Prove it Ace because you god damned sure were bullshitting about favoritism for health care waivers.

What an utterly phony and hypocritical response Ace. You are supporting a guy for president that would outlaw pornography on a porn site and pretending like that does not matter.

And notice here you are trying to dodge what I proved and change the subject again.

Don't ask me. I searched for the poll and could not find it. But both The Young Turks and Keith Olbermann on current tv reported on it. And they are as progressive as progressive gets.

Look for it yourself you lazy parrot.

The fuck you wouldn't have. When I told you you couldn't find a poll where Obama was trailing any of the GOP candidates you sunk low enough to try and claim a state poll from Iowa was incredibly significant.

 

This is sweet.

Wisconsin Dems File Complaint With State Against David Koch

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...int-with-state-against-david-koch.php?ref=fpa


This is bigger than it looks. I'll give you a hint. Over on the Right side they are trying to strip the progressive site Media Matters of their tax exempt status. Trying to make the absolutely false claim that they are actually trying to influence politics.


As opposed to David Koch admitting it on video tape.:excited::excited:


OMG I cannot tell how big this could be.


Koch never should have been bragging and running his mouth.:excited::excited:

 

Scott Walker has to be one of the dumbest hypocrites I've ever seen in elected office.

Walker: The Recall Costs Money — Think Of The Children And Seniors

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...f-the-children-and-seniors.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

 

Scott Walker Recall: Wisconsin Governor Narrowly Trails Likely Opponents In New Poll

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/28/scott-walker-recall_n_1307276.html

 

I don't think this is the kind of news Governor Walker was hoping for going into a recall election.

Why Can't Gov. Scott Walker Stop the Job Losses in Wisconsin?

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/why-cant-gov-scott-walker-stop-job-lo

 

Now I've been contending from the beginning of this thread that had Scott Walker told the truth about implementing the Koch Brother Funded and ALEX inspired union busting agenda if elected when he was running for governor we would not be having this discussion because the people of Wisconsin would not have elected him.

Well guess what. Now we have proof that Scott Walker did in fact lie to get elected.

Scott Walker Caught In Pre-Election Lie On Collective Bargaining Plans-Will Wisconsin Voters Care?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...-bargaining-plans-will-wisconsin-voters-care/

 

Union Violence and Racism against Walker Supporters and the Tea Party

[YOUTUBE]cyjvWTfcnvA&feature=player_detailpage[/YOUTUBE]

Yes, they represent people like stumbler very well

 

Damn if I was Governor Walker I'd be thinking it just wasn't my week about now I guess.

Judge Temporarily Blocks Wisconsin Voter ID Law

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...cks_wisconsin_voter_id_law.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

 

Wisconsin Union Thugs think tax payers should foot the bill
[YOUTUBE]75zKXlmnYUg&feature=player_detailpage[/YOUTUBE]

 

Wisconsin’s ‘Defeat the Recall’ campaign largely funded by out-of-state donors

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/...mpaign-largely-funded-by-out-of-state-donors/

 

You bet it is you two face bigot.....:excited:

From scumbag democrats!!!!!!!

Money & Politics Blog
Out-of-state money flows quietly in




Posted on July 21, 2011 by WisconsinWatch - 0 Comments

COMMENTARY

By Bill Lueders
Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism
Lily Eskelsen, a union leader who lives and works in Washington, D.C., cares deeply about the recall election challenge being waged in Wisconsin by Democrat Shelly Moore.
You might even say she’s invested in it.
Eskelsen, the vice president of the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union, in early May gave $500 to help elect Moore, a high school English teacher in Ellsworth. Three other NEA officials have also given money to Moore, who is seeking to unseat state Sen. Sheila Harsdorf, R-River Falls, in the Aug. 9 race.
Wisconsin’s recall elections, spurred by turmoil over changes that undercut public employee unions, are seen as nationally significant. It’s no surprise they have drawn contributions from across the nation, in amounts large and small.
The $1,425 given by the four NEA officials represent a significant out-of-state contribution to Moore. She has reported raising $238,228 so far this year, including $58,638 from outside Wisconsin, compared to $336,308 raised by Harsdorf, with $25,077 from out of state, according to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board’s website.
But what’s most unusual is Eskelsen’s willingness to talk about why she and others in NEA are giving money to a candidate in a state where they don’t live and can’t vote.
“We know her, we love her,” she exclaims about Moore. “For us, this is all about family.”
Moore, explains Eskelsen, has been a member of the NEA board since 2005, serving on a number of committees. “She was so active and so passionate about everything with her students and what they needed.”
Eskelsen says having a teacher like Moore in the state Senate is “not only good for Wisconsin — it’s good for education.”
Perhaps a similar logic prompted two University of Virginia architecture instructors to give $1,000 each on the same day to Democrat Nancy Nusbaum, who’s running against state Sen. Rob Cowles, R-Allouez. Perhaps not. The instructors did not respond to requests for comment.
Neither did a dozen other out-of-state contributors contacted over the past two weeks, since their names appeared in campaign finance reports filed by the candidates and candidate committees. Among the most mysterious is a group of donors we’ll call the Gang of Five.
They are: William Hume and Patricia Hume of San Francisco; Virginia James of Lambertville, N.J.: Richard Sharp of Richmond, Va.; and Arthur Dantchik of Gladwyne, Pa.
All five are listed as giving substantial contributions to Republican recall targets on the same dates — $500 to Cowles on April 25, $500 to Harsdorf on May 2, $500 to Sen. Dan Kapanke, R-La Crosse, on May 17, and $1,000 to Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, on May 23. And all except Sharp gave $1,000 to Sen. Luther Olsen, R-Ripon, on April 23.
William Hume is an executive with Basic American Foods Inc. Patricia Hume, his wife, is a travel agent. Hume’s office said both were unavailable for comment.
James is alternately listed in online filings as “retired” and as a “self-employed investor.” The website OpenSecrets.org, run by the nonprofit and nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, lists James as giving $417,800 to various political causes and campaigns in the 2010 election cycle, with an emphasis on the conservative advocacy group Club for Growth. She could not be reached.
Sharp, a former chairman of Circuit City, is managing director of V-Ten Capital Partners, a private equity firm. He did not respond to a phone message.
And Dantchik is a financial trader with a company called SIG. His national contribution profile on OpenSecrets.org shows he gives generously to Democrats as well as Republicans. A message left for him was not returned.
Nor did the beneficiaries of the Gang of Five’s largess offer any insight into why they were favored. The campaigns of four of the five recipients did not respond to an email asking, “Do you know who these people are and why they all contributed to your campaign on the same day?”
The only response was from Jennifer Harrington, campaign manager for Kapanke. She says neither she nor the candidate knows these donors, but speculates that they were moved by national media accounts on the race.
“Every time (Kapanke’s) name appears, we get a fairly good response,” says Harrington, adding that there is “interest on both sides from out-of-state donors.”
But isn’t it strange how reluctant many of them are to discuss it? Why not take the opportunity, as did Eskelsen, to put in a good word for the candidates they back?
Instead, these donors prefer to let their money do the talking.
Bill Lueders is the Money and Politics Project director at the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. The project, a partnership of the Center and MapLight.org, is supported by the Open Society Institute.

The nonprofit and nonpartisan Center (www.WisconsinWatch.org) collaborates with Wisconsin Public Television, Wisconsin Public Radio and the UW-Madison School of Journalism and Mass Communication and other news media. All works created, published, posted or disseminated by the Center do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of UW-Madison or any of its affiliates.

http://www.wisconsinwatch.org/2011/07/21/out-of-state-money-flows-quietly-in/​

 

After Wisconsin Voters Revolt Against GOP Lawmakers, GOP Lawmakers Approve Amendment Preventing Recall Elections

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...pprove-amendment-preventing-recall-elections/

 

Blue Corruption puts Wisconsin in Red

By Terry Heinrichs


Wisconsin's ongoing crisis is exposing the channeling of taxpayer money to unions, and thence to Democrats. Taxpayers are being swindled by a system in which their interests come second.

Though there are currently moves afoot to alter some of the procedural details contained in Governor Walker's Budget Repair Bill, nothing of any substance has emerged thus far as the Democrat "fleebaggers" are still camped out in Rahmland and show no evidence of returning to Wisconsin to vote on the bill.

The budget, which Walker believes is critical if fiscal sanity is to be injected into an out-of-control spending process, also contains many provisions which drastically limit the bargaining powers of public sector unions and have been the sparks igniting the anger and outrage of public sector unionists not just in Wisconsin but across the country. Of course, unionists are not the only party affected by these provisions as they also have the effect of seriously reducing the power of Democrats.

It is not at all surprising that public sector unionists and their benefactors would react with fury, alarm, and hostility to any attempt to deprive them of powers they have long enjoyed. In this they are not much different from anyone else; few of us would relish having benefits we have long enjoyed taken from us wholesale with the stroke of a pen, but this is what's happening in Wisconsin, and those who have been the beneficiaries of taxpayer's largesse for years are understandably upset.

But is their case just? It is if you think others should be forced to pay, and continue paying, for benefits you derive from a corrupt system -- and some of these benefits have corruption written all over them. It isn't if you demur.

Union dues are used for many purposes. Among other things, they are used to pay officers, hold meetings, organize and/or attend conferences, fund research, agitate, negotiate, and supply bodies for get out the vote operations. But perhaps most important of all, union monies will fund, and union operatives will work for, candidates who support its positions on the issues. Surprisingly enough, these candidates are just about always Democrats.

On average, public sector unions such as AFSCME, NEA, and SEIU nationally give anywhere from 98 to 99% of their contributions to Democrats. Moreover, union contributions constitute a relatively large share of the monies Democrat candidates receive. AFSCME alone contributed about $84,000.00 to Democrats in Wisconsin's 2010 elections, with about half of that sum going to the current Mayor of Milwaukee, Tom Barrett, who was Walker's opponent in the gubernatorial race. Of the fourteen Democrats in the state Senate, one took no money from any PAC, while of the thirteen others, ten received at least a third of their monies from union PACS, while five of these got over 50%, with one of those who's a member of three separate unions getting a cool 73% from union coffers.

Besides donating money directly to candidates, unions also spend indirectly through PACs for them as well. During the 2010 election cycle, the Wisconsin Education Association Council's PAC forked out almost 1.6 million for television ads for statewide Democrat candidates. Other unions spent about $67,000.00 on Democrats during the cycle while a lone Republican managed to get $20,000.00 out of them. Moreover, Advancing Wisconsin, a "progressive" group that opposes any attempt to lessen collective bargaining rights, contributed $560,000.00 and helped organize opposition to it. Building a Better Wisconsin's "no-Republican's-please" PAC spent $42,000.00 and further helped the effort by funding a "push-poll opposing Walker's collective bargaining proposals while the Democrat front group, Citizen Action of Wisconsin, assisted by contributing $27,000.00 to state Democrats opposing them.

And what did the unions and their front groups get for their money? A Republican sweep of both legislative houses and the governorship, all previously held by Democrats! Why the overwhelmingly negative result? As in many other states, the answer can be found in the unions' previous successes. In Wisconsin, as elsewhere, previous Republican as well as Democrat administrations generally gave the unions what they wanted -- Republicans as a rule because they were afraid of the consequences of confronting labor head-on and Democrats because public sector unions constitute key components of their political base.

Union money was critical in helping Democrats sweep control of the Wisconsin state government in 2008. Democrats in turn helped out their union brethren by continuing past spending patterns until the state ended up with its current 3.6 billion dollar deficit. Moreover, unless checked, total state spending is projected to rise from 28.7 billion dollars in 2010 to 41.4 billion dollars in 2013, an increase of 44%. Hence, Walker's dilemma: he can fund the immediate budgetary shortfall by laying-off state workers, raising taxes, issuing more debt, or by requiring state workers to pay for half of their pensions and 12.6% of their health care premiums. He's chosen the last option but may be forced to adopt the first unless the fourteen Democrat senators return to the state capitol to vote on the proposed budget.

But if and when they do, the state is still faced with massive spending increases down the road, and it is because of these increases and the potential disaster that awaits the state if the corruption in the entire budgetary process is not eliminated that Walker has gone after union bargaining rights. Mike Flynn has outlined the details of this corrupt process. Public sector unions get their money from dues paid by public sector employees. These dues are paid out of wages and salaries which employees receive from contracts negotiated on their behalf by the unions. These wages and salaries -- and benefits as well -- are paid out of the coffers of the state treasury which, in turn, gets its money from taxpayers. So taxpayers, in effect, pay the unions to negotiate with the state on wages, salaries and benefits for their members. If these negotiations result in higher wages and salaries and/or more expensive benefit outlays, taxpayers are paying twice over.

Now put a partisan cast on this process. Of public sector union contributions to political parties, roughly 98% go to Democrats. So taxpayers, Republican as well as Democrat, pay unions to elect Democrats to state political offices who, in turn, are expected by these unions to increase employee compensation and, thus also, the burden on the taxpayer. The corruption of the entire system was nowhere better captured than in the image of former Democrat Governor of New Jersey, Jon Corzine, shouting at a statehouse public sector union rally "We will fight for a fair contract."

Unions are able to make sweetheart deals with state governments which increase the pay and benefits of state workers because, unlike their private sector counterparts, they do not have to confront management in the usual sense. Private sector unions, as a rule, must deal with companies that cannot offer wages, salaries, and benefits that threaten their bottom line. The beauty of the public employees' arrangement is that unlike private sector bosses, the taxpayer "boss" can't go out of business, and he is forever on the hook for any deficits that result.

Moreover, union members get to vote twice for representation at the bargaining table while non-union taxpayers vote just once. Union members, like all other taxpayers, vote for the government representative at the bargaining table, but unlike all other taxpayers, they also get to vote for their union negotiators. They, therefore, have a say as to who sits on both sides of the table. And as if this weren't enough, the private sector working taxpayer is doubly penalized as he has to pay not only his own retirement pension -- if he is lucky enough to have one -- but also both the pay and pensions of public sector employees. As Peggy Noonan put it, "When governors negotiate with unions it's not negotiation, it's more like collusion." However it's labeled, it's the taxpayer who's the patsy! http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/blue_corruption_puts_wisconsin.html

 

Poll Finds Americans Reject Republican Assault On Unions | A new Bloomberg News national poll finds that Americans believe, by a wide margin, that public sector workers should have the right to collectively bargain. 64 percent of respondents, including a plurality of Republicans, believe public workers should be able to bargain collectively for their wages, while 63 percent believe that states should not be able to break pension agreements they’ve already made. This, of course, comes after a number of Republican governors used budget woes to justify removing collective bargaining rights from public employees.

 

UNIONS=CORRUPTION PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY AND ATTORNEY GENERAL ROBERT KENNEDY HAD IT RIGHT
INVESTIGATE UNIONS.AND YOU WILL BE INVESTIGATING ORGANIZED CRIME !!!!

WE MUST TO CONTINUE [SIZE=+0]NOW !!!!!
[/SIZE]

THE NEW WORLD ORDER IS MADE UP OF CORPORATE.
POLITICAL,MILITARY,CORRUPT UNION MEMBERS.AND
ORGANIZED CRIME. HENCE FORTH-EUROPEON ,NORTH AMERICAN. CORRUPT UNIONS
THEY ARE THE NEW
WORLD ORDER !!!!!!!
PUBLIC ENEMY # 1

[SIZE=undefined][SIZE=+0]The Enemy Within[/SIZE][/SIZE]​

[SIZE=undefined]A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear~ Cicero Marcus Tullius[/SIZE]

• UNION CORRUPTION
  (indexed by date )
  
  www.nlcp.org/ucu.asp
  TYPE LINK
  
  
  MAFIA-FINANCIAL INDUSTRIAL
  COMPLEX
  http://www.centroimpastato.it/otherlang/finmafiaen.php3
  
  
  
  
  [FONT=bookman old style, new york, times, serif]Mobsters, Unions, and Feds
  
  [FONT=bookman old style, new york, times, serif][SIZE=+0]A History of Labor Unions from Colonial Times to 2009
  
  [/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]
  
• UNION CORRUPTION
  (indexed by union)
  
  www.nlcp.org/artindx.asp
  TYPE LINK
  http://corporate-misconduct.com/unioncorrutionupdate.pdf
  
• ORGANIZED CRIME
  
  www.ganglandnews.com/archives.html
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/organized_crime
  
  MAHARASTRA CONTROL OF ORGANIZED
  CRIME ACT NUMBER 30, 1999 - INDIA
  http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/maharashtra1999.htm
  
• LABOR RACKETEERING
  
  http://www.fbiacademy.edu/pages/labor20%racketeer.htm
  
• INVESTIGATORS GUIDE TO SOURCES OF INFO
  
  http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/soi/soi_ch2.htm
  
• R.I.C.O.
  (RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT
  ORGANIZATIONS)
  
  http://www.ricoact.com
  
• UNIONS
  
  WWW.NILRR.ORG/
  
• UNION CORRUPTION UPDATE
  
  http://corporatemisconduct.com/unioncorruptionupdate.pdf
  
• [FONT=arial black,avant garde]THE EVIL EMPIRE[/FONT]
  [FONT=arial black,avant garde]by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS[/FONT]
  http://www.rense.com/general88/evil.htm
  
  
  
  Modern day union is often little more than governments and their union
  supporters bleeding the public dry in order to subsidize a political party
  and a union leadership that brings in the votes for that party
  
  
  Who Will Protect the People from the Unions?
  
  
  By Daniel Greenfield Sunday, January 2, 2011
  
  It is often forgotten that one of the causes of the evolution of the modern
  American urban union was the lawless suppression of workers by Democratic
  party affiliated political machines, and yet it did not take so very long
  before the union became an outgrowth of that same political machine. And
  having wiped out nearly every independent industry with which it was
  associated, the only unions still surviving are those in control of either
  municipal services or state subsidized service providers, particularly in
  the medical field.
  
  
  
  If the union began as a way to negotiate salaries and working conditions
  between employers and workers, the modern day union is often little more
  than governments and their union supporters bleeding the public dry in order
  to subsidize a political party and a union leadership that brings in the
  votes for that party. The situation is most critical in California, but many
  state and city budgets are almost as badly strained by the combination of
  municipal union contracts and the subsidized services that they are
  associated with.
  
  
  Lethal work slowdown by union members in New York City during the blizzard
  
  
  The recent lethal work slowdown
  <http://patterico.com/2010/12/30/if-true-how-is-this-not-criminally-negligen
  t-homicide/> by union members in New York City during the blizzard or the
  multimillion dollar media blitzes by California unions for Jerry Brown and
  New Jersey teacher's unions against Chris Christie is a harsh reminder of
  the utter greed and ruthlessness of the union's last stand, their death grip
  on public services fed by taxpayer money. These stands have little to do
  with worker's rights. They have next to nothing in common with the old union
  image of underpaid workers protesting outside of factories. It's still about
  exploitation, but it's about the exploitation of the public by a
  union-government political establishment.
  
  As the bosses of old have given way to managers and then to politicians, the
  union bosses are the only bosses still in the game, who enjoy wealth and
  power far beyond those of the average taxpayer being fleeced without his or
  her consent. Union rhetoric may pretend that they are contending with mayors
  and governors, but in reality it's the public that they're really contending
  with. Their strikes have hardly any effect on the politicians, but target
  the public. And the money that they're paid with is the public's money. The
  New Jersey's teachers union real target was New Jersey homeowners who
  already pay the highest property taxes in the country. But when given a
  choice, homeowners across New Jersey said no to paying more property taxes
  into the union's pockets. And Governor Christie won so much acclaim, because
  he called the union on what it was doing and insisted that the voters should
  have a choice. But much of the time politicians are more than happy to give
  in.
  
  Union negotiations with politicians that they help elect are a corrupt
  farce, because the money extracted from the public goes in part to the same
  politicians who decide whether to accept or reject their offer. In any law
  abiding system, this would be a tremendous conflict of interest, like
  sending in your bank's loan officer to act as your real estate broker. But
  under our current system it is actually commonplace for unions which live
  off contracts with politicians, to be able to fund and work to elect those
  same politicians. And it represents a level of corruption that makes the
  Pentagon's 100 dollar screws or the corporate tax shelters that liberal
  pundits complain about seem almost petty. And now entire states are
  collapsing under the weight of dirty contracts with unions that act like a
  Praetorian Guard, elevating and removing governors and mayors who displease
  them.
  
  Governor Schwarzenegger went in as a reformer, but after losing a battle
  with California nurses unions turned into a Yes Man for Sacramento. His
  replacement, Governor Jerry Brown was elected with millions of dollars of
  union money
  <http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2010/09/independent-gro
  ups-keep-spending-for-jerry-brown.html> . The California media has made much
  of how much Meg Whitman spent on her campaign, but Jerry Brown didn't have
  to spend much money on his campaign. The unions were out there doing it for
  him, with money extracted from a state budget in freefall. This arrangement
  under which a new governor, who has never held any job that was not on the
  public dole, got elected thanks to an arrangement with unions who live off
  the public dole.
  
  
  Corrupt collusion between union bosses and politicians, exchanging public
  money for political support
  
  
  If this was corrupt collusion between businesses and union bosses, as has
  often been the case with some unions such as SEIU, then the only victims
  would be union members. But this is corrupt collusion between union bosses
  and politicians, exchanging public money for political support. And not
  letting go even when the public is bleeding red and there's literally no
  more money to give.
  
  It means that unions get paid, while state tax refunds to
  <http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/state&id=6636740> the public
  are delayed. Because the unions are always at the head of the line. When
  Governor Schwarzenegger tried to temporarily cut worker pay, State
  Controller John Chiang refused to comply
  <http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/02/schwarzenegger-cuts-california-stat
  e-workers-pay-to-minimum-wag/> . Chiang was also the man who decided that
  working families could wait for their tax refunds. And it's no wonder
  because John Chiang, the man with hands on the purse, was also elected by
  the same unions he
  <http://www.flashreport.org/commentary0b.php?postID=2009012212040576&authID=
  2005081622025042&post_offsetP=0> 's pandering to. California unions spent
  millions to put Chiang in place and more to keep reelecting him.
  
  How long can the system go on before it breaks down? That doesn't really
  matter. Because the man at the top in Washington D.C. also got there through
  union backing. And ObamaCare exempts unions, but forces ordinary Americans
  to buy into a health care system whose contracts are negotiated to benefit
  unions. It's a safe bet that Barack Obama won't let Jerry Brown, John Chiang
  and their unions go under. Because his own reelection campaign depends on
  it. Money sent to California unions, is also money sent to the Campaign to
  Reelect Barack Obama. But it's also a safe bet that the California taxpayers
  won't just be the only ones hit with the bill. California may default on its
  debts, state bonds may prove worthless and the federal government may go on
  covering whatever entitlements funding is needed, but sooner or later the
  system will still break down. It will just be a national system, rather than
  a state one.
  
  Political machines have robbed states and cities blind before, but in the
  19th century they did not have access to a massive federal budget on this
  scale. Even President Martin Van Buren, a Tammany Hall man, could not
  command the kind of wealth and credit that Barack Obama does. President
  Buchanan might have helped cover up a murder by Congressman Sickles, one of
  his Tammany Hall favorites, who had been engaged in blatant corruption using
  government money, but even accounting for inflation, he could have never
  overseen a fraud and theft of this magnitude. The Pigford
  <http://biggovernment.com/lstranahan/2010/12/19/pigford-video-blockbuster-ke
  y-black-farmers-lawyer-admits-clients-got-away-with-murder/> settlement
  alone makes Tammany Hall's worst crimes seem like small change, and yet it's
  far from the most notable misuse of money by this congress or
  administration.
  
  Politicians and bureaucrats could and did steal, but there was a limit and
  scope to their theft. Those who stole too much would usually be brought down
  before they caused too much damage, and drove an outraged public to cut off
  the pipeline. Tammany Hall's leadership was repeatedly purged in just that
  fashion. But while the current union system is essentially a legal version
  of the old Tammany Hall system, in which municipal employees were obligated
  to pay "the ring" for their jobs, it has no more limits. Not even the
  bankruptcy of the system that it feeds off.
  
  When the union is isolated enough and the public is desperately trying to
  make ends meet, then the unions may lose. That's what happened with the
  teacher's union in New Jersey. But when the unions are big enough and feed
  off a huge membership that knows it has no choice but to vote union, and the
  unions are closely tied up with an entitlements dependent electorate, then
  the system may be irreparable. And that is what happened in California. You
  can't fix a system like that, not without taking on millions of people who
  are robbing it blind. And that's not an election, it's a civil war.
  
  In his own time as governor of New York and police commissioner of New York
  City, Theodore Roosevelt could not succeed in cleaning it up. And his many
  times removed cousin, Franklin D. Roosevelt turned New York City's
  corruption into a national standard with the New Deal. Together with Tammany
  Hall's New York Senator Wagner, their National Labor Relations Act turned to
  compulsory unionization as a means of forcing workers into supporting the
  Democratic party, whether they wanted to or not. And by doing so, Wagner and
  FDR began the process of reclaiming the unions from the Communist party and
  organized crime, and integrating them into the nationwide structure of the
  Democratic party.
  
  FDR and Wagner were both New York politicians with a ground floor view on
  how its dirty politics worked. And the NLRB was not about worker
  representation, but about money and political power. It favored large unions
  with political affiliations, destroying small unions, and taking a
  Northeastern urban alliance between the political machine and the union
  bosses as its model. The workers were no longer being beaten by goons hired
  by their employers and the political machine's police. Now they were being
  beaten by goons hired by the union bosses and the political machine's
  police. Organized crime had always worked both sides of the aisle, playing
  for the highest bidder. The NLRB showed organized crime that unions were the
  future and industry was the past. But the politicians were ahead of them.
  
  The union became a parasite and union jobs either went south or were
  outsourced. But the public sector union remained a tick fixed on the
  bloodstream of the public. You didn't have to be a factory owned to be
  drained by them. You didn't need to own a single share of stock. All you had
  to do was live and pay taxes in an area where public sector unions had
  gripped in their claws. The intersection of entitlements and public sector
  unions and political machines meant that money was being exchanged for
  political support, and the people outraged were not the ones that
  politicians cared about. They still made a show of driving a hard bargain,
  but more often they showed up at union conferences to loud cheers. Their old
  electorate paid taxes. Their new electorate gobbled them.
  
  And that brings us back to 2011 where the oppressed worker is now the
  taxpayer, whose income and future are being garnished by unions. The poor
  man standing out in the rain is not the union employee, but the man waiting
  to collect another check, that will be torn apart and consumed by union
  bosses and politicians. Who will then protect those workers-the people, from
  the unions?
  

 

Workingman's Blues #2

There's an evenin' haze settlin' over the town
Starlight by the edge of the creek
The buyin' power of the proletariat's gone down
Money's gettin' shallow and weak
The place I love best is a sweet memory
It's a new path that we trod
They say low wages are a reality
If we want to compete abroad
My cruel weapons have been put on the shelf
Come sit down on my knee
You are dearer to me than myself
As you yourself can see
I'm listenin' to the steel rails hum
Got both eyes tight shut
Just sitting here trying to keep the hunger from
Creeping it's way into my gut
Meet me at the bottom, don't lag behind
Bring me my boots and shoes
You can hang back or fight your best on the front line
Sing a little bit of these workingman's blues
Now, I'm sailin' on back, ready for the long haul
Tossed by the winds and the seas
I'll drag ‘em all down to hell and I'll stand ‘em at the wall
I'll sell ‘em to their enemies
I'm tryin' to feed my soul with thought
Gonna sleep off the rest of the day
Sometimes no one wants what we got
Sometimes you can't give it away
Now the place is ringed with countless foes
Some of them may be deaf and dumb
No man, no woman knows
The hour that sorrow will come
In the dark I hear the night birds call
I can hear a lover's breath
I sleep in the kitchen with my feet in the hall
Sleep is like a temporary death
Meet me at the bottom, don't lag behind
Bring me my boots and shoes
You can hang back or fight your best on the front line
Sing a little bit of these workingman's blues
Well, they burned my barn, they stole my horse
I can't save a dime
I got to be careful, I don't want to be forced
Into a life of continual crime
I can see for myself that the sun is sinking
How I wish you were here to see
Tell me now, am I wrong in thinking
That you have forgotten me?
Now they worry and they hurry and they fuss and they fret
They waste your nights and days
Them I will forget
But you I'll remember always
Old memories of you to me have clung
You've wounded me with words
Gonna have to straighten out your tongue
It's all true, everything you have heard
Meet me at the bottom, don't lag behind
Bring me my boots and shoes
You can hang back or fight your best on the front line
Sing a little bit of these workingman's blues
In you, my friend, I find no blame
Wanna look in my eyes, please do
No one can ever claim
That I took up arms against you
All across the peaceful sacred fields
They will lay you low
They'll break your horns and slash you with steel
I say it so it must be so
Now I'm down on my luck and I'm black and blue
Gonna give you another chance
I'm all alone and I'm expecting you
To lead me off in a cheerful dance
Got a brand new suit and a brand new wife
I can live on rice and beans
Some people never worked a day in their life
Don't know what work even means
Meet me at the bottom, don't lag behind
Bring me my boots and shoes
You can hang back or fight your best on the front line
Sing a little bit of these workingman's blues



http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/workingmans-blues-2

 

This thread needs ended....

Bottom line is the Wisconsin Governor did what long has been needed to be done by every other Governor. State employees get wayyyyyyy too many benefits and $$$$!!!!! What do they think they have, a job in the private sector????? Rush Jumped on this a long time ago!!!! So get on with your life liberals!!!!!! If you don't like your job.....get the fuck out!!!!!!!! Thank you.....now go back to your porn!!!! Roflmao

 

National Institute for Labor Relations Research
a non-profit research facility analyzing and exposing the inequities of compulsory unionism


Union Monopoly Bargaining Harms Millions of American Workers

Union Contracts ‘Reduce Wage Dispersion … by Reducing Pay of the Most Productive Workers’


Apologists for compulsory unionism often suggest, with little or no evidence, that employees who oppose unionization of their workplace have no good reason for believing they would be harmed by a Big Labor takeover. In a recent op-ed opposing passage of an Indiana Right to Work law written for the South Bend (Ind.) Tribune, for example, Notre Dame professors Barbara Fick and Marty Wolfson simply assume, without making an argument or citing any facts, that union nonmembers subject to “exclusive” (monopoly) union representation in the workplace thereby “enjoy … benefits.”
As popular as this assumption is with union officials and their allies in academia, it is far from substantiated. Moreover, in examining labor-management relations outside the context of the ongoing debate over state Right to Work laws, which prohibit the firing of employees for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union, a number of proponents of forced unionism have acknowledged, tacitly or explicitly, that unionization is detrimental to the economic interests of many employees.
Take, for example, Richard Rothstein. He is a longtime research associate with the Washington, D.C.-based Economic Policy Institute (EPI). Each year, the officers of a broad spectrum of labor unions funnel millions of dollars from their forced dues-funded treasuries into the EPI, which they obviously regard as an ideological ally. Yet Rothstein has made no bones about the fact that workers whose productivity is above-average typically get paid less when they are unionized:
In [unionized] firms, wages of lower paid workers are raised above the market rate, with the increase offset . . . [in part] by reducing pay of the most productive workers. If firms with this practice are rare, competitors will be able to bid away their best workers.
Rothstein’s understanding of how union contracts work is perfectly standard. In fact, in the passage cited he is actually summarizing an article coauthored by another prominent pro-forced unionism academic, Laura D’Andrea Tyson. And both Rothstein and Tyson are simply echoing the views of Harvard economist Richard Freeman, arguably the leading academic apologist for forced unionism in the U.S. Freeman has actually commended union officials for being “remarkably successful in removing performance judgments as a factor in determining individual workers’ pay.”
Of course, Rothstein, D’Andrea Tyson, Freeman, and other likeminded analysts of labor policy do not regard the fact that monopoly union representation routinely lowers the pay of employees with above-average productivity as an argument against it. On the contrary, they commend such “compression of wages” as a blow for employee “solidarity.”
Do Notre Dame professors Fick and Wolfson dissent from the consensus as expressed by Freeman and other major figures in their field that workers who stand to benefit economically if their employer takes their personal performance into account stand to lose if a union contract prevents their employer from doing so? If they do, they should explain why, rather than pretend the consensus does not exist.
On the other hand, if Fick and Wolfson do acknowledge that union contracts normally reduce the pay of “the most productive workers,” then it makes no sense for them to oppose enactment of an Indiana Right to Work law on the grounds that union nonmembers invariably “benefit” from unionization!
So-called “compression of wages” is just one of a number of ways in which large numbers of employees are economically harmed by union contracts. To take another example, extensive research has shown that unionized firms “shed jobs more frequently and expand less frequently than nonunion firms.” Inevitably, that means rank-and-file employees looking for promotion opportunities will find far fewer of them at unionized firms. And in addition to economic damage, many employees suffer noneconomic, but genuine, harm when they are forced to associate with a union whose moral and political values they do not share.
In short, there are multiple sound reasons why an independent-minded employee might consider having a union as his monopoly-bargaining agent to be a detriment, rather than a benefit. And the individual employee, rather than anyone else, including Notre Dame academics, is the best judge of whether he or she benefits. Right to Work laws acknowledge this truth. And it is the best single reason for making Indiana a Right to Work state.

# # #
http://www.nilrr.org/
​