Archive for the ‘Unions’ Category

A STRONG PRESIDENCY

March 21, 2011

Below are a couple of examples to signify the true strength and standing of our president and the respect he commands from his own party.  His own choice for number two dork, Joe Biden, follows the President’s wishes and words with the approbation they deserve.   To say Obama has destroyed the Office of the President of the United States of America is to say that the financial industry experienced an accounting hiccup a few years back.

Last Friday, Vice Hoof-in-Mouth compared Congressional Republicans to people who excuse rapists by blaming their victims.  He said that Republicans wanting to cut taxes for the wealthy and reduce spending by the government is similar to apologizing for rape.  These words were voiced by the man, chosen by the President, to lead negotiations for the 2012 budget.

Does he not understand that rape is an aggressive, vicious, violent and abhorrent act performed against what is generally perceived as a weaker individual?  Is this wording consistent with Obama’s call for political civility?  Does he understand that words can incite actions?  Is this what can be expected from a White House negotiator?

In January, shortly after the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and 18 others, nine of whom where fatally wounded  in Arizona, President Obama addressed a gathering of mourners at a memorial service in Tucson with the words, “At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized — at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do — it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”  He pled for tolerance and temperance in rhetoric and actions.  Vitriolic language from conservatives was accredited to the creation of  an atmosphere of hatred.

Since that speech in January, we have read articles and seen video images from Wisconsin calling for the deaths of the Republican governor and legislators by Obama supporters simply because they want to rein in excessive spending and keep the state solvent.  We have been exposed to the political civility called for in the form of multi-million dollar damage to a state house.  Some have speculated that support for the destructive mania eminated from, and was fueled by, the White House.

VOTE FOR OBAMA AGAIN IN 2012 BECAUSE REMNANTS OF A ONCE GREAT NATION CAN STILL BE RECOGNIZED!

Advertisements

DEMOCRATS AND CAMPAIGNING

March 6, 2011

Democrats are in campaign mode once again.  Or, perhaps I should say still.  At any rate, they are now organizing to find out who died in the last few years.  It’s imperative that those people have their wants met at election time.  It was just unfortunate that they happened to die when they did.

The Democrats’ oldest chant is that Republicans are the party of the rich.  They happily hold up signs printed and paid for by the poor people they claim to represent.  Most people voting for Democrats choose not to see that most of the funding comes from the destitute actors, directors and producers in Hollywood and the ilk of multi-billionaires Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and George Soros.  Obama has also been courting the music industry with his Wednesday night concerts at the White House.  Not garage bands either; we’re talking about the big names, the people who schmooze with the actors, directors and producers from Hollywood and the likes of Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and George Soros.

Public sector employees are also pursued by campaigning progressive Democrats.  Government wage earners pay dues to unions which are used to support Democrats who support public sector unions.  It’s a back scratching thing.

The way many clear thinking individuals see it, unions have become the driving force of government.  They are not listed in the Constitution, that can be readily identified, as a fourth branch of government, but they have assumed a position more powerful than even the presidency.

Public sector employees are paid in full by taxpayers.  It matters naught if you are liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican or Independent, your taxes are paying the salary and benefits of your neighbor who works in any government capacity.  While you’re working, he or she may be off on a five-week vacation that you can’t afford.  Perhaps your neighbor broke an arm.  You picked up the tab for the emergency room visit, resetting the bone, the cast, the pain meds and all follow-up visits.  If your neighbor is now retired, you may as well hand over your paycheck to him or her on Friday because you’re paying the retirement bill, in full.  That’s why so many liberals work for government agencies; they get more bang for your buck, then vote for more bang.

So, let’s take a trip around the park to understand how public sector unions work.  The following example is one person.   Let your own imagination project the numbers to cover tens of millions public sector union employees you are supporting in-part.  They are working for your local, county, state and federal government.  Let me state up front that this is not an example of all government employees, but it does cover a higher percentage than would be found in the private sector.

Bill (it could be Janet) is the person you encountered eight to ten years ago or maybe last week at the DMV or the planning department or the IRS.   Bill was slow-moving, unconcerned but adequately functional at his routine, by-the-book job.  Bill may speak many languages but had such a heavy foreign accent it required you to ask him to repeat in English two or three times.  Bill did his job but offered no ambition.  Bill could not be fired and replaced by someone with initiative because he belonged to a Public-Sector Trade Union whose acronym (PSTU) just happens to be the same as Partido Socialista Dos Trabalhadores Unificado (Portuguese: Unified Workers Socialist Party).

Bill is now retired after working for the government over 25 years.  Bill started working in the public sector right after high school at a pay scale roughly 15% – 20% higher than he could have earned doing a parallel job in for a private company.   During his time with the government, at minimum, Bill received a COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) in the average amount of 2.3% every year, in both up and down economies.  At retirement, with benefits he earned almost one and a half times his private sector counterpart.  He received 3-5 weeks paid vacation and the medical costs for he and his family, except for a small co-pay, were covered.

Bill is mad now because he is being asked to contribute about half as much to his medical coverage as non-union workers always have done.  He’s not willing to do his share to help balance a budget that is out of control because too many people feel entitled.  He is willing to do what it takes to protect him, personally, at the expense of others.  Bill will riot in the streets holding signs printed by the poor.  Bill will vote for more entitlements no matter what the cost.  Democrats don’t need to campaign for Bill’s vote.

THEY VOTED FOR THEMSELVES

February 19, 2011

It was the union members, uninformed and ignorant people who voted for and elected a president and congress that so willingly obligated your money and my money for redistribution.  Now those people who sold the country down the river, don’t want to provide a plug for the leaky raft on which we float.

