So normally, I try not to ever go more than a week without filing a new article, but I knew that Michigan was going to blow up over the Right to Work vote, so I held off to see what happened. And boy am I glad I did! I don’t think I’ve seen a better example of union thuggery in quite a long time. This week, we have been treated to quite the display of desperation as the unions in a last gasp effort, pushed their way into the state senate and created a mob scene in the senate chambers, attacked a reporter from Fox, tore down a tent filled with innocent women and children, showing no regard for human life. After tearing down the tent, the thugs then turned their attention on Clint Tarver’s hot dog cart, destroying it, while yelling such racial epithets at Carver, like “Ni**er,” “Uncle Tom,” etc. Tarver, who was not there for any other reason than to sell hot dogs, properly stated, “the working people did not respect the working man. He was not there to be political; he was just there to serve.”
We can’t say we didn’t see this coming. This is the typical response that unions have been having as they continue to lose more and more power across the country. In fact, we were warned this was what could be expected. Michigan State Representative Douglas Geiss (D) said on the Senate floor, “there will be blood, there will be repercussions. We will relive the battle of the overpass.” Really? A State Representative practically giving a call to arms to encourage violence and bloodshed over giving the people of his state a choice? A choice, by the way, that the people of Michigan voted in favor of.
This was not even a battle that Governor Rick Snyder had planned on waging at this time, but as Tom Walsh, of the Detroit Free Press tells it:
Public employee unions opposed Snyder’s moves to put more teeth into emergency manager laws that would enable swifter action to rescue cities and school districts that bungled themselves into insolvency.
In Detroit, Mayor Dave Bing and a spineless City Council were stonewalled by employee unions at every turn, slow-walking needed reforms and cost-cutting while the city burned through cash at a frightening rate.
As a result, Snyder’s patient attempt to help fix Detroit via consent agreement instead of imposing an emergency manager has failed.
To top it off, Snyder found himself having to fight off Proposal 2, the ill-advised November ballot attempt to stuff a bag of goodies for organized labor into the Michigan Constitution.
Since Michigan has the highest unionization coupled with the highest unemployment rates, is it any wonder that this show down was all but ordained to happen?
I had planned on part two of this article to specifically cover the financial impact public sector unions have on the solvency of local, state and federal governments. But then the California Teachers Union recently released this funny little cartoon narrated by Ed Asner and it so infuriated me, that I feel the need to incorporate it into the story.
The video, filled with blatant inaccuracies, tells the story of a Utopian society, where everyone always worked, streets were safe and taxes were all paid in a fair and equitable distribution. In what has to be the biggest hypocrisy of the entire video, Asner claims that the rich not caring about the poor people caused the infrastructure of California to fall into decay, when the truth of the matter is, that the real reason for California and many other states inability to reinforce their infrastructure lies squarely on the shoulders of the public sector unions that have bankrupted municipalities and states from one end of the country to the other with outrageous pay, benefits packages and unsustainable pension plans.
This ridiculous attempt to further the liberal agenda of class warfare is so blatant it is laughable. They even go so far as to show a rich man urinating on a group of poor people. The housing bubble is blamed on the rich, completely ignoring the facts of low income loans given to people who couldn’t afford them, Dodd-Frank, unemployment, etc.
The video goes on to accuse politicians and rich of blaming teachers and fire fighters, etc., of causing the housing crash. When did this ever happen? Do they believe that if they just say it, then that makes it true? When have the rich ever pointed a finger of blame at anyone? The video ends basically by saying that we would all be happy if there were no rich people. Could it be that public sector unions, and the teachers union specifically, are finally being held under the light and being forced to explain to the American people why we are allowing them to bankrupt our country? Is this a last ditch effort on their part to justify why it is so necessary to pay for benefits and salaries that are unsustainable? I, for the life of me, can find no reasonable explanation for why public sector unions are necessary. If the government can’t uphold their own labor laws, then we need to elect leaders who will. What we do not need are states being held hostage to union thugs who have no regard for what is in the best interest of the citizenry.
And finally, let’s not forget the California dock workers strike that brought the entire port system of Los Angeles and Long Beach to a grinding halt for 8 days, with a cost of $1 billion per day. The reason for the strike? Union members wanted guaranteed jobs forever for clerical workers, whether they were needed or not. This is California we’re talking about here, so naturally, the unions were pretty much rewarded with everything they wanted, including a generous increase to their pensions. I hold California up as a shining example of how to do everything wrong when running a state. Someday, there will be nobody left to live there except the politicians who have made so many horrifying fiscal decisions, because its residents will have fled for their lives and livelihood to states like Texas and Oklahoma, where people can still live and afford to eat at the same time.
When witnessing all these latest acts of insanity, is it any wonder that unions are losing support in record numbers? It’s no surprise that when given the choice to work for less money or not work for more money, that people will choose the former.
Follow me on twitter: @Lisabucaro