Pennsylvania man hurls vile, racist insults at cameraman and protesters, promptly gets swift justice

[MrWendel]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/12/30/1464870/-Pennsylvania-man-hurls-vile-racist-insults-at-cameraman-and-protesters-promptly-gets-swift-justice

By Jen Hayden



A Pennsylvania man identified by Butler News as "John Pisone" (he’s now deleted his Facebook page) took time out of his busy day to stop and harass a group people protesting against fracking in Pennsylvania.

As the video starts, Pisone is chastising the protesters, questioning if they’ve ever had a job. Only seconds later, he turns to cameraman Tom Jefferson (who is black) and let’s loose a vulgar string of obscenities:

Pisone: This chimp right here (pointing at the camera).

Unidentified protester: What did you say?

Pisone: Yeah, chimp. This fucking nigger right here with a mop on his head.

Protestors: You better get out of here!

Pisone: I don’t give a fuck. He’s milking my fucking tax dollars.

Protestors: You better leave! You better get out now!

Pisone: I don’t give a fuck what you have to say.

He repeatedly made monkey noises at the cameraman and continued his racist rant.

Tom Jefferson uploaded to the video to YouTube and it didn’t take long for outraged internet sleuths to contact his employer, MMC Land Management, who promptly fired John Pisone, releasing the following statement:

Today, we were disgusted to learn that one of MMC’s former employees used racial slurs and made racially charged comments during a peaceful protest in Mars, Pennsylvania, outside of work hours at a location with which we have no affiliation. We are sorry that this incident occurred. Whether at work or not, we do not condone hate speech - EVER. Inclusion and diversity are among MMC’s core values. We believe in equality for everyone, regardless of race, age, gender identity, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. MMC has terminated this employee and will never do business with him again in the future.

Looks like good ol’ boy John Pisone is going to be milking our tax dollars in the near future as he is going to have a hard time finding employment now. And for good reason.

Video in all its glory in link.

GEE, I wonder who has his vote.....

[Journeyman]

1. And once again, cell phone video and social media prove far greater than the initial hype . . .

[AllTooEasy]

104. Yep! Another Trump voter that Bernie covets.

I think Bernie will make a fine president, but trying to convert/embrace these people is dumb.

Bernie will win more votes by giving Trunp's bigot mob the finger.

[riversedge]

105. Why would you say Bernie would give anyone the finger. He is better than that....

and you I might add.
Even though I am not a Sanders fan, I would not attribute rudeness to him.

[Ikonoklast]

118. Really shoehorned that in, didn't you?

With zero proof this guy even votes, let alone who he supports.

[99th_Monkey]

2. His wait time at the Unemployment Office & soup lines will hopefully give this guy some time

to rethink how he comports himself publicly.

Woot!

[daleanime]

15. Maybe to think of his fellow man....

as something other then the enemy.

[meow2u3]

18. I doubt if he'll get unemployment

In Pennsylvania, an ex-employee is ineligible for unemployment if he or she is fired for cause, so I guess he'll have to apply for welfare or do something criminal to make a living.

Karma's a bitch and she bit him in the nuts. WOOF WOOF!

[brewens]

77. He may be screwed as far as unemployment for sure. My employers policy is to never contest

unemployment benefits, even if you were fired for something out of line. They'll write things up as if you were just unable to meet expectations. Not unusual for a blood center. We get people that wanted to be phlebotomists with us occasionally that just can't do it proficiently. They try and do everything they are asked but just miss too many sticks, piss off blood donors, it gets in their head and they wash out.

In this guys case, he's busted publicly. Even if his employer was willing to keep it quite and call it a layoff, he's screwed. He shows up at job service and they'll have the goods on him and tell him to take a hike!

I got fired one time for being out of line with my boss but he knew he had it coming to him. He is a notorious hothead and I was really just sticking up for a new guy and let him have it! But it really was time for me to move on. He agreed to just call it a layoff for lack of avialable work. We were concrete guys. The only time I've been fired too. I was on "unenjoyment" for three weeks at the end of the summer and landed the first job I really wanted that I applied for. I coulda used a couple more weeks off!

[OnlinePoker]

21. Don't bet on it

He'll blame the people he was slurring for getting him fired. People like this never blame themselves for any bad shit that happens to them.

[SCantiGOP]

26. Trump's VP ??

Could be his next job

[ChazInAz]

100. Maybe not VP

Bet he'll show up as the GOP's next darling "Joe The Plumber" figure.

[99th_Monkey]

59. I try to avoid the words "never" and "always"

especially when referring to how a person who's fucked up, will or will not learn from it or not,
once faced with the harsh consequences.

[NBachers]

116. Don't worry- his wife, if he has one, will have plenty of blame to hang on him.

[RKP5637]

3. What a creature he is. Glad he got fired, the racist obnoxious jerk. n/t

[Volaris]

35. I'm not.

1. Now he's not paying taxes.
2. The above poster is correct, odds are he will blame the wrong people for his termination.
3. Corporations/employers shouldn't be able to fire you for what you do NOT AT WORK.

Is PA a right-to-work State? Depending on who he's been voting for, he can blame THIS on himself.

None of the above truths detract from the fact that he's clearly a bigoted, uneducated asshole. Hooray for Social Media!!=)

[SCantiGOP]

70. You make a good point

PA is not a right-to-work state, but in the 25 states that are, his company wouldn't have needed to fire him for this. They can fire anyone, anytime for any - or no - reason. The worker has no recourse.

