The honor of Republican Leadership

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It is a 100% double standard.

Just because you say so? Who the ** died and made you king?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Just because you say so? Who the ** died and made you king?

And you say it isn't? Who the fukc died and made you king? It is obvious to anyone that looks.

[Danno 1,228]

Just because you say so? Who the ** died and made you king?

I Did a few weeks back.

I can do that ya know.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Unions get to legally bribe legislators? Where?

No,

Okay, so it's settled.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Okay, so it's settled.

That is a low edit even for you. It seems you have raised the white flag with your anger and creative edits. So, I guess it is settled. Unions and leadership funds are essentially the same in regards to political corruption.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That is a low edit even for you. It seems you have raised the white flag with your anger and creative edits. So, I guess it is settled. Unions and leadership funds are essentially the same in regards to political corruption.

Not even close. But let's say for a moment that they were. What you suggest, then, is that the playing field is merely being leveled by re-introducing the leadership funds that were abolished 20 some odd years ago because they have an inherently bad smell of blatant corruption to them, yes?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Not even close. But let's say for a moment that they were. What you suggest, then, is that the playing field is merely being leveled by re-introducing the leadership funds that were abolished 20 some odd years ago because they have an inherently bad smell of blatant corruption to them, yes?

I think that both leadership funds and mandatory union dues for public employees should be outlawed as they are both corrupting factors in politics. They are exactly the same, special interests with a lot of money buying politicians.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I think that both leadership funds and mandatory union dues for public employees should be outlawed as they are both corrupting factors in politics. They are exactly the same, special interests with a lot of money buying politicians.

Alright, now we're getting somewhere. I can agree with what you just said. The issue is that the Florida legislature passed a bill that bans the practice of union dues withheld from public employees paychecks and requires union members to authorize use of their membership dues for political purposes. This measure was passed the day after the leadership funds were re-authorized after having been banned for 20 some odd years. You gotta admit that this legislature is not about leveling the playing field and not about doing the right thing. They want to make sure that power in FL is sold to those that can afford it and want to ensure that regular folk have absolutely no shot at having their state government work for them. These are the folks that rode into the state House and Senate seats on the back of the tea party movement which is supposedly about 'taking back our government'. Those representatives are in full swing to sell as much of that government for their personal gain as they possibly can.

Edited March 31, 2011 by Mr. Big Dog

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Alright, now we're getting somewhere. I can agree with what you just said. The issue is that the Florida legislature passed a bill that bans the practice of union dues withheld from public employees paychecks and requires union members to authorize use of their membership dues for political purposes. This measure was passed the day after the leadership funds were re-authorized after having been banned for 20 some odd years. You gotta admit that this legislature is not about leveling the playing field and not about doing the right thing. They want to make sure that power in FL is sold to those that can afford it and want to ensure that regular folk have absolutely no shot at having their state government work for them. These are the folks that rode into the state House and Senate seats on the back of the tea party movement which is supposedly about 'taking back our government'. Those representatives are in full swing to sell as much of that government for their personal gain as they possibly can.

Then it seems FL has a problem. I can assume then that you also support the efforts of Gov Walker in WI?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Then it seems FL has a problem. I can assume then that you also support the efforts of Gov Walker in WI?

What would lead you to that conclusion? Hosni Walker has done far more than banning mandatory union dues for public employees.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

What would lead you to that conclusion? Hosni Walker has done far more than banning mandatory union dues for public employees.

Ok, then I will try to pin you down. Do you support Walkers attempt to deny the state unions from collecting mandatory union dues? Leave the other parts out of it, do you support that one part?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ok, then I will try to pin you down. Do you support Walkers attempt to deny the state unions from collecting mandatory union dues? Leave the other parts out of it, do you support that one part?

Sure. Union membership ought to be voluntary and the payment of dues should be solely between the union and its members.

[Ban Hammer 13,355]

Sure. Union membership ought to be voluntary and the payment of dues should be solely between the union and its members.

except it's not in many cases. even better - one of my neighbors passed away not too long ago and he was union. the union's trying their best to avoid paying the widow more than 50% of his pension.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

except it's not in many cases. even better - one of my neighbors passed away not too long ago and he was union. the union's trying their best to avoid paying the widow more than 50% of his pension.

That would be low. But there's gotta be a contract that defines what her entitlement on her late husband's pension is and such contract can usually be enforced. It's unfortunate that the widow may have to go through a legal battle to receive what is rightfully hers but in the end, she'll get it.

[Ban Hammer 13,355]

That would be low. But there's gotta be a contract that defines what her entitlement on her late husband's pension is and such contract can usually be enforced. It's unfortunate that the widow may have to go through a legal battle to receive what is rightfully hers but in the end, she'll get it.

hopefully. she's had to retain counsel already.