Union Thugs vs. Boss Hogg


The old Hollywood cliche is the robber baron style boss, sitting behind his ornate desk, cigar burning near him.  He would have two thugs on either side behind him.  The supplicant would come in, head bowed, had in hand.  “I want you to tell your people to go out and vote.  If not, we could lose our position, and they would be out of a job.”

The supplicant would bow, “Yes sir, boss, I’ll get everyone out to vote.  You can count on me.”

“...Koch-related organizations plan to spend $400 million during the 2012 campaigns, more than Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) raised for his entire presidential campaign, according to Politico. The Koch brothers have personally pledged to spend $60 million to defeat Obama…”

Those days were allegedly gone for ever, then according to a Pink Flamingo source, Romney met with his rich friends and told them how he wanted them to tell their “people how to vote”.

Does the far right have a problem with people who aren’t white, male, and racist voting?  They have a problem with unions voting.  They have a problem registering voters.  They have a problem with inner city and Black votes.  There are even some who don’t want women to vote.

The Pink Flamingo does not approve of unions telling their employees how to vote.  It is wrong. It is an abuse of power.  I’ve been a Republican all my life.  I’ve been conservative all my life.  I don’t approve of anyone being told how to vote, and being forced to vote that way.  It is against GOP principles.

The far right is furious with unions and telling people to vote.  But, they don’t mind doing it themselves.  They don’t mind when their mega rich bosses tell people how to vote.Looks to The Pink Flamingo that both groups are in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

“...The 13th Amendment, ratified in 1865 after the Civil War, abolished and prohibited slavery and secured a minimal degree of citizenship to former slaves. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all people “born or naturalized in the United States,” and included the due process and equal protection clauses. This amendment did not explicitly prohibit vote discrimination on racial grounds.

The 15th Amendment, ratified on February 3, 1870, provided that, “The right of U.S. citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”. Additionally under the Amendment, the Congress was given the authority to enforce those rights and regulate the voting process. Soon after the end of Reconstruction, starting in the 1870s, Southern Democratic legislators found other means to deny the vote to blacks, through violence, intimidation, and Jim Crow laws.

From 1890 to 1908, 10 Southern states wrote new constitutions with provisions that included literacy tests, poll taxes, and grandfather clauses that permitted otherwise disqualified voters whose grandfathers voted (thus allowing some white illiterates to vote), some with the aim and effect of re-imposing racially motivated restrictions on the voting process that disenfranchised blacks. State provisions applied to all voters and were upheld by the Supreme Court in early litigation, from 1875 (United States v. Cruikshank) through 1904.

During the early 20th century, the Supreme Court began to find such provisions unconstitutional in litigation of cases brought by African Americans and poor whites. States reacted rapidly in devising new legislation to continue disfranchisement of most blacks and many poor whites. Although there were numerous court cases brought to the Supreme Court, through the 1960s, Southern states effectively disfranchised most blacks.

In 1909, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was created with the mission to promote blacks’ civil rights, including to “secure for them impartial suffrage.” The NAACP’s success was limited: although they did achieve important judicial rulings by the Supreme Court and some legislative successes, Southern legislators quickly devised alternate ways to keep many southern blacks disfranchised through the early 1960s.

Following the 1964 election, a variety of civil rights organizations banded together to push for the passage of legislation that would ensure black voting rights once and for all. The campaign to bring about federal intervention to prevent discrimination in voting culminated in the voting rights protests in Selma, Alabama, and the famous Selma to Montgomery marches. Demonstrations also brought out white violence, and Jimmie Lee Jackson, James Reeb, and Viola Liuzzo were murdered. President Lyndon B. Johnson, in a dramatic joint-session address, called upon Congress to enact a strong voting rights bill. Johnson’s administration drafted a bill intended to enforce the 14th and 15th Amendments, aiming to eliminate various previously legal strategies to prevent blacks and other minorities from voting….”

In These Times

Not any more.  According to the latest on Citizen’s United, it is possible that businesses can force their employees to donate and campaign for someone.  Ergo, Mitt Romney is correct when he says this:

“...I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections. And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view, I hope — I hope you pass those along to your employees. Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well….”

These people are thugs. Mitt Romney, at 26:44 into this audio clip says that he wants small business owners to tell their employees that they need to vote. Now, he covers his tushie by saying that business owners who support Obama should do the same thing. But, this is not the work of a GOP nominee for POTUS. This is a thug. The way the man comes across, business owners need to “strongly suggest” their employees consider their futures when voting. Who the heck does he think he is?

Think Progress

Today’s Plutocrat

“…“If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company,” Siegel wrote. “Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.”

