[Lerkfish]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...440418,00.html

Hiller was escorted from Hedgesville High School on Tuesday after shouting comments about the Iraq war and the failure to find weapons of mass destruction there. The crowd had easily drowned out Hiller with its chant: ``Four more years.''

Arriving at his job with Octavo Designs in Frederick, Md., the next morning, Hiller said he was ``shocked'' to learn he was fired. A woman at the company who declined to give her name confirmed Hiller was axed because of his conduct at the rally.

``They see my actions as negative,'' Hiller said, adding he'd do the same thing again. ``There is no venue for the regular guy to ask a question. We don't have access to people in power. And those events are completely scripted and controlled.''

Last month, Charleston City Council apologized to two protesters arrested for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts to the president's July 4 rally. The pair were taken from the event in restraints after revealing T-shirts with Bush's name crossed out on the front and the words ``Love America, Hate Bush'' on the back. Trespassing charges were ultimately dismissed.

prong two, firmly in place, quell with extreme prejudice the citizen's rights to protest.

[CreepingDeth]

CONSPIRACYYYY!!!!!

Drudge reported this. The government had no role. The guy embarrassed his firm in front of a client there. Maybe he shouldn't have been a dumbass. I'm sorry if there is no government conspiracy there for use, but good try at making one. These threads about conspiracies are old.

[LoganCharles]

You left out the part where the guy got free tickets from a client where he works to go. He embarrased the client and the company he works for. He deserved to be fired. This has nothing to do with politics but merely proper business etitique. You don't insult clients.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
You left out the part where the guy got free tickets from a client where he works to go. He embarrased the client and the company he works for. He deserved to be fired. This has nothing to do with politics but merely proper business etitique. You don't insult clients.

Of course he left that part out... it go against his agenda. Good job reading the actual article and not simply accepting his selective quote as the gospel.

[CreepingDeth]

Shhhhhhhh. That's how he makes conspiracies out of absolutley nothing. Refrain. From. Point. Out. His Paranoia. Shhhhhh.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
You left out the part where the guy got free tickets from a client where he works to go. He embarrased the client and the company he works for. He deserved to be fired. This has nothing to do with politics but merely proper business etitique. You don't insult clients.

If I post the link, I am encouraging people to read the whole thing. If I excerpt it, I am not implying that is the only part of the story.

Besides, you didn't read far enough...my prong two comment is referring to the second part of the excerpt, where people were charged with "trespassing" for wearing t-shirts.

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
If I post the link, I am encouraging people to read the whole thing. If I excerpt it, I am not implying that is the only part of the story.

Besides, you didn't read far enough...my prong two comment is referring to the second part of the excerpt, where people were charged with "trespassing" for wearing t-shirts.

The charges were also dismissed.

[LoganCharles]

He also left out the part where the guy wants to go back to being a nurse. Sounds like a typical liberal weenie to me. Nothing against any male Republican nurses out there of course.

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
He also left out the part where the guy wants to go back to being a nurse. Sounds like a typical liberal weenie to me. Nothing against any male Republican nurses out there of course.

I read the article and the guy didn't sound all that upset. He had been at the company 5 months and understood the nature of the business (advertising). Oh well, I'm sure by tomorrow morning this thread will be some rallying cry for the left and another prong will sprout up somewhere.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by placebo1969:
The charges were also dismissed.

but not before removing them in restraints.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
If I post the link, I am encouraging people to read the whole thing. If I excerpt it, I am not implying that is the only part of the story.

Besides, you didn't read far enough...my prong two comment is referring to the second part of the excerpt, where people were charged with "trespassing" for wearing t-shirts.

Do you even read what you post? The charges were dismissed.

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
but not before removing them in restraints.

That's what happens when people get arrested. Not trying to sound like a jerk, but that's what happens.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
Do you even read what you post? The charges were dismissed.

yes, I read what I post.
Even if the charges are dismissed, their ability to express themselves was removed, in addition to being restrained for simply altering a tshirt. The charges being dropped is a good thing, but the infringement of speech had already occurred at that point.

I attended a Kerry rally, where Bush supporters (a very small contingent, about 50-75) were attempting to drown out the speakers with bullhorns. The local democratic chairman welcomed them and said, we support your freedom of speech, we are glad you here. We think everyone in america has the right to be wrong.

and that was all that was made of it. The hecklers eventually left of their own accord. No one was arrested or put into restraints.

drowning out speakers with a bullhorn is a little more over the top than wearing a t-shirt.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by placebo1969:
That's what happens when people get arrested. Not trying to sound like a jerk, but that's what happens.

that's what happens when people get arrested for a CRIME.

[CreepingDeth]

Just saying he shouldn't have insulted the client like that. I'd be pretty pissed if a client saw that.

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
that's what happens when people get arrested for a CRIME.

What else do you get arrested for? I don't remember what they were arrested for exactly, but I'm sure it was something like disturbing the peace, or something. (I will concede that I may be wrong, however.)

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Just saying he shouldn't have insulted the client like that. I'd be pretty pissed if a client saw that.

actually, I don't think insulted the client, he "heckled" Bush. He apparently embarrassed the client (although why the client should have felt embarrassed is beyond me, since he's not responsible for the guys behaviour)

Even If where he works has a clearly defined policy against political partisanship in order to maintain employment, they themselves broke it by allowing a client to garner tickets to a bush rally for their staff.

Grounds for dismissal, IF based on his political stance or making them public would be shaky at best, because political involvement was tacitly approved by the company provided tickets FOR Bush.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by placebo1969:
What else do you get arrested for? I don't remember what they were arrested for exactly, but I'm sure it was something like disturbing the peace, or something. (I will concede that I may be wrong, however.)

from the first post in the thread:

Last month, Charleston City Council apologized to two protesters arrested for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts to the president's July 4 rally. The pair were taken from the event in restraints after revealing T-shirts with Bush's name crossed out on the front and the words ``Love America, Hate Bush'' on the back. Trespassing charges were ultimately dismissed.

Is that a crime, or free speech?

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
from the first post in the thread:

Is that a crime, or free speech?

Last reply before bed. By your own quote, they were arrested for trespassing. That was the crime. Whether or not there was enough evidence to support the arrest is another issue. Stop sounding so paranoid.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by placebo1969:
Last reply before bed. By your own quote, they were arrested for trespassing. That was the crime. Whether or not there was enough evidence to support the arrest is another issue. Stop sounding so paranoid.

how does one trespass at a campaign rally? and how is the crime of trespassing for people with tickets who wear a certain shirt not a crime of trespassing for other people with tickets who wore a different shirt? aren't they both on the same property?

What is different? oh yeah, the free speech thingy.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
actually, I don't think insulted the client, he "heckled" Bush. He apparently embarrassed the client (although why the client should have felt embarrassed is beyond me, since he's not responsible for the guys behaviour)

Even If where he works has a clearly defined policy against political partisanship in order to maintain employment, they themselves broke it by allowing a client to garner tickets to a bush rally for their staff.

Grounds for dismissal, IF based on his political stance or making them public would be shaky at best, because political involvement was tacitly approved by the company provided tickets FOR Bush.

Really lerk, you don't think a company has a right to get rid of someone who embarrasses a client? I was always under the impression that the reason you try to keep clients happy is because they are the ones paying you. If you do something that adversely effects your employers business, you have every reasonable expectation that you will be hitting the unemployment line. This guy has every right in the world to express his opinions and use his right to free speech. His employer has every right not to let that effect their bottom line. I'm sure that if a client had invited employees of this firm to a Kerry event, and he started yelling pro-Bush stuff, he would be just as fired.

[Zimphire]

<--- artist

[LoganCharles]

A 3 pronged illusion? Yeah that would basically sum up the majority of his posts.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I attended a Kerry rally, where Bush supporters (a very small contingent, about 50-75) were attempting to drown out the speakers with bullhorns. The local democratic chairman welcomed them and said, we support your freedom of speech, we are glad you here. We think everyone in america has the right to be wrong.

Oh yeah. Where's your proof that you attended this rally and the above happened?

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
Really lerk, you don't think a company has a right to get rid of someone who embarrasses a client? I was always under the impression that the reason you try to keep clients happy is because they are the ones paying you. If you do something that adversely effects your employers business, you have every reasonable expectation that you will be hitting the unemployment line. This guy has every right in the world to express his opinions and use his right to free speech. His employer has every right not to let that effect their bottom line. I'm sure that if a client had invited employees of this firm to a Kerry event, and he started yelling pro-Bush stuff, he would be just as fired.

sure. That explains why the client would want the guy fired.
Although the company might like the client's money though, the guy wasn't employed by the client.
I"m saying I don't think it would hold up if the artist sued the company, if they said he was fired for his political partisanship since acceptance of the tickets had already established that partisanship was acceptable.
However, I'll concede that I wasn't there, so I have no idea how obnoxious the guy was being...

