Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ 

Wisconsin Vote Stuns The Left

June 8, 2012 by  

Wisconsin Vote Stuns The Left
UPI
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker defeated Democrat Tom Barrett 53 percent to 46 percent.

It’s been amusing to hear all the liberal talking heads on TV trying to claim that Tuesday’s vote in Wisconsin was no big deal. My friends, it was a very big deal indeed. In fact, it just may mark the beginning of the end of union power in this country.

Let’s be very clear about what was at stake in this election. It wasn’t just about ending collective bargaining for government employees. It wasn’t even about how much of their pay union members should contribute for their pensions or their healthcare. While these issues are important, they pale in comparison to what really mattered.

The paramount issue was whether the government could force someone to belong to a union in order to hold a job and deduct union dues from his pay without giving him any say in the matter.

Governor Scott Walker and a Republican majority in the Wisconsin Legislature ended that sweetheart deal for public-sector unions in the State. The results have been catastrophic for the bully boys (and girls) of collective bargaining.

Once the law went into effect, no State employee could be forced to join a union in order to hold a job. Dues would no longer be deducted automatically; employees had to specifically request the deduction of union dues from their paychecks.

Given a choice, guess what happened? Tens of thousands of former union members said “no thanks.” As a result, union membership and dues fell like a safe being dropped out of a window.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) is the second-largest public-sector union in Wisconsin. The largest is the National Education Association.

Prior to the passage of the Walker reforms, AFSCME had 62,818 members in Wisconsin. Six months after the new law took effect, the number had declined to just 28,745 dues-paying members. In other words, once they weren’t forced to be union members, more than 50 percent headed for the doors.

Bryan Kennedy, the president of the American Federation of Teachers in Wisconsin, said that failure to recall Walker “spells doom” for his union. Let’s hope he’s right.

None of this should come as a surprise. Time after time and in State after State, whenever right-to-work laws have replaced compulsory union membership, the results have been the same: More and more workers refuse to support unions. As President Barack Obama’s team will tell you, it takes a heck of a lot of “community organizing” to make up the difference.

Fifty years ago, more than half of the blue-collar workers in America were members of a union. Today, only 7 percent of private-sector employees are union members. That is what happens when people are given a choice. A huge percentage of them will choose to keep the money they earn, rather than let some ham-fisted organization spend it — allegedly on their behalf.

Get government involved and the results are dramatically different. The percentage of government employees who belong to a union is about 37 percent. The total number of union members has skyrocketed, thanks to the explosive growth of government at Federal, State and local levels.

Walker won the Governorship in 2010 by promising to bring some fiscal sanity to Wisconsin, which was facing a $3 billion deficit. To do that, he said that union members would have to start contributing “their fair share.” (Sound familiar?)

His “5 and 12” plan called for government employees to pay more for their lavish pensions and their generous healthcare plans. Under the Walker proposal, contributions to the pension plans would climb to 5.8 percent of their pay. This was still a sweetheart deal compared to what private-sector workers get. Most of the latter have no pension whatsoever; those who do contribute, on average, a lot more than 5.8 percent of their pay toward their retirement.

Healthcare is even more expensive. The average private-sector worker pays 21 percent of the premiums for his or her coverage; government employees in Wisconsin paid just 6 percent of the costs of their health insurance, or less than one-third as much. The Walker plan would double that figure to 12.6 percent — still a bargain by almost any measure.

Union members in Wisconsin went absolutely ballistic at the thought of having to dig into their own pockets so much. Tens of thousands of them marched on the State Capitol in Madison, in a sort of local “Occupy” movement. When that wasn’t enough to intimidate the Legislature, 14 Democratic Senators fled the State. Yep, they high-tailed it to Illinois, so there wouldn’t be enough voters left in Madison to form a quorum.

That standoff lasted for a while. When a vote was finally taken, the Walker proposals passed handily. Union officials and their Democratic allies immediately launched a highly publicized petition movement to demand a recall of Walker, his Lieutenant Governor and four Republican State Senators. Thousands of union volunteers poured into the State. They ended up collecting more than 900,000 signatures for the petition — way more than the 400,000 needed to force a special election.

On Tuesday, the unions and their Democratic allies got what they said they wanted: a chance for the public to vote “aye” or “nay” on the Walker reforms. After one of the most costly and divisive campaigns in State history, a record number of voters showed up at the polls.

Bless their hearts! They gave Walker an even bigger victory than they did in 2010, when he defeated Tom Barrett (yes, the same guy) by 5.5 percent of the votes cast. This time his victory was even bigger; he carried the State by 53 percent to 46 percent.

Let’s not forget that other Governors, including Mitch Daniels in Indiana and Chris Christie in New Jersey, have seen their popularity soar the more they have challenged teachers and other union members.

By the way, I suspect Obama’s pollsters had a much better idea of what was going to happen in Wisconsin than the number crunchers at CNN. How else can you explain Obama’s invisibility in what was clearly going to be one of the most important pre-November elections this year?

Oh, sure, Obama issued a lukewarm endorsement of Barrett from the safe confines of the White House. But when it came time to press the flesh and energize the crowds in Wisconsin, the President was nowhere to be seen. Nor was Vice President Joe Biden.

Remember, Obama and Biden carried the State handily in 2008. Afterwards, the Veep told an enthusiastic crowd of union loyalists, “We owe you!” Sure thing, buddy. But not enough to risk getting some egg on their faces this time around.

Does Walker’s stunning victory mean that Wisconsin is “in play” for Romney this fall? Time will tell. But in the meantime, is that a groundswell I hear saying “Walker for VP?”

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Wisconsin Vote Stuns The Left”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Bob

    I will never forget when I was 18, quite awhile back, I was hired as a warehouse worker pulling orders for differant stores. Trying to do be a good worker I filled 5-6 orders a night. I noticed the others were only doing 3-4. I was told to slow down, I didn’t realize why. That is until the next to the last day before I was to be accepted into the Union. That is when I was called into the office and was told that several of the other workers had complained about me and my work. Included in these people was the union rep. who I worked with. So I lost my job, I was later told by a person that worked there that it was actually because I did not listen to them when they told me to slow down and pull less orders. That They were not going to have anyone make them look bad, This statement was said by the company”s union Rep. that I worked with.

    • Liberty Lover

      Similar deterrents to productivity are repeated innumerable times a day throughout this land. My son experienced it several times during his pre-management work experiences.

  • Neil

    Maybe Hoffa was looking in a mirror when he said something about, “time to take these sunny beeches out.” (Sounded like “sunny beeches”, anyway.)

  • ArkansasRebel

    The history of the formation of the first unions show a very strong communist influence was involved. Check it out. Then look at some of the union demonstrations where the demonstrators are openly carrying banners & placards supporting the communist ideology.
    I grew up in Calif. where visitors frequently commented about how great the highways were. Past tense. About 15 years ago the Cal Trans union workers got an initiative up to put maintainence of the highways into the hands of Cal Trans. Since then the roads have continued to degrade. The quality of repair is just not there anymore & in my estimation Calif. now is among the states with the worst roads. Yes, I have sampled some, not all, of the states roads. Four years ago I did a driving vacation which covered 21 states & with the exception of one or two all had better roads than Calif.
    Also, though not a union member myself, I have had some experience with unions. I worked many years in construction & on more than one occasion had to drive around the work site to a non-union gate to get access to work. I asked one of the picketers why they were protesting & he said because my boss was not paying union wages. When I asked how long he had been working as a carpenter I discovered that he had more experience than me & yet he, as a union worker, was making LESS than me. Was he
    ever shocked.
    I also want to share the experience of my father, a devoted union employee. He worked
    most of his life in a foundry & had one of the most dangerous, dirtiest, & hottest jobs. He
    ran the cupola. Yet his pay was far below some of the workers pay, like the grinders who
    were the highest paid. He took his complaint to the union representatives repeatedly but
    all he got was platitudes. They said they couldn’t do anything about it, that he was being
    paid according to his union grade. He finally got fed up & went directly to his boss & told
    him that he deserved more for his work & his boss was immediately agreeable & told my
    father that he had “wondered if you would ever stand up & ask”. He got a $3 per hour
    raise on the next check.
    Unions had their place & still do. There was terrible abuse of workers & workers had few
    rights. However, they have grown far beyond where they were helpful & have become detrimental. When a union strike can cripple an entire nations economy, like the Teamsters, it is nothing short of extortion. Unions still have their place in preventing employers from taking unfair advantage of employees but it is now time for some limits on the power of unions to take advantage of employers.

    • eddie47d

      Don’t be even suggesting that unions are to blame for crappy roads. Every state has had some budget problems and voters don’t always approve of bond issues to allow those roads to be repaired. Transportation funds have to be approved before work begins so look at the citizen of each state for that answer.

  • Chester

    If you want to work in a place that has a union contract guaranteeing certain working conditions and pay levels, why should you not pay for that privilege, just like the people who were there when it was agreed to? Too many think they are guaranteed all these things whether they support the union or not, but work in an equivalent shop with NO union contracts and see what the pay and working conditions are like. More likely than not, you will not be happy with what you find. There are some exceptions, but they do more to prove the rule than disprove it.

  • Liberty Lover

    Collectivism breeds mediocrity always and everywhere, whether on a macroscopic (communist nations) or microscopic (unions) level. Even from a historical perspective, unions are given much more credit than they deserve. Much of what they have purportedly accomplished would have (and did) come to pass through employer competition for the best workers.

  • Jay Lowell

    People wake up,your being tax to death so your Public employee brother inlaw can seat on his ass and collect a fat pay check and a lottery like pension at your expense.Public employees should be paid far less then the private sector.So called public servants work less and have built in job security and have a management structure that is not accountable.Private sector employees are only as good as there last days accomplishments and have to preform at a much higher level just to stay employed.Small business owners have it even harder,having to take risk with capital and also carry a heavier work load.So stop your whining and be happy with the Public service job you have.Soon they will be obsolete,as the working class who support you wake up to this con game.

  • http://yahoo bob peters

    I am a union member 35 years,.,,Sorry it has gone communist! Long live gov. walker

    • eddie47d

      …and Corporate America has gone Fascist. The American worker is owned by Wall Street and the Elites. Some benefit but more are losing out to their excessive salaries and outsourcing. Gov Walker is now one of those Elites because of those ties.

    • UWorlds1

      After 35 years of enjoying union wages you will retire at a union wage. If you are against communism why didn’t you quit long ago. I bet you will enjoy that union wage when you retire. But now you don’t want to pay taxes so someone else will enjoy a union wage. This is what it is really about. You have got yours, damn everyone else!!

      • Deerinwater

        So you tell us what is wrong with union wages ~ I’ll wait ~

  • vanessa

    I am a teacher in a southern state. We pay 10% of salary per month to our pensions and a whopping 25% of our healthcare. I still felt like I got a good deal so I have NO sympathy for the ones who pay nothing.

    • eddie47d

      Please tell us which union members pay nothing. I don’t know of such a person or place.

      • UWorlds1

        And you’re probably poor but will vote republican!! I wonder how much the corporate hotshots in your southern states pay.

      • Buster the Anatolian

        UWorlds1-definition moron. Once again you show your moronic stupidity. She said NOTHING about the corporate world she said she was a teacher.

    • Jeff

      First, yours is the attitude they corporatists want – “they’ve got a better deal, so screw them!” When you should be saying “they have a union that sought a better deal for them, we should try to do the same.” Second, my sympathies for having to live in the South.

      • Buster the Anatolian

        “Second, my sympathies for having to live in the South.”

        My sympathies for your ignorance or should I say stupidity. I live in the South and the only thing wrong with it is all the dam yankees that come here to escape conditions in their northern cities then try to change us to be just like what they fled from.

  • Alex

    I do not know of any credible people on the Left who did not find Tuesday’s results upsetting. Not sure who Chip Wood is talking about.

    Yes, it hurts pretty bad, but it is neither the death knell for union workers nor a preview of November.

    Voting women are not oblivious to the GOP’s War on Women (and their families). The recent GOP vote against equal pay for equal work will be hard to explain away for the next five months.

  • Frank E.

    Everyone ties elections to who outspends who? How crazy is that? The socialist media just loves that since eveyone’s money flows to them. It’s the “quality” of the message, not just the “quantity”. People who have been forced to live in the socialist union world have not enjoyed it. This is America! Give people the right to chose without threats, intimidation, or violence is they want to join a union or not. It certainly appears the results speak loudly. When ever people are given a free choice to join or not, they chose not to. If unions were that good for “everyone” people would be flocking to them to join instead of running away like enslaved victims.

    • eddie47d

      When there were no unions folks had to work in company towns where they were obligated to the owner for everything. Their housing and all they bought was in their contract so how did that happy world of being intimidated,threatened and faced with violence by the owner work out for you. You were a virtual slave to that owner. Back then it wasn’t so easy to pack up the family and start over in another town. Unions changed all that and life improved.

      • UWorlds1

        Just like what they do in China now.

  • Nottakenyan

    Those who profit the most from union dues are those working for the union organization,
    not the factory worker who is busting his/her hump 40 hours per week.

    • eddie47d

      Unions helped to bring those trade skills to the companies they worked for and the owners benefited. Years ago unions and management had a working partnership and everyone gained. Especially the economy and the Middle Class where those skilled jobs made America the number one producer in the world. Then we had greedy outside CEO’s who came in and cannibalized these smaller companies and sent the jobs overseas. The skilled labor dried up and schools dropped shop classes. The man who worked with his hands became a second class citizen and looked down upon as lazy and worthless. Yet the CEO’s on Wall Street made their 30 pieces of silver off of foreign workers and America went into decline. The Elites won and America is not for the better.

  • Third_stone

    Why would people who supposedly love liberty and support the American way be against unions? Unions are a right won long ago by the working people who were beset by greedy employers under ruthless working conditions. Why would anybody want to throw that away? Unions used to provide the system for educating tradesmen. We are trying to destroy that, and the difference really shows in the trades people we can hire today.

  • Kevin Beck

    Just wait until some State decides that all employees will be given their OWN retirement accounts instead of pensions that will be covered by the general taxation authority of the State!

    For all the still-stuck-in-the-union employees that are moaning about their union still collecting dues AND having to pay higher portions for their “benefits,” I have a question. Which is more important: Your union dues, or the contribution to your “benefits”? I suggest that if you could choose to drop one of those, you would drop your union dues. After all, do you really need those anymore?

    • eddie47d

      That depends on the company and how they treat the workforce. Most don’t need unions anymore at least those businesses who respect their employees and believe in a level playing field. Unfortunately there are still laborers in the USA who work hard and receive extremely poor wages and not so good benefits or working conditions. Will those businesses wise up or do unions have to come in and do the job the owners should be doing themselves? .

  • SMSgt Z (ret) Nam 68

    One needs to inquire why workers had to form unions in the first place.One can be sure it was not do to the fact the owner of the factory,the mill ,the mine,the farm etc,etc WAS TREATING THE WORKER FAIRLY. YOU ALL NEED TO READ A LITTLE HISTORY ON WHY UNIONS HAD TO BE FORMED AND WHAT THE OWNERS AND POLITICANS DID TO TRY AND STOP UNIONS

    • SMSgt Z (ret) Nam 68

      Sorry WERE instead of WAS

      • Charles Kiser

        WAS is correct. The OWNERS WERE – the OWNER WAS. Another typical example of left wing idiocy.

    • Ted Crawford

      First off Sarge, thank you for your service! I did a couple of those vacation tours to Southeast Asia myself, not very enjoyable! !
      The deal here, as I see it, is the comparison between the private (priv) and public (pub) sector unions. Two examples of the differences between the two:
      First: A (priv) employee that dosen’t produce up to wage level is let go, if not the Contractor cannot compete and goes out of business! The (pub) employee that fails to produce to wage level, seemingly at least, can’t be let go! My example for this might be the recent GSA debacle. Not only did they revel in their slovenly behavior, they aggrandized it in a video! While there have been some resignations, to the best of my knowledge, no one has been fired or even disciplined yet!
      Secondly: The wages of a (priv) comes from the private sector not from the Public Treasury. Instead they are taxed on those wages and contribute into the Public Treasury- a net plus! The wages of the (pub) comes 100% from the Public Treasury, and then they return a much smaller portion back to the Treasury- a net negative

  • HarryButtle

    “another victory for those of us who are sick of handing over our paychecks directly to the Democrat Party.”

    You’re kidding, right? The bottom 50% have 2 1/2% of the nation’s wealth. The top 1% have 42% and you think it’s poor people who are taking your money? Wow.

    60% of Wisconsin voters thought that the recall should be used only in case of corruption. If they only knew Walker’s aide had rolled on him and he’s now the target of a corruption investigation. The recall election did give Democrats control of the Wisconsin Senate.

    Exit polls showed President Obama with a big lead over Mitt Romney.

    Sources say Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is Now the Target of Corruption Probe
    http://www.politiscoop.com/us-politics/wisconsin-politics/1435-sources-say-wisconsin-governor-scott-walker-is-now-the-target-of-corruption-probe.html

    The legal sources, who are not involved in Wisconsin’s recall, spoke on condition of anonymity. They said Walker faces “serious legal challenges,” including “a possible indictment,” regardless of the election results on Tuesday.

    If true, Republicans should be thanking the grassroots’ movement for this election and possibly removing Walker from office before charges are handed down, bringing embarrassment to not only the state, but the Republican Party.

    • MAP

      More crying and accusations from the losers on the Left. You people are so blind and deluded, you turn loss to victory. More proof of the fantasy land you live in. So begins another meaningless smear campaign. Democrats are entirely devoid of any hint of honor.

      • eddie47d

        IF Obama had gone to bat in the state of Wisconsin MAP would have been first in line to say that he used his influence to make a win for the Democrats.He wisely stayed out and let the Wisconsin voters decide for themselves. Except for the fact that outside Republican forces sent in limitless dollars to gain their win. The Republican Party bought their “honor” and in spades! Put that in your fantasy league!

      • MAP

        It’s over Eddie. Take your crying and whining to a liberal/communist/Democratic site. You merely make a fool of yourself.

      • nc

        Map. we Democrats know of our weaknesses and strive for the purity of the Republican Party as evidenced by the conduct of Spiro Agnew, Richard Nixon, Scooter Libby and that Republican Foley freak and the Republican Senator in the airport men’s room!
        We are also looking for a daddy’s boy with an MBA (?) who will lead us to another economic “paradise”
        Please tell us of the “honor’ of the above Republicans! Let the spin begin!!

      • MAP

        Nc,you are a Democrat? Then you must be a socialist, a pervert, a liar, a crybaby, a baby murderer, a fanatic, a parasite, a lunatic, a subversive, or a full-blown communist. I am not a Republican, therefore, have no one to answer for. You on the other hand….

  • Bob

    The Civil War was fought to free the slaves. Todays unions are the new slaveowners, the forced union workers the new slaves.

    • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

      Dear Bob,

      You write: “The Civil War was fought to free the slaves.” You are incorrect.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • MAP

        I was going to counter that claim myself, Bob. But I figured it wasn’t worth the time to explain.

      • Hey you

        As I understand, the Civil War was fought to “Save the (USA) Union”.

        I have yet to logically figure out why.

      • Ted Crawford

        ” To save the union ” was the justification for the Union Forces. To ” Protect the Tenth Amendment ” was the motive of the Confederacy.

    • eddie47d

      The Right To Work folks are the new slave owners. They always take away rights,delete or water down safety rules and pay less. Their concern is strictly for the owners not for the employees.

      • Ted G

        Eddie, there is a big difference between public sector unions and private sector unions. You are deliberatly obfuscating, Also most of the weak points in supporting the unions you are trying to make are no longer true in today’s times. They may have been once, but are no longer relevant. Even then they would only apply to the private sector.

      • MAP

        Eddie, your reasoning is backward to say the least. “Their concern is strictly for the owners not for the employees”. These are GOVERNMENT workers. WE are the owners. This is OUR money we are talking about. You take a stand against the taxpayer? Against yourself? What a lamebrain argument!

      • eddie47d

        I’m not working against my own best interest (taxpayer) for I believe every worker deserves a decent livable wage whether a government employee or a private sector worker. There was a time when government workers weren’t getting paid squat and unions changed that. If they are over demanding today then they rightfully should be asked to give back. If not leave them alone.

      • Oneguess

        Yep, MAP. A lame-brained argument from a lame-brain. That’s eddie47d for sure!

      • UWorlds1

        I work for a huge company now…with no union. We work 8 hours with no lunch breaks and two 10 minute breaks. I was going to complain about it at first, but everyone seems to go along with it. I need a job.

      • Liberty Lover

        Be grateful for the job you have in today’s economy, be grateful you don’t have to pay union dues, and be willing to vote with your feet if and when you can find a job with better conditions. It’s called the free market in labor.

      • Karolyn

        Uworlds – I believe it is law that workers be provided lunch breaks. I don’t know if it’s federal or state, but I do remember it from when I worked in NJ.

      • JeffH

        UWorlds1, I suggest you consult your states labor laws regardin breaks and meals.

        Federal law does not require lunch or coffee breaks. However, when employers do offer short breaks (usually lasting about 5 to 20 minutes), federal law considers the breaks as compensable work hours that would be included in the sum of hours worked during the work week and considered in determining if overtime was worked. Unauthorized extensions of authorized work breaks need not be counted as hours worked when the employer has expressly and unambiguously communicated to the employee that the authorized break may only last for a specific length of time, that any extension of the break is contrary to the employer’s rules, and any extension of the break will be punished.

        Bona fide meal periods (typically lasting at least 30 minutes), serve a different purpose than coffee or snack breaks and, thus, are not work time and are not compensable.

        Lunch and meal breaks are largely a function of state law, which means different states have different rules.

      • Karolyn

        UWorlds – I believe breaks are covered by OSHA. Report the suckers! Some companies will get away with whatever they can. Like the chicken companies in NC that were hiring illegals and having them work in poor conditions, cutting their fingers off, etc. Those people will do anything the company wants and take anything dished out. It was covered in a big expose in the Charlotte paper several years ago.

      • JeffH

        eddie has two things he holds very close to his heart…love of unions and environmental extremism.

        Those who don’t agree with eddie’s views are all for 3rd world slave labor at sub-poverty pay levels, unsafe work places and dirty air and dirty water. To eddie, that is what it means to be a conservative and sometimes even a libertarian…oh how the confused mind works.

      • eddie47d

        No confusion here Jeff you must be the one who was short changed. I know the good unions have done and when it comes to the environment I know the damages corporations have inflicted upon our surroundings. You on the other hand want companies to treat workers as serfs and the environment as a dumping ground.

      • Buster the Anatolian

        “We work 8 hours with no lunch breaks and two 10 minute breaks.”

        When I was in college I worked summers at a manufacturing plant. Those working in production did not have set lunch or other breaks. We worked 8 hours straight through. We were paid for our lunch time but took it when we could fit it into the production schedule. This was in a union plant although as a summer temp worker I was not in nor did I have to pay union dues.

      • UWorlds1

        So i guess you think it’s right to work eight hours with no lunch…you are a moron.

      • DaveH

        Apparently, UWorlds, the moron is you. If you weren’t you would simply seek another job that suited your requirements.

      • Buster the Anatolian

        DaveH, UWorlds1 certainly is a moron if he cannot read and comprehend any better than his last comment indicates. For his edification I did not say we not no lunch I said we got no formal lunch break but had to work it in as the production schedule allowed.

      • JeffH

        eddie says in response to JeffH: “You on the other hand want companies to treat workers as serfs and the environment as a dumping ground.”

        JeffH says in response to ignoramous eddie…thanks so much for confirming exactly what I said. :)

        Stupid is as stupid does! You just can’t be fixed.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6wbsGx9qw

  • UWorlds1

    It isnt funny that the decline of unions is also the decline of the middle class. Workers are working for peanuts and doing more. Never could understand why white people vote against their interests. Scott Walker doesnt care about workers and neither does Romney. I live in Wisconsin. I am still waiting to see more jobs here.

    Scott Walker is not too smart. He was kicked out of college. The guy never had a real job. I can’t believe he is our Governor. As we speak he is under a federal investigation. I never understand why white people will stand behind such bad people because of some ideological belief. It’s just stupid. This guy does not know anything about bringing jobs anywhere. Wisconsin has been sold to the highest bidder.

    • Nottakenyan

      The reason we have a lying, illegal Kenyigar sleeping in the White House is partially due to union mentality!!!
      Not really something as an American taxpayer that I am proud of or want my grandchildren to have to pay the price for this disgrace and disaster.

    • Shane

      I am so thankful when someone from a postion different from mine, speaks up as you do UWorlds1. Your comment does more good, than a long winded rebuttal by myself, or those with similar beliefs. Your emotion, illogical conclusions, and unprincipled statements means much in this debate and to the long running debate on the merits of the different political perpersuasion trying to gain dominance in our country.

      UWorlds1 have done a good thing. Please continue to comment, as you did here. Your writings are do a good service in educating the gray hairs and those much younger and more inexprienced. Most individuals will want to distant themselves from those like yourself, and those orgainizations that they are a part of. Thanks again UWorlds1.

      • UWorlds1

        I am happy to accomodate you. Mark my words either Walke will go down for this scandal or because he has not produced jobs.

    • eddie47d

      I believe union members should pay a fair share to their pension and health care so that doesn’t bother me . As long as the company is fair and honest the workers should be as reasonable in any demands. For Walker to take away collective bargaining was immature and was only catering to the extreme right lead by the Koch Brothers. The Koch’s bought Wisconsin long before the election and then bullied Walker into action. Walker was deliberately manipulated and he bit into the carrot.

      • Oneguess

        More hor$e $hit from you. NOT unexpected.

      • JeffH

        eddie ignorantly says ” For Walker to take away collective bargaining was immature and was only catering to the extreme right lead by the Koch Brothers.” Wouldn’t expect anything less from eddie .

        There will still be “collective baraining” in Wisconsin.
        What Walker did do is attempt to eliminate unjustified, unworkable power grabs by public unions. The Governor and citizens are tired of pandering, coercion, bribery, whining, and petulant demands of the unions, and they have spoken with they’re votes in the Wisconsin recall election.

        Under collective bargaining laws, employers have to recognize an elected union and have to negotiate with them!

        The misnamed term ‘collective bargaining’ has given an aura of moral righteousness to the unions who pretend to be fighting for true American values like the freedom of association. However, they are fighting for values quite foreign to the United States, values that come from Marxist collectivism, i.e. the expropriation of the property of employers and the negation of their rights.

      • eddie47d

        Sure Jeff for police and firefighters or didn’t you get the memo?

      • JeffH

        eddie, no I didn’t get the memo…but…at least, unlike you, I get it!

    • diamond1957

      the decline of the middle class will happen at the hands of a repressive government, and unions will aid them. their collusion is a conflict of interest, so are banks and pharmaceuticals, etc….. we must redefine the role of government as it was originally envisioned, put and maintain it in its rightful place, we must take back the power this federal government has claimed and taken unto itself.

  • Nottakenyan

    Do people who pay union dues have brains?

    • eddie47d

      Yes and a decent paycheck! Go back to paying 3rd world wages and watch the Middle Class shrink even further.

      • John

        How about doing the job well, so the company wants to give you a raise, instead of doing a mediocre job, and having the company forced to give you a raise that you didn’t earn on your own.

      • Judy

        My husband has never had to work for a union, thank God. He now works for a company that broke the union 20 years ago, and guess what, people are getting better pay, better health care, more vacation, and bonuses that are based on 10% of personal performance and 10% on company performance. The personal performance can go up to 15%, which means you do a good job for the year and you are rewarded for it, explain to me how that can ever happen Ina union? Unions are going by the way of the dinasour, yeh!!!!!
        Companies want good workers, and to keep them if they are smart, they pay them for it. Now if you are lazy and or irresponsible, or both, you get the boot, you don’t have some union standing there holding your hand and allowing you to continue to be a loser. People need to be responsible for their own actions, and with a union backing you up you really don’t have to. Plus if you are a good hard worker and you are in a union and you watch others get away with doing as little as possible, eventually you may start becoming like them, so unions can ruin a good worker.

      • Liberty Lover

        Great post, Judy. Just as unions can ruin a good worker, socialist policies can destroy an entire working class!

      • diamond1957

        its a different world today, employers compete for top employees, and it will remain this way unless our educational system fails us completely, and we may not be far from it, unions have no interest in self starters, they need drones, obedient drones.

      • eddie47d

        Just the opposite Diamond The companies want “drones” who are subservient.

      • independant thinker

        I worked under a union for a short time. I got mediocre pay, poor benefits, and was constantly told to slow down because I was working doing to much. All that union did was take money for their dues from my paycheck. I left that job for a non union position and got better pay, better benefits, and my hard work was appreciated and rewarded. Incidently the union plant closed a couple of years after I left.

      • Liberty Lover

        My only reply to your very welcome comment is to check the spelling of your screen name.

  • Polski

    It’s a shame. Right to work=LEECHES. The unions got workers 40 hour weeks, safe working conditions, vacations, reasonable pay, pensions, health benefits. And belonging to a union paid for maintaining these. NONE of the right to work anti-union people are willing to give up 40 hour work weeks, safe working conditions, vacation, reasonable pay, pensions, health benefits. But they do NOT want to pay for it. They want FREEBIES. It took unions a long time to get these benefits for the workers. There would not have been any unions if the OWNERS of companies had been reasonable. The original Henry Ford hired a union buster/preventer named Harry Bennett. He was of the same class as Al Capone. No one knows how many people he killed and/or maimed. My grandfather, father, and uncle worked for Ford’s in those days. I was a pre-teen in those days. They got paid $7 a week. NO

    • Doug

      As in so many cases with the unions they got greedy. Maybe there was a time when Unions served a purpose, but that time has ran its course. Unions in my opinion played a large part in the off-shore boom, and limited employment availability to afforded people like your Grandfather, Fathers and others that needed to find work to help feed their families, and education took a backseat. Factory work served a less educated in America. As for Unions in Government…that should have never been allowed. When a union shut down Ford Motor’s is one thing but when a union can shut down a city, state, or nation…that is very different!! When it takes an act of Congress to fire a Federal, State or City employees once they have work three years (vested)…you get people who just don’t care that their customer (tax-payers) aren’t happen (DMV comes to mind for you(?)). And finally, every time the price of Union pay goes up so does everything else and Unions are more concerned about increasing pay to increase it’s dues! If you wonder just how much damage a Union can have on a local economy…Welcome to the State of Michigan..or City of Detroit!!

      • MAP

        I live in the South. It has always been right to work. I’ve always found work and have lived in the middle class. I have never been a member of a union and have never missed it. A couple of times I was in a position to vote in a union, but voted against it. My father was a life-long Teamster member. The truck lines he worked for was driven into bankruptcy and he had to take an early retirement.

      • moonbeam

        “And finally, every time the price of Union pay goes up so does everything else…” When I was just a little kid, my grandmother told me the very same thing about unions.

      • DaveH

        Not only that, but people lose their jobs. Companies, due to the competitive nature of the Marketplace, generally maintain a small margin of profit. When the Unionists get their pay raises the company can either insist on increased productivity (not likely to be accepted) or they can lay off workers. There is no free lunch.

      • UWorlds1

        ‘Companies maintain a small profit margin’…surely you are kidding. Most companies are making money hand over fist. They are paying lower wages and getting more work from employees.

      • DaveH

        You have no idea, Uworld.
        They make their money from voluntary transactions. They provide a product or service that the consumer voluntarily purchases. If they do make high margins of profit it is only until others catch on and join the fray. The average company makes less than 10% profit on their investments. See here:
        http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/performers/industries/profits/

        And as a side effect they give people, who otherwise would be helpless when it comes to employing themselves, a chance to earn a living. Instead of denigrating them, we should be celebrating them, except of course those businesses which earn their profits the Political way (Crony Capitalists).

    • Harry

      My family back then would have loved to got $7 a week because that was very good pay!! Henry Ford almost closed his company was not for his wife. He felt betrayed because he did give back a lot to the employees in that time period. The union was not the one came up with 40 hour work week and all those other benefits at all. Where do you think that they got those ideas from, because there was already a company that was doing those things without unions? Yes, unions had their time in history, but today with all the laws and regulations that a company has, there is no need for unions anymore and that is why so many the people left the unions when they did not have to belong to them. I know that my grandmother was force to strike for a month for a raise that the union told the workers need to do. Now she did not get any money for that month, but did get her raise after the strike which was $.15 an hour, but her union dues went up $.25 an hour. They told her that they need to up on the dues to pay for the strike which most of the workers where against in the first place. When all was done only one that won was the union bosses and their pocketbooks and not the workers. Because the union was so hard to work with the company close their doors the next year and moved to a state in the South that did not have unions. I do not blame them at all and my grandmother blames the union for driving the company out of her home town. Now New Hampshire is a free to work state and I am very glad for that because this will drive the unions out and make the good hard working people keep the jobs and not the ones that do not work and bring down the moral of the company. Now, I own a company and if the union came into my shop, I would close it the next day because I do not need another governing body to tell me how to run my company. Unions are of the past like the horse and buggy. Have you seen how much these Union Boss get for pay and how they life? It is unbelievable.

    • Ted Crawford

      Polski
      You’ve been mislead, while what you say about Unions is correct, you fail to realize that those Unions were Private Sector Unions. Walker, or any other Government official only has control over Public Sector Union Employees.
      Public Sector Unions should never have come into existance. Here is what one of Americas stauncest supporters of Private Sector Unions and American Workers in general had to say on this matter- ” All Government employess should realize thaat the pratice of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has it’s distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management! ” Franklin D. Roosevelt

      • MAP

        That was exactly my point above, Ted. What taxpayer in their right mind would vote to transfer more of their wages to government workers? The Democratic Party has taken an incredibly stupid stand on this. They have taken the side of the minority in the face of the majority (nongovernment taxpayers). It is impossible for a taxpayer to find anything positive in this message.

    • John

      Polski, Right to work means that each one of us has a right to work, that is a right that in some states was taken away from the American people in that state. Any law that takes away any right is a bad law. I work for other people in a right to work state. If I cannot do a good job, then I will lose that job. However, because I take pride in my work ethic, I do a better than average job, and I keep it because I do it very well. No union means I can keep my job because I learned the skill I needed, and can do it very well. That also means that no union can order me to strike, or can take my money that they didn’t earn. If I cannot keep my job, by my own skills, Then that is not the job for me. If I want a raise, I don’t need a union rep to get it for me, I can get it myself. When I have asked for a raise at any time since 1978, I always got the raise I asked for, and I kept those jobs for as long as I wanted, because I did it well. Government employees should not be in a union unless each individual ask to join one. If it is a good union, great, but if all it does is take money, and not spend it on the union members, why join.

      • UWorlds1

        Just wait when that company gets bought out by another company and they raid your pension fund and you have no union to back you up.

    • Notinaunion

      Polski – I am not against Unions in the private sector. Private sector unions fought long and hard for workers rights and we are all beneficiaries of their work. Much of the existing labor law is based on what Unions fought for in this country. My father was part of a union when he worked in the steel mills around Pittsburgh and Buffalo, unfortunately not many of those companies exist any more. However, what I am against is public sector unions – they serve no useful purpose except to rip off the taxpayers. Why did over half of the public union employees in Wisconsin *NOT* opt to fund the union when given a choice? Maybe part of the issue is that they don’t support the union’s political choices?

      • UWorlds1

        I live in Wisconsin and they opted out because they still get union protection without giving to the Union.

    • diamond1957

      sorry Polski your wrong, yes unions did improve things when things needed improving, but your continued support doesnt maintain anything, those things you like so much were bought and paid for by your employer not the union, your membership and dues dont maintain anything but a very lavish life style for a select few. while some sort of representation between employer and worker can be benefical to help keep a balance, some unions have gotten out right corrupt, with pay offs both to them directly or to politicians, but either way its the power that corrupts.

    • http://gravatar.com/catman11 coalminer

      Polshi,
      They also help in getting the Social Security bill passed .I have being working in the coal mines for 43 years and now retired. I also belonged to the United Mine Workers Union and there is no way I would work in a scab mines, one example is the one in West Virginia Those miners paid with their lives.

      thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/05/…/top-five-things-unions/
      Mar 5, 2011 – The number one thing to do if you encounter a problem with your union is to confront them about your concern. There could be a good reason.

  • Vigilannie

    Just one comment……..WHO SAYS Romney??? will be the nominee???? RON PAUL 2012. If Romney were elected president…..basically NOTHING WILL CHANGE!

    • Ted Crawford

      Were Ron Paul to run it would be terribly embarrassing for Rand Paul who just yesterday endorsed Mitt Romney ! !

      • eddie47d

        Ouch!

      • DaveH

        Rand Paul is not Ron Paul. He certainly has lost my respect.

      • Liberty Lover

        Rand Paul is a realist. He has my respect….and I’m sure his father’s as well.

      • independant thinker

        From a Newsmax article.

        “Paul, a tea party favorite, had previously endorsed his father, libertarian icon Ron Paul. “My first choice had always been my father,” said Paul, “But now that the nominating process is over, I’m happy to announce that I’m going to be supporting Gov. Mitt Romney,” reports The Hill.

        Ron Paul nominally remains a candidate in the GOP race, but he announced last month that he was suspending his campaign and has since telegraphed to supporters that he lacks the delegates to secure the nomination.”

      • DaveH

        Realists, Liberty Lover, are what got us to our current state of affairs. As fewer and fewer people stick to their Principles, fewer and fewer Principled people remain. Better to lose and retain your Principles than to win and lose your Principles.

      • Liberty Lover

        We are kindred spirits, DaveH. I will likely vote for Gary Johnson on the Libertarian ticket because Romney has no chance of prevailing in my super-blue state. So I can vote on principle without increasing the risk of Obama acquiring a second term to promote peace through weakness and prosperity through socialism/fascism. I am no fan of Romney, but he’s infinitely preferable to the alternative.

      • Eric Jones

        socialism/facism realy …realy? im going to say this slowly socialism is on the far LEFT and facism (which is closer to the truth i grant you) is on the far RIGHT.

      • Liberty Lover

        Whether you say it slowly or rapidly, Eric, the result is the same. Move far enough to the right on the circle of freedom versus oppression or far enough to the left and you end at the same point of state totalitarianism. Are you aware that the fascist Nazis were the National Socialist Party of Germany?

      • Eric Jones

        I was indeed but were YOU aware that on “the night of the long knives” he MURDERD over 100 members of his own party BECAUSE they belived in the socialist where as hittler USED it as a way to seduce angry young men. p.s for historical sake it was the national socialist GERMAN WORKERS party fyi

      • Kevin Beck

        Eric, let me clear up a misunderstanding you are exhibiting. The only difference between Socialism and Fascism is the ownership of the means of production.

        Socialism is when the State owns the means of production, while Fascism is when private parties own the means of production. In both systems, the State has complete control over the production. So how could Fascism be at the opposite end of the spectrum from Socialism?

        Answer: They are not at opposite ends of the spectrum. They are on the same side.

      • DaveH
    • diamond1957

      regardless of who wins, if the voters don’t stay engaged, informed, and vocal nothing will change. How did our government get so screwed up ? people didn’t pay attention to it, just like children who’s parents aren’t present to raise them, they grow from little monsters into full grown night mares. That’s why we need something like the tea party, to be the big stick or the rod of correction, a tool to remind and force them to better represent the people even handed and not give in to the special interests.

      • nc

        Diamond, you say we need the tea party people because they can be the “rod of correction’!! Like the ending of ear marks???? A government waste study group found that some 50 members of the congressional TEA PARTY CAUCUS requested over 700 ear marks totaling over 1 billion dollars in the 111th Congress! Is that how you do it?? Rather than a Rod of Correction you are looking at the REAMING ROD OF REALITY of how the game is played!

  • MAP

    I am stumped by the implications of this issue. For a union to operate in the private sector doesn’t really involve me or my finances directly. A union can drive a business into bankruptcy, but, unless I work for that business, it is an issue that involves the union, the shareholders, the employees, and the company. Those that work for government, on the other hand, do involve me and my finances. The demands of these government workers affect my taxes. Since there can never be more government workers than nongovernment taxpayers (excluding communism), nongovernment taxpayers will always be a majority. So I ask: Why would someone vote for greater taxes, the only reason being to enrich those living off their taxes? The loons in the Democratic Party are, as logic would dictate, the losers on this issue, just as they are on healthcare and immigration. They prove that the money they receive from the unions is more important to them than the living standards of the taxpayer. Little wonder the Democratic Party has become the ‘parasite party’. With such asinine positions, they are forced to scoop from the bottom of the barrel for support.

    • Joe Brooks

      Some things to consider, besides Sgt Z’s points

      The Communists [keep in mind who we are enriching and buliding the military of thru "free trade" with Red China] infiltrated the unions when they were trying to bankrupt American owned companies by increasing wages/benefits too high, but were largely kicked out due to the efforts of HUAC and George Meany. Now they are working hard to destroy the last vestiges of the real unions as a way to increase their profits.

      The right to assemble should not be thrown in the trash. HUAC needs to be re-established and the Constitution followed.

      Are we trying to become a surrogate USSR?

      The move by President Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party means those participating in “unsanctioned public meetings” can be fined up to 30,000 rubles ($900 US) and up to 300,000 rubles ($9,000 US) if the event causes damage to property or causes injuries.

      http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/russia-putin-urged-reject-law-restricting-right-peaceful-assembly-2012-06-07

      • Joe Brooks

        Watch out for this, we need to be careful not to cause this to happen : Unlike labor unions in the West, Soviet trade unions were, in fact, actually governmental organizations whose chief aim was not to represent workers but to further the goals of management, government, and the CPSU. As such, they were partners of management in attempting to promote labor discipline, worker morale, and productivity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_unions_in_the_Soviet_Union

      • Joe Brooks

        All employees in China have the right under law to join the ACFTU, which claims some 170 million members and is controlled by the Communist Party. ACFTU has a monopoly on trade unionizing in China and creation of competing unions is illegal. Party leaders have ensured that the ACFTU has a monopolist position. They don’t want autonomous unions springing up, because of the potential threat to their authority. In 2008, collective bargaining became a requirement of the Labor Contract Law that went into effect, forcing most companies – including most foreign owned ones – to create an ACFTU chaptered trade union within them. http://www.tradereform.org/2011/09/what-is-the-secret-behind-china%e2%80%99s-cheap-prices/

      • diamond1957

        which came first ? communism or the unions ? today unions are a toe in the door for communist and socialist take overs, this worker mentality blinds people, it appears as security, yet it locks everyone in as a worker, plus our rights come not from the government or unions, our rights are God given, and thats the corner stone of true freedom

    • DaveH

      Map says — “I am stumped by the implications of this issue. For a union to operate in the private sector doesn’t really involve me or my finances directly. A union can drive a business into bankruptcy, but, unless I work for that business, it is an issue that involves the union, the shareholders, the employees, and the company”.
      But it is our business, MAP. If you’re a moral person (and I know that you are) then it is our duty to weed out Force and Coercion every chance we get, whether it involves us directly or not. To do otherwise is to take our finger out of the hole in the dikes that hold back the Immoral Hoardes who would plunder our society.

      • UWorlds1

        I would think the only ones that are immoral are the oligarchy that are stumping on the middlle class. Not the Unions.

      • DaveH

        You would think wrong then. I haven’t yet known a company that can force you to do anything (excluding Government). If you call offering you a job and expecting something in return (your effort) “stumping” on you, what would you call people (Unionists) who are coercively taking somebody else’s money? I call them thieves.

      • Liberty Lover

        The “immoral hordes” are already plundering our society!

  • drewynp

    I live in Montana, where I’m forced to belong to a union as a condition of my employment. Take note legislators! We need nationwide Right to Work laws NOW!!!!

    • eddie47d

      Were you “forced” or was it by majority vote? Big difference! Thank You

      • Armen Kartvelian

        No, Eddie. It’s called a “closed shop.” A condition of employment is union membership. Why do you think they are called “right-to-work states”?

      • Ted G

        When other people can vote to “force” me to give up my own money against my will thats not simply democracy that’s thievery!

      • eddie47d

        If it is a closed shop then you know up front whether you are willing to pay dues or not.He does have the right to work there or not.

      • Vigilant

        “Were you “forced” or was it by majority vote? Big difference!”

        Au contraire! It’s called “tyranny of the majority,” something the Founders were extremely adamant in opposing.

        Tell us, eddie, how is taking union dues from a Republican to contribute to Democrat causes “fair,” even by left wing standards of “fairness?”

      • eddie47d

        Nice attempt at twisting Vigilant. If union members vote on membership then it is the will of the majority workers. If a shop votes down being in a union that is also the will of the workers. Kind of like any election where someone who is voted in becomes the winner and runs the show or is that to complicated for you. I am aware there are Conservatives out there who don’t believe in elections or at least only for a select few so maybe you are one of them.

      • Dennis48e

        “Tell us, eddie, how is taking union dues from a Republican to contribute to Democrat causes “fair,” even by left wing standards of “fairness?”

        Of course its fair Vigilant. Don’t you know only the unions know who it is best to send your money to. Don’t you know only the democrats know what is best for you and how best to waste er spend your money.

      • DaveH

        By a majority vote? So, Eddie, theft is okay with you if the majority of people say so? Killing is okay with you if the majority of people say so?

      • DaveH

        Eddie says — “If it is a closed shop then you know up front whether you are willing to pay dues or not.He does have the right to work there or not”.
        But it can only be a closed shop because Unionists have coercively Forced that upon the owner, Eddie. I realize that too much for you to grasp, but think of it this way, what if we conservatives decided that you weren’t worth what you were paid all those years (no doubt) and we voted in majority to take most of your assets away. You’d be okay with that?

      • eddie47d

        There you go again Dave making assumptions. Most deals in life are negotiated including union shops. When a company wants to do business with another company they negotiate a deal or is that to hard for you to grasp??

      • eddie47d

        Dennis you are a bald faced liar. I belonged to a union for 40 years and my dues went to the local office and to operations at the National office. The union had separate funds or PACs for political fund raising and they were always voluntary.

      • eddie47d

        Hey SICKO Dave H go get a rabies shot for that rabid comment about killing people and thievery. You are disgusting!!

      • Buster the Anatolian

        Oooh eddie is getting mighty testy. Dennis and Dave must be hitting mighty close to home and really upsetting his rotten apple cart.

      • DaveH

        Eddie says — “Most deals in life are negotiated including union shops”.
        Sure, Eddie, negotiated. Like when the 2 wolves let the sheep vote what’s for dinner.
        Voluntary negotiations don’t involve Government. Government is Force. If the Government is involved there is no such thing as voluntary negotiations.
        You can whine and rationalize all you want, Eddie, but Unionists are simply a gang of thieves. They don’t have to be. It would certainly fit in the definition of Freedom for them to join together and walk out. But I’ve never known a Union to stop there. They coerce, they vandalize, they intimidate, they bully, and sometimes they even kill in order to get their way, all under the auspices of criminal Government.
        I know it hurts your sensibilities, Eddie, but then with your bizarre behavior I have gotten over worrying about that.

      • Patty

        That does not make it democracy, it makes it mob rule.

    • jimster

      We do need right to work laws BUT we need NO nation wide laws on the subject, keep the feds out of state rights.

      • diamond1957

        Good point jimster, lets not forget the federal gov. they can be just as bad as unions, the States were intended to run this nation, and things wont ever be right until the States reign again.

      • UWorlds1

        To late the corporations are already in the states and they run the federal government too.

  • Doc Sarvis

    I don’t think the left is stunned, they were outspent $7 for every $1 they spent. Another Koch brothers victory (for the top 1%).

    • drewynp

      No troll, another victory for those of us who are sick of handing over our paychecks directly to the Democrat Party.

      • UWorlds1

        But now you have handed the state over to the Republican party. God help Wisconsin!! Get ready for $5.00/hr jobs.

      • Robert Smith

        Nope, it’s another example of the 1% buyinig an election. Most of the money cam from out of Wisconson.

        If you look IN Winsonson the folks who voted with money BEAT the oppressor.

        Rob

      • rb

        Hurray for the Koch brothers. At least they advocate working for a living. How dare they earn billions of dollars working. They should have to give that to the occupy people.

      • Vigilant

        UWorlds 1 says, “But now you have handed the state over to the Republican party.”

        So you see, the investment was worth it.

        But that’s not true anyway. Most likely, Wisconsin will vote for Obama in the election.

        The state has been handed BACK to the taxpayers, and that’s the most important thing.

      • eddie47d

        rb: Union members do work for a living so why are you so hell bent in taking away what they earned and negotiated for? Why should some billionaire come in and destroy someone else living wages. Maybe that is how the Koch’s made those billions by taking from others.

      • Deerinwater

        “At least they advocate working for a living. ” are you for real ?

      • UWorlds1

        Workers voting against their own interests…I guess they believe the republicans really want to create jobs..NEXT!! I can’t wait to see jobs being created in Wisconsin.

      • Vigilant

        “I can’t wait to see jobs being created in Wisconsin.”

        If you were up on current events, you’d know that they aready have been created.

      • Liberty Lover

        You are absolutely right, Vigilant. One idea that has essentially been ignored in this stream of comments is that Wisconsin, under Walker, is providing the model for tackling unemployment on a national basis. By forcing state union workers to accept modest scalebacks in their terms of employment, Walker was able to preserve tens of thousands of jobs, workers that would have been laid off in the absence of the reforms. How many workers, unionized or otherwise, have voluntarily offered to accept a modest reduction in their individual terms of employment so as to enable a company or public agency to avoid terminating the services of other workers? (I’ve seen a few relatively enlightened teacher unions do so, but not many.) Wisconsin’s unemployment rate under Walker is well below the national average.

      • eddie47d

        How many corporate CEOs have sacrificed for the State or even for their own company. Profits for them are record setting under Obama.They collect the loot but aren’t creating near the jobs that was expected of them. More false promises from Corporate interests.

    • Shane

      Good try Doc. But the actual spending on this campaing was only slighty over two to one when all monies were added up. But use the excuse of seven to one. It does not matter much cry baby. But do play again Doc. You are making a difference. Along with Flashy. More conservative converts are the result of dripping gums from the left, than what the right actually says. Observation. It’s a good thing, but usually takes some time. So keep up the good work Doc and Flashy and the other’s I’ve left off.

      • Doc Sarvis

        Who’s crying? I just pointed out why the left is not shocked. You read WAY too much into what you want to read rather than what is written.

      • Chester

        Shane, you better go back and look again, as even the Republicans admit they BOUGHT that election. Also, there were a LOT of people who saw no official misconduct to demand a recall, so they, too, voted against it. But, none the less, by far and away the largest part of the money came from outside interests who were running an anti-recall campaign long before they knew who they would be running against. You complain about liberals being blind to the TRUTH when your blinders are even more firmly in place.

      • Vigilant

        Sarvis says, “Who’s crying? I just pointed out why the left is not shocked.”

        Dream on….

      • Hey you

        As some say, the election was “bought”. If so, our “democracy” is a hollow shell which money can be used rather than voting.

        So much for democracy.

      • Vigilant

        Hey You, take an elementary civics course. We are NOT a democracy, never have been, We are a Republic, thanks to the Founders and their fear of tyranny of the majority. You know, like forcing the unwilling to pay dues in a closed or union shop.

      • DaveH

        Who’s crying, Doc? You were.
        And how about providing us some references for your 7 to 1 crying claim?

      • http://gravatar.com/smoovious Smoovious Laxness

        IMHO, we stopped being a republic when the states lost their representation in the US Senate.

        What we have now is basically 1 president, and 2 houses of representatives.

        Once the states have their representation back in the federal government, then we can talk about being a republic again.

        – Smoov

    • eddie47d

      So correct Doc. Over $63 million was spent in the Wisconsin election and more than $47 million of that came from Republican organizations including Americans for Prosperity (Koch , almost $4 million) and the Republican Governors Association. They pounded the state with ads and was awarded their pound of flesh. So no more talk about who buys elections and receiving out of state money because they are up to their nostrils this time. Walkers win is not necessary a bellwether since we heard crickets when the unions won in Ohio. In real life you have to accept your wins and losses and be patient until the next time.

      • GFelder3

        OK: arguing about how much was spent by whom, inside WI, outside, and forgetting about Obama’s huge advantage over McCain (which was presumably OK) WHY are these “now liberated” workers NOT staying in the unions? If the bennies were SO great, why are more than HALF the WI AFSCME workers NON-union now? I’m from PA, and I know tons of teachers, FORCED to be in their union, and simply hating the fact that THEIR money only goes to Dems for election, and they have no choice. Just wondering what is really happening in WI and for what reasons.

      • Vigilant

        Hey eddie, in love, war, and politics, turnabout is fair play.

        I will once again link to the TRUTH about who contributes the lion’s share of political money in this country, and to what political party it regularly goes.

        Care to comment on http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php ?

        BTW, I have NEVER been successful in eliciting a response to this link from the left, so I guess the figures are too damning to be assailable.

        Once again, care to comment about this eddie, or anyone else who feels that the poor unions got the short end of the stick? C’mon, “Doc,” Chester the Molester, Eric the Red, denniso, flashy, or anyone else who has the mettle.

      • Power To The People

        Eddie….the taxpayers are sick of funding over paid union complainers when they can’t fund their own retirement. That is the issue…not the BS about who spent more!

        Libs think money thrown on anything has to produce results….just like the war on poverty, HUD and all the other socialist programs that have bankrupted our nation.

      • eddie47d

        Power: Apparently Koch and company thought they could throw money at something ($47 million) and gain results and it worked. Why would you say union members are complainers when they are only defending what they rightfully negotiated for.

      • eddie47d

        Vigilant: Corporations give to who ever they think will give them the biggest bang for their buck. All your chart proves is that crony capitalism is alive and “well”. Didn’t have anything to do with unions??

      • JeffH

        Vigilant, always one step ahead of the talking heads.

        OpenSecret.org: “Heavy Hitters Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2012″

        Instead, I’ll just list a few examples:
        #3 – American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees – $47,977,038 – 92% Dem
        #5 – National Education Assn – $41,412,233 – 74% Dem
        #7 – SEIU – $38,237,146 – 75% Dem
        #9 – Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers – $35,233,775 – 96% Dem
        #10 -American Federation of Teachers – $33,615,766 – 87% Dem
        Seven of the next ten are all unions – 86% or higher to the Dems

        Koch Industries pales in comparison:
        #77 – Koch Industries – $12,733,249 – 90% Rep
        http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

      • Vigilant

        eddie says, unbelievably. “All your chart proves is that crony capitalism is alive and “well”. Didn’t have anything to do with unions??”

        Thanks, JeffH, for showing that eddie’s blindness extends to inability to read charts. The number ONE activity on the chart was ActBlue, with a stunning $62.8 million in donations to, guess who, the Democrats, and ZERO to the Repuns. Who is ActBlue?

        “ActBlue bills itself as “the online clearinghouse for Democratic action.” As a federally registered political action committee, it serves as a conduit for online contributions to Democratic candidates and committees.” (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000021806).

        eddie, there’s NO WAY anyone looking at the chart with intelligence can maintain that the Dems don’t get the bulk of political funding through PACs and labor unions.

      • Jana

        Eddie is so quick to point out over and ove I might add about the Koch Brothers. $47 million is a drop in the bucket to the $400 million George Soros has put up for the Socialists.

      • eddie47d

        Koch gave about $4 million to Walker and Soros gave nothing. The other $43 million was given by other Republican PACs. I believe we have a few others with reading comprehension problems (Jana). Vigilant is correct that ActBlue is a Democrat fund.

    • robowang

      I call BS on that.
      http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/06/06/Media-Spin-Recall-As-Money-Suck
      And before you start whining about that being a” ‘right wing site”, it’s NOT the opinion, it’s the FACTS that matter.
      At least, to any sane person. Socialists? Eh, not so much.

      • DaveH

        What? The Kochs spent $1 million? But Eddie said they spent $4 million. Who to believe, lol?

      • eddie47d

        The Koch’s gave $1 million to Walker and another $3 million to the Republican Governors Associations to aid Walker. That equals $4 million. So who is to be believed…. Eddie of coarse. Dave is nothing but a trouble maker and a troll. They also gave money to ALEC to aid Walker so it could be more!

    • Linda Turner

      You’re right, Doc. Unions are the only protection workers have against Bosses. Forget overtime, paid vacation, sick leave, safety protections, health insurance. And if you don’t like those conditions, no problem; there’s a whole army people who will work for anything. And when these pawns of the 1% wonder where their rights went, they have only themselves to blame.

      • Vigilant

        “Pawns of the 1%?” Surely you jest.

        You might want to read the OP’s article with a little comprehension this time, i.e., “Today, only 7 percent of private-sector employees are union members. That is what happens when people are given a choice. A huge percentage of them will choose to keep the money they earn, rather than let some ham-fisted organization spend it — allegedly on their behalf.

        “Get government involved and the results are dramatically different. The percentage of government employees who belong to a union is about 37 percent.”

        Those “pawns” spoke with the quitting of their membership. Those “pawns,” and the taxpayers of Wisconsin, are the BIG winners.

        Then you say, “Unions are the only protection workers have against Bosses.” And who protects the taxpayers from the unions? Who protected the hundreds of potential workers in SC from the NLRB browbeating of Boeing when they wanted to build a plant there?

        And Linda, take an elementary mathematics course before you decide that 93% of private sector non-union and 63% of public sector non-union members are wrong.

      • Power To The People

        Linda, stop drinking the koolaid….I could agree if all workers were covered and/or unions did not waste their members money on political matters and use violence to get their way.

        We need the legislators to see to it the laws are improved and enforced…we don’t need more unions.

      • eddie47d

        “Power’: It’s a hard battle trying to keep up with a living wage so why aren’t you concerned about the Citizen United ruling that gave immense influence to those who already have the ability to do so. Those Elites already had the champagne market cornered and the Supreme Court bought them another train full. The same with ALEC who are telling Legislators how to vote and even writing the bills. This country is more intimidated by the Elites than the few union members out there.

      • Kevin Beck

        One point to remember about the Citizens United decision: It granted the same benefits to unions as it did to corporations.

      • DaveH

        Linda says — “there’s a whole army people who will work for anything”.
        So, Linda, you have a problem with other people trying to earn a living?

      • Vigilant

        eddie, predfictablly , gets it wrong again with ““Power’: It’s a hard battle trying to keep up with a living wage so why aren’t you concerned about the Citizen United ruling that gave immense influence to those who already have the ability to do so.”

        For the umpteenth time, look at http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php and then tell me who has had the overbearing influence on political campaigns, and which political party has reaped the benefits.

        The Citizens United decision simply leveled the playing field to remove the inordinate influence of labor unions on the process. Obama and the Dems saw this and disagreed on the decision for purely political reasons. Obama’s factually incorrect statement during that State of the Union speech was not only rude and uncalled for, it was a reflection of the Dems’ frustration that they are now forced to play a fairer game.

      • eddie47d

        I disagree that Citizens United leveled the playing field …anything but.Their offspring ALEC and the Chamber of Commerce have gotten very bold lately and have kept Corporations and the Elites way ahead of the game.

    • Wyatt

      Out spent ? Someone has been drinking the leftwing Kool-Aid . The Unions raised and spent $21 million alone and add that to the 2.9 million the Bennett campaign admits to spending and the gap is closed by a huge amount . And if only 2.9 million was spent , who’s pocket did 21 million dissappear into ?

      • Vigilant

        And lest we forget, the millions of $$$ in slanted left wing MSM endorsement of the unions at no charge to them needs to be taken into account.

        What a wonderful day for our Republic!!!

      • eddie47d

        The spending was 3-1 in favor of Walker and Republican Governors Association had much influence in how the election turned out. The talking heads on FOX did their part also so get a grip Vigilant.

      • http://none Judith

        I agree with you Wyatt. The unions used to be for working class. My husband belonged to the Teamsters Union for over 30yrs.after he got out of the navy. He paid his dues and also paid into his retirement and spousal benefits. There were some crooks running the union back then, but they were for the working men. Now it is so involved with government and getting rich they blow the members dues wrongfully. Those dues should stay in the union and help creat jobs for our citizens..Why didn’t they put a few million to help pay our national debt? Because there would be no money in it for them.

    • Jacques

      Terrible, isn’t it? Hopefully you’re accounting for Soros somewhere… or it just work one way. Well, it is a two way street, enjoy the ride!

      • eddie47d

        Soros wasn’t envolved in the Wisconsin election so take your senseless babble to another planet!

      • JeffH

        eddie, Liberals, like yourself , who howled at the nightmarish evil of “Koch Brothers money” supporting Walker are curiously silent about international leftist billionaire George Soros funding anti-Walker websites and organizations through his Open Society Institute.

        One of these Soros operations, the “Wisconsin Values Budget,” urged closing a $3.6 billion state budget deficit with a billion dollars in tax increases.

        Oh, and just so ya know, Soros kid, Jonathan Soros, was also a big contributor to the Recall Scott Walker campaign . Soros is on your evil 1% list isn’t he?

    • http://yahoo a

      Doc,The public is tired of getting screwed and not waking up in the morning with a smile.This was the left’s wet dream and they came up dry. Seems like the Tea Party will rock this fall!!!

      • UWorlds1

        It’s a sad day when workers vote against their own interests…average wages have been going down since the ‘trickle down’ theory of Reagan was enacted. As far as the tea party goes…Romney is no tea party republican.

      • Kevin Beck

        Check your math again. Real wages have been going down since Nixon took the United States off the gold standard in 1971. Even Reagan’s Revolution could not overcome the deceit brought about by Nixon.

    • Armen Kartvelian

      As to spending, fear of having less money to spend must be the reason President Obama has been holding so many fund-raisers, as many as four a day.

      BTW, who pays for his transport and security when he’s at a fund-raiser? OK, the taxpayers cover his security because he’s the president. But why doesn’t his campaign pay for his transport since he’s not at the fund-raiser on official business but as a candidate for re-election?

    • Steve E
      • DaveH

        The end of Democracy? And here all this time I thought we had a Republic.

    • Warrior

      I sense the “progressive” walls are crumbling and falling in on themselves. If there is a benefit to this “recession”, it is that “sunlight” has been shown on all the “unsustainable” ponzi schemes of the “progressives”. SS, medicare, medicaid, public sector unions kickback schemes; planned parenthood and all the rest of “wonderful programs “you enjoy” according to little barry. Fabrication and fraud ARE the trademark now of the “progressive socialist democratic party” Go get yourself some more Beefeaters because I believe you need to be “ginned up” some more.. Funny thing about reality, donkey’s have a very difficult time handling it without medicinal assistance!

    • http://www.facebook.com/nate.kangas Nate Kangas

      Doc that is not correct. Walker did not outspend Barrett 7 to 1. In fact if you read the press they are saying 8 to 1. However, the facts are much different. Walker spent a total of $45.6 million and Barrett spent a total of $17.9 million. That is not 7 to one it is only a 2.5 to 1difference. The 7 or 8 to one you and the press are referring to is the amount of money raised by each candidate. The 8 to 1 number that Democrats are focusing in on is the amount that was raised specifically by each candidate not including independent groups. Scott Walker raised $29.7 million and Tom Barrett raised $2.9 million.

      What that shows is that America is not behind the Unions as much as you would like to think.

      • JeffH

        Nate, try to understand the liberal mind…it’s called cheating if they are outspent or out funded and lose…if they win, then it’s all fair in love and politics…in essence, they’re all a bunch of dependant whiny hypocrites.

    • Power To The People

      No Doc…it was not the spending….throwing money at everything does not produce results! Instead, the voters were aware of the issues and saw through the lefty BS and realized the unions are sticking it to them the tax payer and said “enough”!

      Guess that’s hard to swallow when chocking on your over sized pensions!

    • Judy

      Gee how about the 31 billion George Soross has contributed to the left and it’s crazy ideas.. A far cry from the 4 million the Kock brothers have contributed. Keep in mind Soross is a crazy old koot that wants to see this country on its knees, and we are just about there.

      • eddie47d

        Once again Soros was not envolved in the Wisconsin elections but the Koch’s were so stick to the facts.

    • diamond1957

      and soros’s deep pockets dont ever count does it ? Too bad the Unions pockets arent as deep as the other players. And to those who think going back to $5.00 an hour is so bad, what if the cost living rolled back with it ?

    • JeffH

      Doc, paranoia mind destroia. You lefties have no other boogeyman do you? Well, not right now anyway.The Koch brothers believe that economic freedom and free markets are the best way to generate prosperity for everyone and they put their money where their mouth is. If the Koch brothers really wanted to make a lot of money for themselves, they would act like most corporations…seek fortune through government intervention, not through competition in free markets.

      Charles and David Koch believe in low taxes, less spending, and limited regulation not because those policies helped them but because they helped everybody. “If I wanted to enhance my riches,” said David Koch, “why do I give away almost all my money?”

      You may not like it but I suggest you read this…The left’s obsession with the Koch brothers
      http://wichitaliberty.org/free-markets/weekly-standard-the-left%e2%80%99s-obsession-with-the-koch-brothers/

      • DaveH

        Slam dunk, Jeff.
        Thank you.

    • DaveH

      No amount of campaign contributions can force you to vote any way you don’t want to vote. It’s funny how you Liberals cry about campaign funding when it goes against your wishes, but are just fine with it when it’s in your favor:
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/obama-campaign-fundraising_n_901569.html

    • wisdomwalker

      How is the Koch brothers money any different from George Soros money?

      • Judy

        Thank you, of course most people don’t even know who George Soross is. They need to have a heads up on who he is. I would think they would at least be curious, because he is out to destroy this country, just like his mouth piece Obama

      • UWorlds1

        I think the only people that have destroyed America are people that are hoardng the money. People like Romney.

      • Judy

        Guess what it is none of our business what Romney does with HIS money, but it is my business what Obama is doing with MINE!!!!!!!

      • UWorlds1

        It’s my business when he has gotten money from the government and does not pay taxes on it. Plus he’s running for President of course it’s my business. Romney is nothing but a corporate welfare king.

      • Judy

        What. The heck are you talking about, he made his money by investing and working not from the government, we aren’t really sure where the heck Obama made his. Romeny has never taken any of your money or mine, he invests his own, which by the way he made on his own, I have no idea where you get your info.

      • UWorlds1

        Are you kidding me??? Tax breaks, low-interests loans, government loans, business incentives, etc. Surely you are not that naive to think Romney has not gotten any help from government. The American people are dumber than I thought.

      • Judy

        Are you even aware of how many companies he has rebuilt with that money which by the way helped people keeps there jobs, do you think he’s the only man to get these things? For Pete sakes if I could get some of that money to rebuild something that would save or create jobs I sure would too. You seem to have a problem with people being successful?

      • UWorlds1

        Oh geeze…why when someone has an opinion we are against success? I just am not on the paddy wagon with this job creation BS. i am not ashamed to be a worker. Workers are what built America. And for some reason the worker is being bashed. Romney is first and foremost a wealth creator…for himself. These so-called job creators are a joke. if they were job creators every person in America would have a job. We give these people to much credence. They move money around and make money for themselves. if you think Romney will create jobs while being president you are a fool. if that was the case he should just keep the job he has and create jobs.

        He wants to be in office to enact laws that will make more money for him and his cronies. The middle class will be destroyed under Romney. Most of the jobs he created with Bain were 10.00/hr jobs..not living wage jobs. He knows nothing about student laws, credit care debt, etc. I have nothing against the mega-rich, I just don’t think they make good Presidents.

      • Judy

        We’ll good luck with that one, you have to be rich to run for president, never seen a poor one. If you think socialism creates jobs you are living somewhere else. It’s worked so well for other countries NOT ! Obama has no idea how to create jobs, just where do you think all this money has spent for green energy? It’s lined someones pockets and Nancy Pelossi’s brother is one of those lucky people to get some of that money,that by the way hasn’t created anything. Just what kind of experience can you show me Obama has had at running anything besides community organizing, I guess he may have ordered some shirts or something for his little protesters to wear. He is the biggest joke to ever hit the white house.

      • UWorlds1

        Where did I ever say anything about being a socialist…you people love to throw labels on people.

      • Kevin Beck

        You’re absolutely correct! Both Roosevelts and John Kennedy were horrific presidents.

      • Judy

        Oh and by the way, you have Romeny mixed up with Timothy Gightner Obamas treasury man he didn’t pay his taxes. Besides Romeny is releasing his tax forms, so not paying his taxes like you say is a lie

      • UWorlds1

        He just leaves the majority of his money in offshore accounts. Romney’s not that smart, he’s not a self-made person…he was born rich.

      • Judy

        Lots of people are born rich, so what and as for offshore accounts I have no proof of that and even if he does it’s perfectly legal, thousand of rich people do that. You know what, our government sets it up for people to look for loop holes, I don’t see the government helping me when we redo a house to make extra money, but when we sell it the governments right there looking for their 30%, which they did nothing to deserve it. I have no problem paying taxes, but when the government wants a third of my profit when I’m trying to get ahead it pisses me off

      • UWorlds1

        I have a problem with the government taking to much of my paycheck also…but please don’t try to make Romney out to be a do-gooder. He was born rich, he used all his wealth..not to help people but to get ahead. He not only did not pay his fair share on taxes he wants to lower his tax rate more. He has never served in the military please none of his FIVE sons have not served in at least the Air National Guard. He has given back nothing to the country that has been so good to him.

      • Judy

        Oh yes and Obama has given back so much, oh he didn’t serve In the military either, didn’t know that was a prerequisite for being president. At least he’s wasn’t like some rich kids who just blow all the family money, instead he made more good for him. Most Mormons I know are hard working and they all seem to be pretty well off. Maybe being a good Christian, and giving back to God does make you more successful. Oh by the way have you looked up how much the Romenys donated versus Biden, or Obama, I think you will be shocked.

      • UWorlds1

        Yes I do know Romney donated most of his money to the Mormon church. And we really don’t know how much money Romney has given since we have NOT seen his real tax returns.

      • Judy

        Ok you can go online type in Romenys taxes, and or Romenys donations. He has released his taxes, and it breaks down his donations, what he made and so on. Obama gave 5.7% in 2007 Biden gave .03 and Romney gave 16 % you are mislead if you think Romney hasn’t released his tax statement

      • Liberty Lover

        Romney IS a self-made man, UWorlds1, though he started with significant advantages, including a superior IQ and a good role model for leadership. His wealth is not inherited. Read a little about his life and try to remove at least one of your many areas of ignorance.

      • Eric Jones

        There is NOOO SUCH THING as a self made man. These stories you her about people “pulling themselves up by the boot straps” is a MYTH he exploited his workers like everyone else.

      • DaveH

        UWorlds1,
        You need to do some learning. Capital Investment is what drives an economy. Without the Capital Machinery and Plants that are built with that investment, we would all be on a bare subsistence level like so many people in the third world countries. Now, for sure, if the companies are getting special aid (subsidies, tariffs, quotas, regulations, and other forms of protection) from their Crony Politicians, that is a bad thing. But that’s a separate issue. The best we can hope for is that Government butts the flock out of our Marketplaces.
        Please put on your thinking cap and read this:
        http://mises.org/daily/5277/When-Capital-Is-Nowhere-in-View

      • eddie47d

        Dave thinks all that money in the Cayman Islands is helping America to prosper. Only those who hide their money benefit and too many who do didn’t earn it honestly.

      • DaveH

        You didn’t read the article, did you ignoramus?

    • JeffH

      Doc, I’d like you to take a hard look at this, while you continue on with your liberal infused talking point Re: KOCH.

      George Soros: Godfather of the Left
      Liberal billionaire trying to give U.S. a liberal society it can’t refuse.
      Soros Indoctrinates Students Around the World

      Left-wing donor George Soros spent more than $400 million world-wide to indoctrinate students and teach them to promote liberal, and in some cases extremist, causes. He has even funded his own university that promotes his own unique philosophy of open society. His reach and influence far surpasses that of the Koch brothers, who have been vilified by the left and the media for their grants to universities.

      Soros funded programs and classes at universities around the world promote his radical ideology. Soros’s Open Society Foundations granted $407,790,344 in gifts and commitments to higher education since the year 2000. The Koch brothers were vilified by the American political left for donating almost $7 million to universities while their beloved Soros gave more than 50 times that amount to the same type of groups.

      Soros Gave More than 50 Times as much as Koch Brothers to Universities, Liberals Still Scream Foul.
      http://www.mrc.org/special-reports/special-report-george-soros-godfather-left

      • JeffH

        The liberal media’s shameful double standard when it comes to George Soros.

        In the wake of the liberal humiliation in the Wisconsin recall election Tuesday, the media have been decrying the influence of money in politics. But for years, ultra left-wing billionaire George Soros has been using his billions to advance a genuinely frightening agenda of abortion, indoctrination of our children, drug legalization, limits on free speech, global governance and many more items on the liberal wish list. All the while, the liberal media have ignored or willfully distorted his dangerous agenda.

      • UWorlds1

        We have seen a lot of legalization of drugs, more abortions and the like. Are you in reality. If anything the opposite is true.

      • JeffH

        UWorlds1, not quite sure what point you’re trying to make…that said, do you even know what “reality” means?

        You might need some help…so here it is.reality-
        1.The quality or state of being actual or true.
        2.One, such as a person, an entity, or an event, that is actual: “the weight of history and political realities” (Benno C. Schmidt, Jr.).
        3.The totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence.
        4.That which exists objectively and in fact: Your observations do not seem to be about reality.

      • UWorlds1

        The reality is the only policies that I see as far as education, women’s reproductive rights, etc. have been brought forth from the republican party not the democrats.

      • DaveH

        ?

      • JeffH

        DaveH, UWorlds1 may be related to eddie.

      • DaveH

        Scary thought.

      • Buster the Anatolian

        If UWorlds1 isn’t related to eddie he is related to Flashy. UWorlds1 is just as adept at posting opinions and ideas as fact without one shread of evidence in the form of sources and/or links as either of them.

  • Harold Olsen

    The left doesn’t seem to know just how pathetic and ridicules they are. When things like polls or votes go their way they talk about how important the vote or poll was. But, if a vote or poll goes against them, they call it meaningless and insignificant. When they were sure Walker would lose, they talked about how it would put the Republicans in their place and the Walker recall vote would be the most significant vote in the history of this country. Now they are saying it doesn’t mean a thing, Yet they are all sucking their thumbs and crying in their security blankets like the immature whining crybabies they are.

    • nc

      Harold, I’m from the “left” and I never though Walker would lose! He had enough votes to get elected and I figured he would have enough votes to avoid recall! You speak of the left “crying” and moaning and you post here????? Where the RIGHT pi$$e$ and moans every day because they don’t get to run the show?? They complain that the greatest nation in the world is not now nor has ever been “run right” except in the hands of conservatives! THE FACTS AND FIGURES PRODUCED BY THE ECONOMY DURING DEMOCRAT ( LEFT,SOCIALIST, MARXIST, COMMIE) ADMINISTRATIONS DON’T SAY THAT!!!! TRY “PRESIDENTS AND ROSPERITY” AT FORBES .COM , A CONSERVATIVE OWNED AND OPERATED MAGAZINE AND SEE THAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE DONE LESS THAN THE DEMOCRATS HAVE TO GET US TO NUMBER ONE IN THE WORLD!

      It’s hard to “cry” with our man in the oval office and the country no longer losing 600,000 jobs a month and the stock market well above the “bush 6547″ mark!

      Wis. was a loss in Wis. but it may help with the middle class labor vote in other states. I find it hard to cheer when middle class workers lose ground in an election! I don’t know of a “1%er” who teaches school or picks up garbage.

      • Patty

        Please stop referring to gov’t. workers as middle class workers. They are not. A private sector person cannot legally collect retirement funds at the age of 53 like a gov’t. worker. A private sector worker does not have their healthcare paid by their employer once retired until they reach the age of 65. For a gov’t. worker to collect 75% of their high five average of 70k per year (52,500) a private sector person would have to have approx. 1 million dollars in investments earning approx 6% annually. 1 million dollars would put you up into the 1% bracket. So stop referring to gov’t. workers as middle class.

  • simian pete

    Chip,

    You know what happens when you have a mixed workplace ? It’s war ! It’s total competition like you probably have never experienced Chip ! Quite frankly – it’s GREAT !
    Chip, you need to take a vacation ! Get a job as a lower manager/supervisor (non-union) in one of them Wisconsin state offices for like 6 months ! IT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND ! HA HA !!!! Watch the fireworks erupt between the two groups ! Production definitely will go up !!!

    No more featherbedding !! EVERYONE HAS TO WORK HARD !! The individual Union members won’t get a pay raise for working harder. They are locked into their contract pay rate !!! HA HA HA !!! Work harder you lazy Union asses !!!!

    Then you have the Non-Union workers – the ones who left the Union ! They don’t have any Union dues deducted from their paychecks anymore. They are considered “traitors” by the Union members – much RESENTMENT !! EVERY FREAKIN’ DAY they are reminded of being a traitor … IT”S GREAT ! MAKES THE FORMER UNION MEMBERS WORK EVEN HARDER ! THEY DON’T HAVE ACCESS TO A UNION STEWARD FOR GRIEVANCES !! HA HA HA !!! They are scared to death of losing their jobs ! What a good motivator !!! Better bring the defibrillators. Time to take some CPR courses at the local YMCA …

    I think most of the former Union Members are in for a surprise. WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD !!!! Nothing like total competition in the work environment !!! The Governor has done a good job !!!

    • http://www.facebook.com/merle.burbaughjr Merle Burbaugh Jr

      Perhaps we need to go back to no Unions at all in Government like it should be. Neither the Government nor Union has any vested interest in profit or productivity so only the taxpayer gets screwed.

      • rb

        After 21 years of working for the government in a union job I learned there is a benificial place for unions when you are working for what would otherwise and still is a tyranical mis management force as we had in the government. Without the union we would have been working for minimum wage, 12 hours a days, 7 days a week, with no holidays, pension or health insurance. In those 21 years the management tried very hard to go that direction. Unfortunately the current workers are subjected to some of the worst workplace abuse I have ever seen in a company. Management regulary violates contract obligations on a local and national level and the union sits by and watches as dues paying members are suspended and even fired for minor things. There is no 40 work week. Overtime is mandatory and hourly workers are required to work 6 days per week. All this while those who run the union and live in Washington DC enjoy salaries of at least 2 times what the people they “reprisent” make and refuse to disclose what their “benefit” packages contain and cost the dues paying members. (Little things like complete payment of all housing expenses and a chaufer driven car) At this point the union bosses are so busy lining their pockets with contributions from politicians they have forgotten who they reprisent in this particular government operation. At one time the unions were a good thing and served a great purpose. Now it seems they are serving no one but themselves and the top brass. They no longer work for the both the worker and the company’s benefit but sell themselves to the highest bidder like a polititician or prostitute. (Hmm kind of the same thing I guess)

      • Kevin Beck

        I need to ask one question: Before you got the union involved in your government workplace, did your job require you to work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, only to be paid minimum wage, with no pension or holidays?

        If it did, then you were one of the lucky ones that was rescued; if not, then your comment is senseless.

      • Dennis48e

        Kevin Beck, rb’s comments are pretty much useless anyway. First he says unions are the greatest thing since dirt then he says they do nothing for the workers they are supposed to represent.

      • 2¢ worth…

        He said NOW! Now the unions are as corrupt (as politics) and he’s spot on. I worked for minimum wages at several jobs but I wasn’t made to work 12 – 14 hours a day, 6 – 7 days a week.. I had to volunteer for it in order to make ends meet.. Then the union came on (as each employee voted) and the pay was equal to the work and many of us were happy to work 40 hours a week 5 days as it opened the door to more workers and for decades we enjoyed our jobs as the owners enjoyed our production, then as is always present where humans are concerned, the unions became lax, raised dues and literally told us who to vote for.. I predict that when the unions are no more THAT’S when the corporate toads will pass laws where we all once again will be working under their thumbs for peanuts.. Will we be happy that the unions are no more? Possibly but then (even as they grew and their mode changed) we will have no advocate to tell the toads ‘fair pay for fair work’.. Will it be worth it? Well, I have to agree, it certainly seems so at this point in time but as for our children’s future? It would be a miracle if the big frogs suddenly grew a heart and treated their workers as an asset instead of a commodity for their financial ends.

      • Liberty Lover

        You guys with your “fair pay for a fair day’s work”! Don’t you understand that this is set by the marketplace (despite your wishes to have “fair” determined by an Obama “Fairness Czar”). An employer who doesn’t pay a valued worker a fair wage risks losing that worker to another employer. Judging from my experience in the world (and on blogs such as this), 30% to 40% of workers consider themselves fairly paid and the rest deem themselves underpaid. The truth is that most union workers in industrial America were overpaid 40-50 years ago for easily learnable skills, which is why those jobs no longer exist in the US.

    • ROB

      unions gave us 40 hour work weeks so next weekend when you are deing a lazy scab thank a union member, dummy make less give the ceo 110 times the average wage you all sound like corporate suck pump

      • Grammy

        Unions have been beneficial in our history and still are in some industries, mainly for safety of the workers. Private sector unions are not affected by the changes in Wisconsin at all, just public sector unions. The reasoning behind denying government workers collective bargaining is that the taxpayer doesn’t sit on the other side of the table yet are required to foot the bill. That’s quite different from a private sector employer sitting down to negotiatate with a union. The big difference for the public worker is they they now have a choice about giving their wages to a union, and many have chosen not to, as would I if I still worked in the government position I retired from. (As for the “cadillac” retirement for state employees, my monthly retirement check after 22 years comes $100 short of paying for my monthly health insurance.) Still, all employees should contribute to their retirement plans.

      • Vigilant

        Union lackey ROB says, “unions gave us 40 hour work weeks.”

        Yes, and they gave us incompetent, dumbed down, socialist programmed teachers who cannot be fired without embroiling taxpayers in court suits costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. They gave us organizations that collect dues from members of all political persuasions and then use those dues to contribute to Democrat candidates only.

        According to Milton Friedman, “The president of the National Education Association was once asked when his union was going to do something about students. He replied that when the students became members of the union, the union would take care of them.”

      • Vigilant

        Not to forget that unions gave us cushy teacher/administrator pay and pension plans that consume 75-80% of each school budget, the growth of which has school districts reeling from the effects. Property taxes to support such profligacy are killing property owners here in NY, and with federal/state funds drying up, no relief is in sight.

      • JeffH

        vigilant, I fully agree with you. I’ve been active and represented both sides of that aisle, union and management. I’ve represented both sides of in complaints filed with the NLRB. In 1969, the company I was working for was wage abusive and the employees could be fired without cause…we needed strong representation. I was very active throught the process, became well respected within the hierarchy of the ILWU and the company, and we did help Bio-Rad Laboratories become a better company and workplace. It was needed and it worked. Forward 15 years and the very same union with the very same organizers attempted and succeeded in organizing the labor in our coffee warehouse. It was already a fair workplace, although less than 5 years old, with escalating benefits and twice yearly wage increases…but, a couple of lazy employees thought they needed “protection”. They won the battle to organize but ultimately lost the war. The union reps whom I had cavorted with and impressed at Bio-Rad now looked at me as a virus, a manager, the enemy. The employees were the losers and the “lazy disgruntled” employees ended up losing their jobs…because they didn’t pay their union dues!

        The tale is that I experienced both the good and the bad of the union, and I can say that without the union I became far more successful with my job growth because I had totake responsibility and work hard for my rewards, and that’s what I did.

        Unions have had their day but, in general, the average worker is content to be mediocre whithin the union structure because they have no incentive to excel.

        My hats off to Gov. Walker and the people of Wisconsin have spoken. This is a big blow to public unions, the SEIU and the AFL/CIO, one that is dearly needed. Look for the unons to really start fighting for their existance. Socialism and communism is in the hearts of these unions.

      • DaveH

        Rob says — “unions gave us 40 hour work weeks”.
        No, Rob, Unions didn’t give us 40 hour work weeks. Shorter workweeks were evolving naturally as capitalism provided more productivity, higher wages, and cheaper products.
        But Unions did CONFINE us to 40 hour work weeks. For instance, I wanted to work 4 ten-hour days when I was young and working at a cement plant. The company said it would be okay with them but they were bound by the Union Contract which mandated 8 hour days. I didn’t want to be in the Union but it was a closed shop and I had no choice.
        A high school teacher predicted we would have 32 hour workweeks soon in the late 60s, but alas it never came to pass thanks to Unions and Socialism:
        http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=511

      • DaveH
      • UWorlds1

        I agree…it’s seems the average joe says nothing about a CEO making 1 million a year to drive a company into the ground but will bitch about a worker making a living wage. Go figure.

      • DaveH

        The difference, UWorlds1? The company owners think the CEO is generating a return on their investment that is worth his/her salary. The Unionists, instead of being happy to have a job since they don’t have the initiative to run their own business, want to coercively take that money whether there are others happily willing to take their places or not.

      • UWorlds1

        Everyone does not have the aptitude or the inclination to be a business owner…that is not to say they do not add value to the corporation or small business. You have to know how to be a good follower to be a good leader.

      • http://gravatar.com/catman11 coalminer

        Amen Rob.I agree!

      • Patty

        UWorldsOne – If you don’t have the drive, ambition, aptitude to own, start, run your own business, than why would you feel entitled to someone elses’ drive, ambition, aptitude? You contribute to the company for “X” amount is something you agreed to when hired. And then, after you get in, you feel you are entitled to more than you agreed to? If you don’t want to take the risk, which is fine, why should you get more of the spoils when you were not willing to take the risk? Where does your entitlement attitude come from?
        What does UWorldsOne mean to you? Are you for losing our constitution and becoming a One world, global nation? Just wondering.

      • Patty

        UWorlds1 says – Just because you add something to the company does not give you a “right” to any part of it or any guarantees. The problem with your thought process, is that they could hire someone else to do your job with the same or better result. The owner on the other hand is the risk taker, and to them go the spoils, plus you can’t do what they can do or you would be doing it. With your analogy it would be like you hiring someone to come and put in a patio, pool and deck and then them expecting to use it and come to all of the parties, because they contributed to the equity/improvement of your home. There are people who think up the bridge (entrepreneurs), people who design the bridge (engineers) and then people to build the bridge (worker bees). It is your choice which one of those categories you wish to be in. Steve Jobs invented Apple, he had engineers design the product and software and he has worker bees assembling them.

      • flipperj

        and your a union suck pump

    • Jim

      You see it all the time in N.Y. Several public union members hanging around, 3 trucks running, and one shovel, pathetic! They don’t even try and hide it which is even more pathetic, it’s like being spat in the face. Cuomo need to grow a pair of stones or get the hell out of office, 10 billion dollar debt and growing. Hey Cuomo, stop the yealy Tax Capping and start Tax Cutting, I’m sick of being milked like a cow, now get your hand off me before I kick ya!

      • Sam

        The need for unions has long since passed. We are no longer a nation made up primarily if worker bees, Most workers have enough sense to look out for themselves and make their own decisions. The time has come to get these bullies out of our schools and government. They have inflated government and education cost to astronomical levels while education and local governments have gone to seed. Vote for Romney and Republicans at all levels of government. Restore our economy and reclaim our nation!

      • Nadzieja Batki

        The question is why did the workers not take care of their own interests but put themselves at the mercy of messiah wannabes called the union bosses?

      • eddie47d

        There are still companies out there that treat their employees poorly and unions may be needed. There may well be some greedy unions but nothing in comparison to greedy members of the Elite establishment and CEO’s. The high cost of paying for their salaries and bonuses also comes down on each and every one of us. Higher education is not union either and professors and administrators make outlandish wages. Union teachers only make a fraction of what those administrators make so correct the problem from the top.

      • DaveH

        Sam,
        The need for Unions never existed. It was purely Union Propaganda that people were forced into sweatshop labor and had no other choices:
        http://mises.org/daily/2384

    • Warrior

      I often wonder how such a benevolent gubmint could mistreat it workers. For those of you that are convinced the gubmint provides all the right answers, why in the world would these “public” workers require representation? As i WATCH YOU CHASE YOUR TAILS, PLEASE EXPLAIN.

      • DaveH

        Don’t expect consistency from Progressives, Warrior.

    • Armen Kartvelian

      What’s the point of a public sector union? Working conditions? Already covered by OSHA insofar as safety is concerned. Compensation? If civil service, there are grades and steps. Health insurance? Only the amount of the employee’s contribution. Far too low to be sustainable. Retirement? That’s where the public sector unions have made out like bandits and why so many government entities — municipalities, school boards, states, etc., are in such financial trouble.

      If a mixed shop becomes a battle ground, who are the aggressors? We keep hearing about “fair share.” How about “fair play?” Must union members behave like spoiled children if their fellow employees choose not to belong to their union? Why not behave like adults and try to persuade their colleagues to join or rejoin the union.

      Even Franklin Roosevelt (1937 letter) was against public sector unions.

    • Rsgoeman

      I learned 40 years ago the unions ( like the IBEW) only care that the dues are paid. The union reps never help a person shafted by the lead person on an assembly line.

      • Patty

        RsGoeman – Don’t most union members pick on each other? Kind of from the top down like a hen pecking order?

    • Don

      Most union are relics of the past that should be allowed to die. There really isn’t a need for unions today except in a few industries. And, as for public service unions, they are a joke.
      They are the only unions where one elects one’s boss (politicans).

      • UWorlds1

        And corporations that get huge tax breaks also give to politicians. And then they turn around and lower wages and give no benefits. And it’s all legal.

      • Kevin Beck

        What “tax breaks” are you referring to that businesses get? And what does this have to do with the voting in Wisconsin?

      • UWorlds1

        Why do you think corporation lobby for lower tax rates..that’s more money in their pockets. Plus they get all kinds of ‘incentives’ from the government. Diane Hendricks (one of Walker’s biggest donors) received millions of dollars from the government via government contracts. They say they want the government out of the way all the time taking from the government. They just don’t want the little guy getting anything from the government. ABC corporation would not be what it is today with government handouts. Now that they don’t need government money they don’t want to pay taxes.

      • Kevin Beck

        What “tax breaks” are you referring to? Or do you have a convoluted definition of what a tax break is?

        Lower tax rates? That’s to ensure that everyone is entitled to keep more of what they earn! Only a statist or a socialist would have the view that wealth is created by the government, and that it’s government’s job to determine how much of one’s income (which is not the same as wealth) that one is permitted to keep.

        Regarding the political contributions of one person to Walker’s campaign: What makes that different than the labor unions collecting dues from members and using those dues to cycle back to the campaigns of members of the Democrat party? Labor unions are just acting in their best interests; how’s that different from a business owner contributing to someone promising to look out for his (or her)?

        I will give you some credit for one good line of thinking: Businesses (not limited to corporations) do lobby for “protection” for their goods and services. Before 1998, Microsoft never had a lobbyist in Washington, DC. Then they get hit with an antitrust investigation from the Justice Department. After the investigation concluded, they suddenly hired a lobbyist to participate in that “protection” racket. They were a target for their so-called monopolistic practices, and they didn’t have a Washington lobbyist to “look out for their interests.” At the time, they didn’t need one; they let their success in the marketplace work for them. Now they have one, as a means of protection.

        The biggest problem is that the Federal government contributes over 20% of all the spending (GDP) in the country. This is why reduction of government spending is required: It would reduce the need for the government “protection” racket.

      • UWorlds1

        The problem is corporations ARE taking government funds but are giving nothing back. If you have success in America you can’t take the government handout and then say you don’t believe in paying taxes.

      • UWorlds1

        And one thing about Microsoft…they were a monopoly and they did bundle services which made it hard for other companies to be competitive. I know I worked help desk for many years. Businesses will do anything if they can get away with it.

      • Liberty Lover

        Vote with your feet and get a better job! FWIW, unemployment won’t be dramatically reduced until prevailing wages decline to market-clearing levels. The unfortunate truth is that most lower and mid-level American workers are not well adapted to compete in an increasingly global economy.

    • Nanna Gail

      Simian Pete: You are partly right. I came from a unionized country when I immigrated here, so I can tell you first hand. It IS “like” a war, when you have union and NON union employees, but, it doesn’t make the non union members work HARDER than the union members, because the non union members work at the same pace as the union memmbers, so What it does, is cause “strikes”, and then the whole country is held to ransom.

      • simian pete

        Nanna Gail,

        It could go that way – like you said, the non-union workers go at the same pace as the slow union workers. Anything can happen ! It’s a Dynamic Scenario ! Great to Watch and Analyze !

        What I’ve seen (in a closed shop) is upper management finds out some Union Workers don’t want to pay dues anymore. Then upper Management hires industrial/employee relations experts and/or attorneys to start busting the Union (IE like Jackson & Lewis etc.) . Management gets some really good advice from “Human Resource Relations” consultants (IE “Union Busting Consultants”)….

        The Union Workers who hate paying dues, volunteer to start a petition drive to open the shop. They really don’t like paying them dues to the Union ! They feel they can do better. They also think they will get some “brownie points” from the managers. That somehow upper management won’t lay them off , write them up, nor suspend them.

        Y’know, it comes down to money. People are funny about their own money. These Union Workers who don’t want to pay dues – they are not bad people !!! Their isn’t any need for Union Services in their mind.

        Actually Grievance procedures can save MANAGEMENT MUCHO DINERO !! Why ? Because they won’t need to hire an ATTORNEY – IT ALSO SAVES the Union Member mucho dinero for the same reason … the Union Steward sits down and pretty much (sometimes informally) and gets things straightened out. A VERY INEXPENSIVE SOLUTION .

        But some MANAGEMENT are “funny about money” also and feel the Union isn’t needed … they aren’t bad people ! That’s money’s effect on people…..

        Y’know, Nanna Gail, in the end everyone is commiting economic suicide…. It’s like pre-programmed brainwashed humans jumping off a cliff – like a BAD CULT mentality….aka a anti-Union Feeding Frenzy among corporate sharks ! It’s great to watch ! When it’s all over it’s like an economic JONESTOWN, lower management is forced to drink the KOOL AID. It’s not SUGAR in that KOOL AID – IT’S CYANIDE ! HA HA HA!!!

        The Union due paying members sometimes lose. They get an open shop. The upper management may be benevolent and let the non-union workers be just as slow as their Union co-workers. Usually the big plan is to “decertify” the Union. It’s pretty much over for the Union. The Union Workers finally are “convinced” their is no difference and quit the Union. There is another vote and they (the Union) is gone !!

        Then upper management can really turn the heat up, hire and fire at will ! IT’S GREAT !!!!
        CUT EXCESSIVE PAY AND BENEFITS ! That’s one way the GAME is PLAYED. BYE BYE you bunch of cry babies !!! You just got to see it (I have) when the former Union workers, the ones who defected first, GET LAID OFF !!! HA HA HA !! Especially the ones who complained about paying Union dues and passed around the petitions to open the shop …. They are like “What Happen ?”. They can’t adjust to the harsh realities of the business jungle we all live in ….

        Next thing you know most of the job’s are eliminated (except upper management and a few very expereinced lower managers) and the work is outsourced/relocated to some low paid workers in another location ….

        Nothing wrong with this. That’s just how the game is played …….

blog comments powered by Disqus
Bottom