- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
If you have a Republican representative, it is your solemn duty to write them demanding that they impeach Obama.
For the good of the country.
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 04:37
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2024 17:16
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Has anybody said "the mistake on the lake" yet?
Because the mistake on the lake.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 19:47
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Someone explain to me how a fast food burger flipping job is not a stepping stone and thus needs a "livable" wage.
It's not a skilled position, it shouldn't get skilled pay.
Because a burger flipping job is not a stepping stone for people who are working there as a career, which is a thing that happens
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 18:19
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
How? If we make the bottom tier of pay higher, that will simply increase inflation. If everyone has an influx of spending money, there's no reason to keep prices objectively low on anything.
Labor is 100% the cost of everything, also burger flippers only make one burger an hour therefore burgers will go up $5!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 20:36
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Ann Coulter gets it
quote:Ann Coulter stuck up for the Republican Party in roundabout way on Tuesday when she told Sean Hannity that voters need to support any "crap-rear end" GOPer over the Democrats.
“We can’t just abandon the field right now, you have to vote Republican even if it’s for a crap-rear end Republican," Coulter told Hannity during a spot on his radio show. "And I would name them but I’m not going to,” she added with a laugh.
Hannity, on the other hand, was happy to name some names and began with House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), declaring "he’s a horrible speaker.”
The two descended into a squabble over how far to take criticism of Boehner and the GOP more broadly, until Coulter got the last word.
"He's bad on amnesty but look, who cares — there are a lot of bad Republicans, there are no good Democrats," she insisted. "The country is in the balance. You have to vote Republican right now.”
Yet progressives don't.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 01:38
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
2/3rds of Ferguson's black police force is standing behind him right now
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 20:14
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
What's so controversial and dangerous about pointing out that shooting an unarmed kid 6 times, twice in the face is something we maybe shouldn't aspire to? I'd be happy to lose the vote of anyone who disagrees with that.
only once in the face the other headshot was to his crown
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 17:37
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
death is certain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLs9cVeSxR0
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 20:09
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Why didn't Obama respond forcefully to Foley's murder like he did to Benghazi????
:foxsay:
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 23:00
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Issa's run completely dry on credibility by now, right? All those pointless hearings where he inadvertently gets owned took their toll, right?
Right?
ISIS... Issa... HMM ARE THEY BROTHERS???
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 19:38
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
why can't we bomb both the Islamic State and Assad?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 20:38
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
number of heads cut off in libya: 1?
your move, obamailures
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 20:41
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
When Ginsburg retires, the Court will move further right. A Republican would move it extremely to the right, but Obama nor Hilary will nominate someone as or more liberal than Ginsburg.
Sotomayor is more liberal than Ginsburg.
Sotomayor is the most liberal justice the court has ever had.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2014 17:16
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Obama is the best president we've ever had
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2014 12:21
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...src=al_national
quote:At least four hostages held in Syria by the Islamic State, including an American journalist who was recently executed by the group, were waterboarded in the early part of their captivity, according to people familiar with the treatment of the kidnapped Westerners.
James Foley was among the four who were waterboarded several times by Islamic State militants who appeared to model the technique on the CIA’s use of waterboarding to interrogate suspected terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The victims of waterboarding are often strapped down on gurneys or benches while cold water is poured over a cloth covering their faces; they suffer the sensation of feeling they are drowning. “The wet cloth creates a barrier through which it is difficult — or in some cases not possible — to breathe,” according to a May 2005 Justice Department memo on the CIA’s use of the technique.
President Obama has condemned waterboarding as torture.
“They knew exactly how it was done,” said a person with direct knowledge of what happened to the hostages. The person, who would only discuss the hostages’ experience on condition of anonymity, said the captives, including Foley, were held in Raqqah, a city in the north-central region of Syria.
James Foley was beheaded by the Islamic State last week in apparent retaliation for U.S. airstrikes in Iraq where the militant group has seized large swaths of territory. The group, which also controls parts of Syria, has threatened to kill another American, journalist Steven J. Sotloff. He was seen at the end of a video showing Foley’s killing that was released by the militant group. Two other Americans are also held by Islamic State.
A second person familiar with Foley’s time in captivity confirmed Foley was tortured, including by waterboarding.
“Yes, that is part of the information that bubbled up and Jim was subject to it,” the person said. “I believe he suffered a lot of physical abuse.”
Foley’s mother, Diane, said in a brief phone interview Thursday that she didn’t know her son had been waterboarded.
The FBI, which is investigating Foley’s death and the abduction of Americans in Syria, declined to comment. The CIA had no official comment.
“ISIL is a group that routinely crucifies and beheads people,” a U.S. official, using one of the acronyms for the militant group. “To suggest that there is any correlation between ISIL’s brutality and past U.S. actions is ridiculous and feeds into their twisted propaganda.” 