Irony #1: I'd be willing to bet this guy votes for the people who support RTW laws.
Irony #2: if he wanted to press the legitimate point that his employer shouldn't be able to police his political discourse, a group I know that he despises - the ACLU - would be a good place to start.

And I agree with your final point that the guy is an asshole and it's quite amusing to see his rapid smackdown.

[mythology]

71. Why shouldn't a company fire somebody who does something stupid

that will in turn damage the company's brand? The world is small enough that this guy's video going viral will have an impact on that company.

Not to mention how do you expect his co-workers to be okay with working along side him now? I can't imagine a black co-worker being willing to work next to him. That means the company has to consider the impact of losing other employees in order to stand by him.

[RKP5637]

79. I can see some of your points, but I sure would not want to work with him or even be near him

after a display like that. He's a few cards short of a full deck IMO.

[tblue37]

4. Heck, I would fire someone just for being so stupid that he didn't realize an uploaded video

of such behavior could get him into trouble.

[Kber]

6. Agree!!

[Turbineguy]

5. Those responsible for his world view no doubt

are not worried about being held accountable. On the other hand there may be some opportunities for him in some republican candidate's campaign staff

[MrScorpio]

7. Philadelphia in the east, Pittsburgh in the west...

And Mississippi in the middle.

[mrmpa]

23. Except this county is just north of Pittsburgh, about 35 miles............

it's another world up there. Mars, PA just about 25 miles from downtown Pittsburgh.

[AlbertCat]

98. Pittsburgh,

The most prejudice place I've ever been. (and I live in the South)

The only place I've ever been called a "faggot" repeatedly and loudly at a restaurant...

And is it some tradition there to beat up your wife/girlfriend? The guy upstairs did it every other night. When I mentioned it at work, every girl there told her story of her abusive ex, old BF, father......

[drm604]

34. The Pennsylvania "T".

Philly in the East (I'm just outside of Philly), Pittsburgh in the west, and Kentucky in the middle and the north.

Sometimes known as Pennsyltucky.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsyltucky

[tech3149]

90. Unfortunately it's spreading

I grew up here, about 30 mi east of Pgh. My work had me covering the state north and south Johnstown to Aliquippa. I left in 85 to meet a job opportunity for my ex. I came back it 2002 to find that all those straight thinking working class people I grew up with had become Fox assholes.
We can't rely on someone else to keep our neighbors informed. Spread the word brothers and sisters because you are our only hope!

[drm604]

92. Those straight thinking working class people were the target of a right-wing propaganda campaign.

Unfortunately it was all too successful, and not just in the "T". Not everyone in the Philly area was immune. I have relatives who picked up and moved to western PA, apparently to get away from "those people". I have very little to do with them.

[tech3149]

136. I grew up in Western Pennsyltucky and was pretty proud of the people I grew up with

After 15 years in NJ I was shocked at the rightward stupid movement when I came back home. Most everyone was a right wing idiot that thought in bumper stickers. They had no clue about the beatings and deaths that gave them the life they enjoyed.
I spent three weeks teaching a young racing buddy how he had been programmed to accept a philosophy that was antithetical to what his reason and the facts told him to be true. It only took a month of those bumper sticker ideas to reverse all the information I gave him for that constant RW BS had instilled in him over 15 years I hadn't talked to him.
I remember an immigrant from Soviet Russia telling me how amazed they were we believed the bullshit we are fed daily by corporate media and think it even resembles the truth.
I guess my saving grace is that I do not consume corporate US news, it's not even "junk food news" it's downright toxic.

[riversedge]

8. Whow. and stupid enough to look straight at the camera over and over. Sad but he will

probably not learn a lesson but blame it on the protesters

[daleanime]

16. Probably true....

And definitely sad.

[RKP5637]

78. People like him are incorrigible. He will never get it. n/t

[Person 2713]

9. Bye bye asshole hope you never find work again . You are not fit for a modern civil society

[Rex]

10. Hey Pisone ever had a SECOND job? No? Well goodluck finding one!

Remember when you are picking up your government moneycheck for being fired...to try and smile some inside and remember what you told protestors! No doubt you will be living off the government for as long as possible - hard economy out there jobs can be hard to find...but you will find one! I hear the KKK is always recruiting.

Karma, a great thing it is.

[Tipperary]

17. I thought you could not get unemployment if you are fired for cause.

I hope that is the case for this moron.

[Major Nikon]

29. Generally

However most states specify that "willful misconduct" must be work related, so I suspect he would have a pretty good shot at collecting unemployment compensation.

[dorkzilla]

43. You're most likely correct

My employees can do what they want on their own time; I can't fire them for being assholes in their spare time. He will most likely be able to collect.

My experience has been, however, that jerks like this are also jerks at work. I write these people up for each incident and they get fired after 3 warnings (one verbal, 2 write-ups). When they get fired they almost always file for unemployment but since I have documentation the state denies the claim. I've never written up a good employee because they made a mistake, it's always big jerks doing incredibly stupid things (harassment is the norm, be it sexual or racist, or smoking reefer on the job).

I'm guessing a dirtbag like this has a colorful HR file.

