Courtesy of HuffPo:Conservative Radio Talk Show Host Rush Limbaugh tells Chris: “we need concealed carry in these schools.” Watch the full interview at 2P/10P on Fox News Channel. pic.twitter.com/nYSBZLetjM— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) February 18, 2018
Minutes after interviewing a group of Parkland, Florida, students organizing marches in response to the mass shooting at their school, “Fox News Sunday” put conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh on the air to dismiss their plans and condemn them for trying to advance a “political agenda.”
“Marches aren’t going to solve it,” Limbaugh told Chris Wallace, the program’s host, after a segment featuring student survivors of last week’s shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that claimed the lives of 17 of their classmates and school faculty members.
“Chris, the next shooter is out there. The next shooter probably has the gun that he’s going to use. … How is anything that we’re talking about going to stop that?” he asked of the planned demonstration.
Limbaugh then proposed guns be allowed in schools.
“The solution to me ― and I know this is going to cause all kinds of angst ― but the solution is we need concealed carry (of weapons) in the schools,” he said.
You know I would say that this is unbelievable, but of course it's not, it's exactly what you would expect from the Right Wing.
Well for a counterpoint I offer these statements from two of the students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.
I wonder how much money Limbaugh receives from the NRA?Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School student David Hogg to politicians who receive NRA donations: “If you can’t get elected without taking money from child murderers, why are you running?” (via CNN) pic.twitter.com/qcdlcpcEfV— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) February 19, 2018
OT:
ReplyDelete*THIS* is why Trump's nominating judges is so important and the Democrats inability to block the nominations is going to screw us for decades:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gorsuch-deciding-vote-key-labor-union-funding-case-134044798--politics.html
"America's union leaders are about to find out if they were right to fiercely oppose Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court as a pivotal, potentially devastating vote against organized labor.
The newest justice holds the deciding vote in a case to be argued Feb. 26 that could affect the financial viability of unions that are major supporters of Democratic candidates and causes. The unions represent more than 5 million government workers in 24 states and the District of Columbia who could be affected by the outcome. The other eight justices split 4 to 4 when the issue was last at the court in 2016.
The court is being asked to jettison a 41-year-old ruling that allows states to require government employees who don't want to be union members to pay for their share of activities the union undertakes on behalf of all workers, not just its members. These so-called fair share fees cover the costs of collective bargaining and grievance procedures to deal with workplace complaints.
Employees who don't join the union do not have to pay for the unions' political activities."
So you're not a member and your fees only pay for the services that are provided to you. Mostly it is negotiating your contract. Any extras may not be covered. You don't get to vote for union leadership or for the contract that has been negotiated. If the union has some sort of perk packages for discounts with local retailers, you don't get that. You only get what you pay for.
Now Gorsucks is going to rule that you don't have to pay anything but still are entitled to the services. Because that's how contracts work. The contract is for all workers because businesses claim they can't negotiate individual contracts with every worker. So the burden is placed on the unions. If you can get the services of the unions without being a member or paying for them, more and more workers will leave the union until there is no more union.
Just another way of eroding our middle class.
Gorsucks is going to vote that you're not obligated to pay for services rendered but can have a free ride at the expense of your fellow workers. Just watch. Just another way to gut the unions by eliminating their funding stream.
Please explain...this case has to do with government employees and unions.... why in the world do do government workers need a union again?
DeleteCollective bargaining for one. This is an attack on collective bargaining.
DeleteThere is also workplace safety. Unions do a lot about protecting workers from unsafe working conditions.
Then there are contract violations. Like assigning work outside of a worker's contract duties or making them work overtime without pay or not providing the legally required non-duty lunch hours and breaks.
Unions also represent workers regarding disciplinary issues if a worker is terminated without due process or is being punished in some way for some sort of action. Perhaps without a hearing or representation.
Negotiating a contract is the least of the work that unions do. Breaking a union helps any employer abuse their workers. It's why unions were created in the first place. Unions gave workers the 40 hour week, sick leave, vacation time, maternity and bereavement, all sorts of rights regarding working conditions.
Getting rid of a union is a gift to employers that they can start to abuse workers with no consequences.
The government is the largest employer of unionized workers. You think they wouldn't abuse them if they could? Republicans would use this as a way to make up that huge budget deficit they created by lowering pay, benefits, retirement and instituting unpaid overtime and all sorts of other stuff to save on the budget. And without a union, government employees would have no way to fight it. In fact, some would have no option but to quit because they are barred by law from going on strike thanks to Republicans in Congress.
Government workers need a union just like any other worker needs a union. For protection from abuse.
Ridiculous mlaiuppa. If there is any cake job to get, it is government work.
Delete12:36
DeleteYou are an idiot.
Anonymous 12:11 PM asked: why in the world do do government workers need a union again?
DeleteFor starters, you could reread the comment you are purporting to reply to. For example, “The contract is for all workers because businesses claim they can't negotiate individual contracts with every worker.‟
If you feel that the relationship between governments and their employees is somehow different from that of other businesses, THEN MAKE YOUR CASE.
The Supreme Court will make the case, Ted. And this by no means is making unions illegal, government or otherwise.
DeleteAnonymous 12:36 PM wrote: Ridiculous mlaiuppa. If there is any cake job to get, it is government work.
DeleteThat might be true of the upper levels of the current administration, but I dispute your claim as applied to the rank-and-file. Would you care to make your case? “Everybody knows‟ will not be considered a satisfactory response.
""Employees who don't join the union do not have to pay for the unions' political activities.""
DeleteAs it should be! Why should employees be forced to pay for a unions political activities!?
Anonymous 1:11 PM quoted (without attribution) a statement by mlaiuppa regarding the distinction between political and non-political activities of a union. That statement was made simply as a statement of fact, with no evident value judgement.
DeleteAnonymous 1:11 PM then commented: As it should be! Why should employees be forced to pay for a unions political activities!?
As far as I can tell (admittedly, I've only been reading English for a little over seventy years) nobody in this thread has expressed such an opinion, either expressly or by implication.
Even so, thank you for expressing your strong belief, which I do agree with.
@1:11 PM Why did the Palin Pac use donations for family travel, baby sitting, and shopping?
Delete12:11 it is pretty obvious you have never worked in government. You find the same types of lousy supervisors & bosses in government agencies as are found in the private sector. Some of us want government to work well for everyone, thats why we stay with it. We sure do not like bad management and the Union tends to be the only option to keep things on a level playing field.
DeleteLimbaugh is a big fat idiot. Those who think he tells it like it is are also idiots. There are millions of these low intelligence fools.
ReplyDeleteDanielle Vabner would disagree.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/i-lost-my-little-brother-at-sandy-hook-heres-whats-different-about-the-florida-shooting_us_5a8aecd5e4b00bc49f46ecd0
"My brother and his classmates had a right to life. They had a right to safety. My siblings, both of whom were in the school that day as the horror unfolded, had a right to grow up with their brother. All of that was violently torn from them, and these basic human rights have been torn from thousands of other Americans in the years since.
The worst part? Congress has actively chosen to do nothing to keep it from happening again, despite overwhelming evidence from other countries that common-sense gun safety legislation can and does save lives. In the months after Sandy Hook, Congress voted down a measure that would’ve expanded background checks for gun buyers. And since then, thousands more lives have been cut short due to gun violence. More children have been murdered in their classrooms, including in Parkland last week.
I, along with the rest of the country, have seen the cycle play out over and over in the media: News breaks of yet another shooting, politicians offer thoughts and prayers ― some telling us that these tragedies shouldn’t be politicized or that we shouldn’t have a “knee-jerk reaction” against guns. We are told it’s too soon to talk about gun violence ― when, tragically, it’s much too late ― and then we wait until the next one happens and the cycle begins anew."
"I recently saw a tweet that suggested that the possibility of passing common-sense gun safety legislation ended as soon as we decided that children dying in their first-grade classrooms was acceptable. Despite having felt this way numerous times in the years since Noah was gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary, I disagree. Sandy Hook was the turning point. Although we have allowed this to happen far too many times, there is hope. There is too much on the line not to keep fighting. Lives are at stake, and I refuse to allow my brother’s death to have been in vain. Let’s make Parkland the turning point that Sandy Hook should’ve been."
Because life is one big video game.
ReplyDeleteDo Turk Paylin and Serror Paylin and Toad Paylin agree that moar gunz make you moar safe?
ReplyDeleteLets ask Shaffer Cocks and his intended victims too!
Why the NRA Always Wins
ReplyDeleteIt’s not the money. It’s the culture.
...Why does the NRA always win, despite the repeated national traumas, and despite poll after poll showing a majority in favor of stronger gun control measures? It’s not the money. It’s because the NRA has built a movement that has convinced its followers that gun ownership is a way of life, central to one’s freedom and safety, that must be defended on a daily basis.
...But it’s a mistake to attribute the NRA’s success entirely to its campaign spending. The dollar amount was considerable in 2016: $54.4 million. But that money was not spent on the entire Congress. Thirty million went to Donald Trump, the rest mainly to six Republican Senate candidates in competitive races, five of whom won. For most members of Congress, the amount of money they get from the NRA is a tiny percentage of their overall hauls. If money were the only reason for their gun rights stances, Michael Bloomberg could offer to double whatever the NRA gives them and flip their votes.
To beat the NRA at its own game, the gun control movement needs to better understand how the NRA has built an army of single-issue voters.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/19/why-the-nra-always-wins-217028
so depressing.
Deletehttps://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/nra-guns-second-amendment-106856
Delete"Molding public opinion is the most important factor. Abraham Lincoln, debating slavery, said in 1858, “Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed. Consequently he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes and decisions possible or impossible to be executed.” The triumph of gun rights reminds us today: If you want to win in the court of law, first win in the court of public opinion."
Because there's no decorum anymore.
ReplyDeleteMY way or the highway and BANG you're dead.
Thanks, Limpballs. Enjoy your boys in Thailand.
Man destroys AR-15 on camera to support gun control in wake of Florida shooting
ReplyDeleteA New York man is going viral after he took to Facebook to record himself destroying his AR-15 rifle.
Scott Pappalardo says that he legally purchased and registered the gun more than 30 years ago and that he is also a firm believer in the second amendment – he even has it tattooed on his arm.
“I’m not a hunter, I’ve never killed anything with it. Except a bunch of targets,” he says in the video.
But after a 19-year-old used an AR-15 to kill 17 people at a high school in Florida last Wednesday, Pappalardo said that he had enough.
“Is the right to own this weapon more important than someone’s life? Look at the pictures of those victims. Is that right more important?” Pappalardo said in the video before saying that he wants to make sure his gun is never capable of taking someone’s life.
http://kdvr.com/2018/02/19/man-destroys-ar-15-on-camera-to-support-gun-control-in-wake-of-florida-shooting/
FBI investigating potential money transfers from Russian banker to NRA: report
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fbi-potential-transfers-russian-banker-nra-article-1.3763792
employees that do not pay union dues are SCABS. They receive the benefits of union contract.
ReplyDeleteNo. They're not.
DeleteEveryone should be required to pay for services rendered. At present all employees receive the services of a bargained contract and the union is the provider of that service.
They do not, not should they be required to pay for actions of that provider outside the scope of their direct benefits. I.E. they should pay for bargaining and other representation such as grievance but they should not have to support any political actions as they may be counter to the beliefs and values of the worker.
That is only fair.
What Gorsucks is going to do is a back door to destroying collective bargaining. When that's gone Businesses, including the government, will have carte blanche to basically determine what a contract will or will not say, how it will be enforced, etc. They will have all of the control and the workers will be little more than serfs.
Kiss minimum wage goodbye.
No more sick leave, vacation time, bereavement.
Eventually you'll lose the 40 hour work week, 8 hour day, overtime, holiday pay, holidays and a plethora of safety requirements which will no longer be required. After all, safety costs money.
A scab is someone that crosses a picket line and works during a strike.
Someone that receives benefits without paying is a scoflaw. That would be the wealthy and their tax cuts.
Nope,scabs are hired labor willing to cross a picket line.
DeleteOne of the first thing dotard dildo did was make sure that the mentally ill could buy a assault weapon and go shoot innocent kids.
ReplyDeleteG.W. Bush let the assault rifle ban expire so that's what they could buy.
DeleteCoincidence that incidents of school/mass shootings have risen since the ban expired?
Trump can't blame shootings on the mentally ill when he himself eliminated protections that would have prevented them from "legally" acquiring weapons.
Even bartenders can take away car keys and call cabs to take drunks home. You can't get cough medicine at the local drug store but store clerks can sell assault weapons to wackos?
Shouldn't Rush be fighting the opioid epidemic and let the high schoolers take care of gun control or is he all for oxytocin again?
ReplyDeleteBREAKING NEWS (and further proof that, as predicted, Special Counsel Bob Mueller is closing in on a sanctions policy-for-money/aid Trump-Russia coordination plot):
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/965711888771362817
The Content of the G.O.P.’s Character
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/19/opinion/gop-character-bad-faith.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakistocracy
Obat Testo Ultra Asli Di Medan
ReplyDeleteObat Develope Sex Asli Di Medan
Alamat Hammer Of Thor Di Medan
Obat Titan Gel Asli Di Medan
Obat Anabolic Rx24 Asli Di Medan
Obat Forex Asli Di Medan
Obat Vimax Asli Di Medan
Obat Viagra Asli Usa Di Binjai
Obat Cialis Tadalafil Di Medan
Obat Blue Wizard Asli Di Medan