Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 63
Page 1 of 5

« Previous | Next »

A Guide to Slandering Permissive Bargaining

Slanders

Appeals Officer
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:56 AM

Post Reply

Attaboy, Frank! It is good to see NTEU weighing in on this topic. Our friends at OPM are getting an earful from management, and apparently liking what they hear. Each successive draft of the Executive Order becomes increasingly tepid. I would remind Mr. Berry that it wasn't federal managers that got out and helped to get the President elected. When the support of unions was requested, Obama wanted enthusiastic support, not half measures, and he got it. We earned change, and change that we can believe in.

Truth is not slander

Chemist
USDA
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:20 AM

Post Reply

Most of us know the author is a liberal, but his initial paragraph betrays a liberal slant which is gratutious in this article. It unnecessarily sets a tone which detracts from his message. He would better serve this forum by not wearing his bias on his sleeve.

Re: Truth is not slander

retired
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:23 AM
You lie!!! Are you suggesting the President would be deceptive? Only a racist should think such a thing. I am just as sure that government run health care will not be obtained by illegals as I am that no one making less than $250,000 will see even one penny of tax increases. Liberals don't lie, they adjust.

Re: Truth is not slander

Fed
Worker
Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:01 AM
George Bush and Company is retired IRS's friend. His VP only shot someone and was not prosecuted. Compare that to the New York athlete who shot himself and got a jail sentence. The latter was reasonable. The former was not. Do not forget Georg's tax cuts for the wealthy. Do not forget George's war in Iraq. Afghanistan is reasonable because they harbored terrorists who aggressed against us. Do not forget the patriot act which violated the Constitution against lack of representation, cruel and unusual punishment (torture), and jury trials. I believe speedy trials are also required.
And he refers to a potential tax that is not law?

Wine with Cheese

IT Specialist
DOD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:27 AM

Post Reply

It is interesting the author would open up with a diatribe about our poor Great Leader being slandered. Especially after listening to the 8 years of slander by the Democrats and their ilk (Unions) on Bush. The major difference though is the slander on Bush was mostly false while the current criticism of Obama is mostly true. I would have given the article a little bit more weight if he would have resisted the Political Barrage interwoven throughout. As such, the Author comes across as a political hack who appears to be throwing an adolescent tantrum.

Re: Wine with Cheese

Fiscally Responsible Fed
Somewhere
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:39 AM
The author notes:

"But with the new-found respectability of deceptions, lies, and half-truths that our political leaders are providing, it is now anyone's guess whether there will be any attempt to improve labor relations."

Last time I checked, our political leaders in the House, Senate, White House, unelected Czars, Cabinet, and other administrative agencies were 99% Democratic.

Yes, the author goes on a senseless Political Barrage and totally tunes out serious readers by slinging mud, and remaining in his ivory tower, which by now is covered in doo-doo, because he does so at the 30,000-foot level and does not back up his rhetoric with any meaningful specifics for practioners in the trenches.

This forum is a place for opinions of all stripes, but in this case, Mr. Ferris, you will get back what you give.

Stop Whining!!

Re: Wine with Cheese

Retired
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:03 AM
President Bush unfortunately turned out to be incompetent. The criticisms leveled against him and his administration were for the most part appropriate. Wake up and smell the coffee

Re: Wine with Cheese

IT Specialist
DOD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:21 PM
I have no problems with leaping heaps of criticism on Bush as long as it is true. I think the major difference is he acted like a man and took it from the left whether it was true or not. This administration can't even take criticism that is true. The author tries to define criticism of this administration as slander. I am simply calling him on it. While the term "Death Panels" is a little strong by the President's critics, there will be rationing boards in health care. It is inevitable and it is true. The term hit home and blew a big hole in the health care debate. Now the left has to try and demonize anyone who is concerned about there health care. His Political Rant wasn't necessary for his article and he looks foolish. He lost the discussion before he got to his discussion.

Re: Wine with Cheese

Analyst
DoD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:19 PM
"President Bush unfortunately turned out to be incompetent. The criticisms leveled against him and his administration were for the most part appropriate "

Wrong. Did he have missteps? Yes (like all Presidents do). Did his political opponents grossly exaggerate and distort issues to serve their own interests? Yes they did (and this happens to all Presidents as well). Making a blanket statement that he was incompetent suggests that you are aligned politically against him and therefore not objective. Can you back up your accusation with credible evidence? or are you going to try to prop it up with opinions and political talking points?

Re: Wine with Cheese

Career LR
Anywhere and Everywhere
Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:40 AM
Last time I checked, we were winning (We have WON) the war in IRAQ.

Now BHO is trying to focus our attention on Afghanistan so that we won't realize that Bush was right with the surge as a strategy to end the war in victory.

But you won't see that covered in the mainstream media because it does not fit with the blame game being played ad nauseum "it's all Bush's Fault" and "we inherited this big problem."

Re: Wine with Cheese

Fed
Worker
Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:11 AM
We won the war in Iraq? Everything is settled? There are no bombings? There is no terror there? When did this happen? The only thing good is that Hussein is gone. But nothing secure has taken his place. There is no win there.
Most of the critisism of George is false? Most of the critisism of Obama is true? 1984 was 25 years ago. Repeating falsehoods does not make the lies true. George was incompetent and a liar. The war in Iraq was based on items not proven true. Bush was for the wealthy based on his tax cuts passed and those he tried to pass. He said it would help small business and farmers, but they were mostly for the wealthy. George
was for torture, such as waterboarding, of prisoners.
The radical right loves their czars and socialism, but would rather have they uninsured get sicker because of a lack of insurance. Medicaid does not work.
Sorry, I take Obama over George anytime.

Re: Wine with Cheese

admin asst
noaa
Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:25 PM
fed worker, you are the last person who should be calling anybody incompetent.

Trivia

Analyst
DOT
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:30 AM

Post Reply

Federal unions are meaningless and unnecessary. Their accomplishments are trivial despite the huge subsidies they receive.

Re: Trivia

retired
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:02 AM
Concise and correct. Federal unions are good at singing their own praises, but they achieve little (NTEU included). The fact that the article pushes a liberal agenda should not surprise, federal unions do that constantly.

Re: Trivia

retired exec
Treasury
Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:27 PM
Since Frank omitted the lies told by federal unions, I will expose a few secrets. Even as benefits have declined, they take credit for improving pay and benefits. They claim that only they can protect workers from management abuse - a total falsehood. They claim to be self-sufficient, but they are heavily subsidized. They consider non-members scabs, and treat them that way. Nationally, they push a liberal agenda (that is why Frank probably did not even know his article was biased). Locally they push personal agenda. Many union leaders harbor a hatred for management - often based on preceived slights. They "bargain" over trivia. Many union officials abuse official time. They are not cost effective. They are unnecessary and wasteful. I could continue, but Analyst said it well.

B-1 Subject

Curious
TSA
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:44 AM

Post Reply

OK, I'll bite: What is the "so-called (b)(1) permissive subject" to which you keep referring? What is the rest of the apparent legal citation?
I can only guess it refers to "F-bombs" and "N-bombs" or any of the other hyphenated bombs prevalent in modern rap-talk (or radio/comedy-talk).
But what does it have to do with union negotiations?
If it is some kind of secret-speak to those who know (and the rest of us "outsiders" have no need to know) then you have wasted a lot of space. They already KNOW everything your saying. If the article is intended to inform and clarify for those who need it, then please complete the citation referenced so we outsiders can at least look it up!!! (Or, better yet, clearly define it in the article!!)

Re: B-1 Subject

Curious
TSA
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:09 AM
I retract the above -- I have gone back and read Bob Gilson's articles (February 15, and October 21, 2009).

Now it makes sense.

management own worse enemy

electrical shop supervisor
air national guard
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:47 AM

Post Reply

The employee's have for the most part a better idea of what works and what doesn't why wouldn't you want them appart of the process. So many times management
tries to fix what isn't broken and ignores what is. I have been fed service for 25yrs 11yrs in management and in my experence management is more likely to steal and break regulation with no or little acountabilty than the actual work force is.

Fraudster

Special Agent
retired
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:53 AM

Post Reply

Forget slander, one could argue that charging $135 for his book makes the author a fraudster.

Fraudster: n. 1: a criminal who obtains money by deliberate deception.

Re: Fraudster

retired
none
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:13 AM
This is classic. Thank you for the comic relief - you were kidding, right? By the way, how did you survive to retirement without a union to "protect" you? I hear managers are fiends who abuse workers at will without heroic union reps to slay them. Thank goodness the unions are there to negotiate the truly important things like the color of the toilet tissue.

Re: Fraudster

exec
DoD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:51 PM
Cute, but finding a victim will be difficult. Is anyone dumb enought to buy Frank's book? Has NTEU purchased any? Good luck in your quest for the truth, but you will not find it searching within NTEU.
Total Comments: 63
Page 1 of 5

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.