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
The guy embarrassed his firm in front of a client there. Maybe he shouldn't have been a dumbass.

fascist!

how can this happen?

as a matter of principle i find it very disturbing that a company should be able to fire an employee for exercising his right to "freedom of speech".

"ownership" and "economy" should never supersede the rights granted by the constitution. anything else would lead straight to a dictatorship (regardless of political partisanship).

these "spins" are really starting to make me sick.

edit: this is what happens, when you follow the argument of absolut power to the extreme. the punishments were different, the "spirit" the same.

[version]

I love the part about those wearing t-shirts saying, 'Love America, Hate Bush'. They 'eventually' had charges dropped for trespassing.

Anyway, in the past I've atended several client paid events in which I've done similar things, but never got the sack. Over here that would be an unfair dismissal. But hey, I'm not in, 'The United States of eroding your rights under your noses, using the pretext of securing your safety due to terrorism'.

[voodoo]

I'm simply amazed that the mods have let the personal attacks and idiocy run rampant here. Bad jobs mods.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I'm simply amazed that the mods have let the personal attacks and idiocy run rampant here. Bad jobs mods.

vmarks hasn't got off to a good start, has he? tsk tsk.

[version]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
vmarks hasn't got off to a good start, has he? tsk tsk.

Talking of vmarks, his name on the list of mods for the politics lounge screws up the look of the main lounge page. Just a little observation.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Compare and contrast: A private employer fires a private employee for political activity on the job.

With:

a political campaign that tries to intimidate TV stations into not broadcasting a political ad critical to its candidate,

The same campaign tries to imtimidate a publisher into withdrawing a book critical to its candidate,

It also files FEC charges against the group critical to the candidate,

And it passes a dossier of dirt on the individuals in that group to friendly journalists so they can run hatchet jobs on them.

It also files suits in multiple states to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot.



What was that prong thing, again? Supressing dissent or something?

[SimeyTheLimey]

And speaking of supressing things, how about the candidate authorizing a reprint of his book? There seems to be considerable demand for it. Amazon is offering copies of the out of print book for $500 a copy!

Maybe this is why:

[voodoo]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
And speaking of supressing things, how about the candidate authorizing a reprint of his book? There seems to be considerable demand for it. Amazon is offering copies of the out of print book for $500 a copy!

Maybe this is why:

Whoa cool book!! Me wants me want me WANTS!

Look some of us just hate wars. No matter what the goal of them is. It's a "the end doesn't justify the means" thing. That is something I can relate to and that is why I see John Kerry's character and it is strong. I'm impressed. Then again the way he brought himself to this position as probably the next president of the U.S.A. also shows that strength of character. It is there for all to see who want to see.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Compare and contrast: A private employer fires a private employee for political activity on the job.

With:

a political campaign that tries to intimidate TV stations into not broadcasting a political ad critical to its candidate,

The same campaign tries to imtimidate a publisher into withdrawing a book critical to its candidate,

It also files FEC charges against the group critical to the candidate,

And it passes a dossier of dirt on the individuals in that group to friendly journalists so they can run hatchet jobs on them.

It also files suits in multiple states to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot.



What was that prong thing, again? Supressing dissent or something?

Except that the Bush campaign has done the same things you mentioned here. They tried to intimidate TV stations into not running Moveon ads. They successfully intimidated a publisher into withdrawing a book (Favorite Son). They did file FEC charges against moveon. There's absolutely no question that they dish dirt to journalists. I haven't read about this particular case Lerk is talking about, but if you're trying to unfavorably compare Kerry and Bush with your items, it just doesn't work.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
sure. That explains why the client would want the guy fired.
Although the company might like the client's money though, the guy wasn't employed by the client.
I"m saying I don't think it would hold up if the artist sued the company, if they said he was fired for his political partisanship since acceptance of the tickets had already established that partisanship was acceptable.
However, I'll concede that I wasn't there, so I have no idea how obnoxious the guy was being...

