Why do republicans want to destroy unions?

Your World Without Unions
If you're not union and don't believe the union busting in Wisconsin and other states will affect you; if you believe unions are a problem and not a solution; if you believe unions only help their own and no one else –\Welcome to a country without unions.
No Minimum Wage Law.
No maximum 8 Hour Work Day, 40 Hour Work Week.
No maternity leave job protection.
No pregnancy job protection. If your employer decides to fire you because you're pregnant, he could.
No child labor laws. A return to children in sweat shops, standing on boxes to reach factory machinery.
No mandatory school attendance. It was initiated to save children from forced labor year 'round.
No safety standards in the workplace.
No paid vacations, sick days or personal days.
No pension plans or healthcare benefits.
No salary increases.
No mandatory meal breaks.
No paid holidays.
No unemployment insurance.
No workers compensation.
No overtime pay of time-and-a-half.
No protection from forced work on the sabbath (if this is part of your religion).
There are more, and if you need them, all you have to do is think of working conditions in a third world country. That's what the United States will become, and this isn't hyperbole or exaggeration.

There's a reason why one of the first moves of dictators is to abolish or severely repress unions. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Lenin, Gaddafi – the list goes on and on.

Think about it all before you latch onto the lie that unions do more harm than good for the People. Why else would dictators and despots hate them so much?
By the way, I'm not union. But I want to thank them just the same. You should, too.

US Chamber of Commerce caught with its pants down???

US Chamber of Commerce caught with its pants down???

Stolen e-mails reveal plans for a dirty-tricks-style campaign against critics of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The e-mails revealed, among other things, a series of often-dubious counterintelligence proposals aimed at enemies of Bank of America and the chamber. The proposals included distributing fake documents and launching cyber-attacks.

While many questions remain in the unfolding ChamberLeaks controversy, what's clear is that this multitude of emails clearly contradicts the Chamber's claim that they were 'not aware of these proposals until HBGary's e-mails leaked.
Several of the documents focus on ChamberWatch, a union-backed organization that criticizes the business lobby and many of its members.

The documents include personal details about activists who work for the group and suggestions for targeting its reputation, including planting fake documents, tying the organization to radical activists or creating "fake insider personas" on social media.

Making our country more paranoid

read today:
Last October, Glenn Beck was musing on his radio show about the prospect of the government seizing his children if he didn't give them flu vaccines. "You want to take my kids because of that?" he said. "Meet Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson."

Last April, Erick Erickson, the managing editor of the right-wing RedState blog and a CNN commentator, was questioning the legality of the Census Bureau's American Community Survey on a radio show. "We have become, or are becoming, enslaved by the government. . . . I dare 'em to try to come to throw me in jail. I dare 'em to. [I'll] pull out my wife's shotgun and see how that little ACS twerp likes being scared at the door."

Do right-wing talk show commentators incite violence against the government? Feel free to draw your own conclusions - but to dwell on the rise of violent rhetoric on the right is to miss an even bigger, though connected, problem. Let's focus, rather, on the first part of Beck's and Erickson's observations:

The government wants to take away Glenn Beck's (and by extension, your) kids. The government wants to take a census and will throw Erick Erickson (and by extension, you) in jail if he, and you, don't comply.

Can we see the hands of all the kids taken from their parents because they didn't get flu shots? How about all those people rotting in jail because they didn't cooperate in compiling the census?

The primary problem with the political discourse of the right in today's America isn't that it incites violence per se. It's that it implants and reinforces paranoid fears about the government and conservatism's domestic adversaries.

Much of the culture and thinking of the American right - the mainstream as well as the fringe - has descended into paranoid suppositions about the government, the Democrats and the president. This is not to say that the left wing doesn't have a paranoid fringe, too. But by every available measure, it's the right where conspiracy theories have exploded.

A fabricated specter of impending governmental totalitarianism haunts the right's dreams. One month after Barack Obama was inaugurated as president, Beck hosted a show that gamed out how militias in Southern and Western states might rise up against an oppressive government. The number of self-proclaimed right-wing militias tripled - from 42 to 127, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center - in 2009 (and that doesn't count those that are entirely underground).

As much of the right sees it, the government is planning to incarcerate its enemies (see Beck and Erickson, above), socialize the economy and take away everyone's guns. At the fringe, we have figures like Larry Pratt, executive director of the Gun Owners of America, who told a rally in Washington last April that, "We're in a war.

The other side knows they are at war, because they started it. They are coming for our freedom, for our money, for our kids, for our property. They are coming for everything because they are a bunch of socialists."

But the imputation of lurking totalitarianism, alien ideologies, and subversion of liberties to liberals and moderates has become the default rhetoric of the right. Never mind that Obama is a Marxist, a Kenyan and an advocate of sharia law.

Consider the plight of poor Fred Upton, the Republican congressman just installed as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, over considerable right-wing opposition.

According to Beck, Upton is "all socialist," while Rush Limbaugh calls him the personification of "nannyism" and "statism." Upton's crime is that he supports more energy-efficient light bulbs.

How that puts him in a league with Marx, Engels and Nanny McPhee, I will leave to subtler minds.

American politics and culture have a rich history of paranoia, as historian Richard Hofstadter and many others have documented. Many of the incidents of anti-government violence over the past couple of years - flying a plane into an IRS building in Texas, shooting police officers in Pittsburgh and carrying out last weekend's savagery in Tucson - came from people who, however individually loony they may have been, also harbored paranoid visions of the government that resembled, though by no means entirely, those put forth by the Becks and the Ericksons.

That doesn't make Beck, Erickson, Rupert Murdoch and their ilk responsible for Tucson. It does make them responsible for promoting a paranoid culture that makes America a more divided and dangerous land.

only for those who love and fought for our country

read today:
When there's talk by Republicans of 'target lists' illustrated by gun sights, when there's talk by Republicans of "Second Amendment remedies" for political problems, when there is talk from Republican Congress persons advising their constituents to be "armed and dangerous" and when windows of the other party's district offices around the country were recently destroyed during the health debate, we see and hear where they are trying to take our country. It and they must be condemned as dangerous and unacceptable by we patriots who love our country.

This week, Republicans in the House of Representatives unveiled a bill that will repeal the Affordable Care Act and take us back to the days when insurance companies controlled the health care people could receive. This doesn’t come as a surprise, as Republican leaders have been threatening repeal since President Obama signed the reforms into law on March 23, 2010.

But what is surprising is how carelessly they are disregarding the consequences of taking away the new freedoms, control over health care decisions, and the cost savings the law provides the American people, including

Unprecedented accountability and transparency in the insurance market;
Reduced prescription drug costs for seniors; tax credits for small businesses to defray the costs of employee coverage;
Protection against double-digit premium increases; preventive care without cost sharing; support for working class families by providing them tax credits to help pay for coverage;
Improved quality health insurance coverage for all Americans by creating competitive new state based health insurance marketplaces called Exchanges; and
Affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans regardless of their age and gender, or if they have a pre-existing condition.

Taking away these freedoms from the American people by repealing the law will put insurance companies back in control of health care—leaving Americans once again to worry about:
Losing their insurance, or having it canceled unexpectedly if they are in an accident or become sick;
Insurance companies raising premiums by double-digits with no recourse or accountability;
Insurance companies denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions; and
Limiting the amount of care people can receive, even if they need it.

In addition, repealing the law will add more than a trillion dollars to the deficit—money we don’t have and debt that will be forced onto future generations of Americans. And without the additional support that the law provides states, it will be that much more difficult for them to provide their residents with affordable coverage options.
Today, the Secretary Sebelius released an op-ed outlining the devastating impact repeal will have on the American people and the Department of Health and Human Services released state-by-state reports to show just how devastating repealing the law will be.

Republican hypocrites have no shame

After winning election with an anti-Washington battle cry, incoming Republican freshmen have rapidly embraced the capital's culture of big-money fundraisers, according to new campaign-finance reports and other records.

Dozens of freshmen lawmakers have held receptions at Capitol Hill bistros and corporate townhouses in recent weeks, taking money from K Street lobbyists and other powerbrokers within days of their victories.

Newly elected House members have raised at least $2 million since the election, according to preliminary Federal Election Commission records filed last week, and many more contributions have yet to be tallied.

lies about President Obama

http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp-q=lies+about+Obama&sp-a=00062d45-sp00000000&sp-advanced=1&sp-p=all&sp-w-control=1&sp-w=alike&sp-date-range=-1&sp-x=any&sp-c=100&sp-m=1&sp-s=0&x=25&y=11

another republican lie about President Obama

President Obama indeed has expressed his personal affirmation of American exceptionalism. In addition to the world's largest economy and its mightiest military, Obama said, "we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality, that, though imperfect, are exceptional."

He added: "I see no contradiction between believing that America has a continued extraordinary role in leading the world towards peace and prosperity and recognizing that leadership is incumbent, depends on, our ability to create partnerships because we can't solve these problems alone."

Obama was placing the concept in the context of his view that the United States must enter what he has called "a new era of engagement."

Obama has declared exactly that on many occasions - including in his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, the moment that first brought the then-Illinois state senator to national attention.

"Tonight, we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation not because of the height of our skyscrapers, or the power of our military, or the size of our economy; our pride is based on a very simple premise, summed up in a declaration made over 200 years ago."

Obama told the delegates in Boston. " 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' That is the true genius of America."

The new criticism of Obama on the subject says more about the race for the Republican presidential nomination than anything else.

Teabaggers "take our country back"

You want to "take America back" to an earlier time? To a time when segments of our population were oppressed and treated as less an citizens or worse? To a time when the old lived in poverty because our society did not provide social programs to make their lives easier?

To a time when children didn't get balanced nutritional lunches in schools? There may be things wrong with the America of today, but there are also many things that are right... personally, I would rather live in the America of today than the America of yesterday

Democrats should fight back to Republicans

Pelosi and Obama took crap for the past two years and never once fought back, no wonder the outcome.

You can't practice civility with those who are not civil. If you do, you concede the high ground to the protesters and the liars, and the "againers."

I hope you all learned that lesson or we will continue on our path to destruction.

Williams, Fox, NPR

WORTH REPEATING UNTIL THESE RIGHT WING FANATICS GET IT ----Williams has been WAY over the line with his "commentary" on Fox for many years. His recent Muslims-on-a-plane hate blast was just the straw that broke the camel's back at NPR.

Remember Juan's insulting reference to First Lady Michelle Obama as "Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress"? What if Juan had insulted Laura Bush in that way? Would the teabaggers then have defended Juan's First Amendment rights to insult Mrs. Bush? Don't hold your breath.

Let Juan collect his 2 million pieces of silver from Fox and then turn your back on him as most folks of goodwill already do.

Republicans vs. Democrats

These tea-bagger Tea Party Republicans want to 1. “phase out” Social Security and Medicare; 2. make unemployment benefits “unconstitutional”; 3. say that minimum wage should “absolutely” be abolished; 4. question the legality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 5. claim that Obama’s new health-insurance law violates the Constitution; and they want to repeal existing Amendments to the Constitution which would take us back to Slavery and Segregation.

AND IN THE SENATE, They RECENTLY all voted to prevent our Country from STOPPING BIG CORPORATIONS FROM TAKING OUR JOBS OVERSEAS. If that is not what you want for our country, now is the time to stand up and vote.

Americans more sane than Tea Bag Republicans

Americans continue to see major areas of government spending as essential. Whether it is Medicare, Social Security, national defense, food stamps, education, unemployment benefits or environmental protection, about nine in 10 call these programs at least somewhat important.

On two government programs, Social Security and Medicare, there have been modest declines in the percentage of Americans calling the programs "very important," but overall the changes have been limited.

Food stamps, which former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) has tried to make an issue in the campaign this fall, are seen as vital by more than four in 10 Americans, significantly more than was said in the late 1990s.

When all these big companies gave their high-ranking officials pay raises, it took away from the low to moderate community," she said. "The big-name companies . . . have done it to us little people.
Nearly two-thirds of Americans say the Bush administration's actions made the economy worse.

Whatever dissatisfaction Americans might have about the way Washington works, however, nearly eight in 10 say that whatever its faults, the American system is the best in the world.

So called Tea Party people are really just right wingnut republicans. They run as the republicans that they are.

NRA endorses Democratic candidates

So far this year, the NRA has endorsed 58 incumbent House Democrats, including more than a dozen in seats that both parties view as critical to winning a majority.

The group's most notable move was to choose not to issue an endorsement in Nevada. The NRA has endorsed a handful of Democratic governors, including such embattled incumbents as Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and Iowa Gov. Chet Culver.

Rep. Travis Childers (D-Miss.), who faces a tough reelection race against Republican Alan Nunnelee, got an A-plus rating from the NRA in June, plus an endorsement.

thinking republicans leave the liars behind

Clinton has been by replaced by Obama as the victim of the malicious rumors circulated on right-wing radio. And if Republicans take over Congress, they will surely seek to embarrass the administration through investigations in the same manner as they did to Clinton.

The republicans have always been successful in demonizing their democratic targets. That is what they always do. AND why is that so? It is because those republicans remaining in the party are ditto heads, they believe what their right wingnut leaders tell them. Thinking republicans have migrated to be either indedpendents or democrats.

the Pledge, the new republican hypocrisy

The so-called republican Pledge is grounded in the same worn-out philosophy: cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires; cut the rules for Wall Street and the special interests; and cut the middle class loose to fend for itself," That's not a prescription for a better future. It's an echo of a disastrous decade we can't afford to relive."

One of the ideas that's drawn the most interest on their Web site is ending tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. When Obama recently closed one of the most egregious loopholes for companies creating jobs overseas, Republicans in Congress were almost unanimously opposed.

Republicans in Congress were oposed to the stimulus, saying that it would not stimulate the economy but later lined up to get stimulus mony saying it would stimulate the economy in their districts. What Hypocrites!

Republican "pledge" is a fraud

The Republican so-called "Pledge" contains no credible plan to reduce this debt. On the contrary, it would increase the debt by $4 trillion -- yes, trillion -- by extending all the expiring Bush tax cuts and adding new ones, including a poorly conceived deduction for small businesses. Talk about picking winners and losers; the tax code is already laden with special benefits for small business. This latest deduction would cost $25 billion over two years.

It shirks the politically sensitive task of explaining where the savings would come from. It tosses out a few, relatively small-dollar ideas -- "cutting Congress' budget" and "imposing a net hiring freeze on non-security federal employees," saving $35 billion over 10 years -- and then resorts to the old waste, fraud and abuse dodge.

The biggest dodge of all involves entitlement spending. The Republicans would repeal the Obama health-care plan, a plan that at least holds out the prospect of slowing the growth of health-care spending in general and Medicare in particular

worth repeating

The republican PARTY OF NO rail against so called "legislating from the bench" and "over-turning precedent." but the Republicans on the Supreme Court do just that.

They recently cast off two precedents and struck decades-old prohibitions on the role of corporations in campaigns. They say one thing and do just the oposite and THAT MY FRIENDS IS HYPOCRISY.

Republicans are good at calling names, demonizing all who disagree, and LYING, as with death panels and all the rest.

We must remember that they brought us 1. the 9/11 atack on their watch, 2. the false war on Iraq, 3. dropping the ball on Afghanistan, and 4. the economic collapse. Lies don't change the facts.

what republicans are going to abolish

Here's what the Patient's Bill of Rights means for you:

No more discrimination against kids with pre-existing conditions. Insurance companies can no longer bar families from purchasing coverage because of a child's pre-existing condition.

No more lifetime coverage limits. Insurance companies can no longer put a lifetime limit on the amount of coverage you can receive.

Young adults can now stay on their parent's plan. Young adults can stay on their parent's health insurance plan up to age 26 if their job doesn't provide health care benefits -- a huge relief for many parents and recent college graduates.

Free preventive care. If you join or purchase a new plan, the insurance company will be required to provide preventive care like mammograms, colonoscopies, immunizations, pre-natal and baby care without charging you any out of pocket costs.
Freedom to choose your own doctor. If you purchase or join a new plan, you have the right to choose your own doctor in your insurer network.

No more restrictions on emergency room care. Insurance companies will not be allowed to charge you more for out of network emergency services if you purchase or join a new a plan.
This is a long-overdue
victory for American consumers and patients. For years, millions of Americans have been at the mercy of their insurance companies as they jacked up rates, denied coverage or dropped patients all together.

Republicans are vowing to take the above away.

republicans,guns, 14th Amendment

Second Amendment as Written
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. When the NRA and like organizations refer to the amendment and discuss its application, they most often treat it as if it were written as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What happened to the first part, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,? What happened to that first phrase????

Why are those words in there (up front, at that)?
How does including the first part change the content of the Amendment?
What did they mean by including the first phrase?
I have not seen any even discussion of that.
It's as if those 13 out of 27 words are not even there. Why???

We could have a like discussion about the 14th Amendment with those who claim that
they revere the Constitution, "take our country back to the Constitution."
I hear and read that only the radicals that claim devotion to our Constitution want to change it, throw parts of it out.

How ironic. More phony political republican rhetoric, seems to me.