Siegel and his wife Jackie are also in the documentary “The Queen of Versailles,” which chronicles their mission build the largest house in the country. (About 90,000 square feet, if you’re wondering.)…

Cognitive Dissonance

Who is Dave Siegel? David Frum wrote:

“...Think of David Siegel’s market. It’s not the 1%. I doubt you’ll find a single time-share buyer anywhere from Dupont Circle to Chevy Chase. He is the Wal-Mart of the vacation industry, the Hyundai, the Applebees. His top concern ought to be seeing as much disposable income as possible flowing into the hands of the $65,000 a year family. An economic future that continues to shift wealth from the middle to the top is good news for the Four Seasons hotel chain, for builders of vacation homes in Aspen, for the fractional jet industry. But it’s death to time-shares – and yet there is Siegel fulminating against his very own customers….”

Think Progress

Then there are the Koch Brothers:

“…The letter, first obtained by liberal magazine In These Times, said: “If we elect candidates who want to spend hundreds of billions in borrowed money on costly new subsidies for a few favored cronies, put unprecedented regulatory burdens on businesses, prevent or delay important new construction projects, and excessively hinder free trade, then many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences, including higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation, and other ills.”

It also states: “First, and most important, we believe any decision about which candidates to support is — as always — yours and yours alone.”

The Koch brothers, who made their billions in the oil-and-gas industry, have spent considerable sums supporting Republican candidates through direct contributions from Koch Industries and through conservative super-PACs such as Americans for Prosperity.

A letter like the one Koch Industries sent is comparable to those sent by unions and trade organizations, Tappan said, and therefore is “not unusual.”

Tappan noted the firm also included information employees “often request” about voter registration deadlines, early voting options and candidates supported by Koch companies and KOCHPAC, the firm’s employee political action committee.

“Indeed, unions and newspapers go further than this and actually endorse candidates to their readers and members,” he said….”

In These Times
Think Progress

To The Pink Flamingo, this is close to the last straw.  Voting rights mean nothing.  The right to privacy when voting must now mean nothing.  According to Joe Walsh, that is.

“…Spread the word! If you run, own or manage a company, tell your employees! What was the CEO this week that said, if Obama is reelected, I may have to let all of you go next year? If Obama’s reelected, if the Democrats take Congress, I may not be able to cover your health insurance next year. If there’s ever a year where people who run, manage, or own their companies are going to energize their employees, it better be this year. We’re up against it….”

The delicious irony here is that the very people who are bankrolling the tea parties, who wax poetic about the Constitution, freedom, and the Founding Fathers, are the very ones trying to subvert and literally pervert what these men fought and some died to create.

The Pink Flamingo always said these people were a bunch of fakes.  I guess I was right.

My real problem is the arrogance of Mitt Romney.  If he is like this now, what would happen if he were to be elected?

I know I’m a little slow on the uptake a times, but it just dawned on me why the far right always opposed unions.  They didn’t want the little people to vote. They don’t want inner cities to vote.  They don’t want minorities to vote.  They don’t want women to vote.  They don’t want the military to vote.  They only want white men to vote.

I’m beginning to feel, once again, like I’ve been a fool for listening to these jerks.  Never again.  I think I’ll take the union thugs over Mitt’s billionaire thugs.



3 thoughts on “Union Thugs vs. Boss Hogg

  1. Not all Republicans have been this way; just as not all Democrats have been easy with how the unions work on their members — the numbers are few, but at least there have been some. Hopefully some still are not, and there may be others. But it is a problem which will only get worse under this climate.
    And correcton: the only ones the new GOP want to vote are those who make a certain amount of income. That precludes a lot of people of course.

    The union bosses have been in the pocket of the Democrats for a very long time, and they are thugs (my dad was in a union). That’s been the problem with unions for quite some time. The actual notion of a union isn’t a bad thing — workers should be able to collectively bargain — but in practice most have become so corrupt that the workers could be said to need rights to collectively bargain against their unions.
    Now this from the right. The little people don’t stand a chance…unless by some miracle we can get some people in office who actually will represent the people — all the people.
    It’s going to take a miracle; perhaps praying is in order.

  2. I’m furious — between this and the comment about how missionary = soldier I was breathing fire yesterday (starting to slowly calm down now).
    And I’m afraid — because I don’t know where this is all leading to (although history does give some clues, but they are not encouraging).
    And sad and disgusted — I love my country; I love the idea of America…and it seems to be slipping away…I have kids and am old enough to have grandkids…what will they live in? Even if they get to live at all (we’re military…one could always at least count of Republicans to not act snotty and dismissive towards the military…but now it is different: the military is only good if it back them; just like workers are only good if it backs them…and they feel entitled to call all the shots, to everything).

    Perhaps heartsick is the right descriptor.

Comments are closed.