What's wrong with Unions?

Actually the thing wrong with unions is that they are the ATM for the democratic party.


Shintao: That is probably the most honest answer I will get on this thread. Now, ask yourself why that is true? Because the corporate leadership is the ATM of the Republican party. Now, ask yourself why that is true, and draw a conclusion to your two answers.


Let me ask you this...Why would the democrats be the ATM for the democratic party? The democrats are the ones who want the open borders allowing just anyone to enter this country. And also keeping jobs here in America as opposed to outsourcing (NAFTA). The unions were suppose to be about the American working man and the American dream.

I don't see open borders on the list, although the Dems maybe. Obama surely is. My argument isn't for open borders. My argument is a Constitutional issue of a state usurping federal laws. If a state is allowed to get away with it, they can declare war on their neighbors for frivolous reasons. I don't justify the feds actions which maybe political, as well as Bush signing a treaty agreement to open borders with Mexico & Canada.

I think unions are still about families & the American dream, and contain republicans as well. Just look at the family benefit plans & living wages for members. That tells me they care & work their butts off to maintain them. Members always help injured workers, we have annual picnics, monthly discussions of work and places to boom out for work. We fly the American flag on projects, and support a lot of union friendly businesses in our communities.

I think when we have union busting it occurs at the higher echelon level, like the president and corporate heads. Like Reagan & air controllers & Bush Jr. giving Teamster jobs to Mexicans. The labor union in NY bucked against Hilton giving their jobs to foreigners. Republicans were not involved as far as I can remember. Then GM comes along.
 
Last edited:
Actually the thing wrong with unions is that they are the ATM for the democratic party.


Shintao: That is probably the most honest answer I will get on this thread. Now, ask yourself why that is true? Because the corporate leadership is the ATM of the Republican party. Now, ask yourself why that is true, and draw a conclusion to your two answers.


Let me ask you this...Why would the democrats be the ATM for the democratic party? The democrats are the ones who want the open borders allowing just anyone to enter this country. And also keeping jobs here in America as opposed to outsourcing (NAFTA). The unions were suppose to be about the American working man and the American dream.

I don't see open borders on the list, although the Dems maybe. Obama surely is. My argument isn't for open borders. My argument is a Constitutional issue of a state unsurping federal laws.


Cool now explain how Arizona would have usurped Federal Law by helping the enforce it?
 
The funniest thing to me is How Obama said he would not listen to Special Interests and then rewards Unions at every turn. The person who has visited him at the WH the most times since taking office is the Head of the SEIU.

Unions are one of if not the Largest Special interest in this country. They represent only about 20% of American workers yet are treated like gods by the left.

Obama prolly didn't know much about unions, huh? When he calls us to build a fighter jet, an aircraft carrier, missile launcher, bridge, tower, tank, energy source, we are there for America, not outsourcing, off shoring, selling America or god out. So naturally we are the favored workers with the skills, like god & his Jews, like not building mosques at the 911 site. ~ which I think is a mistake.

Well, you got unions down to 9% of the public sector, and squeaking. Seems like a small number for all that is rquired of us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States
 
Last edited:
The funniest thing to me is How Obama said he would not listen to Special Interests and then rewards Unions at every turn. The person who has visited him at the WH the most times since taking office is the Head of the SEIU.

Unions are one of if not the Largest Special interest in this country. They represent only about 20% of American workers yet are treated like gods by the left.

Obama prolly didn't know much about unions, huh? When he calls us to build a fighter jet, an aircraft carrier, missile launcher, bridge, tower, tank, energy source, we are there for America, not outsourcing, off shoring, selling America or god out. So naturally we are the favored workers with the skills, like god & his Jews, like not building mosques at the 911 site. ~ which I think is a mistake.

Well, you got unions down to 9% of the public sector, and squeaking. Seems like a small number for all that is rquired of us.
Labor unions in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Never said Union workers were not good workers pal. Stop with the persecution Complex.

What I said is they are special interest group.

You Deny that?
 
I don't see open borders on the list, although the Dems maybe. Obama surely is. My argument isn't for open borders. My argument is a Constitutional issue of a state unsurping federal laws.


Cool now explain how Arizona would have usurped Federal Law by helping the enforce it?

PHOENIX — The U.S. Justice Department has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona’s tough new law targeting illegal immigrants.

The government filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Phoenix on Tuesday.

The lawsuit argues that Arizona’s new measure requiring state and local police to question and possibly arrest illegal immigrants during the enforcement of other laws usurps federal authority.

[...]
The government will likely seek an injunction to delay the July 29 implementation of the law until the case is resolved.
Michelle Malkin Feds File Suit Against Arizona


The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of “preemption,” which is based on the Constitution’s supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said…The preemption doctrine has been established in Supreme Court decisions, and some legal experts have said such a federal argument likely would persuade a judge to declare the law unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court has stated clearly and often that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress “plenary power” over immigration policy, meaning that Congress has virtually unlimited authority to regulate immigration into the United States. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution says that federal law supersedes conflicting state law. In immigration matters, the courts have consistently held that this means that states may enact immigration-related laws that go as far as, but no further than, duly enacted federal laws, except in areas where Congress has specifically preempted state action. (The primary example of Congress preempting state action is 8 U.S.C. 1324b(h)(2), which prohibits states and localities from “imposing civil or criminal sanctions (other than through licensing and similar laws) upon those who employ, or recruit or refer for a fee for employment, unauthorized aliens,” which is why states and localities must tie E-Verify mandates to the issuance of business licenses.) Congress has not preempted state or local action regarding any of the federal laws that the new Arizona law seeks to enforce, so long as the state law goes no further than existing federal law. The Arizona law was drafted meticulously to ensure that it complies fully with the U.S. Constitution and with federal immigration laws.
Michelle Malkin DOJ vs. Arizona: The battle over preemption; Updated with complaint link
 

Forum List

Back
Top