Originally Posted by
DAL 88 Driver
I honestly don't see what you're talking about. I'm sure some of it is that I agree with most of what Carl says. But I just don't see the "questionable delivery" you're talking about. What I do see is a lot of very good points, mostly backed up with facts, offered without apology. Sometimes the truth hurts. And after all the personal attacks I've seen levied against Carl, I can certainly see why he might not be inclined to put a lot of effort into sugarcoating his arguments.
Hoser, try to look at it as objectively as you can. If you do that, I think you'll see a heck of a lot more attacks on Carl than by Carl.
Thanks for the kind words man. I'm always amused by the double standard. The usual suspects at ALPA can name call and flat out lie in their defense of ALPA, and guys like Hoser are silent. But when a DPA supporter like me calls them out over it and has the facts to prove it, guys like Hoser call it "hurling insults". It's interesting.
I'm amazed at how smart guys can excuse our unions lawyers who: tried to bust their own union, get fined and sanctioned for lying about an opposing attorney, and write our scope section that they themselves say is so weak they can't defend it. They excuse it and refuse to talk about it. Yet they are obsessed with Lee Seham's firm and focus on those lawyers to the exclusion of ALPA lawyers. Its a good lesson to see how easy it is for a con-man to operate. All you need to do to con smart people is to get them to temporarily ignore evidence that is right before their eyes.
Carl