Furious1Auto Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) and earlier in this thread you implied it would be a good thing for a UAW revolution. If I typed that statement then quote it! Edited March 9, 2009 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 If I typed that statement then quote it! Here is the exact quote: There is a revolution going on in this country right as we speak, where you might say? I don't see people picking up arms in their defense? It is through the use of social forums and people discovering them, and turning off the damn T.V. Very powerful interests control the television, and what you see and hear. Now when you give the people the opportunity to choose for their selves it makes the democratic process work properly. What you guys fail to realize is that by not providing people with the info, and rushin to a vote you are creating mistrust. Now can you answer the question or are you going to stall (much like the IUAW reps you complain about)? And, I can see you are just ignoring the other post. Still, I would like to know what rights you think I have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 President Clinton DID have a republican on his cabinet. William Cohen (Defense) You are absolutely correct. Nice catch and sorry for the error. As wikipedia does note: It is rare for a member of the opposite party to be in the president's cabinet. I still believe that the point I made is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) revolution democratic process Now where does it say UAW? Quote where I was bashing an I-Rep, or was disparaging the I-UAW. Edited March 9, 2009 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 Now where does it say UAW? Quote where I was bashing an I-Rep, or was disparaging the I-UAW. I must apologize to you. You appear to be completely satisfied with the way the I-UAW is conducting our business. Good for you. When you said, "What you guys fail to realize is that by not providing people with the info, and rushin to a vote you are creating mistrust," I thought you were dissatisfied. Apparently, "us guys" are "creating mistrust" amongst other, but not you. Thank you for the support. And, when your wrote: I wonder if there is a way to find out if any officials (and this was speaking about I-Reps and conflict of interest) or any of their family members have made large purchases of company stock. I really believe that they would not be stupid enough to accept money from the company directly. Also if they bought stock it would be stupid to do so in their own name! I certainly assumed you had some doubt about the integrity of the I-UAW. I am positive you will want to also re-phrase that as non-bashing and non-disparaging. What I think is this: You got yourself caught up in two competing, but opposite goals. You felt I had attacked your friends and rushed to their defense. (A very honorable trait.) In doing so, you made some strong statements about me being an outsider. At roughly the same time, you made statements about everyone being heard and entitled to their own opinion. (A very honorable trait, as well.) You can not reconcile both statements, so you are trying to change the argument. This now involves you using President Clinton's defense of "It depends of what your definition of is is?" Show me this, show me that, you say. It's okay. In this issue of open and honest debate, you are acting hypocritical. There are far worse ails in the Union. And, I suspect, after reading other posts of yours, that you are a far better person than what this thread has shown. I suggest you don't worry about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) I must apologize to you. You appear to be completely satisfied with the way the I-UAW is conducting our business. Good for you. When you said, "What you guys fail to realize is that by not providing people with the info, and rushin to a vote you are creating mistrust," I thought you were dissatisfied. Man I think they did the best they could with what they had to work with, however I have my issue's with some of the process, and I don't just mean elections. You can talk to all of these members here till your blue in the face, but you are not going to convince them to stop posting. You can stop it, so the best thing is to recognize these new tools and embrace them as a means of speaking directly to your constituents. As for the rest, blah, blah, blah you make allot of assumptions that are not worth the time to rebutt. You are no different then anyone here, your just a spoke on a wheel with a false sense of self enlightenment. "Down with the UAW" is that what you want me to say, the members are the UAW are you freak'n kidding. Edited March 9, 2009 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 Man I think they dd the best they could with what they had to work with, however I have my issue's with some of the process, and I don't just mean elections. You can talk to all of these members here till your blue in the face, but you are not going to convince them to stop posting. You can stop it, so the best thing is to recognize these new tools and embrace them as a means of speaking directly to your constituents. As for the rest, blah, blah, blah you make allot of assumptions that are not worth the time to rebutt. You are no different then anyone here, your just a spoke on a wheel with a false sense of self enlightenment. "Down with the UAW" is that what you want me to say, the members are the UAW are you freak'n kidding. I agree I am no different. As for the assumptions, were you or were you not being a hypocrite? Easy question, easy to rebut. You can't. Worse, you can not admit that you can not. When you state, my good friend who demands quotes, "You can talk to all of these members here till your blue in the face, but you are not going to convince them to stop posting, " would you be kind enough to show me where I suggested that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CourtJester Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I agree I am no different. As for the assumptions, were you or were you not being a hypocrite? Easy question, easy to rebut. You can't. Worse, you can not admit that you can not. When you state, my good friend who demands quotes, "You can talk to all of these members here till your blue in the face, but you are not going to convince them to stop posting, " would you be kind enough to show me where I suggested that? Sam, am I reading your posts to state that you want the UAW to restructure? If so, you have my vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeme back 2blue Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Sam, am I reading your posts to state that you want the UAW to restructure? If so, you have my vote. you will have to join his REVOLUTION DC! Send him a IM,get the info. There is more power if you have more Idiots. Not that sam is stupid,but he is a IDIOT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 you will have to join his REVOLUTION DC! Send him a IM,get the info. There is more power if you have more Idiots. Not that sam is stupid,but he is a IDIOT! And, why exactly am I an Idiot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeme back 2blue Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 And, why exactly am I an Idiot? Why do we always hear from you folks when then the economy is bad and the UAW is in no position to bargain? Do some research asshole,NEW HORIZONS, SOLDIERS OF SOLIDARITY,AND NOW THE INFAMOUS " The Opposition Party to the Administrative Caucus". Why can't you go to every UAW local and get a member elected to be a delegate to the uaw convention and change every thing that is so fucked up? You can't because it isn't. Why are you so quick to blame IUAW? The economy and our lovely reps in DC-free trade and mismanagement of the big 3 are to blame. You are a very intelligent person, I on the other hand can't really debate you. I will leave that to my more polished members on here. I'm a lesser educated mother fucker but I definately know right from wrong! SO YOU SIR ,IN MY FEABLE LITTLE MIND,U ISA FOOKING IDIOT! :happy feet: :happy feet: :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 Why do we always hear from you folks when then the economy is bad and the UAW is in no position to bargain? Do some research asshole,NEW HORIZONS, SOLDIERS OF SOLIDARITY,AND NOW THE INFAMOUS " The Opposition Party to the Administrative Caucus". Why can't you go to every UAW local and get a member elected to be a delegate to the uaw convention and change every thing that is so fucked up? You can't because it isn't. Why are you so quick to blame IUAW? The economy and our lovely reps in DC-free trade and mismanagement of the big 3 are to blame. You are a very intelligent person, I on the other hand can't really debate you. I will leave that to my more polished members on here. I'm a lesser educated mother fucker but I definately know right from wrong! SO YOU SIR ,IN MY FEABLE LITTLE MIND,U ISA FOOKING IDIOT! :happy feet: :happy feet: :shades: You wrote: you will have to join his REVOLUTION DC! Send him a IM,get the info. There is more power if you have more Idiots. Not that sam is stupid,but he is a IDIOT! I am a bit confused. In one post you write "but he is a IDIOT!" in the next you write "You are a very intelligent person..." Are you suggesting I am a very intelligent idiot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeme back 2blue Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) You wrote: you will have to join his REVOLUTION DC! Send him a IM,get the info. There is more power if you have more Idiots. Not that sam is stupid,but he is a IDIOT! I am a bit confused. In one post you write "but he is a IDIOT!" in the next you write "You are a very intelligent person..." Are you suggesting I am a very intelligent idiot? WITHOUT A DOUBT! ALTHOUGH I DO NOT IN ANY WAY CONDONE YOUR VIEWS.REMEMBER ISA LESSER UNEDUCATED PEOPLES,THAT'S WHY I YELL ALL THE TIME! :happy feet: :shades:ACTUALY I CALLED YOU NOT STUPID IN ONE POST AND INTELLIGENT IN THE OTHER, BUT IDIOT STILL APLIES TO BOTH. Edited March 10, 2009 by takeme back 2blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Gompers Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 WITHOUT A DOUBT! ALTHOUGH I DO NOT IN ANY WAY CONDONE YOUR VIEWS.REMEMBER ISA LESSER UNEDUCATED PEOPLES,THAT'S WHY I YELL ALL THE TIME! :happy feet: :shades: How did you determine I was an idiot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeme back 2blue Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 How did you determine I was an idiot? CHECK THE POST AGAIN IT HAS BEEN EDITED, THE ANSWER TO YOUR ? The Opposition Party to the Administrative Caucus. ENUF SAID! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) I agree I am no different. As for the assumptions, were you or were you not being a hypocrite? Easy question, easy to rebut. You can't. Worse, you can not admit that you can not. When you state, my good friend who demands quotes, "You can talk to all of these members here till your blue in the face, but you are not going to convince them to stop posting, " would you be kind enough to show me where I suggested that? You didn't. you attempted to impune the credibility of respected members of this community, while you with your 13 post have not established your own credibility. So you don't want people to quit posting, you just want to decide who we should listen to. How did you determine I was an idiot? Your not Sam Gompers, you just stole that mans name and used it as your user ID. Edited March 10, 2009 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CourtJester Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 How did you determine I was an idiot? I am interested in hearing your opinion. I've noticed that anytime someone suggests change, they are labeled "anti-union." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CourtJester Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) You didn't. you attempted to impune the credibility of respected members of this community, while you with your 13 post have not established your own credibility. So you don't want people to quit posting, you just want to decide who we should listen to. So new people aren't welcome here? Edited March 10, 2009 by CourtJester Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) So new people aren't welcome here? New peoples opinions carry less weight until they have earned the respect of their peers. I would have to give less credence into what gobstoppers is saying, and more faith in those He addressed. Sammy is a sh-t stick. Edited March 10, 2009 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lquidspine Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 So new people aren't welcome here? New people are always welcome, that I am sure no one will argue. However when post number one starts calling out longtime good standing members of a forum community I think it is time for the Springs, and Pioneers, and levels, and The Generals and most of the rest of you need to recognize what they really are: The Opposition Party to the Administrative Caucus. is a bold move to start things off. The fact is some of those named are already involved, some at the highest level of what Sam suggests they are opposing. So to recap new people are always welcome but come correct before making bold accusations. That would be my suggestion, for anyone that is starting to get involved into a new message forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CourtJester Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 New peoples opinions carry less weight until they have earned the respect of their peers. I would have to give less credence into what gobstoppers is saying, and more faith in those He addressed. Sammy is a sh-t stick. It's a senority thing, I get it. I actually respect that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lquidspine Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 It's a senority thing, I get it. I actually respect that. Furious is a five star general as well, look by his name 5 stars :slap: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) New people are always welcome, that I am sure no one will argue. However when post number one starts calling out longtime good standing members of a forum community is a bold move to start things off. The fact is some of those named are already involved, some at the highest level of what Sam suggests they are opposing. So to recap new people are always welcome but come correct before making bold accusations. That would be my suggestion, for anyone that is starting to get involved into a new message forum. I don't think Gobstoppers gets it lquidspine. This is not the old days where they can put an institutional advertisement in the newspaper, and all we can do is read it. In this day and age you have to answer for your statements directly. Once again Sam these are real people you are addressing, and if you cite BS, you will be judged for it! My suggestion is that you create a new user ID and come back with a new attitude, you have already started off on the wrong foot! It's a senority thing, I get it. I actually respect that. It is not just the amount of time you have spent here, it is mainly the content of your posts. These people Sam is trashing earned their respect because they have shown that they know the language, and argue for the membership's sake. Are you suggesting I am a very intelligent idiot? BINGO, we have a winner! Edited March 10, 2009 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgamerica Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 What do they say on talk radio? Long time listener, first time caller. Same thing here. I think there is a large audience of us readers. Larger than most people realize. I think it is time for the Springs, and Pioneers, and levels, and The Generals and most of the rest of you need to recognize what they really are: The Opposition Party to the Administrative Caucus. (For those who don’t know the Administrative Caucus is the one currently in power. Except for some action out West a few years ago by New Horizons (and I am not even sure they are still around), it has never been challenged.) The IUAW won this round, because they understood who they are and what they wanted. I think, by and large, bloggers on BON who were against the contract understood what they wanted, but did not understand who they were or what they needed to do to win. The slogan by Ron (Live to fight another day) is far superior in its persuasiveness then one BONer’s tactic of telling his co-workers they were “scabs,†if they were going to vote yes- the old “A told them what an asshole they are and now they’ll change trick.†Has that ever worked on you? I wonder how many, if any, BONers who wrote that only stupid would vote Yes actually convinced anyone to vote NO. I suspect they convinced no one. I seriously doubt they even tried, too. In fact, the anti-concession crowd never even developed a printable summary of what exactly was wrong with the contract. A summary which would have been printed off from BON and passed around every plant giving people the opportunity to talk about why they are voting no and why the listener should do so as well. The IUAW, on the other hand, had an extraordinary nice looking flier framing the issues at hand. (Tough times, No Credit, Equality of Sacrifice) While the BON was mocking the flier- and it was part informational/part propaganda- as the low lights the IUAW was setting the stage for informational / propaganda meetings, with a strong basis for voting yes. This was time poorly spent by the anti-concession crowd. Better time would have spent preparing to counter the IUAW at the information meetings. What questions should be asked? Where is the flaw in their argument? There are a lot of smart anti-concession BONers out there. I bet y’ all could have come with some really powerful stuff. Having done that and assuming the questions got asked, like Paul Revere, the news from that meeting would have been relayed to the next group for the informational/propaganda meeting. I can see it now: At the Sterling meeting, Sister Trufflebuns asked the following question. “What is the equality of sacrifice for the salaried personal?†The IUAW Rep. side stepped her question. So, I am asking you, Mr. IUAW Rep.: “What is the equality of sacrifice for salaried personal?†If you want to side step my question, tell you counterpart at OHAP that he will be getting the exact same question. All the while this news is reported back to BON. Somewhere down the line, some IUAW rep. is either going to have to answer the question (and the news will spread back via BON) or say I am not going to tell you (and the news will spread back via BON). Either way, it is a victory in persuading people to vote the way you want them to vote. Likewise, to the “I am voting No, but the vote is corrupt crowd,†faction of the Opposition Party, the IUAW does not need to corrupt the vote. I am amazed at the number of BONers who are shocked, sickened, etc… by how few people have voted. This has always been the case and is why the IUAW had a long history of only publishing the percentages. They are attempting to hide the weakness of how few cared to vote. Remember even presidential elections only draw about 50% of the eligible voters. Why would you think this be any different? The IUAW relies on this to get its agenda passed. That is why there is no need for the IUAW to corrupt the vote. Their guys vote YES and others don’t vote at all. I think you should rely upon the same principle to get your agenda passed. Get your guys to vote No and hope the others don’t vote at all. Remember, that Barack Obama brought new voters out in strong numbers. It might be something you want to consider. Also, writing a post which say it will “pass anyways†simply discourages the very people who you wanted to vote from voting. You were shooting yourselves in the foot by discouraging the very people who are were going to vote the way you wanted them to vote. But, even now if you really, truly believe the vote is being corrupted, (and it is not to my knowledge) run for the election committee. At least you will know there is one honest person on it. I understand BON is a free format, but it seems that the majority of you are dissatisfied with the UAW on some level. As an aside, I found it most interesting that several contributors were very pro contract concession. I think, and can in no way prove, that this was the IUAW doing. I want to stress that any one individual has an absolute right to his/her opinion and in any one case that person could be representing his/her personal view. I just find it interesting that there seemed to be more “pro†voices than usual. I do know that the IUAW monitors BON, but I have never known them to post information on it. Times might be changing. So, I would suggest, if you truly want to “reform†the UAW, you start acting like that which you really are: The Opposition Party. For as long as you remain disorganized, you will lose every vote, every time. That I can guarantee. Hell of a post Sam!!!! Will you or someone please send me imfo on the Administrative Caucus I wouldlove to help out and do my part to stop what our IUAW has become. Email me at bussyharley@yahoo.com. Thanks and lets all stand together and we can make changes. Stand as one and they will crumble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeme back 2blue Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Hell of a post Sam!!!! Will you or someone please send me imfo on the Administrative Caucus I wouldlove to help out and do my part to stop what our IUAW has become. Email me at bussyharley@yahoo.com. Thanks and lets all stand together and we can make changes. Stand as one and they will crumble FYI-Administrative Caucus =your IUAW :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.