I lost alot of respect for Sir Paul

[85Sooner]

Not much here but a pretty good explanation espousing the differences between conservative and liberals (notice I did not identify any party)

http://www.wacotrib.com/opin/content/news/opinion/stories/nugent/06172007_wac_nugent.html


I have musical touring associates who have been fired from their jobs with ex-Beatle Paul McCartney for sneaking a hamburger.

You heard that right. Fired for eating meat by an animal-rights maniac, hard-core vegan bass player.

The entire agenda of the gazillion-dollar-financed joke known as PETA literally is dedicated to outlawing meat.

Neither I, nor any hunter or meat eater on the planet, has any desire whatsoever to influence any vegetarian's choice of diet or to force them to eat meat. We are the friendly, tolerant Americans.

This is but one of many issues that represent the line drawn in the sand between liberals and conservatives.:pop:

[royalfan5]

It should be his perogative to fire his employees for whatever he sees fit.

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

heh


By Ted Nugents Father
Jun 18, 2007 6:20 PM | Link to this (http://www.wacotrib.com/opin/content/news/opinion/stories/nugent/06172007_wac_nugent.html#comment-1324362)
I eat unborn babies. As for Ted, everyone knows he's a rightwing psycho hunting gun freak. He did have some cool licks in his day on the guitar. Now he's just a washed up ex rocker going the way of Charleton Heston.
PROCHOICE - SO STAY THE F OUT OF OUR LIVES meatballs.

[soonerscuba]

Meh. So we should listen to celebrities when they complain about things that you support? I guess that I am curious how this is any different than getting all uppity about George Clooney.

[mdklatt]

While conservatives "live and let live,"


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA


Whatever, dude.

[SicEmBaylor]

Spek for Ted Nugent but neg for linking to a Trib article. It cancels out and I shall do nothing.

[85Sooner]

Meh. So we should listen to celebrities when they complain about things that you support? I guess that I am curious how this is any different than getting all uppity about George Clooney.


Didn't say whether I support it or not. It is demonstrating a clear difference between the two belief systems.

[mdklatt]

Didn't say whether I support it or not.

You don't exactly gotta be Kreskin to figure this one out....

[bri]

I have musical touring associates who have been fired from their jobs with ex-Beatle Paul McCartney for sneaking a hamburger.

1996 called; it wants its common knowledge back.

[85Sooner]

You don't exactly gotta be Kreskin to figure this one out....


Do you disagree? Even the head of the Young Democrats of California agreed last night on Beyond the beltway. He basically said that he was a proud liberal that agreed with the economic theories of communism (his words)course he qualified it by saying in a free market economy, which makes absolutely no sense.

[bri]

So, one guy speaks for ALL of us?

Oooh, can I be in charge of picking the one rando that speaks for all of your side?

[Taxman71]

Only in rock and roll do you get fired for eating a burger and bonused for scoring good ganja.

[yermom]

While conservatives "live and let live," the left arrogantly thinks it knows better than we do and will burden "we the people" with more government control until we are taxed to death.

i'm with mdk on this one... "live and let live" my ***

[mdklatt]

Do you disagree?

Disagree with what? That Paul McCartney can decide who gets to play with him on tour? I don't disagree with that at all.

As far as the "live and let live" philosophy of conservatives, that is complete and utter bull**** when you're talking about the "convervatives" that currently make up the power base of the Republican party.

[soonerscuba]

Didn't say whether I support it or not. It is demonstrating a clear difference between the two belief systems.

Conservatives belief in liberty for all and Liberals don't? Tell that to the mos.

[Jerk]

People Exploding Tiny Animals

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFUb6DkHQ-I

[Jerk]

damn, look at this one!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QG7Y4ukqR0&mode=related&search=

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Not much here but a pretty good explanation espousing the differences between conservative and liberals (notice I did not identify any party)

http://www.wacotrib.com/opin/content/news/opinion/stories/nugent/06172007_wac_nugent.html


I have musical touring associates who have been fired from their jobs with ex-Beatle Paul McCartney for sneaking a hamburger.

You heard that right. Fired for eating meat by an animal-rights maniac, hard-core vegan bass player.

The entire agenda of the gazillion-dollar-financed joke known as PETA literally is dedicated to outlawing meat.

Neither I, nor any hunter or meat eater on the planet, has any desire whatsoever to influence any vegetarian's choice of diet or to force them to eat meat. We are the friendly, tolerant Americans.

This is but one of many issues that represent the line drawn in the sand between liberals and conservatives.:pop:Boy, are you ever asking for it?!!?!

[Scott D]

I wonder if Paul's band is an "at will" conglomerate because that would be super.

[Jerk]

Would it be okay for me to fire someone with an "at will" agreement after I found out he's a muslim?

[Scott D]

if you want to take chances with being sued over religious discrimination by not documenting subpar performance, then go right ahead.

[Jerk]

if you want to take chances with being sued over religious discrimination by not documenting subpar performance, then go right ahead.

What about the burger eater? What if he, like, worships the god of burger-eaters? Can he sue?

[Scott D]

What about the burger eater? What if he, like, worships the god of burger-eaters? Can he sue?

I'd probably think that in his case, there was a stipulation that was in his contract with McCartney in regards to foodstuffs on the tour. At this point it has to be assumed that he felt that it was an acceptable risk to run in regards to the compensation he'd receive as both pay and exposure.

In other words, he's dumb for not being more careful about his desire to fill his arteries with the goodness that is a well crafted burger.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

What about the burger eater? What if he, like, worships the god of burger-eaters? Can he sue?If your employer worships the god of environmental extremism, IMO, you are SOL. Go start your own band.

[Jerk]

Well, I think the guy should sue for some reason or nother. I mean, you can't tell a man that he can't eat a hamburger! What kind of communist bullsh*t is that?

They can have my burger when they pry if from my cold, dead hands.

[mdklatt]

Well, I think the guy should sue for some reason or nother. I mean, you can't tell a man that he can't eat a hamburger! What kind of communist bullsh*t is that?


He's not being told he can't eat a hamburger. He's being told he can't eat a hamburger AND work for Paul McCartney. Why do you hate employer's rights? Communist bullsh*t indeed.

[Jerk]

He's not being told he can't eat a hamburger. He's being told he can't eat a hamburger AND work for Paul McCartney. Why do you hate employer's rights? Communist bullsh*t indeed.
so, I can hire a muslim and say "you can be a muslim, you just can't be one and work for me!"

[mdklatt]

so, I can hire a muslim and say "you can be a muslim, you just can't be one and work for me!"

What do you think the answer to that question should be?

[Jerk]

What do you think the answer to that question should be?

No, you shouldn't fire people because they don't fit your ideological mold. That's exactly what McCartny did.

[Soonrboy]

what if there was sometime type of contract that said, as long as you're at work, there will be no eating of hamburgers...and he violated that agreement?

[Jerk]

what if there was sometime type of contract that said, as long as you're at work, there will be no eating of hamburgers...and he violated that agreement?

Then I'd have to agree.

Was there one?

[Soonrboy]

maybe..who knows.

[Jerk]

Lsat thing, and then I'm outta here.

PETA can suck my big fat ***** ****

[1stTimeCaller]

a burger? apparently. ;)

[mdklatt]

No, you shouldn't fire people because they don't fit your ideological mold. That's exactly what McCartny did.

I'll agree that you shouldn't fire somebody for idealogical reasons, but I wouldn't go as far as to say you can't...in an ideal world; there are pragmatic considerations.

But this isn't a political or idealogical issue. It's a contract issue. Presumably there was a contract involved, and presumably it detailed what you could and could not be fired for. If eating hamburgers was explicitly forbidden as a firing offence, then they've got a point. If not, they can go **** up a rope because they signed the contract voluntarily.

[Jerk]

I agree, if he signed a contract, then, yeah, there's little excuse or recourse for the fired musician.
If it was just a spur of the moment thing with no warning, then too bad Paul didn't have the hamburger shoved up his arse.

[hurricane'bone]

I don't think people who eat hamburgers are a protected class.

Where as Muslims, and all people of relgion, are.

[Ross33]

There is a specific federal statute (and every state has a similar one) that prohibits you from terminating the employment ("at will" or otherwise) of a person because he is a Muslim. There is no such statute that protects burger-eaters. It's simply not a legitimate comparison.

Employers can fire an at-will employee for any reason, or no reason, with or without "cause" or "notice," unless the reason is expressly prohibited by law. My boss can fire me because I like the Red Sox and he likes the Yankees. Nothing I can do about it.

Muslim wins, burger-eater loses.

Paul should be able to fire burger eaters if he sees fit, until such time as the burger eater lobby gets a law passed. Until then, that's the benefit of owning the company.

[Jerk]

That's what we need then. A law. A law to protect people who like to eat hambugers, and another law that states any member of PETA can be shot on sight.

[C&CDean]

Well gee. I guess I won't have to worry about firing a muslim....cause I wouldn't hire one in the first place.

[Jerk]

There is a specific federal statute (and every state has a similar one) that prohibits you from terminating the employment ("at will" or otherwise) of a person because he is a Muslim. There is no such statute that protects burger-eaters. It's simply not a legitimate comparison.

Employers can fire an at-will employee for any reason, or no reason, with or without "cause" or "notice," unless the reason is expressly prohibited by law. My boss can fire me because I like the Red Sox and he likes the Yankees. Nothing I can do about it.

Muslim wins, burger-eater loses.

Paul should be able to fire burger eaters if he sees fit, until such time as the burger eater lobby gets a law passed. Until then, that's the benefit of owning the company.

okay, I dig that. So if I have a company and a fire all of the vegans and vegitarians just because they are vegans and vegitarians, then no could say sh*t. I still don't think it's that much different than firing someone because they're a muslim. But I see your point about the law.

[Vaevictis]

Was there one?

I don't know about this specific individual's case, but in general when it comes to McCartney's tours, the answer is yes.

I have a family member who used to do trucking for bands on tour who did one of McCartney's tours back in the 90's -- they made it very, very clear that nobody working on the tour was to eat any animal products while on the tour, and that anyone who was caught doing so would be summarily fired. And yes, it was in the contracts.

[bri]

okay, I dig that. So if I have a company and a fire all of the vegans and vegitarians just because they are vegans and vegitarians, then no could say sh*t. I still don't think it's that much different than firing someone because they're a muslim. But I see your point about the law.

Your capacity for just not getting the point is nigh legendary.

EVERY SINGLE PERSON that works on one of Paul McCartney's tours has the "no animal products" provision IN THEIR CONTRACT WHEN THEY ARE HIRED. They enter into the employment agreement KNOWING FULL WELL WHAT IS EXPECTED OF THEM. So if you had hired each and every one of the vegitarians and vegans and told them IN WRITING, UP FRONT that not eating animal products was grounds for immediate termination, then it would be the same thing.

Furthermore, besides the fact that I can't believe you people are having kittens over something that has been public knowledge since the early-to-mid-90's, I wonder why it's so horribly wrong for McCartney to have a "no meat" clause in the contracts for the people he employs each tour, but Christian schools can make students sign a "morality oath" that makes co-educational dancing and unchaperoned hand-holding grounds for explusion?

[C&CDean]

Dude, nobody gets "expluted" for holding hands anymore.

[Jerk]

Got your panties in a bind, bri?

I already stated that if it was in the contract, then there's nothing the fired musician could do. I guess you didn't read that.

I just think it's an as*hole thing to do. Just as much of an as*hole thing to do as firing someone for their religion, with the difference being there are laws protecting that class of people. Oh well. He can be a PETA wack-job all he wants, and I'll go shoot prairie dogs. It's a free country.

[SicEmBaylor]

Dude, nobody gets "expluted" for holding hands anymore.
Au contraire!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/17/AR2007061701179_pf.html

Fairfax County middle school student Hal Beaulieu hopped up from his lunch table one day a few months ago, sat next to his girlfriend and slipped his arm around her shoulder. That landed him a trip to the school office.

Among his crimes: hugging.

All touching -- not only fighting or inappropriate touching -- is against the rules at Kilmer Middle School in Vienna. Hand-holding, handshakes and high-fives? Banned. The rule has been conveyed to students this way: "NO PHYSICAL CONTACT!!!!!"

[SicEmBaylor]

That kid has game ^

[C&CDean]

****ing Fairfax County. D.C. Nothing there is actually "America" anyhow.

[85Sooner]

I'd probably think that in his case, there was a stipulation that was in his contract with McCartney in regards to foodstuffs on the tour. At this point it has to be assumed that he felt that it was an acceptable risk to run in regards to the compensation he'd receive as both pay and exposure.

In other words, he's dumb for not being more careful about his desire to fill his arteries with the goodness that is a well crafted burger.


Paul McCartney is "very fond of flowers," won't travel in a stretch limousine with leather seats, and will not stand for backstage furniture made of any animal skin or print (even if it's of the artificial variety). Those are just a few of the unique provisions contained in the ex-Beatle's concert rider for his 2002 World Tour, excerpts from which you'll find below. McCartney also provides promoters with an amusing list of plant demands, one that concludes with this underlined admonition: "No trees please! We want plants that are just as full on the bottom as the top such as palm, bamboo, peace lilies, etc. No tree trunks!" And, of course, the rider requires a pre-show sweep by some bomb-sniffing dogs and it contains the expected vegan salvo: "There will be no meat, or meat by-products allowed to be served in the dressing rooms, production offices, or areas within the 'backstage area.'" But it turns out Paul's backstage demand for 24 bars of Ivory Soap is a major vegan no-no, since the 99.44% pure soap actually contains animal fats, according to Ivory¹s web site. So, while Paul won't sit on leather, the Liverpudlian is apparently lathering with beef tallow. (12 pages)

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/mccartney/mccartney1.html

[jk the sooner fan]

the "no meat" deal is much like my companies "no smoke" deal.......you smoke, you dont work for the company, period

and its legal

there are lots of people that dont eat meat....it doesnt make them any less american, it just makes them different from us meat eaters

[AlbqSooner]

Only in rock and roll do you get fired for eating a burger and bonused for scoring good ganja.
Not true. My nephew and a friend of his got bonused for scoring good ganja by the manager at the Burger King where they worked. One of their co-workers got fired for eating a hamburger - course he didnt pay for it but that may or may not be the reason he got fired.:D

[BigRedJed]

Hell, McCartney has had that provision for longer than that. I got to go backstage in Dallas on his '90 tour. To go backstage you had to agree to not wear any leather, including belts or shoes. The concessions stands specifically could not sell any meat products (the black bean nachos were outstanding!). This was 1990, people.

[soonerboomer93]

That's what we need then. A law. A law to protect people who like to eat hambugers, and another law that states any member of PETA can be shot on sight.

don't forget the law to shoot muslims, communists, oh and mexicans on site...

[Blue]

Paul McCartney is "very fond of flowers," won't travel in a stretch limousine with leather seats, and will not stand for backstage furniture made of any animal skin or print (even if it's of the artificial variety). Those are just a few of the unique provisions contained in the ex-Beatle's concert rider for his 2002 World Tour, excerpts from which you'll find below. McCartney also provides promoters with an amusing list of plant demands, one that concludes with this underlined admonition: "No trees please! We want plants that are just as full on the bottom as the top such as palm, bamboo, peace lilies, etc. No tree trunks!" And, of course, the rider requires a pre-show sweep by some bomb-sniffing dogs and it contains the expected vegan salvo: "There will be no meat, or meat by-products allowed to be served in the dressing rooms, production offices, or areas within the 'backstage area.'" But it turns out Paul's backstage demand for 24 bars of Ivory Soap is a major vegan no-no, since the 99.44% pure soap actually contains animal fats, according to Ivory¹s web site. So, while Paul won't sit on leather, the Liverpudlian is apparently lathering with beef tallow. (12 pages)

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/mccartney/mccartney1.html

Nutjob! and he wallows in Beef tallow. Heh.

[Frozen Sooner]

While within his rights to do it, he wasn't right to do it. And just because something is in an employment contract doesn't mean that the employment contract was totally voluntarily entered into. The threat of unemployment is very coercive, even when only implied. This was one of the fundamental reasons why the right to collectively bargain was finally recognized.

Unless the burger was eaten while the guy was at work (sorry, didn't click the link) then it should have fallen outside the actual scope of employment and not been subject to employment contract.

[jk the sooner fan]

some of you are acting like all of us keep up with how paul mccartney runs his business.....

ok we get it, he's been doing it since the 90's.......count me as one who had no clue, nor cared to know

i just dont keep up with Sir Paul like I should or as the rest of you seem too

[Jerk]

some of you are acting like all of us keep up with how paul mccartney runs his business.....

ok we get it, he's been doing it since the 90's.......count me as one who had no clue, nor cared to know

i just dont keep up with Sir Paul like I should or as the rest of you seem too
No kidding. Posts #22 and #25 were jokes, and not meant to be serious. Certain people got their thongs so far up their arse about it that I made the mistake of trying to make serious replies. And these people think I actually keep up with the hiring practices of some kook washed-out British musician, as if, "everyone knows!!" No, not all of us do, because we really don't care.

My only philosophy is this: You stay out of my life and I will stay out of yours.

Everything else is trivial.

[47straight]

When liberals make libertarian arguments it is the funny.

[Frozen Sooner]

Even funnier when "conservatives" try to make the argument that it's not OK to fire someone for what they do outside of work.

[SicEmBaylor]

Even funnier when "conservatives" try to make the argument that it's not OK to fire someone for what they do outside of work.
Wouldn't that make more sense if you said that conservatives try to make the argument that it IS okay to fire someone for what they do outside of work.

Honestly, an employer ought to be able to fire someone for any reason he/she damned well wants.

[soonerboomer93]

no they shouldn't

if it doens't affect my work, it's not their ****in business

I work 10 hours a day, those 10 hours, my work comes first, when I go home, then well, it's up to me. Short of a DUI or a serious offense of other natures that would cause me to be persona non grata in Korea (which does therefore affect my work) they have no business in what I do.

[leavingthezoo]

Honestly, an employer ought to be able to fire someone for any reason he/she damned well wants.

yeah. like if they went to baylor. or drink zima. or smokes cigars. or can't change a tire, so on and so forth. :D

[Frozen Sooner]

Wouldn't that make more sense if you said that conservatives try to make the argument that it IS okay to fire someone for what they do outside of work.

Honestly, an employer ought to be able to fire someone for any reason he/she damned well wants.

Um, no. See, the irony exists here because people who claim to be conservatives are upset that McCartney fired someone for something they did outside of work.

I can think of quite a few arguments I've heard from conservatives that run pretty counter to that.

[RacerX]

btw Jerk. If your company is small (I think it's 7 or less), you can discriminate.

[RacerX]

I'm upset that McCartney keeps recording.

[JohnnyMack]

This thread is making me want Ron's.

[Hamhock]

how about the irony of gun lovers who support a guy who **** himself for days to avoid the draft?

[sitzpinkler]

This is but one of many issues that represent the line drawn in the sand between liberals and conservatives.:pop:

You mean like the article that was posted on here (pretty sure it was here) a couple of weeks ago where the business owner fired his employee because he admitted to being an atheist?

[Beef]

This is no longer a vegan thread. Your welcome.

[Hamhock]

can anyone here help with me with my question about cleaning squirrels?

[royalfan5]

can anyone here help with me with my question about cleaning squirrels?
Soak'em in Clorox. YWIA

[Scott D]

can anyone here help with me with my question about cleaning squirrels?

Google hates you Hamhock. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=B7K&q=beano%27s+fourth+chin&btnG=Search) :D

[Petro-Sooner]

This thread is making me want Ron's.

Ahhh Ron's. A double meat sausage burger sounds great right about now.

[sitzpinkler]

This is no longer a vegan thread. Your welcome.

my welcome? :D

[yermom]

no they shouldn't

if it doens't affect my work, it's not their ****in business

I work 10 hours a day, those 10 hours, my work comes first, when I go home, then well, it's up to me. Short of a DUI or a serious offense of other natures that would cause me to be persona non grata in Korea (which does therefore affect my work) they have no business in what I do.

that's your opinion, but sadly not the law

[Jeopardude]

I have musical touring associates who have been fired from their jobs with ex-Beatle Paul McCartney for sneaking a hamburger.

Is there an actual news story or personal account of these firings? I'm inclined to believe that this happened (contract rider quoted and Linda McCartney's rep as a nasty beeatch are persuasive), but I really don't wanna get worked up by the third party anecdotes from "musical touring associates."

And what the hay is a "musical touring associate" anyway? Is it anyone who goes on musical tours within six degrees of separation? Did these people tell Ted personally or is this just a story floating around rock and roll world?

[47straight]

Even funnier when "conservatives" try to make the argument that it's not OK to fire someone for what they do outside of work.


No, that's not as funny. Because even if a liberal gives up the "it's not against the law" point they'll drop in a "fundie" reference or some other Christophobic statement. Thanks for playing, though!

[SicEmBaylor]

Um, no. See, the irony exists here because people who claim to be conservatives are upset that McCartney fired someone for something they did outside of work.

I can think of quite a few arguments I've heard from conservatives that run pretty counter to that.

Ohhh, I see your point. Yes, I agree it's horribly hypocritical.

Nonetheless, I stand by the principle that an employer ought to have the right to fire and hire whomever he/she wishes even if it means they're a bigot, homophobe, or don't like zima drinkin' Baylor boys.

[47straight]

Ohhh, I see your point. Yes, I agree it's horribly hypocritical.

Nonetheless, I stand by the principle that an employer ought to have the right to fire and hire whomever he/she wishes even if it means they're a bigot, homophobe, or don't like zima drinkin' Baylor boys.

I see his point but disagree. Conservatives that I know can delineate the differences between their philosophy and libertarianism, understanding when it is similar and when it is different. I've not seen a liberal employ the libertarian argument when the "facist right wing fundies" don't want to employ the gay porn star/escort as a Sunday school teacher. But I'll be darned if they don't whip it out faster in the case of Sir Paul and the veggitarians than Ted Kennedy on prom night. There sure is hypocrisy going on - just some of it is ignored.

And I also disagree with your call for a return to segregation, for what it's worth. ;)

[SicEmBaylor]

And I also disagree with your call for a return to segregation, for what it's worth. ;)

I hardly think that would be a concern. We're talking about an employer's right to employ not creating entirely new facilities or places of business based on race or whatever else. I honestly do not believe most businesses in most places in these United States could survive if they had the reputation of being racist. Personally, if I ran a business I wouldn't give a **** what my employees were doing after work as long as they did their job well. I also don't give a damn what their skin color is.

However, you did bring up another interesting point because I also believe an employer should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. If a business owner doesn't want to do business with someone then why should he/she be forced to do so?

[OUDoc]

Can the bomb-sniffing dog be fired for eating meat as well?

[sooner_born_1960]

It's ok for animals to eat meat.

[royalfan5]

Y'all know that Oklahoma's own Carrie Underwood has the same policy as McCartney right?

[OUDoc]

Y'all know that Oklahoma's own Carrie Underwood has the same policy as McCartney right?
She hates Yoko Ono, too?

[sooner_born_1960]

from here http://www.cmt.com/news/articles/1520422/01092006/underwood__carrie.jhtml

15. How can you be associated with PETA since you grew up in rural Oklahoma? They do not like livestock shows, rodeos, hunting and fishing. These are the activities that define us as Oklahomans.

That's a good question. I don't think those things define us as Oklahomans. I think that the way that we are in our personality and in the morals that we have, I think that defines us Oklahomans. Livestock is definitely a big deal in Oklahoma. A lot of my friends were in FFA and stuff like that growing up. ... I just choose not to eat animals. That's it. I'm not really associated with PETA. If they're doing a spay-or-neuter campaign, I'm all for it. I'm not really for so many radical things. I think there's just an easier way. I don't preach to others about it. This is just the way I am. If you were sitting there next to me, eating a steak right now, I wouldn't say anything about it because that's your choice, just like it's my choice not to eat it.
That doesn't sound exactly the same.

[Petro-Sooner]

So animals can eat other animals but humans can't?

[sooner_born_1960]

So animals can eat other animals but humans can't?
I hoped someone would get it. ;)

[royalfan5]

from here http://www.cmt.com/news/articles/1520422/01092006/underwood__carrie.jhtml

That doesn't sound exactly the same.
Refusing to take the stage at Comstock in Nebraska because she could see a rodeo going on does, as well as taking the meat from her road crew when it was served to them, instead forcing them to eat cheese pizza does.

[Scott D]

from here http://www.cmt.com/news/articles/1520422/01092006/underwood__carrie.jhtml

That doesn't sound exactly the same.

that also doesn't sound like she's referring to a work situation, but rather if she's out to eat and some random guy at the next table has a steak on his plate.

[sooner_born_1960]

Refusing to take the stage at Comstock in Nebraska because she could see a rodeo going on does, as well as taking the meat from her road crew when it was served to them, instead forcing them to eat cheese pizza does.
Looks like she lied in the interview then. Which is her prerogative.

[OUDoc]

I hoped someone would get it. ;)
Didn't want to get into a "humans are animals" debate. :)

[Petro-Sooner]

I"m an animal................................in bed. :texan: :hot:

[OUDoc]

I"m an animal................................in bed. :texan: :hot:
You lick your groin a lot?

[47straight]

I honestly do not believe most businesses in most places in these United States could survive if they had the reputation of being racist.

Depends on the race, but I agree. However that doesn't change what the law ought to be IMO. Laws are needed when it is socially acceptable to discriminate based on X. A burger joint in a hillbilly state with a sign saying "no towelheads" might actually see a bump in business.



However, you did bring up another interesting point because I also believe an employer should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. If a business owner doesn't want to do business with someone then why should he/she be forced to do so?

The problem is when many or most employers want to lock out a certain segment of the population. Then they become second-class citizens. Striking the balance between what you've suggested and giving people some general right to participate in society is what led to drawing the line according to "public accomodation," which seems to work most of the time.

[Scott D]

Depends on the race, but I agree. However that doesn't change what the law ought to be IMO. Laws are needed when it is socially acceptable to discriminate based on X. A burger joint in a hillbilly state with a sign saying "no towelheads" might actually see a bump in business.




The problem is when many or most employers want to lock out a certain segment of the population. Then they become second-class citizens. Striking the balance between what you've suggested and giving people some general right to participate in society is what led to drawing the line according to "public accomodation," which seems to work most of the time.

psst...you're arguing with a guy who claims the Confederacy was innocent when it came to the Civil War...er "The War Between the States"...er "The War of Northern Aggression (we want you to forget we actually started the firing of weapons though)". :)

[SicEmBaylor]

Depends on the race, but I agree. However that doesn't change what the law ought to be IMO. Laws are needed when it is socially acceptable to discriminate based on X. A burger joint in a hillbilly state with a sign saying "no towelheads" might actually see a bump in business.

If they did see a spike in business then my question is, so what? I'm not a racist by any means but I still fail to see why the government should tell people who they can hire/fire and who they can serve. Ultimately, people are freely choosing the establishment they patron for whatever reason and it seems to me that the government shouldn't be involved in telling people where they can eat and for what reasons. So if some bozo eats at a place because a sign outside says, "no towelheads" then ultimately, so what?


The problem is when many or most employers want to lock out a certain segment of the population. Then they become second-class citizens. Striking the balance between what you've suggested and giving people some general right to participate in society is what led to drawing the line according to "public accomodation," which seems to work most of the time.

That sort of rests on the assumption that the people of this country are overwhelmingly racist and/or there's something about owning a businesses that makes you more likely to be racist then the general population. I don't believe that's true, and I do believe that most business owners are going to do what is best for business whether it be selectively choosing who they hire or not. I'd be willing to bet that the vast overwhelming majority of business owners wouldn't discriminate based on a characteristic that the individual has no control over (such as race, sex, etc.), but I do think there'd be a slightly greater number discriminating based on other things like religion, whether or not their employee smokes (which has actually been done in a few cases), etc.

Ultimately though, as I've said, I fall on the side of property ownership.

[BigRedJed]

I love when people say "I'm not a ______ by any means, but..."

[Tulsa_Fireman]

I'm not a burger eating towelhead from Arkansas by any means, but...

[SoonerBBall]

Man, some of you people make all of us from the US look like retards.

Regardless of whether or not Pauly boy is a worthless PETA whore (which he is) who hasn't made decent music in longer than most of the posters on this board have been alive, it is absolutely his right to fire people for doing things that are against their contractual obligations. Why are you people even arguing this? In addition, comparing firing someone for eating a hamburger to firing someone for being a certain race/religion/sex/etc is retarded. If that comparison came to your mind, stop posting. Please. It is for the good of everyone involved.

[Scott D]

Man, some of you people make all of us from the US look like retards.

Regardless of whether or not Pauly boy is a worthless PETA whore (which he is) who hasn't made decent music in longer than most of the posters on this board have been alive, it is absolutely his right to fire people for doing things that are against their contractual obligations. Why are you people even arguing this? In addition, comparing firing someone for eating a hamburger to firing someone for being a certain race/religion/sex/etc is retarded. If that comparison came to your mind, stop posting. Please. It is for the good of everyone involved.

yeah..beyonces.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Jihadburkaburka, hummus?

[mdklatt]

I honestly do not believe most businesses in most places in these United States could survive if they had the reputation of being racist.


I don't think that's the case. Not because of racism, but because of apathy. There would be a small percentage of people would actively support the business because they're racist, too. There would be an even smaller percentage of people who aren't racist themselves but would actively support the business because they felt it had the absolute right to be as racist as it wanted to be (call this the "states' rights" crowd ;) ). There would be a larger percentage who would not support the business because they think racism is wrong. The largest percentage, I think, would be people who think racism is wrong...but not so much that it's going to stop them from shopping there.

[85Sooner]

from here http://www.cmt.com/news/articles/1520422/01092006/underwood__carrie.jhtml

That doesn't sound exactly the same.


Actually sounds like what the Nugent was saying.

[KC//CRIMSON]

Y'all know that Oklahoma's own Carrie Underwood has the same policy as McCartney right?

Have you heard her new single dedicated to Tony Romo?

"You Fumbled My Heart In The Endzone Of Love"

[47straight]

Man, some of you people make all of us from the US look like retards.

Regardless of whether or not Pauly boy is a worthless PETA whore (which he is) who hasn't made decent music in longer than most of the posters on this board have been alive, it is absolutely his right to fire people for doing things that are against their contractual obligations. Why are you people even arguing this? In addition, comparing firing someone for eating a hamburger to firing someone for being a certain race/religion/sex/etc is retarded. If that comparison came to your mind, stop posting. Please. It is for the good of everyone involved.

So can we rag on him for putting into his contractual obligations at all?

[Mixer!]

Safe to say that Macca's last significant musical contribution was the theme to "Spies like Us"? :pop:








oh, and Traveling Wilburys > Wings.

[BigRedJed]

Here's a hypothetical: Billy Graham goes out on a crusade, which takes many, many workers to put on. This one happens to be in Las Vegas. While working with the crusade, employees agree to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the message Dr. Graham is espousing. Several days in, it is discovered that one of his people visited a (legal) brothel, and was seen (legally) drinking and gambling in a casino during his downtime. He is dismissed.

Is anyone here outraged by his dismissal?

[BigRedJed]

BTW, put me down as NOT outraged.

[BigRedJed]

Also, put me down as NOT outraged that Paul McCartney requires his employees to not eat meat, wear fur or leather in his presence or while on tour with him.

[BigRedJed]

And, put me down for a roquefort filet.

[stoopified]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[JohnnyMack]

I'm busy eating a sausage biscuit.

I'll get back to you in a half an hour or so.

[BigRedJed]

WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE???!?!?!

[King Crimson]

the only option is to bomb Iran, Europe, Mexico, Angel Cabrera and Paul McCartney.

i thought it was last December that Lennon was the Commie and McCartney was a saint. when the commie (corporate owned) MSM documented the death of Lennon instead of Pearl Harbor Day. somehow.

[BigRedJed]

My hypothetical situation has absolutely nothing to do with religion, although some on here probably believe that it does. My only point is that it's OK for an employer to require certain values-based behaviors when representing said employer. The anti-McCartney posters just don't like it because Paul's values don't match their own. They don't match mine, either, but I do believe he has the right to require employees (who agree to do so at the outset) not to eat meat while backstage, dining with him, or in some way representing him and his tour while being paid to do so.

[BigRedJed]

But then again, I tend to side with employers more than labor when it comes to workplace issues. Maybe the anti-McCartney posters should form a labor union for his displaced workers.

[King Crimson]

My hypothetical situation has absolutely nothing to do with religion, although some on here probably believe that it does. My only point is that it's OK for an employer to require certain values-based behaviors when representing said employer. The anti-McCartney posters just don't like it because Paul's values don't match their own. They don't match mine, either, but I do believe he has the right to require employees (who agree to do so at the outset) not to eat meat while backstage, dining with him, or in some way representing him and his tour while being paid to do so.

my anti Paulie feelings is that he put a song about his sheep dog on the White Album. and Honey Pie is such a lame cheese-fest that it was ridiculed on the SAME album by Lennon (the commie) and also the Pixies on the BBC sessions.

[King Crimson]

I'm busy eating a sausage biscuit.

I'll get back to you in a half an hour or so.


is that what the non-hetero kids are calling it these days?

[SoonerBBall]

So can we rag on him for putting into his contractual obligations at all?

Totally. He's a ******.

P.S. Random negspeker that doesn't leave his name, you can negspek all my green away, I don't care, but have the balls to post your name. Neg sniping just makes you look like a *****. Actually, I take that back. It doesn't make you look like a *****, it makes you a genuine *****.

*Edit* Hmm, I can't say *****, so anytime you see those stars, think "slang for vagina".

[Hamhock]

Here's a hypothetical: Billy Graham goes out on a crusade, which takes many, many workers to put on. This one happens to be in Las Vegas. While working with the crusade, employees agree to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the message Dr. Graham is espousing. Several days in, it is discovered that one of his people visited a (legal) brothel, and was seen (legally) drinking and gambling in a casino during his downtime. He is dismissed.

Is anyone here outraged by his dismissal?

no

[VeeJay]

I think it's a safe bet the McCartney tour bus will not be pulling into Ryan's Steakhouse any time soon.

[Frozen Sooner]

So, I was thinking about this, and I came up with this thought:

If I was as rich as Paul McCartney, I would eat a huge steak and a lobster for dinner every night while wearing a leather bathrobe.

Therefore, he is nuts.

[Viking Kitten]

If I was as rich as Sir Paul, I'd have third-world-dwelling 8-year-olds make my shoes from the skins of their younger, weaker siblings.

[47straight]

If I was as rich as Paul McCartney, I'd buy businesses where PETA members worked, order them to eat meat, fire them when they didn't, then sell the business and move to the next one.

Actually I would do that with the guys who beat me up in middle school. But skip the eatine meat part.

[BigRedJed]

So can we rag on him for putting into his contractual obligations at all?
Yes. It's also totally cool to rag on him for being such a strident vegetarian. It's everybody's right to have different viewpoints, and even to ridicule a stance like vegetarianism (although it seems like there are plenty of more worthwhile things to rail against).

But it is also entirely within his rights as an employer to require such behavior out of employees who have agreed to abide by that standard of behavior at the outset of their employment. Getting all huffy because he fired someone for doing something that they apparently agreed in writing not to do is silly.

[BigRedJed]

And if I were as rich as Paul McCartney, I'd eat steak and ribs every night while bathing in a tubful of lard and watching a private, live performance by a rotating selection of national touring acts of my choosing.

[Hamhock]

and watching a private, live performance by a rotating selection of national touring acts of my choosing.

cat juggling?

[BigRedJed]

No, more like Cat Power.