I’ll take “Things that go between feet and shoes” for $200, Alex.
OK, that’s a fair opinion. There were likely better things I could have said, I feel, but I still think I was technically correct. That is, I was objecting to their categoric statement that they could have whatever opinions they wanted.
This is actually something which I never disputed - my objection was to the way in which their opinion on something upsetting to me (and I imagine others) was presented to me while they were in their capacity as an employee.
My intent was to illustrate through an example which could not be argued with that no, maybe some opinions should not be expressed so publicly by employees.
But, alas, “technically correct” is not always “correct”.
Well, in a perfect world, I would simply have liked them to issue some sort of “friendly corporate reminder” (like I get all the time at work) saying:
Or something. I don’t know, I’m writing off-the-cuff here, so please don’t nit-pick, but along those lines. 
Really, that was all. No firings, no reprimands, no free frequent flyer miles. Just a “friendly reminder” or something.
Here ya go Fierra:
[carp1 Pronunciation Key (kärp)
intr.v. carped, carp·ing, carps
To find fault in a disagreeable way; complain fretfully. See Synonyms at quibble]
I am of the opinion that the F.A.s were off the clock so I don’t think I was out of line, given that. Besides, I think complaining to someone’s company about a freakin’ sticker is narcing, carping, petty and all too demonstrative of what our society has devolved into; a bunch of sissies crying to the teacher every time some other kid says something they don’t like.
Having said that, however, I still want to semi-apologize to Anthracite for my somewhat rude reply, for in their later post, they explained the frame of mind and circumstances that drove them to their calling the airline. I had to fly quite a bit for business right after 9/11, and I wasn’t a happy camper at all, so I can at least understand why you were upset.
I’m sitting there for a good ten seconds thinking “Is Milo talking about my mouth?” You know, foot in mouth? No…that can’t be it. Why would he be talking about shoes?
OK then, let’s think. How do the shoes play into this? Between feet and shoes…between feet and shoes…
And you could almost hear it. I swear you could hear the light bulb click on and the dingdingding of the bell in the background.
Tonight’s been a really slow night for me in just about every sense of the word.
:smack: Ender, don’t feel bad. I was thinking “between feet and shoes… feet and shoes… Toe lint! What the heck?”
Then I saw your post, and thought “Toe lint. I don’t get it. Why toe li… oh. Oh. Oh yeah.” :o
First, DeniseV. BS right back at you. Yes, you can wear a button across the street in the park on your briefcase that is offensive. While AA may lease some areas of the airport, the airport is public property, like a park, not private property, like a hospital. (Even a “public hospital” would not meet public forum for free speech requirements). An airport is long an appropriate public forum for speech. See Airplane for a parody of just how silly it can get. Yes, taking one’s business elsewhere is the appropriate response, and many posters have said so, but the OP mentioned that before she saw the sticker, she was on a long flight with the flight attendant and saw the attendant in the airport, meaning after the flight, rolling her luggage. She then made a complaint not to the fellow citizen, but to the person she knew to be the FA’s employer. This phone call was clearly a heavily edited verision. We do not know from where (home, the airport etc.) the call was made, nor do we have a transcript of what was said, merely a summary of the major points as the OP mentioned. Yes, I did come to the conclusion that the OP was sneakily trying to get the FA punished, but at least I’m not doing it to the OP’s employer secretly. I wasn’t born yesterday, I know what was going on, more of the far right’s crap like the Washington Posts right wing columnists directly contacting employers of people emailing on company time complaining of their complaining.
I have complaints about companies and employees all the time. I usually leave a working stiff alone at all costs. I will write a letter of complaint about bad service. But to complain of an off duty employee having a bumper sticker I disagree with? That’s mean and vindictive. This is a working person with a political view that is disagreed with. So what. To try to screw with their livelihood is cowardly, and nothing short. It is beyond despicable. That anyone thinks it could be acceptable behavior is just weird to me.
AnArky, thanks for the support. I wish I could have made it as succinctly, but I was just so angry that everyone here was missing the real issue and piling on with how to complain. Hey! Whiners! Stop complaining about the idiot opinions of others! People watching won’t be able to tell the difference. (I’m complaining about an action, not an opinion.)
