Question for The Tea Party

[PoliticalChic]

1. I am a strong supporter of the Tea Party. I believe that the Party folks are patriots, and
are, largely, imbued with similar motivations as those of the earlier patriots of our nation.

2. Is is not more than a Left-wing talking point to try to blame the Tea Party for the debt ceiling crisis or the downgrading.

a. "Blaming the TEA Party for the downgrade is like blaming Paul Revere for the Revolutionary War."

3. Freedom of assembly, sometimes used interchangeably with the freedom of association, is the individual right to come together and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests. Freedom of assembly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. There are currently several threads about the recall vote in Wisconsin, the issue being the removal the union's right to collective bargaining.

5. My question to fellow Tea Party supporters: how can we cheer the severing of a groups' ability to " promote, pursue and defend common interests"?
This is not to say we support, necessarily, what the union asks for, but how can we cheer the deprivation of the 'asking' right?

6. It may be understandable that many on the Right are self employed, or business owners, etc., but I expect that we can understand a basis for the common tactics of unions, and 'political unions.'

7. If the asking price is too high, or unfair to the electorate, then it is the politicians who should be held responsible for refusing them.

a. In my state, public unions have no right to strike.

The Tea Party and the unions are all groups of Americans, and no laws should prevent what is essentially free speech.

 

[Oddball]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

"The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table...."
Is, in exactly the same way as the taxpayer is represented in Congress.

"... "no "right" to collective bargaining..."
Collective bargaining is a benefit to both sides, as the alternative is to bargain with each individual separately.

"...no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone."
Union dues would pay for same.

 

[Sallow]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

Sure there is..

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Oddball]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

Sure there is..

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

See point #1.

DUH!

 

[rightwinger]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

So, by your definition there is no bargaining. It is all one sided with management setting the rules for what is bargainable and who gets to represent the other side

 

[Oddball]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

"The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table...."
Is, in exactly the same way as the taxpayer is represented in Congress.
Not when the "representation" is a political flack, who gets a fair sum of their campaign cash from those unions.

"... "no "right" to collective bargaining..."
Collective bargaining is a benefit to both sides, as the alternative is to bargain with each individual separately.
A benefit is not a right, either.

"...no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone."
Union dues would pay for same.
That still imparts no obligation upon me to listen to you.

...

 

[Oddball]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

So, by your definition there is no bargaining. It is all one sided with management setting the rules for what is bargainable and who gets to represent the other side

Tens of millions of people work as "at will" employees every day, who have to get up off their asses, show some spine and ask their employer for the salary and benefits they seek.

Don't like it, you can lump it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1) Your right to free speech constitutes no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone.

2) By that token, there is no "right" to collective bargaining...It's a privilege extended by one party, to those who wish to bargain with them.

3) The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table when bureaucrat unions make their demands.

4) Bureaucrat unions (AFSCME, NEA, AFT and the like) not only should have no such privileges but should be abolished ab initio, as the monopolies and political money laundering operations that they most certainly are.

Hope that helps.

"The taxpayer isn't at the bargaining table...."
Is, in exactly the same way as the taxpayer is represented in Congress.
Not when the "representation" is a political flack, who gets a fair sum of their campaign cash from those unions.

"... "no "right" to collective bargaining..."
Collective bargaining is a benefit to both sides, as the alternative is to bargain with each individual separately.
A benefit is not a right, either.

"...no obligation on my part to supply you with a printing press or microphone."
Union dues would pay for same.
That still imparts no obligation upon me to listen to you.

...

"Not when the "representation" is a political flack, who gets a fair sum of their campaign cash from those unions."
Sad but true....but this is exactly the same with every member of Congress. I would rather see term limits that limits on assembly or free speech.


"A benefit is not a right, either."
Of course, words should be use with precision; you are correct, it is not a 'right.'
But...it is an efficiency in the system that benefits both sides.


"...no obligation upon me to listen to you..."
You are exaggerating....I know that you are not opposed to listening
to another viewpoint....
...listening does not nean acquiescing.

In my best-of-all worlds, the elected official entertains requests,
runs it through his 'CBO,' and tells the electorte what he finds acceptable.
I don't have a white paper on the full procedure, yet...but there must be
other Calvin Coolidge's out there.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"While it's discouraging that 47% of Wisconsin voters sided with public sector unions, it's clear at least some of those folks haven't a clue what they were voting for. The new law limits collective bargaining rights for benefits only; it doesn't impact collective bargaining rights for wages or any other contract negotiation rights and it certainly doesn't prevent public employees from joining the union."
Wisconsin GOP 'Darling' Deals Democrats a Blow Felt Nationwide - HUMAN EVENTS

Hmmmmm.......now, that's a little different.

 

[cutter]

Unions are fine in the workplace but need to keep out of politics. Most unions back candidates that don't necessarily reflect the views of their members. Supporting candidates should be left to the individual members and the unions should spend their money on workplace issues, If they have money left over, lower dues.