Archive for the ‘Unions’ Category

DEMOCRATS HAVE THE GREEN PARTY BLUES

Friday, September 8th, 2017

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Democrats Have the Green Party Blues

The party’s environmental extremism puts it at odds with working people whose aspiration is prosperity.

Protesting a planned Scott Pruitt speech at New York’s Harvard Club, June 20.PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES
September 7, 2017
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: To demonstrate how Green the Democrats have become, one need go no further than President Obama’s statement last year that climate change (the new code word for global warming) is the nation’s No. 1 problem. He also claimed 97% of scientists agree that “climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” But actual scientists don’t agree 97% on much of anything.

The modern Green movement got traction from the 1968 founding of the Club of Rome at that city’s Accademia dei Lincei. Describing itself as a global think tank concerned with the “future of humanity,” it produced a global best seller called “The Limits to Growth,” predicting, inaccurately, that at the then-current rate of development mankind would soon exhaust the Earth’s natural resources. Maurice Strong, a self-described socialist and former oil tycoon, imported the Club of Rome’s philosophy into the United Nations, launching the U.N.’s propagation of the global warming theory.    (AGENDA 21)

  

The political commentariat has unleashed a torrent of words since the 2016 election analyzing what befell the Democrats. Donald Trump won because of his TV fame; he tweeted his way into the White House; the Russians did it; etc.

Why not spend a few more words on the current demeanor of the Democratic Party? It was losing badly in elections at all levels as early as 2010, well before Mr. Trump came along. Despite its deeply flawed candidate, Hillary of the indiscreet emails, it won the popular vote for the presidency and therefore still has to be taken seriously.

Its members and backers, particularly at influential media organizations like the New York Times , the Washington Post and MSNBC, have been heaping abuse on the new president, suggesting Mr. Trump’s victory was illegitimate. When they hurl the words “fascist” and “plutocrat” wildly, their anger begins to sound pathological.

(more…)

Share

THE BLUE STATE DEPRESSION

Tuesday, December 6th, 2016

 

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The blue state depression

 – – Stephen Moore is an economist with Freedom Works and a senior economic adviser to the Trump campaign.
Sunday, December 4, 2016

People are leaving the Hillary-supporting states in droves

When I say the blue states are in a depression, I don’t mean the collective funk they are in because they lost the election to Donald Trump.

I’m talking about an economic depression in the blue states that went for Hillary. Here is an amazing statistic. Of the 10 blue states that Hillary Clinton won by the largest percentage margins — California, Massachusetts, Vermont, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Connecticut — every single one of them lost domestic migration (excluding immigration) over the last 10 years (2004-14). Nearly 2.75 million more Americans left California and New York than entered these states.

They are the loser states. They are all progressive. High taxes rates. High welfare benefits. Heavy regulation. Environmental extremism. Super minimum wages. Most outlaw energy drilling. The whole left-wing playbook is on display in the Hillary states. And people are leaving in droves. Day after day, they are being bled to death. So much for liberalism creating a worker’s paradise. (more…)

Share

VIDEO – DONALD TRUMP’S WISCONSIN SPEECH – AUGUST 16, 2016

Thursday, August 18th, 2016

Share

JUSTICE GINSBURG’S WISH LIST FOR THE SUPREME COURT

Tuesday, July 12th, 2016

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Ruth Ginsburg’s Victory Lap

The Justice dances on the conservative Court’s political grave.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg in Washington in 2014.ENLARGE
Ruth Bader Ginsberg in Washington in 2014. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS

Liberals fond of griping that the Supreme Court’s conservative Justices are too political should check in with Ruth Bader Ginsburg.The Supreme Court’s oldest Justice sat down with the New York Times on Friday to deplore Republicans and predict a coming liberal ascendancy. “I can’t imagine what the country would be—withDonald Trump as our President,” the Justice averred, adding that the possibility brought to mind her late husband’s advice: “Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.”

Justice Ginsburg also ran a victory lap at the results of the Court’s recent term after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Among the highlights, she noted, last month the Court upheld racial preferences in Fisher v. University of Texas in a 4-3 vote with Justice Elena Kaganrecused. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the opinion, which gutted an earlier opinion he wrote in the same case.

