Archive for the ‘Unions’ Category


by Stephen Levine on Thursday, November 7th, 2013

This is article 68 of 70 in the topic Travel/Transportation

Do you want armed bozos in a “gun free” target-rich environment?


The progressive socialist democrats running the unions are not ones to let a crisis go to waste, so there should be absolutely no surprise that the union associated with the TSA officers are urging that they be armed. Of course, this presents its own challenges.

  1. Can you trust a poorly vetted and grossly-out-of-shape civilian police force that has relaxed standards and would be an armed presence in a gun-free zone?
  2. Can you trust TSA personnel, who face daily insults and the scorn of the public, not to overreact and become a threat to the traveling public?
  3. Can you imagine TSA officers spraying innocent civilians in the proximity and not hitting their intended target?
  4. Can you trust a civilian police force, not to use the guns they are officially issued, on their home turf?
  5. Can you trust the unions not to demand more and more money as these officers are trained and armed – with the union eventually demanding they be given federal law enforcement status with equivalent pay, pensions, healthcare, early-retirement, and other perks?
  6. Can you trust the political leadership of the TSA?
  7. Is there any proof that any TSA person thwarted an actual terrorist attack in the history of the TSA?

Even when trained, many of these people will remain TSA bozos and not somehow miraculously turn into trained Israeli Airport Security people!

According to the Los Angeles Times …

Union urges arming TSA officers after LAX shooting  — Airport security experts note the cost and risk of arming TSA officers. The Airport Police chief says more officers in the terminal wouldn’t have necessarily saved lives.

When Congress formed the Transportation Security Administration two months after 9/11, the agency’s mission was clear: Its officers would not carry guns or make arrests. Instead, they would focus on screening passengers for weapons, bombs and other dangerous materials.

But the shooting death of a TSA officer at Los Angeles International Airport — the first fatality in the agency’s history — could change that. On Monday, the union representing 45,000 federal security agents called for the creation of a class of armed TSA officers with law enforcement training and the authority to arrest people.

“The sad truth is that our TSA officers are subject to daily verbal assaults and far too frequent physical attacks,” said Jeffrey David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees. “We feel a larger and more consistent armed presence in screening areas would be a positive step.”

TSA Administrator John Pistole said his agency would review its protocols after Friday’s attack.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric Holder also weighed in Monday, saying that the government should examine the agency’s role in protecting airports.  Part of the investigation will be “a review of the security measures that were in place not only at LAX but, I think, a review of the security arrangements that exist in other airports as well,” he said.

Go straight to Post


by Stephen Levine on Sunday, October 13th, 2013

This is article 382 of 458 in the topic Government Corruption

It appears that the majority of Americans are apathetic – caught up in a malaise without any feeling of unity or sense of purpose.

Events beyond their control swirl about. Talking heads and political pundits fill the airwaves with what is wrong with America. With the progressive media dishonestly blaming the GOP and holding President Obama and his cadre of fellow travelers harmless for the damage being done to our nation. The top two subjects being discussed appear to be crime and politics – in reality, and as perceived by most people, one in the same thing.

Daily life goes on, with most Americans wondering, not about the broader economic forecasts, but about losing their jobs and the possible loss of their healthcare insurance coverage.

They are slowly awakening to the fact that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, stood before them an lied to the up-turned faces looking for “hope and change.”

Instead they found that they may not be able to keep their current insurance coverage or their current doctors. They are finding that the Affordable Care Act is not affordable and represents a major increase in their insurance premiums, often for less medical care. Even worse, they are finding that their jobs are being cut-back as the Affordable Care Act redefines a full-time position to be 30 hours.

Should Americans look a little closer at the Washington dung heap, they would see little difference between the political parties as they struggle for perpetual control and the right to pick the taxpayer’s pockets. Not only to enrich themselves and their friends, but to purchase enough votes to achieve permanent political control over the system. Even to the extent of granting citizenship rights to currently illegal aliens; in reality an invasion of a foreign culture that refuses to assimilate. Recreating crapistan here in America as they parasitically suck local and state governments dry – reducing emergency services and social safety nets designed and paid for by the legal citizens of our states and nation.

Even worse, it appears we are caught up in a dystopian world seemingly created by George Orwell. Where equality is only a talking point and some animals are more important than other animals. Where political speech is topsy turvy and up is down, black is white, and evil is good. Where commonsense and morality give way to political correctness, multiculturalism, and moral equivalency. Where terrorists are freedom fighters if they are allied with a favored political cause – in spite of the fact that they are killing innocent men, women, and children in the name of their religion and pursuing their goal of achieving dominant political power.

