Pelosi: S. Carolina Boeing Plant Should Be Closed if It Doesn’t Unionize

[red states rule]

Meanwhile, Dems and the liberal media are saying it is the Republicans who are the job killers


<IFRAME height=315 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cnpeBTX-DMA" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

[fj1200]

It's not about jobs, it's about the right kind of jobs. :rolleyes:

[ConHog]

ConHog to Pelosi:

Your mouth oughtta be closed, PERIOD

[logroller]

I love the back-peddle when Pelosi responds "You asked me what I thought"

Remind me of a joke my wife told me:

A teacher asks a student "How do you spell 'crocodile'?"
"K-R-O-K-O-D-I-L"

"Well that's wrong." responds the teacher.

"Well it may be; but you asked me how I spell it." :laugh:

[Abbey Marie]

2575

[logroller]

I wish Pelosi gave a bulworth response--"I get huge donations from union leadership and PACs, so I'll always favor them."

[ConHog]

I wish Pelosi gave a bulworth response--"I get huge donations from union leadership and PACs, so I'll always favor them."

I say it again. outlaw unions and lobbyists.

[logroller]

I say it again. outlaw unions and lobbyists.

Well see, here's the thing; organizations are a necessary part of our society, as is the freedom to organize. This was debated at length in the federalist papers, which discussed how a republic was superior to a direct democracy; where the special interests, or 'factions of the minority', serve a necessary check to the majority, or "mob" rule. So if you outlaw the mechanism of the minority voice, whose only protection is their ability to organize, you run the very high likelihood of a runaway train directed by oppression and ultimately, tyranny. It's a recurring theme in how our government should protect freedom, that it is not how great the general consensus is, but rather how accepting the majority is of dissent. Unions and lobbies serve to promote dissent, which can be frustrating, but it is necessary.

[red states rule]

It's not about jobs, it's about the right kind of jobs. :rolleyes:

and when will Pelsoi allows unions to sign up her employees that work for her companies?






Nancy Pelosi (http://www.technorati.com/tag/Nancy Pelosi)’s socialist political views are exactly what have kept her elected in San Francisco, along with the flow of union campaign money. The staunch “union supporter” Pelosi has even received the Cesar Chavez Award from the United Farm Workers Union. But her $25 million Napa vineyards and winery, she and her husband own is a non-union shop.

The hypocrisy doesn’t stop there. Pelosi has received more money from the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees union than any other member of Congress in recent election cycles.

The multi-millionaire investors own a large stake in an exclusive resort hotel in Wine Country, the Napa Valley Auberge Du Soleil Resort. It has more than 250 employees. But none of them are in a union, according to Peter Schweizer, author of “Do As I Say, (Not As I Do) – Hypocrisy of Democrats” and a regular contributor to the New York Times.
Pelosi is also partners in a restaurant chain called Piatti, which has 900 employees. The chain is – you might have guessed — a non-union shop.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1738226/posts

[red states rule]

I wish Pelosi gave a bulworth response--"I get huge donations from union leadership and PACs, so I'll always favor them."

Obama recently said Pelosi was the best Speaker of the House the country ever had

Damn, I do not want to see who the worst one was

[ConHog]

Well see, here's the thing; organizations are a necessary part of our society, as is the freedom to organize. This was debated at length in the federalist papers, which discussed how a republic was superior to a direct democracy; where the special interests, or 'factions of the minority', serve a necessary check to the majority, or "mob" rule. So if you outlaw the mechanism of the minority voice, whose only protection is their ability to organize, you run the very high likelihood of a runaway train directed by oppression and ultimately, tyranny. It's a recurring theme in how our government should protect freedom, that it is not how great the general consensus is, but rather how accepting the majority is of dissent. Unions and lobbies serve to promote dissent, which can be frustrating, but it is necessary.



I agree that allowing dissent is necessary. I disagree that that is the main function of lobbies and unions though.

[fj1200]

Well see, here's the thing; organizations are a necessary part of our society, as is the freedom to organize. This was debated at length in the federalist papers, which discussed how a republic was superior to a direct democracy; where the special interests, or 'factions of the minority', serve a necessary check to the majority, or "mob" rule. So if you outlaw the mechanism of the minority voice, whose only protection is their ability to organize, you run the very high likelihood of a runaway train directed by oppression and ultimately, tyranny. It's a recurring theme in how our government should protect freedom, that it is not how great the general consensus is, but rather how accepting the majority is of dissent. Unions and lobbies serve to promote dissent, which can be frustrating, but it is necessary.

Excellent defense of personhood. Corporate or otherwise. ;)


I agree that allowing dissent is necessary. I disagree that that is the main function of lobbies and unions though.

It's much easier to oppress an individual isn't it?

[ConHog]

Excellent defense of personhood. Corporate or otherwise. ;)



It's much easier to oppress an individual isn't it?

I am against oppression of any kind. Which is why I oppose lobbies and unions.

[fj1200]

I am against oppression of any kind. Which is why I oppose lobbies and unions.

How do they oppress?

[ConHog]

How do they oppress?

They oppress the will of the people in favor of the will of a few who have the money of a union or lobby.

[fj1200]

They oppress the will of the people in favor of the will of a few who have the money of a union or lobby.

They give voice to those who won't be heard individually.

[ConHog]

They give voice to those who won't be heard individually.

They give special access to those of their choosing.

[fj1200]

They give special access to those of their choosing.

And you suppose an individual has the same access?

[ConHog]

And you suppose an individual has the same access?

They should and that's another topic entirely.

On that subject I favor sending Congressmen home to their home districts. Let them them do their jobs via secure web conference THEN the common ;person WOULD have that access.

[fj1200]

They should and that's another topic entirely.

It's exactly this topic. I also don't buy your definition of oppression.

[logroller]

I do have an issue with union-only trades. Especially in the OP case, where there's a pretty short list of jumbo-jet aviation companies. World wide, there's Boeing, Airbus... whose employees are members of highly specialized labor class; and if they don't have the choice NOT to join and pay dues, then, in effect, the union represents the majority, not the minority. It's a legal monopoly on labor really; which does oppress the freedom of the minority to dissent. (aside from quitting, of course, but that's not really a choice if your highest and best use of your time is that job)

[ConHog]

It's exactly this topic. I also don't buy your definition of oppression.

That's fine. I can agree to disagree with you on this topic. It's not like unions or lobbies are realistically going anywhere anyway.

[logroller]

That's fine. I can agree to disagree with you on this topic. It's not like unions or lobbies are realistically going anywhere anyway.
I don't think that's fair assessment. I think that union reforms would be advantageous. As to my last post, where unions should be available, but membership isn't required. For example, I favor the traditional role of trade unions: to help provide a well-qualified workforce. Which would help those business which traditionally experience high-turnover-- construction, for example.

[red states rule]

Liberals like Pelosi, Obama, and Reid have always been - and will continue to be - a threat to prosperity and positive economic growth in the private sector

This is all about unions, their power, and their campaign contributons