Waterboarding was one of the interrogation techniques adopted by the CIA and sanctioned by the Justice Department when the agency opened a series of secret overseas prisons to question captured terrorism suspects.
Three CIA detainees — Khalid Sheik Mohammed, Abu Zubaida and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri — were waterboarded while held in secret CIA prisons. Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks was waterboarded 183 times, according to a memo issued by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.
All three men, along with 11 other so-called high-value detainees, were transferred to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in Sept. 2006, when President Bush closed the CIA’s overseas prisons.
Obama on entering office outlawed the use of coercive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding.
Critics of waterboarding have said for years that the practice endangered Americans, putting them at risk that they will be subjected to the same brutal treatment at the hands of the enemy.
“Waterboarding dates to the Spanish Inquisition and has been a favorite of dictators through the ages, including Pol Pot and the regime in Burma,” said Democratic senators Dianne Feinstein of California and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island in an op-ed in 2008. “Condoning torture opens the door for our enemies to do the same to captured American troops in the future.”
The Senate Intelligence Committee is preparing to release a report asserting that waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques used by CIA operatives were not effective, according to Feinstein who chairs the committee. Former agency employees dispute that conclusion.
French journalist Didier Francois, who was imprisoned with Foley, has told reporters that Foley was targeted for extra abuse because his captors found pictures on his computer of his brother, who serves in the U.S. Air Force.
Francois said Foley was subjected to mock executions — something suspected al-Qaeda operative Nashiri also endured while being held in a secret CIA prison, according to a report by the inspector general of the CIA. The Justice Department did not sanction mock executions.
Francois was kidnapped by the Islamic State in June 2013 and held for 10 months. He and three other French journalists were released near the Turkish border.
U.S. and British intelligence believe they’re close to identifying Foley’s killer among a group of British men who had traveled to Syria to fight and appear to have held Foley, Francois and the others hostages.
On Wednesday, Sotloff’s mother released a video, making an emotional plea for the leader of the Islamic State to free her son.
“Please release my child,” Shirley Sotloff said. “And as a mother, I ask your justice to be merciful and not punish my son for matters he has no control over.”
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2014 22:02
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Putting it that way how do outsourcing and workforce agencies fit in?
As in, AcmeCo. needs a large 24/7 call center but doesn't want to add that many bodies to their employee roster (all those benefits, YUCK!). They handle the office space, equipment, etc and enter a contract with StaffCo. Now, if you wanted work at AcmeCo.'s call center, you would go to AcmeCo's building, interview and get hired by AcmeCo people, and from there you have an AcmeCo. boss, on AcmeCo customers and projects, a random of coworker in the break room could be employed by AcmeCo, could be StaffCo, AcmeCo assigns all your day to day, gives you some level of security access, accounts on their internal systems, sets your schedule, rules, can fire you, etc. Your check says StaffCo. There is no way to work for them directly, you have to go through StaffCo.
I'm trying to see how that is different from a union under the way you put it. It's interesting to me because in my youth I once held a lovely job at a StaffCo working for an AcmeCo. Our benefits were so awful that when the person conducting our orientation class told us the cost of getting insurance through them she immediately conceded (to a room full of shocked faces) that it is a terrible deal and she flat out pleaded with us to "find another way" to pick up medical insurance if we needed it. It was something like 15% of our gross pay if we worked a solid 40 each week. That was just the beginning of all the crap they could pull on the workers.
That place was like the employer anti-union but thinking back on it now it definitely behaved in the same way that you couldn't work there unless you went through them.
NLRB is on the way to making this illegal
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 00:14
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
I would like to know more about this.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/nlrb-case-tests-who-employs-contract-workers-1409183483
quote:Just a month after a controversial decision involving employees of McDonald's Corp. franchisees, businesses are bracing for a new action by federal labor regulators that could lower the barriers between companies and the contract workers they use.
The National Labor Relations Board is re-evaluating its decades-old standard for deciding when contractual business arrangements render one business a "joint employer" of workers employed by another. It is using a case in which a union wants a company at the table in collective bargaining involving subcontracted workers.
These joint-employer cases are the latest battle over the application of labor laws at a time when businesses are increasingly turning to contract workers. U.S. staffing companies employed an average of 3 million temporary and contract workers a week in 2013, up 4% from 2012, according to a quarterly survey by the American Staffing Association.
If the standard is changed, employers say all kinds of businesses could be affected. Franchisers such as McDonald's could be forced to manage labor practices and engage in collective bargaining in thousands of units across the country. The construction industry, where subcontracting practices are widely used, could suffer a "particularly destabilizing" hit, an employers group said in a brief to the NLRB.
Unions say such arrangements enable companies to exercise control over wages and working conditions but escape responsibility when workers have problems or demands. But as labor groups ask the five-member NLRB to declare more companies joint employers, business groups are fighting back, saying such moves could defeat the efficiencies of contracting and expose companies to greater liability in labor matters.
