Comments on: Democrats losing a cash cow

By: Hammer

Hammer — Sun, 31 Jul 2005 01:50:02 +0000

JM, our mutual friend M in Wichita says you can’t afford to split any hairs, heh, heh. Something about conservation.

By: J M Walker

J M Walker — Sat, 30 Jul 2005 15:07:26 +0000

Uhh…that’s what I said. If you don’t belong to a union, there are very few laws to protect you. Same thing. We’re splitting hairs here.

By: Hammer

Hammer — Sat, 30 Jul 2005 03:48:01 +0000

“The laws on the books concerning labor in this country are weighted towards unions.”

No, the laws in this country support a binding legal contract, as in a Union contract.

By: J M Walker

J M Walker — Sat, 30 Jul 2005 02:06:11 +0000

Laws restricting work hours? Not if you’re not a union member (opps…double negative). There are no laws, unless passed by the state, restricting work hours; unless you have a blatant discrimination or sexual abuse complaint, you wont get any help from the department of labor either, and especially if you’re not a union member. The laws on the books concerning labor in this country are weighted towards unions.I’m not making any judgment, mind you, just stating facts.

By: Hammer

Hammer — Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:43:59 +0000

Wayreth, what laws do you think restrict work hours or control benefits? Laws can be changed; witness the changes in overtime law in the recient past. Anyone who carries a lunch box to work and opposes unions is just nutz. You wouldn’t buy a car without a formal contract. Too much money involved to not protect yourself. You wouldn’t buy a house without a contract. Again, too much money involved. But you’re ok with just leaving your yearly income to the whims of your boss? Most company CEOs work under contract, but they’re the first to tell their employees that a contract is a bad thing. The only way you have any rights in the workplace is if you have a legal contract. Tell me one “right” you think you have in the workplace.

By: Wayreth

Wayreth — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 23:54:17 +0000

Unions are an outdated idea in this day and age. With all of the laws in place restricting work hours, benefits, and many other things, you don’t need a union. I say get rid of the unions all together.

By: Hammer

Hammer — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:42:08 +0000

CF asked:What do people like Phillip and Joe Williams think SEIU and the Teamsters going to do–give money to the Republicans who consistently screw them?

Any time the Teamsters are involved, you better worry.What makes anyone think the Teamsters won’t support a Republican? They have before.I’m a solid union supporter. I’ve organized for the union and I’ve had my nose mashed for it (mashed a few noses myself). I’ll tell you for sure, Teamsters are NOT supporters of Organized Labor. Teamsters are not Union supporters. Teamsters are Teamster supporters. If they can cut a deal with republicans that screws labor and helps Teamsters, look out!

By: GetReal

GetReal — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:40:55 +0000

Hacktacular.

“The unions have been a cash cow for supporting Democratic candidates — though the spending often failed to generate wins on Election Day.”

Often. That means more often than not.

So forget about the many, many elections that allowed Democrats to essentially control both houses of Congress for 30 years before 1994. Yeah, 30 years – not a long time.

You might also want to forget the Presidental election of 1992.

And the presidential election of 1996.

And the presidental election of 1976.

And when Democtats regained the Senate a few years back.

And the presidental election of 1964.

And the presidental election of 1960.

Now a non-crazy version of that sentence might read:

“…though the spending often failed LATELY to generate wins on Election Day.”

Ahhh, much better. Back to Journalism school for you! Back, I say!

By: CF

CF — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:23:54 +0000

What do people like Phillip and Joe Williams think SEIU and the Teamsters going to do–give money to the Republicans who consistently screw them? Please.

By: Antares

Antares — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:47:29 +0000

Yeah, Jimmy, they’ll now be going into their own slush funds. And are they going to support George I-Love-Ken-Lay Bush?

They will be supporting the party that supports labor just as much as before, and that party is the Democratic party.

By: Antares

Antares — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:44:13 +0000

Again, Phillip is lifting his opinions straight from the RNC talking points memos.

Oooh . . . the big labor bosses are not gonna support the democrats. What are they gonna do now, hahaha.

The democrats are raising more money than they ever had from small, grassroots members like me.

That’s the real story, but of course, you won’t read it in The Eagle.

And btw, there’s no real evidence that if some labor unions pull out of the AFL-CIO that means less money for the DNC. The unions are pulling out because they feel they can do a better job recruiting new members.

That’s good for democrats, not bad.

By: Jimmy Bisoni

Jimmy Bisoni — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:48:09 +0000

$10 million in worker dues each from SEIU and the Teamster’s will not be going into the AFL-CIO’s political slush funds. There’s trouble in Union City. Couldn’t happen to nicer guys.

By: Joe Williams

Joe Williams — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:35:18 +0000

Unions will eventually disappear. The only ones that will be left in the future are the teachers unions.