Labor unions primary recipients of Obamacare waivers

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: And those plans represent 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers. Right?

So what? Doesn't matter. Anyone can "skew" the numbers to show their own personal "biases" whenever they want to. In your case, it would appear you have an "anti-organized labor" bias while I'm more fer organized labor than agin it. Go figure.

Why should anyone, unions, private business, anyone get a waiver?

Read the article.

Already did... twice... now how is 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers skewed?

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Already did... twice... now how is 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers skewed?

Read it again, and again, and again until you get it..... now, please define "socialist" since you are still bandying this term about with no clear definition, from YOU, of what it actually means. It isn't about ME understanding, or not understanding, the definition of the term. Rather, it is about whether or not YOU do. :smurf:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Already did... twice... now how is 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers skewed?

Read it again, and again, and again until you get it..... now, please define "socialist" since you are still bandying this term about with no clear definition, from YOU, of what it actually means. It isn't about ME understanding, or not understanding, the definition of the term. Rather, it is about whether or not YOU do. :smurf:

Definition of socialist... that's easy... YOU!

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Already did... twice... now how is 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers skewed?

Read it again, and again, and again until you get it..... now, please define "socialist" since you are still bandying this term about with no clear definition, from YOU, of what it actually means. It isn't about ME understanding, or not understanding, the definition of the term. Rather, it is about whether or not YOU do. :smurf:

Definition of socialist... that's easy... YOU!

OMGawd! The master of deflection has arrived and it is you. You won't define "socialist" because you don't have a clue what it might be. And, with regard to the other, have you read it again, and again, and again? Evidently not, since you've not even come close to defending your posit on skewing the numbers. You can look up the definition(s) for both "socialist" and "skew" anywhere on the web. As far as my definition of "socialist" is concerned, I consider your post a "compliment" in lieu of a bona fide definition from you. As far as "skewing" the numbers is concerned, the rationale in my post wasn't from the perspective of whether your figures are right or wrong, per se. Rather, they are to illustrate that you posted with a right wing political perspective that liberals, and labor unions in particular, are receiving unfair treatment as a direct result of waivers being granted. Simply not true as my first post in this thread and the followup clearly show. Your continued partisan biases show through loud and clear. Perhaps you should be calling yourself The Liberal GOP Twit. That might be more appropriate.

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Already did... twice... now how is 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers skewed?

You're still a full-fledge socialist. Embrace it... be proud of it. I can never understand why liberals are always so shy about admitting their true political colors?

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Already did... twice... now how is 543,812 union workers and only 69,813 nonunion workers skewed?

You're still a full-fledge socialist. Embrace it... be proud of it. I can never understand why liberals are always so shy about admitting their true political colors?

Ain't nuthin' shy about it. Are you willing to admit you are a fascist? Of the two, I'd rather be associated more with Socialism than Fascism.

Too bad the Red Rooster is no longer in business.

Martin Ent Inc wrote: Too bad the Red Rooster is no longer in business.

Martin... what is the "Red Rooster"?

Used to be where the Crossroads is, you 2 coulda got a room... LOL

Martin Ent Inc wrote: Used to be where the Crossroads is, you 2 coulda got a room... LOL

That's cool Martin... so... you're into DP?