[Major Nikon]

46. Most people can be fired for any reason not prohibited by law

The exception is if you have a contract. However most large employers have some sort of clause in their code of conduct about employees embarrassing the employer and there's not much even unions can do about it.

[happyslug]

72. This sub thread is about unemployment INSURANCE NOT employment law

Unemployment Insurance and Employment law are two DIFFERENT set of laws. What you say is true about EMPLOYMENT law but if an employee is unemployed for NO Fault of his own, then he is eligible for UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE. Thus if an employer fires an employee for NO reason, that employee can NOT sue to get his job back OR for damages do to the lost of a job, BUT the employee can file for unemployment and unless the employer can show willful misconduct by the employee, the employee will get unemployment.

When I was in College taking business law the professor mentioned your employment handbook is NOT your employment contract. When I stared to practice unemployment insurance law, I found out why such handbooks exists. In cases involving Unemployment INSURANCE, if the employer does NOT follow the procedures set forth in the handbook, they tend to lose unemployment insurance cases. If employers follow such procedures, they tend to win such cases. Thus employment handbook is a way for an employer to defend themselves in unemployment insurance cases.

Employers want to defend themselves for the taxes that support unemployment were set by Congress to be paid by Employers based on what the employers paid in wages. 2/3rds of the money collected are allocated to the states to be paid as unemployment, 1/3 to be paid to the Federal Government to set up the unemployment system (The actual employees are STATE employees but paid via the FEDERAL portion of unemployment taxes).

The states allocated its 2/3rds of unemployment taxes to pay people who are unemployed for no fault of their own, AND every state reduce the unemployment taxes due, based on how often an employee lays someone off work EXCEPT when such an employee does NOT apply for unemployment OR if they do, it is denied, generally for Wilful Misconduct. Thus employers have reasons to fight unemployment claims for the more claims made on them, the higher taxes they must pay (Please note the 2.1% tax rate with .7% going to the Feds, and 1.4% going to the states, is the minimum tax rate, the State MAY have higher rates if needed to pay unemployment insurance, when states do adopt such rates MOST are reducible based on lay off rates just like the 1.4% is).

What is unemployment was left up to the states but someone who is laid off do to the lack of work or the employer has no money to be pay workers wages, the Federal Government has called the bare minimum a state can adopt as someone who is unemployed for purposes on Unemployment Insurance purposes. Most states have extended the right to unemployment to include people who are laid off by employers UNLESS the employer committed some sort of "Wilful Misconduct".

What is "Wilful Misconduct" varies from state to state, for example in most states if your employer locks you out because of a Union contract dispute, the union members locked out get unemployment compensation, but no unemployment compensation if they go on strike (North Dakota is a state that denies unemployment insurance even in cases of lock outs, so this rule is NOT universal, thus you have to check your home state unemployment rules).

What is "Wilful Misconduct"? That is a violation of a rule of the employer (unless that rule is universally ignored) anything that harms the employer. The following is constantly being repeated in Pennsylvania unemployment insurance cases, for it is a quote from the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court in 1977 as:

As a general principle in order to deny unemployment compensation benefits to an employee, his or her action must involve a wanton or willful disregard of the employer's interest, a deliberate violation of the employer's rules, a disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employees, or negligence in such degree or recurrence as to manifest culpability, wrongful intent, or evil design, or show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer's interests or of the employee's duties and obligations to the employer.

http://employmentlaw101.blogspot.com/2010/03/pennsylvania-unemployment-hearings-what.html#sthash.tJ4XyDqw.dpuf

This follows a 1972 Commonwealth Court Case that followed a 1951 Pennsylvania Superior Court Case (in 1969, when the present Pennsylvania Constitution was written, the Convention crated Commonwealth Court to hear cases involving government entities such as the Board of unemployment compensation).

Unfortunately, the Legislature has not defined the phrase "willful misconduct". The appellate courts of this Commonwealth have endeavored to establish the standards to be applied in willful misconduct cases. As a general principle in order to deny unemployment compensation benefits to an employee, his or her action must involve a wanton or willful disregard of the employer's interest, a deliberate violation of the employer's rules, a disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employees, or negligence in such degree or recurrence as to manifest culpability, wrongful intent, or evil design, or show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer's interests or of the employee's duties and obligations to the employer.

http://www.leagle.com/decision/19724906PaCommw484_1423/LODER%20v.%20UNEMPL.%20COMP.%20BD.%20OF%20REVIEW

Here is the 1972 case:

http://www.leagle.com/decision/19724906PaCommw484_1423/LODER%20v.%20UNEMPL.%20COMP.%20BD.%20OF%20REVIEW

The 1951 case:

http://www.leagle.com/decision/1951459168PaSuper291_1407/DETTERER%20UNEMP.%20COMPENSATION%20CASE

Given that paragraph includes the phase "willful disregard of the employer's interest" that is enough to deny this man unemployment compensation UNLESS he can show he was CLEARLY not representing his employer at the time of the incident. Thus grounds to be denied unemployment.

[Major Nikon]

87. This sub thread and any other is about whatever anyone wants to discuss

I'm just not that into getting told what can or can't be discussed in a thread. YMMV. I didn't attempt to conflate unemployment compensation law with other employment laws. So I'm not sure where you got that from. I was just making a comment on something someone else said. No need to read anything more into it.

Unless you can dig up case law that is very similar to this case, what you've managed to find isn't all that valuable. It's not as simple as saying the employee was or was not fired for reasons of their own cause. Employers are free to make whatever rules they want, but they can not always use those rules as a basis to deny unemployment compensation. You also have it exactly backwards. It is not the responsibility of the fired employee to disprove "willful disregard of the employer's interest". It's the responsibility of the employer to prove this within a preponderance of the evidence. Unless the aforementioned festering asshole mentioned his employer by name or was wearing a company logo, it would be pretty hard to prove the former employee was CLEARLY representing his employer's interest when he's off duty. So it's true that he can certainly be fired for that or for lots of other things, it's not so clear cut that his employer can use that as a basis to deny unemployment compensation. Inside the article linked by the OP, the employer CLEARLY states:

Today, we were disgusted to learn that one of MMC’s former employees used racial slurs and made racially charged comments during a peaceful protest in Mars, Pennsylvania, outside of work hours at a location with which we have no affiliation.

There's also a big difference between legal theory and the application of those laws. What they don't seem to spend much time teaching in business school is it's not always worth it to spend the time, effort, and expense of fighting an administrative law process even if you are reasonably sure you will prevail. Most employers are just simply not going to the trouble unless they are quite sure they have an open and shut case, and sometimes not even then, and what you've presented most certainly doesn't make this open and shut.

[happyslug]

93. You obviously do not practice Unemployment compensation law in Pennsylvania

I do. The Unemployment Referees (the name used in Pennsylvania for the people who decides cases where the right to unemployment compensation is at issue) are notorious for being pro employer. Furthermore, while the burden of proof is on the employer is such cases, preponderance of evidence generally means, "I have a rule, he disobeyed it, he gets no unemployment" or in a case like this "his actions made me look bad and that is wilful misconduct". Referees will ruled that to be the "facts" of the case and that the Employer carried his burden of proof by preponderance of evidence in such cases. Thus employees MUST be ready to show that such rules were NOT enforced, that the actions the employee did was either within reason OR that the employee was CLEARLY off work.

In this case, given what this person SAID and that it is on film, the Employer can use that film to carry ANY burden of proof required in this case. Employers do NOT need much evidence to carry that burden and with this film they have more then enough.

On appeal, what the Referee found to have happened can NOT be challenged for that is a finding of fact reserved to the Referee, but that the action amounted to "Wilful Misconduct" is an issue of law that can be appealed. You first go through the rubber stamp of the Board of Review, then you appeal to Commonwealth Court.

Many years ago, I attended a meeting where the Clerk of Court of Commonwealth Court. In that meeting the Clerk mentioned that the Court actually likes Unemployment Compensation cases for generally all they hear are cases involving contracts with Municipalities (Which the court were created to hear in addition to appeals from Commonwealth Agencies). His comments was you can find cases supporting almost any issue that comes in front of the Court, for the Court tends to uphold whatever the Unemployment Compensation Referee decided if something was or was not wilful misconduct.

Thus my comment, all the employer has to show is this man's action brought the name of his employer into disrepute and that by itself is "Wilful Misconduct". That is all the evidence the Employer needs to satisfy the requirement that the burden of proof is on the employer.

As to an actual case, See the "CADDEN UNEMPL. COMPENSATION CASE" 195 Pa. Super. 159 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1961.

https://casetext.com/case/cadden-unempl-compensation-case

In that case the court ruled that speeding off the job was grounds was wilful misconduct.

It constituted willful misconduct connected with his work. It was a willful disregard of the employer's interests and of the standards of behavior which the employer has a right to expect of its employees.

195 Pa. Super. 159 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1961

Now that case involved exceeding the speed limit in a car owned by the employer and used by the employee for he was on 24 hour call, but the actual speeding violation was when the employee was using the car on his own time and having NOTHING to do with his employment. The Court's comment clearly stated they did NOT think the employee was on duty when he received the ticket, but that ticket was enough to show "Wilful Misconduct" in his refusal to obey the speed limit even off duty/

Thus Pennsylvania has a long history of DENYING unemployment to employees whose actions OFF WORK, brings their employer's reputation into disrepute. In such cases, all the Employer has to show that the employee did SOMETHING that looked bad and that he was their employee. The Employee has to show that his actions where NOT only off work BUT he made it clear he was NOT representing his employee when he did the act.

In many ways this goes back to the Master-Servant rule, where an employer is held responsible for the actions of their employees UNLESS it can clearly be shown that the employee was clearly outside of the Employer-Employee relationship (Thus the owner of a trucking company is responsible for any accidents his truckers get into UNLESS it can be shown that the employee was clearly working outside his normal work).

In such cases employers can be held liable even for actions of their employees off duty IF IT APPEARS THAT OTHER PEOPLE WOULD THINK THEY WERE ON DUTY. Notice it is NOT that the person was on duty or not, but if they APPEAR to be on duty to other people involved in the accident or incident. That is the Master-Servant rule. They are restrictions on that rule as to when it applies when an employee is off the work site, but if it is normal for the employee to work off the work site, the Master-Servant rule still applies and if that rule applies to the situation so does unemployment compensation law. That appears to be the case here and I see the Unemployment Board of Review to uphold that set of facts and that this person's action were "Wilful Misconduct".

[Major Nikon]

94. I'm not much for anonymously claimed expertise on the internet either

Lots of people claim all sorts of experience anonymously on the internet, which doesn't really impress me all that much. YMMV. Although not in Pennsylvania, I am heavily involved in the application of employment law for a large company. Your anecdote doesn't lead me to believe you have any real experience if you think all an employer has to do in order to prove preponderance of evidence is to state an employee broke their rules, especially since you still seem to believe the burden of proof is on the employee.

You did a lot of typing to present a case that is most certainly not like this one. What an employee does with an employer owned car most certainly is within the scope of employer interests and certainly does have a nexus to his employment. If an employee is required to drive a company car as a condition of employment, their driving record most certainly has a nexus to their employment so it probably wouldn't have even mattered if the employee was in a company owned car. In the case you presented there's actually two connections to the employer's interests.

The festering asshole in question was both off duty and had exactly zero nexus to his employment which is not even within a cab ride of the example you presented. I suggest you go back to your google and look for a case that is actually relevant to this one. I don't think you'll find one, but if you can I might be more convinced.

[Tipperary]

95. Excellent response.

[brush]

45. When he apllies he'll have to explain why . . .

and give them the link to the video that got him fired.

That may influence whether or not he gets it.

If I was on the board that decides it I'd deny his ass.

[Major Nikon]

50. It might, but it shouldn't

Anyone who applies for unemployment compensation has a legal recourse if they are denied the benefit, and as such a legitimate legal reason must be cited. So as undeserving as this festering asshole is, he still has the same rights under the law as everyone else does and you just don't want people using arbitrary reasons for denial. Otherwise a slimy Republican governor could just deny everyone and there wouldn't be anything you could do about it.

[brush]

74. All good points. Even a hole racist like him have rights

Even though he'd likely deny them to others.

Good thing I'm not making the decision as I'd still like to deny his ass.

[Laurian]

11. What a disgrace.

An utter embarrassment to the human race.

[madamesilverspurs]

12. Well, it's been a few hours.

Has the Trump campaign hired him, yet?

[Rose Siding]

42. Ha! Like Joe the plumber -John the Unemployed Bigot.

He really believed that those people were taking HIS tax money. -Especially the black man.

[zazen]

125. "John-the-Unemployed-Bigot"--Love it!! n/t

[Plucketeer]

60. That was my first thought!

This guy needs a job as an audience moderator for Trump rallies!

[BuelahWitch]

13. Good! I'm glad there were consequences for this!

I saw this tirade on the Lawrence County PA's Fracking Resistance Facebook page yesterday. I am ashamed to say I come from that area of the country. Anyway, idiot got what he deserved. I doubt he'll learn from it, but at least he got a kick in the pants (figuratively).

[valerief]

14. Another moron and asshole created by RW Jeebus America. nt

[malaise]

19. Oh Yes!!

[juxtaposed]

25. thanks, didn't know but if anyone wants it it's out there on fb.

[Major Nikon]

22. ...

[George II]

27. No doubt Donald Trump will hire him as his Pennsylvania as his local campaign manager.

[JackInGreen]

28. With any luck

He'll hit a bar to drown his sorrows, open his mouth to the wrong person, and spend the next few days nursing a broken face after booking.

[Whiskeytide]

30. Wow. So this is what we see when the filters ...

... are stripped away by the sorry state of what passes for political discourse in the republican party, huh? "The candidates aren't using dog whistles anymore, why should I?"

Damn.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

31. Now watch the dude suck up tax dollars.

[Catherine Vincent]

32. Hopefully he didn't have kids

Now he'll be milking the black guy's taxes. Idiot.

[Generic Other]

33. He said he'd only seen 10 people of color in his life

and yet he is so full of hate. Who was acting like an animal? The chump making chimp noises, that's who. The person filming had a cool head and steady hand given the circumstances.

[TeamPooka]

109. He was very cool. Admirable. nt

[Uncle Joe]

36. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, MrWendel.

[Inkfreak]

37. I've posted before about how I hate it when people's livelihoods are taken....

when they do something stupid.

This, I have zero problem with. Fuck him.

[dorkzilla]

44. Actions should have consequences though

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[Inkfreak]

66. A bit simplistic. But as stated, no problems with this one.

[dorkzilla]

73. Oversimplified for sure

But honestly I think that people should weigh their actions more carefully. I think that as a somewhat transient society we lack the guidance and consequences that living in our ancestors villages used to provide; you didn't want to run the risk of tarnishing the family name or be shunned by your neighbors. I'm not suggesting we go back to the days where we would shame unwed mothers or anything like that, but I hope we will evolve to the point where you think about what you say or do because you may lose a lot by it.

Everyone has a camera phone now, and reddit will doxx the shit out of you...

[Logical]

82. I get your point. This crossed the line I think! Nt

[cindyperry]

38. Good

As s hole deserves it

[rurallib]

39. bet his parents are proud of him

wonder if he got that at home?

Wonder if the PC and free speech crowd like Teddy Cruz are defending him.
What he proved is you can say incredibly idiotic stuff, but there may be a reaction you never counted on.

[SammyWinstonJack]

40. Get a job...hippies. How orginal...

My but he was proud of his racism wasn't he.

Milking his tax dollars ....another orginal thought....silly:

[SCantiGOP]

62. I thought the same thing

He wasn't born when the phrase "Get a job, hippie" was actually in use.

[litlbilly]

41. The dog whistle is simply now a foghorn. They dont even try and hide who they are

[Moostache]

47. Actions have consequences...and that swings both ways.

Cheerleading this idiot's demise and wishing pain and suffering on his family is no better than his actions in the first place.

The intolerance that leads to just condemnation and celebration of same, but no reflection on why these attitudes exist and thrive in the minds of 21st century citizens of a first world nation at all, is the real tragedy here.

Justice is not served only through punishment alone - but through rehabilitation and improving society as a result.
The entire principle of imprisoning people is supposed to be about rehabilitation, even though in our sad little prison-industrial country that concept has been all but totally lost and is now clearly seeping into our general discourse as well.

Remember that his attitude is not extinguished through retribution in a single (or even multiple) case. If we truly want an end to racism and to vicious, inane and stupid rants and hatreds, then cheering this kind of thing from a far is counter productive unless we are simultaneously willing to address the reasons these attitudes persist in the first place. Education and conversation, HONEST, PAINFUL, RAW conversation, are the way to clearing these attitudes out of society.

His words have no place in the society I want to live in...but the response to those words and gleeful attitudes about "payback" and "learning his lesson" and such also have no place in a better society either. He should learn a lesson and he likely will suffer justly in the process, but being derided, discarded forever and failing to learn the REAL lesson (that people of color are NOT the ones that make his life worse than previous generations and that racial hatred is not a solution but an albatross) is not serving anything but the very same base nature that leads to the words in the first place.

Attacking this man and his pathetic and uneducated attitudes and words, without tying it to the larger issue in the country, namely that in the face of the law and law enforcement officers in many areas that black lives do NOT matter by law is tragic.

One man and his words cannot, and should not, allow the conversation to shift from systemic and endemic racism to the symptoms of that sickness. Pointing out that this guy is wrong is like saying that sugar is bad for diabetics and calling it a day! We can be better than that without providing acceptance of this kind of thing. We can and must be better than hate or celebratory hate as the two options...

[niyad]

55. your post is very thoughtful and insightful. however, I will point out that one can well understand

the things being posted here, because so many of us are sick unto death of seeing his kind of hatred and ignorance spouting off, with no consequences, because we are not the sort who spew back in ways they might, possibly, understand.

[Moostache]

64. Fair enough and certainly valid...

Thank you for a measured and well received response.

I am afraid that we run the risk of losing sight of the forest for the trees if we do not stop to reflect...I would be aghast to find the Democratic Party hosting a left wing or progressive version of the Trump-led circus and incivility that rules the current right!

I agree that there is anger building like water behind a dam regarding the total lack of justice in race relations and criminal justice in America today...the situation is dire and MUST be discussed, addressed and corrected for society to advance or even tread water at the current levels, but we equally need to focus on the root cause to eradicate the disease.

[Logical]

84. Wait a minute, so you think the company made a mistake firing him.?????

Imagine him back at work and making a comment to a black employee?! The company, knowing about him being racist, would be sued for millions.

You need to put a lot more thought into this!

[Moostache]

114. Oh, I see ...

If that is all you got from the post I am afraid you missed the point, but I am happy for you that you were able to tell me I did not think about it enough before firing off a knee jerk response that illustrates the point for me.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

91. Yeah, yeah yeah. Whatever.

As employer, I would fire that prick as fast as I could. The guy is a time bomb lawsuit waiting to happen. I wouldn't want him within a thousand miles of my other employees OR my customers.

That's all there is to it.

[Locrian]

102. yep, pretty much

He's a liability. And you can't fix stupid.

[Lucky Luciano]

48. Clearly from the Alabama part of Pennsylvania. nt

[1939]

130. The Quakers

William Penn and the Quakers didn't believe in war, but Native American raids on their newly established colony were negatively affecting them. They paid the passage for a bunch of warlike Scots-Irish from Ulster to come over and settled them between the peace-loving Quakers and the raiding tribes. That provided a buffer and security zone for the peaceful Quakers in Philly and surrounding areas. That is why middle Pennsylvania is so like western Virginia and Kentucky and Tennessee. Read James Webb's "Born Fighting" about the Scots-Irish in America.

[JohnnyRingo]

49. K&R ... Words and actions have consequences.

Now he can spend the coming months complaining how Obama took away his free speech.

[niyad]

51. very interesting addition to the information here, including who the protestors were:

https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/12/pennsylvania-man-insults-activists-makes-racial-epithet-to-videographer-then-tells-mom-to-teach-girl-good-morals/

[niyad]

52. may this scum receive everything he deserves.

[shadowmayor]

53. As Herr Trumf would say

You're fired loser!

[niyad]

67. you mean, der drumpfenfuhrer?

[shadowmayor]

86. Si

[Scootaloo]

54. McCain had Joe the Plumber. Now Chump has John the Woodchucker

[TeeYiYi]

56. From the comments section...

...Hat tip to GoGoGoEverton — Wzrd1



TYY

[niyad]

69. absolutely wonderful. KO used to take great delight in pointing out that the free speech thingy

was about GOVERNMENT interference in your speech. everybody else has the free speech rights to call you an asshole, or whatever else they think fits.

the problem is that these people do not understand that others also have free speech rights. think it only applies to them.

[Liberal_in_LA]

57. His past history with the n word

[TeeYiYi]

63. Dude...

...needs to consider going back to school for some basic learnin' of his letters.

Maybe he'll have time for some 'schoolin' now that he won't be encumbered with employment.

TYY

[arcane1]

80. Sounds like he's using racism to compensate for some massive insecurities. The gun too!

He might genuinely hate black people, but he's definitely being an an outspoken asshole in part to elevate himself by shitting on others.

[shadowmayor]

65. Yep

This is far more common than many of my white friends can admit. Ever since Obama's election in 08 I've heard more "nice" white people freely use racial slurs than ever before. This attitude is prevalent in a large swath of America, north & south, east & west, rural and in the cities. When I hear it, I politely explain that I don't appreciate that kind of language or racism in any form and usually I get a simple "that's fine" or I'll watch my tongue etc. When I say the same to folks describing Muslims, it often is a prelude to an argument. Hater's gotta hate and racists gotta spew. Finally, does this deserve a Public Announcement Message regarding texting and shooting?

[lob1]

68. He writes like James Joyce set on stupid.

[johnp3907]

75. "James Joyce set on stupid."

Oh, I'm totally stealing that!

[SMC22307]

83. ....

Ah, thanks, I needed a good chuckle.

[reACTIONary]

124. +100 !! (NT)

[LeftyMom]

85. Is he trying to show off his noodly arms or his pink Dollar Tree body wash?

Maybe his sweet $7.88 WalMart shower curtain?

[Liberal_in_LA]

89. Good questions. Why show off the gun in the bathroom?

[SwankyXomb]

131. He's either

going to masturbate to/with it, or repaint the ceiling in blood and brains.

[rdmtimp]

58. What's the over/under on when he gets a gig with Fox News.....

I say 2 weeks.

[Enthusiast]

61. Yeah. I wonder who he is voting for....

[nomorenomore08]

76. Piss on John Pisone! Sorry, someone had to say it...

[rhett o rick]

81. I have to point out that his views on fracking agree with those of the Republicons, HRC, and

President Obama. Progressives support the 99% that protest against this environmentally damaging practice.

[Oneironaut]

88. Another gun nut with metallic courage strapped to his thigh.

"I can say whatever I want! I have a gun! I'm not a loser anymore, and can pick on whoever I want!"

Glad they didn't touch him. He probably would have started shooting.

[Marr]

96. This whole 'get the person who pissed you off fired' thing really needs to stop.

Argue with them, absolutely-- but going straight to their employer in the hopes that they'll fire the person for something they did when they weren't even at work... it's creepy, and weirdly juvenile. Feels like running to teacher to tattle.

[Cali_Democrat]

97. Why do you think they fired the racist?

Because working with a racist constitutes an unsafe work environment. I certainly wouldn't feel safe working with a vile racist and I'm sure most other blacks would agree with me.

Your defense of the racist is sad, but not surprising considering your other posts on this subject matter.

[Marr]

103. More likely because they were afraid of losing business, and being buried on Yelp.

And your chickenshit accusation of 'defending the racist' is about what I'd expect from you, too. Engage on the topic-- stop hiding behind easy insults that short circuit discussion. Simply throwing accusations at anyone who doesn't respond to every topic in the way you deem 'correct' is childish.

[Glassunion]

108. Or (I know this may sound weird), the company gives 2 shits about their employees.

Yes it will effect their business having someone like this on their payroll. #1 It would be bad PR. #2 This asshat, seems to me like he'd be hostile to work with, unless of course you are an asshat racist just like him. It is a wise decision to fire this piece of walking garbage.

Having an employee like this on the payroll will hurt business. A good employer knows that customers make jobs, and that your employees in those jobs are the face of your business to those customers. So customers create jobs, and employees grow the business.

If I needed some landscaping done and hired this business to do it, and this asshole showed up and started talking to me like he did that cameraman, that company would lose my business, and it would be a relationship beyond repair. Not to mention how far out of my way I'd go to make sure that everyone I met would know how shitty the company is.

Now from the employee side... As a black man, I would not be happy working with someone like this, nor for a company that would keep someone like him on the payroll. So, how happy of a face would I put forward knowing I'd have to work with a racist asshat on a daily basis? Sure asshat is fine at work, but tosses racist slurs during what appears to be every waking moment outside of work. The face of the business would a rather sour one.

I would not want to do business with a company with a bunch of sour employees. To me that says that the employer is not taking care of their employees. As a customer, how could I spend my money with a business that is terrible to their employees? I'd have a hand in their misery and would be responsible for it by giving this company money to continue abusing their employees.

So, a bit of a reality check is in order. This jerk stopped his car (he did not have to), got out of his car (he did not have to), walked up to the protesters (he did not have to), started arguing with them (he did not have to), was stupid enough to call a cameraman a nigger (he did not have to), while the camera was rolling continued his racist tirade (he did not have to), and now someone wants to cry foul because he lost his job? To me it looks like this asshat went well out of his way to get fired. He did not have to stop, he did not have to argue, and he was on a level of stupid so high the laws of physics would need to be broken to build a sensor able to accurately gauge how fucking dumb he was for looking at the camera and saying what he said.

As an employer, if I ever found so much as an inkling of one of my people acting like this asshat outside of work or not, their ass would be fired so obscenely fast that they may burn up on reentry into the atmosphere. This jerk, nor any like him would be welcome around any of my employees. I have a duty to ensure they are happy and taken care of first and always.

[noiretextatique]

112. this idiot made a choice to make a racist rant in public

how on earth could the company expect him NOT to be a liability? how could they legitimately expect this to work with black or "hippie" customers? there are consequences to free speech, even for racist assholes...finally. clearly that has not always been the case, and these idiots have been emboldened by the coddling and tacit agreement they used to get from society. not true anymore...thank god. long past time for people to stop accepting this shit...by any means necessary.

[Logical]

120. Wow, are you missing the whole point! This racist idiot deserves to be fired. I am sure the.....

company is glad he exposed himself.

[WcoastO]

99. I would guess he'll get another job......

without too much trouble. There are plenty of potential employers out there with similar beliefs and attitudes.....they just are more covert about it.......and it's unlikely that he will change his warped views. In the future, it's probable he'll be more careful about such rants in public.

[Fla Dem]

128. Yep, for sure. nt

[cilla4progress]

101. I think it's possible

he has lead poisoning - exposure to toxic levels of lead. I often wonder if this is the reason for widespread stupidity in Amerika.

[ryan_cats]

106. Interesting

Interesting that everyone is high fiving each other and fail to see the real problem.
How would people here react if the roles were reversed and this was someone doing this at a Trump rally and got fired?

Was idiot representing his company? By what rights does his company have to fire him and that is rhetorical question as I have no desire to read anyone's hyperventilated posting about enforcing 'your' version of what you think is right. We'll see you change your tune if Trump is elected and how much you like this kind of thing when his type of people do it.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

117. Doing what at a Trump rally?

What is your flip side to this that someone, say a DUer, might do at a Trump rally to get fired?

I'm curious what you have in mind here.

[ryan_cats]

122. I

I re read it and what I meant to write was someone protesting the speech at a Trump rally and him having his jack booted thugs attack that person via his work. I did not mean someone from our side would make the same stupid type of remarks the guy who got fired did or at least I hope no one would as I expect better.

[matt819]

133. Huh?

First, the idiot was not representing his company. And it appears his company has nothing to do with fracking. It doesn't seem that anyone called for his firing. The guy uploaded the video and the employer made a decision. It will stand or it won't, but no one was calling for his firing. Likening this to some sort of trump-related thing is silly and totally off topic.

[ryan_cats]

134. Reading

Reading is fundamental. Second, I agree with your first sentence.

Tom Jefferson uploaded to the video to YouTube and it didn’t take long for outraged internet sleuths to contact his employer, MMC Land Management, who promptly fired John Pisone, releasing the following statement:

[Initech]

107. He'll have a cushy job as an Infowars correspondent.

[ValasHune]

110. Are we sure his name isn't Cleetus ?

[lark]

111. Hard to say who he truly supports, although we can make some good guesses.

first guess - Trump
2nd guess - Cruz
3rd guess - Any of the Klown kar repugs

[Dr. Xavier]

113. This would be a better story if

this jerk would learn from it, but like most republicans, he's going to go home and stew and blame his problems on the black man. And this is why we cannot have nice things.

[Hoppy]

115. Rollin' Coal ain't gonna be easy when your trying to do it on your bicycle.

After losing his job, his pick-up will be reposed when he can't make the payments.

[saturnsring]

119. why lookee here it's skeeter

[Eleanors38]

121. I know of a job opening! SA Zoo Primate Area, as part of the act.

[LiberalLovinLug]

123. While I enjoy watching a racist asshole get taken down a peg

It would have been good if the protesters had at least attempted to say why they were there. He calls them lazy hippies and unemployed. Like many right wingers, they are simply uneducated about issues like fracking. And are brainwashed by Faux News and hate radio The guy in the protest should have asked him if he wanted fire to come out of his taps. Is a job worth having your drinking water contaminated...etc..

[saltpoint]

126. Mr. Pisone was not under any direct

attack. The protestors were opposing fracking.

But Pisone made it personal, and then he made it vulgar. One suspects there may not be any difference between the two in Pisone's case, if his comments are any indication.

There's not much good will likely to follow a conversation when one of the speakers says to the other, "I don’t give a fuck what you have to say."

MMC, made aware of their employee's remarks, terminated his employment. Their statement did not specifically address the point the protestors are making in their opposition to fracking. Their statement characterized the protest as "peaceful."

Pisone may have spoken as he did this time last year for all I know, but I couldn't help but wonder if he may have been at least somewhat emboldened by the Trump campaign, where ugly things are said and no real consequence is realized.

[Hoyt]

127. Props for the employer.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

129. Too bad Mr Pisone is not rich

1. Affluenza would certainly excuse racist rants.

2. Mr Pisone could save his job by checking himself into some sort of "rehab resort".

3. Mr Pisone could run for President as a Republican.

[matt819]

132. The truly absurd part of this

Is that it was unprovoked. The few protesters said nothing to generate this kind of outburst, well, at least what we saw in the video. The video guy was silent. All this moran had to do was . . . Nothing. Just keep his mouth shut. Not get out of his car.

And you gotta love the "apology." He's not completely racist. He was angry and lost his temper. This was the calmest angry guy I've seen.

What a ridiculous episode.

[niyad]

135. I would like to point out that nobody ASKED the company to fire this hate-filled, ugly-

minded pos. they simply pointed the company to the video, and the company chose to deal with him that way.