Fair / 64° F
Consistency in their hypocrisy [UPDATED]
Published 9:25am Thursday, March 15, 2012 Updated 11:26am Thursday, March 15, 2012We are pleased to see that those on the sled dog journey to St. Paul from Ely and other points north to deliver petitions against copper/nickel/precious metals mining on the Iron Range had a safe trip and reached their State Capitol destination on Thursday.
Any time people, regardless their viewpoints, exercise their First Amendment right of free expression, that is good for our country.
They were greeted by but a handful of supporters at the Capitol, in stark contrast to a pro-nonferrous rally at the same place just a week or so ago.
But that’s fine.
After all, their message will be forever hyped as overwhelmingly supportive by a majority of people by their preservationist groups with deep pockets such as the Sierra Club and some cheerleading friends in the media, even though that is not the case.
And they likely traveled some of their ballyhooed sled dog trip on trails that are maintained by snowmobile clubs, even though environmental extremists are outraged by those winter engine-powered sled machines.
And they most likely kept in contact with family and friends — some of whom were likely fellow preservationist activists — via cell phones, even though such communication devices have innards with metals that will be mined at the nonferrous sites they are opposing.
And should they damage knees or hips with the vigorous and healthy sled dog activity they might need replacement surgery in the future, even though if that happens the medical marvels inserted to relieve severe pain and give them back mobility and better lives would also be made with nonferrous metals.
And when Mother Nature failed to cooperate with enough winter snow for the group to finish its trip by sled dog they had to take to vehicles to the finish line, even though those vehicles likely had environmentally friendly catalytic converters manufactured with nonferrous minerals.
We are mystified by, but do applaud, their consistent hypocrisy on the copper/nickel/precious metals mining issue.
— Mesabi Daily News
Well, what else do you expect from radical Democrats?
Honesty? Ethical conduct? Being in touch with reality?
Since when are any of those things valued by radical wackos in their efforts to destroy our free market economy and replace it with totaliarian socialism?
Smiles and chuckles. The Mesabi Range is mining country. Miners are heavily unionized. Unions tend to support Democrats. The Mesabi Daily News endorsed Mark Dayton for Governor in the last election and he is a Democrat. The environmentalists also tend to vote for Democrats. So two things should be evident from the letter and the comment 1) the Democratic Party includes many different view points and 2) some ultra conservatives jump to rash conclusions without doing the slightest of research.
Maybe if MN was a Right to Work state, the Democratic Party would be amenable to the plight of miners, since unions could no longer extort dues from laborers for the support of democrats.
Of course, and if Minnesota was a right to work state all the employers would say “now that we got rid of those nasty unions we can raise everyone’s wages, just like we wanted to do all along, but those mean old unions wouldn’t let us.” Then they will give everyone a nice new pension plan and full medical coverage.
All the workers will march in the streets singing “Praise be to our republican protectors they truly have us in their hearts”!
Mike, I’ll try to bring your comment current and pass on the update–since CWA vs. Beck (1988)the only contributors to a political party selected by unions are members who did/do so willingly or out of ignorance. (Ignorance is not the sole possession of the GOP, they just seem to pass it around more)
Larry, I’ll try to bring your comment current and pass on the update:
“During the 2010 election cycle, SEIU spent nearly $15.8 million on advertisements and other communications known as independent expenditures that overtly advocated for or against federal political candidates, with Democrats benefiting from almost all of them.”
opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000077
Thank you for sharing DNC ignorance, Larry.
Mike, this is not a difficult concept–unions do not have the power to “extort dues from their members” for political purposes, they haven’t since 1988. The fact that most union members choose to support candidates who are Democrats is not the issue. Many business owners support Democrats too. You would support people having the right to support any candidate they choose even if that is a candidate of an opposing party. No?
(You might want to do a source analysis before believing what you read)
“Labor leaders voted Wednesday to increase union dues to build the AFL-CIO’s campaign war chest by $25 million for November’s elections and the next presidential race.”
AFL-CIO Raises Union Dues
Published May 22, 2002
Associated Press
Mike, What is your point–labor leaders don’t pass on information about CWA v. Beck or that even the Associated Press reporters are journalists and maybe don’t have a clue about labor law? But you know people do not have to make political contributions with their union “dues”. You can web search for the court decision and read it for yourself. You know the truth. For you to pass on anything else would not be morally correct.
The “Beck Decision” is difficult to enforce.
Congressional hearings have demonstrated that workers often experience union coercion and intimidation once they try to assert their rights under the Beck decision. Many workers testified about the harassment and intimidation tactics some unions use to try to silence Beck objectors. http://www.mackinac.org/1407
Negative campaigning (attack ads against a particular candidate) is one way to endorse a preferred candidate without actually donating money to that candidate. This method enables a union to avoid campaign donation rules.
Unions are currently trying to pass Card Check, to eliminate secret ballots and enable further coercive tactics. Coercion is a union mainstay.
No they did not. They voted to increase the affiliation fee for member unions. Even Fox News acknowledged that the increase would not be passed on to union members and that not one cent will go to any candidate or candidates political campaign.
Not that it makes any difference to people wanting to spread lies about unions but the money goes to “Get Out The vote Campaigns” and does not endorse any candidate or political party.
Geez Van Horn at least try and act like you can read or even listen instead of making stuff up.
Richard–good catch. The International charged each of their Locals the equivalent of $0.04/member to be taken out of each Local’s reserve funds. Strope writes a lot about union business matters. I wonder if he wrote the headline? It seems the orginal article is only available on a pay service, unless of course, you trust Fox.
How can you expect republicans to know about the Beck Decision, which has been law for a mere 24 years when some of the same crowd refuse to accept that the world is not flat and that Ferdinand Magellan,
is just another liberal conspiracy to encourage our youth to drink fluoridated water and fall off the earth in a state of delirium.
Richard–I agree. Can you imagine what would happen if I were to quote someone who said, “I came not to end the law but to fulfill it” and were to tell them abortion was legal at the time He made that comment? Heads would explode.
I just heard a few pops
How sweet to see the socialist pseudocharacters at play, chuckling among themselves at what they perceive to be a successful disinformation string . Yet, it is true that more than a hundred complaints from union members, about funds from their dues being used to support the Marxist Democrat party and its candidates without the consent of the members, have ben pigeonholed, no action taken, by the Zer0bummer Justice(?) Department and the Attorney General Eric Holder.
Whew, Mike and Jerome, we finally agree on something. By your comments I can conclude from your inference, people are no longer required to contribute to political parties as part of their union “dues. Good. Now that we are done with this non-issue let’s see if agree that being an adult and trying to live the American dream is tough. Some things are not easy but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be attempted.
I just cited evidence above that unions are extorting dues from members and using them in political campaigns, which was my premise.
If your delusions place us in agreement, you must believe that unions are violating the law decided in “Beck”.
How sweet it is to hear Jerome Mullins whining about “disinformation”. Today he know about “more than a hundred complaints from union members” being abused by their unions despite “Beck v CWA”. Some time ago he knew about hundreds of people committing voter fraud, but has yet to turn any of them in to the state or the ACLU for his $1000.00 reward check. Before that he was spreading the rumor on these pages that our state representative Gretchen Hoffman was so afraid for her life in St. Paul that she needed protection from the Capitol security force. The facts are that Gretchen Hoffman never asked for protection services and was never in need of that service. The threats to Hoffman’s life and stories of voter fraud existed only in Jerome Mullins mind.
You get three strikes Jerome, you’re out.
Since the 2010 election 108 prosecutions against people for voter fraud in Minnesota. Minnesota has the dubious distinction of leading the nation in numbers prosecuted and convictions from that election. Also, more than eighty cases still winding their way through the state courts.(AP and Yahoo News and MSN).
Reports of squelched complaints from union members re unauthorized expenditures of members dues for campaign contibutions to Democratic party are almost a weekly occurence on World News Daily (WND) website, several articles in Washington Examiner in past six months (Mona Charon several pieces).
You looked better as a sock puppit parrot.
Ah yes, the typical fallback for a conservative. When you can’t beat the argument, accuse someone of being someone else.
Mike, This is why it is so hard to move discussions forward. This is why the optimism of Obama’s 2008 election promise to work with both sides of the isle has been such a complete failure. Some people say things that are not true, are no longer true or are so clouded by confused conclusion the truth is hidden. Simply stated, they are prone to make “Yes, but” statements.
You began by saying unions take money from members, use it to support candidates a member might disagree with completely and THERE IS NOTHING THE MEMBER CAN DO ABOUT IT. I told you about “Beck”. You cited a conservative, pro-business lobbying group. They specifically support my information about Beck and confirm a worker’s right to refuse to pay for objectionable political campaigns. If you cite an authority you must agree with the authority or else why would you cite it?
So, to end at the point where we agree–Since Beck, 1988, union “members” can not be required to support political candidates they disagree with.
(If a reader wants to exercise their Beck rights, I suggest you do so “one on one” with your local officers. Don’t make it a public affair for officers tend not to respond well to public confrontations, and do it early-before a union makes the decision, a pledge, a commitment to support a specific candidate. It makes sense that it is much more difficult stop a contribution after it has already been made.)
Larry, it is unfortunate that your definition of “moving discussions forward” is an euphemism for beating everyone of your detractors into submission to your socialist utopian fantasies.
Admittedly, there are many unconcerned, ill advised or educated people who are easily gulled by promises of expensive gifts for no effort other than electing masters of their fates. One need look no futher to verify this than that we have an idiot in the White House elected by such people.
But, much to your regret and dismay, there are those of us who say, “Hell NO! Keep your dictatorial paws off my life, my family, my property, my God given unalienable rights”. And, we are not moved by your phony arguments.
Camilla, we never get around to talking about socialist utopian fantasies. We get stuck on fictions, fanciful mathematics and a complete misunderstanding of history in the context of its time. A few years ago I was teaching a young man to read. He was a child of welfare. His mother had also been born into poverty. She can’t read either. His mother complained that my efforts were not only interfering with her shopping trip to the Mall of America, but, as I had requested he concentrate on his studies instead of his shoe size, I was interfering with her parental rights. That was an argument the mother won. The young man fathered a child with a 15 year old girl, dropped out of school and is living with yet another female someplace in Chicago. He became just like his mom. You see, mom said something like “Keep your dictatorial paws off my life, my family, my property, my God given unalienable rights”. Camilla, facts, math and an appreciation of history matter. I wish people wouldn’t feel beaten into submission when they cling too closely to other things, but accuracy and truth are important. They should be the basis for making serious decisions in these serious decision making times.
Larry, lets discuss fictions, fanciful mathematics and a complete misunderstanding of history in the context of its time:
Your fictional premise, “He was a child of welfare. His mother had also been born into poverty” is disproven by, “His mother complained that my efforts were not only interfering with her shopping trip to the Mall of America.”
The mother seems to be using the fanciful mathematics of your hero, Zero. Spend your way to prosperity.
“I wish people wouldn’t feel beaten into submission when they cling too closely to other things, but accuracy and truth are important.” This brings us back to “Obama’s 2008 election promise to work with both sides of the isle has been such a complete failure.” Larry, it is time to replace the failure that is Zero.