The Union Label

Liberal Doublethink alert: UNIONS against Minimum Wage Increase!

Last week, the Los Angeles City Council approved an increase in the legally required minimum wage to result in a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour by 2020. During the months preceding the City Council’s decision, the underlying intellectual position in favor of the increase in the minimum wage was that everyone should receive a living wage. The arguments against raising the minimum wage revolve around the possibility that certain businesses such as restaurants will close based on their inability to pass along such wage increases to their customers. Opponents also argue that jobs will move elsewhere, whether it is another U.S. city or overseas if the minimum wage is increased.

The arguments presented above have not changed very much over the past fifty years. It is axiomatic that most interested individuals would like to see minimum wage discussions disappear because the overall community is more highly educated and lower wage jobs are the province of young individuals who will soon move into the marketplace of skills and ideas. Sadly, such is not the case.

Enter the union leaders of Los Angeles. Now, the Federation of Labor in Los Angeles is asking for exemptions from the minimum wage for companies where the workers are represented by a union. The position is that workers represented by unions should have leeway to negotiate a wage below the amount mandated by law. The underlying theory according to Randy Hicks, a leader of both the county Federation of Labor and the Raise the Wage coalition is ” “With a collective bargaining agreement, a business owner and the employees negotiate an agreement that works for them both. The agreement allows each party to prioritize what is important to them. This provision gives the parties the option, the freedom, to negotiate that agreement. And that is a good thing.”

And now, the Mad Hatter enters stage left. Apparently, only a union worker should be able to work for a wage that is less than a ‘living wage’. And that union worker is apparently able to work for that lower wage and also able to pay union dues to support the crack union negotiating team working to procure or maintain his or her wages that are less than those required by the new minimum wage law.

In this Alice in Wonderland proposal by the unions, two identical restaurants serving the same food, hiring from the same labor force, located on the same street and owned by the same person could be operating under two different sets of laws with respect to the wages paid to their employees. Restaurant A, operating under a union contract, would be able to negotiate wages less than the minimum wage. Restaurant B, operating without a union contract, would be forced to pay a minimum wage higher than the wages paid by Restaurant A. Likely, Restaurant A would charge their customers lower prices than Restaurant B and drive Restaurant B out of business costing the employees of Restaurant B their higher paying jobs.

It does sound like the unions are looking for their own form of crony capitalism in Los Angeles. Who would think that the unions would accept and lobby for lower wages for their members in an effort to compete successfully with entities paying higher wages to their employees? What is the purpose of a union if it is attempting to successfully negotiate lower compensation for its members? Only in Wonderland, also known as Los Angeles. (Townhall)

LA Times:

Landmark plan to boost the Los Angeles minimum wage took another step forward Friday, as a panel of city lawmakers vetted a draft ordinance putting the pay hikes into law.

But a host of complex and divisive questions about the plan will likely remain unanswered even after the law is passed — including whether unionized companies will ultimately be able to opt out of the wage requirements if their workers agree.

“This is an ongoing process,” City Councilman Curren Price, who heads the Economic Development Committee, said Friday. “There’s still a lot of things to be resolved.”

Passing a Law to find out what’s in it is the latest fad trend in “transparency” these days. 🙂

When it takes up the proposed law next Wednesday, the full council is widely expected to pass the ordinance, which would gradually increase the citywide minimum to $15 hourly rate by July 2020. But because the pay hikes do not start until the middle of next year, officials could make changes to the law before the increases begin.

Political and Union maneuvering, just like on ObamaCare, where the unions were the ones that got the vast majority of the exemptions.

And of course, Unions are a Democrat money machine so they always get what they want.

So, yes, you could likely get Liberals voting to exempt Unions from “living wage” but still be Democrats who are fighting for it.

Orwell, is proud of you my sons.

But here’s the secret:

Labor leaders also pressed to include some controversial wording that could exempt unionized companies from the wage requirements if management negotiates a waiver with workers. Business groups have attacked that idea as a gambit to prod more companies to unionize.

Rusty Hicks, who heads the county labor federation, said that would provide union workers the flexibility to trade off pay for other benefits that might be more important to them.

“This isn’t a secretive way to incentivize workers to organize, or about paying union workers less than they deserve,” Hicks told reporters before the hearing. “This is about staying consistent with previous provisions and crafting something that will withstand legal scrutiny.”

Wanna pay less, well then you have to unionize and when you unionize the Union will screw you and your employees for Union Dues that will go the The Democrats!!

But the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce and other major business groups criticized the proposed exemption as defying the stated goals of the minimum wage ordinance. They pointed out that labor activists had previously opposed a number of suggested exemptions for other kinds of businesses, saying no one should have a “subminimum wage.”

They were for it, before they vote against it! 🙂

If the exemption is approved, “it will replace the mantra of helping the working poor with hollow rhetoric that enables organizers to sign up more dues-paying members,” Chamber President Gary Toebben wrote in a letter to Price this week.

Ta Da!  More money for The Democrats. More Union control of the means of production.

Crafty, aren’t they.

Many labor activists have raised concerns about how L.A. will ensure that the new wage rules are enforced. City officials pressed forward Friday with a plan to create a new city division to crack down on employers who pay less than the minimum wage.

More Bureaucrats, more control…Gee, that never happens when Liberals attack! 🙂

Think Like a Leftist: Holiday Edition

First off, the very mention of Christmas is exclusionary so I can’t say “Christmas Edition” without being politically incorrect to start with. But I’m sure I will finish strong. 🙂

1. Christmas IS exclusionary and discriminatory. Isn’t everything about a Leftist just want to scream “discriminatory” at the drop of any hat (actually you don’t even need a hat). Christmas discriminates against any one who isn’t a Christian, you evil bastards. So like every -ism that a Leftist can come up with this is just another way that right wing Christians have an unfair advantage and we all know that Leftists are all about “fairness”. 🙂

And they hate “intolerance” and “discrimination” of any kind, under any pretense. 🙂

2. Redistribution Fairness. Redistribution of Wealth and making every mediocre poor is a Leftist Utopia  (look at Cuba). Everyone his the same. Everyone is Equal. Everything is Fair. So, when it comes to Christmas it is n’t fair that some kids get presents and some don’t. Screw the fact that there are charities for this kind of thing, they still don’t get the job done for EVERY child so we should mandate that at least 1 present per child should be given to the Government to be redistributed to those in need (and who vote for Democrats or who will vote for Democrats in the future) just to be “fair”. White people should give 2, just as reperations for slavery. It’s social justice, you now.

We can even open a new branch of The Government, The Bureau of Fairness. Yeah, that’s the ticket!!

Or here’s an even better solution…

3. But the quandary for The Leftist is that Christmas, as configured today, is fundamentally a Capitalist Consumer Fest. A virtual gorging of consumerism. And Leftist hate capitalism! It’s Greedy, it’s dirty, it’s unfair. So they have a problem.

Solution: Let the Government run it! That’s the Leftist solution for everything isn’t it?

You will barred from buying your own gifts and the Government will do it based on that grand and glorious Leftist principle:

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Peace and Happiness shall reign on Earth! Fairness to All and to All a Good Night!!

Thus Christmas can finally be fair. It’s just that the poor, the illegal, and Democrat will get everything and those dirty, nasty, greedy right wingers will finally be on the perpetual naughty list and we’ll find a more socially acceptable use for coal– they’ll get it for Christmas presents but be barred from using it for energy production!!

4. And we’ll do away with that Old, Fat, White Christian symbol of Christmas, St. Nick, aka Santa Claus. I mean really, we’re celebrating White People! and The Morbidly Obese! Are you kidding me!

The Morbidly Obese are not “jolly”. They are a health hazard to everyone and should not be held up as a symbol of anything good.

Christmas Candy has to be replaced with Broccoli (because George W. Bush hated broccoli, of course!) 🙂

5. And cutting down a perfectly good tree just to stuff it in your Living room for a few nights, then throw it away! Are you kidding me!

Think of the harm to Global Warming. Think of the fire Hazard. It’s unsafe for all mankind and should be banned immediately!

Deforestation is not a joke!

As for artificial trees, well they use up valuable electricity and are also a waste of energy.

Christmas Ornament are exclusionary, I mean a Christmas Star or Angel at the top, I mean really? Think of all the other religions you’re excluding by that act you hateful person.

6.Santa’s Workshop. Some old fat white guy who enslaves elves to manufacture his toys for him so he reap the benefits of the profits and the adulation of the public. How evil is that. At the very least the Elves need a Union to represent them and they need a more diverse work environment. The racial balance is all wrong. The EEOC needs to do a thorough review of the conditions and then we need to get Unions in their to get the elves some fair working conditions.  Are they even getting $15/hr??

7. We need to move Santa’s Workshop because the North Pole is threatened by Global Warming and we have to think about The Polar Bears so this an environmentally sensitive area. Plus, being at the North Pole also affords him to much privacy and he needs much more oversight. Someone call Green Peace.

8. Reindeer. Really? That’s animal cruelty making them pull a sleigh for an old, fat, white guy. What do you think they are Black Slaves! No, we have to get PeTA in there to save the Reindeer.

9. Bah humbug! Scrooge was a nasty old capitalist slave driver anyhow.

Just about every year at this time, “A Christmas Carol’ shows up somewhere on TV, as do headlines about how one Republican or another is the modern equivalent of the tale’s greedy miser, Ebenezer Scrooge.

“The GOP’s sad Scrooge agenda.” “GOP Protecting Ebenezer Scrooge.” “Maher Likens Republicans to Ebenezer Scrooge.” “Republicans play the role of the stingy Scrooge.”

You have to wonder if these folks have actually read “A Christmas Carol” or spent any time pondering what Scrooge actually says and does. Because if you do, you come to realize that Scrooge more closely resembles a modern liberal than a conservative.

A major clue comes early in the story, when two men collecting for charity arrive at Scrooge’s office. After asking Scrooge for a donation to help the poor and needy, Scrooge responds: “Are there no prisons? And the Union workhouses? Are they still in operation? The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigor?”

He goes on to say, “I help to support the establishments I have mentioned — they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there.”

Modern translation: I pay taxes to support the welfare state, why should I give money to you?

Turns out, that’s a decidedly liberal viewpoint.

Studies have consistently shown that big-government liberals donate far less money to private charities than conservatives. In his book “Who Really Cares,” Arthur Brooks notes that households headed by conservatives give 30% more to charity than households headed by liberals. Another study found that even poor conservatives donate more than rich liberals .

There are other facets to Scrooge’s character that line up better with modern liberals.

During that same conversation, Scrooge says it might be better for the poor who are unwilling to go on welfare to die “and decrease the surplus population.”

Cold and heartless, yes. But which side is always bemoaning overpopulation? From Paul Ehrlich in the late 1960s to environmentalists today, it’s been a fixation of the left, not the right.

Al Gore, for example, once urged making “fertility management ubiquitously available” to fight the scourge of carbon-producing people.

Also like most liberals today, Scrooge was clearly a religious skeptic and not a churchgoer. In fact, Dickens points out that one of the first things Scrooge does on the Christmas morning after his visits by the spirits is get on his knees and pray, and then go to church.

A 2012 study in Social Psychological and Personality Science concluded that “religious individuals tend to be more conservative.” A Gallup survey found that 55% of conservatives, but just 27% of liberals, are “frequent” churchgoers. And a Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey found that religious conservatives outnumber religious liberals in America nearly four to one.

Scrooge was also unhappy, a mood found more frequently on the left. Pew Research, for example, found that conservative were 68% more likely to say they were “very happy” than liberals, and that this “happiness gap” has existed since 1972.

Want more?

The fact that Scrooge was single and childless puts him on the left side of today’s political spectrum.

Writing in the New York Times, Brooks notes that 53% of conservatives are married, vs. 33% of liberals, “and almost none of the gap is due to the fact that liberals tend to be younger.” Conservatives also have more kids than liberals.

Finally, lest you think Scrooge was intolerant — the one sin the left still abhors — consider how he instructs his nephew on the virtues of tolerance.

“Keep Christmas in your own way,” he tells Fred, “and let me keep it in mine.”

QED. (IBD)

Merry Christmas to all, and to all a Good Night! 🙂

I can… 🙂

 

 

The Twinkie Clue Game

Thomas Purcell: As the fictional Senator Smith once said ‘Well, you all think I’m licked. Well I’m not licked.  I’m going to stay right here and fight for this lost cause, even if this room gets filled with lies like these! When the Taylors and all their armies come marching into this place, somebody’ll listen to me”

That’s right, the conservatives need to hunker down and look themselves in the mirror and start bringing up candidates that can properly defend the American ideal of a smaller government, free markets and a strong defense. They need to bring that argument to the American people again and again and pound it home, and realize that you’ll never do it with candidates like Mitt Romney; you do it with candidates like Ronald Reagan. The American ideal of conservatism can’t be sold and packaged out of a corporate boardroom with slick ads and jingles; it has to explain in simple terms and by giving Americans reasonable explanations and facts.

It’s not about moving to the right or the left, it’s about truth. It means we need to reach out to minorities and not say ‘you are wrong’, it means you say ‘here’s why we are right’. It’s about fighting the good fight with people who believe in the cause of minimal government, not wealthy industrialists who see to increase profits at the expense of ideology.

The Republican Party needs to change; it needs to find itself and the roots of what they believe in. It needs to get off the mantra of appealing to special interests, from the religious right to the boardroom babies. You won’t find that ideology or those persons in the Rockefeller Republicans, it’s got to come from the Goldwater and Reagan crowd. It comes from unifying the party factions from the Federal Bank Paulites to the pro-marijuana Libertarians to the hawkish maverick McCain’s.

