Thursday, February 24, 2011

Unions Take Page From Ron Paul (Or Vice Versa) To Skew WSJ Poll

WSJ has a poll on whether state employees should have collective bargaining rights. All the leftist sites which includes union sites are trying to skew the poll. You can vote HERE

Rachel Maddow Blows It Again

Rachel maddow, who has never been know for her veracity, is at it again as she no doubt "misspoke" on the Jay Leno Show.

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: But, if you look at like the last election cycle, of the top ten people donating money in that election, seven of them were giving to Republicans. It was all corporate interests and right-wing PACs and stuff. Seven of the ten were all right-wing. And the only three that weren't were unions.
MADDOW: So, if Republicans can get rid of the unions, particularly these public sector unions, they can run the table in every election from here on out. This is the only competition they have for actual, big contributors in politics. So, they want to get rid of the unions for partisan reasons.
It is so unfortunate when someone of Rachel's caliber misspeaks so often.

It is amazing that in this day and age people feel that they can blatantly lie, especially on national TV, and get away with it. Granted, Maddow used to work with Keith Olbermann, but really, enough should be enough.

Go HERE to read more about it including numerous charts looking at Maddow's statement from numerous angles.

Public Sector Unions VS America

Separation Of Churl & State

Since liberals and progressives like to use letters in place of the constitution as was done by KKK'er, Hugo Black, I think we can use a letter by Franklin Delano Roosevelt concerning public sector unions and collective bargaining.

My dear Mr. Steward:
As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.
Very sincerely yours,

Churls now presume to extract that which doesn't belong to them, power over the public purse and demands that the people pay for this excess. The same Hugo Black wrote, not in a letter, on this abuse by groups on the mass of citizens.

"I cannot consider the Bill of Rights to be an outworn 18th century 'strait jacket.' ... Its provisions may be thought outdated abstractions by some. And it is true that they were designed to meet ancient evils. But they are the same kind of human evils that have emerged from century to century wherever excessive power is sought by the few at the expense of the many."

Indeed, human evils seeking excessive power for the few at the expense of the many may be stated as the separation of churls & state. Let it be done.

The Face Of Unions-Thuggery

via I Own The World
Read the whole story.