Comments on: MUST WATCH: TINKLBERG ON UNION CARD CHECK

By: Let Freedom Ring » Blog Archive » Tinklenberg Supports Threats & Intimidations?

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:36:56 +0000

[...] 2:08 pmTinklenberg Supports Threats & Intimidations? After seeing the YouTube video that Michael posted, I’m wondering whose side El Tinklenberg is on, the unions’ side or the [...]

By: el presidente

el presidente — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 06:28:07 +0000

MBB/MDE STILL hasn’t spelled Tinklenberg correctly.

Michael and Michele,
Sitting in a tree,
S-P-E-L-L-I-N-G.

By: Charlie Quimby

Charlie Quimby — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:58:35 +0000

The “Minnesotans for Employee Freedom” brought up intimidation first, and Tinklenberg countered as that troll tried to complete his hit.

Guess where this stalwart, grassroots organization posts its video and comments like this: “They are doing the bidding of the Washington union special interests”?

At the blog operated by this notorious
Washington-based union buster.
http://tinyurl.com/oaczm

By: TheGipper

TheGipper — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:53:10 +0000

Tinkles has no shot against the ATTRACTIVE Michele Bachmann:)

By: DJZ

DJZ — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 18:52:21 +0000

I’m too young for the Dead and you are going to loose this election. Your 2004 tactics are so tired.

By: KT

KT — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 17:05:49 +0000

My question is a simple one about the posing from the left. Are the lefty bloggers suffering from ADD, Mental deficiency from being dropped on their heads as children, flashbacks from too many Greatful Dead concerts or are they just paid to change the subject by some wealthy European/Socialist investor like George Soros?

By: el presidente

el presidente — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:34:52 +0000

Perhaps it is not Dutch. It does not end in -ma, or contain Van, etc. I know he was raised in a Dutch Community.

By: el presidente

el presidente — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:33:15 +0000

MBB – Perhaps WordPress has the spell check feature where you are able to “add words” such as the Dutch name “Tinklenberg.”

By: ansel

ansel — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:31:26 +0000

the thing i never hear from unions is why there is an objection to determining if a union will represent workers by holding a secret ballot?

do they claim the elections are rigged? neither an employer or union can influence individual voters as long as it is a secret ballot and fairly held.

am i not understanding something here? is the card check just to have an election or to actually determine union representation?

By: el presidente

el presidente — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:29:50 +0000

el presidente again points out that MBB/MDE has misspelled EL (Elywn) TINKLENBERG’S name incorrectly in upper case, red, letters, yet again.

el presidente for his new found amgio EL TINKLENBERG

By: KT

KT — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:23:28 +0000

What I find interesting is that there is no good defense for Card Check so if it wasn’t for the opposition to it putting up ads, then no one except Democrats and Union Officials would have known this was part if a Bill.

Sneaky and underhanded, typical Socialist crap. Eh Comrade DJZ?

By: KT

KT — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:19:39 +0000

If he wanted to make a point, he should not have run away from further questions.

As a member of a Union I don’t think anyone at my workplace should be seeing how I voted. That is private and no ones business, and that includes co-workers, the union and my employer.

I really don’t see how the right to a private vote has anything to do with employer intimidation anyway.

By: Troy

Troy — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:16:55 +0000

Riiight DJZ. No union has ever employed any intimidation tactics to achieve their goals. Ever.
*rolls eyes*

By: DJZ

DJZ — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:21:00 +0000

They cut him off because he spoke the truth- The intimidation is by the employer.

I love it. Keep working for that union vote Republicans while you keep shipping those jobs overseas and now to South America. Good-bye Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Hello Columbia, India and Tahiti.

By: Kyle Christensen

Kyle Christensen — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:28:32 +0000

He’s a Democrat. He supports coercion and force.

By: PlymouthDem

PlymouthDem — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:11:34 +0000

You can’t exactly claim he “seems to leave rather quickly when asked follow-up questions about intimidation” when you cut the video off half sentence in his response.