Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 63
Page 1 of 5
Page 1 of 5
« Previous | Next »
A Guide to Slandering Permissive Bargaining
Total Comments: 63
Page 1 of 5
Page 1 of 5
« Previous | Next »
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2068 | +0.0035 | +0.67% |
| F | $13.6034 | +0.0087 | +2.02% |
| C | $13.6990 | +0.0063 | +3.64% |
| S | $17.9053 | -0.0670 | +8.77% |
| I | $18.3571 | -0.1731 | -0.97% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1066 | -0.0408 | +3.02% |
| L 2030 | $15.8797 | -0.0339 | +2.71% |
| L 2020 | $15.6688 | -0.0268 | +2.28% |
| L 2010 | $15.4289 | -0.0062 | +1.37% |
| L Income | $14.0606 | -0.0041 | +1.30% |
Slanders
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
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
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:23 AM
Re: Truth is not slander
Worker
Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:01 AM
And he refers to a potential tax that is not law?
Wine with Cheese
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
Somewhere
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:39 AM
"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
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:03 AM
Re: Wine with Cheese
DOD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:21 PM
Re: Wine with Cheese
DoD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:19 PM
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
Anywhere and Everywhere
Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:40 AM
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
Worker
Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:11 AM
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
noaa
Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:25 PM
Trivia
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
IRS
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:02 AM
Re: Trivia
Treasury
Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:27 PM
B-1 Subject
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
TSA
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:09 AM
Now it makes sense.
management own worse enemy
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
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
none
Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:13 AM
Re: Fraudster
DoD
Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:51 PM