The people of Washington have lost the services of a dedicated public servant who refused to pay protection money to the union extortion mafia.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 30, 2006 03:24 PM | Email ThisOh well. There's certainly a non-union Walmart job for her where she can bargain on her own and see what kind of wage she can get.
Posted by: Erik on January 30, 2006 03:28 PMWhere in the article does she say that? The only thing close was this quote:
"The 64-year-old was dismissed and took an early retirement rather than sign up with the union. She said she thinks unions do not help employees."
Sounds like she didn't think there were any "benefits of group negotiation". Next time try not to put words in people's mouths.
Posted by: Mike H on January 30, 2006 03:37 PMyou keep up that good little sheep outlook and you'll do fine. The rest of us who DESPISE collectivism won't miss you.
"Unions: Protecting Mediocrity since 1886."
Posted by: libertarianobserver on January 30, 2006 03:44 PMMulticulturalism trumps EVERY other form of political correctness.
Posted by: scold on January 30, 2006 03:55 PMFORD HAS A NEW AD SLOGAN..."AT FORD QUAITY IS JOB JUAN" SO MUCH FOR THAT UNION...GET REAL!!!
What a bunch of crap. I am so happy I work for a non-union company. Imagine: I am well qualified, I negotiated my initial pay on my own, I get routine raises based on my PERFORMANCE and bonuses to boot!
Why should I pay someone else to negotiate for me and bring up all the slack-asses?
Unions are for the lazy. period. end of story.
Note that for the religious exemption, the union wants to go and talk to your priest/pastor...
http://www.theolympian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051219/NEWS0401/51219033/1016/NEWS0401
Posted by: Eric on January 30, 2006 04:18 PMTruth is, there probably IS a Wal-Mart job available to her, a 64 year-old woman. What does that say about Wal-Mart's hiring practices?
If she applies to every union in the country tomorrow, what are the odds that she'll get hired?
"Woodward said her early retirement means lower benefits. She said she’s thought about doing something to earn cash in retirement but has not decided what."
I thought protecting the little guy, those not fortunate to have a silver spoon in their mouth, was the Union's and Democratic Party's job. It appears it's been left to Republicans and private firms to look out for those older Americans who lose their jobs. Don't worry - we won't drop the ball like you guys did for the last four or five decades.
Posted by: Larry on January 30, 2006 04:20 PM
Working longer and smarter and harder than any workforce in the world ( The American workforce ) for low non-union wages, no medical, and no retirement plan = EXCELLENCE
You conservatives win the CHUMP award hands down!! Whadaya think, Jamoke, ya think ya some kinda mogul...? A conservative commenter yesterday was complaining that he could no longer afford $250 a month for medical coverage for himself and his family. He blamed his situation on people who have gay sex!
Talking to you guys is like trying to penetrate a 10 foot thick wall of mud.
Posted by: Rev. A.A. Tappman: Anabaptist on January 30, 2006 04:23 PMThat's your thick skull you're trying to penetrate there headlice......
Posted by: alphabet soup on January 30, 2006 04:35 PMOf course, in today's world, it is the union members who are getting the short end of the stick. I show up every day at work wondering whether they'll ask me to turn in my badge, and you know what? It doesn't bother me. I know that I am providing a very valuable service that they really can't get elsewhere easily. I have far more power over negotiation than any union guy could ever hope for.
What happens in companies is eventually, all the good guys start bailing out for better work or their own opportunities. You can't keep enterprising, intelligent people from seeking their own fortunes. Unions try to enslave the working man, equalizing pay by paying the superior inferior wages. They actually drive out their most productive members.
What's funny is what happens when the company fails. They dance around and whine and moan without understanding that because of their substandard work and high wages, the company couldn't compete.
I wish we could outlaw government unions. See, as a government employee, you can't strike. The company will never fail, even if you get a bloated salary and reduce your productivity to the negative realm. So it's really not fair because market forces will never equalize the playing field.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on January 30, 2006 04:57 PMAnd a mean nasty bully of a big brother, too.
Posted by: Starboardhelm on January 30, 2006 05:27 PM"Talking to you guys is like trying to penetrate a 10 foot thick wall of mud."
You could, of course, stay there in your little mud hut with 10 foot thick walls, or come out and join the real world. We'll save ya a place by the campfire where we can sing revolutionary songs and drink some KoolAid together.
What planet are you on? Non-union jobs with no medical and no retirement plan? I understand hyperpole in attempting to make a point, but either you've never worked in the private sector or you're more dense than I thought.
Care to clarify?
Posted by: jimg on January 30, 2006 06:50 PMFortunately, overall unions are dying. Their numbers decline every year. Were it not for government employee unions, there would be very few people in this country gauranteed high pay and a nice pension for doing very little.
The world is on the shoulders of those of us in the private sector who are legion, carry most of the tax burden, do by far and away most of the work, and who also far and away generate the greatest economic output for the US. The parasitic Unions could not exist were it not for work that we all do to carry this country.
If you are not in a union, pat yourself on the back. If you are in a union, especially a government union, you are a walking insult to the ideas that made everything you have possible. You are using force to get what you otherwise don't deserve.
Posted by: Jeff B. on January 30, 2006 09:12 PMBTW - you'd think that someone could file a lawsuit against her termination, but it probably wouldn't do any good with our state supreme court.
Posted by: Dengle on January 30, 2006 10:03 PMThe Pastor of my Church was once a union worker early in his ministry. He started a new church without and denomination money, hey thats why were called Independent Baptists. Any way his union tried to get him fired because he was working so hard he was making others look bad. My Pastor's reason for working hard, He tries to bring glory to God in all things he does. His union practiced religious discrimination.
Posted by: RennDawg on January 30, 2006 10:11 PMThe UAW hampered Ford for years and now the chickens have come home to roost. The UAW's refusal to allow upgrades in a timely manner is just one of the many silly demands they insisted on. As for union clout, the unions at Dairy Gold and Swedish ended up settling for what was originally offered. In Dary Gold's case, the settlement was actually a bit less than originally offered and some employees no longer had jobs.
To the clueless Reverend: Either you don't have health insurance or you don't pay for it. It is very expensive and a huge expense item for businesses. Before you start quoting the sad tale of WalMart check out the facts first. There is a big difference between not being able to get benefits at work and not wanting to pay a portion of the costs. I am constantly amazed at how people have no problem spending hundreds of dollars a year on internet service and cable TV but they cry when they have to chip in for health insurance.
Posted by: Burdabee on January 30, 2006 10:39 PMSIDEBAR: THREE KIDS WERE STANDING AROUND THE PLAY YARD BRAGGING ABOUT HOW FAST THEIR DADS WERE…THE FIRST BOY SAID THAT HIS DAD CAN RUN A MILE IN UNDER 6:OO MINUTES…THE SECOND BOY SAID THAT HIS DAD CAN RUN A MILE IN UNDER 5:00 MINUTES…THE THIRD BOY SAID THAT NOTHING…MY DAD IS HOME EVERYDAY AT 1:30 PM…THE TWO OTHER BOYS LOOKED AT EACH OTHER AND SAID WHAT HAS THAT GOT TO DO WITH ANYTHING…THE THRID BOY ANSWERED…MY DAD WORKS AT BOEING AND DOESN’T EVEN GET OFF UNTIL 3:00PM.
Where are you in the 12 step process?
From your posts it sounds like you are a moonbat, therefore support a woman's "choice." Where is your support for her choice to make her decision to belong to a political organization or not?
Choice? Only when it's about killing children.
Posted by: Obi-Wan on January 31, 2006 12:14 AMYou know why they call it the right wing "echo chamber"? Because you guys just repeat the same lame crap over and over, ad infinitum... for decade after decade. If someone had only your paranoid rhetoric to go by , they'd think it was still 1964 and we'd just passed the Civil Rights Bill. I think it's just the feeling of "outrage" that you enjoy, but none of you are smart enough to figure out what is really going on that is outrageous. So, it's the same old crap from 1964 for you. Back then there was a lot of "outrage" about businesses being required to hire minorities.
Things haven't changed a bit for you morons.
You are a stone around the neck of humanity and the water's getting a little too deep to carry you much farther.
Posted by: Rev. A.A. Tappman: Anababtist on January 31, 2006 08:26 AMThe Civil Rights act was passed by Republicans.
Union representation concerns businessmen. And we properly understand the commitment that is made to employees.
Calling us morons or other names is a way of you disconnecting to your echo chamber by turning off conversation and debate.
I agree the water is getting very deep and that is why business after business is moving out of this state. We just can't afford to support the protection racket, high taxes and regulation. In short Washington is not competitive with the rest of the world.
So Rev. AA sooner rather than later you lose by default for without a flourishing business community fewer folk will support your trivial.
Posted by: snuffy on January 31, 2006 08:37 AMStart your revolution already.
Posted by: jimg on January 31, 2006 09:03 AMAs Snuffy said, the Civil Rights bill was passed by Republicans over the objections of Democrats and Byrd in his white hood.
Posted by: fred on January 31, 2006 10:32 AMAATappman- chaplain, very timid, but wants to be stronger; given the third degree for stealing a tomato; misses his wife terribly
Played by "Psycho" Anthony Perkins.
AA's email address is also the same as Winston Smith's.
Posted by: Catch-22 on January 31, 2006 11:20 AMThe conservative economic dogma is that this money will be invested in America and we'll all be better off. But, guess what? THE MONEY IS BEING USED TO BUY GOV'T. BONDS WHICH ARE BEING ISSUED TO FINANCE THE TAX CUTS.
How will you spin this to explain how this benefits anyone but those who already have more money than they deserve? You guys are not so much interested in being correct, but in uniformly believing the same thing whether it be false or not. Hence the spectre of the conservative "dittohead" pollutes the body politic. It gives you comfort from the realities that you cannot face: A community of true believers in a false ideology.
As your own president said: "I know what I believe and I believe that what I believe is the truth." GW Bush
This quote doesn't mention facts at all. Facts are used by conservatives only when they support what they already believe. Most people outgrow this mindset by mid-adolescence --- but in this sense the conservative mind remains forever fearful of reality.
The conservative economic dogma is that this money will be invested in America and we'll all be better off. But, guess what? THE MONEY IS BEING USED TO BUY GOV'T. BONDS WHICH ARE BEING ISSUED TO FINANCE THE TAX CUTS.
How will you spin this to explain how this benefits anyone but those who already have more money than they deserve? You guys are not so much interested in being correct, but in uniformly believing the same thing whether it be false or not. Hence the spectre of the conservative "dittohead" pollutes the body politic. It gives you comfort from the realities that you cannot face: A community of true believers in a false ideology.
As your own president said: "I know what I believe and I believe that what I believe is the truth." GW Bush
This presidential quote doesn't mention facts at all. Facts are used by conservatives only when they support what they already believe. Most people outgrow this mindset by mid-adolescence --- but in this sense the conservative mind remains forever fearful of reality, preferring instead to fit in with the group. You are an unthinking herd of cows...
Really? The Republic is destroyed? When did that happen? I don't live under marshall law, I can still vote for whom I want (whether King County counts it is a different story...). The economy is on an upswing. I still have the right to bear my arms. The police aren't storming my home for no reason. I don't have folks asking for my papers when I walk down the street. I am still secure in my person and effects. People aren't getting arrested for holding protest marches. I can say whatever I want without going to jail. And in three more years, he will leave office. He's the President... not Emperor Palpatine. Screaming "the Republic is destroyed" only makes you look like a hyperbolic ninny.
Really Rev., Obi-Wan is right, if you aren't in a 12-step program, you might want to think about it...
Posted by: Mike H on January 31, 2006 11:28 PMMONEY QUOTE: "How will you spin this to explain how this benefits anyone but those who already have more money than they deserve?" Just who the hell are you to determine how much anyone else deserves?
Posted by: libertarianobserver on February 1, 2006 08:42 AMThe conservative economic dogma is that this money will be invested in America and we'll all be better off. But, guess what? THE MONEY IS BEING USED TO BUY GOV'T. BONDS WHICH ARE BEING ISSUED TO FINANCE THE TAX CUTS.
You mean to tell me that I (making less than $40k and not being even close to rich) am going to spend the money I get back only on bonds? I am? No one told me that. I thought I was going to pay off bills and throw some of it into savings. I had no idea that my tax cut was going to purchase bonds. But hey, the good Rev. must have an extra close connection to God and know stuff I don't.
Posted by: Mike H on February 1, 2006 09:13 AMLiberal Econ 101, upside down and inside out. Another good one dipshit.
Posted by: Amused by liberal whackos on February 1, 2006 10:22 AMMussolini seized it as a means to power by exhorting the workers to commit to a supposed “Third way” between the alternatives of a free market economic system and bolshevism or Marxist communism. It amounted to centralized autocratic government economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. Proponents of Bolshevism like current Democrats were stupid enough to believe that the stability offered by unionized corporatism would make their lives better. It led to the incorporation of business under direct government control, dictatorship, economic collapse, and war.
While liberals love to classify fascism as a right wing ideal, in fact it is a left wing alternative to Marxist socialist communism in the form of totalitarian socialism, where the distinction from socialist communism was symbolic (fasci-Roman symbol of authority)only. In practice it is virtually indistinguishable from the totalitarian communist models practiced by the Soviet Union, Red China, and Cuba among others. All of the pretense of a free market economy, with none of its benefits. The constitutional right to "Freedom of Association," used to mean something in America.
Note: For you brain dead liberal sheep (headlice, Erik, Gregoire, Simplet Sims), the Constitution of the Unites States was America’s founding document and the Supreme Law of the land. It still is our basis of law although liberal Democrats are doing everything conceivable to render it meaningless. Among other things, it gave liberals the right to be morons. The right to freedom of association is implicit in the freedoms of speech, assembly, and petition, and dues process of the constitution. It allows liberal morons to be communists and spout idiotic ideas that hurt people without fear of retribution from the state. It also holds that a state cannot make laws that require membership in a union as a condition of their employment. I know that you don’t care, but it is the truth.Government has supplanted unions with regulations of wage and hour laws, benefits, etc. to such an extent that unions are no longer necessary. Nevertheless under this law, they have become nothing more or less than a dangerous extension of government because they make public policy without representation, and use the force of the state to enforce it.
Hopefully issues like this will be taken up and overturned by conservatives in the judicial branch or people like Sims, Gregoire and headlice will kill the Goose (headlice will no doubt rape it to death). In the meantime, it will be interesting to see how far this goes before someone says enough and does something about it. If it goes far enough, there will be violence, and those who ignore the warning will suffer. I plan to keep my equipment well oiled, and my powder dry.
. . . and a good sense of humor whenever I see the scribblings of morons like headlice.
Posted by: Amused by liberal fascists on February 1, 2006 11:29 AMThe treasury is bring in MORE tax dollars in real terms than ever before. More than any year under Saint Bill. So we are bring in more money, so how are these being financed by the tax cuts.
What were you saying about a trained seal?
Posted by: fred on February 1, 2006 01:33 PMYour entire premise, amused , is a fabrication. Unions were not a precursor to fascism, but their destruction was. What do you hope to gain by such an easily punctured fabrication?
Posted by: denzel w. on February 2, 2006 11:21 AMRead books . . . not liberal hackneyed reinventions of history on the internet. Your interpretation is superficially correct but it grossly oversimplifies the facts.
Look up syndicalism and then look up the March 23, 1919 meeting in Milan, Italy, where Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in congress with revolutionary syndicalist leaders Agostino Lanzillo and Michele Bianchi. Yes, Mussolini destroyed the unions, the corporations, the Italian economy, and eventually himself and the country . . . but only after he used each of them as leverage to convince the public that fascism or symbolic economic centralization, consolidation, corporatism, nationalism, and military power would stabilize outcomes for the Italian people.
He started with the labor unions (Bolshevik syndicalists) because they were the most easily manipulated. He brought them together under his direct control and then used their combined clout to eventually seize control of the corporations (corporatism). Then he disbanded the unions to mollify those that were afraid of the spread of Bolshevik communism. Failures in the European markets prompted fear of laissez faire economics as well, and Mussolini distorted what was called the "Third Way," or “Fascism” to seize total control. Practically speaking, it was all based on seizing and consolidating economic and military power. But it was done incrementally by manipulating and deceiving the Italian people into complacency exactly the same way as the employees here are forced to comply with a union by government regulation.
INCREMENTALISM—small changes, justified by cynical expediency, through public complacency and ignorance of history that steals rights like individual freedom of association.
Once government has the power to control your means of earning a living it has the power to totally regulate it. It is only one small step from this unconstitutional control to direct state control over the means of production—capital. Tell me how Marxist communism was different from Italian Fascism under Mussolini once it fully developed? Then explain how forcing a worker to join a union promotes the right of a worker to associate freely in the market environment with employers free from coercion from government control.
I notice that you ignored my comments about the Constitution and "Freedom of Association." Do your liberal bu!!shit sources tell you that the Constitution is a fabrication and untrue as well?
Please enlighten me with your vast knowledge of history and the law about the right of a state under the constitution to force workers to a join union or lose their job.
denzel, you are wrong and you don’t know what you are talking about, but I understand . . . you are a liberal . . . and liberals are allowed to be lazy and ignorant.
Prove me wrong!
He proves once again that he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about but he is willing to do anything to manipulate this website to twist, distort, lie, obstruct, and discredit the comments of those who come here to comment with facts. In doing so he reveals the true objects of his liberal beliefs.
In his defense of the Washington State Federation of Employees UNION against a dedicated public servant who refused to pay protection money to the union extortion mafia, headlice (calling himself denzel w) quipped, ”Mussolini abolished all the unions and wages immediately dropped way down. Profits grew disproportionately and the war was on.” Right headlice . . . you bet . . . and then they went to the zoo.
Unions backed by government power are dangerous.
The words “fascism,” and “union,” are literally synonymous, Mussolini was a socialist, and formal “Fascism” started with the 1919 Fasci di Combattamento in Italy by Mussolini with a group of union leaders. Partisan fascist symbolism and union power was used by Mussolini to distort reality in support of a totalitarian socialist dictatorship. Fascist symbolism using deliberate lies and deception is practiced by liberals like headlice who take any opportunity to distort reality in support of blind partisanship. headlice's purpose here is to obscure the fact that the Washington State Federation of Employees uses government enforced extortion to keep employees in line with a fascist liberal agenda.
Headlice says, ”Your entire premise, amused , is a fabrication. Unions were not a precursor to fascism, but their destruction was. What do you hope to gain by such an easily punctured fabrication?” I gained the opportunity to prove that you HEADLICE are—as usual—completely full of SHIT in defense of your empty religion, and you once again offer me an opportunity to demonstrate it. Thanks.
I ALSO NOTICED THAT YOU DECLINED TO SUSTAIN YOUR NONSENSICAL REBUKE OF MY COMMENTS.
MORE HIT & RUN FOOLISHNESS EH?
Every conservative at Sound Politics owes headlice a debt of gratitude for the service he provides by illustrating how shameless and pathetic the modern liberal ideology has become.
Watch headlice daily play his shallow games as, AKA Headless Lucy, AKA Rev. A.A. Tappman: AKA denzel w, etc., etc., and other liberal morons (e-mail address— s_choir_50@yahoo.com).
Thanks headlice . . . very amusing indeed.
Posted by: Amused by liberal fascist tactics on February 3, 2006 10:23 AMheadlice is an excellent example of the current state of leftist politics in America - it asserts its wacko notions and then goes on to the next "opportunity". If it gets no rebuttal, it struts around and proclaims its So-called "victory over conservatism", but if it gets the slightest bit of resistance, it folds like a cheap suit, only to reappear later as if it thinks no one noticed.
"The words “fascism,” and “union,” are literally synonymous..."
These word are more true today than any time in history. The idea And ideal of straw-vote or democratic majority have been entirely supplanted but coercive manipulation. The only ones stupid enough not to notice are ones like headlice and ivan.
The Unions are actively f#cking over their rank & file (as well as anyone in the immediate vicinity), and these douche-bags doggedly continue to toe the "Workers Unite" line.
I look forward to the implosion that is destined to occur when the left reluctantly recognizes that they have been duped by stooges no smarter than the likes of ivan ;'}
Posted by: alphabet soup on February 3, 2006 08:22 PM