Understand that Wisconsin teachers pay .2% into their retirement fund and only 6% of the cost of health care. Through collective bargaining, the union has secured a billion dollars for Viagra subscription refunds for its members. The last collective bargaining cycle took 18 months to negotiate and that was with a Democrat controlled Wisconsin congress.
16 states either have seriously modified collective bargaining policies or have no such bargaining at all. There is no migration of teachers moving from these states to those unions in Wisconsin or California or whereever, evidence that teacher pay in non-bargaining states is at acceptable levels.
In addition, states that suffer under progressive union control, prohibit folks from work unless they either join the union or pay union dues. They force you to pay dues even if not a member. And, they spend these dues -- every penny coming from taxpayers -- to defeat the will of the taxpayer and those from whom they steal these dues.
In the video below, the union folks pretend they are fighting for the middle class when 90% of the middle are not union members. Note the substantive argument the state official versus the silliness of the union people. They love to talk about "rights" while working against the rights of the 90% who do not want to join their union.
Case closed on union lies and the free political will of the people.
Finally, a little truth about our debt versus spending crisis. Conclusion? More folks need to leave congress, now !!
Our debt put into context:
#1 As of Feb 20, , the U.S. national debt was was more than 14,000,000,000,000.
#2 If the federal government started now, to repay the U.S. national debt at a rate of one dollar per second, it would take over 440,000 years to pay off the national debt.
#3 If the federal government began repaying the national debt at a rate of $10 million dollars a day it would take approximately 3,800 years to pay off the national debt.
#4 Today, the U.S. national debt is increasing by roughly 4 billion dollars every single day.
#5 The U.S. government is borrowing approximately 2.63 million more dollars every single minute.
#6 On September 30th, 1980 the U.S. national debt was 907 billion dollars. Just thirty years later, the U.S. national debt is over 14 times larger.
#7 According to a recent U.S. Treasury report to Congress, the U.S. national debt will reach 19.6 trillion dollars in 2015.
#8 It is being projected that the U.S. government will be paying 900 billion dollars just in interest on the national debt by the year 2019. We are currently spending close to $400 billion per year.
#9 A trillion $10 bills, if they were taped end to end, would wrap around the globe more than 380 times. That amount of money would still not be enough to pay off the U.S. national debt.
#10 The U.S. Congress has raised the federal debt ceiling six times in just the past three years.
#11 The 111th Congress, Nancy Pelosi's congress, added more to the U.S. national debt than the first 100 U.S. Congresses combined.
#12 The 111th Congress got us into so much new debt that it breaks down to $10,429.64 for each of the 308,745,538 people counted by the 2010 U.S. census.
#13 The U.S. government currently has to borrow approximately 41 cents of every single dollar that it spends.
#14 When you break down the debt that the U.S. government owes to China alone it comes to over $10,000 for every single American family.
#15 If you were alive when Christ was born and you spent one million dollars every single day since that point, you still would not have spent one trillion dollars by now. Almost unbelievably, the U.S. government will accumulate well over a trillion dollars more debt in 2011.
#16 If right this moment you went out and started spending one dollar every single second, it would take you more than 31,000 years to spend one trillion dollars.
#17 The Congressional Budget Office is projecting that U.S. government debt held by the public will reach a staggering 716 percent of GDP by the year 2080. It is currently around 80% of GDP. Of course, our debt cannot get as high as project before a complete economic meltdown.
Turns out the "change" Obama preached, once upon a time, is that change which can be used in a vending machine. Who knew !!??
Only 47% of all legal aged workers in America are employed full time.
In an effort to hide the true unemployment number, 85.2 million Americans have been taken off the "employment roles." In other words, 108 + million folks in America are either "unemployed or underemployed" but we only count 25 million of these Americans. All presidents play this game but who cares, two, three, fifteen wrongs do not make it right. Obama promised changed, a new kind of America in a good way. Turns out he was only kidding.
At 9.0% "unemployed," the Administration ignores the truth. At 10.3% "unemployed," Gallup does exactly the same thing. Few sources tell us the truth. We are in much worse shape than we can imagine, and "imagination" is what we are left with when we throw out the phony numbers being told us by folks on both sides of the political aisle.
(Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/real-employment-rate-47-percent-2011-1). I could have worked the numbers, myself, but since the libs who visit this site do not think much of my "8th grade" math skills, I decided to use this source. Understand that the Libs coming to this site (maybe 100 to 150 per day) hate the fact I have pushed concerning union membership: total work force = 153 million minus union membership of only 15 million. With that equation in mind, numbers coming from the Department of Labor, the claim that "unions represent middle America" is laughable.
The truth: 50-State Union Protest Falls Far Short Of Predicted Turnout
I love the headline which reads, "Thousands rally nationwide ." There is something wrong with a movement that sees only "thousands" in a well advertised, seriously organized, nationalized event. . . . . should have been "millions," no??!!!
We encourage our readers to review both linked stories.
Understand that the current "labor movement" represents paltry 15 million American workers out of a national workforce of 153 million, according to Department of Labor statistics. Remember this rather brilliant axiom: "next to no" representation equals "next to nothing" in terms of a national day of protest. he he he
I could not have cared less. The Founders thought it a good idea that the central government be a part-time job, primarily because federal governance was in the hands of the blue collar crowd and they needed to get back to the personal business of earning a living.
So Weiner does his imitation of Chicken Little . . . . or was that Little Chicken . . . . and, in the end, is proven to be the rhetorical clown that he is.
Today, the New GOP is announcing intentions of voiding a shutdown while working to cut spending. What will not get reported, however, is the fact that this has been their plan all along. While the Dems have had two years doing what the people demonstrably did not want, the GOP -- thanks to the Dems -- have been positioning themselves as the Party of Responsible Leadership. They, the GOP leadership, understands that 2008 was more about their failures, as a conservative body, than the election of an angry black man with no experience and little common sense. 2008 was about the GOP and intra-party reform. Period.
Think about it: John McCain was one of the most unpopular GOP candidates of all time. True conservatives had watched this man make one serious compromise after another, all in the name of "getting along" with the Marxist Dems and avoiding the dreaded "gridlock" criticism of a liberal press. He was the great compromiser, what with his "gang of 14" and all that crap . . . . the "Maverick," not afraid to fight members of his own party; the man who ridiculed conservatives during his nomination campaign in 2004; the man who promised, if elected in 2008, to seek the advise of Al Gore and work for a "reasonable version of Cap and Trade." Those of us on the outside of conservative politics, hated the compromise we saw, beginning with the Gingrich era (Please note: while most have respect for Gingrich, the Era of Compromise began during his tenure and gained steam through 2007 and into the election cycle of 2008).
We had watched as McCain and Lindsey Graham teamed up to make the GOP the Party of 'Whatever you think best, my fellow Democrat.' Taking hard positions on conservative issues was deemed divisive and harmful to the continued viability of the GOP . . . . . . . and that strategy cost them the elections in 2006 and the embarrassing defeat in 2008. Even the Bush victory in 2004 against the communist sympathizer, John Kerry, was weak. Kerry should have been beaten by 15 points. No one liked the man and he had accomplished exactly "jack" in the Senate, serving years and years and years without a single hallmark piece of legislation . . . . kind of like what he is doing right now. Heck, his own wife dreamed of better days who her deceased husband !! Pretty bad when you get beat out by a dead guy.
Many conservatives rebelled in 2006 and 5 to 7 million stayed away from the polls in 2008. I am saying that if we had had a true conservative as a candidate, that election might have gone differently. Disagree? Well, put this in your pipe and smoke it --- the Dems spent 3/4 of a billion dollars, more than twice the amount of McCain, and beat this unpopular GOP candidate by only 7 points . . . . . with 5 to 7 million conservative voters staying away from the voting booth altogether. THAT was the context of the Obama victory. He didn't beat the GOP. The GOP beat the GOP.
In 2008, the conservative battle cry was this: "Try winning an election without us."
I believe, the new leadership of the GOP got the message.
Understand that we sent the same message to the Democrats, in 2010, kicking their butts out of "absolute" power and setting the stage for a strong 2012 election result.
Sadly, we conservatives cannot work alone; we have to depend upon the leadership of the GOP to help accomplish the "taking back of America."
There is so little press on what the Republicans say and do that I thought I would give you Speaker Boehner (pronounced "Bayner") in his own words. If you are not a Marxist Moron, you will like what you read.
“This is very simple: Americans want the government to stay open, and they want it to spend less money,”
On entitlement reform and moral responsibility
“To not address entitlement programs, as is the case with the budget the president has put forward, would be an economic and moral failure. By acting now, we can fulfill the mission of health and retirement security for all Americans without making changes for those in or near retirement. And we can keep the promises we have made to our children.”
“We have a moral responsibility to address the problems we face. That means working together to cut spending and rein in government – NOT shutting it down. The House has passed legislation – reflecting the will of the people – that would keep the government running through October while cutting spending. The leader of the United States Senate has refused to allow a vote on this legislation, so the House will pass a shorter-term bill that will also keep the government running while including reasonable spending cuts at the same time. This is very simple: Americans want the government to stay open, and they want it to spend less money. We don’t need to shut down the government to accomplish that. We just need to do what the American people are asking of us.”.
“Now surpassing $14.1 trillion, our national debt is on track to eclipse the size of our entire economy this year. In other words, we’re broke. Broke, going on bankrupt. Just as a bankrupt business has trouble creating jobs, so does a bankrupt country. … Yes, this debt is a mortal threat to our country. It is also a moral threat. It is immoral to bind our children to as leeching and destructive a force as debt. It is immoral to rob our children’s future and make them beholden to China. No society is worthy that treats its children so shabbily.”
On where Republican leadership plans on taking the country
“Our budget, under the leadership of our Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, will specifically deal with entitlement reform. To not address entitlement programs, as is the case with the budget the president has put forward, would be an economic and moral failure. By acting now, we can fulfill the mission of health and retirement security for all Americans without making changes for those in or near retirement. And we can keep the promises we have made to our children.”
“We have a moral responsibility to deal with this threat to freedom and liberate our economy from the shackles of debt and unrestrained government. Our new majority in the House began this work by humbling ourselves and finding ways to exercise frugality. We banned earmarks, which had become a symbol of a broken Washington. We replaced rules making it easy to increase spending with reforms making it easier to cut spending. We cut our own budgets by five percent. … Earlier this month, the House approved more than $100 billion in spending cuts compared to what President Obama requested for the current fiscal year. … Next month, we will propose cutting or eliminating wasteful mandatory spending programs. … And we’re fighting to end taxpayer funding for abortion once and for all … we’re working to protect life.”
“Our new majority in the House is committed to using every tool at our disposal to fight a government takeover of the Internet. Congressman Fred Upton of Michigan, the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, has pledged, in his words, to be ‘a dog to the Frisbee on this issue.’ … Congressman Greg Walden of Oregon, a former broadcaster himself, has introduced a congressional resolution of disapproval to reverse the FCC’s net neutrality rules. I’m pleased to report the House will act on this measure as early as next month.”
From the mind of William Jacobson, prof at University of Cornell, Law School.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Promoters, such as David Dayen at Firedoglake, were predicting a million-person turnout nationwide. But reports as of 7:00 E.S.T. today make clear that other than in Madison, Wisconsin, the crowds were sparse.
The turnout in Madison was sizable, with estimates ranging over
In Washington, D.C., only about 500 people showed up (go to link for good photos of crazy signs). (Note, WaPo says 1000.)
In Columbus, OH, where you would expect a big crowd given a similar controversy, only "several thousand" people protested.
Other head counts, based on news reports, include: Boston (1000), Portsmouth, N.H. (few hundred), Augusta, ME (small crowd), New York City ("several thousand"), Chicago (1000), Miami (100), Austin (several hundred), Chicago (1000); Lansing, MI (2000), Nashville (hundreds), Los Angeles (2000), Richmond, VA (300), Denver (1000); Frankfurt, KY (several hundred), Jefferson City, MO (several hundred), Harrisburg, PA (several hundred).
While I don't have a complete count, based on these numbers from some major cities and labor states, total protesters nationwide (excluding Madison) likely totaled under 100,000 combined.
Outside of Madison, there were no reports of sizable crowds. And if you read the news reports, almost all the protesters were other union members. Despite the efforts, the organizers failed to motivate significant numbers of non-union members to come out for protests.
The 50-state protest was a failure, plain and simple, although the images from Madison may create the false impression of massive nationwide protests.
Update: As predicted, the mainstream media is painting the nationwide protest as a success. The headlines talk about protests around the country, but the stories talk almost entirely about Madison, giving the false impression that there was widespread support around the country:
- The New York Times, In Wisconsin and Beyond, Rallying Behind Unions, only had one factual reference to a protest outside Madison, nothwithstanding the headline: "In Miami, about 150 people took part in a rally at Bayfront Park in solidarity with public employees in Wisconsin and elsewhere."
- AP, Protesters across US decry Wis. anti-union efforts: "Large crowds of teachers, firefighters and public workers also gathered for rallies — holding American flags, wearing pro-union clothing and holding signs — in other capital cities including Topeka, Kan.; Harrisburg, Pa.; and Olympia, Wash."
Will the most partisan president in our history walk the line with the rioting teachers? Ed Shultz of MSNBC is demanding that he should.
“And understand this: If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I’m in the White House, I’ll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I’ll walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States of America. Because workers deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner.”
There you have it. Guess what Ed Shultz, the resident blowhard at MSNBC has to say about this: Obama, walk with us or forget your second term (short version).
Here is Shultz actual quote:
“If the President can’t go on a road trip or say more than one sound bite to a local affiliate, and realize that this is what 2012 is all about, if he can’t unequivocally come out in support of every protester that has been out there peacefully trying to fight for their way of life and protect their kitchen table, if this president can’t do that, then he does not deserve a second term.”
Before her resignation as Governor, they were close to accomplishing their goal of total destruction. The plan was to file as many frivolous lawsuits as possible, forcing the Governor to use her own money (by State law) to defend herself. At the time of her forced resignation, these hate filled morons had 18 lawsuits filed against her and she was 500 thousand dollars in debt on her way to losing her home, her private business and investments and two/three million dollars in legal fees. The JournoList conspiracy created to fight McCain-Palin in 2008 never disbanded and has been actively conspiring against Palin since that national election. They had the woman on the ropes taking the final blows before being counted "out!!"
Understand that I think her decision to quit the Governorship was both necessary to save her physical home and brilliant in terms of a pathway to "conflict resolution." Within weeks of her leaving office, she was a millionaire and heir to the power that comes with wealth. The Mama Grizzly was down and wounded. And, then, she was medicated and angry --- one doesn't want to anger a mama grizzly and let her live, I am told.
Many politicians would have allowed the Marxist environmental freaks to define the nature of the conflict being waged against them. Not Palin. That decision to quit as Governor, released her from State law that limited her counter attack. Her decision changed everything. And she has won the war. We all know that there are no surprises remaining with regard to Palin and her personal life. They have dug up all the dirt they can and found next to nothing. She is not only beautiful but politically pristine !!! he he he
But the Losers on the Left persists in the failing effort to destroy the Governor. Here is that Yahoo article:
<When the conversation turned to the escalating price of gas and groceries, Palin reportedly said, "It's no wonder Michelle Obama is telling everybody you better breastfeed your baby--yeah, you better--because the price of milk is so high right now!"
It may have just been an attempt to draw a laugh from the crowd over issues--childhood obesity and the medically proven benefits of breastfeeding--that are no laughing matter. But even though she followed up by saying "and may that not be the takeaway, please, of this speech," it has become one of them. Headlines saying that Palin was mocking Michelle Obama's attempt to make it easier for women to breastfeed have lead stories following the speech.>
I listened to the comments in question. The Yahoo article got it wrong. The joke, itself, was first, funny (note the audience laughter) and, secondly, was a shot at the increasing cost of everything. Who cares what the headlines declare? They are all written by folks bent on her destruction and are wholly incredulous for that reason. Period.
The filthy mouthed Left Wing wants civil war and Palin as its first victim. They are losers in this effort and unhappy about that failing reality. And, currently, they are losing the larger political war, as well. Of course, the GOP can shoot itself in the foot, as is their case history, but until and unless that happens, the Marxist influences in this country are being set back by decades as a result of the Obama/Reid/Pelosi alliance. Two years ago, none of us would have believed this changing tide of influence would have been the case . . . . . . and they say "There is no God."
Turns out Governor Walker represents the vast majority of American workers. We have the proof , here.
Editor's note: there is really no point in reading more of the above article. The current Big Labor riots are not about "Labor." Do you know that only 6.9 % of the private sector work force is unionized; 36% of the national labor force is unionized in the public sector? The total ? 14.7 million Americans are in unions of some sort, down from 20 million in 1983, the first year such numbers were tracked.
How does 14.7 million workers compare to the non-union labor force in the United States? What bloggster cares about THAT statistic? Certainly no liberal pundit. You are probably reading the answer for the first time here at Midknight Review - new and revised.
Here is the comparison: Unions, both public and private sectors, equals 14.7 million workers.
Private, non-union workers, equal 138 million.** (cf. Labor stats here)
"Unions" simply do not represent middle America and the counter debate is based on an illusion, a fantasy and nothing else.
**In case you are wondering after visiting the linked source, our private sector "139 million" baseline comes from this equation: 153,00o,000 minus 15 million (rounding off 14.7).
Give me a break.
This past week, the White House conducted work shops for kids, teaching them the importance of Mo Town's cultural contributions rather than meeting day after day until they get a handle on the gathering of information, world wide. He is flying blind and we are worse off because of it.
I can no longer find records of this, but as late as six months ago, the White House had thrown more than 300 parties and concerts during the first two years of their gluttonous sojourn as Chief Executives. That is a party of some sort every other day. Remember the press conference with Obama and Bill Clinton? Obama was "keeping the First Lady waiting" and had to leave to attend a Christmas party !!! He turned the press meeting over to Bubba and left the building. . . . . . . . to attend another stinking party !!
He is the most irresponsible president we have ever elected to office; a party hound who has made millions off his celebrity as president . . . . . . there is something wrong with that picture for sure.
Obama talks about "their fair share." What is his "fair share?"
Sadly, I think we know the answer to that question.
Understand that under Jimmy Carter, his government saw shutdowns each and every year, on average lasting 11 days. Under Reagan, 6 of his 8 year term saw brief periods of "government shutdown."
Notice who the fear mongers are in all this. There will be no shutdown, unless the Dems think they think they can score political points. With the current angst against spending, many in the Democrat Party know of the risk of forcing a shutdown. This is not the mid 1990s when the GOP allowed a shutdown and took one on the chin because of that decision. The people have made is abundantly clear, they want financial change and are willing to work for the defeat of those politicians who do not join them in this effort.
Know this, Wall Street is thriving because the Fed continues to print and pump money into that system (per CNBC business news ).
The cost of energy, a central core economic value, is teetering at the brink of $5.00 per gallon gas-at-the-pump, ending all hopes of a recovery. I live in California. Here, parts of the state already record $4.00 per gallon. The Administration has had more than two years to solve this problem and has done nothing but make it more volatile.
25% of all homes in this country are vacant and another 11% are "upside down" as relates to equity versus home values.
The Department of Labor Statistics has unemployment at 9% while Gallup has that total set at a full 10%.
19.3% of this nation's workforce is unemployed or underemployed -- well over 34 million folks, the highest in history.
The largest tax increase in history has been levied on retired citizens in the form of a two year decision by Obama to not give cost of living increases to those on Social Security.
It is expected that food commodities will rise 3 to 4 percent in the coming year.
And most disturbing of all is the fact that 44% of our total economy is borrowed money. Take that 44% away and we move from the illusion of prosperity to the reality of a third world, poverty stricken nation.
We have a report telling us that Egypt will NOT fall into the hands of the radical Muslim Brotherhood.
Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman delivered the following statement Feb. 11: “In the name of God the merciful, the compassionate, citizens, during these very difficult circumstances Egypt is going through, President Hosni Mubarak has decided to step down from the office of president of the republic and has charged the high council of the armed forces to administer the affairs of the country. May God help everybody.”
Suleiman’s statement is the clearest indication thus far that the military has carried out a coup led by Defense Minister Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi. It is not clear whether Suleiman will remain as the civilian head of the army-led government.
Egypt is returning to the 1952 model of ruling the state via a council of army officers. The question now is to what extent the military elite will share power with its civilian counterparts.
At a certain point, the opposition’s euphoria will subside and demands for elections will be voiced. The United States, while supportive of the military’s containing the unrest, also has a strategic need to see Egypt move toward a more pluralistic system.
Whether the military stays true to its commitment to hold elections on schedule in September remains to be seen. If elections are held, however, the military must have a political vehicle in place to counter opposition forces, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. The fate of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) thus lies in question. Without the NDP, the regime will have effectively collapsed and the military could run into greater difficulty in running the country. While the military council will be serving as the provisional government, it will likely want to retain as much of the ruling NDP as possible and incorporate elements of the opposition to manage the transition. Sustaining its hold on power while crafting a democratic government will be the biggest challenge for the military as it tries to avoid regime change while also dealing with a potential constitutional crisis. (we are a paid member of Stratfor). >>>>> END OF REPORT
Editor's notes: when you stop to think about it, the Middle Eastern and North African Muslin nations are not led by raving radical Muslims hell bent on defeating Israel and running the United States out of the region. To be sure, radicals are there and in power (Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Gaze ) but cooler heads prevail in Egypt where more than 3000 of the Egyptian military officer pool has been educated in West Point and related schools in the States. Add to this largest country in the region (80% of the Muslim/Arab population live in this most ancient of nations), Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen, Jordan, Morocco, Oman, United Arab Emirates and Iraq (thank you George Bush) and even Libya. Turkey, Pakistan and Afghanistan remain questionable as to the end game and the ultimate influence of radicals within those countries. Of course radicalized elements of Islam can co-op the region, but that does not appear to be a likely scenario.
Understand that I am not predicting outcomes, in this post. But I am suggesting that when the dust settles, the United States could be in a reasonable good position. Obama has to get it in gear, however. If he continues to sit on his hands, the outcome might be disastrous for our country.
. . . . Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers. . . . . They are being asked to accept a cut in their salaries so that the state of Wisconsin can use the money to fill the hole left by tax cuts and reduced audits of corporations in Wisconsin. (Source: tax.com ).
The problem? Well, for starters, every nickle a public union type earns comes from the non-unionized taxpayer. That includes the monies, in this case, teachers pay in taxes and benefits contributions. What the genius, above, misses in his statement, is the fact that all funding for teacher salaries and legacy programs come from the taxpayer. When a Wisconsin teacher pays taxes and increases his legacy "contribution," he is returning monies back to the taxpayer. When a non-union taxpayer pays Wisconsin taxes, she is funding the public unions of that state at all levels. Again, when the teachers pay taxes, they are returning monies to the taxpaying public.
This is part of the reason why George Meany, perhaps the biggest name in the American labor movement in the early 50s and FDR apposed public unions not to mention the scam on public funding that is "collective bargaining."
On the right, is a plastic toy reset button used by Obama as a gift to the Russians, indicating our desire to reset our relationship with them . . . . the Russians . . . . . our enemy.
Obama talking to a sixth grade class complete with teleprompters and one Secret Service agent. Imagine, only one agent against 30 sixth grade kids. Whoa !! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<< Obama in his younger adult days
looking tough, seriously. He likes that tough guy persona. Remember, this is the first president to try to decide "whose ass to kick." And they hated Bush for saying, "Bring it on." Geeeesh.
We have, here, the first president to ever pray in a mosque with the Muslim faithful to a foreign god -- a Christian praying to allah................................................>>>>>>>
<<<<< Obama looking as stressed as any president in memory. Just stare at it for a moment and the stress will become obvious.
Wonder what she thinks of him now. Back then, it was near worshipful.>>
Are you kidding. This was not posed or so we are told, but look at this pic (left). The eagle images are positioned on top of two flag polls.
Lots of this crap with Bush. It was all good with the Dems. Now, suddenly, we need to respect the office of the presidency. >>>>>>>
University at Georgetown. the letter at
<<< top of the darken dormer are IHS. These are Latin lettering symbolizing the name of "Jesus.
Obama ordered these letters covered over before he gave a commencement speech. A Christian (?) ordering the name of Jesus covered over. Not in my book. Case closed on that question.
Click on pics to enlarge.
Conservatives Allege "Fake" Doctors Notes, Ignore Doctor-Patient Confidentiality, as if 15 different video recordings of doctors committing this fraud, in the Wisconsin halls of congress, constitute "privilege," not to mention that several reporters received these excuses, pretending to be teachers. The doctors did not care who these people were as they feverishly wrote their excuses. So why the concern for "confidentiality?"
Our second nomination is this statement from one of the Wisconsin State Senators, doing the business of the people while in hiding: talking to a Fox reporter, he said, "Senate Democrats do not intend to be obstructionists." After making this statement, he ran back into hiding, effectively shutting down state government on a number of levels.
Rally to Save the American Dream
In Wisconsin and around our country, the American Dream is under fierce attack. Instead of creating jobs, Republicans are giving tax breaks to corporations and the very rich—and then cutting funding for education, police, emergency response, and vital human services.
On Saturday, February 26, at noon local time, we are organizing rallies in front of every statehouse and in every major city to stand in solidarity with the people of Wisconsin. We demand an end to the attacks on worker's rights and public services across the country. We demand investment, to create decent jobs for the millions of people who desperately want to work. And we demand that the rich and powerful pay their fair share.
We are all Wisconsin. We are all Americans.
This Saturday, we will stand together to Save the American Dream.Sign up today to join in!
Know that the picture above frames hundreds of criminally involved teachers in Wisconsin, rioting in violation of state law -- hardly a picture of "democracy in action." Seriously. I am not name calling or making things up. State law defines this gathering as illegal as it pertains to the teachers of the state. They should be summarily fired and prosecuted. Maybe placed in camps of some sort ?? !
Understand that what is lost in the Wisconsin teacher riots is two-fold: the rule of Constitutional law and the rights of the non-union taxpayers. The first consequence is obvious. The second is grossly under-reported.
Society cannot exist without the rule of law. The public unions of this nation, at least many of them, do not regard the rule of law as critical when they stand in opposition to that law. Such is the very definition of "criminal involvement."
As to the rights of the non-union worker: she is completely unimportant to these teachers. All salaries paid to the demonstrators in Wisconsin are paid by the taxpayer, the fast majority of whom are the non-union middle class. Public unions cannot survive without other peoples money and they, the unions, could not care less. Public union employees are not "middle class." Rather, they are part of the Entitlement Class that is fully supported - I say, again, "fully" supported - by those who are non-union members of society.
You might object with that last statement, saying, "John, you are forgetting that public union workers pay taxes too." Yes they do but with whose money? Understand that I am saying that all of the money a public sector unionized teacher makes and pays out comes from the non-union, private sector . . . . all of it.
Look, if all of my son's "income " (I might call it an "allowance") is given to him by me and he gives me back a measly portion of that total, he is only returning my money. When I pay taxes, I support the teacher. When the teacher pays taxes, he is only making my tax burden less that what it could be, nothing more.
I should have the right to manage my money, but under "collective bargaining," my right to manage my money is completely ignored. In fact, collective bargaining's end game is always this from the public unions:
Pay us more of your money.
Obama, once again, orders the Department of Justice to ignore current federal law. Get over this notion that he is "just like us."
WASHINGTON – The White House says President Barack Obama is "grappling" with his personal views on gay marriage even as he's ordered the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of a law that bans it. The Justice Department announced Wednesday that, at Obama's direction, it would not defend the Defense of Marriage Act in a court case where it's being challenged. Spokesman Jay Carney said Obama has always opposed the Defense of Marriage Act as "unnecessary and unfair." But Carney said there's no change to how Obama views gay marriage itself. Obama said in January that he is [was] still wrestling with whether gay couples should have the right to marry. He said his feelings on the issue continue to evolve but he still believes in allowing strong civil unions.
Such "indecision !!" Are they kidding us? How does anyone put those last two sentences together? He is "still wrestling with . . gays . . . . right to marry . . . . but still believes in strong civil unions." Whatever. It seems that the idiot media is more confused than Obama.
Look, for starters, a "civil union " is not a traditional marriage. The words "civil union" never refer to traditional marriage, exclusively. Second, Obama's ordered decision to not enforce federal law (the Defense of Marriage Act) is, in fact, a clarification as to his personal beliefs on the subject. Of course he believes in gay marriage. Of course he is not "like us" on this or any other issue, it seems.
Representaton of Federal Law Be Damned
What is it with Democrats? In the past two years, it has become undeniably obvious that an important part of their belief system is the willingness to ignore or violate federal law with which they disagree. The problem with that is the fact that they are representatives of the federal legal system. That means nothing to this bunch of political misfits. Those of us who are in our late 50s to mid 60s went to college with these jerks. They were proud Marxists then, without question. I call them by that name, today, because I see no philosophical difference between them in their college years and now. Once a Marxist, always a Marxist.
Chaos Defined In Practical Terms
If they don't like the results of an election, they ignore its consequences ala Nancy Pelosi and the Doomkauf, Harry Reid. If they want to increase their voter base, they refuse to enforce border law. If they see a political-social advantage in supporting undocumented squaters, they push for illegal "sanctuary" cities . . . . . . . . and there are dozens of these conclaves, all under Democrat governance. If they are defeated in Congress, they circumvent the political process, using regulatory law to impose their will over that of the representative government of the people. If they reject contract law (per the GM takeover), they simply ignore it. If they reject federal court decisions as in the case of the New Black Panther convictions of 2009, they refuse to continue its prosecution. If they disagree with what is about to happen, legislatively, they run and hide [per Wisconsin and Indiana], all in the name of representing the people. "Elections have consequences" is a term only applied to losing conservative politicians, never to Democrat extremists. And, if the representative of the Marxist Democrat Party doesn't like a particular law, he orders the Department of Justice to ignore it. He makes it official !!
One Man Rule Is The Order of the Day
Understand that I think the Department of Justice's job, its job, is to enforce federal law whether it agrees with a particular law or not. To do otherwise is to sanction the rule of chaos or, worse yet, to allow for the authoritarian rule of one, two or three individuals. In this case, we are talking about "one person" rule. Elections are won and laws passed. Then, one man overrides those elections and laws and the majority opinion is effectively forfeited. Understand that all despots claim to be serving the "will of the people." That phrase - "will of the people" - means nothing when the peoples' elections are ignored and their laws violated . . . officially violated.
Institutionalized/Structured Chaos as a Tool to Reform is happening now.
This lie that Obama is not pro-gay [marriage] is the tip of the legal iceberg. Below the surface, he is nothing "like us." Fairness, in his mind, must override the expressed will of the people. Wealth is owned by the poor and must be returned to the poor. Pushing for a one world governance is preferred over and against the sovereign will and utilitarian exceptionalism of the United States of America. The private sector working class is not the middle class as Obama defines middle class. The fact that the Constitution limits federal governance has been rejected by Obama and his Marxist hordes. Established law is unimportant when in opposition to the "greater good" as defined by this current crop of misfits and thugs. In short, chaos has been institutionalized by the Radical Democrat leadership with the hopes that the resulting calm will usher in a fundamentally transformed America. That is "their" agenda and that is the reason we must fight them to the bitter end.
More on the legislative idiocy that is ObamaCare - now they are going to charge the poor who use the ER
One of my sons is an ER doctor in one of the near-by hospitals. In fact, it is the same hospital in which he was born some 35 years ago. Neither he nor any of a dozen doctors we know believe that ER rooms across the nation will realize any sort of change in terms of over-crowding. . . . . . ain't going to happen. Obama's solution? Charge the poor and the illegals. . . . . . . . . brilliant !! You libs must be so proud.
My question is this: how come I know this and Obama hasn't a clue?
Murphy / The Beast: Koch Whore — Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker answers his master's call — “David Koch” . . . .
Well, the donut eaters at The Beast think they have made a serious point as they go ad hom on Governor Walker. But who is the real plantation massa, here, seriously?
Hint: Big Labor and the Donut Eater in Chief, Richard Trumka.
Don't know who Trumka is? You should. He owns Barack Obama, period.
Understand that the AFL-CIO gave Obama 5 states in the 2008 election and hundreds of millions of dollars to his campaign. Obama cannot win re-election without Trumka and Big Labor Thumka represents. . . . and he knows it.
Below is Trumka bragging about his visits to the White House. If you don't think Obama is not owned by this man, you are having an allergic reaction to truth and/or common sense. Understand that the day's headline story reports that Obama has not spoken to 6 members of his Cabinet [in one-on-one settings] since their appointments but has had time to visit with Trumka 700/800 times a year . . . . . in person. Think we are kidding? Listen to Trumka's pompous claim:
I personally believe that Obama has sold out his hopes and dreams for this country. Although I did not agree with his agenda, it was real and substantive. Now, he has nowhere to go and Big Labor understands their new place of power. They have reeled Obama in and are now using him as one would a pawn.
And he has responded in predicable ways, lying his butt off while pretending to be what he is not. The world is going up in flames, our national security is in worse shape than before 9/11, nothing has been done to solve the pending oil/gas crisis [price per barrel of crude has gone up $16 in a week] , we now know that the stimulus money either went to state coffers or into the pockets of Obama's union masters and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . his party is being run [into the ground] by the most incompetent group of losers in modern history. And he does not have time to talk to his Cabinet . . . two years with no oversight or conversation.
Tell me, someone, what is his agenda? Where is he going or is he simply circling the drain along with this wonderful country??
Last year, I predicted he would quit. I am not so sure he will not do so, but one thing for certain, he and the Dems need to win big in 2012. Without a Democrat majority in the Senate and Obama in the White House, ObamaCare is gone. The curse of the past two years will be erased if the Dems suffer a second monumental defeat.
Point of post: to remind the reader who is really the most powerful man in the world . . . . . . . . and it ain't Barry.
Palin 16 %
No doubt the libs will whine about Gallup's conservative bias.
Understand that the ONLY radical in the house is hiding somewhere out of state. These people need to be arrested and thrown in jail. Their salaries need to be confiscated and their union disbanded for fomenting riotous and harmful behavior. Do they have the right to peaceful assembly? Hell no. They are suppose to be at work and, by law, public union members cannot go on strike. In fact, their behavior is felonious as defined by law.
What is happening in Wisconsin and Indiana is not "democracy in action."
Think about it. If this is how we get things done in this country, in the future, what a sad day for democracy. I do not want to be ruled by a union which decides what I will do with my money apart from the legislative process. We have the right to an orderly and constitutionally ordained political process. Third World riots and the hate speech of the community organizer should have nothing to do with this country's politic.
And where is Obama in all this? Using his OFA to embellish this disgusting behavior, leading the way of chaos, as he works to fundamentally transform the United States of America.
And what, pray tell, are the only two responses to mob rule?
The enslavement of the onlooker on the one hand, or open and violent rebellion (civil war) on the other. I have no intentions of being a passive member of the first group. These jerks need to be defeated by those who are actually in charge of law and order in this country, or civil war is just around the corner.
Pass a law that demands I pay their retirement plans and I have to comply. Have these criminals gather in my front yard and demand my money? Well, only after the fight.
As a side note: Mitch Daniels, the Republican Governor of Indiana has just destroyed chances of winning the GOP nomination for President. He wants to try. If successful, I will personally vote for the Libertarian no-chance-to-win candidate and never support support the GOP again. I am nearly done with all this Left Wing crap. We, conservatives, were here first. We fought the wars, bleed and died for this country. If liberals had been in charge of the American Revolution, it would not have happened and all of us know this.
And to be clear, I do not want to fight, but if mob rule is the order of the day, fighting for the right to be free is the only choice. Trumka can drop dead.
Anyway, here is the song. Kind of clever and that is what makes it so repulsive . . . . we listen and like the sound of the song. . . . we play it over and over because we likie and soon, we become them !!!
Told you it was clever / likable.
I have included this op-ed from Investors.com. I am very concerned with this Administration's desertion of our allies, Israel and Great Briton and what appears to be a consummate allegiance with many of our manifest enemies. Last week, it was grossly under-reported that Obama planned on publicly criticizing Israel before the UN in an effort to avoid a veto of a critical Security Council resolution condemning Israel for its continued building efforts in the West Bank. -- MR Editor (yes, its "Mr" to you !!)
Ally Betrayed: The Obama administration wanted the best of both worlds in vetoing a U.N. condemnation of Israel while publicly agreeing with it. Instead, an increasingly impotent United States added insult to injury.
Last Friday the U.S. performed a contortionist's routine at the United Nations Security Council. We officially exercised our veto against Lebanon's resolution criminalizing Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories. Yet afterward, both our ambassador to the U.N. and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed public support for the substance of the resolutions they vetoed. In explaining the U.S. veto, Ambassador Susan Rice apologized to the world on behalf of America, confessing that "we agree with our fellow Council members — and indeed, with the wider world — about the folly and illegitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity," and charging that it has "corroded hopes for peace and stability. . .. We therefore regrettably have opposed this draft resolution."
Appearing on ABC's "This Week," Secretary Clinton, like Rice, used the term "illegitimate" — a half-notch down from "illegal" (both words coming from the Latin lex, meaning "law." But no one could mistake that the U.S. was condemning our staunch ally Israel in word, while providing the semblance of a defense in deed. The result is a schizophrenic foreign policy in which the president can tell the world we've become anti-Israel, while maintaining the pretense at home that we haven't. The whole argument against Israeli settlements is based on a twisting of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, designed to prevent a repeat of the Nazi practice of sending people to concentration camps. But Israeli settlements entail no forcible transport; nor is there displacement of Arabs, whose growing population continues living in the territories.
The real threat to Palestinians' quality of life in these areas is not Jewish settlements but the terrorists they choose to elect to the Palestinian Authority. The state of Israel staunchly stood with the U.S. at the U.N. against the Soviet Union for decades throughout the Cold War. Israel is the only representative government of long-term stability in the Middle East. And Israel has been our ally in the global war on terror. As Middle East Islamic nations, one after the other, are threatened or overthrown, our influence as the world's lone superpower seems to be diminishing.
How does a two-faced policy toward Israel help?
The above editorial was taken from Investors.com in its entirety. We encourage you to visit this resource here.
The very biased USA Today has commissioned Gallup to poll Wisconsin. Results: 60% support collective bargaining. Really ??
We draw that last conclusion because I believe USA Today is a rank Marxist rag when it comes to anything political. This bias is reflected in everything from its sports coverage to the listings in its want ad section, insisting on politically correct language rather than the popular language of middle America.
The polling result is listed in our headline. 60% sounds substantial. Kind of sounds as if the people support the methodology the current teacher revolt.
Two observations: one, I cannot find a statement as to the question(s) asked in this survey. Secondly, whether support for collective bargaining is as high as suggested, it is a rather common polling result that the American voter does not support the teacher's riot and illegal walk-out.
I must add that Gallup often presents its methodology for public review. It is not Gallup I suspect. Rather, it is USA Today. To be sure, Gallup has a left leaning bias; Rasmussen has a right leaning bias. Neither allows this bias to substantially effect their individual polls when they supply their own questions and run use their own methodologies.
Our map of the Middle East and Northern Africa presents Shia populations only (and Sunni by implication).
How to read the map including implicit population alternatives: Lybia, for example, is 10% Shia by [map] design with an implied Sunni population of near 90%.
Egypt, with 10% or less Shia population, also has a 15% Coptic Christian population with the remaining citizenry being Sunni. Saudi Arabia, with its 10% Shia population, has a huge Sunni majority with almost no Christian influence.
The three shades of green record the heaviest Shia populations. These populations tend to be more radical, believers in Shari Law. Iran is at the top of that list with Iraq a close second, followed by Yemen and then Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, [Bahrain, Lebanon, also, though not obvious on the map] and Turkey as a group. . . . . all with significantly large Shia populations.
Sunni populations make up 85% of Muslims, world wide, but have a smaller majority in the region displayed above. Understand that most Muslims do not make a "big deal" of the Sunni/Shia divide. That is much more a non-Muslim issue. The two sects share a common faith and, generally, live in peace with each others. They are brethren without making claim to being "members" of one sect or the other.
But, since we are not Muslim, we non-Muslims see a significant difference between the two groupings. Sunni is "good." They are less prone to radicalization, are less militant with regards to the US and Israel and are more open to negotiations with those whom they consider the opposition. They also tend to be more secular, especially in terms of governance. Know that "secular" in this case does not have the same anti-God, filthy mouthed [often] implications of a "secular humanist" in the West. Sunni populations will, at times, elect their leadership although all leadership in the Muslim world is authoritarian in nature. The more secular of the Sunni populations, ones with a heavy youth influence, can be more open to Western influences - a function of "youth" much more than a function of "Sunni."
The big difference between the two groupings is the regard for Muslim leadership. Shia populations look to Imams for leadership, religious clerics who are seen as sinless in nature and infallible in theory. In Iran, for example, the Ayatollah has considerably more influence over the population than does that country's midget nutcase president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Ayatollah Khomeini to the Westerner, is more popularly known as Imam Khomeini with the country. While both "sects" (Sunni and Shia) have their imams, the distinctive institution of Shia Islam is the Imamate - a much more exalted position than the Sunni imam, who, with the Sunnis, is primarily a prayer leader. In contrast to Sunni Muslims, who view the caliph only as a temporal leader and who lack a hereditary view of Muslim leadership, Shia Muslims believe the Prophet Muhammad designated Ali to be his successor as Imam. With the Shia, Ali is the first Imam. With the Sunnis, he is the 4th Imam.
Anyway, it all gets complicated at this point. Understand that the Shia traces its leadership back to the Prophet in a continuing line of succession. There are or have been 11 Imams - all religious leaders, none secular or government leaders. The "12th Imam" appears to be mystical designation rather than a particular person.
What does this all mean? First, the Sunni population within Islam is less radical, more inclined to be less militant. The distinction can be critical to our way of life. There is a reasonable chance that the Muslim nations in North Africa remain or become more open to Western influences and less critical of Israel -- provided we have competent leadership extending from or capitol. At this time of unrest and change in the region, the fact that we have Obama as a novice diplomat, one who could not have cared less for foreign affairs before being elected to the Top Job, is of great concern. We have a once in a life-time opportunity to influence the political dynamics of the region. Instead, our leadership sits on its collective hand, hoping that things work out in their political favor. Know this, when we hear the phrase "hope and change," hope, per se, is not the path to change. You can't just sit there, hoping, and expect a beneficial outcome. You actually have to do something and do it effectively.
On the map to the left, the vast majority of know oil fields are located in the Shia controlled nation of Iran. Not good for Westerners. Iran is the #3 exporter of oil, shipping out ,more than 2,000 barrels of oil per day.
But, Saudi Arabia with its Sunni population, is the number one exporter of oil in the world. Lose Saudi oil and the cost of gas at the pump, in this country, would go well over $7 per gallon, perhaps above $10 per gallon. Saudi Arabia ships 7,300 barrels of oil per day (Russia is second, btw, with 7,100 barrels per day exported).
The United States buys most of its oil from Canada (#14 exporter in the world) with 5% or so coming from the Middle East. That 5% is significant, however. We have enough oil reserves in our country, if developed, to forgo Mid Eastern oil altogether, but have historically done nothing to retrieve this oil. The fault for this idiocy? Radicalized Environmentalism. And now, with Obama, this monumental failure has become the order of the day.
Understand that oil prices are traded in American dollars. Our dollars. If world wide supplies take a hit from oil exporting Middle Eastern nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates, the cost of gas at the pump will be sorely effected -- far beyond what one would expect.
We have had three years since the "wake up call" in the spring of 2008 and $4.50 per gallon cost. Our current leadership has done nothing but make matters worse, shutting down oil supplies in this country, pushing for expensive green transportation that is decades from offering viable and popular alternatives to Mid East oil.
Never forget, Obama once believed that if we aired up our tires and tuned the engines in our cars, we could completely escape the need for Mid East oil !! Wow. Beyond stupid wrong and indefensibly incompetent. And he is our representative to the world.
Politics and the Shia Influence
Outside Islam, the primary proselyting Muslim influence is Shia. The New York Mosque folks are Shia -- militant and racially pro-Islam in an exclusive sense. Shia Muslims residing in foreign countries, have no intention of melding into the larger, non-Muslim, population. They push for Shira Law and work for the nationalism of Islam in whatever country they reside.
If you know this, you understand why the NY Mosque is such a threat to this country -- and I am talking about the mosque located at 51 Park Avenue, only. Its original name was the Cordoba House. It is a victory mosque and will be seen as such in Muslim nations around the world.
Do our laws allow us to stop its construction? Simply stated, the answer is "no." But law is not the only influence we can use to defeat the location of this mosque. Attention needs to be given to financing , some of which comes from know terrorist groups and is illegal for that reason.
Understand that CAIR is a Shia organization. Obama accepts CAIR while the FBI has red-flagged the institution.
Origins of the Sunni/Shia Split in Islam
Origins and Early Development of Shia Islam
Shia Muslims in Iraq
Here is a list of Shia Muslim organizations in the United States: click on this link.
We Westerners tend to think in absolute, analytical terms. That does not benefit us in our current discussion. We have just talked of peace between the two sects. In Iraq, the Sunni Kurds of the north have often been targets of the more radical Shia population. The divide in Iraq between Sunni and Shia elements is the source of much of that country's discontent. Peace in that country is tentative and unpredictable, or, at least, it has been.
Again, Obama has had two years to get us (as in US) ready for the coming price surge and did nothing. And we all are going to pay dearly for his incompetence.
What do we do about this?
For one thing, when you go to the gas station, fill up your tank. The next time you go to the station, gas may be 50 cents higher.
Plan your trips "into town." Make one trip do for a whole weeks worth of travel.
Look to help others with the money you save doing things right.
And pray that I am wrong about all this alarm, seriously.
Anyone know what this is?
The end of the recovery !!
It all depends upon about what happens in the Middle East. Egypt does not effect the price of oil. But, what happens in Behrain or Lybia does.
A week ago, price per barrel of crude was $84 per barrel. Today? It may close out the day at $95 per barrel. Worse yet is the cost of wholesale gas. Yesterday, it rose 8 cents per gallon and today, as I write, it has risen 12 cents. If these costs remain, the price of fuel at the pump will definitely increase.
Understand that what happens in Iran, Iraq, Bahrain and Lybia effects our economy. This morning, Lybia announced the cancellation of all current oil contracts. Start shaking your heads and say this with me, now, "We are all so screwed!"
Point of post: to encourage the readership to get ready for hard times, ala the spring of 2008. Obama has had two years to get ready for this eventuality and has done nothing in dealing with the immediacy of this matter. Instead, he has effectively shut down the Gulf from drilling (via the permit process), canceled major coal contracts and prevented states from developing oil supplies within their own boundaries. Natural gas supplies are being developed with no thanks to Obama, but nothing is coming our way in terms of immediate relief -- nothing as per the energy policies of this stranger in our White House.
Before the next seven days are gone, this baby will be executed by the [Canadian] State. In time, this WILL BE an American story
“I asked them: why not send him to Windsor and let him die at home?” he continued. “They said they will give him injection, but I don’t want to.”
Understand that the State will not even allow this baby to die in his own home !!! When government gets to that point, people need to rise up and replace that government. Period.
But, of course, this story has nothing to do with the American scene. >>>> READ THE REST OF THE STORY.
This morning, it is reported that House Democrats in Indiana have fled that state to avoid voting on legislation they deem as anti-union.
I have to tell you, two years ago I had tears in my eyes thinking about the ruin being caused to this country. Taking back America is the prevailing theme of the current grassroots revolt. Without Obama, I believe there would have been no such revolt.
The national Democrat party is screaming about the fantasy threat of a GOP governmental shutdown. But who is more willing to shut down government?
I think I have the answer and it is found in Wisconsin and Indiana . . . . . . . maybe Ohio and West Virginia. Which party shows a willingness to shut down government until it gets its way? Which party actually thinks the "people" owes them a living and security and benefits and long lived retirement funds? We all know the answer, don't we [that was a statement, not a question, hence the omitted "?"] .
I have written this post as an excuse to enter this quote from the godfather of American unionism -- FDR. By the mid-1950s and as a result of what FDR began, private sector unions owned 35% of the American work force. They collected and paid their own retirement programs. Their path to collective bargaining did not effect the taxpayer as a taxpayer. What most do not know is this, FDR did not support the notion of public, taxpayer financed, unions.
Here is what he had to say on the subject:
In a little-known letter he wrote to the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees in 1937, Roosevelt wrote these timely words:
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ... Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people."
Understand that public employees are government, They cannot strike without "shutting down government." It is not possible.
FDR's last comment is exactly what is happening. We are watching a group of people perfectly willing to shut down the democratic process in order to get their own way. They are no more concerned for their students or for the will of the people that they can fly without wings or eat without paying for their meals.
If FDR was alive, he would not stand in support of what is happening in today's union "movement." And the larger US population is losing interest in the selfish concerns of these public unions, as well.
'Nough said until the next post, of course.