"You're talking about tens of thousands of business relationships between companies all over the place," said Zachary Fasman, a partner with the law firm Proskauer Rose, which filed a brief on behalf of more than a dozen business trade groups in industries such as retail, restaurants, construction and health care. "It could implicate a whole raft of different areas."
Unions and their allies say business groups exaggerate the scope and impact of a revision. They say they're not suggesting that all subcontractors should be joint employers, but cite the growing temporary-staffing industry as one example of why the standard needs changing.
"The difficulties presented by this triangulated workforce structure has created a second-tier workforce of employees working for lower wages and fewer benefits than the standard employees performing the exact same work," the union in the subcontracting case said in a brief.
For the past 30 years, the NLRB, a federal agency that settles workplace disputes, has said that one business couldn't be held liable for employment-related matters at another unless they had direct control over the employees in question. That means that generally, the firms in question had to share or co-determine employment matters such as hiring, firing and discipline in ways that have a meaningful effect on the workers. Franchisors have generally not been considered joint employers under this standard, labor lawyers say.
Then came the McDonald's case, which began when the NLRB received complaints alleging McDonald's and its franchisees had violated the rights of employees involved in protests against them. After finding merit in some of the complaints, the NLRB's general counsel's office issued its opinion that the company should be considered a joint employer in the matters.
His opinion means McDonald's, along with the franchise owners, will be named in unfair labor practice actions the agency said it plans to file based on the allegations, assuming there is no settlement first.
McDonald's has vowed to fight the legal opinion, saying that franchisees, who own 90% of McDonald's more than 14,000 U.S. restaurants, set wages and control working conditions within their restaurants.
In the contracting case, a Teamsters local union, the Sanitary Truck Drivers and Helpers Local 350, has asked the NLRB to consider Browning-Ferris Industries of California Inc. and Leadpoint Business Services, a Phoenix-based staffing firm that provides the company with temporary workers, joint employers of a group of those workers for collective bargaining purposes. The union says it can't adequately bargain over their terms and conditions of employment unless Browning is at the table as a joint employer.
The union says the plant, located in Milpitas, Calif., is an integrated single operation where Browning dictates the hours and duties of all the workers, including its own and Leadpoint's. Browning, for example, has required the workers in question to clean work areas before taking a break and it controls when the breaks occur and for how long, the union says in its brief.
There are no examples on record in which Leadpoint has rejected or refused Browning's directions, the union brief adds.
But the companies say their continuing 2009 contract states that Leadpoint is the "sole employer" of the personnel and that Browning doesn't have responsibility to supervise those workers, who have their own on-site management.
Browning decides certain things, such as what times the waste sorting lines will run and for how long, Leadpoint says in its brief, but, "As the customer, it makes perfect sense for BFI [Browning-Ferris Industries] to decide these matters, given that it is responsible for operating the MRF [Material Recovery Facilities] in the first place."
The union asked the board to review the dispute after an NLRB acting regional director sided with the companies. The NLRB agreed but went even further by asking for input on whether it should update the joint employer standard.
Unions want a standard more akin to the one used before 1984, when even indirect control over employment matters could render a business a joint-employer.
The NLRB's general counsel in a brief filed in response to the board's call for input urged it to adopt a standard that "would make no distinction between direct, indirect, and potential control over working conditions." The current standard "ignores" Congress's intent to treat the term "employer" more broadly and inhibits meaningful collective bargaining involving nontraditional employment agreements, the brief said.
The Browning case is pending review before the five-member board.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 13:13
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
It's sort of interesting that all these online outlets seem to wind up with their own Libertarian. Yglesias at Vox, Moody at Yahoo!, Weigel at Slate, Barro at The Upshot, Friedersdorf at the online version of The Atlantic, and Greenwald, of course. I'm probably missing a few more obvious ones.
Given what we know about how the Libertarian (it's all capital L where the money's involved) network has been grown, shaped and has spread I've always assumed that these guys are the libertarian version of the conservative pundits and what not that were carefully inserted into, and spread throughout the media.
Yglesias, Weigel, Barro and Greenwald, at least, are definitely different than the Fonzie of Freedom crowd at Reason
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 13:15
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Andrew Sullivan has interns?
Paid interns, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 14:07
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
That part at least is not right to work.
Yes it is, considering that a union would prevent firings for no reason at all.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 16:33
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2024 17:16
|
|
- WhiskeyJuvenile
- Feb 15, 2002
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
My motives have never been ulterior. They are entirely transparent. I want Barack Obama to do a Colin Baker cosplay and refuse to acknowledge that he's doing it.
I am a creature of simple pleasures.
I thought it was a lawn jockey
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2014 03:51
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 04:37
