Union Workers *Probably* Torched a Quaker Meetinghouse Over Christmas

Police say union workers "almost certainly" torched an under-construction Quaker meetinghouse in northwest Philadelphia four days before Christmas. The Chestnut Hill Friends had hired non-union labor for the project, which discommoded several construction unions.

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Vandals with an acetylene torch crept onto the project's muddy construction site in the middle of the night. Working out of view in the meetinghouse's freshly cemented basement, they sliced off dozens of bolts securing the bare steel columns and set fire to the building crane, causing $500,000 in damage.

Police detectives deemed the attack arson because of a series of confrontational visits from union officials days before the incident. They say the torch could only have been operated by a trained professional, and believe it was almost certainly the work of disgruntled union members. The city has assigned extra investigators to the case and is working with federal forensic experts to track down the vandals, said Michael Resnick, the city's public safety commissioner.

…Trade unions dictate hiring at virtually all large construction projects in the city. Their dominance has had the virtue of ensuring that members receive good salaries and generous benefits, on par with those in New York. But it has also made construction exceptionally expensive here. Those high costs, real estate experts like Kevin C. Gillen at Econsult argue, have been a drag on the city's revival.

…Cross [the unions] by hiring nonunion workers or demanding more efficient work rules, and you can expect a giant inflatable rat at your door—or worse. The Post brothers, who are renovating a former factory into apartments at 12th and Wood Streets, learned the hard way in the spring when union protesters laid siege to their construction site, blocking deliveries for five months.

...It was not an easy decision, acknowledged Meg Mitchell, clerk of the meeting, the closest thing the non-hierarchial group has to a spokesperson. But after assuring themselves that [the contractor] was paying fair wages and that his company had maintained an excellent safety record, she said, the Chestnut Hill Friends dropped any lingering reservations.

Philadelphia Magazine has in-depth coverage (“brutish threats, expletive-heavy protests”) of the Post Brothers' dust-up with Philadelphia’s Building and Construction Trades Council.

Reason hosted a dust-up of our own over right-to-work laws last month.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Just honest, hard-working, regular guys trying to keep food on the family table. Why does Reason hate families?

  • sandy_jones||

    my best friend's step-sister makes $73 every hour on the computer. She has been fired for 10 months but last month her income was $13470 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this site. http://google.com.qr.net/j4qT

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    So AnonBot II is selling us on porno webcams?

  • Agammamon||

    But is she union?

    Jeez, stick to the subject - this is H&R after all.

  • ||

    Reason doesn't hate all families, just those Families that are traditionally subject to the RICO Act.

  • Mensan||

    Labor unions are criminal gangs engaging in extortion, sabotage, and other violent acts? This is unpossible![/sarc]

  • ||

    Obviously we need to ban fire.

  • Sam Grove||

    Unions should be decertified when any of its officials or members engage in tactics of intimidation/extortion.

  • ||

    Which would abolish most unions, without making you look anti-working class.

  • John Galt||

    It way past due time that RICO be used to take these organized criminal unions down.

  • ||

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    (takes breath)

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • ||

    You gonna still be laughing when those union hacks are behind bars, smart guy?

  • ||

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    (takes breath)

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Use RICO to fight an organized criminal conspiracy instead of taking away boats and businesses because their employees smoked a little pot? How dare you try to twist RICO for your own devious purposes!

  • John C. Randolph||

    Yeah, that will happen as soon as the unions quit getting the vote out for the democrats.

    -jcr

  • Auscifer||

    The "postbros" Youtube channel no longer exists, but the videos are still up. Not sure how that works.

    Anyway, look what I found, the playlist of all 32 videos.

    http://www.youtube.com/playlis.....E34BA382F4

  • Lyle||

    Do something Obama you're our only hope.

  • ||

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    (takes breath)

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • ||

    I know, right? Obviously Eric Holder is our only hope.

  • ||

    Also known as a condition of total hopelessness.

  • Lyle||

    What if white Tea Party members had done this to a black church (which of course would never happen because it would make no sense whatsoever). Lord Jesus.

    Democrats have no shame. May history remember them unkindly.

  • Specail Sauce||

    This seems rather unlikely as they will no doubt be writing the history.

  • Lyle||

    Smart point, but I find that professional historians have some character and one of them will want to become famous at some point for telling a revisionist story that's the truth.

  • John Galt||

    Well, I'm not waiting for history to remember them unkindly when I remember them unkindly now.

  • XM||

    You.... knee on?

  • ||

    Barry is too busy launching phase one of the War on Guns: White House considering going beyond banning assault rifles and high capacity ammo clips, want mandatory drug and mental health screenings and a Federal database.

    In addition to this, Obama and Biden are exploring ways to circumvent Congress to create stricter gun control with the ATF and 'cooperation' of big gun retailers like WalMart and others.

  • ||

    Enjoy your minority in the House and the Senate, bitches!

  • ||

    You mean treating millions of voters like criminals isn't a good way to win elections?

    Buh, buh, think of the children!

  • Mike M.||

    Block Yomomma treats millions of business owners and private sector taxpayers like criminals, and it worked out great for him.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Block Yomomma...

    You been nippin' at Granddad's cough medicine again, Mike?

  • JeremyR||

    Good luck with that

    Free stuff and caring trumps things like rights in the eyes of voters

  • np||

    Obama to NRA: "mandatory drug and mental health screenings and a Federal database? Hey, great idea!"

    NRA: "Err, No.. wait! What bout the rest of our deal?"

  • RBS||

  • Mensan||

    Racist

  • ||

    Idiotist.

  • Mike M.||

    I'm sure Mitt Romney would have done the same exact thing.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

  • Xenocles||

    Mitt Romney signed Massachusetts's permanent assault weapons ban into law. Your move.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Because that's how you get elected in Massachusetts, not in the US in general.

    All summer I was told that Romney was an unprincipled hack who would do anything to get elected, and now I'm being told that Romney would have done the same horrendously unpopular things that BO is doing.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    and now I'm being told that Romney would have done the same horrendously unpopular things that BO is doing has been reelected for doing.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    He wasn't reelected to enact gun control, that's for damn sure.

    If he was pulling this shit in October he would have gone down in flames.

  • Xenocles||

    It turns out we don't get to choose what we elect them for; we get everything they support - or everything that enough of them support, anyway.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Yes, X, that is sadly true. My point, however, was that an unprincipled politician who cares about nothing but winning votes in the general country isn't going to support gun control at this point in time.

  • John Galt||

    It's becoming more and more difficult to deny that a majority of Americans aren't complete gullible morons.

    Maybe it's time to pull back to a more easily defensible perimeter at the state, if not the county, lines.

  • ||

    "It's becoming more and more difficult to deny that a majority of Americans aren't complete gullible morons."

    I came out of my denial during the clinton administration.

  • Mensan||

    Barry was reelected, and Willard came in second; therefore, the overwhelming majority of Americans are complete gullible morons.

  • A Mathematician||

    Move to New Hampshire

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Once they put up a fence on their southern border I'll think about it.

  • Xenocles||

    Let's recap the nomination process:
    Everyone hates Obamacare, so the GOP nominee was naturally the guy who pioneered it.
    Everyone hates the AWB, so the GOP nominee was naturally a guy who put his name on a state-level one.
    But Romney was the only guy who could win, right?

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Everyone hates Obamacare, so the GOP nominee was naturally the guy who pioneered it.

    This lie again? The individual mandate, along with the basic structure of BOCare, was "pioneered" by the Heritage Foundation in 1993. If anything MassCare provided a cautionary tale about the unintended consequences of that type of system.

  • Xenocles||

    You don't think the actual implementation of an idea is more important than dreaming it up?

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    If you're talking about implementation, he didn't implement Obamacare.

    If you're talking about the idea, he didn't come up with the idea.

  • Xenocles||

    This is sophistry; the first state to implement the insurance mandate - the integral and least popular part of OC - was Romney's Massachusetts.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Great. Now say that instead of claiming Romney pioneered Obamacare and I won't have a beef.

    Not letting you get away with blurry language in support of your point isn't sophistry.

    The insurance mandate isn't the worst part of OC, anyway. If you took away just the insurance mandate it would be even worse since guaranteed issue would kill the private insurance industry.

  • pmains||

    So, Romney implemented the plan that would be the model for Obamacare. But because there were other, less powerful and visible people talking about it, he doesn't count as a pioneer.

    Well, glad we got that cleared up.

    This kind of hand-waving was the essence of the Romney campaign. It gets to the heart of why he lost. He really thought -- just as you seem to -- that by throwing enough words out there, he could bend reality. Well, the American people saw him stacked up next to the other reality bender and decided to go with the devil they knew.

  • ||

    But Romney was the only guy who could win, right?

    All I know for certain is that the only one that would most assuredly lose was Ron Paul. The Republicans told me so.

  • Mike M.||

    A lot of republicans were supporting Paul back in 2008 when a piece of shit fake libertarian "journolist" working at Reason was doing everything in his power to undermine Paul's campaign.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Huh? Weigel had nothing to do with the newsletter expose, if that's what you're referring to. Welch and Balko were the heavy hitters on that, and RP deserved to be hit over it (and still does).

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Gingrich and Santorum would have most assuredly lost too. The electorate wants free shit, not leadership.

    Ron Paul would have appeared 10x less empathetic than Romney, and apparently that's what Americans look for in a prez these days.

  • Kyfho Myoba||

    Then why did Ron Paul poll better, consistently and persistently, than Romney against Obozo?

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Because people didn't know who Ron Paul was, and BO was already smearing Romney with the "aloof rich guy" image during the primary season. "Unnamed Republican" consistently outpolled all the actual Republicans, too.

  • pmains||

    Romney had to have his goons throwing out primary votes in key states (Iowa, Maine) and overturning state convention results through brazen fraud (Arizona, Oklahoma, Louisiana) in order to maintain the magic cloak of inevitability that allowed him to sail through most of the primaries despite having virtually no popular ideas. But, as you assured me before, that was all technicalities. Caring about having the actual elected delegates vote at the convention was just some crazy trick that Ron Paul thought up. Clearly, we should have the presumptive nominee pick the delegates, just to be fair.

  • lap83||

    Call me crazy but, even given Romneycare, I still think Romney would be more likely to look at Obamacare and say "hmm.this stinks, let's abandon it", if for no other reason than he doesn't have his ego riding on it. Hell, I think ANYONE would have been more likely to abandon it than Obama, whose picture should be included in the dictionary as an antonym for "realist".

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    could include rallying support from Wal-Mart and other gun retailers for measures that would benefit their businesses.

    The only gun control "measure" I can think of that would benefit (some) gun retailers would be a ban on online sales of guns, gun accessories, and/or ammunition. And I don't see how that's going to work anyway, because the NRA and its members draw a lot more water in Washington than Walmart does.

    White House aides have also been in regular contact with advisers to New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), an outspoken gun-control advocate who could emerge as a powerful surrogate for the Obama administration’s agenda.

    Oh come on. Bloomberg isn't going to convince anyone who's not already on their side.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    For instance, this person suggested, Wal-Mart and other major gun retailers may have an incentive to support closing a loophole that allows people to bypass background checks if they purchase firearms at gun shows or through other types of private sales. That could result in more people buying guns in retail stores.

    That would be an extremely tiny effect, since people could still buy guns via private sales, they'd just have to go through an FFL for transfer. The effect of gun owners boycotting Walmart for aligning with the gun grabbers would be much, much larger.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    They can write all the laws they want. I will never go through an FFL for a face to face private transfer. And neither will most people.

    Ditto with registration and all that nonsense. The government can go fuck itself. I will not be of any help to those who wish for nothing more than the next tragedy in order to justify taking my guns.

  • John Galt||

    Here in Montana we have the Freedom Firearms Act HB 246 which limits federal jurisdiction over firearms in this state. Looks like it may well be put to the test sooner than expected.

  • Adam330||

    Walmart need only look at Smith and Wesson to see what signing on with Obama means for its business.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    It's interesting that the lefties are claiming we're "drowning in gun violence", but then also claim we need to act now before the memory of gun violence fades.

  • John Galt||

    "Never let a crisis disaster recession senseless tragedy go to waste."

  • An0nB0t||

    "that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks"

    No. We're not doing any of that shit.

    "stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools"

    That answers the pressing question as to how many lessons the progressives learned from their initiatives on alcohol, poverty, drugs, and firearms over the past century.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Right. It's already a federal felony to carry a gun within 1000 feet of a school without a carry permit from the state (and reciprocity agreements don't count).

  • Not an Economist||

    But this time it is different. We have TOP men in charge and they'll make sure it will really work this time.

    Really....

    Stop laughing!!!

  • John Galt||

    It's my understanding Walmart has already removed their inventories of scary looking firearms from their shelves.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Stopping one's own sales of an item is very different from supporting changes in the law to end all sales of that item.

    It's also quite likely that they simply don't have any to sell, just like most gun stores.

  • Xenocles||

    Sure, the world's biggest retail supply chain system wants them but can't get any.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Considering they can't get .22lr bricks either, it seems plausible. The gigantic network of crap factories spanning China and Argentina and Bangladesh doesn't help with firearms.

  • John Galt||

    You know what, that possibility hadn't occurred to me. Immediately after the shooting there was a rumor going around that they had willingly emptied their shelves. Personally, I've seen no evidence that the rumor is true.

    What I do know is I've been in the local gun shops attempting to buy ammunition for target practice. The shop keepers informed me that they were completely sold out of the .223 Remington (and 5.56) that I was seeking, as well as all magazines and AK/AR style rifles. They went on to inform me that they were trying their best to get more of all of the above but had no idea when that would happen.

    It's reasonable to believe, without evidence to the contrary, that Walmart may also simply be out of inventory.

  • Virginian||

    Ammo is one thing, but firearms are not churned out by thousands per day in giant factories during a time of general peace. Guns last if taken care of. My oldest is only 40 years old, but there are guns well over a century old which still function perfectly.

    There simply isn't the manufacturing capacity to keep up with this spike in demand.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    I wasn't surprised at the run on "scary looking guns" and ammo for them, but what amazed me was that it became impossible to find even regular guns and ammo. Then someone suggested that manufacturers are converting as much of their production as possible into producing 223 ammo and ARs, since those are where the big money is being spent, so they simply weren't producing 22LR and 22/45s, etc, anymore. That seems plausible.

  • Mensan||

    When I was at my local gun shop last week they had two AR-15s and a half dozen AKs in stock. The ARs were marked for $3,950, and the AKs were $2,800.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    I got flamed up the wazoo on the PAFOA forums for suggesting that price gouging is a good thing because it keeps stuff in stock for people who need it, rather than letting speculators buy everything up. Gun people are not libertarian in general.

  • Virginian||

    Yeah I really got pissed about people calling for boycotts of Cheaper Than Dirt because they priced their AR parts, mags and ammo according to demand. But I would correct your last sentence:

    Gun people are not libertarian in general.

    No one is in favor of the free market when it punishes their stupidity.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I got flamed up the wazoo on the PAFOA forums for suggesting that price gouging is a good thing because it keeps stuff in stock for people who need it, rather than letting speculators buy everything up. Gun people are not libertarian in general.

    You're crazy. I'v been reading every thread over there for the last few weeks, and except for some low-post whiners everybody seems pretty free market. Unless you call one or two people disagreeing with you "flamed up the wazoo".

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Have you looked at the threads on Cheaper Than Dirt? You'd think they were delegating their store policies to Dianne Feinstein with the fit they're throwing.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    The true meaning of "price gouging" is when the price goes about what you're willing to pay, not what the market will bear.

    In short, there is no such thing as price gouging.

  • General Butt Naked||

    It seemed to me that they felt betrayed by CTD when they made their (now reversed) decision to not sell firearms.

    And, being pissed that a company to which you've been a loyal customer to wants to now lubelessly fuck you isn't technically anti-free market.

    If you can link some posts where people were calling for a law to be passed to stop retailers from over-charging that would help, but otherwise it's just bitching about a company's policy.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    It was never supposed to be a permanent end to firearm sales. The email they sent and the messages on the site at the time said they were suspending sales while reevaluating their sales processes. They certainly should have been more clear that they were doing it due to the frenetic pace of orders they were getting.

    being pissed that a company to which you've been a loyal customer to wants to now lubelessly fuck you isn't technically anti-free market.

    How are they lubelessly fucking people? If there are pmags available for better prices somewhere else, people should go buy them there. If not, then that's an indication that the higher price is correct.

  • General Butt Naked||

    It was never supposed to be a permanent end to firearm sales.

    Yeah, it was. Until they saw that they'd be out of business in a couple months if they didn't make some shit up about over-demand. You must remember that they did all this in the few days after the shooting (raising prices, backing away from guns), before stocks had been run out elsewhere. Hell, you could still get ARs and mags at other retailers at that time.

    To anyone not naively sycophantic to an online company, their actions indicate that they wanted to distance themselves away from yucky gun owners (because it seemed politically expedient to do so) and, at the same time, make some money off of gun owners.

    Once they saw that shit was going to blow over they backtracked and claimed that they were over-taxed in the aftermath of the shooting. Fuck that, they were trying to throw us to the dogs like other retailers were, and me not supporting them is not anti-free market; it's anti

  • General Butt Naked||

    oops

    ...anti-those that would sell us out in hysteria.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Oh come on. "The Ultimate Shooting Sports Discounter" was distancing itself from gun owners? That's their entire flerking business! Unlike Dicks and WM, every customer they have is involved with firearms in some way.

    I guess we should boycott Midway USA for not selling guns either, those horrible gun control enablers.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Sniper's Hide has the same problem.

    They simply can't buy the idea that there is no such thing as price gouging short of a government mandate; that everything else is simply supply/demand.

  • Virginian||

    Yeah the thing about gunnies is they are well organized and hyperalert to governmental threats and to private sector discrimination. Very much like the gay community: if you don't want the business of gun owners, they will be sure to tell all their gun owning friends that this is true.

    Dick's Sporting Goods, for example, really screwed the pooch when they pulled all their ARs and canceled orders that had already been paid for. They're going to take a major hit because gun owners have long memories. I for one am never spending another dime there.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Where Dick's screwed up is that they publicly announced this action, and made a big deal about how they were removing all firearms from the Newtown store as well. While I don't begrudge them their decision to do so (not like I shopped there anyway) that certainly has to rub gun enthusiasts the wrong way, as it looks like they're looking for a pat on the head from the grabbers.

  • Virginian||

    They bought into the bullshit that MSM is spreading that their is some kind of groundswell of support for strict gun control. More importantly, they completely lost sight of their customer base. David Gregory has probably never been inside a Dicks. If he does any outdoor activity, he probably goes to REI or to specialty shop. There's nothing wrong with that, I prefer those places myself.

    The people who go to Dicks are not all gun owners. But I bet you most are. While Dad checks to see if there are any deals on 12 gauge shells, his wife is buying new yoga pants, his son is looking for a new backpack for his next Scout trip, and his daughter is looking at soccer cleats.

    Looking for, as you put it, a pat on the head, they pissed all over their customers. They probably won't go bankrupt, but they will probably see a drop in sales.

  • John Galt||

    Agreed, it's Walmart's prerogative to not sell whatever kind of weapons they please.

  • ||

    “Debating is not the action verb we need to protect our children.”

    "There's no time to think! DO SOMETHING!"

  • Sevo||

    Well, someone did something and gave Feinstein an earful:
    "Marine to senator: 'No ma'am,' I won't register my guns"
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/04/.....?hpt=hp_t2

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    They don't call it the world's lamest deliberative body for nothing.

  • Sevo||

    "mental health screenings"

    What could possibly go wrong?
    Yes, psychiatry is such an unambiguous science that it could never be used to gain political advantage!
    ""punitive psychiatry," is defined as "a tool in the struggle against dissidents who cannot be punished by legal means"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.....viet_Union

  • ||

    Bolts were cut.

  • Dweebston||

    Mistakes were made?

  • Ted S.||

    Procedures were followed.

  • tres||

    Wasn't any procedure followed with those shitty cuts. Fucking hack with a torch could at least attempt to show some workmanship.

  • Sernylan||

    If the bolts were not doing anything wrong, they have nothing to fear.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Notice tha very careful language used when naming unions as possible perpetrators.

    They say the torch could only have been operated by a trained professional, and believe it was almost certainly the work of disgruntled union members.

    If this were a Muslim worship center, TP proponents would have been outright blamed without any proof whatsoever, and a retraction would never have been made when it was discovered they were wrong.

    Look at how quickly the media was in blaming the TP with that AZ legislator being shot.

    Look at how quickly the media fingered the wrong guy after Newtown.

    But they're super careful to give every benefit of the doubt to the union thugs?

    The media is a bunch of cum guzzling whores.

  • John Galt||

    Yup.

  • sticks||

    They say the torch could only have been operated by a trained professional, and believe it was almost certainly the work of disgruntled union members.

    I don't read that as giving every benefit of doubt.

  • Mensan||

    It sounds like the police are buying unionists false claims that only union members can operate given pieces of equipment.

    On the contrary, I'm neither a union member, nor a trained professional, but I can operate an acetylene torch. They're not complicated.

  • Sevo||

    "On the contrary, I'm neither a union member, nor a trained professional, but I can operate an acetylene torch. They're not complicated."

    Welding needs skill; cutting needs none.

  • Mensan||

    I learned how to weld in metal shop in middle school. It may not be pretty, or look like a professional did it, but I can at least lay a bead that will hold. And, as Sevo correctly pointed out, cutting, which was done here, takes no skill.

  • tres||

    No skill - apparent from the photo. In a just world the cost to replace that base plate and lower portion of column (many thousands of declining US dollars) would come directly out of the moron who destroyed the property.

  • Sevo||

    The photo is also faked to some degree or other.
    The fasteners at the bottom and off to the left seem to be cut on the threaded portions of what is likely a stud rather than a bolt, and the nuts are well removed from the cuts.
    Fail. The nuts would have been tightened to the base plate and the cut would have been messier as the torch first cut through the side of the not closest to the torch and then through the stud.
    Someone 'fiddled' with the image one way or another.

  • Libertarius||

    I noticed that too. The nuts should have been flush to the plate, which means the nuts should be toast instead of the opposite side of the bolt. WTF lolz

  • Libertarius||

    The media messed up and accidentally published a photo from the union thug arson and destruction training center.

  • ||

    I assumed that the vandals undid the nuts and then just cut through the bolts.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    "almost certainly" is the key phrase.

  • thistle||

    "The media is a bunch of cum guzzling whores."

    I think a point about the media being full of dirtbags can be made without slandering sex-workers. Turn it down, this is Reason, not Reddit...

  • mad libertarian guy||

    I think a point about the media being full of dirtbags can be made without slandering sex-workers. Turn it down, this is Reason, not Reddit...

    I'd thought about the offense towards prostitutes, but simply couldn't think of another apt comparison.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    "The media is a bunch of cum guzzling whores."

    Ha! Almost spit my Coke Zero! Best line of the day. I may have that tattooed on a part of my body I normally only show to prostitutes.

  • michael.langdon@learninge||

    I think we all understand why you have to pay for sex.

  • Hugh Akston||

    I'm sure the Quakers did something to deserve it.

  • Xenocles||

    They're too quiet.

  • ||

    Richard Nixon was a Quaker, IIRC. Does that count?

  • John Galt||

    Are you implying that the Quakers will retaliate by breaking into the union's HQ?

  • Drake||

    I would convert to Quaker if they showed up at the next union meeting and beat the fuck out of everyone there.

  • ||

    Easy enough to say, since this will never happen.

    Pacifism is one of the group's core tenets, iirc.

  • Libertarius||

    The Quakers said, "You don't work, you don't eat."

    To which a fat, pig-eyed bum named Tony replied, "I see you've never done business with the union before."

  • John Galt||

    I knew it!

  • GroundTruth||

    Reminds me of the story about the Quaker who heard someone breaking in to his house one night. He grabs his hunting rifle, stands at the top of the stairs pointing the gun at the intruder and says "I mean you no harm, but I am about to shoot where you are standing".

    One can only turn the other cheek so many times.

  • DrAwkward||

    Where's T o n y and his usual union apologetics?
    I'm sure they had a good reason to do this!!

  • Brutus||

    They're just protecting worker rights!

  • ||

    How 'bout we just assume the goalposts will be moved. Possibly to something regarding weekends, hours and/or child labor.

  • Sevo||

    And "FAIR"! Something about FAIR! Probably not intelligible, but FAIR! something, something...

  • Sernylan||

    And BOOOOOSH!

  • buybuydandavis||

    Union labor in eastern big city's are organized crime. They are *entitled* to bribes, *entitled* to a monopoly on business, and they will protect those entitlements with violence. They are the proverbial "offer you can't refuse".

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    Next time I complain about the allergies and the heat in Texas remind me that the chances of union thugs burning down my house are next to zero.

  • The Daily Chimpout||

  • waaminn||

    All unions do is suck the life blood from companies!

    www.AnonMix.tk

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Why anonybot, I think you hit this one head on. One step forward toward the Singularity.

  • Brian from Texas||

    Protesters should show up at the union headquarters with a big inflatable effigy of Lenin, seeing as how unions are all a bunch of bolshevik thugs.

  • michael.langdon@learninge||

    That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So, much for Reason. Go fuck yourselves you stupid bigots. Where there are teachers unions, schools don't beat children as a form of punishment. Why do you want to beat children?

  • iggy||

    This is the greatest thing I've read in my entire life. Apparently not beating kids is the result of the teacher's union, and nothing else. That explains the rash of child beatings you hear about in private schools.

    You can hardly walk through the doors in one of those places without being hit in the face by a scourge.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement