Unions and the Wisconsin Governor

[Townsend]

Seriously? Bomb threats now?

http://www.piercecountyherald.com/event/article/id/33730/

Wait, "threats"?  How many?  Was it a number of wackos sent by the Palin's?  I'm sure if there were a number of threats one of them might've been ol' Todd.

But apparently it was "allegedly" one guy who was let go.

Jesus Guido, that's just sad.

[Red Arrow]

Civil rights, women's equality, the right to organize, education, affordable health care, etc. are all in the party's mission.

You seem opposed to each of these things. Clearly, the republican party seems mostly opposed to each of these measures as well. 

I don't believe for a second that the Republican Party is for slavery, making women second class citizens, keeping people uneducated, and denying everyone health care.  I'll somewhat give you labor unions if you give me that Democrats want to destroy business in order to advance individual workers.

There is a basic difference in the perception of the correct path to achieve the good goals.

[Townsend]

I don't believe for a second that the Republican Party is for slavery, making women second class citizens, keeping people uneducated, and denying everyone health care.

That's just the Jerry Falwell fall out.  Most of us don't believe that but there's a loud part of our party that seems to.

Remember when Pat Robertson ran for president?  He left some of that in the soup too.

[Red Arrow]

Remember when Pat Robertson ran for president? 

You should also remember that he didn't get nominated. (thanfully)

[guido911]

First, how many bomb threats are necessary for you to be worried or sickened. 10? 20? But kudos for working in a Palin attack. Expected.

And yes, "allegedly" you buffoon. Just like Loughner "allegedly" shot Giffords and killed 6 others:

Loughner was quickly arrested after he allegedly shot Giffords and some 12 others at a public event at a Safeway grocery store in Tucscon. He reportedly shot the congresswoman "point blank" in the head and may have come from inside the store. He attempted to flee after running out of ammunition and was tackled by one of Giffords' staffers.

[Emphasis added].

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/08/jared-lee-loughner-gabrielle-giffords-shooter_n_806243.html

Or that Major Hasan "allegedly" killed 13 people at Fort Hood:

WASHINGTON - Army superiors were warned about the radicalization of Major Nidal Malik Hasan years before he allegedly massacred 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, but did not act in part because they valued the rare diversity of having a Muslim psychiatrist, military investigators wrote in previously undisclosed reports

[Emphasis added].
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/02/22/ft_hood_suspect_was_army_dilemma/?s_campaign=8315

Or the "alleged" underwear bomber:

New charges brought against alleged underwear bomber

[Emphasis added].

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-15/justice/michigan.abdulmutallab.new.charges_1_new-charges-explosive-device-umar-farouk-abdulmutallab?_s=PM:CRIME

Believe it or not, at one point McVeigh was the alleged Murrah building bomber.

Folks suspected of committing criminal offenses are so because of, wait for it, "allegations". Thus the word, "alleged". The fact that he was not jailed pending charges is of very little consequence. "Jesus" you are out of your league on this one, and that's what truly is "sad".

Incidentally, have you called out or condemned any of the conduct the unions or its supporters I have point out since this mess began. You know, the homophobic/sexual abuse threat, the phony sick notes signed by doctors, teachers dragging their students to rallies, teachers lying and calling in sick thus closing schools, the Walker sucks Koch signage, threatening to break the neck and assaults on media folks, the Twitter death wishes against Walker, Congressmen telling unions they may need to get "bloody", protesters trashing a war memorial (and the millions of dollars in damage to the state house), a state assemblyman telling a colleague that she is "f&cking dead", and the other numerous examples of horrific behavior. I guess with that list, one bomb threat is perhaps not so bad--in your world.

[nathanm]

And guido has once again successfully made a thread about himself, rather than the topic. Awesome. (and I just helped!)

[guido911]

And guido has once again successfully made a thread about himself, rather than the topic. Awesome. (and I just helped!)

Thank you Clavin.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Red,
You can't be serious.  If you think you are, then you really should know better.

Review this again.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap

This is what the real redistribution of wealth is all about.  And you and I are getting to subsidize it.  (Guido doesn't, cause he is one of the chosen ones....)  But 99% of the rest of us do.

[Red Arrow]

Red,
You can't be serious.  If you think you are, then you really should know better.

Review this again.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap

This is what the real redistribution of wealth is all about.  And you and I are getting to subsidize it.  (Guido doesn't, cause he is one of the chosen ones....)  But 99% of the rest of us do.

Please have the courtesy of quoting which of my posts you are responding to. You and I disagree on enough that "you really should know better" will be a difference of opinion.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Sorry.  I get carried away sometimes.

Your quote;
I'll somewhat give you labor unions if you give me that Democrats want to destroy business in order to advance individual workers.

Now, my quote(s);
Democrats no more want to destroy business than the man in the moon does.

It all keeps coming back to the redistribution of wealth in this country (and world wide.)  You mentioned earlier you didn't like a 25% cut, but that is what you have had in the last 30 years if you are getting a paycheck!  Actually a little more than just 25% for most.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap

Unions and negotiations with companies/governments are probably the truest remaining example of law of supply and demand we have in this country.  Isn't that one of the main pillars of capitalism?  A scarce resource being more valuable than an abundant one?

Except when you can buy a legislature to write a law to intervene.  Like so called "right to work".  Or taking away a persons right to for a group for negotiation of terms?

[Red Arrow]

Sorry.  I get carried away sometimes.

Your quote;
I'll somewhat give you labor unions if you give me that Democrats want to destroy business in order to advance individual workers.

Now, my quote(s);
Democrats no more want to destroy business than the man in the moon does.

It all keeps coming back to the redistribution of wealth in this country (and world wide.)  You mentioned earlier you didn't like a 25% cut, but that is what you have had in the last 30 years if you are getting a paycheck!  Actually a little more than just 25% for most.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap

Unions and negotiations with companies/governments are probably the truest remaining example of law of supply and demand we have in this country.  Isn't that one of the main pillars of capitalism?  A scarce resource being more valuable than an abundant one?

Except when you can buy a legislature to write a law to intervene.  Like so called "right to work".  Or taking away a persons right to for a group for negotiation of terms?

Sorry, I do believe that Unions and generally the Democratic Party are willing to sacrifice a company for the "rights of the workers".  I have said in past threads that 100 years ago I probably would have been a 100% Union guy. I believe that now Unions are nothing more than a big business in themselves to promote benefits for the workers potentially at the expense of ruining the business that supports them.  On second thought, I retract the "sorry".  Supply and demand work until either the company or the Unions resort to violence to support their position.  You know that both have happened.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Yep - there have been stupid on both sides.  And so then you also know it started when the first group of workers decided it just wasn't fair to be locked in a building while it burned down around them.  Or when the US Army came in with machine guns and mowed down the workers.  Union movement in this country was always a reactionary movement.  Reacting to excesses of Rockefeller, Carnegie, Sidney Dillon, and many, many mine owners.

Interesting time line showing how far back the problems really went.  Sound bite of history, but I bet Google can fill in some blanks, if interested.

http://clear.uhwo.hawaii.edu/Timeline-US.html

Takes a big business to stand up to big business, and since the Federal government has been bought and paid for BY big business, who is left to stand up to them?  Fewer and fewer every year.

[Red Arrow]

Yep - there have been stupid on both sides.  And so then you also know it started when the first group of workers decided it just wasn't fair to be locked in a building while it burned down around them.  Or when the US Army came in with machine guns and mowed down the workers.  Union movement in this country was always a reactionary movement.  Reacting to excesses of Rockefeller, Carnegie, Sidney Dillon, and many, many mine owners.
Interesting time line showing how far back the problems really went.  Sound bite of history, but I bet Google can fill in some blanks, if interested.
Takes a big business to stand up to big business, and since the Federal government has been bought and paid for BY big business, who is left to stand up to them?  Fewer and fewer every year.

As I said, 100 years ago I would have been a Union guy.  Get with the times, it's not still 100 years ago.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Look around you at the economy today.  Check out that link in a previous reply about the redistribution of wealth in this country.  Not that much different.  Yes, we are missing the machine guns mowing people down, but a lot of the principles are the same - just a difference in technique.

[nathanm]

Sorry, I do believe that Unions and generally the Democratic Party are willing to sacrifice a company for the "rights of the workers". 

The Democratic Party is not by any means the party of the workers. They get union money, but most likely because who the hell else is going to get it? The Republicans?

There certainly are folks who are left of the Democrats on this, but even they by and large aren't out to strangle business. They think that greater regulation and stronger unions leads overall to a stronger business climate that has the side benefit of not grinding people up under its boot.

I could never be anti-union with a straight face, not because of ideology, but because I believe in checks and balances. The unions (should) act to check the sometimes destructive impulses of CEOs focused too much on this quarter than next year. Company management should be acting to check any greed within the union attempting to get more out of the business than is sustainable for it.