Hey listen folks, the redistribution of wealth hurts all those who have to some degree, even if they have just a little more than their neighbor.  To level a playing field, to fill in the holes, some filler must be taken from the mounds.  Little mounds and big mounds must be scraped to fill the divots.  America is starving and they, the government employees and other union members, are unwilling to lay down their forks or share the scraps on their plates.

From Wikipedia: Redistribution of wealth is the transfer of income, wealth or property from some individuals to others caused by a social mechanism such as taxation, monetary policies, welfare, nationalization, charity or tort law.[1] Most often, it refers to progressive redistribution, from the rich to the poor, although it may also refer to regressive redistribution, from the poor to the rich.[2] The desirability and effects of redistribution are actively debated on ethical and economic grounds.

It seems like the state workers and other union members in Wisconsin are unhappy because they are being required to participate in the process of wealth redistribution.  It was okay as long as just you and I that had to contribute, but now that they are involved, it’s a different story.

It also looks at this point as if Ohio, Minnesota and Michigan are soon to follow the lead.  Lining up in place right behind them are Texas, California, Illinois, New Jersey, and New York.  Please have your governor take a number and wait behind the yellow line.

Exempting the red state of Texas, the remaining states listed above are all blue and comprise 179 electoral votes.  Isn’t it odd that the residents of those states were instrumental in electing the borrow and spend, spend and borrow, tax and spend, spend and tax some more progressives that for too many years controlled those states and for two years comprised the majority of the legislative branch and controlled the executive branch of our federal government?

How could they not see they would also affect their own inflated wages, over-promised and under-funded pension plans and other entitlements?  Now they are whining that they are being hurt by the corrective measures required for all to survive the storm.  It’s only the inbred butt biting they deserve!

The gimme, gimme, gimme, greedy mentality has got to stop at some point.  It’s not all Wall Street.  The problems of today have been recognized and ignored for years.  The entitlement programs have been so misemployed over the decades that yesterday may have been the point of no return.  We have people “in service” to our country whose idleness does little other than draw down on the economy.  At the same time, we have brave men and women in uniform who are willing to, and do, give their lives for less “entitlement” than the elected elite consider their rightful expense reimbursements.

Blame Bush if you want to, but he and his crew did ¼ the economic damage to this country in 8 years that this administration has done in two.  Yet, the last ten years are still only the tip of a five decade iceberg.  Put on the life jackets and grab the rails, the seas are about to get very, very rough!

JERRY BROWN

February 1, 2011

From the Los Angeles Times
Citing the pro-democracy unrest in Egypt and Tunisia, Gov. Jerry Brown called it “unconscionable” that GOP legislators are vowing to block his attempt to ask voters to extend tax hikes to balance the budget. 

From the Rahm Emanuel playbook, “A crisis is a terrible thing to waste”, Gov. Brown will find any excuse to raise taxes on the masses instead of cutting government waste, graft, corruption or need-for-naught entitlement programs to illegal aliens.

“When democratic ideals and calls for the right to vote are stirring the imagination of young people in Egypt and Tunisia and other parts of the world, we in California can’t say now is the time to block a vote of the people,” Brown said in his first State of the State address in nearly 30 years.  He said the budget has tough choices but that the people “have a right to vote” on the package.

He challenged both parties to take the difficult votes necessary to balance the budget.

“If you are a Democrat who doesn’t want to make budget reductions in programs you fought for and deeply believe in, I understand that,” he said.  “If you are a Republican who has taken a stand against taxes, I understand where you are coming from. But this time things are different. In fact, the people are telling us — in their own way — they sense something is profoundly wrong.  They see that their leaders are divided when they should be decisive and acting with clear purpose.”

There are enough union bosses and people drawing their living from the government in this state who do not contribute to the tax base, that the few working people just may have to “pick up the slack”.  EBT-SNAP recipients will undoubtedly see a bit more in their monthly stipend to cover the difference on their end.

The idiots in Sacramento, like New York City, simply cannot correlate  their inane policies with why so many income and tax producing companies and families are exiting the state faster than you can say tax increase.  They blindly continue them only to enhance the existent problems – or…maybe it’s a well planned scheme to break the system.

ONE NATION…?

January 17, 2011

Is this country turning into Bizarro World, USA or not?

The National Labor Relations Board is threatening to sue the states of Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah because those states believe union workers have the right to a secret ballot.  They want the workers to identify who they are and how they cast their vote.

It seems a bit inconsistent to me that the same federal government refuses to allow law enforcement to verify the identity of those very same workers because some of them may not be in this country legally.  This is the same government that keeps knocking down every state wanting to ask people to identify who they are when it comes time to vote for elected representatives.

Let’s quit the insane pretense.  Answer the following questions for yourself, according to your personal and honest beliefs.

Either we are a nation of (a) laws, or (b) not.

Either we, as individuals, are (a) endowed by our creator with certain unalienable  rights, or (b) not.

Either we, as a nation, are defined by (a) borders, or (b) not.

Either we, as a nation, are a people bound together by (a) one language, or (b) not.

Either we, individually and independently, are (a) capable, or (b) not.

Either we, individually, should be (a) wholly reliant on the government for subsistence and well-being, or (b) not.

Either we, as citizens, are governed by three branches that should treat every citizen, including themselves (a) fairly and equally, or (b) not.

If you answered all the above with (a): welcome to the United States of America.

If you answer any of the above with (a), and one or more (b), you are inconsistent and contributing to the demise of the United States of America.

If you answered all the questions (b), you should find another country in which to live because this is definitely not the one for you.