General Discussion

MineralMan

(151,301 posts)

87. Thanks for your note, Sabrina.

Wed May 15, 2013, 02:43 PM

May 2013

When an OP posts here, there is an obligation to present a position truthfully. If a title is misleading and not representative of the source material, then that deserves a clear explanation, which has not been given. When I reply to an OP saying that his or her title is incorrect and misleading, I have no obligation to you to provide the details when you ask for them. None whatsoever. It is not my OP. Ask the original poster. Call Al Franken and ask him why he voted as he did, if it interests you. I have not asked him about this, since it's just something that's in committee.

Spare me your lecture about lecturing, OK?

Bye for now.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

90 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Al Franken votes against protections for American workers [View all] markiv May 2013 OP

the 'smarmy comical good guy' just stabbed American workers in the back nt markiv May 2013 #1

Reading helps. nt EOTE May 2013 #5

Reading comprehension........ Marrah_G May 2013 #7

care to elaborate, or is 'Fail' your entire arguement markiv May 2013 #13

oh, I think it's been made clear to you that you failed to read the article cali May 2013 #15

bottom line: you cant elaborate either nt markiv May 2013 #18

How unfortunate for you to have joined DU a few weeks ago jberryhill May 2013 #36

Re-read the article Marrah_G May 2013 #19

cite the element of what I said that was wrong markiv May 2013 #21

Here's the paragraph you didn't read... Jeff In Milwaukee May 2013 #46

that's actually a great arguement against ALL regulations markiv May 2013 #47

trollin? demwing May 2013 #62

No, it's not an argument between bad regulations and no regulations at all. baldguy May 2013 #67

that doesnt make NO regulations to protect workers better markiv May 2013 #72

And here's the other paragraph that you didn't read... Jeff In Milwaukee May 2013 #86

don't worry, we'll consider it 'down the road' markiv May 2013 #88

yap yap yap Ellipsis May 2013 #89

d*mn this almost sounds like a billo statement.....ugh. eom a kennedy May 2013 #48

Doesn't it just? baldguy May 2013 #68

No, you know, Franken didn't. You didn't read the entire article, MineralMan May 2013 #2

Gee, if YOU say it it has to be true! Bluenorthwest May 2013 #8

All you have to do is read the article. MineralMan May 2013 #9

Heh heh heh alcibiades_mystery May 2013 #14

Grassley voted to STRIKE the green card count provision markiv May 2013 #10

What else is in that bill? madokie May 2013 #3

whatever one might think of Grassley markiv May 2013 #12

Thats not very reassuring madokie May 2013 #25

that amendment sounds like feel good vote getting crap that accomplishes nothing CBGLuthier May 2013 #4

Perhaps they don't like the loose wording and want it stronger. Marrah_G May 2013 #6

No, he didn't. Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing; The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #11

Grasley, for whatever reason, has been the strongest against H-1b abuse markiv May 2013 #16

You know, the thing is that many DUers MineralMan May 2013 #22

the title was my own to highlight the point markiv May 2013 #26

You made no point about Franken. MineralMan May 2013 #29

the article was about actions of senators markiv May 2013 #32

Your title was not relevant to the article. MineralMan May 2013 #33

What is Franken's position on this? I have read your posts but don't see much information on sabrina 1 May 2013 #58

It would have been a good idea if the OP had explained. MineralMan May 2013 #59

' I have no obligation to explain myself to you' markiv May 2013 #69

By your own logic then, the OP 'has no obligation to explain' him/herself to anyone either. sabrina 1 May 2013 #71

Thanks for your note, Sabrina. MineralMan May 2013 #87

There is no information in the article. That's the problem with this OP. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #66

Thank you, probably best to contact them at their offices so the record can be set straight. I can't sabrina 1 May 2013 #73

"NOT ONE, has disputed my point" jberryhill May 2013 #34

your entire arguement is predicated on prejudice markiv May 2013 #24

No, it's based on reading the entire article. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #31

well, at least you DID bother to read it, which puts markiv May 2013 #38

The article means nothing without more information The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #40

your OP is calling you a liar sigmasix May 2013 #17

what's 'right wing' about worker protections'? markiv May 2013 #20

What the fuck is this shit right here? Brickbat May 2013 #23

LOL you are not a DUr riverbendviewgal May 2013 #27

if that means party above average workers,l then yes nt markiv May 2013 #28

Au contraire. I think they've been a DUer a whole bunch of times...nt SidDithers May 2013 #42

True, he's markiv demwing May 2013 #64

If Whitehouse voted against it too, there must be a good reason ProudToBeBlueInRhody May 2013 #30

he is a troll, isn't he riverbendviewgal May 2013 #35

The bottom line is, we don't know what's tied into the amendment that they don't like ProudToBeBlueInRhody May 2013 #39

no, not a troll, just someone who got slaughtered by H-1b markiv May 2013 #43

They see me trollin,' they hatin' ... The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #74

because Franken is far more well known markiv May 2013 #76

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #78

yes, i do markiv May 2013 #83

That's not what I meant, but you know that. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #84

What is the difference between an Amercian worker and a non-Amercian worker? ZombieHorde May 2013 #37

Here's the problem. DanTex May 2013 #41

Grassley is an asshat cyberswede May 2013 #44

Dude, you are way out of your league here! Vinnie From Indy May 2013 #45

Well, that wasn't quite as easy as you thought it would be, was it, Sparky? 11 Bravo May 2013 #49

it's about what i expected markiv May 2013 #50

Please You Should Stop Lying To Yourself HangOnKids May 2013 #52

markiv, it would benefit you if you would learn the inner workings of proposed legislation. lumpy May 2013 #63

Except that's not what happened. Iggo May 2013 #51

Read the article; your concern is noted... ms liberty May 2013 #53

thank you nt markiv May 2013 #56

One lonely rec on this turd of a thread.. SidDithers May 2013 #54

Hahahaha. n/t Ellipsis May 2013 #70

" H2O Man May 2013 #79

That's a bad title. It needs editing. ananda May 2013 #55

that's actually a legit response markiv May 2013 #57

There is no point. Ellipsis May 2013 #60

uh, that response wasnt directed to you markiv May 2013 #61

. Ellipsis May 2013 #65

Thanks for dropping by at feeding time. winter is coming May 2013 #75

Looks like they also voted down Cruz's amendment to increase the H1B count 400% 0rganism May 2013 #77

But everybody knows Al Franken is the enemy of the American worker! The Velveteen Ocelot May 2013 #80

it didnt say which members voted against the cruz amendment markiv May 2013 #85

absolutely - Cruz's amendment would have been a DISASTER markiv May 2013 #81

You made the classic mistake - making a post taking down one of the moderate darlings. Peregrine Took May 2013 #82

well, the bill passed the committee, with all worker protections GONE markiv May 2013 #90