He That Has Ears To Hear, Let Him Hear (Matthew 11:15-30)
Challenging both secular wisdom and religious doctrines. - Will our descendants know moral virtue?
Unions and Democrats
Back to America's Moral Decline Index
Electing their bosses....
James Sherk Tells Nevada Lawmakers Why Public Sector Unions Are Bad Policy By Maureen Collins - In his testimony, Sherk argues that unions for government employees are bad policy, because unlike private sector unions they: Undermine representative government: “Collective bargaining in government takes away the final say on public policy from voters’ elected representatives. It forces them to negotiate a contract with union leaders, excluding all other citizens and potential workers from the bargaining table.” Come with no checks and balances: Private sector unions have competition with non-unionized businesses, but government employee unions do not: ...Inflate pay for their workers: “Collective bargaining has considerably inflated the compensation of Nevada’s local government employees. It has produced benefit packages that few private-sector workers ever see. In many local governments, employees pay nothing toward the cost of their extensive health insurance benefits.” Follow this link to see the rest of Sherk’s testimony.
why unions hate worker freedom By Tim
Dunkin - Unions hate worker freedom. Despite the chest-thumping propaganda
that unions "saved the worker in America," the fact is that unions represent a
business/labor model that simply is
not relevant to our economy today. This, as much as the increased prevalence
of right-to-work laws, is why they are dying out. Instead of adapting to the
times, unions generally seek to freeze in place the sort of rust-belt economic
model that peaked in the 1950s – which is a great example of the typical
intellectual bankruptcy that is rife throughout liberalism. Part of this
effort involves trapping workers in union shops were the union will "represent"
them at the price of extorted dues taken out of their hard-earned paychecks.
Obviously enough, the unions have a vested interest in forcing as many workers
as possible to contribute. After all, expensive cigars and Cadillacs for the
union bosses aren't cheap.
Propagandists for the unions will try to claim that workers "really" like unions and want to be unionized. The very fact that so many workers bolt the unions when they can – as evidenced by the steep declines in union revenues seen in Wisconsin, to give one example – suggests that this is not the case. Likewise does the steadily declining membership rolls of most of the major unions in America. Sure, there are always some workers out there who want to belong to a union, but many don't, and right-to-work laws and laws such as Wisconsin's provide them the opportunity to make their own choice.
The issue is really about worker freedom. Right-to-work laws do not outlaw unions or forbid union membership. These laws do not infringe upon the First Amendment right of workers to organize and associate together. What they do, instead, is to affirm the First Amendment right of workers to NOT organize or associate with a union if they don't choose to. Freedom to choose to join a union must by necessity carry with it the converse freedom to not join a union.
Forced unionization is also unjust because of the fact that unions essentially serve as fundraising arms for the Democratic Party. Yet, large numbers of blue-collar workers support conservative and Republican causes and candidates. By requiring the deduction of union dues so that the unions can throw large bags of money at left-wing candidates and movements, at best the unions are misrepresenting many of their own constituent workers, and at worst they are disenfranchising them. Millions of workers in America see some of their money taken and given to candidates and causes they never would themselves support.
...As we can see in Wisconsin, worker freedom works. Wisconsin has seen declines in the funding (and therefore the power) of economically cumbersome unions. At the same time, Wisconsin has also seen its unemployment rate continue to decline, and also faces the somewhat unusual "problem" of having a budget surplus (due to increased economic activity in the state) that it has to figure out what to do with. Scott Walker's solutions have worked in Wisconsin – we should work to see them extended all across the country.
