If the AFL-CIO supports a Republican, I will consider crossing their picket lines.

they WOULD be being a better union. They would actually be working in the interests of their members.

Rather than this conversation, shouldn't we be asking how we can root out the anti-union Democrats (or perhaps even those who are merely generally supportive)?

Supports military action in Libya?
Against abortion?

What?

Are talking about a pro-organized labor Rick Santorum? (a rare bird, to be sure)

am I wrong?

many of the Democrat's traditional constituencies have been overusing the carrots. Time to bring out the sticks.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

In fact, if they simply fail to support the Democratic Nominee, a considered response of some sort would be appropriate.

Clearly the unions have figured out that going to work for politicians who refuse to do a damn thing to support union issues is counterproductive. To paraphrase Janet Jackson what has the Democratic Party done for unions lately?

The Republicans aren't the only ones who are attacking unions and where it is the Republicans on a national level the Democrats have been very quiet. Unions are supposed to blindly support this?

I'm so sick of the attitude of entitlement. Democrats seem to be forgetting that they can't take their base for granted and win. Democrats can still get the union support. EARN IT.

The problem is finding a pro-gay Republican. Finding anti-gay Democrats, sadly, isn't too difficult.

I imagine the situation is similar for the Unions.

Is that plain enough for you???

and how does imposing your mandate that Unions support Democrats make them better in any sense other than for the Democrats?

Helping people, not so much.
How about current solidarity, by having Democrats vote strongly on unions?

I was too puzzled to speak

Besides being an extremely arrogant statement, its also a statement equating to a doctor saying something like: "Doctors who intentionally kill their patients to cure them from their cancer are not violating the hippocratic oath."

A SCAB is a SCAB! PERIOD! And ANY politician who goes against or doesn't support labor issues is anti-labor and doesn't deserve labor's support!

ungrateful Democratic party are improving the Democratic Party.

proposal to increase pension contributions, increase insurance premiums, and freeze in grade promotions will not be tolerated. Don't you read government executive? Obama has not been a friend to labor or the public employee. As I said earlier, I would not expect a pro-choice woman to vote for a pro-life democrat. Why does everyone assume that a pro-labor democrat should vote for an anti-union democrat? Oh yeah, labor is not important anymore and those fucking public employees should get screwed cause I got screwed even though my workplace was too lazy to form a union and we were too cheap to pay the dues.

makes absolutely no sense at all. What are you trying to say?

Because women's reproductive rights are sacred, right? However, a pro-labor democrat should put their beliefs on the back burner because labor is not sexy anymore and a lot of democrats only half-ass support it, right?

As an AFL-CIO member I hope NOT A FUCKING DIME of my money goes to support any democrat who is not pro-labor and votes that way.

Just FYI, I have already given up 7% of my salary, we have a hiring freeze so I now do extra work, they want to cut our pensions, and they want to increase our insurance premiums, Obama called it a "tough choice" then bent over for the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

Furthermore, I personally, have had my ass in the sandbox providing engineering support to our men and women in combat. So whoever says "My pay got cut too" can go fuck off until they wake up at 4AM with mortars being fired at their compound and have that be part of their job. I am tired, I am pissed, and I am sick of "democrats" who don't support labor. If you want to be a scab, go be a scab. Maybe labor is not important to you, but it is important to me. The fucking Ludlow massacre happened ten miles north of where I grew up. My grandfather was there.

Among some Americans is because Unions have been perceived as getting involved in issues that have nothing to do with protecting their members jobs. Specifically reproductive and gay rights. I have spoken to Unions member who have said exactly this.

Is there anything sacred in this world that is not threatened by the Pink Menace?

:scared:

I would think that is part of the territory. If Democrats want union support, they should support them. Wisconsin Democrats did. Many around the nation now do not but primarily some that have been sent to DC are actually damaging them.

to hell with them if they try to fight back? Great logic and rational thought there.

When did anyone fight for them recently?

Hope to see you out on the picket line.

It is you who declare you'd cross a picket line at a local if the national endorsed a Republican in another locality. Where is your solidarity, and to whom is it pledged? Not to the strikers, that much is clear.
A Union serves the members, it is not a political party nor an arm of a political party. I am a Democrat and a Union member. I do not cross picket lines ever. You would. To me, that says it all.

I believe Peter King of NY gets union support and he
usually votes with them. I can remember a while back
he made it clear with his leadership that he would
need to vote for Union Issues. This was cleared for
him. Now this year with UNION BUSTING going on I have
not heard where he stands.

My point is the Unions have always supported those who
support them. It is just the Democratic usually has
more members who support Unions.

When they say they will not be supporting Democrats, It
is the National Democrats who have remained awkwardly
silent while the Unions are under seige. Ask yourself
Do all Democrats on the Hill support Unions??? If so
why did they not pass Card Check???

I've asked it several times: why did they drop Card Check? All Democrats voted for it, including the DLCers, plus Arlen Specter, when Bush was president. But as soon as Obama became president, he dropped it. Harry Reid talked a little about bringing it up in the Senate anyway, but he soon dropped it as well. Why?

labor completely bungled it. They just assumed it would be passed and didn't put the extreme effort into the lobbying that was required. The environment to get it done was there, but they had to work a lot harder than they did.

they won the vote, on the Senate floor. They got EVERY democrat, plus a republican.

Then in 2008 they helped elect a Dem president, and MORE Democratic senators.

The battle was over, the unions won. And then for reasons I still haven't understood, the democrats dropped it, starting with Obama shortly before the inauguration.

they only won the best environment in years to get it done. But the work to get it passed was only starting. But they assumed the attitude that you state, that they had won. They sat back and expected it to be given to them without a fight. It doesn't work that way and a golden opportunity was lost.

as I recall, the AFL-CIO held their fire when he backed off EFCA, and supported Obama big-time through the health care battle, even making concessions on the so-called "Cadillac" plans.

Is this what you mean by sitting back? By "fighting" do you mean labor should have said to Obama, we'll support you on health care, but only after you fulfill your promises on EFCA? If that's what you mean, then I agree.

pigeon-holing fence sitting Democrats and "beating" them about the head and shoulders in an aggressively lobbying way to get the votes nailed down. I think it could have made it out of the House. But it needed to pass by a healthy majority in order to motivate the Senate. Labor couldn't even get blue dogs on board who they needed. Make no mistake, it was possible to get most blue dogs, but it would have taken a lot of cajoling, money AND the credible promise that labor would make the difference that would get them reelected. The means to do this were never in order before Obama got elected. Even if they could get it out of the House, the Senate was an entirely different story in an upcoming election year that traditionally saw the party out of the WH pick up seats and labor is weak in a lot of states. Again, it would take a lot of time, money, organization and lobbying along the lines of what corporate America does. Labor just didn't and still doesn't have that.

every one, plus Specter.

In the Senate, in a roll call vote, every Blue Dog, plus Specter voted for EFCA. Their names are there in the Congressional Record, FOR CARD CHECK. Blanche Lincoln,all of them.

Then Obama was elected, and suddenly Card Check isn't essential anymore.

go figure.

You either have morals or you don't. And for labor to support a Republican would be highly rare. In the highly unlikely event it does happen, the Republican has a proven track record of supporting labor versus a Democrat that doesn't.

NEVER means never.

The construction trades have an agreement not to picket when there's an argument over which trade is suppose to do a particular job. Sometimes, a union will picket anyway. Rather than shut a project down, we don't honor the picket. It makes the unions look bad when we can't get a job done because of infighting. That's why we've agreed to take our disputes to an arbitrator.

and this is a good example. Building trades are a different animal in many ways from the industrial unions.

They wouldn't, I presume - it would be like the TUC supporting David Cameron, which they definitely wouldnt!

Cross my picket line? Try it buster, and you'll find I shall not be moved.

Proud member of the AFL-CIO

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=439&topic_id=450192

does that mean You're trolling?

for so long.

Two-way street.

If the Democratic Party nominates a candidate who does not support full equality for GLBT citizens, I will consider not voting for them.

to have all that emotion and be unable to explain it in a way that we can understand on a message board.

:rofl:

The AFL-CIO might not be enthusiastic about Dems but they'll get NO love whatsoever from the Repubs. Has Trumka forgot about Wisconsin already? Ohio? Michigan?

:wtf:

will never be in any position to do anything to support unions in any official capacity in today's Republican Tea Party. Some Democrats may be worse on Unions than others but Unions IMHO will ALWAYS have more clout and influence in the Democratic Party than they EVER will in the GOP.

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 8 NOV 1954

I imagine that it would be very unlikely to have another Republican with Ike's views. He was a rare one.

I remember when Kucinich said he was thinking about not voting for the milquetoast 'health insurance reform'. You went so far as to suggest not voting for him, in the period after primary when his only opposition was the Republican. And of course, Kucinich did vote for it, he was doing what is called 'politics'. But just the foisting of the notion made you declare that he should be removed from office when the only alternative was the Republican. Because he said he was thinking about it.
When I hear a person say they'd dump a Democratic Congressman for thinking about his vote, and talk about crossing picket lines when a Union big wig says he's thinking about strategy and his membership's good, I have to wonder. Thinking. You dump on them for thinking. Not for actions, nope. For thought forms. In an instant, you are crossing pickets and ejecting people from Congress. Just like that. When nothing at all has happened. Kind of amazing.

Never pegged you as a supporter of LABOR,
or the dirty hands Working Class in general.

Didn't you endorse the White House's support of virulently Anti-LABOR Blanche Lincoln over a Pro-UNION Democrat?

I have my own mental list/hierarchy. The party carries less weight for me than the union. I was union before I was a Dem, and I suspect that loyalty will stay with me my whole life. FWIW, the rankings are something along the lines of family, friends, the union, then party...

The labor movement brought you a weekend, health insurance, and an expectation of safety in your workplace. The work of the unions keeps our kids out of factories and us out of indentured servitude.


YMMV.




Laura

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

“When the doctrine of allegiance to party can utterly up-end a man's moral constitution and make a temporary fool of him besides, what excuse are you going to offer for preaching it, teaching it, extending it, perpetuating it? Shall you say, the best good of the country demands allegiance to party? Shall you also say it demands that a man kick his truth and his conscience into the gutter, and become a mouthing lunatic, besides?” Mark Twain

Because I thought that term was for (people) who claimed to be a democrat but threaten to vote third party. That doesn't sound like the AFL-CIO in any way at all.

To "make them better" presumably, but if the Democratic Party does something you disagree with you will support them as much as ever? And not only that but eviscerate those who don't?

That smacks of blatant hypocrisy to me. You sound as if you don't have political values so much as you have a favorite team. Rather like a football fan whose team has sucked for years but this year FOR SURE they are gonna win it all.

Here's Jack London on the topic:

http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/WarOfTheClasses/scab.html

Pickets for:

Better wages?
Better benefits?
To prevent cuts in the above?
For a contract?

When have you refused, IRL, to cross a picket line? In Illinois, I imagine you've had PLENTY of opportunities to not cross a picket line.

And I include my fellow cube rats in the "workers" category. We'd all be better off if the white collar types figured out that anyone whose compensation doesn't include large amounts of stock options is "labor".

Forgot where you are again, LoZo?

doesn't recognize the word "Republican" but offers extra bonus points for the words "third party" and "union" and likely others.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1144998&mesg_id=1144998

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1145080&mesg_id=1145080

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1150574

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1150688

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1144346

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1140203

...ad infinitum.

even right here on DU. :shrug:

Why is it so hard to conceive of a union supporting someone who supports them as opposed to someone who doesn't? Isn't that the job of unions? Isn't that the point of solidarity.

Of course in the real world, you won't find any republicans who support unions (I mean really support).

Is there any issue that you would find important enough to matter this way? Any issue?

After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, and the vampire, he had some awful substance left with which he made a scab.

A scab is a two-legged animal with a corkscrew soul, a water brain, a combination backbone of jelly and glue.

Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles.

When a scab comes down the street, men turn their backs and angels weep in heaven, and the devil shuts the gates of hell to keep him out.

No man (or woman) has a right to scab so long as there is a pool of water to drown his carcass in, or a rope long enough to hang his body with.

Judas was a gentleman compared with a scab. For betraying his master, he had character enough to hang himself. A scab has not.

Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage.

Judas sold his Savior for thirty pieces of silver.

Benedict Arnold sold his country for a promise of a commission in the British army.

The scab sells his birthright, country, his wife, his children and his fellowmen for an unfulfilled promise from his employer.

Esau was a traitor to himself; Judas was a traitor to his God; Benedict Arnold was a traitor to his country.

A scab is a traitor to his God, his country, his family and his class.

Jack London (1876-1916)

:patriot:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.