“I don’t expect that we’re going to see another affirmative action case,” Justice Ginsburg said. “I think [Justice Kennedy] comes out as the great hero of this term.” We wonder if Justice Kennedy appreciates the political shout-out.

Asked which precedents she’d overturn, Justice Ginsburg pointed to 2008’s Heller ruling that upheld the right to bear arms, calling it “a very bad decision” that could be overruled. Justice Ginsburg has previously said that without the need for a militia, the Second Amendment is “outdated” because “its function has become obsolete.”

Her other goal is overturning Citizens United v. FEC, which in 2010 restored First Amendment rights for businesses and unions. “It would be an impossible dream. But I’d love to see Citizens Unitedoverruled,” she said, thus signaling she’ll do everything she can to see that happen. She also boasted that she expected to be back in the five-vote majority soon.

We don’t recall another Supreme Court Justice so publicly telegraphing, outside a written opinion, a vote in a future case. No wonder so many Americans think the Supreme Court has become merely another political branch. Justice Ginsburg has confirmed it.

 

Share

LABOR BOSSES FEAR TRUMP

Monday, June 6th, 2016

 

Remember the Left’s outrage over the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United Ruling that  corporations have the same Free Speech rights as do unions?  The article below gives you an idea of how deeply unions are involved in politics.    Nancy     
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Labor Fears Partisan Defections Toward Donald Trump

Union leaders mobilize to try to counteract the Republican’s appeal to the white working class

Donald Trump speaks during a rally May 5 in West Virginia.ENLARGE
Donald Trump speaks during a rally May 5 in West Virginia. PHOTO: BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

Labor leaders are nervous about Donald Trump’s appeal to unions’ many white, working-class members, and they are working to head off partisan defections.

Unions spend heavily to support Democrats in elections and wield great influence over whether their members support those candidates. But labor leaders fear many of their members could be drawn to Mr. Trump. Merged Wall Street Journal/NBC News polling data from the first four months of the year show that among white union households, support is split evenly between Mr. Trump and Hillary Clinton, at 44% each, in a potential general-election matchup.

“Everybody recognizes the enormous threat Trump poses” whether their unions have backed either Democratic candidate, Bernie Sanders or Mrs. Clinton, said Robert Master, the Eastern region political director for the Communications Workers of America, which has endorsed Mr. Sanders. “There’s an element in that right-wing populism that is appealing to some of our members, there’s no question about that,” Mr. Master said.

The AFL-CIO is preparing an education campaign to highlight some of Mr. Trump’s statements—such as that wages are too high—and lesser-known things about how he has run his businesses and treated employees, said Mike Podhorzer, political director of the nation’s largest federation of labor unions.

Last week, the AFL-CIO began its on-the-ground program in battleground states including Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Nevada. It is distributing fliers at members’ workplaces and homes and is making them available to its affiliate unions and local chapters in every state.

(more…)

Share

SOLIDARITY IN A NUTSHELL – A MUST READ !

Thursday, May 5th, 2016

 

Yes, this is definitely a chilling  ” nutshell description” of the socialist movement that is gaining hold in our country and is  the basis of much of  the turmoil that is taking place in society. 
To defeat  the enemy, you have to know who the enemy is.    Nancy

About Solidarity

Share

WHY WE OPPOSE JUDGE GARLAND’S CONFIRMATION

Saturday, March 19th, 2016

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

We Oppose Judge Garland’s Confirmation

He is a friend of big labor and regulators, not small businesses.

By

Juanita Duggan  

Ms. Duggan is president and CEO of the National Federation of Independent Business.

