Feb 28, 2011

The public does not support GOP union busting


Despite an all out war on collective bargaining and unions by Republicans like Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, the public is simply not buying it.

A CBS/NYT poll released today shows a majority of people have a favorable opinion of unions. Public employees and their unions have been the biggest target of Republicans since the November election, and they are being blamed for municipalities teetering on the brink of bankruptcy despite the fact that Wall Street helped create the deepest and longest recession since the Great Depression.

Like in Wisconsin ad Michigan, public employees have given back wages and benefits to help balance state budgets while Wall Street bankers get huge bonuses, but what Republicans really want to do is take away their civil right of collective bargaining. But, again, people are not buying into that myth that public employees are making too much money and getting too many benefits.

The poll found the majority, 36 percent, say their compensation is about right, and a majority opposes cutting their pay and benefits to balance state budgets. A majority also oppose what Walker is trying to do in Wisconsin, and 38 percent oppose limiting collective bargaining.

With the tide turning against him, Walker has taken more tyrannical measures, locking the public out of their state capitol.

36 comments:

brad said...

While Wall Street gets huge bonuses? Lets all thank TARP for that.

Next, nobody is union busting, you really are the most dishonest "blogger" I have ever read. Remember Jimmy Carter, Democrat - GA 1 term president? Yeah, he made it illegal for public sector unions in the Federal Government to be able to have collective bargaining.

Remember FDR - hero to all libs? He said "Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters."

Your OWN LEADERSHIP says or has said youre in the wrong. Private unions are fine and can have all the rights you claim they should have, nobody is saying otherwise.

I am smiling while I write this because we all know youre full of sh!t, it is getting more comical by the day.

brad said...

While Wall Street gets huge bonuses? Lets all thank TARP for that.

Next, nobody is union busting, you really are the most dishonest "blogger" I have ever read. Remember Jimmy Carter, Democrat - GA 1 term president? Yeah, he made it illegal for public sector unions in the Federal Government to be able to have collective bargaining.

Remember FDR - hero to all libs? He said "Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters."

Your OWN LEADERSHIP says or has said youre in the wrong. Private unions are fine and can have all the rights you claim they should have, nobody is saying otherwise.

I am smiling while I write this because we all know youre full of sh!t, it is getting more comical by the day.

Johnny C said...

Because you read it on a right wing blog doesn't mean it's true.

Communications guru said...

Yes, partly TARP may be responsible, but it was signed into law by George Bush.

Sorry, Republicans and Walker are trying to bust unions. Yes, I remember Jimmy Carter, and I have even heard that talking point about how he “made it illegal for public sector unions in the Federal Government to be able to have collective bargaining.” It doesn’t make sense because the guy after him, remember Ronald Reagan, fired the air traffic controllers for striking.

Yes, I remember FDR, and he is a hero to more than just “libs.

The quotation you picked up via rightwing talking points was is in a letter he wrote to a postal worker leader in the 1930s. But labor historians, such as Georgetown University professor Joseph McCartin, author of "Labor's Great War: The Struggle for Industrial Democracy and the Origins of Modern American Labor Relations, 1912-21" and an expert in the history of public sector unions, said that quotation has been a bit blown out of proportion. He said Roosevelt absolutely did not favor collective bargaining for federal workers and especially did not favor the right to strike. But like many people, had he lived into the postwar era, he might well have changed his mind. Because a consensus developed pretty quickly after World War II that collective bargaining in the public sector was actually a positive thing. That consensus really took shape between the late '40s and '50s.”
My own leadership? Who would that be? Perhaps you are not aware of it, which does not surprise me, but Roosevelt died in 1945. But that’s funny; now you say its’ OK to have private unions after the all-out war waged against them by Republicans. Thank you so much.

Collective bargaining is a civil right for all workers. In fact, as I posted before, Martin Luther King, one of the greatest civil rights leaders in history, died while supporting striking sanitation workers, which were public employees.

Really, you’re “smiling while you write this this “because we all know youre full of sh!t?” I’m laughing because you can’t even spell your or you’re. But hey, thanks for the compliment.

brad said...

Johnsonville, because you read something on a left wing blog (like this one), doesnt make it true.

TARP was crap, yes I dont like everything Repubs do, but it was bi-partisan in passing to become legislation.

In regards to Carter and FDR they did say and do those things, call it what you will but when its a fact and used against you you try to downplay it.

Good thing Obama is having TSA unionize too.
Seriously, how do I unsubscribe from this? Somehow my yahoo and gmail have subscribed, I just want to get rid of the yahoo one, and as the "guru" can see its the same email address and sadly I dont have multiple screennames.

Communications guru said...

In regards to Carter and FDR, I acknowledged FDR said it, but as has been proven, it has been a good thing. What, exactly did Cater say? You made the claim he made collective bargaining for federal employees illegal. I don’t believe that, so you’re going to have to prove that. While you are at, explain to me how the air controllers were able to collective bargain after Carter left office.

I agree with you, it is a good thing Obama is having TSA unionize, but he is not having them do it, he’s allowing them to do it. I know I would prefer highly-trained TSA workers responsible for airline safety over minimum wage Wackenhut or Briggs security guards.

How do you unsubscribe? I would venture a guess and say it’s the exact opposite of the way you subscribed.

The thing about TARP, if you will remember, the fear was the country was going to fall into a depression if the country did not act.

brad said...

These federal collective bargaining limitations came about because of President Jimmy Carter, “In 1978, Democratic President Jimmy Carter, backed by a Democratic Congress, passed the Civil Service Reform Act... It severely proscribed the issues over which employees could bargain, as well as prohibited compulsory union support.”

TSA unionized is good? Maybe maybe not. As long as they cant collective bargain and walk off the job since they are "needed". On a union note, unions do not mean everything they work on is perfect, I know of too many examples where that is not the case.

Air controllers "On August 3, 1981 the union declared a strike, seeking better working conditions, better pay and a 32-hour workweek. In doing so, the union violated a law {5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p.} that banned strikes by government unions. Ronald Reagan declared the PATCO strike a "peril to national safety" and ordered them back to work under the terms of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Only 1,300 of the nearly 13,000 controllers returned to work.[4] Subsequently, Reagan demanded those remaining on strike return to work within 48 hours, otherwise their jobs would be forfeited. At the same time Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis organized for replacements and started contingency plans. By prioritizing and cutting flights severely, and even adopting methods of air traffic management PATCO had previously lobbied for, the government was initially able to have 50% of flights available.[4]

On August 5, following the PATCO workers' refusal to return to work, Reagan fired the 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored the order,[6][7] and banned them from federal service for life. (This ban was later rescinded by President Bill Clinton in 1993.)[8] In the wake of the strike and mass firings the FAA was faced with the task of hiring and training enough controllers to replace those that had been fired, a hard problem to fix as at the time it took three years in normal conditions to train a new controller.[2] They were replaced initially with nonparticipating controllers, supervisors, staff personnel, some nonrated personnel, and in some cases by controllers transferred temporarily from other facilities. Some military controllers were also used until replacements could be trained. The FAA had initially claimed that staffing levels would be restored within two years; however, it would take closer to ten years before the overall staffing levels returned to normal.[2] PATCO was decertified on October 22, 1981.[9]

Some former striking controllers were allowed to reapply after 1986 and were rehired; they and their replacements are now represented by the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, which was organized in 1987 and had no connection with PATCO."


TARP, avoid a depression? We could get one soon, its one of those catch 22's with that. It could have been short term hurt, but long term health. With TARP it was just a bandaid and banks are still going belly up and not helping with credit crunches.

Communications guru said...

Yes, the TSA unionized is good. If they can’t collective bargain they are not a union. There is nothing more democratic in the workplace that unions, and they tend to be much more professional.

You cut and pasted the Wikipedia, but it did not prove anything.
Yes, the TAR helped avoid a depression.

brad said...

State Sen. Julie Lassa (D) is pregnant and “extremely unhappy” about being on the run.

You have read and concurred that FDR said that statement, yet you think he must be wrong too?

If you can respond, please do so point by point, you can even do it in numbers so we can follow along.

1. Public unions are big money.
Paul Krugman is correct: we do need “some counterweight to the political power of big money.” Of the top 20 biggest givers in federal-level politics over the past 20 years, 10 are unions; just four are corporations. The three biggest public unions gave $171.5 million for the 2010 elections alone, according to The Wall Street Journal. That’s big money.

2. Public unions redistribute wealth. Public employees contribute real value for the benefit of all citizens. Public-union bosses collect real money from all taxpayers for the benefit of a few. Unlike private-sector jobs, which are more than fully funded through revenues created in a voluntary exchange of money for goods or services, public-sector jobs are funded by taxpayer dollars, forcibly collected by the government (union dues are often deducted from public employees’ paychecks). In 28 states, state and local employees must pay full union dues or be fired. A sizable portion of those dues is then donated by the public unions almost exclusively to Democratic candidates. Michael Barone sums it up: “public-employee unions are a mechanism by which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party.”

3. Public unions silence the voters’ voice.
Big money from public unions, collected through mandatory dues, and funded entirely by the taxpayer, is then redistributed as campaign cash to help elect the politicians who are then supposed to represent taxpayers in negotiations with those same unions. In effect, the unions sit on both sides of the table and collectively bargain to raise taxes while the voters’ voice is silenced. But the noisy mob in Madison is amplified beyond its numbers. Wisconsin faces a $137 million deficit this year, and a $3.6 billion shortfall in the next two-year budget. The proposals offered by Gov. Scott Walker would avert 5,500 layoffs of public employees and save $300 million. The public unions, representing just 300,000 government employees in the Badger State, are trying to trump the will of the voters. Though voters don’t get to sit at the bargaining table, they do speak collectively at the ballot box.

4. We should require that all teacher contract negotiations be conducted by an independent, professional negotiator representing the taxpayers. It would be well worth the fee, and for the common good as you claim you want and not just the good of a few.

5. Just as Wisconsin is proposing, let’s stop having our city and school district automatically deduct union dues out of employee paychecks. Let each union member write a check every month to pay their union dues. That will certainly cause them to reflect on the cost and value of their investment.

6. Private sector unions deal with corporations. These employee unions negotiate for better wages and benefits, and any increases come out of company profits. But the company must be careful because if they give too much, they’ll go out of business and everyone will be without a job.

Public sector unions, however, are another issue. These are unions for government employees, teachers, police and fire fighters. Government workers don't create any profits, so they are paid by taxpayer dollars, and therein lies the problem. Again, nobody is saying disband them, but they cant hold the taxpayers hostage because that will HURT EVERYONE, the common good you so claim to stand for.

And lastly from nationalreview: 8. I would urge you to read it and would love to see you argue against it. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/260241/collective-bargaining-public-sector-yuval-levin

O happy day.

Communications guru said...

I suggest you read what I wrote about FDR. Like I said before, withholding a quorum is a tactic as old as this country, and the father of the Republican Party, Abe Lincoln, used it.

Who did you plagiarize this from? Mark McKinnon? Any words of your own? I didn’t thin so. Unlike you, I can speak fro myself.

That money unions give comes from working people, and that’s why they are under attack by Republicans in the disguise of claiming they are trying to balance the budget. The money pumped into the last election cycle by corporations, including foreign companies, is unparalleled.

All unions “redistribute wealth,” and that’s a good thing. A country with a huge gap between the rich and everyone else does not last long or is a third world country. The huge gap between the rich and everyone else is turning the U.S. into a banana republic.

“Public-employee unions are a mechanism by which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party?” That is pure bullshit. As I have said a million times, there is nothing more democratic in the workplace than unions. Union members decide where the money is going. It’s not unions fault that Republicans only care about the rich. But at least we know why the grand oil party is trying to kill unions. Pure power.

“ Public unions silence the voters’ voice?” Bullshit. So, it’s OK for a foreign company, many controlled by the government, - including communist governments - to contribute to Republicans? Again, Union members decide where the money is going. It’s not unions fault that Republicans only care about the rich. But at least we know why the grand oil party is trying to kill unions. Pure power.