Yes, the bumper sticker is foolish from the standpoint of almost any thinking person, left or right.
No, the Klan analogy is not apt. A “Clinton Lied” analogy would be better. A Klan sticker was not what the FA had, and it is accusing the FA of being a racist, which is a form of ad hominem attack against the FA. It is attributing a view to the FA that the FA does not have as far as we know. The phone flack picked up on this instantly, and the flack isn’t even fighting ignorance. Yes, the Klan is also a hypothetically offensive bumper sticker, but if one were to draw a Venn diagram, the inflamatory ad hominen charge of racism overwhelms the merely political offensiveness point.
I may have come down too hard on the OP, for which I apologize, maybe nobody has ever explained that you don’t screw with people’s jobs, but real people who live lives not on message boards need to know that anything approaching messing with someone’s livelihood is not done lightly, and certainly not unless they start messing with you personally, and even then probably not. I got really teed off because I immediately remembered the Washington Post incidents of a few months back to which I alluded to earlier. Columnists are supposed to get stupid and angry letters to the editor, they aren’t supposed to professionally stalk their critics.
Likewise, please people, do not mess with another’s job unless you must to protect life, limb or your own job. 9/11 sucked for all of us, especially flight attendants, especially AA flight attendants who lost many friends on 9/11, live in daily fear, and serve you peanuts and booze anyway.
I think that Zoff has a point that the NRLA and the various labor codes are not the First Amendment. However, to say that these statutory provisions do not spring from the same impulses as the FA and further those same political freedoms is not tenable. They are all directly vindicating the rights of people to state political views. As far as the NLRA goes, even if something is not in the collective bargaining agreement (the contract), the employer cannot unliaterally change it without engaging in collective bargaining if it alters working conditions. If one wishes to use “First Amendment” as shorthand for the various rights people have to freedom of expression granted by the consitution and statutes, I don’t really consider that spurious, although not technically accurate. In the interests of fighting ignorance, it may have use to pick this nit, but not otherwise, it is a side point, a tangent.
I accused many people of not having half a brain, summarizing someone else’s quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Revtim
For the love of fuck people, can’t we just let them have whatever sticker saying whatever the fuck they want? A person with a half-working brain should realize that a sticker on a stew’s luggage isn’t an official statement from the airline. It aint the company newsletter, folks, use some common goddam sense.
What the fuck good is having a 1st amendment when it’s declared null and void every time someone goes to their place of work?
and I replied:
“Well, most of the folks here don’t have half a brain, or isn’t that obvious? And what’s worse, it’s willful. Any honest fool would realize that it isn’t the company position, but that isn’t what the complaint is, the complaint is about the view expressed.”
So many posters were piling on with how to make a complaint that there seems to me to be an underlying assumption that this was somehow company policy, when Mr. Revtim’s statement is right on the button. How could anyone with half a brain not know that this was the Flight Attendant’s personal statement, and to try to inflate it into company policy is absurdity. So if someone wishes to ask to have me banned for calling folks with that view half wits, after demonstrating why, be my guest, this isn’t my life here, it’s my opinion.
Now, I have already stated that “Bush Knew” is nonsense. I wouldn’t use the phrase. But that does not mean that I am uncritical of the executive branch of government for the 9/11 events. I’ve followed the dribbling clues in the domestic and foreign press closesly. GWB was not personally in charge of the anti-terrorist efforts and only the titular head of government. To suggest that he personally process the clues and warnings or was to personally take action if presented with a 100% warning was not his personal responsibility. But while I wouldn’t use the phrase “Bush Knew”, neither would I excuse the government which Bush heads of being derelict in their duties to the point of letting this happen. I am glad to see the former FBI chief gone and Mueller put in. The last guy, Louis Freeh, screwed up a lot on his watch and played a lot of politics. He was supposed to set an example, and did. He screwed around with political things and missed stuff like 3000 pages of materials in the McVeigh case and many other incidents. I thought his leadership was piss poor to say the least. The failure to pass on memos from the Pheonix and Minneapolis field offices was just exactly the kind of if-it-doesn’t-happen-in-Washington-it isn’t important kind of attitude. He was fascinated with his disagreements with Atty Gen Reno and ignored his duty to pay attention to criminal activity to protect the public.
Bush ran on a platform of taking personal responsibility, “restoring” honor and integrity, etc. Frankly, whether he knew or not, it happened on his watch, and he is as responsibile as Clinton would have been if it had happened on Clinton’s watch. Did we blame Clinton personally for Oaklahoma City? Only the nutbags did. (And plenty of them did, and also blame Clinton for 9/11) But nutbags are entitled to their opinions and their jobs. If someone wants to suggest that Bush has done a crappy job leading to 9/11, that is their right. It’s our right to view them as idiots.
As for many people feeling that you are still “on the clock” when at the airport, or in uniform. I must respectfully disagree. A flight attendant gets paid when on the clock, not for time putting on the uniform or walking through the airport to get to work. They really are on the clock. If the company wants to have a locker room or changing facility nearby, that might change my opinon (perhaps letting them change on the plane before customers get on), but until and unless the company is going to pay for that time, the time is the employee’s, and if the company expects the employee to get dressed in such a fashion that they wear the logo to or from work on their own time as a necessity, that is the company intruding on the employee’s private life, and not the other way around. We are human beings, and our time is our own unless you want to buy it, in which case, buy it. Don’t make a bunch of meely mouthed arguments that amount to getting the time for free, pay people for their time. Would I have such a bumper sticker if I were wearing the company uniform? Nope. It wouldn’t meet my personal level and feeling of professionalism. But let’s also point out that a flight attendant is not a professional in the sense that his/her duties require a high level of specialized judgment (such as a pilot or surgeon or teacher). A flight attendant is much closer to being a food server and sometimes safety assistant.
Next, G8Guy, I Am Sparticus, You are Idiot. and you are not a great guy. You are so inferior in intelligence that if you used logic in your job, they would get rid of you. You said it, I merely summarize and repeat. You really did say essentially that. Must make your momma proud. And yes, you are welcome to your opinion, they are like assholes, everyone has one. I notice that the OP, even having posted more, still hasn’t given us anything resembling a transcript. If I am to infer a less than pure motive from this absence of information, I’ll do just that. Now don’t cry. Here, wipe your nose. Yes, I filled in the facts, but I did it right. No you aren’t allowed to do that at your job and no one else is either. That’s because ratting out flight attendants and telling one sided stories about it isn’t a job. Thankfully.
And fierra, bite me. Yes, you, a customer have a right to make a complaint about something someone does. That isn’t a duty. You don’t have to narc on them. If you want to know why kids beat you up at school when you were a kid (of which I don’t approve) it is because you confuse a right to complain with a duty to whine. The flight attendant was no longer even working. While the customer may still technically have a right to complain, it is tattle taling at this point.
The OP didn’t get anyone in trouble, she tried to. It was so obviously a whiny assed tattle taling that she got hung up on. Good job flack. It is not the job of the flack to take abuse from customers. Hanging up was entirely appropriate. And I explained above why the Klan analogy is simply wrong and I will not apologize for pointing that out. Nor did I call the OP a racist, although I will confess that I think it is fair inference from her OP. Why go to the Klan? One usually goes to Nazi stuff. I didn’t threaten anyone, I asked them how they might feel about someone doing that during a post where I made absolutely clear that I thought doing such a thing is cowardly, disgusting, etc., etc. It’s called empathy, of which the OP had damn little to none. While I will back off a bit and apologize for hurt feelings, I do want to make clear that the behavior of ratting someone to the boss for political beliefs is scummy. Please people, don’t do it just cuz you are a whiny person whose eyes were offended. If it isn’t clear, turning someone in to their employer is not something I would do short of someone being in an awful danger. That’s my point, isn’t it?
And finally, yes, threatening someone’s job for seeing a bumper sticker they have that you don’t like is the scummiest thing I’ve seen on the net. And I have seen some pretty weird and scummy stuff. Are my feelings too precious for you? I doubt it.
If you’re such a fuckin’ wizard, you should realize that it’s “g8rguy.” Gator Guy. Florida. Get it, moron? Christ, you aren’t even bright enough to get someone’s username right when trying to turn it around on them as an insult.
And, see, here’s something to consider: Those of us who have been posting here for a long time know Anthracite, and have never, ever known her to be anything but honest and trustworthy. Ever. If she says that’s how the conversation went, then that’s how the conversation went, and I don’t need to know anything more about it.
But if you’re gonna come in here and cast aspersions and accuse her of lying to us . . . well, buddy, you better have something a lot better than some unrelated event concerning Washington Post op-eds. And if you’re gonna call her a fucking racist, for pity’s sake (or imply that it’s a “fair inference”), you better be able to come up with a lot more. I want photos, I want transcripts, I want fucking notarized statements.
She’s got a track record, you don’t. So put up or shut up, you cowardly, finger-pointing piece of shit.
It’s inappropriate not because of the content, but because of the person it was directed at. Let’s be honest, the person on the phone is most likely a minimum-wage, ill-trained flunky, and more importantly was not the person who was displaying the sticker, and frankly had nothing to do with the incident in question. The person on the phone was not who Anthracite was offended by, but was the unfortunate object of her ire. I’m sure the phone rep is prepared to deal with some level of confrontation, but they also should be able to expect a degree of civility. Being confronted with a racist comparison/accusation when they themselves have done nothing offensive is reason enough, in my book, to hang up on the person one is speaking with, paying customer or no.
And, as Anthracite has already acknowledged this, I don’t see much reason in talking about it further.
Speaking of which…
Well, again, I find that a perfectly reasonable goal. I also think you would be quite justified in expecting a letter of apology from American Airlines. I think you can and should make further attempts to achieve that end, since it is obviously something that bothered you and others.
Thanks PLD: I’ve been rewriting a rebuttal for about 45 minutes and you said what I was trying to better than I could have done.
I fully agree with everything you said about Anth. I’ve never know her to be disingenuous, racist, or a liar. I put her right up there with Polycarp and just a handful of other Dopers who I trust implicity. She’s One of the Good Ones!
I Am Assholicus on the other hand…
You’re a whiner, a moron and a jackass. And your vague, veiled threat about her employer? Stupid AND mean-spirited AND pathetic. The triple-threat.
And no, there’s no parallel. Anth wasn’t representing a company while putting forward a vaguely pro-terrorist message.
Fenris
As per the comment made by someone else, there’s no way I’d confront an airport worker in an airport these days, on-duty or off. It may be “public property” like parks, but most parks did not have National Guard members patrolling them, etc. I would be worried that my query might be over-reacted to and that I would be seen as harassing. I probably would have made a call to clarify things but not made the Klan remark, just so I’d know if that was all right by the airline’s standards. Most flights that I’ve been on, I have seen at least one of the attendants’ suitcases. Unless you’re assuming that the woman in question took the sticker off her luggage each time she boarded the plane, I think it’s safe to assume that it went onto the plane (unless she actually checked the bag, which I’d find hard to believe) in view of passengers. That is what I would be concerned about; I definitely would have been shocked that a bag like that would have been brought onto a plane full of passengers, and certainly I would have thought that an airline might be concerned that such an overt reminder of their planes being destroyed would be displayed. Why would they not care about the display of something like “hey, your plane could be next and the government will keep it quiet” around nervous passengers?
As to your demands for a transcript, I wasn’t aware that one had to start reporting their activities in minute detail for them to not come under grave suspicion. Your head must have swam reading that “worst restaurant experiences” thread and all the complaints those restaurants got.
Of course, since this is directly contradictory to what the OP herself said her intent was, there are two possibilities: either Anth is lying to us about her intent or you are jumping to entirely erroneous conclusions. Based on the respective track records even in this thread, I can tell you which I believe more likely. In fact, I have to tell you, because otherwise you’ll start thinking that I agree with you and that I believe Anth was lying (that being the less logical outcome of reading my post and therefore the one you’re more likely to reach). So in case it’s not entirely clear yet… You’re jumping to entirely unfounded conclusions. Your psychic powers have failed you. Sorry.
In words of one or two syllables (I wish I could use smaller words than that, but I can’t, so you will have to deal with big long words that you may not be used too)… No one is saying that this is what the airlines thinks. What they are saying is that this is the stew’s statement, that it offends them, and that this is not a proper way to act at the workplace.
Fortunately, I never claimed to be a great guy, merely one with his head at the correct end of his torso. (As to the your logic sucks/you’re an idiot/you’ll be fired garbage, I believe I’ll let our respective statements in this thread speak for themselves.)
As, alas, are cliches. Thank you for that startlingly original and unexpected piece of wisdom. I can die a happy man now that I’ve been informed of this bit of lore.
Alternatively, you could realize that she in all likelihood didn’t have a tape recorder going at the time, that she quite probably sees no real point in making up a conversation to satisfy the more vacuous elements of the thread, and that you are to infer that she did not, in fact, take incredibly extensive notes as to what happened in the conversation. Izzat a reasonable inference? I thought not. Just checking.
Oh wow, it’s more of those psychic powers! Quick, please do tell me what the winning Lotto numbers will be for the 12 years! If I had powers like that, I could be a multi-gajillionaire!
Alternatively, it could just be that you fabricated a great deal out of whole cloth and then got nastily personal as a result of your psychotic ravings and deranged imagination. Let’s check, shall we?
Hmm… a presumption. May be correct, may not be correct. The testimony of one smermy (read up several posts in the thread, it’s there, really) suggests that it is quite premature.
Public property? Check. Flight attendant’s own time? BZZZT. Follows from unsupported assertion, admittedly, but if the premise is a leap of faith, of course the conclusion is as well. Objection to the company uniform etc etc? Not at all. The objection seems, quite obviously, to be an objection to unprofessionalism. It’s not an objection to wearing the company uniform, it’s an objection to doing something unprofessional while wearing the company uniform. I don’t give a rat’s ass if you wear a police uniform (well, I do, since I’d be wanting to move to another society if you were an example of a typical policeman, but let’s ignore that for the moment), but if you were an off duty cop and chose to cuss out a three year old while in uniform, you’re damn right I’d object.
No, in fact, we don’t. You believe that she did so, but you’re making that up on absolutely zero evidence. See, were to I do that, my research supervisor would fire me. Fortunately, I’m smart enough not to confuse fabricated details with facts. I am, in addition, smart enough not to assume that someone who objects to a particular offensive statement is a racist. Apparently, this lesson has not yet quite reached all segments of society.
To quote your own words: “the inflamatory ad hominen charge of racism overwhelms the merely political offensiveness point.” In other words, you lost all credibility the moment you imputed racism to Anthracite, especially on such a flimsy pretext. This does, in fact, qualify you as an idiot in my view (yes yes, it’s an opinion, it’s like an asshole, we all have both and they all stink, thank you, I had not forgotten), and if you don’t like being called out for being such, I suggest you not make it painfully clear to the world in the future.
And that, I believe, is all that I need (or even should) say on this topic.
On the heels of such thorough dissections of He is Sparticus’s various stupidities, I hate to come in with such a lame criticism, but as a Roman history fan I must say:
Spartacus! Damnit! Spartacus! With an “A!”
I am Sparticus, your accusation of Anthracite being no more than a liar is unjust and totally untrue, IMHO. If anything, she is an incredibly fair person. Let me tell you how I, personally, know this.
Anthracite was on the recieving end of an unintentional flame by me on her own BBS. At that time, Anthracite chose not to flame me in return…rather, she responded to my post in a very calm manner. I, in turn, clarified my original post and everything is okay with me there. I ask you this: How many Board Administrators (other than at the SDMB) would have done this rather than ban someone straight away? Honestly? Very, very few. This situation, in my eyes, shows me that Anthracite is neither petty nor sneaky as you seem to believe.
As Fierra pointed out, if the OP was the most despicable thing that you have seen on the net, then you have a whole new world of ugly headed your way. :eek:
I won’t even get started on your not-so-veiled threat to her.
Sparticus you still haven’t said what you’ve done when you’ve been offended or received shitty service from a place of businesss. I’m curious. Did you do nothing for fear of people thinking you were ratting them out? That is the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard all day.
If I was a higher-up at AA I would like to know what the customers want/don’t like, for after 9/11 the industry was in a financial shambles. The customer is paying my salary, not some flight attendant who believes in some crackpot theory and chooses to make her political statements in such a way and place that makes me not want to fly with them. In fact, it would behoove the FA herself to tone it down, as her job would be on the line if people refused to fly with them.
Businesses need input in order to make it…I thought it was proper policy to inquire with CS or a manager in order to clarify things or get relief from bad service you have received. I agree with accosting the FA in the terminal isn’t a good idea in this day and age. Is that what you would have done?
And if this is the scummiest thing you have ever seen on the Internet, maybe you should unplug your computer and take a long walk outside and breathe fresh air, because there have been far worse subjects I’ve seen here.
Now Anthracite has been very gracious as Wildcatz has pointed out (I have used preview to compose), so I don’t want any of what follows to be considered as dumping on Anthracite (I use OP because it is quicker typing), but I don’t want to just toss out the comments, because they are in large part directed towards her “defenders”. I will make another pass through to try to improve this. (Incidentally, guys and gals, I’ve made at least 4 pass throughs of each post, toning them down.) It is not my intent to hurt feelings, but it is definitely my intent to convince people not to screw with the jobs of others.
You don’t like me, too bad. You are basically a bunch of cowardly bullies who do exactly what the original post did: you make ad hominem attacks, false analogies and recharacterize the original argument until it is a straw man you can deal with and then gang up in a little bunch when challenged. Oooooooh. What are you going to do to me? Call me names? (Great Gildersleeve voice:) Yessssss!
I did not imply racism to the OP, you inferred it. I did not originally draw that conclusion, you attributed it, and still do. I don’t think it is too much of a stretch, but I think it is more revealing as what the Klan statement was originally used for: a false analogy that is so false it takes on the added dimension of an ad hominem.
For you to say that I have reduced it to racism is an interesting projection. That is a recharacterization because you can’t deal with the arguments about the flaws in the logic of the Klan analogy. Same thing with the “thinly veiled” threat crap. I threatened nobody, nor do I. Well at least not except in your minds. I have no way of “getting” any of you even if I hadn’t already pointed out several times that that sort of thing is despicible. One doesn’t get even for arguments, one makes counterpoints.
I am fully aware that maybe the original poster made a one time mistake in judgment, but when I suggested that some slack be cut for her because that might be the case (and I was concerned that I might have gone overboard) the OP’s friends decided not to take that olive branch. Heck the OP even concedes that the Klan analogy may have been going a bit too far.
There really is nothing lower (short of a full fleged felony and I’ve never seen that approved of on the internet) than someone who goes around trying to get other people fired. That it was done over a stupid political statement to a complete stranger, behind that stranger’s back, moroever, by suggesting that the person was no different than a displaying Klansman is what you paladins of ignorance combat are supporting. Even the OP has wondered about that. Why don’t you guys?
Thank God that nothing actually came of this complaint.
That you folks would approve of the messing with someone else’s rice bowl, support for her family, simply 'cuz your pal is annoyed at a bumper sticker and it makes her annoyed speaks volumes about you guys. It shows an immaturity and an insensitivity towards others that is rather remarkable. It reminds me of the idiotic thread last week or so about the disabled person driving a Dodge Viper. And the threads ranting about that. Yeah, they were jokes. Ha ha. Disabled people driving cool cars is funny.
My description of the act as despicable, cowardly etc. is in my opinion entirely fair from what was described, and frankly, it is exactly the same thing I have seen elsewhere on this forum, and is exactly what you guys are doing in this thread now. It is unsociable, narcissistic and nasty behavior.
My eariler point about the details of the phone call was important for illustrating that you were getting a heavily edited one side of the telephone conversation supporting one argument, namely the OP. It clearly left quite a bit out, if not most of it. While the OP fairly reported the Klan remark (at least in part), she seemed not to understand why this resulted in a terminated telephone call, and neither do the rest of you. Even after having pointed out by other than wicked me. Why is that? Can y’all not hold opposing thoughts in your heads? But none of you seem interested in the facts, only that the OP might have her feelings hurt from having viewed a bumper sticker. Let me remind you again: the flight attendant in question undoubtedly had friends and co-workers on at least two if not all of the hijacked flights. Her friends had their lives snatched from them and slammed into buildings and the ground in fiery deaths. Nevertheless, she gets on an airplane five fucking days a week to get y’all liquored up so you can work up the nerve to get on a plane twice a year. And y’all begrudge this flight attendant a bumpersticker that is looney, but how she deals with it? It isn’t rational, and none of us agree with the bumper sticker, but so what? Y’all gather round your friend and her hurt political sensibilities, and ignore everything else in the whole damned world. Nice safe little fantasy land you have going here. Some people work for a living.