3 Ways to Reform Labor and Save Our Country By Bob Beauprez - Editor, Bob Beauprez's Note: The following commentary on labor reforms is authored by 18 economists and labor experts, including A Line of Sight Contributing Editor, Sanjai Bhagat, Provost Professor of Finance at the University of Colorado. The article was originally published July 10, 2012 by Fox News.com. A full list of the authors may be found by clicking here. ...First, steer our cities away from insolvency and bankruptcy by passing meaningful reforms to public employee pensions and compensation. ...make modest pension cuts that will save taxpayers millions. (Unions responded by filing suit.) ...The next step, at the state level, is to advance right-to-work legislation that gives employees a choice in union membership. A key tenet of our democracy is freedom of association—including the freedom to form a union. But what about the right of a worker to choose not to join a union? In the 27 states that haven’t passed right-to-work laws, this right doesn’t exist. ...The last step to effective labor reform should happen at the federal level, with the passage of the Employee Rights Act (ERA), a piece of legislation sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Rep. Tim Scott (R-S.C.). The provisions of the ERA include reinforcing the right to a secret ballot union election, regular recertification votes on whether employees wish to remain part of a union, and paycheck protection to allow employees to prevent their dues from going to politicians they don’t support. Unsurprisingly, in polling commissioned from Opinion Research Corporation, these provisions receive 80 percent support—even in union households.
End the Secrecy in Public Union Collective Bargaining The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that state and local government employees earn 43 percent more than their private sector counterparts... ...In 11 states, secret government union collective bargaining is law, a lack of oversight that should be corrected. This lack of oversight often leads to unions employing strong-arm tactics to receive higher wages and benefits at taxpayer expense, say Nick Dranias, Bryron Schlomach and Stephen Slivinski of the Goldwater Institute. ...Even when transparency in bargaining is enacted, government unions still have access to public records of government finance and can assess what the municipality can afford. Unions around the country have a lot to lose if transparency becomes the guiding principle for collective bargaining negotiations. Dranias, Schlomach and Slivinski believe that all bargaining should take place at open meetings. All meetings should be documented verbatim and those documents should be available as part of public record. Taxpayers and budgets everywhere will benefit if transparency and accountability is required in government union collective bargaining. ...Source: Nick Dranias, Bryron Schlomach and Stephen Slivinski, "Airing Out the Smoke-filled Rooms: Bringing Transparency to Public Union Collective Bargaining," Goldwater Institute, January 17, 2013.
Understanding The Employee Rights Act By: UnionFacts.com - It’s been more than 50 years since Congress overhauled America’s labor laws. During the following decades, we’ve witnessed a workplace revolution that has fostered innovation, opportunity, and flexibility for America’s 150 million member strong workforce. It is time we reform our labor laws to put employees’ rights first, not self-interested labor union leaders. Now is the time for the Employee Rights Act.
The legislation would:
o Secret Ballot Elections — Guarantee employees the right to a secret ballot election when choosing whether or not to join a union.
o Union Recertification Elections — Require that all unionized workplaces hold a secret ballot referendum every three years to determine whether the employee wish to remain represented by their current union.
o Paycheck Protection — Gives employee the right to refuse support for a unions’ political operations or support of political parties or candidates.
o Standardized Election Timing — Require unions and employers to give employees a minimum of 40 days to hear from both sides when deciding whether or not to join a union. o Decertification Coercion Prevention — Strengthen the National Labor Relations Act to prohibit unions from intimidating or coercing employees from exercising their rights, including their right to decertify the union.
o Secret Ballot Strike Vote — Give employee the right to a secret ballot vote before union leaders can declare a strike.
o Criminalizes Union Threats — Forbid unions from using violence, or threats thereof, in an effort to coerce employees.
o Unions Are the Political Dinosaur in the Room - Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh - A famous radio talk show host asked rhetorically why unions have supported and financed the Occupy Wall Street movement. The answer is quite simple. Occupiers are asking for communism. In communism, the entire labor force is unionized. It is in the best interest of unions to promote communism since union membership in this country is down to single digits and not likely to rebound. Unions were necessary at the turn of the 20th century to protect workers from dangerous working conditions. Unions survive today as a political tool to influence elections and exert economic power.
o The Left Versus Minorities - By Thomas Sowell - Not all charter schools are successful, of course, but the ones that are completely undermine the excuses for failure in the public school system as a whole. That is why teachers' unions hate them, as a threat not only to their members' jobs but a threat to the whole range of frauds and fetishes in the educational system. The autonomy of charter schools is also a threat to the powers that be, who want to impose their own vision on the schools, regardless of what the parents want. ... Charter schools take power from politicians and bureaucrats, letting parents decide where their children will go to school. That is obviously offensive to those on the left, who think that our betters should be making our decisions for us.
o Teachers unions' alliance with Democratic Party frays By Seema Mehta, Los Angeles Times - Public efforts toward school reform have some Democrats questioning the party's support of guarantees that school districts have made to teachers for decades. ...Teachers unions have been the Democratic Party's foot soldiers for more than half a century, providing not only generous financial backing but an army of volunteers in return for support of their entrenched power in the nation's public schools. But this relationship is fraying, and the deterioration was evident Monday as Democrats gathered here for their national convention. A handful of teachers and parents, carrying large inflated pencils, picketed a screening of "Won't Back Down," a movie to be released this month starring Maggie Gyllenhaal and Viola Davis as mothers, one a teacher, who try to take over a failing inner-city school.
The plot is ripped from the headlines: California has the first "parent trigger" law in the nation, which allows parents to petition for sweeping changes to improve low-performing schools. The first parent trigger attempts have occurred in Compton and Adelanto; the former failed, and the latter faces numerous obstacles. Parent triggers, along with other emerging efforts, have some Democrats questioning their party's longtime support of guarantees that public school districts have made to teachers for decades. Those efforts also include merit pay, charter schools, weakening the tenure system and evaluating teachers partly based on their students' performance on standardized tests.
...Obama enjoys great support from teachers unions, and there are no signs that they will desert him en masse in this election. But he has angered them, notably with his "Race to the Top" competition that rewarded states financially for making moves unpopular with labor, such as increasing access for charter schools and encouraging states to use standardized testing as one way to measure teacher effectiveness. This has prompted a vociferous response at times. When a leader of the overhaul movement was hired to be Obama's spokeswoman for California, the California Federation of Teachers told state Democratic officials that if she was not fired, the union might not "participate" in Obama's reelection effort. The spokeswoman remains on the Obama team.
Union Money in Elections By
Amy Payne - This election
year, millions of Americans will donate to the political candidates and
initiatives of their choice at the local, state, and federal levels. But for
unionized workers, union dues come out of their paychecks and go to political
causes—and they aren’t consulted on where that money will go.
In July, The Wall Street Journal’s Tom McGinty and Brody Mullins published an eye-opening report that “Organized labor spends about four times as much on politics and lobbying as generally thought.”
They broke down the unions’ political spending from 2005 to 2011: $1.1 billion “supporting federal candidates through their political-action committees, which are funded with voluntary contributions, and lobbying Washington, which is a cost borne by the unions’ own coffers.” But that was only the beginning. Add to that another $3.3 billion for political activity from “polling fees, to money spent persuading union members to vote a certain way, to bratwursts to feed Wisconsin workers protesting at the state capitol last year.” Who pays for this? The workers, McGinty and Mullins report: “Much of this kind of spending comes not from members’ contributions to a PAC but directly from unions’ dues-funded coffers.”
Despite findings that 60 percent of union members object to their dues being spent on political causes, this practice continues. Why? In the 27 states without right-to-work laws, many unions are able to put clauses in their contracts that allow them to fire workers who do not pay union dues. If a worker wants to work for a unionized firm, he or she is forced to join the union and pay the dues, which can run from several hundred to several thousand dollars a year. In a new paper, Heritage’s James Sherk gives an example of this rule at work: “The United Auto Workers (UAW), which organized General Motors’ Michigan factories in 1937, is a case in point. Michigan does not have a right-to-work law, so union-represented workers must pay the union’s dues or get fired.” Notice the year there—1937. The workers coming on the job in 2012 are bound by a vote taken by their ancestors, essentially. “General Motors’ current employees never had the chance to vote for or against the UAW. UAW representation was a non-negotiable condition of their employment.”
o Source of school bullying ID'd – it's the teachers union! By Dave Tombers - If you're poor and your children are getting a lousy education in C-, D-, or F-rated Louisiana schools, there's hope for you. Or, there was until the teachers union, in a fit of voucher rage, decided to resort to intimidation. ...The threatening letter sent to private schools across the state gives each school until this weekend to opt out of accepting funding for low income students, or be sued by the teachers union. “The LAE union threatens to initiate litigation against individual schools if they do not pledge – in writing … to cease participation in the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence (SSEE) program,” says the American Federation for Children. “The letter comes despite a judge’s ruling two weeks ago that dismissed a union attempt to get an injunction stopping the program,” officials said. ...The letter can be read on the Louisiana Department of Education website, which released the letter to the public along with their statement denouncing it.
o Letter from FDR Regarding Collective Bargaining of Public Unions written August 16, 1937. - All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.
o Why Unions Want Higher Taxes By James Sherk and David Weinberger - No one likes tax increases, right? Not quite. Government unions do. In California, government unions recently postponed their contract negotiations until after a vote on an initiative that would hike taxes. The unions support the initiative, and they don’t want their new contracts to cause Californians to vote no. Their concern is understandable. Heritage senior policy analyst Jason Richwine estimates that on average government employees in the state make 30 percent more than their private sector counterparts. The minimum retirement age for most government employees in California is 50. To maintain this, unions want—and need—more taxes. Similarly, in Nevada, government unions are spearheading a ballot initiative that would hike business taxes. ...Raising business taxes in a weak economy costs private-sector jobs—but that does not deter government unions. Higher taxes still means more for them. In Massachusetts, unions are pushing for a $1.37 billion tax hike. They want to raise the state income tax to almost 6 percent. As the spokesman for a coalition of government unions complained, Massachusetts does “not have a revenue system that is bringing in enough revenue.” But has a government union ever concluded that a tax system brought in too much revenue? Government employees in Massachusetts, of course, can start collecting pensions at age 55. Tax increases hurt the economy. They cost jobs. They take money out of taxpayers’ pockets. But they (usually) mean more money for the government—where most union members now work. Small wonder, then, that the union movement campaigns so heavily for them.
o UnionFacts.Com Vital Statistics - Recent attacks by unions have them accusing corporate America of being "greedy" resulting in slow job growth and a stifled economy. When you look at the facts is it corporate America that's greedy or the self-serving unions? A recent poll had over 90% of respondents stating that unions are bad for America.
Size and Scope
Total Union Members: 14.3
Annual Dues Paid to Unions:
Total union officers and staff
members: 189,217 people
Pension Funds controlled by
Crime, Corruption, and Violence
Recorded Incidents of Union Violence and
Intimidation since 1975: 9,000+
o A Primer on What Unions Do to the Economy - Unions create a substantial distortion within a market-driven economy. To raise their members' pay unions must control the supply of jobs in a company or an industry. Unions must prevent employers from hiring anyone without their permission. If they can do this, they can expect the laws of supply and demand to work in their favor. Holding down employment drives up union members' wages. In other words, successful unions are job cartels, says James Sherk, a senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
- Unions restrict competition for labor by limiting employers' hiring options.
Because unions often incorporate political efforts by forming interest groups
and lobbying, they often employ government regulations and red tape to restrict
market access to union-friendly businesses.
- The union wage premium amounts to between 8 and 12 percent -- this pay differential over market rates reduces the total number of workers a business can hire (average businesses hire 5 to 10 percent fewer after unionization) and passes on higher costs to consumers.
- Unions act as an anchor on corporate investment: because they tend to demand higher wages when businesses do well, businesses are less likely to allocate resources to investments that would lead to that end. This results in a 15-percent loss in physical capital, and research and development.
Fortunately, the market inefficiencies that are introduced by unions are under
constant attack from an increasingly communicative and competitive global
- Within the United States, competition between states to attract employers, specifically between largely unionized states in the north and right-to-work states in the south, has caused a gradual migration of jobs towards the south.
- Just as foreign imports damaged the United Auto Workers' stranglehold on American car manufacturing, increased international trade creates competition that undermines unions.
This growing competition offers only marginal comfort, however, because government-employed unions are largely unaffected by competition. Government services do not face the same competition pressures that the private sector does and have significantly deeper pockets provided by tax revenues. Until public-sector unions disappear, taxpayers and consumers will continue to pay the price.
Source: James Sherk, "The Union Difference: A Primer On What Unions Do To The
Economy," Capital Research Center, January 3, 2012.
For text: https://capitalresearch.org/2012/01/the-union-difference-a-primer-on-what-unions-do-to-the-economy/#more-10005
"If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." Thomas Jefferson (letter to Thomas Cooper, 29 November 1802)
Less than 60 years after the Constitution was ratified, French economist Frederic Bastiat predicted, "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
Resource: The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, established in 1968, is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by abuses of compulsory unionism.
REPORT: Right-To-Work States Are Winning The Future By Jim DeMint/Jim’s Blog (May 2011) - A new report from U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) indicates that Right-to-Work (RTW) states not only protect workers’ freedom, they also have discovered a winning economic strategy over years of competition with other states. This research shows that compared to forced unionism states, RTW states have: More new residents More new businesses More new jobs Faster income growth Currently, 22 states have right-to-work laws that protect the rights of workers not to be forced to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of employment. The RTW states are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming. There are 28 states with forced-unionism.
Elect Your Boss Its Easy as 1-2-3! by Kyle Olson: There's a dirty little secret in public school governance: for a few thousand dollars, unions can run the table. How? Elect the school board. Then, at negotiation time, they're sitting across the bargaining table from their friends
Unions to Taxpayers: "Where's the Cash?" by Kyle Olson - The unions and the education establishment judge Americans' value of public education based on how much we're willing to spend. Americans, on the other hand, are beginning to question what they're getting for all this money they are "investing." Consider this: From 1980 to 2007, the U.S. increased K-12 education spending by a whopping 571 percent (from $101 billion in 1980 to $581 billion in 2007). That works out to over $10,000 per student per year. All that money must have increased learning, right? Afraid not. Every year, college-bound high school seniors take the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SATs) to assess "academic readiness for college."Â From 1980 to 2008, the average SAT score for critical reading stayed absolutely flat (502 to 502), while the average SAT math score climbed from 492 to 515 Ã¢â‚¬â€œ an increase of just 4.6 percent. Even the left-wing Center for American Progress published a report concluding that there isn't much of a correlation between spending and student achievement. But as 'Give Up the Bucks!' reveals, unions have become the virtual pirates of public education, looting the ship even as it is going down. The question you should ask is: who is benefitting from all those education dollars? The answer will likely shock you.
SEIU fights healthcare repeal after obtaining waivers from law
Support for Public Employee Unions Declines - With states across the country finding that benefits for public workers are becoming nearly impossible to fund in the current economic climate, support for public employee unions has fallen. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 45% of Americans now at least somewhat favor unions for public employees, while the identical number (45%) are opposed to them. These findings include 21% who Strongly Favor such unions versus 30% who are Strongly Opposed to them. (To see survey question wording, click here.) In May of last year, 53% of Adults favored unions for public employees, while 37% opposed them. By comparison, 51% now at least somewhat favor unions for private sector workers, with just 39% opposed.
Strained States Turning to Laws to Curb Labor Unions By STEVEN GREENHOUSE - Faced with growing budget deficits and restive taxpayers, elected officials from Maine to Alabama, Ohio to Arizona, are pushing new legislation to limit the power of labor unions, particularly those representing government workers, in collective bargaining and politics. State officials from both parties are wrestling with ways to curb the salaries and pensions of government employees, which typically make up a significant percentage of state budgets.
Top of Page
New Film Documents Unions' Destruction of Public Education By Kyle Olson - "Kids Aren't Cars" is a new short film series set for release February 1st. Using examples from the Midwest, it documents the impact organized labor has had on the American education system, creating a one-size-fits-all assembly line model that leaves students behind and treats teachers equally, stifling innovation and improvement. See the trailer here.
Our government education system has been spending more and more each year, yet
the results have been the same. While unions demand higher spending - which of
course ends up in the pockets of their members - money is not fixing the
Those that have been in the trenches gave shocking interviews - stories of money grabs by adults while children are left behind.
An executive director of a literacy clinic in Detroit - where high school graduates go to learn how to read - compared the actions of the school board to the Ku Klux Klan. "If they were sitting up there in Klan robes," she said, no one would be tolerating what is going on, but the effect is the same. [Eight of the 9 school board members are black.]
We tell the story of two Indiana teachers recognized state-wide for their impact on students, only to be fired literally the next day because they lacked seniority of their co-workers. Numerous leaders sound the alarm, but do elected leaders have the courage to stand up to the all-powerful teachers' unions? The tide seems to be turning, but the need is dire. The United States continues to slip globally [pdf], with student achievement lagging behind Iceland and Hungary.
In short, it's because our public school system is designed to benefits adults, at the expense of children. The focus has been on spending - which invariably ends up in pay, health benefits and retirement for the employees. "Kids Aren't Cars" is an unflinching look at the state of public education in America and what can be done about it.
Top of Page
The Real Agenda of Unions
SEIU drops mask, goes full commie A May Day rally in Los Angeles, co-sponsored by the SEIU and various communist groups, as well as other unions, reflected yet another step in the normalization of self-identified communist and socialist ideologies in the Obama era. Not only did the SEIU help to organize the rally in conjunction with communists, they marched side-by-side with communists, while union members carried communist flags, communists carried union signs, and altogether there was no real way to tell the two apart. Southern California citizen journalist and photographer “Ringo” was on hand to record the day’s events, and posted a full-length photo essay on his site Ringo’s Pictures. To bring this important photo essay to a wider audience, I present here a small selection of Ringo’s May Day pictures; visit his site to see dozens more photos from the rally.
Andrew Klavan: Behold! Your Public Sector Unions at Work.
The Public Union and Democratic Party Collusion
Public Unions Force Taxpayers to Fund Dems by Michael Barone - Unions, most of whose members are public employees, gave Democrats some $400 million in the 2008 election cycle. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the biggest public employee union, gave Democrats $90 million in the 2010 cycle. Follow the money, Washington reporters like to say. The money in this case comes from taxpayers, present and future, who are the source of every penny of dues paid to public employee unions, who in turn spend much of that money on politics, almost all of it for Democrats. In effect, public employee unions are a mechanism by which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party. So, just as the president complained in his 2010 State of the Union address about a Supreme Court decision that he feared would increase the flow of money to Republicans, he also found time to complain about a proposed state law that could reduce the flow of money to Democrats.
Collective Bargaining 101: When union leaders claim that collective bargaining is a right, Heritage is here to provide the facts. Our new video is a helpful primer on the rise government unions and the monopoly power given to them through collective bargaining.
Top of Page
Collectivist Tyranny By Mark Alexander - The governor plans to impose economic realities on the collectivist bargaining ability of the state's public employee unions by capping their wages with the Consumer Price Index (unless increase by voter referendum), requiring union members to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary to their pension funds and picking up 12.6 percent of their health insurance premium costs. For the record, private sector employee pension contributions average 7.5 percent and almost 20 percent for health plans. Most vocal among the state's 300,000 public employee union members are protesters from the 98,000-member teacher's union, who are now paid, on average, more than $75,000 in wages and benefits. Wisconsin parents should be protesting against these teachers, too many of whom are clearly motivated more by tenured job security rather than improving student performance. According to the latest federal education data, pathetically less than 40 percent of 8th grade students in the state's government schools meet basic requirements for math and reading performance, even though the state spends more per student ($10,791) than any other Midwest state. In Milwaukee, where the average teacher compensation package exceeds $100,000, the graduation rate is under 50 percent, and for black children it is below 35 percent. ... Government unions face no competition, so there is no impetus to produce or perform at a higher level, and to call government union negotiations "bargaining" is a gross mischaracterization. ...It is no small irony that protesting Wisconsin teachers are sporting placards likening Gov. Walker to Adolf Hitler. Ironic, I say, because Hitler proclaimed, "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
Top of Page
Back to Progressive Liberals
Back to Wall of Separation? Index
Home | About | Search | Newsletter | Contact