March 17, 2016

President Obama on Wednesday formally nominated Merrick Garland, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to the U.S. Supreme Court. After studying his extensive record, the National Federation of Independent Business believes that Judge Garland would be a strong ally of the regulatory bureaucracy, big labor and trial lawyers. On behalf of the hundreds of thousands of members we represent, the NFIB opposes Judge Garland’s confirmation.
In NAHB v. EPA, Judge Garland in 2011 refused to consider a Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) claim by the National Association of Home Builders against the Environmental Protection Agency despite the law’s clear language. The RFA is one of the few federal statutes that explicitly require certain agencies to take into account the effect of their actions on small employers. Consider that the federal government itself estimates that the typical small business must spend $12,000 per worker annually just to be compliant with federal regulations. With Judge Garland on the Supreme Court, the EPA and other regulators would have a freer hand to impose even more costs on small businesses.
In another case, Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, in 2003, Judge Garland argued that the Commerce Clause, which regulates economic activity between the states, applies to an animal species found in only one state and which has no economic value. In doing so he foreshadowed the creative reasoning that the Obama administration used to defend the Affordable Care Act in NFIB v. Sebelius. We fear that as a pivotal justice on the Supreme Court, Judge Garland could apply his elastic view of the Commerce Clause to almost anything else.
In two other cases involving the National Labor Relations Board, Judge Garland didn’t just side with the government—he argued that business owners should be personally liable for labor violations. In other words, their personal assets, including their homes and their savings, would be exposed to government penalties. What worries us is that Judge Garland has been consistently wrong on labor law. In fact, in 16 major labor decisions of Judge Garland’s that we examined, he ruled 16-0 in favor of the NLRB.
With more than 320,000 members, our organization is the country’s largest advocate for small-business owners. When we asked members on Wednesday whether they wanted to fight the Garland confirmation, the response was overwhelming. More than 90% urged us to take action.
It is especially important that we get involved now because this year and in future sessions, the Supreme Court will hear cases in which NFIB is a plaintiff. We are challenging the Waters of the United States rule, an unprecedented expansion of the EPA’s power to regulate water. The Clean Power Plan, another massive expansion of federal power that we are challenging, threatens to drive up energy costs for consumers—and for small businesses.
Given Judge Garland’s record on the D.C. Circuit Court, is there any question about which side he would take in these cases? When it comes to big government versus small business, we know where he would stand.
This is the first time in the NFIB’s 73-year history that we will weigh in on a Supreme Court nominee. As the plaintiff in NFIB v. Sebelius, which upheld the Affordable Care Act, our members know the power that a single Supreme Court justice can wield. We cannot support his elevation to the Supreme Court.
Ms. Duggan is president and CEO of the National Federation of Independent Business.

 

Share

REDS EXPLOITING BLACKS: THE ROOTS OF BLACK LIVES MATTER

Thursday, January 14th, 2016

 

James Simpson
James Simpson is an economist, businessman and investigative journalist. His articles have been published at American Thinker, Accuracy in Media, Breitbart, PJ Media, Washington Times, WorldNetDaily and others. His regular column is DC Independent Examiner. Follow Jim on Twitter & Facebookwww.aim.org/special-report/reds-exploiting-blacks-the-roots-of-black-lives-matter/print/
 – Accuracy In Media – www.aim.org

Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Roots of Black Lives Matter

This is a report from the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism
BLM Poster
The Black Lives Matter [1] movement (BLM) casts itself as a spontaneous uprising born of inner city frustration, but is, in fact, the latest and most dangerous face of a web of well-funded communist/socialist organizations that have been agitating against America for decades. Its agitation has provoked police killings and other violence, lawlessness and unrest in minority communities throughout the U.S. If allowed to continue, that agitation could devolve into anarchy and civil war. The BLM crowd appears to be spoiling for just such an outcome.
Nevertheless, BLM appears to be exercising considerable leverage over the Democratic Party, in part by pressuring and intimidating Democratic candidates such as Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders (VT) into embracing their cause. The movement could also assist President Obama’s exploitation of racial divisions in society beyond his final term in office.
This report examines in detail, for the first time, how communist groups have manipulated the cause of Black Lives Matter, and how money from liberal foundations has made it all possible.
Leftist Origins
Exploiting blacks to promote Marxist revolution is an old tactic. The late Larry Grathwohl, former FBI informant in the Weather Underground, understood from personal experience how white communists exploited blacks and other minority groups. He said [2] that Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn regarded Barack Obama, whose political career they sponsored, as a tool—a puppet—to use against white America. Obama’s legacy at home will certainly include more racial division.
BLM launched [3] in 2013 with a Twitter hashtag, #BlackLivesMatter, after neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman was acquitted in the Trayvon Martin killing. Radical Left activists Alicia Garza [4], Patrisse Cullors [5] and Opal Tometi [6] claim credit for the slogan and hashtag. Following the Michael Brown shooting in August 2014, Dream Defenders, an organization led by Working Families Party [7] (ACORN) activist and Occupy Wall Street anarchist Nelini Stamp [8], popularized the phrase “Hands Up–Don’t Shoot! [9]” which has since become BLM’s widely recognized slogan.
Garza, Cullors and Tometi all work for front groups of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization [10] (FRSO), one of the four largest radical Left organizations in the country. The others are the Communist Party USA (CPUSA [11]), Democratic Socialists of America (DSA [12]), and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS [13]). Nelini Stamp’s ACORN—now rebranded under a variety of different names—works with all four organizations, and Dream Defenders is backed by [14] the Service Employees International Union (SEIU [15]), the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center [16] and others.
Share

VIDEO – GOV. SCOTT WALKER’S SPEECH IN IOWA – JANUARY 2015

Thursday, February 5th, 2015

Share

THE TOP TEN LIBERAL SUPERSTITIONS

Saturday, November 1st, 2014

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

THE TOP TEN LIBERAL SUPERSTITIONS

The 2014 campaign brings a fresh focus on candidates with fervently held, evidence-free beliefs.

By

Kate Bachelder   Biography 

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  Someone might mention this to North Carolina Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan, who is knocking State House Speaker Thom Tillis for cutting $500 million from schools. Per-pupil K-12 spending has increased every year since Mr. Tillis became speaker in 2011, and most of what Ms. Hagan is selling as “cuts” came from community colleges and universities, not the local middle school. Mr. Coulson’s Cato study notes that North Carolina has about doubled per-pupil education spending since 1972, which has done precisely nothing for the state’s adjusted SAT scores.

 hallmark of progressive politics is the ability to hold fervent beliefs, in defiance of evidence, that explain how the world works—and why liberal solutions must be adopted. Such political superstitions take on a new prominence during campaign seasons as Democratic candidates trot out applause lines to rally their progressive base and as the electorate considers their voting records. Here’s a Top 10 list of liberal superstitions on prominent display during the midterm election campaign:

 

1. Spending more money improves education. The U.S. spent $12,608 per student in 2010—more than double the figure, in inflation-adjusted dollars, spent in 1970—and spending on public elementary and secondary schools has surpassed $600 billion. How’s that working out? Adjusted state SAT scores have declined on average 3% since the 1970s, as the Cato Institute’s Andrew Coulson found in a March report.

No better news in the international rankings: The Program for International Student Assessment reports that in 2012 American 15-year-olds placed in the middle of the pack, alongside peers from Slovakia—which shells out half as much money as the U.S. per student.

Someone might mention this to North Carolina Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan, who is knocking State House Speaker Thom Tillis for cutting $500 million from schools. Per-pupil K-12 spending has increased every year since Mr. Tillis became speaker in 2011, and most of what Ms. Hagan is selling as “cuts” came from community colleges and universities, not the local middle school. Mr. Coulson’s Cato study notes that North Carolina has about doubled per-pupil education spending since 1972, which has done precisely nothing for the state’s adjusted SAT scores.

2. Government spending stimulates the economy. Case in point is the $830 billion 2009 stimulus bill, touted by the Obama administration as necessary for keeping unemployment below 8%. Result: four years of average unemployment above 8%. Federal outlays soared in 2009 to $3.5 trillion—a big enough bump to do the Keynesian trick of boosting aggregate demand—but all we got was this lousy 2% growth and a new costume for Army Corps of Engineers mascot Bobber the Water Safety Dog. Every Senate Democrat voted for the blowout, including the 11 now up for re-election who were in Congress when it passed.

3. Republican candidates always have a big spending advantage over Democrats. Majority Leader Harry Reid took to the Senate floor recently to deride the Koch brothers as “radical billionaires” who are “attempting to buy our democracy.” Yet the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has raked in $127 million this cycle, about $30 million more than the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and Democrats have aired more TV ads than Republicans in several battleground states, according to analysis by the Center for Public Integrity. Meanwhile, Mr. Reid’s Senate Majority PAC has raised more than $50 million. As this newspaper has reported, between 2005 and 2011, labor unions—linchpins of the Democratic Party—spent $4.4 billion on politics, far outstripping any conservative rival. (more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories