sure what you mean by "illegally underpaying". I think I understand that what you're saying about the contract situation is that the employer is acting in opposition to the IRS rules as to who is defined as a full-time employee, and who is defined as a part-time employee. (Is that correct?)
But on the issue of payment, unless there is a federal statute (e.g. minimum wage for applicable companies) setting wages for the broadcast industry, I'm not sure I understand the idea of illegally underpaying. Isn't it more a "this is what I'm offering" situation?
(Please know I'm not being snarky here - I'm just not sure what you're saying in that regard. Thanks!)
Basically the situation is this. If you want to work at any of the broadcast/tv shops in NYC, the only way to do so is to come on as a "freelancer." Which means that you are scheduled every day, work 40+ (usually +) hours a week, and use company provided video editing and computer equipment to do your job. Despite the fact that "freelance" by legal definition means you don't work regularly scheduled hours, and provide ALL of your own equipment.
This should make you a full-time employee under law, and grants you certain benefits with regards to wages, sick days, health insurance etc. Which all of these companies are loathe to provide.
Thanks! At least I have a sense of the issue that I didn't have before. It does sound like the real issue is the definition of full-time, part-time, freelance, etc. and the provision or not of benefits and hours associated with each category.
Then you've missed a real treat. In order to keep my gigs, I don't bitch about 'em online, on the not-unreasonable theory that those who know the real me would object in strenuous terms with economic consequences.
I have never seen anyone complain so much about their job, and keep it.
I don't work there precisely because of how shitty it was. The fact that I myself found another job doesn't make it any less fucked up that those who still work there are getting shafted. I only worked at CBS right out of college while I was searching for other jobs in a different field. For those who wish to actually build a career in broadcasting, you pretty much have to put up with it for several years until you can beg them to "annoint" you as a proper full-timer.
Thanks! At least I have a sense of the issue that I didn't have before. It does sound like the real issue is the definition of full-time, part-time, freelance, etc. and the provision or not of benefits and hours associated with each category.
Exactly. They basically have an army of full-time workers that they illegally avoid giving benefits to, and paying payroll taxes for, by defining them as "freelance." The joking industry term for it is "permalancer." And that's mostly why I find it so outrageous. Because its so prevalent among these huge media conglomerates and there is absolutely no enforcement of either the tax or labor laws that are being broken.
I'm sure you'll be ready with similar quip next time you see one of your wingnut pals systematically downdinging every post of mine on a thread - except you won't, of course...
I'm sure you'll be ready with similar quip next time you see one of your wingnut pals systematically downdinging every post of mine on a thread - except you won't, of course...
I'm sure you'll be ready with similar quip next time you see one of your wingnut pals systematically downdinging every post of mine on a thread - except you won't, of course...
And the employers don't have to deduct payroll taxes either.
Claire. I have been in the broadcast industry for 25+ years. Do networks hire freelancers and stringers and part timers? Yes they do. But the HUGE Majority of ALL employees at all the networks and their affiliates, wheather owned privatley OR by the network themselves are fulltime contracted employees WITH benefits including but not limited to heath, 401K and profit sharing
Call the Dept of Labor on them. Get them audited. They'll regret having been born!
Personally I would looove to file a lawsuit against them but there's other family members that have business relationships with CBS. Probably wouldn't be wise.
I didn't use the word legal. I accuse bin laden of being an asshole, and judge him accordingly. I accuse Acorn of being corrupt and judge them accordingly, I have seen it with my own eyes.
Defend them all you want. They were exposed to the world as being corrupt.
I don't want those individuals charged with a crime, I want Acorn to clean its act up. And until they do, not get a time of tax payer money.
No, not "they too" - the downdinging behaviour of your little wingnut friends goes beyond what I have done here - (merely dinging a few commenta on a thread up and down - pretty normal behaviour as I'm sure most people realise.) No, I'm talking about systematically downdinging everything someone posts whether it is contentious or not - that's what your little wingnut pals do all that time and you are ok with it.
So quit your pathetic whining every time you or your wingnut buddies gets dinged.
Claire. I have been in the broadcast industry for 25+ years. Do networks hire freelancers and stringers and part timers? Yes they do. But the HUGE Majority of ALL employees at all the networks and their affiliates, wheather owned privatley OR by the network themselves are fulltime contracted employees WITH benefits including but not limited to heath, 401K and profit sharing
Yes, they hire plenty of legitimate freelancers such as stringers. Stringers who own their own camera, work less than fulltime and only provide a videotape for a fee. That's a true freelancer. Showing up to edit video and write scripts at CBS Newspath 60 hours a week, every week, using CBS AVID rigs and computers does not fit that definition.
I don't doubt that you work in the broadcast industry. And I know for a fact that there are very many people employed in the industry with fair wages, great benefits, etc. But specifically in NYC, and specifically in any sort of break-into the industry, entry-level job: there is no other option than to be a "permalancer" and get screwed out of benefits.
going that way in London, the abuse of Internships as slave labour is catching on a pace.
Exactly. If you don't have the means to have your parents subsidize your living while you work as an "intern" or "permalancer," you're effectively shut out of certain industries. The only way I was able to survive on the $100/day per diem CBS paid was because I was crashing at my cousin's place rent-free.
But specifically in NYC, and specifically in any sort of break-into the industry, entry-level job: there is no other option than to be a "permalancer" and get screwed out of benefits
Again,, 100% false
There are other options, and I broke in IN NYC. They'll give a contract (full timer) with bennies IFyou bring something to the table other than a "I just want to break into the biz", and even then I know lots of people that came in with NO broadcast skills or background that got hired fulltime.
And as far as Mr Redstone, I have met him, have been to his house (when he had it) in Stoneham Mass (grew up several towns away and worked in the Boston market for years). He is genuinely a nice and caring man
I'm sure you'll be ready with similar quip next time you see one of your wingnut pals systematically downdinging every post of mine on a thread - except you won't, of course...
Hypocrisy - ain't it fun?
Every downding is a tiny seed of hate planted- new proverb.
Claire. I have been in the broadcast industry for 25+ years. Do networks hire freelancers and stringers and part timers? Yes they do. But the HUGE Majority of ALL employees at all the networks and their affiliates, wheather owned privatley OR by the network themselves are fulltime contracted employees WITH benefits including but not limited to heath, 401K and profit sharing
And as far as Mr Redstone, I have met him, have been to his house (when he had it) in Stoneham Mass (grew up several towns away and worked in the Boston market for years). He is genuinely a nice and caring man
In April 2007, Sumner M. Redstone announced a commitment of $105 million in charitable grants to fund research and patient care advancements in cancer and burn recovery at three major non-profit healthcare organizations. He recently contributed $500,000 (the largest donation the charity could accept) to the Cambodian Children's Fund, a nonprofit program that provides a wide range of critical health and educational services to impoverished and abused children in the capital city of Phnom Penh
Like all those dings--both up and down--you and IceWeasel gave Wednesday night?
Nothing wrong with dinging up or down per se. But systematically downdinging someone's posts just because you don't like them (as I caught Matrix31 doing on that thread) is pathetic.
Try giving up downdinging for a while and see if your mental state when reading a thread doesn't improve. Worked for me and I don't even comment that often. But if I did downding, and I didn't have time to tell the person why, I felt bad all day, like a nagging felling that I had done something a little mean. Downdinging makes your interior life a melodrama and your blog life a soap opera. Neither are healthy.
And as far as Mr Redstone, I have met him, have been to his house (when he had it) in Stoneham Mass (grew up several towns away and worked in the Boston market for years). He is genuinely a nice and caring man
In April 2007, Sumner M. Redstone announced a commitment of $105 million in charitable grants to fund research and patient care advancements in cancer and burn recovery at three major non-profit healthcare organizations. He recently contributed $500,000 (the largest donation the charity could accept) to the Cambodian Children's Fund, a nonprofit program that provides a wide range of critical health and educational services to impoverished and abused children in the capital city of Phnom Penh
That BASTARD!!!
/
Look man, I'm not saying that the guy is goddamn Saddam Hussein. But the fact remains that he took home $13 million dollars in cash salary, while the stock price of his company got cut in half, and thousands of his workers are illegally denied benefits.
You can keep building up strawmen, but you're missing the larger point here. This isn't about whether or not Redstone is a nice guy. It isn't about whether or not he is donating some of his money to charity. It's about the fact that CBS is blatantly violating tax and labor laws with their employment practices. What Redstone does with his money is completely irrelevant to this fact.
And YOU'RE the one that keeps pontificating about an industry I have shown you know little (if anything) about!
You have made blanket statements here based on your ONE bad experience at ONE shop. I have been at this since the early 80's, have worked for most of the majors as well as locals as well as where I am today, (a company that provides a multitude of broadcast services via fiber and satellite to ALL the above and more)
Not saying this is right, or even the option for everyone, but I decided long ago to let it all go. I mean, when you get right down to, nothing that has been said or posted here really affects me one way or the other. Not really. I post & read here, I have some folk with whom I have had pleasant conversations and a very few with whom it has gone otherwise.
But none of it means a thing, when you get right down to it. I can't hurt you, you can't hurt me, because none of us, except for the Lizard couples, knows anyone here.
That KSM thread (two of 'em, actually) was brutal and ugly and, dare I say it, therapeutic? Maybe I grew up in a screwed up family, but we had melt-down screaming matches with some regularity, and none of it meant anything, because that's just how people are.
And YOU'RE the one that keeps pontificating about an industry I have shown you know little (if anything) about!
You have made blanket statements here based on your ONE bad experience at ONE shop. I have been at this since the early 80's, have worked for most of the majors as well as locals as well as where I am today, (a company that provides a multitude of broadcast services via fiber and satellite to ALL the above and more)
Read the links, jackass. I know exactly what I'm talking about, and just posted numerous articles referencing the facts I just laid out.
Here's another:
Here's what we hear from what we believe has truly become the Viacom sweatshop. (One Viacom permalancer estimates that almost 50% of the staff are contract workers at this point.) A 50-hour workweek will now be standard, at least at MTV Digital (which means no overtime until after 50 hours, and no overtime at all for higher-level people, like producers and segment producers), and all will go from a day rate to an hourly rate. Healthcare, which was offered to permalancers after a staggering year of service, will now be offered only to employees who have worked 1,280 hours (25 of those 50-hour workweeks) in any one division. And that's the catch: Get transfered, as often happens, from VH1 to MTV or the like, and you start over on that clock.
No, not "they too" - the downdinging behaviour of your little wingnut friends goes beyond what I have done here - (merely dinging a few commenta on a thread up and down - pretty normal behaviour as I'm sure most people realise.) No, I'm talking about systematically downdinging everything someone posts whether it is contentious or not - that's what your little wingnut pals do all that time and you are ok with it.
So quit your pathetic whining every time you or your wingnut buddies gets dinged.
Sorry I've been trading my time and skills to the capitalist pigs in exchange for my fat paycheck.
Back to your retort:
Laughable.
I rarely watch the spy. I observed you downdinging away at the most mundane comments. I made an observation and you took offense.
Read what I posted. Do broadcasters hire freelancers, stringers and part timers YES
Are they FORCED (your word) to take that job
NO
NOBODY guaruntees that YOU get to have A job in AN industry
So which is it then? You keep jumping back and forth. Are you claiming that I "know nothing" about the broadcast industry, and am making this all up? Or are you claiming that the practice exists, but that it's the workers fault for taking the job in the first place? You can't have it both ways.
Try giving up downdinging for a while and see if your mental state when reading a thread doesn't improve. Worked for me and I don't even comment that often. But if I did downding, and I didn't have time to tell the person why, I felt bad all day, like a nagging felling that I had done something a little mean. Downdinging makes your interior life a melodrama and your blog life a soap opera. Neither are healthy.
I think it would be better altogether if certain people just resisted the temptation to bitch and whine every time they see a liberal poster downdinging something. I don't apply dings on a personal basis, just purely on the merits of the posts. If I disagree strongly, or if I think it's just stupid or ignorant, I'll downding it. Post something intelligent,informative or funny and I'll upding it.
Dinging (whether up or down) is a handy way of registering your opinion when you can't respond to every post. Given that wingnuts downding so 'liberally' -not to say often spitefully- without attracting any complaints from their fellow wingnuts, I think what we are really seeing here is an attempt by some right wing posters to intimidate liberal posters into not registering their feeling about posts.
So which is it then? You keep jumping back and forth. Are you claiming that I "know nothing" about the broadcast industry, and am making this all up? Or are you claiming that the practice exists, but that it's the workers fault for taking the job in the first place? You can't have it both ways.
{sigh},, again
are you claiming that the practice exists,
I NEVER said it does not exist. Reread!
it's the workers fault for taking the job in the first place
ummm,, YUP
re: #174 drcordell paying workers illegal wages by forcing them to work
As I asked upthead ( and never got an answer)
Did they show up to your house with a gun? 2 men in trenchcoats and sunglasses?? A black sedan with tinted windows !?!?!?
And as far as Mr Redstone, I have met him, have been to his house (when he had it) in Stoneham Mass (grew up several towns away and worked in the Boston market for years). He is genuinely a nice and caring man
In April 2007, Sumner M. Redstone announced a commitment of $105 million in charitable grants to fund research and patient care advancements in cancer and burn recovery at three major non-profit healthcare organizations. He recently contributed $500,000 (the largest donation the charity could accept) to the Cambodian Children's Fund, a nonprofit program that provides a wide range of critical health and educational services to impoverished and abused children in the capital city of Phnom Penh
That BASTARD!!!
/
Oh, Sumner Redstone is one of my least favorite media moguls. MTV is toxic waste of the cultural variety, IMHO.
Sorry I've been trading my time and skills to the capitalist pigs in exchange for my fat paycheck.
Must be awful having to 'work for a living'. You should try getting in with Soros - you hardly have to do anything and the paychecks are enough to keep me and iceweasel in the lap of socialist luxury (as we flit from continent to continent on our never ending quest for thrills.) The odd freelance illustration/animation commission kinda helps too, of course...
I rarely watch the spy. I observed you downdinging away at the most mundane comments.
Nope - the comments I downdinged here were either dumb or nasty.
it's the workers fault for taking the job in the first place
ummm,, YUP
re: #174 drcordell paying workers illegal wages by forcing them to work
As I asked upthead ( and never got an answer)
Did they show up to your house with a gun? 2 men in trenchcoats and sunglasses?? A black sedan with tinted windows !?!?!?
You're hopeless. It's not that hard to grasp the fact that workers in an industry can in fact be forced to accept illegal terms of employment if they do not wish to be unemployed, and wish to continue working in their chosen field. Nobody is putting a fucking gun to their head. But yes, they are being forced to choose between unemployment, or acceptance of substandard benefits.
It would be just peachy if everyone could simply say "THIS IS ILLEGAL I QUIT" in this situation. But this is the real world. People have rent to pay and mouths to feed. Taking an illegal permalancer position still pays better than unemployment. Why you are unable to understand that in the real world, in a recession, people can't just QUIT their jobs despite being denied fair benefits, is beyond me.
Oh btw, if anyone wants to see a prime example of the sort of petty, spiteful downdinging I am talking about, look no further than this post on this thread, where Sharmuta has downdinged me for agreeing - via the word "Exactly" - with an entirely reasonable post by drcordell.
Seriously, who but the craziest of wingnuts, or someone with some kind of personal grudge, would react in that way to my post there?
How does one determine the extent of damage caused to my psyche by the mention of those two "songs"? It's not so much the mention, it's that they're now jabbing their knives into my memory...
See, now look. The dentist's son on the right of the picture is committing one of the most footling errors. His pocket square matches his tie. Makes him look even more foolish than otherwise he might have. Probably came with the tie, which is a dead giveaway that that's not the tie you want, by the way. Shoulda been a simple white square, folded into a neat rectangle protruding not more than about a half inch (if that) over the top of the pocket.
Knot on the tie is all wrong - probably the same knot he used on the tie at his first frat mixer.
Shirt's got the oxford collar, which is OK with the sports coat, but a no-no with a suit. Stripes on the shirt & a patterned tie probably don't work in this case - too many angles.
Kid's a train-wreck right outta the box, and that's without knowing anything about him or what he stands for. If he can't even project the image of importance and seriousness, how the hell can he expect to be taken seriously? This little thing (his sartorial foul-ups) shows me that he's got no manager or minder to keep RSM et al away. He'll screw up royally. Just wait.
While I think the red pocket-thingie does not have the same pattern as the tie, you point is otherwise well-taken. And by "oxford collar", do you mean "button down"? Because, if so, once again, right behind you - that's casual, not the least bit formal (says the woman whose husband insisted it was ok to wear a button down shirt with his dinner jacket! Sigh...).
Whoever we are, whereever we're from, we should have noticed by now our behaviour is dumb, and if our chances are expected to improve, it's gonna take a lot more than trying to remove, the other race, or the other whatever, from the face of the planet altogether -- Dumb All Over, You Are What You Is
Frank says: