Twinkie maker Hostess to wind down ops, lay off 18,500 workers, put brands up for sale
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Saturday, November 24, 2012 18:01
VIEWED: 12327
PAGE 9 of 9
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Ergo, he doesn't feel the need to back up whatever he posts, he's just having a "free-flowing conversation". He just chooses to state it as fact.
No, Niki, you're have it completely wrong. I did say cites ARE appropriate, but not for every single conversation. If I like crunchy peanut butter over creamy,and say as much, that shouldn't require 3 independent citations form " neutral " sources. You folks love to pick and choose who you call ' cites ' for, and more times than not, it's done to me, simply to avoid having a serious discussion on the matter.
And you said it yourself, that my sources are " right wing " , so you feel free to dismiss what ever I post anyways, so what'st he fucking point ?
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You're big on claiming things that simply are not true.
Sort'a like this claim you quoted above?
Did I make a claim that is untrue?
Or did I quote a source you have an issue with?
(There's a difference between the two, but in your rapidly deteriorating mental state, you seem not to be able to discern such differences.)
That's cute. I noticed how you managed to put your own quoted clips in quote tags, yet made the quotes I posted look like they were things that *I* said, when you know they aren't my claims, but allegations made in an article which I cited.
Further, you've yet to show where the article I posted is "untrue". You've only posted something else which differs from my source. Would it be valid for me to claim that you're citing untrue articles if I have a source that disagrees with yours?
See Mike squirm. Squirm, Mike, squirm.
See Geezer spin. Spin, troll, spin.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
It's not coercion, or intimidation and certainly not tyranny. It can be part of legal agreements between a Union and an Employer. So while I agree with you that people should not have to pay dues as part of employment I do not share your hyperbole.
It's not 'hyperbole', but the way things are. You think because it's "legal", that makes it O.K. ?
If buying of slaves is deemed " legal ", then what's the problem, right ?
Learn to read moron.
"So while I agree with you that people should not have to pay dues as part of employment I do not share your hyperbole."
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
No, Niki, you're have it completely wrong. I did say cites ARE appropriate, but not for every single conversation. If I like crunchy peanut butter over creamy,and say as much, that shouldn't require 3 independent citations form " neutral " sources.
Please learn the difference between opinion and facts.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That would be nice, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I don't think it will ever happen. The problem he doesn't see is that he makes flat statements and states them as "fact" without providing any backup, then complains when asked for same. It's one thing to state an opinion, another to claim something is fact. Whether he realizes that or not, he'll continue to do so, then complain whan asked to back up his "facts".
As to right wing, everything's biased. But there are some sources SO right wing that they're not credible, and it is those to which I was referring. I try not to quote MSNBC or others so obviously left wing for just that reason. That will probably never change either.
I think part of the problem is that Rap hears something from the only sources he claims to enjoy, FauxNews and right-wing talk radio, spouts it here then has trouble backing it up from anything but those sources or their ilk on the internet, so he grouses about requests for backup.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
No, Niki, you're have it completely wrong. I did say cites ARE appropriate, but not for every single conversation. If I like crunchy peanut butter over creamy,and say as much, that shouldn't require 3 independent citations form " neutral " sources.
Please learn the difference between opinion and facts.
My opinions are based on facts.
Deal w/ it.
Niki, what you can't get your mind around is that I have a different take on the world than you. You see your 'facts' , and ignore all else.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We keep arguing about the unions, but I put something about this up earlier, and tho' nobody noticed at the time, I think it's a valid question which is one of those "perspective" issue regarding Hostess' demis:Quote:
Did Congress kill the Twinkie? The tariff tale behind the Hostess demise.
Since 1934, Congress has supported sugar trade tariffs. In a sign of the power of the sugar lobby, Hostess picked unions, not the lobby, to fight when it had to cut costs to stay in business.
Since 1934, Congress has supported tariffs that benefit primarily a few handful of powerful Florida families while forcing US confectioners to pay nearly twice the global market price for sugar.
One telling event: When Hostess had to cut costs to stay in business, it picked unions, not the sugar lobby, to fight.
“These large sugar growers ... are a notoriously powerful lobbying interest in Washington,” writes Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute in a 2007 report. “Federal supply restrictions have given them monopoly power, and they protect that power by becoming important supporters of presidents, governors, and many members of Congress.”Further at http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2012/1116/Did-Congress-kill-the-Twin
kie-The-tariff-tale-behind-the-Hostess-demise.-video
It's easy for those of a certain mindset to say "It's the unions!", without looking any deeper at what might have contributed--more than the unions--to a problem such as this.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
My opinions are based on facts.
If that is true you should have no problem backing them up with citations.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Bingo. If we want to give our opinions, or talk "off the cuff", that's one thing. But when Rap claims his "opinions" are "based on" facts, then he has the onus of showing said facts so we can come to our own opinions. Simple as that.
Otherwise, he's just blowing off steam, talking through his hat, or repeating talking points from right-wing sources, which is what I believe he's doing 99% of the time.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME