Email On Unions - From Alan Grayson:

MikeK

Gold Member
Jun 11, 2010
15,930
2,495
290
Brick, New Jersey
On May 4, 1886, in Haymarket Square in Chicago, the public rallied peacefully in support of 40,000 workers in Chicago who had gone on strike, to win the right to organize. The police attacked, and eight died.

On July 6, 1892, in Homestead, Pennsylvania, 3800 workers went on strike, to win the right to organize. Three hundred hired and armed goons attacked them. Five people died.

On April 20, 1914, in Ludlow, Colorado, 1200 coal miners went on strike, to win the right to organize. The Colorado National Guard attacked their shantytown, and burned it to the ground. Nineteen people died. Two women and 11 children were asphyxiated, and they burned to death.

Here and around the world, many people have fought and died, so that you and I would have the right to organize.

And so that 250,000 public workers in Wisconsin would have that right, too.

This is not exactly a new idea. Six months after the Ludlow Massacre, President Wilson signed the Clayton Act, prohibiting the prosecution of union members under Antitrust Law. That was almost a century ago.

Two decades later, during the Franklin Roosevelt's first term as President, he signed the National Labor Relations Act into law. It protects the right to organize. That was over 75 years ago.

The right to organize also is a fundamental principle of international law. Over 150 countries have ratified the "Right to Organize" Convention, an international treaty. It was adopted in 1949, over 60 years ago.

So why are we even talking about this, 11 years into the 21st Century?

Because the teabaggers want to "take back America." They want to take it back, all right – take it all the way back to the 19th century, when there was no right to organiz, when people worked for a dollar a day. when grown men competed against children for jobs when women were barred from most jobs, When you worked until you died.

Not to mention slavery.

I want to see an America that is healthy and wealthy.

They want an America that provides cheap labor to our corporate overlords. An America where the middle class is chained by debt.

We didn't ask for this fight. But we have no choice except to fight back. For the survival of the middle class in America. For us, for our children, and for our grandchildren. And so that the victims in Haymarket, in Homestead and in Ludlow did not die in vain.

As Cardinal Spellman said 45 years ago, "it is a war thrust upon us, and we cannot yield to tyranny."

I'm ready to fight for what's right. What about you?

Alan Grayson
 
LOL.

I'd take Grayson's name off of it if you want to be taken seriously.
 
Awww, how sweet.

Mr. (nutjob) Graysone does have a way with words, eh.

Because the teabaggers want to "take back America." They want to take it back, all right – take it all the way back to the 19th century, when there was no right to organiz, when people worked for a dollar a day. when grown men competed against children for jobs when women were barred from most jobs, When you worked until you died.

what a friggen loser, he can't EVEN spell organize RIGHT..:lol:
 
Last edited:
No one's taking away their "right to organize."

And where were Grayson and his ilk when Jimmy Carter and his super majority Dem congress really raped the unions?
 
Grayson's undoing was Grayson himself.

His obscene personal wealth did not sit well with many on the left, when taken in context with his rantings against the rich. He began to be viewed as a "spoiled rich kid" as much as some "champion of the poor." His personal anger issues aside, his political philosophy did not jibe with his actual situation, and in the end, Orlando viewed him as a lunatic hypocrite, and sent him back to his practice.
 
Grayson's undoing was Grayson himself.

His obscene personal wealth did not sit well with many on the left, when taken in context with his rantings against the rich. He began to be viewed as a "spoiled rich kid" as much as some "champion of the poor." His personal anger issues aside, his political philosophy did not jibe with his actual situation, and in the end, Orlando viewed him as a lunatic hypocrite, and sent him back to his practice.

While I agree that Mr. Grayson stepped over the line with his "Taliban Dan" ad (although it was partially true. Only the part about Webster believing that wives should submit to their husbands was taken out of context.) and it didn't help him in his campaign...it was a lot of GOP gerrymandering that was instrumental in Mr. Grayson losing (that and it simply being the midterms), not his pretty truthful ad.
 
Grayson's undoing was Grayson himself.

His obscene personal wealth did not sit well with many on the left, when taken in context with his rantings against the rich. He began to be viewed as a "spoiled rich kid" as much as some "champion of the poor." His personal anger issues aside, his political philosophy did not jibe with his actual situation, and in the end, Orlando viewed him as a lunatic hypocrite, and sent him back to his practice.

While I agree that Mr. Grayson stepped over the line with his "Taliban Dan" ad (although it was partially true. Only the part about Webster believing that wives should submit to their husbands was taken out of context.) and it didn't help him in his campaign...it was a lot of GOP gerrymandering that was instrumental in Mr. Grayson losing (that and it simply being the midterms), not his pretty truthful ad.

And his personal fortune.

His rantings began to grate on his constituents as his wealth and fame grew while he seemingly ignored the job they sent him to do, instead posturing for a national audience.

Had he paid a little more attention to the people he was elected to represent, and less to the national rumble, he might still be in DC. But he alienated his own district, and at the end, he didn't even have time for them. Unless you get called up to the Big Show, that's always a recipe for defeat.

Grayson was, and always will be, his own worst enemy.
 
Comparing teaching to working in a coal mine in the 1800's is a bit of a stretch no?
 
Grayson's undoing was Grayson himself.

His obscene personal wealth did not sit well with many on the left, when taken in context with his rantings against the rich. He began to be viewed as a "spoiled rich kid" as much as some "champion of the poor." His personal anger issues aside, his political philosophy did not jibe with his actual situation, and in the end, Orlando viewed him as a lunatic hypocrite, and sent him back to his practice.

While I agree that Mr. Grayson stepped over the line with his "Taliban Dan" ad (although it was partially true. Only the part about Webster believing that wives should submit to their husbands was taken out of context.) and it didn't help him in his campaign...it was a lot of GOP gerrymandering that was instrumental in Mr. Grayson losing (that and it simply being the midterms), not his pretty truthful ad.

And his personal fortune.

His rantings began to grate on his constituents as his wealth and fame grew while he seemingly ignored the job they sent him to do, instead posturing for a national audience.

Had he paid a little more attention to the people he was elected to represent, and less to the national rumble, he might still be in DC. But he alienated his own district, and at the end, he didn't even have time for them. Unless you get called up to the Big Show, that's always a recipe for defeat.

Grayson was, and always will be, his own worst enemy.

April 9, 2010:

Is Rep. Alan Grayson a party crasher?


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grayson is a fucking liar, and apparently, he too didn't get the memo about 'civil discourse'. When the democrats start speaking civilly, hell may well freeze over.
 
Grayson is a fucking liar, and apparently, he too didn't get the memo about 'civil discourse'. When the democrats start speaking civilly, hell may well freeze over.

And it very well may freeze over before some start living in the real world instead of their chosen alternate ones they have built for themselves.

But by then the game has been played and it's over.
 
Grayson is a fucking liar, and apparently, he too didn't get the memo about 'civil discourse'. When the democrats start speaking civilly, hell may well freeze over.

:eusa_shhh:
Don't you know? Civility is for everyone else. Democrats can be as UGLY as they always are.
 

Forum List

Back
Top