Go Get 'm, Scott

The stranglehold the public employee unions have on the citizens who pay the bills is in jeopardy in Wisconsin and do believe the Labor Goons know it.
Scott Walker, the newly-elected tea-party governor of Wisconsin is presenting the strongest challenge to the unions since Chris Christie in New Jersey and in fact his challenge strikes right at the heart of Big Labor – mandatory unionization and collective bargaining for all state employees. Most of my comments are prompted by this article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110216/ap_on_re_us/us_wisconsin_budget_unions_13

As Barack Hussein once said, “elections have consequences.” I am not sure he expected that to “come around” quite so soon. Last November Wisconsin voters by a large margin asked Mr. Walker to fix the state fiscally. One can assume that the vociferous self-serving groups now protesting a-la Greece did not vote for him. The conservative, sensible voters in Wisconsin, who are never the ones in the street (they are busy, productive people relying on elected officials to responsibly represent them while they manage their daily lives), knew what they were asking and Mr. Walker is delivering.

The major pieces of Mr. Walker’s initiative (backed by a conservative legislature) are:

• End collective bargaining for state and local employees. This makes sense on its face. There is no competition in the provision of public sector services so the unions have nothing to lose in their greed (except for some of their members due to layoffs but that never matters so long as the remaining continue to enjoy salaries well beyond their worth). Mandatory union membership, or “closed shops” does not stand the test of freedom of association or involuntary servitude, under our constitution. How the courts have allowed closed shops to remain is beyond the grasp of this thinking libertarian. Additionally, most states have abandoned “spoils” systems of employment in favor of “civil service.” This means that one need not be a player in a politician’s campaign in order to hold public employment. Well documented is that unions make all their political contributions to democrats and labor-friendly Republicans. This is de facto “spoils” because then in order to hold public employment, an individual is required to support specific philosophical dogma and candidates irrespective of his/her personal beliefs.

• Require employees to contribute more to health care and pensions. This too makes sense on its face even though the employees don’t like it. (Now THAT is a surprise.) Employees can “contribute” to managing health care costs by how they care for themselves personally. Collectively if employees adopt good personal care, in the end, costs drop. When Big Brother bails you out of every ill…..can you imagine one employee saying to another, “You really ought to lose weight”? I can’t but it was a fun fantasy for a moment. With respect to retirement (I work for the state of Washington) employees have no interest at all in the health of the state retirement system and so they can enjoy hating “Big Oil” and “Big Evil Corporations,” et al (except for GM and Chrysler which most of us taxpayers objected to keeping a-float with our taxes so the poor under-paid union members lost nothing.) Paying more attention to the health of the system and the mechanics of a free market may have a positive effect on how we trough folks view our economic systems. Can you picture a group of public sector employees gathered around the water cooler concurring that Shell Oil ought to begin drilling off the coast of California to increase profits, produce less expensive energy for America and keep their pension systems flush? No, actually, I can’t either.

• “Tort Reform.” Wisconsin has already implemented this and that is significant by itself. Bad things happen to good people and the victims should be made “whole.” But the “pain and suffering” awards are disgusting. Those awards make attorneys rich and provide obscene wealth to people who had nothing more than a run-in with bad luck and who in some cases contributed to their poor luck! “We” pay for these egregious settlements in insurance premiums and in the loss of goods and services that often have more value than negative consequences. Have you not often heard "We cannot sell you this," or "You cannot do this" because of "liability." Liability that as in informed adult you may freely accept?

Associated Press on February 16, had a particularly good article on Mr. Walker’s aims. That link is pasted above. We read in that article how “upset” people are by Governor Walker’s actions but the “people” are all public employees or students who have been taught to detest capitalism and to further their own “rights” as in the students objecting to what is likely to be higher tuition and the demise of socialism – albeit on a very small scale. The unions expect to protect usurious pay and benefits beyond their worth – contributing generously to campaigns with money extracted from the “non-believers.”

The state of Washington is in the same boat; the difference is that Christine Gregoire, our “governor” is bound and tied in bed (whips and chains optional) with the unions and will have nothing to do with any legislation that reins in union greed (bet you might not have heard the notion that unions, not just corporate America, are greedy). While this state is swimming in red ink to the tune of five billion dollars over the next several years she and the "progressive" legislature (Wisconsin, you do not know how lucky you are that all branches appear to be conservative) are earnestly debating whether coffee should be our “official state beverage” and how to punish local community groups who hold car washes – because the soap gets in to the water discharge systems.

Mr. Walker might be a “hero.” In a previous post I attempted to debunk our liberal use of the word “hero” as applied to public employees but this guy is on the cusp of turning Wisconsin in to a state with a great deal of personal financial freedom and public sector accountability. I hope that he is receiving the support he will have to have from within and outside of the state - to face these narcissists. Anyone who reads this wants to follow the progress of this effort.

Oh, any public sector employee who called in “sick” to protest should be disciplined until it hurts, no matter how long it takes or how much it costs. Deliver the message to them, Mr. Walker; don’t relent. Pure hatred and lies will follow but in the end you can look at yourself in the mirror; you are a hero to those of us who hope for a second chance.

*&*&*&*&*&*&*

Intolerance and Ignorance on The Dating Sites

I belong to several dating sites, using one by far the most since the price is better than most (hey! Even on-the-market-seasoned-citizens must be frugal.)
A few things that have surprised me:

1) Most (but not all) the nice-looking women live in Florida or Texas. Must be the heat; causes them to shed clothing and get a tan.

2) Because these sites typically have members from all over the country, the chances that “The One” will be next door are very slim and very random. I think it is a conspiracy to keep people subscribing without interruption.

3) The nicest looking women are offended if you tell them that. 70’s residual I guess. Gloria Steinen and her malicious band of mal-contents had no success at convincing me the woman was not to be physically admired but was instead to be admired for her brain. Thank Heavens they failed. Women chase a lot of attributes. Men chase skirts and I confess that is simplistic. If women want men to learn only of their heart and brain perhaps they would wear burlap sacks although that will not get my attention. Some women present only photographs with no profile narrative whatsoever. So what is a guy to learn from that? Tough to discover much of the intellect, no?

4) Back to the more serious headline however. We, and I mean “all of us” who have paid attention, have learned in the last ten years, the hatred progressives have for anyone who is not in lock step with them. I have yet to read on these websites, a woman say “I hate liberals.” On the other hand I read one in ten say “If you liked George Bush then we won’t get along.” This morning I read “I am allergic to Republicans.” I use none but benign four-letter words in my blog. (there were several in that sentence) But these women can go do something offensive to themselves. First hand I know that a good relationship between two high-quality people will not withstand strong political differences added to assertiveness about those difference. We parted with a great deal of mutual respect for each other in spite of the differences. Few of us like clones on the other hand none of us wants to walk on pins and needles in a relationship we hope is a "safe place." What might these women have said, had they any respect for people who do not agree with them? How about, “I am committed to liberal/progressive beliefs; I believe there are fine men who do not agree but such differences can make a relationship quite tenuous.” Wow, what a difference, eh? Lastly, the one that prompted this blog earns $200,000 per year in commercial real estate in Colorado. I think there is something wrong with that picture. This woman is a capitalist to the max in a capitalist economy and yet throws poison darts at the party which, albeit timidly, believes in the personal financial freedom to make that sort of money.

So goes life on the dating circuit in the land of the self-serving and under-educated (thanks to the public school system and leftist universities – maybe another topic one day)

*&*&*&*&*&*&*

STOP THE FLAG LOWERING AND RAISING for STATE EMPLOYEES

Washington State, no one denies, is a union-Gestapo state. Okay, Big Labor Democrats deny it. In this environment, a pro-union governor whose hands are tied (fortunately) by budget shortfalls which the public will no longer tolerate raising taxes to fix, can’t stop issuing proclamations slobbering over the state work force. If you can’t pay ‘em; praise ‘em. One of the tricks in her bag is her ordering the lowering of state flags to half staff when an employee dies at work. This includes police and fire fighters, over which she has no direct authority but who are lopsided in their contributions (forced from all in the ranks) to all things Democrat.

I am a state flag ascender and descender (I love fancy titles)and wonder if we should not have the flags motorized, like a garage door opener. It might save millions or – yes - trillions of dollars in the salaries of the employees raising and lowering the flags. Yes, even salaries like mine!

What irks me is the message that we as government employees are more important than the rest of the public. We are not! We are not special and we are not heroes. Flag lowering used to be an honor bestowed only upon long time and accomplished public servants. There are no heroes in any paid ranks. Fire fighters and police are paid beyond what is reasonable. Death and injury are a part of those jobs and if the risk is too great, they need not apply. This is America; until Obama is through with us we still have choices. The prison guard who was recently killed? I am sorry for her family (The prison guard is not concerned about the incident any longer), but we should NOT lower the flags in her behalf. Now, had she, off-duty, pulled an unconscious person out of a burning car on the freeway, she would indeed be a hero. The difference is that pulling the person from the car exposed her to great risk for which she was not paid. Still, we do not LOWER the flags for public sector employees – at all.

I work for the state. I have a desk job but what happens if a runaway computer monitor falls on me and kills me; am I a “fallen hero”? I don’t think so!
Fire fighters; police, prison guards and highway flaggers are not heroes; they are doing simply what they are paid to do.

Knock it off. Leave the flags up and stop placing public servants on pedestals.

*&*&*&*&*&*&*&