It’s not surprising that this would be the stick the libs beat their opponents over the head with.

Very predictable…

have not made my work fail NOW THAT IS RACIST!!

When/if this Fascist propsal becomes law, the term for people who don’t want unions won’t be ‘racist’, the terms will be ‘unemployed’ and ‘unemployable’.

Personally, here’s my deal: To all union organizers…. I’ll be nice twice. “I may be in the tech-construction field, but no thank you, I do not wish to be part of your union no matter which one it is. If need be, I’ll revert back to my one-person company in music business consulting.”

That’s the first time. One to go. After that, things may get ‘a bit different’. Come to my home and all bets are off.

Cheers !

Century concept. There was a need for them in the early 1900′s when workers were abused and taken advantage of. Now, it is the unions that are taking advantage of and abusing the taxpayers, holding companies hostage, and destroying our economy by forcing unrealistic wages and benefits on market that cannot support them. Unions should not be allowed or tolerated in the government sector (federal, state, and local). Local union ‘thugs’ (and yes, I include teachers and police unions when I use the word thug) need to be exposed, protested, and litigated against for every possible transgression.

…should expect. Honestly we should be glad that they’re exposing their true inner selves. All the more reason why the GOP must get its dyfunctional house in order and win back either the House, the Senate or both in 2010. We can’t endure 4 years of this nonsense. It must be stopped or slowed drastically in 2010. DD

Thought it was the unions themselves who were historically the racists…. need I really say more than the Davis-Bacon Act?

This has long been a union gripe; retaliation against an employee for a protected activity, e.g. being an inside organizer, has been an unfair labor practice since the National Labor Relations Act was passed in 1935. However, the only remedy was re-instatement or reduced penalty such as remove a suspension from the employee’s record and a cease and desist order against the employer and its agents and you have to put up a sign that says you committed an unfair labor practice. Frankly, that is a pretty small price to pay to get rid of a PITA employee or two. There were several times in my career that I decided that whatever it was that the Employer wanted to do was worth doing and if putting up a sign was the price of doing it, we’d pay it.

The big problem is first the NLRB adjudication process is stacked against employers, especially small employers and after a couple years of a Democrat administration will be quite pro-labor. By a Democrat’s second term, the NLRB will just be an extension of organized labor and the only remedy for an employer is to take the Board’s decision to the federal courts, a long and expensive process and most employers can’t afford it and will just cop to it or settle out. This is the way bad administrative law gets made; the administrative agency has the power and money of the government and can defend a bad decision vociferously. Second, most employees who become union activists are already performance or discipline problems. As soon as a union shows up, it is your malcontents and discipline problems who go like moths to a flame and become the union’s internal organizers. So, Joe Blow has a stack of interest cards in his pocket and spends lunchtime harranguing his fellow employees about signing cards. In his enthusiasm he returns from lunch 15 minutes late, something he has previously been disciplined for and is on a “last chance” notice regarding his tardiness. Pursuant to the written notice that he will be fired if he is ever late again, Joe is fired. Joe and the union file an unfair labor practice complaint against the company alleging retaliation for Joe’s lunchtime organizing. The controlling authority is an NLRB decision called Wright Line which sets up a balancing test to determine “but for” the protected activity, what would the employer have done? In this case, the ULP should be dismissed and Joe should stay fired under Wright Line unless the union can prove something like lots of people were late and the Employer ignored it but was giving special scrutiny to Joe because of his union activity. Lots of cases like this are lost by employers because some stupid manager does just that; tells the supervisor to keep a close eye on the organizer and not to let him get away with anything. Unfortunately, somebody heard him say it an testifies to same in the ULP hearing. The more likely result after card check passes will be some young, just out of college or just out a a stint as a union or community organizer lawyer who is now a NLRB investigator, ’cause they’ll be hiring lots of them, will think it just isn’t fair to fire somebody for being late and will conclude that Joe really was fired for his organizing activity. Now the Employer has to appeal to the Board, which as I said above, after a year or two of a Democrat is going to be very union friendly. The Board will ignore the law and maybe even make new law giving even broader protections to employees engaging in activities protected by the Act. And the only thing the Employer can do is try to get the federal courts to reverse the Board. The Courts have not been reticent to reverse the NLRB over the years, some courts more than others and some Boards more than others, but I suspect that we’ll very quickly have a very union friendly federal bench so all employers had better hope for some SCOTUS justices good health.

The KKK, Jim Crow laws, lynchings, segregation, those were all Democrat institutions. Of course, you knew that right? The Democrats started the KKK in about 1870 to keep the blacks down on the farm, and when they wouldn’t stay there, that’s what the lynchings were all about. The Jim Crow laws were just the way the Democrats enforced their discrimination.

Republicans were the party of Lincoln, remember him? Freed the slaves, or something like that.

Another fact is Democrats didn’t want blacks owning guns, so they restricted their ownerships to non whites. That’s where the 14th amendment came from, called “incorporation”, it forced incorporation of the entire Bill of Rights on the all the States.

So technically, the racists party is just proposing more discrimination, er uhh, ahhh in the name of racism.

That is why they name call so much. If there were really good reasons for supporting ANYTHING they do, they would present them. Since they lack such reasons, they just name call and threaten to get their way.