In response to:

Hey Unions: Welcome to Politics

Zen. Wrote: Jul 11, 2012 1:46 AM
Right-Wing Double Standard: When it comes to public and private sector unions the Right-Wingers have an entirely different standard on how unions should conduct electoral politics. These are standards that purposely put workers’ union at a disadvantage in fund raising and electoral politics. According to the Knox vs. SEIU ruling, nonunion public sector workers have to be given a choice on whether they would "opt in" and pay into special political action funding not related to collective bargaining. Of course, many nonunion members objected to these special fees being used for political and ideological purposes they disagree with. The Right-Wing hypocrisy here is that no such rule applies to the fund raising of corporate ‘persons’ when...
Hachi Wrote: Jul 11, 2012 4:33 PM
The difference here, Zen, is that those corporations use their OWN money! They don't rob their employees, coerce them, assault them, etc, to get money. The unions, as proved by many cases, do!
Zen. Wrote: Jul 11, 2012 1:46 AM
....they use shareholders funds and company profits to buy and bribe political candidates and campaigns. How about corporate political action committees getting the pre-approval of all their shareholders before spending unlimited amounts of money to buy elections and candidates? It is not going to happen. Many corporations are secretive about their contributions to political campaigns, preferring to funnel their money into Right-Wing front groups like the Americans for Job Security, Workplace Fairness Institute, Freedom works, and other front groups. They would rather these front groups do the dirty work of misrepresenting and attacking unions. None of these Right-Wing front groups will disclose who their corporate funders are. It would....
nightguy Wrote: Jul 11, 2012 6:36 AM
Unlike unions, which can force a person to join in order to gain or hold a job, corporate stockholders are not forced to remain a part of the company if the company does something with the money they have voluntarily invested that they do not approve. Stockholders are free to divest themselves of stock at anytime they wish if they are offended by company policy. So the comparison of forced unionism with the liberty of stock investing is apples and horse apples. No one forced me to buy stock where I worked and I had a voice which I expressed by voting in the stockholders' meeting annually. I haven't seen any indication that the unions have anything like a stockholders' meeting to decide what to do in the future concerning any decisions.
SpaceVegetable Wrote: Jul 13, 2012 7:48 PM
Union sour grapes because now the contribution playing field is finally level. No wonder the liberals want to do away with Citizens United.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a hat tip to common sense, decided yesterday that nonunion members can opt out of union fees that are targeted towards political purposes.
“Labor unions must give nonmember workers ‘fresh notice’ of unplanned increases in fees or assessments -- money that might be used for political purposes -- the Supreme Court ruled Thursday,” according to CNN.

For labor unions around the country, it serves as a painful reminder that when they decided to go all-in for Obama in 2008, they alienated the rest of us non-government, non-union members- the 99 Percent- who have to go...

Related Tags: Politics