April 23, 2012
— Ace These ladies have been enslaved.
In a lawsuit against three Indiana government officials, a labor union alleged on Wednesday that its constitutional rights under the Thirteenth Amendment — which outlawed “slavery” and “involuntary servitude” — are violated whenever its members are forced to work alongside nonunion employees.[A]n amended complaint filed on Wednesday added a Thirteenth Amendment claim as well. The new lawsuit suggests that when nonunion employees earn higher salaries and better benefits because of the union’s negotiation on behalf of its members, the union has been forced to work for those nonunion employees for free.
You know, I'd like to explore this notion that if a law requires one to labor for the benefit of another, it constitutes illegal, unconstitutional slavery under the 13th Amendment.
Posted by: Ace at
11:21 AM
| Comments (237)
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: joeindc44 says hide your dogs, SCOMDEF's in town at April 23, 2012 11:26 AM (QxSug)
Posted by: jimmuy at April 23, 2012 11:26 AM (kSaUf)
You know, I'd like to explore this notion that if a law requires one to labor for the benefit of another, it constitutes illegal, unconstitutional slavery under the 13th Amendment.
OWS- see you in court!
Posted by: The One Percent at April 23, 2012 11:26 AM (SCcgT)
Posted by: Lone Marauder, pre-denounced for your convenience SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:27 AM (NY7mQ)
Bald pasty good for nuthin shitstain...
Posted by: laceyunderalls at April 23, 2012 11:27 AM (pLTLS)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE
Posted by: Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! at April 23, 2012 11:27 AM (Aaxiu)
Posted by: joeindc44 says hide your dogs, SCOMDEF's in town at April 23, 2012 11:28 AM (QxSug)
Posted by: Every Doctor in the U.S. at April 23, 2012 11:29 AM (wggOP)
Posted by: chuck in st paul at April 23, 2012 11:29 AM (EhYdw)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 11:30 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: Barky O'McFuckstick at April 23, 2012 11:30 AM (Z3f4B)
Obama tells Wasserman Schultz “Don’t Forget, You Work For Me”
http://shark-tank.net/2012/04/20/28406/
Posted by: kbdabear at April 23, 2012 11:30 AM (Y+DPZ)
Posted by: Buzzsaw at April 23, 2012 11:31 AM (tf9Ne)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:31 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: soothsayer at April 23, 2012 11:32 AM (jUytm)
Posted by: Truman North at April 23, 2012 11:32 AM (I2LwF)
But alas, they went judge shopping and found a damned union stooge.
Posted by: Vic at April 23, 2012 11:32 AM (YdQQY)
http://shark-tank.net/2012/04/20/28406/
Posted by: kbdabear at April 23, 2012 03:30 PM (Y+DPZ)
So that's how it is in that family.
Posted by: Ed Rooney at April 23, 2012 11:33 AM (Aaxiu)
Hahahaha.
That sounds like a pandora's box they really, really don't want to open.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:33 AM (8y9MW)
This seems like a way to establish a Precedent, to use in trying to nulify right-to-work laws.
Unions would like to claim....that all wages are better, because of their efforts to get them raised. ....Therefore, all wage earners owe them....something. This is bullshit, of course.
Posted by: wheatie, who sez Barky is a SCUD who's doing it to us on purpose at April 23, 2012 11:33 AM (O4AQQ)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 23, 2012 11:34 AM (bxiXv)
I sure do like this line of reasoning. If I'm forced to work, in order to pay for my Cheetos and cable tv, that might be considered slavery as well.
Posted by: BurtTC at April 23, 2012 11:35 AM (TOk1P)
http://shark-tank.net/2012/04/20/28406/
Posted by: kbdabear at April 23, 2012 03:30 PM
Do you know who I am? I'm Barry Obama! I was makin' my bones when you were doin' cheerleaders!
Posted by: Moe Obama at April 23, 2012 11:35 AM (Y+DPZ)
Posted by: Pomeranian at April 23, 2012 11:35 AM (Q1lie)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at April 23, 2012 11:36 AM (D4YYZ)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 11:36 AM (i6RpT)
Gosh, I would have sworn that the true slaves in this scenario are the union schmoes whose dues are garnished in order to satisfy their Fat Cat overlords, AKA union officials.
But, I'm told, I AM naive...
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (HmCnI)
Posted by: blindside at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (x7g7t)
Slavery!
Bloomberg would do something about slavery!
Posted by: Thomas "Cliff" Friedman at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (Y+DPZ)
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (ebPtk)
So, this means the welfare state and alimony payments violate the 13th Amendment, right?
Posted by: Insomniac at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (v+QvA)
Because, somehow, being in a Union makes a worker more valuable.
Think about that for a moment. It's the exact opposite of the truth. In fact, if I were an employer (and could afford it) I'd pay my non-union employees more- as a function of my increased costs from having to deal with the union and their rules regarding any union employee.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 03:36 PM (i6RpT)
Ditto
Posted by: maddogg at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Mac Gootbone at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (XCSw/)
I saw an article the other day where someone is proposing merit raises for union employees. You know, that silly old rule that non-union shops have been using since the first job was created.
Of course, the minimum pay floor would be unaffected. Duh. Slackers need love too. But here's the thing -- I wonder how long it would be before the overachievers are finding their cars vandalized in the parking lot? Or kneecappings.
That should slow the brown-nosers down a bit.
Posted by: GnuBreed at April 23, 2012 11:37 AM (ccXZP)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 11:38 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 11:38 AM (4yXmp)
33 -
Reminds me of the old Carlin joke... you know why it's best to have sex with your sheep on the edge of a cliff? The sheep will push back!
Posted by: BurtTC at April 23, 2012 11:39 AM (TOk1P)
The case involved a migrant worker camp in which several young Mexican girls were being held against their will and used as sex slaves.
Posted by: Vic at April 23, 2012 11:39 AM (YdQQY)
I think the free rider problem is a valid issue that should be discussed but, as far as I know, no one is forcing the negotiators to represent these non-union employees. It also isn't anything close to slavery but hey if unions want to waste even more of their money fighting losing battles I'm all for it.
Posted by: Colonel Pooteh at April 23, 2012 11:39 AM (YhZFe)
Can I shop for ugly suits and lecture strangers on their shitty morals and get paid the same as my US Senators?
Posted by: the new, improved arhooley -- now with 10% more cynicism! at April 23, 2012 11:39 AM (yYpN2)
When she was much younger she was a good looking woman with a really nice set of knockers, no brain and a loud mouth.
Now? She still has no brain and a loud mouth.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 11:40 AM (nEUpB)
Posted by: Cicero Kid at April 23, 2012 11:41 AM (cqoba)
Posted by: John B Anderson, it didn't work when I did it at April 23, 2012 11:41 AM (KHo8t)
Posted by: joncelli, going back to decaff now at April 23, 2012 11:41 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 11:41 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: Fritz at April 23, 2012 11:42 AM (/ZZCn)
Posted by: SarahW at April 23, 2012 11:42 AM (qQ/le)
Posted by: joeindc44 says hide your dogs, SCOMDEF's in town at April 23, 2012 11:42 AM (QxSug)
Time to unionize all tax payers to sue the deadbeats who are making out from our slavery.
Wait. We did that a few hundred years ago.
Posted by: Roy at April 23, 2012 11:42 AM (VndSC)
Posted by: X at April 23, 2012 11:43 AM (KHo8t)
I've considered this but have found that Swedish women in their 20s seem to have absolutely no desire to work on an American peckerwood plantation.
Posted by: Cicero at April 23, 2012 11:43 AM (QKKT0)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at April 23, 2012 11:43 AM (jucos)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 03:40 PM (nEUpB)
And no husband
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 03:41 PM (i6RpT)
Were they ever married? Maybe it was like a Kurt Russell-Goldie Hawn type deal.
Posted by: EC at April 23, 2012 11:44 AM (GQ8sn)
Well, that's nice, 'cause nobody else watches her. In anything.
Posted by: Hobbitopoly at April 23, 2012 11:44 AM (yISZ8)
You are paid in my allowing you near me. And I must say you are overpaid.
Posted by: The Kitteh at April 23, 2012 11:45 AM (tf9Ne)
You talk about them like they're people or something.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Troll Hunter! at April 23, 2012 11:45 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Paul Krugman at April 23, 2012 11:45 AM (eHIJJ)
Posted by: Fritz at April 23, 2012 11:46 AM (/ZZCn)
Posted by: Susan Sarandon at April 23, 2012 11:46 AM (s85lI)
Make it an equal protection thing: It is harder to fire union employees- and even when an employer moves to do so they get automatic hearings and such to determine if the employee can be fired. As an at-will employee, you have no such protection.
Leave the "union rep" part out of it- but the rest? You should be entitled to those same protections.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (8y9MW)
Bankers are so behind the curve, lawyers figured this out right away.
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (oZfic)
Bullshit. Hitler was well known for his commitment to personal rights.
Posted by: Cicero at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (QKKT0)
I'll take $10 for each tooth I desperately wanted to knock down a teamster's throat.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (nEUpB)
I think they should have added a pinch of Commerce Clause just for seasoning.
But, alas, the SCOAMT regime will realize what the ramifications of this will be and tell the unions to back off.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (BCeCZ)
>>>>constitutional rights under the Thirteenth Amendment — which outlawed “slavery” and “involuntary servitude” — are violated whenever its members are forced to work alongside nonunion employees..
***
Look for the Union Label because nonunion people are icky and they smell.
Posted by: dananjcon at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (eavT+)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (i6RpT)
------
Early thread winner right there!!
Posted by: fixerupper at April 23, 2012 11:47 AM (C8hzL)
Pure fucking genius. Make this man a coblogger.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 11:48 AM (nEUpB)
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 11:48 AM (ursbV)
Posted by: wheatie, who sez Barky is a SCUD who's doing it to us on purpose at April 23, 2012 11:50 AM (O4AQQ)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 11:51 AM (4yXmp)
Posted by: AmishDude at April 23, 2012 11:51 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Margot Kidder at April 23, 2012 11:51 AM (D4YYZ)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 03:30 PM (i6RpT)
---------------------->
Big quibble: Hitler was a leftist as in "National Socialist." Nazism and communism initially peacefully co-existed. My understanding is that the break came because Hitler regarded the communists in Germany as not being nationalist enough.
Posted by: Retired Buckeye Cop at April 23, 2012 11:51 AM (M0NzJ)
AHH! My eyes! MY EYES!!!!!
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:52 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: I am the 99% at April 23, 2012 11:52 AM (QKKT0)
82 73
My phone is being tapped while I, unfortunately, am not.
------
Early thread winner right there!!
------
Seconded!
Posted by: wheatie, who sez Barky is a SCUD who's doing it to us on purpose at April 23, 2012 11:52 AM (O4AQQ)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at April 23, 2012 11:52 AM (jucos)
I mean today. Are they really against it? Or are they all for slavery as long as the right people aren't the slaves.
Posted by: AmishDude at April 23, 2012 11:52 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: moki at April 23, 2012 11:53 AM (dZmFh)
Heh. Effin billable activity interposed itself upon my slackitude.
THE BALLS ON THESE GUYS!
Posted by: toby928© at April 23, 2012 11:53 AM (NG097)
There are so many similarities that it's easy to believe they'd cooperate early on, but that's an important and fundamental difference.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:54 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 11:54 AM (4yXmp)
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 11:54 AM (ursbV)
I'll take $10 for each tooth I desperately wanted to knock down a teamster's throat.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 03:47 PM (nEUpB)
**
The most obnoxious in our area are the IBEW goons. Its ok though, Verizon is working to 70-90% wireless which could translate into 70-90% less union maintenence jobs. Oh the sweet, sweet tears.
Posted by: dananjcon at April 23, 2012 11:54 AM (eavT+)
Democrats are still pro-slavery. Now they're just equal opportunity slavers.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 11:55 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: EC at April 23, 2012 03:44 PM (GQ8sn)
No, they were "cohabitating", until they weren't... convenient, that.
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at April 23, 2012 11:55 AM (HmCnI)
Posted by: nerdygirl at April 23, 2012 11:56 AM (gZX7b)
98My understanding has always been that Communists see themselves as a world community ("Workers of the world, unite!"), whereas National Socialists see themselves as citizens of a particular country first.
There are so many similarities that it's easy to believe they'd cooperate early on, but that's an important and fundamental difference.
NAZI's have snappy uniforms, Commies have itchy scratchy uniforms. I think that's the difference. Too bad they both lost.
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 11:56 AM (ursbV)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 03:54 PM (4yXmp)
Hey! We got nothin' to do with that guy!
Posted by: Greasy Weasels Local 402 at April 23, 2012 11:56 AM (RD7QR)
watching her'... and reveals she was denied White House security
clearance
And yet....Barry......Like I've always said, that skinny bastard would never have passed a WH security clearance.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at April 23, 2012 11:56 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 03:54 PM (ursbV)
He thinks he's Burt Lancaster?
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at April 23, 2012 11:56 AM (HmCnI)
Posted by: nerdygirl at April 23, 2012 11:57 AM (gZX7b)
Posted by: moki at April 23, 2012 11:57 AM (dZmFh)
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 03:54 PM (ursbV)
---------------------------------------
She's old, ugly, and can't rap.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 11:58 AM (BCeCZ)
I do believe that slavery does mean your held against your will and made to work for free! If your unions can't negotiate a better wage than your non union co-workers, that says something about your unions, freakin idiots. a union is not for the worker anymore, I know been there. My sugestion is to take your freakin bleeding hearts somewhere else to work!
Posted by: Walt at April 23, 2012 11:58 AM (hwvX7)
"Illinois’s backlog of unpaid bills has risen to more than $9 billion because of pension costs and falling federal aid, leaving the state “essentially treading water,” Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka said."
Illinois... that state sounds familiar. Is there some guy from illinois in charge of something in DC?
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at April 23, 2012 11:59 AM (ebPtk)
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 03:54 PM (ursbV)
---------------------------------------
She's white, old, ugly, and can't rap.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 11:59 AM (BCeCZ)
Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at April 23, 2012 03:46 PM (hXJOG)
---------------------
That really wasn't a "slave law" as much as a hold-over from the 50s. And I think they let either one or two of the youngest ones off on that charge and allowed them to be tried in juvie court. Which means they will walk and have their record cleared in a few years.
(besides some blacks were "offended" by the title of that law so they changed the title last year. Punishment and everything else is still the same though).
Posted by: Vic at April 23, 2012 11:59 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 03:54 PM (4yXmp)
Ahem!
Posted by: Senator Charles "Chuck U." Schumer, unctuousness brought to life at April 23, 2012 11:59 AM (HmCnI)
Posted by: HoosierHillbilly at April 23, 2012 11:59 AM (o0MNs)
***
She made plenty of charges against Bush. Claiming Bush is out to get you makes you a worthless leftwing shitstain liar. Making similar claims against your own messiah makes you certifiably crazy.
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 23, 2012 11:59 AM (61yvg)
Nice truck you got there. It would be too bad if we ran you off an overpass and you die in the crash.
True story. UPS manager during the strike in 1997.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 12:00 PM (nEUpB)
115SC also charged the eight black kids that beat up the white teenager with an old slave law, lynching.
Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at April 23, 2012 03:46 PM (hXJOG)
---------------------
That really wasn't a "slave law" as much as a hold-over from the 50s. And I think they let either one or two of the youngest ones off on that charge and allowed them to be tried in juvie court. Which means they will walk and have their record cleared in a few years.
(besides some blacks were "offended" by the title of that law so they changed the title last year. Punishment and everything else is still the same though).
If you don't like lynching, don't go to Mexico. Lynching is a bunch of people doing the jobs Americans won't do. I know this because I saw on TeeVee.
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 12:01 PM (ursbV)
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at April 23, 2012 12:02 PM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 12:02 PM (4yXmp)
Posted by: Susan Sarandon at April 23, 2012 03:46 PM (s85lI)
**
Hey Susan, show us your tits and you can have all the access ya need!! We may even throw ya a mercy screw!!
Posted by: Obama's CIA detail at April 23, 2012 12:03 PM (eavT+)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 23, 2012 12:03 PM (bxiXv)
Really, really wish we had a Keef Olberdouche thread. He be-clowned himself on This Week on Sunday.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at April 23, 2012 12:03 PM (UOM48)
Amateur.
Posted by: Henry Waxman at April 23, 2012 12:03 PM (nEUpB)
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 12:03 PM (oZfic)
This may be what you're hinting at, but doesn't this spell doom for all those income-redistribution mechanisms that have become a la mode?
Posted by: Flounder at April 23, 2012 12:03 PM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 23, 2012 12:04 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at April 23, 2012 12:04 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Henry Waxman at April 23, 2012 04:03 PM (nEUpB)
And that guy -- don't get us started!
Posted by: Greasy Weasels Local 402 at April 23, 2012 12:04 PM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 23, 2012 12:05 PM (bxiXv)
>>>Bullshit. Hitler was well known for his commitment to personal rights.
Property rights *maybe* as long as the state doesn't sorta need your stuff. Any other rights? Free speech/press, RTKBA, rights against search and seizure, quartering, fair trial, freedom of religion, not so much.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Troll Hunter! at April 23, 2012 12:05 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 12:05 PM (4yXmp)
Posted by: Jean at April 23, 2012 12:05 PM (JjNG+)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 04:02 PM (4yXmp)
------------------------------------------
Better yet. Who's the congressman with the gaping nostrils who claimed to have had oral sex with Helen Thomas?
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:06 PM (BCeCZ)
O/T....sorry, but...
Does this elbow-hit to the side of the head look like an "accident" to you?
watch?v=j2j9MPNOqzI
Looks pretty damn intentional to me.
Posted by: wheatie, who sez Barky is a SCUD who's doing it to us on purpose at April 23, 2012 12:06 PM (O4AQQ)
Technically, they want others "reeducated" and not "enslaved" in the camps; so, really, they're just looking out for others. Nothing to see here.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at April 23, 2012 12:06 PM (eHIJJ)
Posted by: Guy Who Says All This Post Needs Is A Noose at April 23, 2012 12:06 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: Captain Gullible at April 23, 2012 12:06 PM (Ky1+e)
Posted by: Stan at April 23, 2012 12:06 PM (N1Gru)
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 04:03 PM (oZfic
We're not having a problem. Maybe it's just you.
Posted by: Catholics at April 23, 2012 12:07 PM (UOM48)
We have repeatedly asked the union to allow us to represent ourselves (a futile request) in negotiations. We do NOT want my wife represented by them, hence her not being a member of the union. In our small district, she is the only teacher with the level of education she possesses, a level only shared by two in administration (a principal and the superintendent). Her extensive education, experience and accomplishments in prior positions building successful educational results for students, is such that there would be no value in being represented by a union that is interested in the protection of the least qualified, least educated, least driven workers.
If there is a question of involuntary servitude, it is most definitely one of being one of the more valued human resource assets to a district - one that is pulling up standardized test results, keeping troubled kids engaged and succeeding, pushing the advanced students, etc. That my wife would have to settle for a lousy salary negotiated by a union that is only concerned about the protection of the weakest members is indeed servitude (I won't insult those who have been slaves in our nation's history or currently under slavery in other nations by using that comparison). I can speak with certain personal knowledge of the matter of involuntary servitude, as one who's ancestor was sold into servitude at the turn of the prior century and forced to work as a child for more than a decade until she had paid for her freedom. I cannot imagine she would have felt these women litigating had any experience with the concept of servitude, and would suggest she would find the tyranny of the weak that has been imposed by those who carry the burden for the rest is the servitude we must be watchful of.
But in Barack Obama's America, the hard working middle class that put itself through school, worked its way up, made hard sacrifices and continues to do so, is the servant for the lazy, extremely overpaid and under-worked union member, be it public or private.
May the union grasshopper find its lazy ass thrown out before we ants starve!
Posted by: Multitude at April 23, 2012 12:07 PM (ijdDW)
Posted by: Mace at April 23, 2012 12:07 PM (opfWD)
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy telling the truth at April 23, 2012 12:07 PM (ggRof)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at April 23, 2012 12:07 PM (THbHS)
Canada's got a ton of 'em.
Posted by: That guy who thought the other guy was talking about moose at April 23, 2012 12:08 PM (Ky1+e)
143This too will be an exploding cigar for the left. When this finally ends up at SCOTUS, they find that the Wagner Act violates both the 13th and 14th Amendments and be declared unconstitutional. If that happens, look for the Commies to fall to the floor kicking and screaming in a huge circle. I for one, would love to see the Congress pass a national right to work.
Methinks you don't understand Latina law and ACLU law and the power of teh Georgetown salons.
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 12:08 PM (ursbV)
Posted by: Penfold at April 23, 2012 12:09 PM (1PeEC)
Posted by: I Coulda Swore we were talking about Goose at April 23, 2012 12:09 PM (jucos)
Posted by: BlueFalcon in Boston would be forever alone without AoS at April 23, 2012 12:10 PM (KCvsd)
Posted by: Not an Artist at April 23, 2012 12:11 PM (uRumV)
Posted by: That guy who thought the other guy was talking about moose at April 23, 2012 04:08 PM (Ky1+e)
A nøøse once bit my sister...
Posted by: Some Norwegian guy in the opening credits at April 23, 2012 12:11 PM (v+QvA)
Posted by: SarahW at April 23, 2012 12:11 PM (qQ/le)
I know they won't, but I would love Lockheed to point out that a great deal of their work is all done in right-to-work states, and that they'll just move their machining operations there, too, if the union feels so aggrieved.
I know they're based in Fort Worth, for instance, and they've got a couple plants here in the area.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:12 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Ian S. at April 23, 2012 12:12 PM (tqwMN)
Posted by: Gay Bowel Syndrom at April 23, 2012 12:13 PM (ursbV)
Posted by: Sub Tard at April 23, 2012 04:08 PM (ursbV)
Honey, your hair looks FABULOUS - it would be such a shame if anything were to happen to it!
Posted by: Georgetown Hairdresser's FABULOUS Union Local 486 at April 23, 2012 12:13 PM (DrWcr)
Posted by: joeindc44 says hide your dogs, SCOMDEF's in town at April 23, 2012 12:14 PM (QxSug)
Posted by: Multitude at April 23, 2012 04:07 PM (ijdDW)
----------------------------------------
The next day after OK signed it's Right-to-Work law, my younger sister, who's a teacher, called me and ecstatically said the first thing she did that day was waive her union membership.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:14 PM (BCeCZ)
"I know they won't, but I would love Lockheed to point out that a great deal of their work is all done in right-to-work states, and that they'll just move their machining operations there, too, if the union feels so aggrieved. "
Unions? We've got their back. No sweat. - NLRB
Posted by: Count de Monet at April 23, 2012 12:14 PM (4q5tP)
I understand Lockheed-Martin is staying open. I wonder, is it a good idea to strike when there are infinitely more machinists per position in the world? I hope L-M tells the union to go pound sand.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at April 23, 2012 12:15 PM (eHIJJ)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:16 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: nerdygirl at April 23, 2012 12:16 PM (gZX7b)
Posted by: John Galt at April 23, 2012 12:17 PM (9NQ6I)
144 128
What happened to the Catholic League website?
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 04:03 PM (oZfic
*
The Catholic League website is only for good Catholics. Are you a good Catholic dally?
Posted by: The Catholic League at April 23, 2012 12:17 PM (eavT+)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 23, 2012 12:18 PM (i6RpT)
I believe that's correct.
Yeah... I'm with you, I'm not sure what the union is thinking. They're complaining about the health insurance (would now be similar to something most people have) and the move to defined contribution (instead of defined benefit) pension.
Frankly, I suspect they'll come to the table in a week or two, appropriately whipped.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:18 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 04:16 PM (8y9MW)
----------------------------------------------
Isn't Southwest Airlines non-union? That's my understanding anyway.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:19 PM (BCeCZ)
Posted by: The Catholic League at April 23, 2012 04:17 PM (eavT+)
**********
Of course I am! I'll have you know that I say my rosary on my finest set of anal beads.
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy telling the truth at April 23, 2012 12:19 PM (ggRof)
Nope. Their unions are better behaved than most (because their employees (as a rule) love working there), but they still have union contracts. I think some of the airports they fly into are closed-shops, so they have to have unions to fly into those airports. And, once you've got a union, you're stuck with that union.
I'm not sure what the union participation is, but I am sure they have at least some unions.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:21 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: The Catholic League at April 23, 2012 04:17 PM (eavT+)
**********
Of course I am! I'll have you know that I say my rosary on my finest set of anal beads.
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy telling the truth at April 23, 2012 04:19 PM (ggRof)
***
Eeew.
Posted by: The Pope at April 23, 2012 12:21 PM (eavT+)
Three years ago, our unionized school district was faced with major budget cutbacks due to changes in how the state participated in the funding of education. The district was faced with a shortfall exceeding a couple of million, and was able to absorb some of it with reduction in operating budgets. But payroll continued to be the largest category of the budget and had to be affected.
The administration proposed headcount reduction (not replacing retirements that would make a few areas work a little harder, and consolidating some functions and distributing workload), but leaving merit pay intact give the school had been teetering into noncompliance with No Child Left Behind and other regulations that required the staff to be aggressively remediating. The union rejected the reduction proposal (even though the seven people protected were most definitely some of the weakest personnel, some of which had also been on payroll for decades and checked out into mental retirement long ago).
So merit pay was scrapped. The top performing teachers were made servants, having what was rightfully their earnings seized and taken from them so that the least deserving, lousy teachers could continue to get paid without putting in much effort.
Who's the servant?
Posted by: Multitude at April 23, 2012 12:21 PM (ijdDW)
Posted by: The Catholic League at April 23, 2012 04:17 PM (eavT+)
That's not true, it's a public website. Mr. Donohue is a real spitfire, as my gram likes to say.
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 12:21 PM (oZfic)
Posted by: Kevin in ABQ at April 23, 2012 12:22 PM (q1qCt)
169....If their theory is correct, this permanently ends welfare as being unconstitutional.
Because we are being forced to support people with our tax dollars.....yup!
158 If you can quit, you aren't enslaved. The end.
Right. ....So can we quit paying our taxes? Nope. .....Therefore, by their argument, we are being enslaved by Taxation.
Posted by: wheatie, who sez Barky is a SCUD who's doing it to us on purpose at April 23, 2012 12:23 PM (O4AQQ)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at April 23, 2012 12:23 PM (THbHS)
Lost in all the flack Scott Walker has been taking in his fight with the PEUs in Wisconsin is just how much of a hate-on unions have for Mitch Daniels. I live in Illinois about 45 min from the Indiana state line, and Mitch Daniels was over here last week to give a speech for some Republican Party dinner. The speech was at a hotel across the street from a little restaurant where my wife works, and there were probably ~4,000 union members outside protesting for a couple of hours while he was speaking. During this time, probaly 50-60 union guys came over to the restaurant, each ordered 1-3 beers (no food), hung out in the restaurant to drink them, and left. My wife's total tip haul from all these guys? $0.00
She doesn't get an hourly wage, but keeps 100% of her tips. So, for the honor of being their indentured serving wench, she got a grand total of nothing. And to add to that insult, they packed the place up such that some of her regular customers came in and left without even waiting for a seat, seeing that the place was so busy. Takes a slaver to know a slaver, I guess.......
Posted by: djm1992 at April 23, 2012 12:23 PM (1o4B5)
You know, I'd like to explore this notion that if a law requires one to labor for the benefit of another, it constitutes illegal, unconstitutional slavery under the 13th Amendment.
Like, for instance, the fact that I am going to work until, oh, about May 15th this year to pay my taxes.
Oh, and by the way... the irony of Emancipation Day and Tax Day falling back to back this year on April 16th and April 17th was not lost on the Regular Guy.
Posted by: The Regular Guy at April 23, 2012 12:25 PM (qHCyt)
Posted by: Dr. Doctor at April 23, 2012 12:25 PM (JOnLy)
Posted by: polynikes at April 23, 2012 12:25 PM (Ax0zn)
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 04:21 PM (oZfic)
Posted by: curious/dally at April 23, 2012 12:25 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: wheatie, who sez Barky is a SCUD who's doing it to us on purpose at April 23, 2012 04:23 PM (O4AQQ)
----------------------------------------------
Not quite. We are enslaved by taxes only as they are used extraconsitutionally. Taxation is as old as our nation.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:26 PM (BCeCZ)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at April 23, 2012 12:27 PM (THbHS)
Posted by: Knemon at April 23, 2012 12:28 PM (u1+3w)
Posted by: Guy Who Says All The "Guy Who Says All This Post Needs Is A Noose's" Comment Needs is a Noose at April 23, 2012 12:28 PM (nj1bB)
And just to the north, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources declares (some type of) pigs to be an invasive species.
No word yet on dogs or Mooselums...
[link in id to naturalnews_dot_com]
Posted by: RioBravo at April 23, 2012 12:29 PM (eEfYn)
187 That's not true, it's a public website. Mr. Donohue is a real spitfire, as my old, menopausal granky gram likes to say.
***
Your Grammy doesn't love you and Mr. Donahue thinks your a twit.
Posted by: God at April 23, 2012 12:29 PM (eavT+)
Posted by: just sayin' at April 23, 2012 12:30 PM (HOOye)
Yes, but the idea of an income tax (which is, effectively, a tax on being alive since no income = no food) was a radical departure. And, yes, is very akin to slavery in many ways.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:30 PM (8y9MW)
And just to the north, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources declares (some type of) pigs to be an invasive species.
No word yet on dogs or Mooselums...
--------------------------------------------------
So I guess they're getting tired of unions too.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:31 PM (BCeCZ)
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 04:26 PM (BCeCZ)
Blog ate my comment. Taxation generally, yes. Federal income tax is a relatively recent invention.
Posted by: Insomniac at April 23, 2012 12:31 PM (v+QvA)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 04:30 PM (8y9MW)
----------------------------------------------
I do know that real-estate taxes took away our right to private property.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:33 PM (BCeCZ)
What the hell? I couldn't make it all the way through the article (my ADD is acting up today, apparently), but that seems... strange.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:33 PM (8y9MW)
Hitler was considered Right Wing because he aligned with the facists, Franco and Mussolini.
Mussolini invented[/] fascism, and had long been a committed socialist (at one time a confrere of Lenin, no less). After his experiences in WWI, where he saw that nationalism trumped class solidarity, he married nationalism to socialism and came up with ... national socialism, i.e., socialism in one country, instead of the more traditional international socialism of Marx and Lenin.
Franco wasn't really a fascist (i.e., a follower of Mussolini's views). He was basically trying to avoid a Communist takeover of Spain (backed by Stalin), and rather cleverly played off Hitler/Mussolini against Stalin. He got the support he wanted, but then sat out WWII, to Hitler's irritation. Pretty good strategery for a guy who held no cards.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 23, 2012 12:34 PM (g5oFd)
Posted by: joeindc44 says hide your dogs, SCOMDEF's in town at April 23, 2012 12:35 PM (QxSug)
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 23, 2012 12:35 PM (g5oFd)
That, too.
Basically, the legitimate taxes are sales taxes, duties, tariffs, and what we now call "fees" or "use taxes."
Of course, if the government limited itself to those sources of income, and wanted to stay economically competitive, they'd have to get by on a lot less money...
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:35 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Insomniac at April 23, 2012 04:31 PM (v+QvA)
------------------------------------------
The Federal Income Tax is constitutional. There's an amendment that makes it so.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:35 PM (BCeCZ)
Posted by: Thomas Jefferson at April 23, 2012 12:36 PM (DoaFB)
I didn't see anyone say it wasn't. That doesn't make it right, and that doesn't make it "not slavery." Prohibition used to be Constitutional, too.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 12:37 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: joeindc44 says hide your dogs, SCOMDEF's in town at April 23, 2012 12:37 PM (QxSug)
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 04:35 PM (BCeCZ)
Yeah...and?
Posted by: Insomniac at April 23, 2012 12:37 PM (v+QvA)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 12:37 PM (4yXmp)
Posted by: Dagny, warrior at April 23, 2012 04:37 PM (4yXmp)
Some of them come across as rather porcine.
Posted by: Insomniac at April 23, 2012 12:38 PM (v+QvA)
Have you ever seen what wild pigs can do to crop land?
That's why most states have no limit on pig hunters.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at April 23, 2012 12:39 PM (nEUpB)
The fact of the matter is this is part and parcel of the FDR legislation that was supported by his pack court. In orderto turn around thyis crap we would need 16 years of Ronald Reagan followed by 8 years of some one equally conservative all with a virtual rubber stamp Senate.
That is what it would take to turn our shitty judicial system around. And people, that is NOT going to happen as long as freeloading looters can vote.
Posted by: Vic at April 23, 2012 12:40 PM (YdQQY)
It is interesting to see how the process is the same with union membership and ObamaCare: force everyone by law to be thrown into a group, and then complain that since there are so many mouths to feed in the group, a tyrant has to be allowed to be the decider. It's not fair to have anyone at that point being allowed out of what conditions have been artificially imposed.
But for these tyrants to complain about being made slaves to those few who have attempted to escape their tyranny is utterly profane. The only thing more repugnant than a fascist is an impotent, whining fascist.
Posted by: Multitude at April 23, 2012 12:41 PM (ijdDW)
Posted by: Another Bob at April 23, 2012 12:41 PM (RJMcc)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 23, 2012 04:37 PM (8y9MW)
-----------------------------------------
Taxes are slavery if they are spent extraconstituionally, which most all taxes are. I'm not against paying an income tax for the original purpose of government as outlined in the Constitution.
Posted by: Soona at April 23, 2012 12:42 PM (BCeCZ)
I wonder, is it a good idea to strike when there are infinitely more machinists per position in the world?
*does Forrest Gump wave*
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 23, 2012 12:42 PM (d0Tfm)
Posted by: polynikes at April 23, 2012 12:46 PM (Ax0zn)
Posted by: Insomniac at April 23, 2012 04:38 PM (v+QvA)
**********
I will have you know that one of my friends is a doctor and he said that my BMI of 156 is considered in the "normal" range!
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy telling the truth at April 23, 2012 12:47 PM (ggRof)
I see what you did there.
Posted by: Ken at April 23, 2012 12:47 PM (7yb9x)
Posted by: Jones in CO at April 23, 2012 12:48 PM (8sCoq)
My cousin is a union rep for her VA office. She spends all of her time working on leftwing and union causes. She's managed to insult a good chunk of the family with her BS, and is heading for a nervous breakdown.
Posted by: Alex at April 23, 2012 12:49 PM (jdZlf)
For some reason I keep getting the message that the site in your link is forbidden on the server. Why would that happen?
Posted by: Grandma Mimi at April 23, 2012 12:50 PM (roHFn)
Posted by: nickless at April 23, 2012 12:56 PM (MMC8r)
--
Yep, the end of "spreading the wealth" tax funded socialism.
Posted by: panzernashorn at April 23, 2012 12:58 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Jones in CO at April 23, 2012 01:04 PM (8sCoq)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at April 23, 2012 01:04 PM (i0App)
"You know, I'd like to explore this notion that if a law requires one to labor for the benefit of another, it constitutes illegal, unconstitutional slavery under the 13th Amendment."
So the same applies to all the "social" spending leviathan taxes me for right? Hmm intereresting.
Posted by: Oldcrow at April 23, 2012 01:04 PM (8NiWI)
Posted by: panzernashorn at April 23, 2012 01:14 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: panzernashorn at April 23, 2012 01:31 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Eric Holder, Attorney sans Law at April 23, 2012 01:37 PM (lZBBB)
Posted by: dally, who does not enjoy paying so much tax at April 23, 2012 01:39 PM (oZfic)
Posted by: Guy Who Says All This Post Needs Is A Noose
Canada's got a ton of 'em.
Posted by: That guy who thought the other guy was talking about moose at April 23, 2012 04:08 PM (Ky1+e)
------------------------------------
For Christmas! Posted by: I Coulda Swore we were talking about Goose
I once made a big ass airplane outta that shit.
Posted by: Howard Hughes, who thought he heard someone say something about spruce at April 23, 2012 01:49 PM (Ky1+e)
Uh, what makes you say that Hitler was "on the right?" Just because academia declares so without reasoning it out? To the left is more government, to the right is less. Hitler was a proponent of socialism and the fuerherprinzip. Seems like a lefty to me.
Posted by: Fast 'n Furious at April 23, 2012 01:58 PM (lf4N9)
yeah, but where would that ever happen?
Posted by: Buddha at April 23, 2012 02:37 PM (8NlUk)
The word "socialist" is right there in the Nazi name. That would be the "left" not the "right". What a give-away.
Posted by: Dang at April 23, 2012 02:42 PM (Ky1+e)
Posted by: steevy at April 23, 2012 03:17 PM (7W3wI)
Posted by: Sandra Fluke, who thought she heard someone say loose at April 23, 2012 04:39 PM (ZfZCA)
Posted by: Frankly at April 23, 2012 06:19 PM (C6cix)
Posted by: The Wind Through the Keyhole ePub at April 25, 2012 12:50 AM (t8IT7)
Posted by: The Mongoliad iBooks at April 25, 2012 01:16 AM (oVOk7)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2027 seconds, 365 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: EC at April 23, 2012 11:25 AM (GQ8sn)