Me

It’s all about me.

Screw you.

That’s what we have now.

Thomas Sowell: The biggest myth about labor unions is that unions are for the workers. Unions are for unions, just as corporations are for corporations and politicians are for politicians.

Nothing shows the utter cynicism of the unions and the politicians who do their bidding like the so-called “Employee Free Choice Act” that the Obama administration tried to push through Congress. Employees’ free choice as to whether or not to join a union is precisely what that legislation would destroy.

Workers already have a free choice in secret-ballot elections conducted under existing laws. As more and more workers in the private sector have voted to reject having a union represent them, the unions’ answer has been to take away secret-ballot elections.

Under the “Employee Free Choice Act,” unions would not have to win in secret-ballot elections in order to represent the workers. Instead, union representatives could simply collect signatures from the workers until they had a majority.

Why do we have secret ballots in the first place, whether in elections for unions or elections for government officials? To prevent intimidation and allow people to vote how they want to, without fear of retaliation.

This is a crucial right that unions want to take away from workers. The actions of union mobs in Wisconsin, Ohio and elsewhere give us a free home demonstration of how little they respect the rights of those who disagree with them and how much they rely on harassment and threats to get what they want.

It takes world-class chutzpah to call circumventing secret ballots the “Employee Free Choice Act.” To unions, workers are just the raw material used to create union power, just as iron ore is the raw material used by U.S. Steel and bauxite is the raw material used by the Aluminum Company of America.

The most fundamental fact about labor unions is that they do not create any wealth. They are one of a growing number of institutions which specialize in siphoning off wealth created by others, whether those others are businesses or the taxpayers.

There are limits to how long unions can siphon off money from businesses, without facing serious economic repercussions.

The most famous labor union leader, the legendary John L. Lewis, head of the United Mine Workers from 1920 to 1960, secured rising wages and job benefits for the coal miners, far beyond what they could have gotten out of a free market based on supply and demand.

But there is no free lunch.

An economist at the University of Chicago called John L. Lewis “the world’s greatest oil salesman.”
His strikes that interrupted the supply of coal, as well as the resulting wage increases that raised its price, caused many individuals and businesses to switch from using coal to using oil, leading to reduced employment of coal miners. The higher wage rates also led coal companies to replace many miners with machines.

The net result was a huge decline in employment in the coal mining industry, leaving many mining towns virtually ghost towns by the 1960s. There is no free lunch.

Similar things happened in the unionized steel industry and in the unionized automobile industry. At one time, U.S. Steel was the largest steel producer in the world and General Motors the largest automobile manufacturer. No more. Their unions were riding high in their heyday, but they too discovered that there is no free lunch, as their members lost jobs by the hundreds of thousands.

Workers have also learned that there is no free lunch, which is why they have, over the years, increasingly voted against being represented by unions in secret ballot elections.

One set of workers, however, remained largely immune to such repercussions. These are government workers represented by public sector unions.

While oil could replace coal, while U.S. Steel dropped from number one in the world to number ten, and Toyota could replace General Motors as the world’s leading producer of cars, government is a monopoly. Nobody is likely to replace the federal or state bureaucracies, no matter how much money the unions drain from the taxpayers.

That is why government unions continue to thrive while private sector unions decline. Taxpayers provide their free lunch.

Then there’s Obama and The Democrats jockeying for 2012.

The political fortunes of Senate Democrats and President Obama are moving in opposite directions, complicating their efforts to win a titanic battle against Republicans over federal spending.

Obama’s reelection forecast has improved since the midterms, when he looked like a one-term president. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, must defend 23 seats next year, handing Republicans a strong chance to win back the upper chamber even if Obama cruises to a second term.

The dynamic opens the door to intra-party tension that has already broken through the surface unity.

What’s political hay for the president and White House, after all, isn’t necessarily good for his party’s majority in the Senate. That’s one reason Obama has left much of the work of dealing with Republicans on spending cuts to party leaders in the House and Senate.

“I imagine the president doesn’t want to really get his hands dirty with this until he can walk away with an agreement, which isn’t helping the leadership at the moment,” said one Democratic strategist. “Now, does that have something to do with 2012? Sure it does.”

The short-term result, say several Capitol Hill staffers, is that the “every man for himself” attitude of an election year has arrived even sooner than expected. Senate Democrats wonder if or when the White
House will take the reins in a budget fight that has several of their vulnerable colleagues in a vise.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) used a floor speech to criticize Obama for not being a leader in the spending fight.

A few days later, several Democratic senators gave White House officials an earful after Vice President Biden was appointed to lead talks on a spending deal, and then promptly left the country.

The tension, said Democratic pollster Stefan Hankin, is that if one side of the budget debate on Capitol Hill bends and an agreement is reached, “Obama can look like the great arbitrator and he wins.”

For the White House, Hankin added, it doesn’t much matter which side blinks. “If there’s an agreement, it will most likely be viewed as the president working with Republicans. So the president stands to get much more credit than Senate Democrats do,” he said.

And the compliant Mainstream Media will be more than happy to be the cheerleaders for him.

After all, it’s all about them too. 🙂

Then there’s Social Security:

Everyone knows that the U.S. budget is being devoured by entitlements. Everyone also knows that of the Big Three – Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security – Social Security is the most solvable.

Back-of-an-envelope solvable: Raise the retirement age, tweak the indexing formula (from wage inflation to price inflation) and means-test so that Warren Buffett’s check gets redirected to a senior in need.

The relative ease of the fix is what makes President Obama’s Social Security strategy so shocking. The new line from the White House is: no need to fix it because there is no problem. As Office of Management and Budget Director Jack Lew wrote in USA Today just a few weeks ago, the trust fund is solvent until 2037. Therefore, Social Security is off the table in debt-reduction talks.

This claim is a breathtaking fraud.

The pretense is that a flush trust fund will pay retirees for the next 26 years. Lovely, except for one thing: The Social Security trust fund is a fiction.

If you don’t believe me, listen to the OMB’s own explanation (in the Clinton administration budget for fiscal year 2000 under then-Director Jack Lew, the very same). The OMB explained that these trust fund “balances” are nothing more than a “bookkeeping” device. “They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits.” In other words, the Social Security trust fund contains – nothing.

Here’s why. When your FICA tax is taken out of your paycheck, it does not get squirreled away in some lockbox in West Virginia where it’s kept until you and your contemporaries retire. Most goes out immediately to pay current retirees, and the rest (say, $100) goes to the U.S. Treasury – and is spent. On roads, bridges, national defense, public television, whatever – spent, gone.

In return for that $100, the Treasury sends the Social Security Administration a piece of paper that says: IOU $100. There are countless such pieces of paper in the lockbox. They are called “special issue” bonds.

Special they are: They are worthless. As the OMB explained, they are nothing more than “claims on the Treasury (i.e., promises) that, when redeemed (when you retire and are awaiting your check), will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures.” That’s what it means to have a so-called trust fund with no “real economic assets.” When you retire, the “trust fund” will have to go to the Treasury for the money for your Social Security check.

Bottom line? The OMB again: “The existence of large trust fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the government’s ability to pay benefits.” No impact: The lockbox, the balances, the little pieces of paper, amount to nothing.

So that when Jack Lew tells you that there are trillions in this lockbox that keep the system solvent until 2037, he is perpetrating a fiction certified as such by his own OMB. What happens when you retire? Your Social Security will come out of the taxes and borrowing of that fiscal year.

Why is this a problem? Because as of 2010, the pay-as-you-go Social Security system is in the red. For decades it had been in the black, taking in more in FICA taxes than it sent out in Social Security benefits. The surplus, scooped up by the Treasury, reduced the federal debt by tens of billions. But demography is destiny. The ratio of workers to retirees is shrinking year by year. Instead of Social Security producing annual surpluses that reduce the federal deficit, it is now producing shortfalls that increase the federal deficit – $37 billion in 2010. It will only get worse as the baby boomers retire.

That’s what makes this administration’s claim that Social Security is solvent so cynical. The Republicans have said that their April budget will contain real entitlement reform. Obama is preparing the ground to demagogue Social Security right through the 2012 elections. The ad writes itself: Those heartless Republicans don’t just want to throw Granny in the snow, they want to throw Granny in the snow to solve a problem that doesn’t even exist! Vote Obama.

On Tuesday, Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia denounced Obama for lack of leadership on the debt. It’s worse than that. Obama is showing leadership. With Lew’s preposterous claim that Social Security is solvent for 26 years, Obama is preparing to lead the charge against entitlement reform as his ticket to reelection. (Charles Krauthammer)

And again, the Media will be right their to pump up the Talking Points for Obama and not be very critical of his outrageous claims.

Why?

What else, it’s all about them! 🙂

Screw you.

Next we’ll look at ONE TRILLION dollars. This is that number we’ve been hearing about so much. What is a trillion dollars? Well, it’s a million million. It’s a thousand billion. It’s a one followed by 12 zeros.

You ready for this? It’s pretty surprising. Go ahead… Scroll down…

Ladies and gentlemen… I give you $1 trillion dollars…(in $10,000 bundles)trillion

And the National Debt is FOURTEEN TIMES THIS!!!
But not worry, according to Michael Moore “we aren’t broke” and this is really a problem.
And the Republicans and Democrats are so obsessed with 2012 re-election that they are talking about cut $61 Billion from this fiscal year and the vote fails!!
Doesn’t it give you confidence that it’s not all about them. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Groupthink

I found this funny: “New Tone”– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY5T1Pdiols

Funniest Editorial Cartoon in Years:

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

******************************************************

Crimethink is the Newspeak word for thoughtcrime (thoughts that are unorthodox, or are outside the official government platform), as well as the verb meaning “to commit thoughtcrime”. Goodthink, which is approved by the Party, is the opposite of crimethink.

Groupthink is a type of thought within a deeply cohesive in-group whose members try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas.

To make groupthink testable, Irving Janis devised eight symptoms indicative of groupthink (1977).

  1. Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking.
  2. Rationalizing warnings that might challenge the group’s assumptions.
  3. Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions.
  4. Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, evil, biased, spiteful, impotent, or stupid.
  5. Direct pressure to conform placed on any member who questions the group, couched in terms of “disloyalty”.
  6. Self-censorship of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus.
  7. Illusions of unanimity among group members, silence is viewed as agreement.
  8. Mind guards — self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting information.

The 2009 law that requires Wisconsin teachers to teach labor union and collective bargaining history to the state’s kids is seen by union bosses in the state as a means to promote their cause, frame labor’s message in a favorable light and increase membership.

Political propaganda as “education”, gee Liberals never do that!!! 😦

Self-serving Ideology as “education”, Liberals never do that! 😦

I’m sure it will be “fair” and “balanced”. 😦

When The Daily Caller reported that the state passed such a law in December 2009, it wasn’t clear that union organizers planned to utilize it to further their agenda. Newly uncovered information from an April 2010 conference, the Wisconsin Labor History Society, a pro-union group that pushed the new law through the all-Democrat state government in 2009, shows the state’s labor organizers and union bosses do indeed plan to use the controversial new law as a propaganda tool.

“I believe we are in the midst of an irrepressible labor conflict that has pitted the haves versus the have-nots,” said University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, history professor Andrew Kersten at the conference. “As Warren Buffett has said recently, ‘There is a class war, alright, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s waging it, and we’re winning.’ It’s not merely the money or the political power they crave, they seek to transform the way we think and act on a daily basis.”

At the conference meant to help teachers prepare new curricula to comply with the new AB 172 law, Kersten went on to say that teaching union history and “the struggles of working men and women and of unionists is vital to maintaining a healthy democracy.” In his speech, Kersten also attacked President Barack Obama for not focusing on labor unions in his 2010 State of the Union address, for not getting card-check legislation passed and for failing to get controversial former union lawyer Craig Becker appointed to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The history professor, who was supposed to be helping teachers prepare new classroom materials, also took a shot at then newly elected Sen. Scott Brown, Massachusetts Republican, for being the deciding vote against Becker on the NLRB.

“The reason why he rushed to take his seat in Washington, D.C., was not to block Obama’s medical and health insurance reforms, but to stop the appointment of Obama’s NLRB nomination, Craig Becker, the union lawyer and associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union,” Kersten said.

Union bosses at the conference included the state’s National Education Association (NEA) director, Hedy Eischeid, the state’s AFL-CIO president, David Newby and the president of Wisconsin’s American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Bryan Kennedy.

AFT is a union for those in higher education, so Kennedy talked about how he’d teach teachers to teach about unions. “I recognize that there is an important and special role that I have as a university educator to educate future teachers on how to educate young people about labor union history,” Kennedy said. “As educators, many of us are aware that the first exposure many teachers had to unions is when they graduated, took their first job and were told they were a member of the teachers union. If they didn’t grow up in a union household, what does that mean?”

Eischeid said it’s better to teach teachers about unions before they develop their curriculum, and wants to “connect it to them personally.”

“Many of our own folks don’t really even understand what labor has done for them. I think it really has to start with our members,” she said.

Newby said this is a battle everyone in Wisconsin has to fight, not just teachers, parents and students.

“We have got to convince both teachers and the citizens of the state that teaching labor history is appropriate and, in fact, is necessary, if students are to understand the history of this state and of this nation,” Newby said. “And, that’s really an assignment for all of us, whether you’re involved in this particular project of labor history in the schools or not. And, all of us need to be talking to our neighbors, our co-workers, our family and our friends to get them talking about it as well, particularly those that have kids.”

The AFL-CIO also provided textbooks on the subject for every high school library, according to Richard Grobschmidt, the state’s assistant superintendent at the Department of Public Instruction.

The union bosses and academics who spoke at the conference knew, too, that they’d have to defend the new law in the near future.

“Now that we have a law, we must defend it, tooth and nail, for our opponents won’t rest,” Kersten said, while railing on conservatism. “They’re angry about the changes in American politics and have, as you’ve noticed no doubt, tripped up many meaningful reforms in the state and across the nation. It may not be long before they begin to target our own new law, as they have so many others.” (DC)

Yeah, the other side of the argument is very,very evil!! 🙂

It must be destroyed. That’s the new tone. 🙂

Why should liberals want to change the public educational system when it is turning out the product they have been striving for years to produce?

Check out these real news headlines from the past several weeks and months about the state of U.S. public education across the country:

  • “U.S. teachers tell U.N. sex is a ‘spectrum’ – advocate mandatory classes to free students from ‘religion'”
  • “Principal orders Ten Commandments yanked from school lockers”
  • “Teens ask for more sex ed, greater condom availability”
  • “State university defines Christians as ‘oppressors'”
  • “Why Catholic schools score better than public schools”
  • “Teachers take charge to save ailing public schools”
  • “Schools’ mandatory Arabic classes create firestorm”
  • “District taking money, but censoring Christians?”
  • “No opting out of pro-gay school propaganda”
  • “District pays up for slamming student’s rosary”
  • “Judge cites homeschoolers for violating U.N. mandate – Police interrogate parents, confiscate their curriculum”
  • “Some say schools giving Muslims special treatment”

On Dec. 27, 1820, Thomas Jefferson wrote about his vision for the University of Virginia (chartered in 1819), “This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow the truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error as long as reason is left free to combat it.”

But what should happen 200 years later when our public schools and universities avoid the testing of truths? Or suppress alternate opinions because they are unpopular or politically incorrect? Or no longer tolerate opinions now considered errors or obsolete by the elite? What happens when sociopolitical agendas or scientific paradigms dominate academic views to the exclusion of a minority even being mentioned?

What happens when the political and public educational pendulum swings from concern for the tyranny of sectarianism in Jefferson’s day to secularism in ours? What happens when U.S. public schools become progressive indoctrination camps?

You get Today. You get the Public Sector Unions. You get the NEA and the AFT.

You get crap on a stick that cost an average of $10,000 per student and they can’t even read the f*cking diploma at the end of 16 years!

But they can be great mush heads for the Socialist Democrats!! 🙂

Polling firm of Luntz Research,notes that the 57 percent of faculty members represented in our most esteemed universities are Democrats (only 3 percent Republican) and 64 percent identify themselves as liberal (only 6 percent conservative). Moreover, 71 percent of them disagree that “news coverage of political and social issues reflects a liberal bias in the news media.” And the No. 1 answer they gave to the question, “Who has been the best president in the past 40 years?” was Bill Clinton (only 4 percent said Ronald Reagan).

This is why it is no surprise that the two largest teachers unions, the NEA and AFT, are the largest campaign contributors in the nation (giving more than the Teamsters, NRA or any other organization), and that 90 percent of their contributions fund Democratic candidates. In doing so, do we think such funding is going to balance traditional and conservative values in public schools?

Is this present, restrictive and one-sided educational environment that which Thomas Jefferson and other founders intended for the future generations of America? Absolutely not! Rather than encourage free thinking, the U.S. academic system has turned Jefferson’s plans for open education into our culture’s system of indoctrination. (Chuck Norris)
And that works for Liberals. Gotta get them young, before they figure out they’ve been had.
And better yet, control the Mainstream Media so they never have to find out!!
🙂
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Astroturf & Notes From The Left

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Doctors in white coats are standing outside the Wisconsin capitol in Madison, giving away fake doctor’s notes the way shirts are given out at basketball games. They’re a disgrace to our profession.

The news not only offends my professional pride and code of ethics, it also strikes me as a violation of their license to practice medicine.

The Wisconsin State Medical Examining Board of the Department of Regulation and Licensing should suspend these doctors for violating their Hippocratic Oath as well as their professional responsibility.

The 12.6 percent share of health-insurance costs that the new Wisconsin bill asks for from public employees is paltry by comparison to the 50 percent or more that many private employers now ask.

But if the doctors at the University of Wisconsin and the Medical College of Wisconsin who are writing these notes are so concerned about teachers and other employees being able to afford their health care, I’d suggest that these doctors (if they really are so altruistic) provide care to these public servants for free.

Are these disgraces to the profession unaware that the state of Wisconsin (as well as other states) is going bankrupt — even before ObamaCare forces huge new Medicaid costs on them?

The Wisconsin fake-note writers might also note that federal anti-trust law forbids physicians from engaging in collective bargaining or work stoppages. This law serves a purpose — it protects the American public from greed. The health of our patients would be threatened if we could go on strike, just as the education of the students of these protesting teachers is at stake here.

These doctors should value their medical degree more, before they lose the chance to use it to see actual patients.

Dr. Marc K. Siegel is a practicing internist in New York and a Fox News medical contributor. (NY Post)

Liberals don’t care. The law doesn’t apply to them.

But you know the Left is worried because now THEY HAVE A POLL to use as a Talking Point!!

It was conducted by the AFL-CIO, a Union. Guess what it said?

The Voters are with the protesters and hate Gov. Walker!!

I know, you’re shocked that a leftist poll done by a Union would side with the Union. It’s just so amazingly coincidental.

BTW:Average Salary In Wisconsin: $46,390
Salary raise last year: 4.7%
Salary raise over 10 years: 21.5%

The Daily Caller has broken out the salaries and benefits of teachers who have publicly entered the debate by commenting to the press.

Wisconsin’s 2010 Teacher of the Year, Leah Lechleiter-Luke of Mauston High School, told CNN the budget changes would force her to look for additional part-time work.

“When people say that public sector employees live high off the hog, I’d like to share that for 13 of my 19-year teaching career I have held a part-time job either in the summer or teaching night class at the local technical college,” Lechleiter-Luke told CNN. “In addition to tightening the belt even more and crossing our fingers that nothing breaks, I will need to find part-time work again.”

Lechleiter-Luke makes $54,928 in base salary and $32,213 in “fringe benefits,” which include health insurance, life insurance and retirement pay. (which she currently doesn’t pay for at all!)

Brad Lutes and his wife, Heather Lutes, told MSNBC’s Ed Schultz that Walker’s budget would hit them twice as hard.

“Having to explain to an 8- and 10-year old that the governor of your state basically wants to take money away from dad and mom? It’s just really, really frustrating,” Brad Lutes told Schultz.

He makes $49,412 in base salary with $27,987 in fringe benefits and his wife makes $50,240 with $9,413 in benefits. That’s $137,052 annually between the two of them.

ASTROTURF SALES SKYROCKET IN MADISON

The Community Agitater-In-Chief, Barack Obama, has sent his minions onto the battlefield to crush the State of Wisconsin’s government with his own apparatchiks and his narcissistic Union thugs.

All in the name of the children, and freedom of speech, of course. 🙂

So the teachers get fake doctor’s notes so they don’t have to show up and do their job and mobs of the Agitators minions shout down anyone who disagrees with them.

They have hateful, uncivil discourse and immature signs but don’t you dare call it hateful, uncivil, and immature because liberals are never hateful,uncivil or immature. 🙂  Just ask them.

And of course, they are geniuses and superior to everyone, especially YOU.

“The unions are the people who brought us a weekend. If we don’t do this now, our children will not have a weekend!” —One Protestor yelled out!

So the 88% of you who aren’t in a Union, you need bow down and kiss the ass of every Union member because they have brought you weekends!! Hallelujah!!

So why does anyone work on “the weekend” because the Unions brought it to you? Must be greedy capitalist pigs!

“We need to make sure that as loud as the voices are in the capital, we don’t let them overpower the voices of the tax payers I was elected to represent. We are willing to take this as long as it takes, because in the end, we are doing the right thing, and for us, we have to do this.”

There is so much wrong with how liberals go about attempting to exercise power. Teachers leave their work to hang out at the capitol to try to harangue the duly elected government? The schools they are supposed to be working in are closed down, the kids no longer having a place to go and their parents now responsible to stay home with them or find some other arrangement?

The Democrats that are supposed to be a functioning part of the government decided to leave the state they are supposed to be helping to govern and hid in Illinois to prevent the government from being able to move forward legislatively, making themselves a tyranny of the minority. In addition, the ‘protesters’ are now going to the home of the governor and scaring his family. These are the same tactics the union thugs did with the AIG execs.

A CNN reporter asked one of the protesters:

“You talk about coming to the table.. the governor coming to the table. Do you think it was the right tactic for the Democratic senators not to come to the table.”

At which point the CNN reporter was shouted down with

“United we stand. UNITED WE STAND. UNITED WE STAND…”

Nice answer. And these folks are teaching our kids? These people are an embarressment. The people of Wisconsin are being threatened by a thuggish political state.  (WThe)

Funny, That was the slogan of Ross Perot in the 1990’s, but that was evil. 🙂

American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees: $43,337,565 in political contributions in the last 12 years 98% Democrat.

National Education Assn: $32,021,910 93% Democrat.

American Federation of Teachers:  $28,731,591 98%-Democrat

Over a $100 million in 12 years!!

That’s a lot of dues. AFSCME was founded in Wisconsin.

So is it any wonder that the Community Agitator-in Chief would be very swift and decisive to save his own apparatchiks but dither like a person with Alzheimer’s on the Middle East?

No. But the left will use it for their own spin…

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: All right, one quick last question. When you make the reference to Egypt, you aren’t saying that the conditions that the Wisconsin teachers are teaching under with this new — new bill or without it is remotely like Egypt, or are you?

STATE SEN. LENA TAYLOR, D-WIS: No, what I’m saying in particular, Greta, is that in Egypt, if you look, after they overthrew their ruler, they had some specific rallies and protests, and one of the ones that they had was on workers’ rights. How ironic is that, right?

Sen. Taylor also said: I have to do what I have to do so that the people of Wisconsin can have an opportunity to be heard and that this bill is not rammed so rapidly that they have no idea what’s going on.

My immediate reaction to this was then Speaker Queen Pelosi’s: As the business community and more public polling shows opposition to ObamaCare, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) tells us, “[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

But the Senate Democrats in Wisconsin are hiding out in Illinois (undoubtedly being paid by the Unions, George Soros, or the DNC) because they haven’t got the balls to face the democratic process when they aren’t the majority.

So enter the Astroturf:

We now know that Organizing for America (O.F.A) (Obama’s 2008 election campaign tactical team) and the Democrat Party have been hard at work supporting this protest. Ben Smith wrote this on February 17:

O.f.A Wisconsin’s field efforts include filling buses and building turnout for the rallies this week in Madison, organizing 15 rapid response phone banks urging supporters to call their state legislators, and working on planning and producing rallies, a Democratic Party official in Washington said.

And so I ask, who are the “Astroturf activists” now? Those people on the streets are not there as citizens, but as members of a powerful interest group, gathered to petition government for special treatment, with the DNC and Organizing for America coordinating the events on the ground from their offices in Washington DC.

The Astroturf activists on the streets of Madison may think they are helping their cause, but the American people are watching. And they are judging–judging them and those officials we elected to serve taxpayer rather than union interests.

America’s Organizer in Chief, President Obama, weighed in on the issue last week, calling Governor Walker’s actions an “assault on the unions.” You bet they are. And if the Democrats get this issue wrong like they got ObamaCare wrong, they’ll be hearing from the American people once again in 2012.

And this time, it just might cost them the U.S. Senate and the White House. (DC)

Michelle Malkin: Welcome to the reckoning. We have met the fiscal apocalypse, and it is smack dab in the middle of the heartland.

As Wisconsin goes, so goes the nation. Let us pray it does not go the way of the decrepit welfare states of the European Union.

The lowdown: State government workers in the Badger State pay piddling amounts for generous taxpayer-subsidized health benefits.

Faced with a $3.6 billion budget hole and a state constitutional ban on running a deficit, new GOP Gov. Scott Walker wants public unions to pony up a little more.

He has proposed raising the public employee share of health insurance premiums from less than 5% to 12.4%. He is also pushing for state workers to cover half of their pension contributions.

To spare taxpayers the soaring costs of byzantine union-negotiated work rules, he would rein in Big Labor’s collective bargaining power to cover only wages unless approved at the ballot box.

As the free-market MacIver Institute in Wisconsin points out, the benefits concessions Walker is asking public union workers to make would still maintain their health insurance contribution rates at the second-lowest among Midwest states for family coverage.

Moreover, a new analysis by benefits think tank HCTrends shows that the new rate “would also be less than the employee contributions required at 85 percent of large Milwaukee-area employers.”

Obama Speaks Up

This modest call for shared sacrifice has triggered the wrath of the White House-Big Labor-Michael Moore axis. On Thursday, President Obama lamented the “assault on unions.”

AFL-CIO and Service Employees International Union bosses dubbed Walker the “Mubarak of the Midwest,” while their minions toted posters of Walker’s face superimposed on Hitler’s.

Moore goaded thousands of striking union protesters to “shut down” the “new Cairo” while the state’s Democratic legislators bailed on floor debate over the union reform package.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan spurned the opportunity to condemn thousands of Wisconsin public school teachers for lying about being “sick” and shutting down at least eight school districts across the state to attend Capitol protests (many of whom dragged their students on a social justice field trip with them).

Instead, Duncan defended teachers for “doing probably the most important work in society.” Only striking government teachers could win federal praise for not doing their jobs.

Yes, the so-called progressives truly believe that bringing American union workers into the 21st century in line with the rest of the work force is tantamount to dictatorship.

Yes, the so-called progressives truly believe that by walking off their jobs and out of their classrooms, they are “putting children first.”

If ever there was proof that public unions no longer work in the public interest, this is it.

Big Labor dragoons workers into exclusive representation agreements, forces them to pay compulsory dues that fatten Democratic political coffers and then has the chutzpah to cast itself as an Egyptian-style “freedom” and “human rights” movement.

Meanwhile, union leaders elsewhere are quietly forcing their low-wage members to share the sacrifice in order to preserve teetering health funds.

In New York state, Skidmore College campus janitors, dining service workers and other maintenance employees received late notice from the SEIU that 4.15% of their gross earnings will now be deducted from their paychecks to cover the cost of the health plan provided through the behemoth 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund. (If the name sounds familiar, it’s because this is one of several privileged SEIU affiliates that has received an ObamaCare waiver.)

These workers are forced to join the union in order to preserve their jobs, and unlike non-union workers, they are locked into a single health plan.

The SEIU has now decreed that they must pay new fees to include spouses on their plans and has hiked employee co-pays for doctor visits and prescription drugs.

What’s necessary for New York union workers is necessary for Wisconsin union workers — and for the rest of the protected union-worker class in bankrupt and near-bankrupt states across America.

The “persuasion of power” so ruthlessly and recklessly exercised by the SEIU and its thuggish allies must be broken by the moral courage of fiscal discipline.

It’s now or never.

The Top Ten ways to know if you’re in a Public Sector Union By Rod Pennington

10.) You take a week off to protest in Wisconsin and your office runs better.

9.) On a snow day when they say “non-essential” people should stay home you know who they mean.

8.) You get paid twice as much as a private sector person doing the same job but make up the difference by doing half as much work.

7.) It takes longer to fire you than the average killer spends on death row.

6.) The worse you do your job, the more your boss avoids you. (and the more raises you get)

5.) You think the French are working themselves to death.

4.) You know by having a copy of the Holy Koran on your desk your job is 100% safe.

3.) You spend more time at protest marches than at church.

2.) You have a Democratic congressman’s lips permanently attached to your butt.

1.) You pay more in union dues than you do for your healthcare insurance.

“The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.” — John Maynard Keynes

The particular defunct economist who most dominates the minds of the Obama administration and the Democratic Party is Keynes himself.

But…shhhh..that’s a secret….so pass a note to the one next to you.

Don’t worry, the teacher will not catch you, she is too busy protesting to keep her greed to actually be in the classroom teaching.

MORE “CIVIL” DISCOURSE From Wisconsin Union Protesters:

Doubtful that any of the left-wing media is covering much of this.

One of many profane protest signs at the Madison, WI ‘sick out’ protest… great education for the students who were brought by their teachers.

And we end as it began, with Astroturf:

This sign cracks me up — it was obviously not grass-roots but professionally mass-produced, likely by the DNC or the unions: “Fox News will lie about this.”

Gee, I think we know who needs that new Center for Civility in Public Discourse that The University of Arizona just opened.

Or would that end up being an episode of A&E’s “Intervention”? 🙂