While I don’t think that the OP’s feelings being hurt is at all a good thing, I still don’t think most of the people here have any conception that the behavior she ascribed to herself was bizarrely self-centered and potentially destructive to the livelihood of others. Fortunately the flack catcher for the airline spotted the finely honed flaming skills picked up on this board and dealt with it correctly.
The reporting of the bumper sticker struck me as really weird behavior. This bumper sticker wasn’t thrust in the face of anyone, yet the OP saw fit to take it as a personal affront. And that is the generous view, and not the one I feel happened. Having seen your little pack for a few weeks I am fairly confident that it was about trying to punish someone with different views. That is what you guys are all about, its what you are doing now. Maybe I’m over the top, but it appears to me that we have a case of “can dish it out but can’t take it”. My only experience with this sort of thing in the past has been with the aforementioned stalking columnists from the Washington Post and neighbors who complain anonymously to the employers of other neighbors who post political lawn signs. What possible innocent motive is there? That the OP was so deeply psychologically affected that she had to take action? That is preposterous.
You next accuse me of having accused the OP of lying. I definitely think we have not been provided all of the facts, and that is definitely a credibility gap. You assert that she is honest. She may have been honest as far as she has stated things for all I know, and you are all wonderful pals for sticking up for her, I wouldn’t expect you to do anything less and still claim to be pals. But I have dealt with enough children to know when I’m being given only part of the story. I didn’t see in the OP any concern for the feeling or well being of the stranger with the bumper sticker, all I saw outrage at someone having the termerity to have a stupid opinion in a bumper sticker and an attack on their livelihood.
A bumper sticker? Are you idiots insane? Now I understand that y’all don’t like me, fine. But let’s take a poll,
- Who here has reported someone to their employers for a political opinion displayed on a bumper sticker?
- Who here has reported someone to their employers for a political opinion expressed while not being paid?
- Who here would have made the same report with or without the Klan remark as indicated in the OP?
LolaBaby:
I think I did post a short reply earlier, unless the “hamsters” ate it. I bascially said that you complain to the person who is causing the problem or write a letter.
I have since thought of a specific incident. I used to patronize a particular deli, because they would slice my meat thin like I liked it for my sandwich. A new owner came in, and sliced my meat thin, just like I liked it. Except that he would not slice a full fifth of a pound, he just gave me the same number of slices. I took aside one of the long time employees and asked her to very gently speak to the boss about this, as he was new at the deli business and everything. She did so. The boss did the same thing next time, I have never been back.
I have never complained about someone’s bumper sticker however, as offensive as I find some of them. Bush Knew is one such sticker. Sore Loserman is another.
Of course it’s all OK; I’m not sure it ever wasn’t OK. 
That meat-slicing story just goes to show that business owners themselves can be selective about who they want to serve as customers. And talk about brilliant communication on the deli owner’s part: he knew how to say “fuck off” without doing anything more than slicing your meat.
Thanks for the story, doofus. Made my day.
Very good mikan. You will find that the deli is no longer in business because he was saying fuck off to too many customers. The deli that I now patronize makes my sandwich perfectly every time and got written up in the local newspaper for it. All of the employees and I call each other by name and we invite each other to social events.
That was my serious response to a serious question about another poster, and you prove my point again: you clique people lead with an ad hominem, make a false analogy and finish with a recharacterization to the point of a straw man.
I noticed that you approve of the man cheating me out of my sandwich meat, which is essentially theft. The proper way to rid oneself of a customer one doesn’t want is to say: “I’m sorry, we can no longer serve you.” It is not proper to steal from customers, but you clearly would and do.
At this point, I’m just repeating myself, and I will no longer respond to anything in this thread.
IaS, you forgot to accuse the mods of being Nazis… :rolleyes: