Originally Posted by
qball
I'm not going to accuse anyone here of lying as that hinders a healthy debate, but I will say that DAPLA grossly misrepresented their "No Deal is Better Than a Bad Deal" banner not long ago.
According to Donatellis words, I don't think "No Deal" was even in their thought process.
His "fired all the bullets", "extracted every penny" and "if don't accept this deal" rhetoric clearly shows that "NO Deal" was ever an option in their thinking.
No plan for what to do should the MEC had done it's job and sent this back.
Now this "expedited negotiation, expedited vote" runaway train is barreling down the tracks and the only emergency brake is our NO votes.
This reminds a great deal of how DC seems to be operating re: the trade deal for Obama. Secret rooms, hush-hush, gotta vote for it now or else, find out the details later, etc, etc. The similarity is glaring.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
Okay, here is the list you asked for. There are a dozen reasons to say no. Some are big and some are not. In the aggregate this is a NO vote in my book.
Denny
13. Executive Compensation will be calculated before Profit Sharing (ie. "leadership" get's their's before the troops)