Ok, lets leave the politics out of it. Say the client had given the company tickets for a play, not a political event. The same employee receives a ticket for the play, and is rude through the entire thing, heckling the performers, thus pissing off the client and embarrassing the employer and causing the employer to try and salvage the relationship with the client, or face a loss of that revenue. Would it be ok for the company to dismiss that employee then? My employer recently terminated an employee for telling some to **** off. Was this a violation of his right to free speech? When I'm at work, I conduct myself professionally. If I'm at an event that is company sponsored, or work related in some way (i.e. they gave me tickets for the event) I conduct myself appropriately. If I didn't, I would expect consequences for those actions.

[voodoo]

I think many people here - I won't name names - have a really warped sense of justice and what an employer should be able to do. Getting fired on an employer's whim is just ****ing stupid.

Fortunately this kind of behaviour of employers is not condoned in more advanced social states in the world. Scandinavia for instance. We fought damn hard for being treated with respect from the employer and it is sad to see employees take up the glove for employers in general.

[CreepingDeth]

Name names. This board's sense of justice involved relative opinions and double standards. Scandinavia?
Listen, if a new guy pisses of an employee, he's gonna be punished. If you're a waiter, and you don't show up, you're gone. If you lose the deal for your business, you're dead. If you piss of an employee which threatens their business relationship, you will be punished. This isn't some inefficient government bureaucrat: the employer can fire anyone he wants, but since that creates a missing man in their company, he won't do it whenever he feels like it. I know you guys wish everything was government run, but please, the boss is the owner of the company and thus has control over his people.

[vmarks]

Some states are 'right to work' states, where you cannot be fired without good cause, and it's nearly impossible to let someone go.

Other states are not 'right to work' states, where you are employed at the employer's pleasure.

The rights of the Constitution are very clearly prohibitions on what Congress can and cannot do. They are not the only rights Americans have, they simply lay out lines that Congress cannot cross. An employer isn't bound by those restrictions.

As for moderation, when a user posts a theory about conspiring parties, it renders him a conspiracy theorist. Whether or not it is a personal attack is your own value judgment.

See something you don't like? Report it. The moderator's first instinct is to take less action rather than more, feather touch rather than heavy handed. After all, we are able to edit your posts, change your words, lock threads, among other things. Yet that happens in the other forums frequently and not at all here. Why? Because the first thing that would happen would be cries of 'stepping on Free Speech!'

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I think many people here - I won't name names - have a really warped sense of justice and what an employer should be able to do. Getting fired on an employer's whim is just ****ing stupid.

Fortunately this kind of behaviour of employers is not condoned in more advanced social states in the world. Scandinavia for instance. We fought damn hard for being treated with respect from the employer and it is sad to see employees take up the glove for employers in general.

That's why your system is going bankrupt. It's in a liberal fantasy world that employers sit around eating grapes being fed to them by virgins while their employees slave away shackled. Most employers have put years of hard work to get where they are at. To have some punk employee mouth off and embarrass a client, potentially hurting a relationship is genuine reason for dismissal. The loser should be blacklisted.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I think many people here - I won't name names - have a really warped sense of justice and what an employer should be able to do. Getting fired on an employer's whim is just ****ing stupid.

Fortunately this kind of behaviour of employers is not condoned in more advanced social states in the world. Scandinavia for instance. We fought damn hard for being treated with respect from the employer and it is sad to see employees take up the glove for employers in general.

I think that respect should be mutual. I am an employee of the company I work for, and when I am at work or at an event sanctioned by them, I conduct myself accordingly. I also have my own business, which provides the majority of my income. If one of my employees does something '****ing stupid' that jeopardizes that income, they may well become '****ing stupid and unemployed'. This wasn't an honest mistake on the part of the designer, he knew full well what he was doing, and I think it's rather naive on his part not to think there would be consequences for that. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to behave professionally and appropriately at a company sponsored event, or an event you have been invited to by a client.

[mo]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
That's why your system is going bankrupt. It's in a liberal fantasy world that employers sit around eating grapes being fed to them by virgins while their employees slave away shackled.

Hey voodoo, you know of any management-level openings where you work? I've been looking for something just like this.

The loser should be blacklisted.

That's the spirit!

[voodoo]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
I think that respect should be mutual. I am an employee of the company I work for, and when I am at work or at an event sanctioned by them, I conduct myself accordingly. I also have my own business, which provides the majority of my income. If one of my employees does something '****ing stupid' that jeopardizes that income, they may well become '****ing stupid and unemployed'. This wasn't an honest mistake on the part of the designer, he knew full well what he was doing, and I think it's rather naive on his part not to think there would be consequences for that. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to behave professionally and appropriately at a company sponsored event, or an event you have been invited to by a client.

Sure there should be mutual respect, that means as employees would respect the interest of their company, the company would respect the employees' interests. This example is nothing but a textbook example of a company's complete disrespect for an employee. If this was a company sponored event it is outside the workplace and distanced from said company. Not to mention if this was after work hours or a non-payed event. A company has to respect that people are only their employees from 9 to five so to speak. A company cannot and must not have any influence over employees' political opinion, religious affiliation or sexual orientation (to name a few). Obviously that is a right U.S.Aricans don't enjoy and us Scandos damn well fought and died for. Whatever your POV is, and it sounds all lofty and fine (mutual respect and such) that is a far cry from what the reaction of that company towards their employee was.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
That's why your system is going bankrupt. It's in a liberal fantasy world that employers sit around eating grapes being fed to them by virgins while their employees slave away shackled. Most employers have put years of hard work to get where they are at. To have some punk employee mouth off and embarrass a client, potentially hurting a relationship is genuine reason for dismissal. The loser should be blacklisted.

?

<looks at Scando system>

Umm

I think you are confusing this to the Saudi Arabian system or something.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by mo:
Hey voodoo, you know of any management-level openings where you work? I've been looking for something just like this.

There are always openings every once in a while :/

Like in every normal workplace.

[CreepingDeth]

It seems like the loudmouth was the disrespectful one.

[mo]

Originally posted by voodoo:
There are always openings every once in a while :/

Like in every normal workplace.

Just kidding, sorry. I can't get the workplace virgins here to feed me anything.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
It seems like the loudmouth was the disrespectful one.

Perhaps, but even looking at this from the U.S.Arican POV the company didn't do itself any favor by reacting like this. The rest of the employees' morale takes a hit when they realize how expandable the company considers them. The loudmouth and the company and the rest of the employees would have been better served by an official warning to the loudmouth. Everyone is entitled to screw up once in a while, that would be only fair. Everybody screwes up and employees know that. When will they screw up and get sacked without warning? Goodbye morale. Same applies to the people who are applying to replace the recently fired individual. They won't like the prospect of working for a company that is so disrespectful towards their employees. That degrades morale and employee dedication to the company. Very likely that kind of reputation will rather attract low life employees that are used to getting sacked or don't care. Have no ambition. There are so many good reasons for mutual respect between employers and employees. That respect has to be earned by the emploer though. Not the other way around. The smart, hard working, talented and responsible employees realize that they are in fact a valuable asset to the company. More so than the company is to them in fact. That is why companies compete for the talented people. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by mo:
Just kidding, sorry. I can't get the workplace virgins here to feed me anything.

i work with hot chicks but dang shucks I think they ain't no virgins no longer

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by vmarks:
As for moderation, when a user posts a theory about conspiring parties, it renders him a conspiracy theorist. Whether or not it is a personal attack is your own value judgment.

no, actually as a moderator, its YOUR value judgement. Which you've clearly indicated.
So, in your opinion, if someone posts what others consider to be a conspiracy theory, its open season on them as far as you are concerned: all personal attacks, no matter how heinous are acceptable, all misdirections of threads, anything at all is no holds barred....am I reading you correctly here?

Who gets to decide who is a conspiracy theorist, then?

I certainly would characterize those who think Kerry plotted 35 years ago to fake injuries and falsify requests for medals so he could be elected president at some point a conspircay theory.

Does that mean that, for me, its open season on LoganCharles, Simey, Zim, CreepingDeath? Does that mean, that If I attack them, you'll let it slide?

That's the criteria you have set up. Shall I test it? oh, wait, I don't have to. I've already received a PM admonition telling me to relax and allow Zim to abuse me.

good job! Hope that works out for you.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by vmarks:

See something you don't like? Report it. The moderator's first instinct is to take less action rather than more, feather touch rather than heavy handed. After all, we are able to edit your posts, change your words, lock threads, among other things. Yet that happens in the other forums frequently and not at all here. Why? Because the first thing that would happen would be cries of 'stepping on Free Speech!'

That this thread has seen no moderation and the fact that some of the posters in this thread are still allowd to post in the political lounge demonstrates the failure of the moderators of the pol lounge. i'm not accusing any one of you in particular but I am criticizing all of you for not doing your job in a an effective and *consistant* manner.