The union would rather you go under than give in even a micro-nanometer.

Besides, if you do go under, it’ll be your fault for not paying more tribute to the union.

To all our friends on the left reading this, y’all need to realize that a union is in business and in place for these reasons only : To make money and generate power for the union.

Unions no longer have anything to do with protecting workers.

the BK judge does. They – and the NYT – have pretty well destroyed their circulation base. They – and the NYT, the LAT, the SPI, etal – have given up on reporting the news over the last ten to twenty years and yeah, the business is changing with the web and we’re in a recession that will naturally depress advertising dollars, blah, blah, blah, but people just don’t care what these opinion papers have to say anymore.

Take a look at Time and Newsweek, they’re on the same path. They’ve at least had the grace to admit that they’re now opinion weeklies and not news magazines anymore.

You can look for legislation to be hatched to bail out the print media before long. Those “jobs” must be saved.

Fantastic post.

An instructive example of a union making a company go bankrupt.

In this case I’ll be curious whether the judge sides with the newspaper over the unions.

How to pick a side? Meanwhile, the Obama administration wants to preside over the breaking of contract law in order to allow millions of people to remain in “their” homes.

---

Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots

This is the kind of news we need. It clearly demonstrates the failure of Lib./Dem policies.

Unionism, if uncontrolled, will always lead to investment and economic disasters.

The president should be encouraging people to start their own business and offer contract work instead of this union stuff that will cost people more jobs. I contract and I have more work than I can work.

Stars of the NIMBY. Yes, the pun was intended.

Unions are good for OTHER companies, but when it is your own ox being gored, it is a whole different situation about which the GOVERNMENT must do something. Not the paper, which should have controlled these greedy, bas .. ummm twits .. long ago.

with unions was under Democrat governors. Under Gov. Cowper back in the late ’80s, early ’90s, it was no holds barred. At first Knowles tried to keep them happy by giving them whatever they wanted but he had a Republican Legislature (with me working for it after the second year) that wouldn’t give him any money for them. By halfway through the second term, the Administration was hiring me back to get the unions out of their buildings and off their backs. Never a word about it in the press. But when a Republican is in power and gets crossthreaded with unions, they are excoriated by the media and fold like a cheap deck chair. Murkowski was good with all but the two licensed marine unions that endorsed him. Keeping that love was both bothersome and expensive. Gov. Palin has had it exactly backwards: she’s gone out of her way to alienate the unions that don’t hate her and gone equally out of her way to give stuff to the ones that do hate her – and any other Republican. Can’t complain much though; it has made me a lot of money.

It is like watching an enemy die a slow, degrading death.

As super-liberal as the Star Tribune is (and very few in Minnesota would argue any differently,) guess which candidate they found too liberal to support?

Al Franken.

Now, they supported former democrat Norm Coleman for his ability to reach across the aisle (read as: RINO,) but still a surprising shot from the MSM left at Franken.