Getting back to the roots of conservatism means it hat to start at the bottom, like the liberals did. You have to run for the school boards and local councils before you run for President. Real societal change comes from these places—you can’t hope to win a Republican Presidency if the man in the street has been taught to hate what he stands for. The liberals did not sell their bill of goods with Obama with one election, it was 25 years in the making.

I will fight as I know how best to—with my heart and mind and conviction, on one simple fact and basic message of conservatism: That government that governs least governs best, and that all power eventually corrupts those that wield it.

I’m not going anywhere; I’m going to get louder. I’m going to fight leftism in the schools, the radio, and the papers. I’ll fight them on the beaches, in the mountains and in the halls of state houses. I’ll fight them with blood, bone and sinew. I’ll fight them until the last breath; the last ounce of strength escapes me, until government silences me by smothering me with the pillow of Obamacare. You want to roll over and just die, be my guest. Not me, I’m not quitting. I refuse to accept that people want to live in a leftist police state; not when I know they merely have been fooled into thinking that government is the fountain of all that is good.

I plan to be the iron bar of conservatism, till death do my part, and only until the rest of this strange and wonderful country starts thinking that way, will things ever change for the better.

Smith had it right-  “And in this world today, full of hatred, a man who knows that one rule has a great trust… you know that you fight for the lost causes harder than for any others. Yes, you even die for them”

So go ahead and make your deals Mr. Boehner. The left can continue to spread its vile lies that government knows best. 

I’m not going anywhere. Neither is conservatism. Eventually, somebody’ll listen. Hopefully it won’t be too late by then.

But I doubt it.

Why?

Simple. Listen to what Richard “I’m not a Psycho” Trumpka of the AFL-CIO had to say about the liquidation of Hostess Brands on Friday…

“What’s happening with Hostess Brands is a microcosm of what’s wrong with America, as Bain-style Wall Street vultures make themselves rich by making America poor,” Trumka said in a public statement. “Crony capitalism and consistently poor management drove Hostess into the ground, but its workers are paying the price.”

He’s either completely dishonest, disillusion or insanely partisan to the point of Orwellian deceit.

And thats the Left for you.

After all, how many Crony capitalist failures in “green” energy have they had? Or Union Bailouts? and no one cares about them at all??

And that’s the din we have to shout against.

I don’t think the Republicans have the balls for it.

Last week, thousands of Hostess union member employees went on strike because of cut wages and benefits, The Associated Press reported Friday.

Hostess has said the company was unprofitable, in part due to union workers’ demands. (The workers who went on strike were members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union.)

Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh fired back at Trumka on his radio program Friday.

“[Obama] gets to blame Romney, Bain Capital and the Republicans for the fact that the company’s failed. And at the same time he gets to blame capitalism, crony capitalism. That’s Trumka’s word here. Crony capitalism, Bain-style, Wall Street vultures,” Limbaugh said, according to a show transcript. “See, you and I, we sit here, we hear that, we say nobody is gonna believe that, until we stop and realize that over half the country already thinks it.”

Limbaugh said that Trumka was rehashing the same old attacks that unions and the left have used against Romney, fitting a story line most of the public is already familiar with.

“Trumka didn’t have to even tell his voters, they already know. He was just confirming it for ‘em. Al-Qaeda’s alive, Twinkies are dead,” Limbaugh said.

The kicker?

“But Osama was killed by Obama, and Hostess was killed by the Republicans,” Limbaugh said. (Politico)

So if the Republicans roll over and kiss Liberal ass they will weaken themselves and if they stay strong, EVERYTHING that the left does to destroy this country will be their fault. (and if they weaken themselves EVERYTHING will still be their fault but they’re will evidence to point to just like the Debt Ceiling Cave-in.)

And ONLY the Republicans will be “partisan” and “divisive” and “obstructionist”.

That’s why this election was the end of America.

Simple as that.

It was a Twinkie in Texas with a Ministry of Truth sledgehammer…

In Consequential

Elections have Consequences:

President Obama’s election victory ensured his Affordable Care Act would remain the centerpiece of his first term in power – but that has left some business owners baulking at the extra cost Obamacare will bring.

Florida based restaurant boss John Metz, who runs approximately 40 Denny’s and owns the Hurricane Grill & Wings franchise has decided to offset that by adding a five percent surcharge to customers’ bills and will reduce his employees’ hours.

With Obamacare due to be fully implemented in January 2014, Metz has justified his move by claiming it is ‘the only alternative. I’ve got to pass on the cost to the customer.

The fast-food business owner is set to hold meetings at his restaurants in December where he will tell employees, ‘that because of Obamacare, we are going to be cutting front-of-the-house employees to under 30 hours, effective immediately.’

Obamacare requires businesses or franchises with more than 50 workers must offer an approved insurance plan or pay a penalty of $2,000 for each full-time worker over 30 workers.

The program mandates that only employees working more than 30 hours a week are covered under their employers health insurance plan, chains like Olive Garden and Red Lobster are already considering reduced worker hours. (KFYI)

President Obama and the heads of several labor unions and prominent liberal groups met at the White House on Tuesday at an event that was more pep rally than negotiating session.

“The president has been very clear for quite a while now on the tax cuts on the wealthiest 2 percent — that they need to be eliminated,” said Dennis Van Roekel, the head of the National Education Association (NEA). “Of course, there was no disagreement in that room.”

At the meeting itself and in conversations afterward, activists were keen to stress agreement with the president on the tax issue. 

“It was a great meeting. The president was really standing firm on taxes. Everyone talked about how much they have the president’s back in this fight,” Neera Tanden, the president of the Center for American Progress, said afterward.

Attendees said Obama was “very clear” on where he stood on taxes. “He’s not just clear, he didn’t just draw a line in the sand, he spray-painted it,” one participant said.

This is Obama’s “new ideas” and his seeking “compromise” with the Republicans on this issue, by the way. 🙂

Obama told the participants that the “campaign isn’t over,” and asked for their help.

Don’t that just give you the warm fuzzies? 🙂

Hostess Brands CEO warned the company will liquidate unless striking workers returned to the job by the end of the day on Thursday. Now, that four o’clock Central Time deadline has come and gone.

“We simply do not have the financial resources to survive an ongoing national strike,” Gregory Rayburn said in a statement on Wednesday.

Hostess has not made any official announcement beyond the CEO’s statement. Any update on liquidation would come on Friday.

Eyewitness News has learned insurance, health and welfare benefits for striking workers have been cancelled.

Workers are protesting a contract imposed by a bankruptcy court. The contract calls for an 8 percent pay cut in addition to health care and pension changes. The bakers union has called the contract “outrageous.”

A liquidation would result in some 18,000 workers losing their jobs and an uncertain future for American icons Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Wonder Bread.

Win the Strike, Lose your Jobs. Good Going guys!

I guess they’ll have to go on the public dole instead of the union dole and apply for some Obama Money and an Obama Phone.

We’ll see.

Perhaps what all these petulant employees don’t realize is that companies are in business to earn a profit.  If they can’t, there is nothing with which to pay employees (or hire more of them).  So while it may be emotionally satisfying to “stick it to the man” through strikes and protests, perhaps the disgruntled should take a look around, realize that the economy isn’t too great, and keep in mind that they may end up doing serious damage to companies they are counting on to help them feed their families.

Sure, if the companies go out of business, the unemployed will get government benefits.. . for awhile.  But after awhile, if too many businesses go under, who exactly is supposed to provide the tax revenues that subsidize those benefits? (townhall)

Why, THE RICH of course!!

Oh right, the employers are the rich, whoops! 🙂

The Future So Bright I have to Spin Dry

The Obama administration is 0-for-3 in meeting economic expectations. In 2009, President Obama and his advisers believed the bountiful stimulus package would give the economy a strong jolt. It didn’t, and still hasn’t. In 2010, Obama declared Recovery Summer and predicted a surge in employment. The economy lost 283,000 jobs over the summer. This year, Obama expected a significant ratcheting up of jobs and growth. There’s been a ratcheting down. Presidenting for Dummies Gary Locke The White House always has an excuse. Obama’s economic policies are never at fault. The problem in 2009, according to Obama? The economy was in worse shape than he’d feared when he took office. In 2010, economic adviser Christina Romer said the dip in jobs was unexpected. No doubt it was, but that’s a lame explanation. And Obama stubbornly refused to express regret for having proclaimed Recovery Summer in the first place. Now, two years after the recession officially ended, the excuses for economic stagnation and puny job growth are stale and implausible. Obama didn’t offer any in an economic speech in Toledo a few hours after bad job numbers for May were released last week. Romer’s replacement, Austan Goolsbee, dismissed the 9.1 percent jobless rate as a bump “along the road to recovery.” House Democratic whip Steny Hoyer blamed the Bush administration—really, he did. Yet Obama labors on as if his policies are working, only a bit more slowly than he’d anticipated. In two and a half years in the White House, he appears to have learned nothing about what stirs the economy and produces jobs and growth. Evidence of failure, like 1.8 percent growth in the first quarter of 2011, matters little. Rather than a midterm course correction, Obama wants more of the same, lots more. (Fred Barnes)

According to the unemployment data released this morning, the economy added only 54,000 jobs, pushing the unemployment rate up to 9.1 percent. However, this report from MarketWatch suggests the data is much worse than that:

McDonald’s ran a big hiring day on April 19 — after the Labor Department’s April survey for the payrolls report was conducted — in which 62,000 jobs were added. That’s not a net number, of course, and seasonal adjustment will reduce the Hamburglar impact on payrolls. (In simpler terms — restaurants always staff up for the summer; the Labor Department makes allowance for this effect.) Morgan Stanley estimates McDonald’s hiring will boost the overall number by 25,000 to 30,000. The Labor Department won’t detail an exact McDonald’s figure — they won’t identify any company they survey — but there will be data in the report to give a rough estimate.

If Morgan Stanley is correct, about half of last month’s job growth came from the venerable fast-food chain. That is hardly the sign of a healthy economy. (Weekly Standard).

And McDonalds was the first of over 1,300+ companies and organization (and even states) to get ObamaCare waivers. Coincidence?? 🙂

But you won’t hear it from the Mainstream Ministry of Truth Press or even our Dear Leader.

President Barack Obama says the U.S. economy is still facing challenges and it is going to take more time to mend the wounds inflicted by the recession.

So you need to re-elect him in 2012 so he can finish the job. <<wink wink>>

“Every time we look at those numbers we don’t get too excited by what those numbers say, or we don’t get too disappointed by what those numbers say. What we’re looking at is the overall trend,” spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters traveling with the president on Air Force One. “If you look at where we’ve come from, the turnaround is pretty dramatic.”

He’s serious, folks. Really, he’s serious…

Distancing himself from new economic sputters, President Barack Obama on Saturday declared that recent “headwinds” were the result of high gasoline prices, Japan’s disastrous earthquake and jitters over a European fiscal crisis. He cited the U.S. auto industry’s resurgence as an inspiration for a broader recovery.

“We’re a people who don’t give up, who do big things, who shape our own destiny,” the president said in his weekly radio and Internet address.

<<Barf bag on Standby>>

Sen Lamar Alexander (R-TN) cited a perfect Obama example of the ‘right kind’ of job our Dear Leader wants and if he can’t get it, f*ck it!

He cited the case of Boeing, which was accused last month by the National Labor Relations Board of retaliating against union workers in Washington state who went on strike in 2008 by locating a new assembly line for its 787 aircraft in South Carolina, a state with right-to-work laws. The NLRB is seeking a court order that would force Boeing to return all 787 assembly work to Washington.

Obama promoted “investments” in education and technology, and touted his management of the auto industry, which he said saved millions of jobs.

The Bush and Obama administrations pumped $80 billion in taxpayer money into Chrysler and GM, with Obama guiding the companies into bankruptcy. The companies are now reporting profits, Chrysler has paid back all but $1.3 billion of its federal infusion, and the White House declared this week that the overall loss to taxpayers will be $14 billion, far less than initially expected.

And that’s the Good News!? 😦

The president also called for spending cuts and hinted at tax increases. “We’ve got to live within our means, everybody’s got to do their part,” he said. ”Middle-class workers like you, though, shouldn’t be bearing all the burden.  You work too hard for someone to ask you to pay more so that somebody who’s making millions or billions of dollars can pay less.”

Obama evoked national pride: “[W]e are people who will forge a better future because that is what we do… when we come together, no-one can stop us” – then reprised his ‘Win the Future’ slogan and declared that “we can live out the American dream again… that’s what drives me every day I step into the Oval office.”

<<excuse me>>  RALPH!….

“We’re still feeling the sting of the recession… even though the economy is growing, even though it has created more than 2 million jobs in the last 15 months,” 

<<RALPH>>

Consider the evidence: We already know that (a) the president appointed a debt commission, then ignored its recommendations on ideological grounds; (b) the White House has already released its 2012 budget, which was so disastrous that it received zero votes in the Democrat-controlled Senate; (c) President Obama offered a grand new “vision” for entitlement reform in April, which conspicuously lacked any actual solutions; and (d) Democrats everywhere are deliberately avoiding committing to any plan of their own, opting instead to focus their attention on demagoguing and lying about Paul Ryan’s responsible alternative.  Against that backdrop, ta da! (Nice catch by ABC Newsman Jake Tapper, based on his exchange with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney):

    TAPPER:  In the meeting yesterday with House Republicans, a number of the House Republicans said to the president that they wanted him to introduce a budget that was score-able — that CBO could actually assess — instead of what he introduced, the broad outlines and the April speech at GW, and the president seemed to indicate he was not going to do that.  You — I think you said from the podium that he wanted something score-able that was part of a compromise, not his own separate budget proposal.  Why not?  If the Republicans in the House are saying it would help the negotiating process to have a score-able —

    CARNEY:  Well, we heard two things — we heard two things from the Republicans yesterday:  one from the speaker that we need to get these negotiations wrapped up and finished in the next few weeks, and that the president should put forward a new plan, a new proposal, that should make its way through Congress and be scored.  I don’t think those are compatible.

    Everyone knows what the president’s position is, what his plan is, the parameters of his plan.  It’s quite clear.  The Democrats are aware of it.  Republicans are aware of it.  The president’s spoken about it at length.

    And that is what the vice president brought to the table for these negotiations.  We are at a point now where we don’t need new plans.  We need to find common ground around the shared goal of significant deficit reduction and come together, hold hands, and agree that we’re going to get this done and find as much common ground as we can in what the president believes needs to be a balanced approach towards deficit reduction — because as I said earlier, it is not a goal unto itself.

Translation: Uh, we have a plan!  (They don’t).  It’s very clear! (By definition, it isn’t)  So, we don’t need any, you know, score-able blueprints.  We need bipartisan consensus!  (Just like Simpson/Bowles?)  Another gutless runaround from Democrats on entitlements — color me shocked.  Hey, no worries — it’s not as if Medicare is cataclysmically speeding toward insolvency, or anything. (Guy Benson).

So what if the National Debt is over $14 Trillion. The Democrats haven’t passed a budget is April 2009. There’s a Double Dip recession on the horizon. Your house is worthless…But Obama is still in Large and In Charge!

Re-Elect him! He’s wonderful!

Be Happy!

Hope and Change II is on the way…

The Next Disney Fantasy…

This Election Brought to you by…

So are we headed for the same Corporatization of Elections that we have, say in, Stadiums. Like the ones here Locally, University of Phoenix where the Cardinal play. Where the University of Phoenix won the “naming rights” by paying the Cardinals lots of Money.

The same with US Air Arena (built as America West- and I still call it that).

Or Chase Field (built as Bank One Ballpark- or “BOB” as I still call it).

So as we going to have McElections??

These election results brought to you by…

Or are we already there to begin with.

WSJ:  Corporations, labor unions and other political entities are gearing up to play a larger role in influencing elections in 2010 and beyond after a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down elements of campaign-finance law.

The Supreme Court on Thursday made it easier for entities to influence elections for Congress and the White House by stripping away rules that limited their ability to fund campaign advertisements. The court also struck down a part of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law that prevented independent political groups from running advertisements within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election.

The question now is whether corporations and labor unions will take advantage of their new freedom. For the past decade, labor unions have been more aggressive than corporations in finding legal ways to fund independent political campaigns. But the relaxation of campaign-spending restrictions could clear the way for groups from all points along the political spectrum to spend more, and target more of that spending in the critical final days of a campaign.

Or will be get EVEN MORE Negative Attack ads in this hyper-partisan atmosphere?

Corporations, unions and wealthy individuals have sought to influence elections for decades by funding their own independent campaigns for or against candidates.

In the 2004 election, outside groups spent more than $550 million on their own campaigns, more than double what they spent in the 2000 campaign. Most of these independent efforts were bankrolled by labor unions and wealthy Democrats and were designed to help Democrats at the polls.

WSJ’s Ashby Jones speaks to Kelsey Hubbard on the News Hub about the Supreme Court’s decision today striking down limits on corporate political spending.

The two largest independent groups in 2004—America Coming Together and the Media Fund—spent a total of $136 million in an effort to elect Democrats. The Service Employees International Union spent $48 million, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

During the 2008 election cycle, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents businesses, led all other independent groups by spending $36.4 million, mainly to help elect Republicans to the Senate, according to the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute, which tracks spending by outside groups. The second-largest organization was the labor union American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which spent $30.7 million. The Service Employees International Union spent $27 million.

William McGinley, a campaign finance lawyer with Patton Boggs who works with Republicans, said Democratic-leaning organizations “have outspent their conservative counterparts during the last few years, and now is the time for conservatives to re-engage.”

I would argue we are already there.

And have been for a long time.

Special Interest groups rule Washington D.C.

You only have to look as far as the Labor Unions who objected to the “Cadillac Plan” tax in the now largely defunct Health Care Reform.

They screamed and yelled and got special treatment.

AARP got bought off.

The U.S Chamber of Commerce got shut out because it wouldn’t be bought off.

The AMA got bought off.

Whole States (Nebraska, Louisiana and Florida) got bought off.

So the Politicians get bought off by the Special Interests, and they by them off too.

There is no place for the American people in this equation.

Only at the Ballot box.

And Massachusetts proved that.

The Political earthquake that that set off is still being assessed.

Obama Jan 14,2009: “If Republicans want to campaign against what we’ve done by standing up for the status quo and for insurance companies over American families and businesses, that is a fight I want to have.”

But on Jan 19th, the people spoke.

And the entire country changed.

That’s all, We the People have.

That’s our only weapon.

Charles Krauthammer:  After Coakley’s defeat, Obama pretended that the real cause was a generalized anger and frustration “not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

Let’s get this straight: The antipathy to George W. Bush is so enduring and powerful that … it just elected a Republican senator in Massachusetts? Why, the man is omnipotent.

The evidence was unmistakable: Independents, who in 2008 elected Obama, swung massively against the Democrats: dropping 16 points in Virginia, 21 in New Jersey.

On Tuesday, it was even worse: Independents, who went 2-to-1 Republican in Virginia and New Jersey, now went 3-to-1 Republican in hyper-blue Massachusetts.

But you have to wonder, how many Anti-Bush attack ads will be airing soon because that’s still the main demon and main excuse of the Left in this country.

Will they run against a past President this fall?

And will you buy it?

An astonishing 56% of Massachusetts voters, according to Rasmussen, called health care their top issue. In a Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates poll, 78% of Brown voters said their vote was intended to stop ObamaCare. Only a quarter of all voters in the Rasmussen poll cited the economy as their top issue, nicely refuting the Democratic view that Massachusetts was just the usual anti-incumbent resentment you expect in bad economic times.

So, my advice, is to get a DVR between now an November and record your shows and fast forward through all the attack ads or else you may just go mad.

The SEIU has been one of the largest donors to outside political groups in the past decade. On Thursday, the organization denounced the court decision, saying it opened the door for corporations to outspend unions.

“I don’t think working people would ever have as much to spend as corporations. For us, being able to spend a few extra dollars isn’t worth allowing decisions to be made from boardrooms instead of the polling booth,” said union spokeswoman Lori Lodes.(Bloomberg)

But you don’t want them decided at the polling booth, you want them decided in D.C. That’s why you had a special meeting with The White House to pitch a fit over the “Cadillac plans” and got exempted from them for five years, while the normal average American (92% non-union) was not.

But at least we had some good news:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said her chamber lacks the votes to pass the Senate’s health-care legislation, dashing hopes of a quick resolution for President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority.

“In its present form, without change, I don’t think it’s possible to pass the Senate bill in the House,” Pelosi told reporters today in Washington. “We are not in a big rush,” Pelosi said. Congress will “take the time it needs to consider the options,” she said.

That doesn’t mean they will stop trying. Oh no, that will never happen.

But at least for this moment, the Wicked Witch is dead. Massachusetts, of all places, dropped a House on Nancy Pelosi. 🙂

“The sense is we shouldn’t drop the subject, but maybe we need to look at some pieces of it,” said Representative Jose Serrano, a New York Democrat.

That would fit with a suggestion Obama made yesterday.

“I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements in the package that people agree on,” Obama said in an interview with ABC News broadcast last night.

So, the people still have the ultimate power.

The Congress is already bought and paid for by Special Interests.

I don’t see much of a change.

But WE THE PEOPLE still elect these people. So ultimately, regardless, we have the last say.

But that doesn’t preclude the Corporations and other Interests  from picking the Candidates as many Special Interest Groups do now.

So we may still get Twiddle-Dee and Twiddle-Dumber.

That’s when we have to raise our standards. No rubber stamps. No “I voted for the Democrat/Republican just because I am a Democrat/Republican”.

Be a savvier shopper than that.

Yes, that will require time and dedication while your working and relaxing and playing with the kids.

But, no one said Democracy was easy.

Because we can’t hope to out spend the Special Interests in Washington now.

But we get the Vote.

We have to use what tools we do have.

Now, more than ever.

With characteristic condescension, they contemptuously dismissed the (tea party) protests as the mere excrescences of a redneck, retrograde, probably racist rabble.

You would think lefties could discern a proletarian vanguard when they see one. Yet they kept denying the reality of the rising opposition to Obama’s social democratic agenda when summer turned to fall and Virginia and New Jersey turned Republican in the year’s two gubernatorial elections.

That something is substance — political ideas and legislative agendas.

Democrats, if they wish, can write off their Massachusetts humiliation to high unemployment, to Coakley or, the current favorite among sophisticates, to generalized anger. That implies an inchoate, unthinking lashing-out at whoever happens to be in power — even at your liberal betters who are forcing on you an agenda that you can’t even see is in your own interest.

Democrats must so rationalize, otherwise they must take democracy seriously and ask themselves: If the people really don’t want it, could they possibly have a point?

“If you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call,” said moderate — and sentient — Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, “there’s no hope of waking up.”

I say: Let them sleep.

Good Night. Sleep Tight. Don’t let the Special Interest Bugs Bite. 🙂