Crazyiness abounds. How else can you explain that issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens will make the roads safer? Or how the economy will be boosted by the illegal aliens who are taking entry-level positions and making them into careers – depriving teenagers and recent graduates access to this job pool?

How else can you explain pouring more and more money into a union-dominated socialistic education system that continues to pump out decades of functional illiterates who are little more than ideological activists who cannot read, write, do simply arithmetic or even function without a calculator or computer. Disadvantaging the poor even more and insuring a permanent underclass.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Obama calls Republicans ‘extortionists’ during speech

by Jim Kouri on Saturday, September 21st, 2013

This is article 491 of 687 in the topic Healthcare

President Barack Obama shocked a number of Americans when during a televised speech on Wednesday he accused the House Republicans of being extortionists, according to a number of news organizations.

“You have never seen in the history of the United States the debt ceiling or the threat of not raising the debt ceiling being used to extort a president or a — a governing party,” Obama said to an audience of top business executives who are members of the Business Roundtable association.

The only difference between Obama’s negotiations with Putin and Boehner then would be that the president would never say the things about Russia’s strongman that he has about the weakened speaker of the House. And that’s very telling indeed,” said Fox News Channel’s Chris Stirewalt.

But a former police detective is more blunt: “How dare this president with his almost constant ‘cover-up mode’ accuse his political opponents of a felony? If anyone should be investigated for alleged extortion, it’s President Obama and his Chicago machine that’s invaded the White House,” said Det. Sidney Franes, who also served as a Marine intelligence officer.

In a written statement released on Thursday, the Obama White House delivered a tough message saying the President opposes a GOP bill in the House of Representatives to at least temporarily defund Obama’s prized Obamacare, claiming the GOP bill “advances a narrow ideological agenda that threatens our economy and the interests of the middle class.”

In addition, several Senate Democrats have already claimed they will vote against the Republican remedy to what conservatives allege is a corrupt and misguided healthcare system revamp.

As reported in an Examiner news story, President Obama unilaterally rewrote the law — without congressional approval — to delay the so-called “employer mandate,” which was scheduled to go in effect on Jan. 1, 2014, for at least a year. The employer mandate stipulates that companies with over 50 full-time employees must provide healthcare plans for their workers that comply with Obamacare standards.

If they do not, they will be forced to pay a penalty “tax” for each employee not receiving an Obama-approved healthcare plan. The temporary waiver allows companies to save millions of dollars, according to the Examiner story.

However, Judicial Watch notes that the President did not rewrite the Affordable Care Act so that Americans would be eligible for a delay in the implementation of the “individual mandate,” which requires nearly all Americans to have Obama-approved health insurance by that same date or pay a tax penalty.

“Many Americans are caught in the middle. They are obligated to have Obama-approved health insurance, but their employers are not obligated to provide it, at least for another year. As a result, these Americans will be forced to purchase Obama-approved health insurance on an Obamacare-created health insurance exchange or pay the tax penalty. Either way, they’re out-of-pocket,” stated officials at Judicial Watch.

In it’s press statement, Judicial Watch noted: If you are going to have to purchase Obama-approved health insurance through an Obamacare-created health insurance exchange or pay a tax penalty because your employer, which would have been covered by the employer mandate, is dropping or does not provide health insurance, you may have a claim to challenge President Obama’s unilateral rewriting of the law.

Click to continue reading “Obama calls Republicans ‘extortionists’ during speech”
Go straight to Post

Bitter Lesson for Big Labor: “Redistribution Marxism” No Panacea for Little People!

by John Lillpop on Monday, September 16th, 2013

This is article 489 of 687 in the topic Healthcare

Barack Obama’s electoral success is due, in no small part, to unwary labor leaders who blindly followed The One’s Marxist promise to “Bless the Little Guy by Soaking the Rich.”

Naïve labor leaders bought into Obama’s Pied Piper fantasy about reducing health care costs by adding 30 million uninsured to the public trough!

Both Obama and Big Labor continue to hallucinate about the existence of “Free lunches,” and the morality and wisdom of stealing from the successful to subsidize the slothful and inept.

Big Labor can be excused, partially, for greedily subscribing to the Marxist notion of wealth redistribution. After all, why not force the rich to pay their “fair share,” even if it requires a tyrannical government to seize THEIR wealth to do the deed?

Indeed, as long as redistribution mania does not cost union coffers and their members more booty, why fret about unlovable millionaires and billionaires?

Along the way, Big Labor learned a vital lesson about Barack Obama and Marxist “fairness.”

To begin with, labor leaders learned that Obama is a congenital liar who will say damn near anything to get elected and to get his way in governance.

Promises made to reach Marxist goals are essentially “inoperative” once The One is in office, and are equally meaningless once a “Legacy” signature bill has been signed into law…as in the train wreck known as the Affordable Care Act.

Secondly, Soak the Rich” policies are terrific—-unless one happens to be “Rich,” as defined by a goofy Marxist government.

Which is the case when it comes to “Cadillac” plans enjoyed by some Union members.

However, an unintended consequence of redistribution has caught up with Obamacare and Big Labor. Thus, the groveling faithful are in open revolt against Obamacare as reported at the reference:

Despite pressure from top labor leaders, the Obama administration said late Friday it cannot extend government subsidies tied to the new health care law to union members with multi-employer health plans.

It appears that despite fiery rhetoric over the summer, the unions were unable to convince the Obama administration that their plans should benefit from the same type of premium support.

Earlier this week, the AFL-CIO passed a resolution at its convention that calls on the Obama administration to change the health overhaul and reiterates their desire to see a government-run single-payer health system.”

Will Obamacare finally teach Big Labor that Progressive solutions are no match for good-old fashioned market forces in a capitalist society?

Or will Big Labor remain manacled to the slavery that inevitably follows when one follows a Progressive (and clueless) Pied Piper?

John W. Lillpop
San Jose, California

Go straight to Post

No Obamacare exemptions for Big Labor? We’ll see

by Doug Powers on Saturday, September 14th, 2013

This is article 486 of 687 in the topic Healthcare

The Obamacare rollout has been an uncomfortable one for Big Labor. Congress passed the law with their blessing, and now they’re finding out what’s in it, and they want out. The White House issued its first response to union concerns. Try not to point and laugh:

The Obama administration on Friday appeared to rule out giving unions a special deal to offer their workers extra ObamaCare subsidies, but left the door open to other changes after a private White House meeting with labor leaders who are concerned over the law.

Earlier in the day, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka had urged the White House to act within a week to address labor unions’ concerns over ObamaCare.

The sit-down with President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden came amid concerns from Republicans that Obama might be preparing to offer the unions a special deal to assuage their concerns.

But on Friday night, the White House said the Treasury Department had issued a letter “making clear that it does not see a legal way for individuals in multi-employer group health plans to receive individual market tax credits as well as the favorable tax treatment associated with employer-provided health insurance at the same time.”

I’ll be waiting this one out in the gray area between schadenfreude and skepticism. There’s absolutely no way those who were at the front lines in ramming Obamacare through Congress should be exempted from some of its provisions, but at the same time it’s unlikely the Obama administration and the Democrats won’t desperately search for a way to help ease the self-inflicted pain of some of their greatest election-year allies.

Go straight to Post

Backfire: Obamacare fallout continues as 40,000 longshoremen quit AFL-CIO

by Doug Powers on Monday, September 2nd, 2013

This is article 482 of 687 in the topic Healthcare

Democrats received Big Labor support for Obamacare because of promises that unions would have priority access to lifeboats when the whole thing started to sink. Now, some union heads are coming to the harsh realization that they were duped, and membership is expressing their dissatisfaction:

In what is being reported as a surprise move, the 40,000 members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) announced that they have formally ended their association with the AFL-CIO, one of the nation’s largest private sector unions. The Longshoremen citied Obamacare and immigration reform as two important causes of their disaffiliation.

In an August 29 letter to AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, ILWU President Robert McEllrath cited quite a list of grievances as reasons for the disillusion of their affiliation, but prominent among them was the AFL-CIO’s support of Obamare.

“We feel the Federation has done a great disservice to the labor movement and all working people by going along to get along,” McEllrath wrote in the letter to Trumka.

The ILWU President made it clear they are for a single-payer, nationalized healthcare policy and are upset with the AFL-CIO for going along with Obama on the confiscatory tax on their “Cadillac” healthcare plan.

If the ILWU is upset at Obamacare’s negative effect on their “Cadillac” health plans, wait until their dream of single payer is a reality (the wreckage of Obamacare is merely a stepping stone to single payer, according to Harry Reid, who accidentally told the truth recently). This is kind of like trying to halt your arteriosclerosis by funneling hydrogenated oil.

Not so coincidentally, around the same time 40,000 longshoremen–and more importantly, their dues payments–were leaving the AFL-CIO, the head of that union held a press conference saying he’s not really angry or anything but somebody needs to fix the law, pronto! Hard to feel sorry for him:

Go straight to Post

Supersized Stupid: McDonalds Workers Strike for ‘Living Wage’

by Doug Powers on Friday, August 30th, 2013

This is article 182 of 191 in the topic Marches/Protests/Riots
liberalutopiaSo what if your Big Mac costs $12, the unions want in!

Beginning a day of protests that organizers say will spread to 50 cities and 1,000 stores across the country, a crowd of chanting workers gathered Thursday morning at a McDonald’s in midtown Manhattan to call for higher wages and the chance to join a union.

About 500 people, including workers, activists, religious leaders, news crews and local politicians, gathered outside the McDonald’s on Fifth Avenue. The protesters chanted “Si Se Puede” (“Yes, We Can”) and “Hey, hey, ho, ho $7.25 has got to go,” holding signs saying “On Strike: Can’t Survive on $7.25,” referring to the federal minimum wage.

Nobody ever told these pinheads that making French fries isn’t really supposed to be a lifetime career option? There are a bunch of people who have a really rude awakening in store.

This is really all about unions wanting to get their porky snouts deeper into the fast food biz, because they’re losing membership everywhere else. But that’s what they do these days — bleed an industry dry and then move on to cripple another.

Update: “I’m libbin’ it” — new striking fast food worker mottos.

Update II:

Go straight to Post


by Stephen Levine on Thursday, August 29th, 2013

This is article 181 of 191 in the topic Marches/Protests/Riots

Most of the people who walked off their job in fast food restaurants do not seem to have a firm grasp on reality …

  1. Your employer operates a “convenience store” that is non-essential in the normal scheme of things as people have been preparing food at home since the dawn of time. In addition, there are any number of other “convenience” stores and pre-packaged food outlets.
  2. Your employer has an abundant source of labor with each graduating class of seniors and the laws of supply and demand control the value of your job.
  3. In all likelihood, your job was designed for an entry-level employee or part-time student or senior citizen. The only worthwhile jobs are managerial in nature, not preparing or serving food or maintaining the facility.
  4. This is a transparent ploy by the unions to unionize low-skilled workers. It is not that the union actually cares for its members, it cares about dues, managing large healthcare and retirement funds, and the political power to corrupt politicians and coerce employers. This strike is a clear example of the union trying to flex their muscle.
  5. And, while I feel sorry for your current economic situation, I did not tell you to have multiple children out of wedlock with multiple men who refuse to financially and emotionally support their progeny. Likewise, I did not curb your education and your opportunity to get a better paying skilled position – the teachers’ unions produced decades of functional illiterates that have no place to turn.
  6. If you want to rise above your current situation, there are any number of government grants available, but you will have to work doubly hard to overcome what choices you have made.
  7. I do not understand why you believe that I should pay more for my “Happy Meal” to support your poor choices and disadvantage myself or my family. This is not a socialist society where “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” is the operative guideline. And, I believe wealth distribution is charity at gunpoint and that a significant portion of any forced funding goes to the politicians and their special interests as “administrative fees.”
  8. We pay enough for job training and college programs – some complete with babysitters and paid living expenses.

From the progressive media …

Why I’m on Strike Today: I Can’t Support Myself on $7.85 at Burger King — ‘I know what it feels like to be afraid of having your children go to bed hungry or being evicted. But today is not scary; it’s empowering.’

I’ve worked at fast-food restaurants in North Carolina for the past 15 years. I’ve spent more hours at Church’s Chicken, McDonald’s and now Burger King than I can remember. I work hard – I never miss a shift and always arrive on time. But today, I’m going on strike.

I make $7.85 at Burger King as a guest ambassador and team leader, where I train new employees on restaurant regulations and perform the manager’s duties in their absence. Before Burger King, I worked at Church’s for 12 years, starting at $6.30 and ending at just a little more than $8 an hour.

I’ve never walked off a job before. I don’t consider myself an activist, and I’ve never been involved with politics.

Go straight to Post


by Stephen Levine on Wednesday, August 28th, 2013

This is article 39 of 45 in the topic Equal Rights/Civil Rights

This is a direct insult to those who have fought and died to protect America and its Constitution …


You will notice that the flag appears to be held by a person wearing a NEA-logo union shirt …

On Monday’s broadcast of “The O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel, network contributor Juan Williams accused African-American leaders of corruption an criticized speakers at Saturday’s March on Washington anniversary for failing to address education.

“[March leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.] is not one who would simply cry, as you were saying, over the awful lyrics and the bad schools,” he said. “He would act. He would stand up. That’s the tradition of Dr. King — stand up and act against bad schools that are condemning these kids to useless lives because they never have an opportunity to climb that ladder of upward mobility. And the civil rights challenge of this generation is education, and Dr. King would never allow anybody to buy his silence, to buy him off, to sell out the kids and that’s what’s happening right now.”

“I look today at some of the reports on union spending — it’s unbelievable,” Williams continued. “[The American Federation of Teachers] — you know, AFT and their affiliates in New York, tens of thousands of dollars going to Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and NAACP. Same thing with the National Education Association — NEA.


Because they know that they don’t want those civil rights leaders to ever stand up and say yes to charter schools, yes to vouchers, yes to school reform. Yes to Rahm Emanuel in Chicago saying that we need the black community. Poor people need better schools, and you can’t make excuses at the cost of our children and our children’s future.” <Source>

Divisive …

50th Anniversary of the March on Washington Week-Long Schedule of Events

Celebrating the Legacy of Youth in the Movement
Protect Our Voting Rights & Social Justice Youth Organizing Training
10th Annual Black Youth Vote! National Civic Leadership Training Conference
Highlights: Unity Breakfast, Tribute to Jamal Rose, Gathering of Black Men “I Am Trayvon” Dialogue, Sister Circles, Issue Organizing Breakouts, Regional/State-Based Organizing Strategy Sessions
9:00 am – 9:00 pm
National Education Association
1201 16th Street, NW
Washington, DC
Hosted by National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, NAACP, NEA, Generational Alliance, NAN Youth Move, The Praxis Project, NUL Young Professionals, Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc., BK Nation, 100 Black Men of America, Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc. Source>

Bottom line …

The public service employees unions are infiltrated with socialists and communists, so why should we be surprised when these radical leftists try to subvert the government from within and spout their race-baiting socialist propaganda? Never before has our enemies, both foreign and domestic, had such a grip on our government and the institutions that made America strong.

Remember, the 2014 congressional election cycle is fast approaching and it appears that the socialists and communists are at risk of being voted out of office. While they may call it racism, I call it subversion, sedition, and treason.

— steve

Go straight to Post

When Did Labor Unions Go Republican, Mr. President?

by John Lillpop on Sunday, August 18th, 2013

This is article 477 of 687 in the topic Healthcare

In his weekly radio address, President Barack Obama sought to blame all of the woes facing his Marxist health care scam on Republicans in Congress.

According to the President, Republicans, by trying to avoid a devastating “train wreck” that a new entitlement would bring to future generations of already- bankrupt Americans, are nothing but obstructionists to his loopy progressive nonsense.

As reported at reference 1:

President Obama on Saturday offered one of his strongest defenses to date of his signature domestic achievement, lambasting Republican critics of his health care law as obstructionists who are playing politics with the well-being and economic security of millions of Americans.

  In blunt terms, Mr. Obama used his weekly address to describe health insurance as a “right” and distinguished states that have embraced his law against those that have not.

He said the Affordable Care Act is already helping young adults stay on their parents’ health plans and offering free preventative care.

“But there’s also a group of Republicans in Congress working hard to confuse people, and making empty promises that they’ll either shut down the health care law, or, if they don’t get their way, they’ll shut down the government,” he said.

“Think about that,” he added. “They’re actually having a debate between hurting Americans who will no longer be denied affordable care just because they’ve been sick — and harming the economy and millions of Americans in the process. And many Republicans are more concerned with how badly this debate will hurt them politically than they are with how badly it’ll hurt the country.”

His defense of the law comes less than two months before state-by-state insurance markets, or “exchanges,” start to enroll Americans without employer-based insurance who may buy coverage with the help of government subsidies.”

Obama’s fact-starved defense of his legacy accomplishment ignores the fact that some of the harshest criticism of his namesake law emanates from comrades on the very far left, namely, big labor unions.

As reported at reference 2:

Labor unions are among the key institutions responsible for the passage of Obamacare. They spent tons of money electing Democrats to Congress in 2006 and 2008, and fought hard to push the health law through the legislature in 2009 and 2010. But now, unions are waking up to the fact that Obamacare is heavily disruptive to the health benefits of their members.

Last Thursday, representatives of three of the nation’s largest unions fired off a letter to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, warning that Obamacare would “shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.”

The letter was penned by James P. Hoffa, general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Joseph Hansen, international president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union; and Donald “D.” Taylor, president of UNITE-HERE, a union representing hotel, airport, food service, gaming, and textile workers.

“When you and the President sought our support for the Affordable Care Act,” they begin, “you pledged that if we liked the health plans we have now, we could keep them.

Sadly, that promise is under threat…We have been strong supporters of the notion that all Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. We have also been strong supporters of you.

Click to continue reading “When Did Labor Unions Go Republican, Mr. President?”
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin