Posted on Nov 25, 2021
LA firefighter accused of wiping butt with vaccine mandate letter that was handed to him — Fox...
1.71K
7
6
3
3
0
Coronavirus COVID19
Los Angeles
Firefighter
Public Health
Responses: 3
0
0
0
He was put on paid leave until his punishment is determined, up to and including termination. If he refused the vaccine, he would have been put on unpaid leave until he was terminated.
It seems he made his choice and also wanted to be paid until he was terminated.
It seems he made his choice and also wanted to be paid until he was terminated.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Well his right to protest it and hey the way he did it that’s his choice. He might very well be out of a job for refusing the vaccine.
(0)
(0)
1
0
1
Here we go again. Fascist Fox trying to portray someone who is willing to spread a disease to others as a hero. You do know even Donnie got the shots.
(1)
(1)
Lt Col Mark Avery
Question: Is it possible for you to comment on a divisive topic without invective?
Just curious.
Just curious.
(1)
(1)
SFC Randy Hellenbrand
Lt Col Mark Avery - Absolutely. I never have a problem with honest people who aren't F-ing trumpnick insurrectionists traitors. So, which side of the fence were you on on Jan. 6th; democracy or right wing dictatorship???
(0)
(0)
Lt Col Mark Avery
And in your mind, "F-ing trumpnick insurrectionists traitors" isn't invective. Noted.
You see, Randy, that's precisely what I was asking. Can you comment on a divisive topic without labeling the people you disagree with using insulting or abusive language? At the very least, we disagree over whether your response was appropriate. Given your approach in many other threads, it really seems you've abandoned invective and jumped headlong into vituperation. It's your call, of course - it's a free country and there is very little moderator censorship on this board. The problem is that launching into tirades does less to further your cause than it does to tag you as someone not interested in an open and honest discussion about the issues. Simply because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them dishonest.
Over time, I've found I learn less from people who agree with me than from those who don't. When conversation turns to verbal combat, nobody learns anything, at least not about the topics. Maybe that approach worked for you as a senior NCO when you wanted to get your way without opposition. In general, there are two ways to get someone to do something they don't initially think is a good idea - you can force them to do it or you can persuade them. In the arena of ideas, force simply doesn't work.
You see, Randy, that's precisely what I was asking. Can you comment on a divisive topic without labeling the people you disagree with using insulting or abusive language? At the very least, we disagree over whether your response was appropriate. Given your approach in many other threads, it really seems you've abandoned invective and jumped headlong into vituperation. It's your call, of course - it's a free country and there is very little moderator censorship on this board. The problem is that launching into tirades does less to further your cause than it does to tag you as someone not interested in an open and honest discussion about the issues. Simply because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them dishonest.
Over time, I've found I learn less from people who agree with me than from those who don't. When conversation turns to verbal combat, nobody learns anything, at least not about the topics. Maybe that approach worked for you as a senior NCO when you wanted to get your way without opposition. In general, there are two ways to get someone to do something they don't initially think is a good idea - you can force them to do it or you can persuade them. In the arena of ideas, force simply doesn't work.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google