“ We should require that all teacher contract negotiations be conducted by an independent, professional negotiator representing the taxpayers” They are, they are called school boards, and they are accountable to voters. Many school boards have labor counsel or a negotiator.

Wisconsin is proposing to bust the union. Then let the employee write a check every payday for insurance, taxes and everything else.

Again, unions negotiate for more than just wages. Every worker has a right to band together to sell their labor, no matter where the paycheck comes from.

Why would I read it? Why don’t you just post it word for word as your own like you did with this rant?

brad said...

Exactly, you have no counter points other than your few responses. Unions are democratic? Haha, right, well they fund democrats, thats proven. Do you seriously not read anything anyone writes other than your own people? Ive said unions are fine, just not in the public sector. When public sector has them you have issues like this in more states now, and air traffic controllers getting fired, and the list will grow. So like at the federal level, fine keep the uinons, get rid of collective bargaining. If everyone was unionized we wouldnt be a capitalist society either, we would be closer to your utopia commie guru of socialism.

TSA union workers are better? I laugh at your statements, here is the latest example of the F'n up.http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/queens/tsa_staff_jet_blew_it_Y7NcXScFd0oS2HNvkypthP

Communications guru said...

Sorry, but I countered every single point, and none of them were even from you.

Yes, democratic. You obviously have no idea how unions work. First, an election has to be held to form a union. Then every single leadership position in the union is elected, and every single contract must be voted on and approved by the membership. Again, there is nothing more democratic in the workplace than unions. That must be one reason why Republicans hate them so much. Not only that, but the candidate endorsements are voted on.

Hell yes they fund Democrats., You support those you support you, and Democrats represent real, working people.

Every single worker has a right to collective bargain no matter where they work.

“If everyone was unionized we wouldnt (sic) be a capitalist society either?” Where do you get that BS? Of course there would be. All workers are doing is selling their labor at a fair price, and at the best price they can get. Why is it OK to have chambers of commerce and buses and trade associations? There is no real difference.

Correct, unionized TSA workers would be more professional and better trained than a minimum wage security guard. The professionalism and training unionizing would bring to the table would help eliminate the incident you linked to.

kevins said...

Who is this Cater guy that commie guru refers to?

Guru says he "didn't thin so." Does that means he "fat so?" Just asking.

Guru also says, "I can speak fro myself." Apparently, though, he doesn't do that well when he writes for (fro?) himself.

Communications guru said...

I guess when you can’t win on the facts you have to look for typos. Sometimes I commit a typo, and that’s what happens when you use your own words and not somebody else’s.

kevins said...

Let's see. You criticized someone for writing "youre" instead of "you're." In so doing, you make it sound like you weren't sure if "you're" or "your" was the right use, so you look even more stupid than normal.

However, by your statement, "when you can't win on facts you have to look for typos." So you went after a typo for the word "youre", which means by your own admission, you were unable to win on facts.

Once again, I commend you for admitting that your arguments lack any foundation. We all know you will regress and deny something you just said, but each small step forward shows you're progressing.

Communications guru said...

And you think that was a typo from your other screen name? Not. But, again, thanks for the compliment. There is a good reason you stick to name-calling.

If my “arguments lack any foundation” then why is it that you can’t debunk any of them?

kevins said...

I've debunked many of them, and you've even admitted that...before you denied it...you and John Kerry are flip-flopping fiends.

I'm just quoting you...you said that when you lose an argument, then you resort to typos...you lost an argument so you went after a typo.

Communications guru said...

Perhaps in your dreams. Like I said, do you think that’s a typo?

Communications guru said...

Plus, I haven't lost an argument in some time, especially not to you.

kevins said...

You are so predictable...

Was it a typo when you Johnny C said he had a hard-on for you?

kevins said...

You have lost many...the easiest to find is when you change your argument after I've proven you wrong.

1. You said Livingston County Republicans broke the law and then changed your argument after I proved you wrong.

2. You said a guy broke the law because he spoke at a public meeting.

3. You said protesters were going to break the law and disrupt a parade when they merely planned to protest peacefully along a parade route. (By your definition, the Wisconsin protesters are all lawbreakers.)

4. You said there is no such thing as a union thug. They are rare, but they do exist.

5. You said there is no such thing as a democratic socialist, even though there is one elected to the U.S. Senate.

6. You said the majority of home day care providers voted to join a union, when in fact a small minority voted in the election at all.

7. You said that a suicide proved that there is an increase of rightwing-motivated hate crimes. Even when you admitted it was a suicide, you said your point was still valid...even though the centerpiece of your argument was false.

8. You have accused me of posting under other names, which is false.

9. You said that no one could have foreseen the Republican landslide last election, and have stayed with that mistake even after I provided many examples of how you were wrong. (In a classic example of your poor rhetoric skills, you argued that the predictions didn't count because they were from conservative sources. That's stupid on two counts..first, it doesn't matter the source since you said "no one;" second, among my sources was Huffington Post, hardly a conservative site.)

10. You've called me a conservative, rightwinger, etc., even though that is false.

11. You supposedly decry hate speech and name calling, but you describe anyone you disagree with as a rightwing extremist. Tough talk from a bomb-throwing leftist such as yourself.

Again, and I realize these are numbers that are larger than you deal with comfortably, how many of the 16,500 day care providers voted in the union election?

Communications guru said...

I appreciate you reviewing five years of posts, but you are wrong, again.

1. Again, Livingston County Republicans advocated in a local election when they were not registered to do so.

2. Ever heard of disturbing the peace?

3. Again, if tea baggers wanted to be in a parade that raises funds for the Monroe County Fair, then pay the entrance fee.

4. There is no such thing as a “union thug.”

5. That’s not what I said.

6. More word games. The majority of home day care providers voted in the election voted for the union.

7. I admitted it was a suicide after the results of the investigation were released.

8. Say you. I stand by it.

9. Like I said, no one predicted the gains would be this big. Tell me who predicted the Republicans would take that many seats in the Michigan House, other than someone in the party trying to GOTV.

10. Then I’m not a liberal.

11. I call it as I see it, but I would consider white supremacists and militia members extremists.

Again, it does not matter “how many of the 16,500 day care providers voted in the union election.” Make your point. The election was legal and certified by both the NLRB and the Michigan Court of Appeals, twice.

I’m still waiting for you to debunk an argument.

brad said...

Every one of the "guru's" counterpoints have been proven otherwise. Delusional?

It makes me sick to watch angry, militant, ungrateful state employees WITH JOBS complain that they can't get extravagant benefit-pension contributions from people who have no money because they're out of work. No one's asked the public sector to dip into their savings like private sector people are having to do. Now its happening in the liberal utopia of Rhode Island. Leftwing extremism is becoming an epidemic.

Communications guru said...

Wrong again.

Unbelievable Angry, yes, and most people would be angry when confronted with having their civil rights stolen from them that many people died for. This has nothing to do with alleged “extravagant benefit-pension contributions” because the unions have said they will make concessions like they have in the past. In fact, they are giving Scooter everything he wants, but they will not give up their civil rights. The good news is the majority of the American people are behind them. This is not about concessions or balancing the budget, it’s about busting the union.

Wow. They should be grateful that they have a job and just sit down and shut up about having their rights taken away. Unbelievable. That’s probably exactly what the robber barons said to the peasants.

brad said...

Majority of Americans are behind them? Ha, that poll you stated is worded incorrectly. People arent against unions, but PUBLIC unions should NOT be holding the taxpayers hostage. You are completely wrong. There is a reason Carter and LBJ both flaming Libs were right in their programs and statements.

We hear about 'union organizers,' and think they're organized against some evil, rotten, fat cat CEOs who would love it if they could see these union guys starve to death. But who are the public sector unions 'organized' against? Isnt it against us, the taxpayers? And when it comes to their fight against merit pay and firing incompetent teachers, aren't they organized against the children?

Private unions can strike and get collective bargaining because they are striking against a CORPORATION and the CORPS profits, not the profits or lack thereof of the taxpayers of the state.

So again, public unions should have the same "rights" as the federal unions and that is no collective bargaining so you cant hold the taxpayers hostage like what the teachers and whoever else in Wisconsin are doing. Hostage? Yes, threating to strike, walk off the job be "sick" etc.

Priavte unions can stay in business all day and strike and get more collective bargaining perks for all I care.

Lastly, you still havent a clue as to what Walkers demands are. If you do, please tell us in detail what they are because its more than collective bargaining. I really want to see if you know what you are talking about because so far its obvious to most you dont. Redeem yourself please.

Communications guru said...

That is correct, a majority of Americans are behind them. Those are pretty reliable polls, but if you have some proof to dispute it, please take your best shot. Correct again, people aren’t against unions, and that includes public sector unions. The right to collective bargain is a civil right no matter where you work.
Union organizers organize unions to represent the best interests of workers, no matter why they work for. Teachers unions are not and have never been against “firing incompetent teachers,” and that’s just one more false Republican talking point.

That’s funny; now Republicans now care about private unions after years of attacks. The fact is if they are successful in stealing the civil rights away from the public sector unions, the weaker private unions will be next.

Walker’s demands are to kill collective bargaining. Now, his so-called “budget repair bill” is mostly about killing unions, and the few other things it does is give away public assets to the Koch boys; that’s just one reason they are bankrolling his union busting

brad said...

What "rights" are in the collective bargaining?

The poll you refer to doesnt say public sector nor give up facts showing wages and benefits and who pays for what. It just says labor unions in general. That there in doesnt provide accurate polling questioning.

Communications guru said...

“What "rights" are in the collective bargaining?” The right to assemble and band together and sell your labor.

Can you read? The poll certainly does address public sector unions. The first paragraph says, “A majority of Americans say they oppose efforts to weaken the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions and are also against cutting the pay or benefits of public workers to reduce state budget deficits, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.”

The language in the poll is very clear. How is this question not clear?

“As you may know, collective bargaining refers to negotiations between an employer and a labor union's members to determine the conditions of employment. Some states are trying to take away some of the collective bargaining rights of “public employee unions.” Do you favor or oppose taking away some of the collective bargaining rights of these unions.”

brad said...

That paragraph you refer to isnt part of the polling. The first question in the poll says labor unions it does NOT refer to public sector. Why arent you going after Jimmy Carter and the Dems for making sure Fed Unions do not get the "right" to collective bargain?

As for Wisconsin collective bargaining, they want to change or get rid of TENURE. You cant fire crappy teachers is insane. They want to get rid of the state paying union dues for union members, the union should get it themselves from their members. Both of those items cost a lot of money or needless and wasted money for all governments.

Thanks again for making my point that you dont know what you are talking about, you just want to rail away and cost the TAXPAYERS more money that the TAXPAYERS can not afford.

Side bar, Scott Walker Gov of Wisconsin is doing exactly what he campaigned on in 2010 to become Governor and he is doing exactly what he said he would do. Since he had majority of the vote in 2010, one could rightly assume he has majority of people behind him in his state.

Communications guru said...

My God, are you stupid? The question was :

“As you may know, collective bargaining refers to negotiations between an employer and a labor union's members to determine the conditions of employment. Some states are trying to take away some of the collective bargaining rights of “public employee unions.” Do you favor or oppose taking away some of the collective bargaining rights of these unions.”

The biggest majority, 38 percent strongly oppose taking away collective bargaining rights of “public employee unions,” and 60 percent overall oppose taking away collective bargaining rights of “public employee union

“Why arent (sic) (I) you going after Jimmy Carter and the Dems for making sure Fed Unions do not get the "right" to collective bargain?” Easy, because I do not believe it’s true.

Tenure is another issue, and like I said, no teachers’ union has ever opposed firing a bad teacher. What the hell difference does it make whether or not they take union dues out of their checks, other than one more Republican attempt to kill their largest opposition?

I have never made your point. Hell, you can’t even make it yourself.

Scooter never, ever campaigned on killing collective bargaining, and he said as much is his phone call to his sugar daddy David Koch.

brad said...

Please remove my yahoo address as a follower.

The number of that poll you are referring to is #8 or #9 I believe, where they do not elaborate on what is involved within the collective bargaining which you showed as well you didnt know either. Also, when you have a large group of questions like this, there is an agenda there to make the person being polled agree with your agenda/focal point, hence all the different questions. If they were true and honest, have 1 question with elaboration, but since they love your side ofthe aisle, its not.

Tenure is not another issue, its part of the whole Wisconsin issue. They want tenure and teachers not being able to be fired. Union dues is a huge deal, it costs money for the state to make sure that they pay on behalf of everyone in the union. The union should do it themselves, another cost saving move, but the union is scared that once people realize more how much money they take it will piss off its members.

As for Carter and FDR, you dont believe its true? What part? The part where they made sure it was illegal when all of Congress and the President voted for the legistlation in 1978 on whether or not Federal unions are allowed to have collective bargaining power (they voted against it) and FDR said unions of the Fed and State were bad ideas because you cant negotiate with yourself? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA youve lost your mind. Look it up, stop with your
"I dont believe its true" lies. Kevins can add this to the list of lies you tell and refuse to believe.

Communications guru said...

Are you kidding me? The poll is very clear.

No, the issue is collective bargaining, period. Again, the union does not and has never protected bad teachers. The union protects due process, and due process is a right guaranteed in the Constitution. It costs nothing to take union dues out of check, just like they do it for the United Way campaign or for a 401k.

No, you said Carter and LBJ. Yes, I don’t believe your claim abut Carter because, like I explained abut 10 times now, the guy after him fired air traffic controllers, and they were engaged in collective bargaining. I already explained FDR’s position.

I didn’t add you, so remove yourself.

brad said...

Commie Guru, thou art the worlds stupidest blogger. I dont bestow that on anyone very lightly either. Jimmy Carter and the Democrats controlling Congress passed this legislation called the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Do yourself a favor and read up on it. Also in 1980, PATCO and the teamsters all endorsed Reagan OH MY!!!!! Look up why Reagan fired everyone too btw, the union air traffic conts were in violation of the law, Reagan wasnt F'n around kind of like your blogs. Get informed you dolt and maybe learn something before you spew your stupid drivel.

Communications guru said...

There is no such person as “Commie Guru.” However, I will accept you compliment; coming from a genius like you it means a lot.

The Civil Service Act of 1978 did not bar collective bargaining. Man, you really are misinformed, and what’s even funny is you think you know what you’re talking about. Yes, Ronald Reagan fired the air traffic controllers because they went on strike, but guess what; they were engaged in collective bargaining. How would that be possible if Carter banned collective bargaining?

“Reagan wasn’t F'n around kind of like your blogs?” What the hell does that mean?

I’m sure you are also aware that Reagan was a big union boss that you hate so much. In fact, he was the only president in American history to have belonged to a union; the AFL-CIO affiliated Screen Actors Guild where he served six terms as president.

I was wondering why you had not commented on the poll the Wall Street Journal did that showed support for the Wisconsin public employees? Did they ask the question wrong?

Brooklyn Blood said...

Ques 8 is tell-tale: Cuts are for the betterment of the people not to bust the union. I'm a union member and have been for 24 years. However, the people, no matter those who pay taxes for public employees, or higher prices for retail, to even higher costs in medicine should not have to bear the brunt of benefits for everyone of these members. Unions were created to protect the Ametican workers - but they weren't created to place hardship on those who chose not to, or were never given the opportunity to join a union.

Communications guru said...

I’m sorry, but I must disagree with you. What is going on in Wisconsin, Ohio and even in Michigan is union busting. The unions in Wisconsin have given the concessions he wants, but that’s not what he wants; he wants to bust the unions. He made that pretty clear when he thought he was talking to David Koch.

Yes, unions were created to protect workers, and that is what they are doing.