Sarah Palin: Extremist

[SoCrazes]

Union, CEO, the difference is, with the CEO you only have one crook to worry about.

Re workers rights, in the states without open shop laws, the workers have the "right" to pay the union whether they want to or not.

In most of these states, before one can even get a job, one must make a payment (not even dues) to a union rep. This is legallized extortion.

Until recently, the union could spend the dues money on political advertising for whatever candidate they pleased, without a vote and without prior consent of the people whose money it was.

In fact, they still do this, just in more roundabout ways.

Political speech. For sale. "Shut up, son, we'll do the talking for you."

Not exactly the workers paradise Marx envisioned.

But if anyone doubts the value of the concept, I suggest they look to the example the unions in Poland set.

Harte

Yea, you can "cherry pick" any idea, concept, etc. to death. There are always a few bad apples in every barrel. You're reaching Harte, take an aspirin before you "blow."

[SoCrazes]

Yes she is.

She is extremely more qualified than Obama (or Biden).

She is extremely more experienced as a leader than Obama.

She is extremely more articulate than Obama.

She is extremely more confident and determined than Obama.

She is extremely more positive and up-beat than Obama.

She is extremely better looking that Obama or Hilary.

So yes, you're right. She is extreme.

Good one Poo, you write that during study hall?

[Harte]

Yea, you can "cherry pick" any idea, concept, etc. to death. There are always a few bad apples in every barrel. You're reaching Harte, take an aspirin before you "blow."

I thought I made up for it by citing Poland's unions.

Harte

[Startraveler]

Political speech. For sale.

Unfortunately, that's the American way.

[Harte]

Unfortunately, that's the American way.

There's some difference between the Supreme Court's decision equating political contributions with political (and protected) free speech and some syndicate forcing you to pay them or lose your job, then taking your money and giving it to the candidate that is most likely to allow them to keep taking your money.

The latter once was the American way. Some posters here think that the fact that this practice is less common nowadays is a sign that "workers rights" have eroded.

That dog won't hunt.

Harte

[SoCrazes]

That's not the kind of 'union' we are discussing but thanks for twisting it around!

Here is a story about a union between "Big Oil" (for you MasterPo) and government:

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Government officials handling billions of dollars in oil royalties partied, had sex with and accepted golf and ski outings from employees of energy companies they were dealing with, federal investigators said Wednesday.

full article at http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jzUY8Ol...6YfYmwD934FHVG0

the article discusses how government brokers responsible for collecting billions of dollars in federal oil royalties operated in a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity" that included having sex with energy company employees, accepting lavish gifts and rigging contracts to favored firms, investigators said Wednesday, Sept. 10, 2008.

This wasn't done in secret. The participants in these activities, on both sides, wanted the world to know this and told the investigators. This is the generally accepted way of how a U.S. government and business relationship should work. This should not be considered "big oil" nor a conspiracy.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Edited September 13, 2008 by SoCrazes

[SoCrazes]

"This all shows the oil industry holds shocking sway over the administration and even key federal employees," said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla. "This is why we must not allow Big Oil's agenda to be jammed through Congress."

[SoCrazes]

Interesting that MasterPo and Harte aren't here to counter these last few posts. I was looking forward to learning.

[Harte]

Interesting that MasterPo and Harte aren't here to counter these last few posts. I was looking forward to learning.

I don't spend a lot of time in this forum. I'm usually over in the "Ancient Civilization" forum, or whatever the name of it is.

Anyway, I'm shocked that sex and substance abuse occurs in get-togethers between parties where one regulates the other, though I don't see why you say that

This is the generally accepted way of how a U.S. government and business relationship should work. This should not be considered "big oil" nor a conspiracy.

The article you linked states:

The two-year, $5.3 million investigation by Interior's inspector general found workers at the Minerals Management Service's royalty collection office in Denver partying, having sex, using drugs and accepting gifts and ski trips and golf outings from energy company representatives with whom they did government business.

The investigations exposed "a culture of ethical failure" and an agency rife with conflicts of interest, Inspector General Earl E. Devaney said.

Who is this Inspector General, some outsider from out of the country?

Do you claim that this scandal was exposed by the press? Is that the case here?

Who discovered it, who reported it, and who is prosecuting those involved? The press?

No, the Government of the United States of America.

Harte