Here were my top 5 favs for the week. Excepting the liberal bias in this first one, I like the Black-Eyed PP… by Signe Wilkinson at GoComics.com…
by Glenn McCoy at GoComics.com…
by Chip Bok at Townhall.com…
by Glenn McCoy at GoComics.com…
by Chip Bok at Townhall.com…
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Abortion advocates on Twitter are circulating a link saying that you “think violence against women is so great” because you like the first comic. Apparently, they have no idea what symbolism is, and missed the fact that there are also three groups represented by males with black eyes. Also, it’s a cartoon!
I guess we should feel pretty good, if that’s all they’ve got.
Over at Feministe, they’re accusing you of supporting violence against women over the first image… it’s really ridiculous.
These are likely the same women who love and admire Bill Clinton, despite his history of “alleged” sexual abuse and assault. Feminist “outrage” tends to be highly selective and politically motivated.
I wish number two was somewhat correct – but there’s no square off – no debate – no compromise or discussion. I don’t care about the ideas portion of it – I’m going okay if people believe what Walker is doing is the right thing. When he talks about sending instigators into crowds of peaceful protesters, that is wrong. When he talks about somebody who tries to get things done and describes him as: “He’s pretty reasonable, but he’s not one of us. … He’s not there for political reasons. He’s just trying to get something done. … He’s not a, he’s not a conservative. He’s just a pragmatist.” That is just wrong. When he talked of lying to the Democrats to get them back to the state to vote – that’s just wrong.
I don’t like what the Democrats have done in fleeing the state – but in the face of what is going on, it is the only option and I support them.
“Over at Feministe, they’re accusing you of supporting violence against women over the first image… it’s really ridiculous.”
==============================================================
Another stunning example of how illogicial and inconsistent the feministas conitnue to be and more evidence that female homosexuals are missing the gene which carries a ‘sense of humor’.
They are female chauvenist sows.
Feministas are only concerned with preventing violence against women who agree with them.
If the feministas/feminazis were truly egalitarian they would be equally outraged at violence directed at any one, irrespective of their age, intelligence, education, gender, ethnicity, nationality or religion.
You go girls!
EGV,
How one interprets Walker is pretty much in the eye of the beholder. I heard nothing of great relevance in the conversation.
From my perspective I want the unions broken. They have turned into the very people they were meant to stop. The powerhungry and greedy. No I do not mean rank and file working people, I mean the officials who spend millions of their members donations to keep themselves and sympathetic politicians in power.
I believe unions have long outlived their usefulness and as I said, have turned into the very evil they were meant to stop. Power corrupts, whatever side you are on.
Mary,
Amen, and amen! Unions are good things, in raw theory… but the vast majority of secular unions have “morphed” into something quite corrupt, to the point where (as you pointed out) they’ve betrayed their original purpose for existence. WEAC (the Wisconsin teacher’s union), for example, has so polluted itself that it now fights for the “right” to have abortion clinics and/or referrals IN SCHOOLS, the active normalization of homosexuality (in all curricula, K-12), the adamant support for (and distribution of) contraception to the students, and more; and it really needs to be abolished completely. I’ll go further: even after WEAC would be abolished, unless there’s some concrete way to prevent a replacement from going down that “public path to perdition”, unions as a whole should be suppressed.
I mean, honestly: when a teacher’s union of a state whose schools are largely suffering from low enrollments (I speak from manifold experience, on that point) supports the slaughter of 20-40% of its future students, can anyone else see how this could fairly be called “insane”?
WEAC (the Wisconsin teacher’s union), for example, has so polluted itself that it now fights for the “right” to have abortion clinics and/or referrals IN SCHOOLS….
You’ve GOT to be kidding! The libs have said comprehensive sex-ed and condoms would take care of teen pregnancy. Any teacher who’d be willing to take my child to an abortuary would NOT be teaching my child for long. Kids rise to the expectations of their parents and teachers, so why aren’t they telling them they are too immature to handle the responsibility that goes with sexual activity? Where are the parents???
Hey feminists! I like the black eyes on all of the groups in the first picture. I’d like to see them all taken down to size.
Mary
Nothing relevant in the conversation? The governor of a state talked about bringing in instigators to stir things up at a rally? Not relevant? Seriously?
I agree that the unions might be past their usefulness here – just not sure if it is the governments place to step in and get rid of them completely.
Oh, please Ex-GOP. He didn’t “talk about it” he humored someone who raised the question. He didn’t actually do anything, unlike Democrats who use this trick ALL THE TIME.
As for your second point:
These are GOVERNMENT UNIONS. They are whining that they’re going to have to chip in 12% to their insurance and will only be able to collectively bargain their salaries.
Cry me a freaking river.
Lauren –
Actually, and not sure if you’ve been following the news of it or not, but the unions have agreed to the concessions of insurance/pension. It is the right to collectively bargain that they are digging their heals in on.
Are you saying that Walker was just lying to who he thought was a billionaire – maybe just telling tall tales to try to get a few bucks? Is that what you are saying?
No, I’m saying that he was brushing off a question, something that every single politician does.
He says absolutely nothing damning in that audio. If the best you can come up with is that he doesn’t denounce a very, very common political ploy with enough enthusiasm, you’ve lost the debate.
Oh, and the collective bargaining thing is idiotic. They’re is absolutely no reason that a government union needs to collectively bargain against the other citizens of the state.
The Governor is being generous to allow them to bargain over their salaries. They should be thankful.
Janet,
(*sigh*) I wish I were. Check out Resolution I-17:
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/resolutions-documnent-2010-2011.pdf
So when Walker says “We thought about that” (planting troublemakers), you think he was lying and brushing off the question? Do you think they didn’t have those conversations, or that they did?
If you don’t have an issue with it – maybe you should call Noble Wray – he has an issue with it, and seems to be in more of a position than you or I to have an issue with it.
You have a right to your opinion on the collective bargaining rights of public employees. Just as Reagan did, who brought the right to workers in California in 1968, and Nixon in 69 (via executive order, he strengthened rights overall).
“Do you think they didn’t have those conversations, or that they did?”
I have no way of knowing. However, the important part of his statement is when he said that they WERE NOT GOING TO DO IT.
Hyperventilating over this doesn’t make you seem reasonable. “OH MY GOSH HE SAID “we thought about it, but no.” He should have said “No, good sir, I am a man of impeccable integrity! How dare you suggest such an untoward thing! I am going to report you to…someone!”
Please. He didn’t do anything legally or ethically wrong in the entire conversation. You’re grasping at straws and it’s really pathetic.
EGV wrote, in reply to Lauren:
Actually, and not sure if you’ve been following the news of it or not, but the unions have agreed to the concessions of insurance/pension. It is the right to collectively bargain that they are digging their heals in on.
Er… and the news (though perhaps not the MSM) also covered the fact that those “concessions” could be obliterated in the very next contract negotiation, in a New York minute, so long as collective bargaining and binding arbitration stay in effect. These also hand-cuff the local governments in many of their efforts to renegotiate contracts.
Are you at all familiar with how “binding arbitration” works in Wisconsin school contracts, EGV? It’s, “one side makes an offer, the other side makes an offer, and the panel of arbitrators chooses one or the other; no possible compromise”. If the union demands an 8% pay raise, and the school says that it can’t afford more than 3%, the arbitrators choose one or the other (and notoriously chose the higher of the two). Many schools have been forced to close or consolidate, since they simply couldn’t pay the ever-greedier demands of the unions. (This is why the QEO was instituted, by the way… which allowed administrators to bypass arbitration, so long as unions were guaranteed at least a 3.8% increase per year. Pretty cushy, all things considered… though, needless to say, the union HATES the QEO with a passion!)
This “binding arbitration”, along with “mandatory union dues” (even if one doesn’t belong to the union), are the real “core” of what the union is fighting, in Wisconsin. They know, full well, that any “concession” of benefits and salaries will be extremely temporary, so long as the “power tools” of their trade (i.e. collective bargaining, mandatory dues) stay intact.
EGV,
Speaking of outside instigators, did you hear Jesse Jackson made an appearance? When did he become an employee of the state of Wisconsin?
Friends of mine encountered unionistas who travelled to Madison from New York and were enjoying luxury accomodations at the local hotel. I wonder what poor working union person is paying for that.
I don’t suspect these outsiders came Madison to lead prayer vigils.
Is there any evidence that Walker planted instigators? Talk is one thing, let’s see where he actually planted them.
BTW, did you know that Democrat icon Franklin Roosevelt opposed public employee unions? So too did AFL-CIO president George Meany.
Lauren – again, call Nobe Wray – he’s in a much better position to know if is an issue or not – and seems to want some answers.
Paladin – that is all fine and good, but Walker has made it clear that we’re broke in the short term and need to deal with it quickly. The concessions would do that – and the future can take care of itself – again, Walker himself has said that he’s concentrating on the short term budget.
As a member of an industrial union for 33 (an officer for 15) years I speak with some experience on the subject of unions.
Unions are necessary–because management makes it so. In a perfect world everything would be ordered with honesty, fairness, and a respect for the dignity of the individual. We know this is not always the case. Thus, the three major areas where unions can make an impact for their members are: wages, hours, and working conditions.
Having said that there are other circumstances that come into play in the granting of collective bargaining rights. Historically we have prohibited certain classes of employees from collective bargaining–the military comes to mind as one example. Can anyone imagine them having the right to bargain for working conditions? Other civil service jobs offer limited collective bargaining rights absent the right to strike for obvious reasons.
The question of further restricting what public employee unions are able to bargain for (simply wages alone), which is the main issue surrounding the legislation Gov. Walker will sign if it passes, has come about due to the inability of the state to honor commitments that have been placed upon it by either through the naiveté or incompetence of previous legislators and governors. The problem has gotten so bad that the Governor recognizes it is not enough to simply have a brief “timeout” as it were for the unions to accept proposals for an increase in their contributions to health and pension costs, but then resume demands when the political climate once again favors them. No, the Governor recognizes from his tenure in Milwaukee what the root of the problem is when it comes to dealing with politicians doling out public monies. The dirty little secret is that in return for political contributions certain candidates seeking office if elected are pressured by these same constituencies to return the favor. This has led to the problems we face today: unrealistic and unsustainable commitments that are borne by the taxpayers who are themselves unable to pay greater amounts into the system. Therefore rather than punt the problem of this unholy alliance down the road two or three years, the solution is to take such stern measures that it will not have to be dealt with again any time soon. If Governor Walker were a professor, his course could be named: Realism 101.
Liberals should learn from this. They are the ones that are constantly agitating for more and more government control of all facets of our lives. Conservatives are always warning them: the government that has the power to give its citizens everything also has the power to take them away. Here is a classic example: the libs insisted on more and more security from the state through bigger and more expensive labor contracts, and sure enough when the players and the conditions changed, so too did the benefits from the state. Now maybe you can see why we are so much against Obamacare and the intrinsic power that the state will ultimately accrue over its citizens in matters of life and death decisions. Be careful for what you wish for.
Now, looking back, wouldn’t it have been far better for the members of the public service unions to have taken responsibility for their own pensions and medical costs and in the best traditions of our country and self reliance set aside for a rainy day?
As for the turmoil of teachers abandoning their charges and the dishonesty of doctors writing medical excuses to cover the illegal job action of the teachers I have this to say to those who think this is great: this is a democratic form of government and you can elect whomever you want in the next few years, but now you teachers and especially you democrat/socialist senators—get back to work!
“The concessions would do that – and the future can take care of itself ”
Sure, let’s put a band-aid on a gunshot wound. Sound’s like a sure plan to fixing the situation.
Lauren – the message has pretty much been straight from Walker himself – he says we’re broke, there’s nothing to negotiate, and that we need to fix things immediately for the current shortfall. In fact, another Republican offered a competing bill that would have taken rights away for 2 or 3 years – again, because this is being sold as an “emergency” type situation.
“Nobe Wray”
Shocking! A public union supporting democrat “has questions.”
Please.
Did you even read Paladin’s comment, EX-GOP?
Well Lauren, you could also call him a Chief of Police – somebody who puts his behind on the line for you (and deserves a little respect). If you had a decent head on your shoulders to at least see clearly once in a while…you could see how a police chief would have issues with that sort of tactic being taken.
Yes Lauren – I read them.
Hi Jerry,
I certainly respect your experience and perspective, though I feel unions, while necessary and good at one time, are obsolete.
If the world were ideal. Sure. But unions have hardly been any more so.
That comes from my childhood in a union run city. Teamster president Jimmy Hoffa wasn’t offed by the mob because he prayed too loudly in church. They wanted to keep their puppet as head of the Teamsters, and Jimmy just out of jail could pose a problem. Not that Jimmy ever had any qualms about associating with mobsters. Detroiters only wondered what took the mob so long to kill him.
I’ve never had union representation. Somehow I have had suitable working conditions, not always ideal by any means. My pay has been acceptable to me. No one forced me to take any job. At least I know, unlike the Teamsters, that the Mob was not availing itself of my pension fund.
The government taking money out of public employess paycheck and giving to a union without the consent of the employee is wrong in so many ways. We need to end this corruption of the political system where people are forced to pay into unions that support the Demoncraptic party. Joining “the union” should not be a qualifucation of public employment. I am all for doing whatever it takes to end this corruption. I know of at least fourteen public employess who left the state because they understand that carrying out their sworn duty and voting on this bill will stop the ability of the unions to coerce money from the people and redirect a percentage into Democratic party campaign funds. These Demoncrats have no respect for the consitution or the law or the vote of the people.
EGV wrote:
Paladin – that is all fine and good, but Walker has made it clear that we’re broke in the short term and need to deal with it quickly. The concessions would do that – and the future can take care of itself – again, Walker himself has said that he’s concentrating on the short term budget.
Remind me to quote your “all fine and good”, if you ever take issue in the future with any of the points I raised in it. :)
But I have to correct you on one point (which seems to be your main point): Gov. Walker has said explicitly that he is NOT merely concentrating on the “short term” budget. In fact, he’s said that the whole point of removing “collective bargaining/binding arbitration” was to empower local governments (as well as the state) to preserve these budget fixes for “our children, and our grandchildren”. Wherever did you read/hear that the governor was only interested in the “short-term”? Can you supply a link? Here’s a link to the Governor saying the exact opposite:
http://www.wqow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14013269
Gov. Walker has mentioned this point in every press conference he’s ever given, when asked specifically about the perceived necessity of removing “collective bargaining”. What stations were you watching, again…?
“If you had a decent head on your shoulders to at least see clearly once in a while…you could see how a police chief would have issues with that sort of tactic being taken.”
You mean an action that was never taken? Gotcha. Maybe the chief should be more interested in the actual law that was broken when the Captain Smarmy impersonated Koch.
“Yes Lauren – I read them.”
:) I’ll be sure to quote you on that one, too, EGV, and trust that I won’t need to repeat anything from them, then!
BTW: what’s with the insult levelled at Lauren (re: not having a “decent head on her shoulders”)?
Last I checked, EX-GOP, we couldn’t be arrested for our thoughts. At least not yet.
See, here’s how it works.
Say I’m talking to someone about how much trouble I’m in because I’m overdrawn on my bank account and I don’t know how I’m going to feed the kids.
“Why don’t you just go rob a bank?” he asks.
“Haha, I’ve thought about it…but no I’m not going to do that,” I reply.
In your world, I should be charged with a crime. Do you see how absurd that is?
Hello Paladin,
Great posts and good points.
:) Hi, Mary! Right back at you!
Paladin – It is in a budget repair bill – it is in a bill to address the short term budget deficit of a couple hundred million – that is why I took it as concentrating on the short term. You are right – he has talked about it as well as long term – but he’s sold it as an emergency thing that must be done immediately – and even a fellow GOPer offered up the short term play…because again, that is where the problem lies.
EGV wrote:
You are right – he has talked about it as well as long term – but he’s sold it as an emergency thing that must be done immediately – and even a fellow GOPer offered up the short term play…because again, that is where the problem lies.
You’re right in saying that a “fellow GOP’er” offered up a short-term solution; but surely you see that your conclusion (i.e. Sen. Dale Schultz offered up his alternative “because that’s where the problem lies”) is merely your unproven (and rather biased) opinion? No other possible explanations come to mind? You don’t think it’s possible that Sen. Schultz simply wanted to avoid the unpleasantness of the battle, or that he was trying to act with “comity” towards his “friends and colleagues on the other side of the aisle” (which he has a track record of doing), or any number of other reasons? Moreover, you seem to think that Sen. Schultz was RIGHT to make his offer; aside from your personal tastes/opinions, why do you think so? It certainly doesn’t follow from the data you presented, so far…
Lauren – you should be proud of Captain Smarmy – that seems to be method of choice these days to get good information – go undercover and lie!
Paladin – on the insult thrown – if you read our entire debate, I think you’ll have a good feel for why I got a bit on edge.
I read it. So… when are you going to calm down, and apologize?
“go undercover and lie!”
There is a vast difference between going under cover as a generic teenager and impersonating a prominent individual.
The latter is a crime in the state of Wisconsin.
Thanks, Paladin.
What I’m saying is that Schultz at least is willing to compromise (like Tim Cullen – interesting piece in the LaX Trib today – http://lacrossetribune.com/news/opinion/article_10d027aa-413e-11e0-bedd-001cc4c002e0.html). The motivation for Shultz? I don’t know – maybe it is because in a few years, the state could be completely flipped again, and who knows what could be under attack then. As the two sides have shown more and more unwillingness to even respect each other – the odds of anything getting done right for the long term keeps slipping away.
Look, I know that we’re in a budget crunch. I know that these folks should take a hit. I also think it is a little bit sad that attacking folks in the middle class is so wildly cheered. I’ve got a teacher friend who says his family of four (his wife stays home with the kids) will probably qualify for food stamps after this. Just a little sad to me that we’ve willing to beat up on teachers, but the thought of raising taxes a bit on millionaires is political blasphemy for Walker. One of the best things of moving to this state has been the teachers and the educational system. And I don’t see any of them driving around in BMW’s or Audi’s. Yet this is who Walker goes after first.
Lauren –
I apologize profusely for saying you “didn’t have a decent head on your shoulders”.
When you said “Cry me a freaking river”, I think I incorrectly attributed it me and not the unions.
and when you said “hyperventilating over this doesn’t make you seem reasonable”, again, I’m sure you meant that in the kindest way possible. Also, when you called me pathetic, I’m sure it was in Christian love.
You have my deepest of apologies though – I know you meant well through the whole conversation.
For what it’s worth, Senator Schultz’s wife is a school district administrator.
EX-GOP.
Ah, the non-apology apology. Real mature.
Honestly, I don’t really care what you think of me. You’re right, I haven’t been spreading sunshine and roses. The reason for this is that your “arguments” frustrate me beyond belief due to their complete lack of intellectual reasoning.
It goes way beyond the debate at hand. You seem to come at every argument with the notion that “The republicans are bad!” and twist your logic into a pretzel to defend this point of view. On the subject of unions, it’s irritating. On the subject of human life, it’s down right maddening.
The fact that you’re on here engaging in some sort of “point scoring” after a completely innocuous phone call reminds me of all the times you’ve lined up behind the baby killers in order to prove some point about the “evils” of the GOP.
Further, EX-GOP, you claim to be pro-life but do nothing at all to support the unborn.
Frankly, that disgusts me. I’m much more sympathetic to someone who has yet to learn the truth about abortion than I am to someone who claims to know the truth,but yet doesn’t care enough to stop it.
Of course, even that doesn’t describe you. You’re actively working to further enshrine the destruction of human life.
Lauren –
Right back at you! You seem to think that the way to balance power in Wisconsin is to attack the middle class – I don’t like that.
I don’t like that the Democrats support abortion – I’m a pro-lifer myself (though I don’t go to rallies, so I don’t know if I qualify – Paladin and I are working on the point system to see) – I’m just not going to paint every thing that GOP does as “good” because they talk some about abortion, and everything the Democrats do as “bad” because they are pro-choice. If you think Obama and health care reform is the master “baby killer” – then I’m guilty as charged – I’ve supported it a lot on this site and if you truly think it is the end of life as we know it, then sure, point your anger at me.
I kinda wonder if you have me confused with somebody else though – I don’t talk much on the abortion threads.
I do apologize though – I shouldn’t have been mean. I’m sure in a face to face conversation, you are a perfectly likable person.
“Actively working to further enshrine the destruction of human life”.
How?
Wall Street represents American’s money and retirement plans. It represents the capital that keeps this great nation running. If it was the DEMs walking by instead of the GOP, Wall Street, representing the financial backing of every day people, and companies that support jobs and the economy, would be the only one with a big black eye.
EGV,
Thanks for the candour, at any rate. As a teacher myself, who’s seen the “behind-the-scenes” talks and workings of the teachers’ union (i.e. WEAC), I have something of a different view of all this.
First: you’re simply wrong when you categorize this as “an attack on teachers”. Even by your own admission, the unions were willing to accept the budget requests (but not the collective bargaining); so if it’s so horrid (and “forcing teachers onto food stamps”), then why would the union have agreed to it at all? Gov. Walker has said, repeatedly (and he’s been consistently ignored by the media when doing so) that the argument is with the union (and rightfully so), not with the rank-and-file teachers.
Second: I live in a county where teachers, on the average, are one of the highest paid groups! Do you know from where the lion’s share of school money comes? It comes from property taxes (i.e. being taxed simply for being alive, and not homeless), which have driven more than a few friends of mine off their farms; and which primarily go to pay for school expenses. (You might be interested to know that, even with the QEO in place, property taxes jumped 30-40% in the last few years–and schools were the dominant “consumers” of that “new money”). Our unemployment rate (in this county) is somewhere around 20-25%, the foreclosures happen every week, layoffs happen every half-month or so, and the median salary of the typical person in my town is about $5,000 lower than mine (and I work at a Catholic School, making about $10,000 less in salary than my public school counterparts, with no health insurance coverage, and with no retirement benefit package!). Can you explain to me how I could face one of those local people (if I were still in the public school, making $15,000 + $25,000 benefits per year more than he) and say, “You really need to let your taxes go up, or else I’ll have to contribute 5.8% of my own money(!) to my retirement package, and I’ll have to pay 12% of my own health insurance premiums(!)“…?
Can you? I can’t. WEAC can, though… and that’s why I think they need to be stopped. That’s why I don’t object at all to the removal of collective bargaining and “binding arbitration” (to say nothing of mandatory union dues); with them in place, there isn’t a prayer of letting the local communities rid themselves of the crippling tax burden.
Walker is absolutely right to do what he is doing. The government should not be taking money out of peoples paychecks and into the Democratic party. It is the epitomy of corruption and the ‘Democratic’ party is shameless to abandon the ‘Democratic’ process by leaving the state in order to avoid a vote. I hope each one gets fired. But I am sure the union will have a spot for them. But even the union will make them work again eventually when they stop paying for their suite at the Best Western and force them to bang a drum somewhere.
No, EX-GOP, you’re exactly who I am thinking about.
“You seem to think that the way to balance power in Wisconsin is to attack the middle class – I don’t like that.”
Right, having to pay 12% of your own health insurance and only being able to negotiate your salary collectively is such a hardship.
You know what, EX-GOP? My husband is a teacher for a private company. He pays 100% of his insurance and his salary is set by his bosses based on merit. There’s no such thing an automatic raise.
Maybe he should just abandon his students to go protest on the steps of the capitol about how “unfair” it all is.
Paladin – you seem to be implying that all of the woes of your county and in the state are because of public unions. That simply isn’t the case and is dishonest to paint the picture as such.
On facing the local person…you seem to be okay saying that there’s no way we should help their ploy by raising taxes on the upper class – but you think it is reprehensible to have good wages for the folks raising the next generation of Americans. Is that correct?
Is it getting itchy dealing with all that straw, Ex-GOP?
Lauren – that is the choice your husband made. The choice the teachers made were to be in a union, and now we’re stepping in and saying that isn’t a choice anymore.
The blanket that this is being done under is a budget bill. Walker and his friends had a lot of ways to attack the budget. The folks they choose to attack were middle class Americans.
I just wonder who they’ll go after next?
Attacking a corrupt union does not equal attacking the middle class.
The vast majority of the middle class work in the private sector where they pay their own insurance and contribute to their own retirement.
Then we pay for public school teachers as well.
Lauren –
Oh, so the couple hundred million dollars in extra revenue to the state is coming from just the unions and not the folks who works for them?
Sorry – have to go for a while and actively…oh wait, let me scroll up and find the wording…Actively work to further enshrine the destruction of human life.
Actually, I’m just going to go hang out with the newest family addition. Will be back on later.
No, EX-GOP, asking the union members to kick in a paltry amount to their benefits package is not an “attack on the middle class.”
Paladin – you seem to be implying that all of the woes of your county and in the state are because of public unions.
(!!) Oh, please. Unless you can show me where I said anything of the sort, I’m calling “rubbish” on this, and any similar nonsense you choose to say on that specific point. “ALL the woes because of unions?” I’m not sure how you’d be unfamiliar with the idea of unions being a “contributing factor”, and not “the over-arching source of all evil”? This is ludicrous of you. Remember what I warned, EGV, about your predilection for painting with a broad brush? (Do you have brushes of any other size, I wonder?)
That simply isn’t the case and is dishonest to paint the picture as such.
I’ll keep that firmly in mind, if I ever say anything of the sort. You might want to save your scolding for the straw-man that you just built, whom you tried to fashion in my image.
On facing the local person…you seem to be okay saying that there’s no way we should help their ploy by raising taxes on the upper class – but you think it is reprehensible to have good wages for the folks raising the next generation of Americans. Is that correct?
(*sigh*) I’m really trying to be patient with you, EGV… and I don’t know whether you’re simply being thoughtless because you’re frustrated, or what-have-you… but this sort of non-sequitur nonsense is really taxing my patience. Let me try to pick apart your comments, to the extent that I can make any sense of them at all:
1) Could you explain what you mean by “help their ploy”? Whose ploy? Was that a typo?
2) What makes you think that the teacher salaries, after the 5.8% contribution to their retirement packages (which they will get back at retirement, with interest–were you aware of this?) and the 12% contribution to their health insurance premiums, will NOT be “good wages”? Can you explain this nearly-inexplicable statement to a humble and fallible mathematician such as I?
3) Have you not grasped the fact that “the locals” are suffering before our very eyes, NOW? This isn’t some textbook story-problem, EGV; these are real people, really going hungry, really losing their homes, and really losing their jobs (the very concerns that liberals usually have as “top priority”, yes?)… and even the laudable concern about “providing for the future of our children” really needs to take lower priority, for the moment. Even if the moral urgency completely passes you by, EGV, do you not see that, if people keep losing jobs and homes, there will be no children left in the area to teach? Wouldn’t the idea of “logical impossibility” make you pause, in your own conclusions?
4) You also seem to be entrenched in the idea that “raising the next generation of Americans” logically requires “public education”, “state agencies” and “federal agencies”; you haven’t considered Catholic schools, or home-schooling, or other private schools (many of which work at greatly reduced costs and greatly enhanced efficiency)? I have… and I’ve had the fortune of being able to compare two of them (public vs. Catholic) “from the inside”. I know that the idea of “public schools or bust” is hyperbolic nonsense.
So no, your attempt at a synopsis was not correct. Synopses do, in fact, require you to preserve the original content while attempting a brief summary.
Care to try again?
I have something to say on this topic: If the union is corrupt, then yes, it should be abolished. However, I do not think that unions have out-grown their usefulness.
However, I live in a place where the school district, itself, is corrupt, and the unions are the ones left fighting for teachers’ rights. The teachers get paid a paltry amount, and the district members ride to work in limousines. The district holds back the money they get from the government, which is in the tens of millions of dollars, for their own pay. Due to this, the schools are left laying off teachers, laying off needed instructional assistants, making class sizes larger due to the lack of teachers, eliminating programs (music, drama, and art were the first to go; and, when I was in school, I know I would not have survived had I not had my music classes), and, many times, even closing. The district does nothing, but keeps upping their own pay, while our schools are suffering.
Maybe it is different in Wisconsin. However, where I am, the schools and the teachers would get nothing if it were not for the unions.
As for other unions, I know that at Walmart the employees are not even allowed to think the word union, and are fired on the spot if they do. Meanwhile, they are made to work ridiculous hours, do not get benefits of any sort – health or otherwise -, do not get overtime pay, do not get sick days, and are constantly mistreated by their employers. Walmart tends to hire those who otherwise could not get a job, particularly teens and the elderly. Therefore, the employees cannot just go out and get another job.
Due to knowing what goes on in the schools in my area, as well as hearing horror stories of the non-unionized from people I know who have worked for stores without unions, I respect unions that fight corrupt systems. When it is the union that is corrupt, it is time to make them change out leadership and change the rules. However, I am all for unions.
I have… and I’ve had the fortune of being able to compare two of them (public vs. Catholic) “from the inside
Me too. I taught at a Catholic school. They didn’t care that I was not certified by the standards set by the public school system. LOL. All I needed was a letter of recommendation from my mother’s monsignor. LOL. Two years of molding future, feminist, pro-choice (the sentiment of many of the nuns) female leaders (Many of whom were sexually active and used contraception provided by Planned Parenthood). LOL
and I work at a Catholic School, making about $10,000 less in salary than my public school counterparts, with no health insurance coverage, and with no retirement benefit package!).
Well boo, freaking, hoo. If this is what you choose, too bad, don’t complain. If you want to be a wage slave for the Catholic church, that’s your problem. Why don’t you and your non unionized pals stand up to your Catholic masters. And BTW, why don’t you teach at a public school? Afraid of the students that get bounced out of the RC schools? Not qualified?
Hi Amy,
You contradict yourself. You describe the appalling conditions then say if not for the unions the teachers would get nothing. It doesn’t sound to me like the teacher unions in your area are doing squat, except collecting dues so as to donate millions to Democrat politicians and keep union leaders in power. Why are the teachers in the situation you describe if unions are so wonderful and doing their job?
Geez, where I live people fight for jobs at Wal-mart. Why can’t they get other jobs? They certainly seem like normal intelligent people to me, not dregs that no one else will hire.
Amy, unions have been corrupt for years. Criminal organizations controlled unions. Jimmy Hoffa allowed the Mob to dip into the Teamster pension fund, millions are given to politicians to keep the union honchos in power. Millions that might have helped make a better life for the teachers you describe. Yes the unions served a purpose at one time, but power corrupts, however noble the intention.
I tell people I am from the era of large classrooms and nonunion teachers. Teachers enjoyed authority and respect. We learned, whatever our race, religion, socioeconomic status, family situation.
No one has greater respect for teachers than I have. I’m sorry to say I have only seen the status of teachers and education in this country decline.
But what we need are more babies born to poor families who can’t afford them. Now that’s a plan.
Well CC,
Given the conditions Amy describes, who in their right mind would teach at a public school? You know, with those great unions there to fight for the teachers and truly better their working conditions.
Actually, Pope Leo XIII was very pro-union. The main focus of the RC church is, at present, abortion and gay marriage. But interesting, at one time the RC church was on the side of the unions.
Don’t feed the carbon-copy troll, y’all…
You know, with those great unions there to fight for the teachers and truly better their working conditions
The unions are fighting for better conditions – but then there are those who want me to use my money to pay for vouchers for schools that espouse a religious philosophy that I don’t. And in so doing, they seek to drain the public schools of even more money and more resources. Sad, the public schools used to be the third rail of American life. Now, not so much cuz everybody hates teachers and their unions.
CC,
So all of a sudden the opinion of the Catholic Church has some relevance in your life.
Gee, I thought that would make you loathe unions even more.
“Who would teach at a public school?”
Those who are committed to our American students. Those who teach at parochial schools are cowards.
So all of a sudden the opinion of the Catholic Church has some relevance in your life
I despise the Catholic Church. I was just making a point that those who hate unions are members of a church that, at one time (when it wasn’t sucking up to the rich), supported unions. That’s all…
y’all
Is that what passes for correct usage at regional Catholic schools? (In my area, not hardly.)
CC,
Fighting for better conditions? Well if the unions weren’t siphoning millions to keep their honchos in power while teachers lose jobs I might actually believe that.
Vouchers, which are the money the student is entitled to have, simply give parents a choice as to where the money will be spent. This can be a religious or non religious school, you know, like the Obamas having a choice to send their daughters to a Quaker school but denying other Washington DC parents the same choice to send their children to better quality schools.
Vouchers, which are the money the student is entitled to have, simply give parents a choice as to where the money will be spent
Vouchers paid for, in part, by my tax money. Vouchers that go, in part, to religious schools. First Amendment, anybody?
CC,
Well CC, I’m not a member of the Catholic Church and I loathe unions.
Two years of molding future, feminist, pro-choice (the sentiment of many of the nuns) female leaders (Many of whom were sexually active and used contraception provided by Planned Parenthood). LOL
Yeah, corrupted individuals usually do seek to corrupt those younger than they are. You seem to take great pride in this. Infiltrating Catholic schools to corrupt young women? Somehow I think that could qualify as a tad cuckoo.
Here’s your warning, CC. Get off this line of commenting and namecalling or be banned. Thanks.
Oh, and it’s all about choice, If you send your children to a papist school, that’s your choice. Don’t complain. They get the education that you want them to have.
CC,
Let me make this simple. You pay the tax dollars no matter what. The parents make the decision where their child’s education needs would best be met. This can be a religious or non religious school. Maybe your tax dollars would go to truly better a child’s education.
Here’s your warning, CC. Get off this line of commenting and namecalling or be banned. Thanks
I was just speaking the truth. The kids I taught were very progressive. And “infiltrating” – a bit conspiratorial. I was just looking for some scarole.
CC,
If you’d like to be upgraded from “troll” to “non-troll”, it’s well within your power; just leave your troll-suit (and the attendant vile manners, disregard for logic, and short attention span) at home. You might also be interested to learn that “LOL, *snark snark*” is hardly the height of English eloquence…
Honestly…
First Amendment, anybody?
Misinterpretation of the First Amendment, anybody?
The parents make the decision where their child’s education needs would best be met.
Right, and it’s not the responsibility of the taxpayer to subsidize non public schools – especially Catholic schools which would be the biggest beneficiaries of the vouchers. Please, how many Quaker schools are there in this country vs. Catholic schools?
Misinterpretation of the First Amendment, anybody?
Church/state separation – which, I realize, you don’t believe in. But fine, I support Catholic schools and Catholic churches are taxed. I can live with that.
Regarding the leftist, man hating, baby hating, abortion living, woman hating Feministas types and their faux outrage over Jill Stanek’s comment regarding her enjoyment of the first comic, the one with the black eyed characters, elective abortion is an act of violence against women and new human beings who are violently slaughtered worse than cows in a slaughter house.
Abortion contributes to many women being coerced, harassed, beaten, and murdered because they refuse to abort. Those who push the aboritons, those who force women to continue being abused, using abortion to cover up their abuse, and those who comit the abortions are the executors of the violence against women.
Those feminista-feminazis can take their fake outrage and stick it where the sun don’t shine and get back to us when they have a real concernt.
Hi Kel,
Isn’t that the truth? You’d be surprised the people I have had to tell that the Constitution says nothing about the seperation of church and state.
Interesting how so-called “seperation of church and state” never applies to the “Revs.” Jackson and Sharpton showing up at union rallies and other political events.
Can you imagine the howling if Pat Robertson showed up in Madison to support Gov. Walker?
CC,
Using your rationale, I don’t want my tax dollars goint to public schools that I don’t like. Fair is fair.
Oh and about the First Amendment, try to actually read it. Also, point out where the Constitution mentions church/state separation.
Seperation of church and state is fine with me, but its applied very selectively, don’t you think?
Abortion contributes to many women being coerced, harassed, beaten, and murdered because they refuse to abort
And those who are coerced, harassed, beaten, and murdered because they use birth control and abort? But that’s fine because they’re “murderers,” right?
THIS IS AN HONEST QUESTION.
Does the US government give tax dollars to catholic/christian schools? If they do, do they also give tax dollars to jewish or muslim (or any other religion) schools?
I only ask because it was brought up about vouchers and taxes to schools, and I am confused slightly.
Thanks!
Using your rationale, I don’t want my tax dollars goint to public schools that I don’t like. Fair is fair
And I don’t want my tax dollars going to a war that I don’t support. But hey, privatize your schools and get patronage teachers, with no academic credentials, willing to work for minimum wages.
Well gee CC,
If public schools are so great the Catholic schools wouldn’t benefit from vouchers now would they? In fact, there probably wouldn’t be a voucher program with parents standing in line to get their children into it.
Sounds like those teachers unions are doing a great job.
Does the US government give tax dollars to catholic/christian schools? If they do, do they also give tax dollars to jewish or muslim (or any other religion) schools?
They provide aid for textbooks and transporation for Catholic/Christian schools who ask for it. I assume that Jewish/Muslim schools would be accorded the same treatment.
CC,
Just using your argument. You don’t want your tax dollars subsidizing certain schools, I don’t want mine subsidizing certain schools. Fair is fair.
If public schools are so great the Catholic schools wouldn’t benefit from vouchers now would they?
Why don’t folks,like you, work to improve the public school system which is an underpinning of our democracy? Why do you want to demolish it? That’s not very patriotic, is it? Oh I know, it’s because of those evil socialist unions. Right?
You don’t want your tax dollars subsidizing certain schools, I don’t want mine subsidizing certain schools. Fair is fair
And I don’t want my tax dollars subsidizing books and transportation for Catholic schools in my state. I’m not a Catholic. Fair is fair. And how bout that war in Asia. I don’t support that.
CC,
You’re seriously misinformed. The majority of teachers at my parochial school have masters degrees. It’s a great teaching atmosphere and a better learning one – the curriculum doesn’t have to be watered down so as to remove all vestiges of Christianity and morality. The discipline is better.
(*smacking forehead*)
CC, is this your normal M.O.? To machine-gun out a series of outrageously silly statements, each one worse than the last, until exasperation finally leads someone to try to answer them (simply to try to knock the ugly things out of the sky)? I really do wonder what it would be like: to see you have a civil and reasonable conversation, with some modicum of self-restraint and avoidance of cliche-ridden “talking points”. Care to step up to the challenge?
And how bout those folks who don’t support the death penalty. Why should their tax dollar go to killing prisoners?
CC,
We have the teachers unions, right? What needs to be improved on? I never said I want to demolish it. I have argued the teacher unions have siphoned millions to keep their power while conditions that Amy describes go unchecked.
I’m from an era when teachers had respect and authority which sadly is a thing of the past.
Everyone must realise that in a democratic country, you will pay taxes that go towards things that you don’t agree with. That is the nature of “majority rules”.
I think people are putting to much thought into what school gets what money and not enough attention into CHILDREN GETTING A GOOD EDUCATION.
Care to step up to the challenge?
Here’s the thing. If you want to make less money, pay more for health insurance, and have no job security at your papist school
That’s – Your – Problem.
I will gladly pay my tax dollar (and they are considerable) for public schools and not yours.
And I don’t want my tax dollars subsidizing books and transportation for Catholic schools in my state. I’m not a Catholic. Fair is fair.
It’s cheaper for the state to pay nominal fees with tax dollars than to provide a full education. I believe the transporation subsidy has been taken away for the next school year. (Everyone’s having to bear the brunt of cuts…..)
Janet,
:) Funny, that, eh? Same at my school…
CC,
(*sigh*) I tried. I really did. So be it.
No, CC, “speaking the truth” is not what you’ve ever done here.
I’ve deleted yet another one of your “Catholic pedophile” rants. No more of that. And the namecalling needs to stop, please.
Mary,
The unions are doing their jobs. The district has lawyers that have higher connections, so the unions do not get much. They have saved many teachers’ jobs. They have saved many schools. They saved my mom’s job by making the district keep instructional assistants in the special needs classes (special education, English as a second language, etc). However, there are still people who have to be laid off left and right, while the district members are noticeably rich, and the one district member I knew who was not corrupt told us how much was in the bank accounts, and not being shared with the schools. An investigation was done, and it turned out to be true. However, now, the whole thing has been tied up in litigation for years, and the schools have yet to see that money.
As for Walmart, many employees there cannot get other jobs because almost no one hires teens or anyone past retirement age (save for Walmart, a few stores in the mall, and the entertainment business). Search “Walmart employee abuse” if you want more information on why many believe Walmart employees need unions. There are too many articles on it to list here.
Also, the mob has had control of many things, including people in the government, stores, theaters, restaurants, the entertainment business, etc. It does not mean that every one of those types of organizations are corrupt, just the particular ones run by the mob are.
Amy. I am a former Walmart employee.
In no way did Walmart mistreat me as an employee. Teens are hired for MANY jobs, including, but not limited to restaurants, retail and other customer service jobs. The reason we did not have a single person at my Walmart talk about unions is because WE DIDN’T WANT IT. We were treated well. I was given all the time off i needed for school and sports, and was even given a scholarship for university.
In case you think it is a fluke, there is also my aunt, who is not disabled or a teen or over 65 who works there full time. she gets medical insurance, paid vacation and options for stock every year.
For every one unhappy walmart employee, there are 100 happy ones.
First, none of those cartoons are funny.
Second, Feministe is right about that first cartoon.
Third, the Lockerbie bomber died quite some time ago.
Fourth, whatever planet you people live on, please stay there and leave the rest of us alone, okay?
Ex-GOP Voter says: February 27, 2011 at 12:25 pm
“I don’t like what the Democrats have done in fleeing the state – but in the face of what is going on, it is the only option and I support them.”
===============================================================
Ex-RINO,
“Well of course you do.”
[When you read the words imagine the voice of Sean Connery responding to ms P. Galore when she told him her name.]
Paladin says: February 27, 2011 at 7:14 pm
‘Don’t Feed The Trolls’
============================================================
Paladin,
I am not sure if we are witnessing ‘tag team’ trolling or the dayshift trolls are handing off the ‘bong’ to the second shift.
What next? The ‘grave shift’ trolls.
Now that conjurs up some truly frightening images.
Nothing as innocuous as the caricature you have presented.
[Kind of reminds me of Joy Behar. Something along the lines of Bella Abzug would be closer to the mark.]
“First, none of those cartoons are funny.”
Subjective Opinion
“Second, Feministe is right about that first cartoon.” Assertion backed by no evidence
“Third, the Lockerbie bomber died quite some time ago. ”
Just flat out wrong. He’s still alive and kicking.
“Fourth, whatever planet you people live on, please stay there and leave the rest of us alone, okay?” Insult that adds nothing to the conversation.
Congratulations, Ellid. Your posts add absolutely nothing to the discussion!
Actually, Pope Leo XIII was very pro-union. The main focus of the RC church is, at present, abortion and gay marriage. But interesting, at one time the RC church was on the side of the unions.
Actually, CC, Archbishop Listecki of Milwaukee just wrote a letter to the Wisconsin legislators in favor of the unions. You get the idiot buzzer again.
What you get in the secular news media is only THEIR version of what the Church is all about – and for them everything is about sex. Surprised much? I remember one bishop (I think it was Archbishop Chaput of Denver) saying – “I talk as loud as I can about ALL of the Church’s social teachings, but they will only report on the ones that have to do with abortion, gay marriage, birth control and priestly celibacy.” Howw much attention do you think Abp Listecki’s letter got in the press?
And you certainly don’t need to go back to Leo XIII to find out what the Catholic Church thinks about labor and unions. Read the encyclicals of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. or go visit http://www.usccb.org and find out what the Church in the U.S. is up to.
Or you can remain in ignorance all your life – which ignorance has now gained the Archdiocese of New York a total of $30 for its pro-life work.
“What you get in the secular news media is only THEIR version of what the Church is all about – and for them everything is about sex. Surprised much? I remember one bishop (I think it was Archbishop Chaput of Denver) saying – “I talk as loud as I can about ALL of the Church’s social teachings, but they will only report on the ones that have to do with abortion, gay marriage, birth control and priestly celibacy.” Howw much attention do you think Abp Listecki’s letter got in the press?”
The media reports things that are controversial. Hot-button social issues (particularly the “con” positions) are controversial. Most of the Church’s other social teachings are not controversial because most everyone is in agreement that things like poverty and war are bad or that the working class deserves some form of organized representation vis-a-vis the owners of the means of production. Which is part of why, as a Catholic, I find it frustrating that the Church devotes such a disproportionate amount of time and effort to hammering on the tiny fraction of social issues that are extremely volatile when it could focus on things where there is plenty of common ground. And looking at the matter pragmatically and not ideologically, there’s really no excuse for the Church to be more strident about social wedge issues that aren’t really going anywhere anyway, when there is plenty of work to be done in far more important areas.
Ellid,
Given the tender sensibilities of yourself and other feminists, can you explain to me why they maintained a deafening silence when Bill Clinton was accused of everything from exposing himself to rape? When the women accusing him were reviled and ridiculed as liars and bimbos?
Hi Amy,
You continue to make my argument. Given the problems you describe, why aren’t the unions spending millions on good legal representation instead of on politicians who keep them in power?
Concerning the mob, again power corrupts. Union leaders allowed themselves to be manipulated and controlled by mobsters for their own gain, at the expense of hardworking and honest working people. They have become part of the political machine. I’m afraid Amy that I see nothing but goons fight to keep their power, not looking out for the interests of the people they are supposed to represent.
Joan:
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
If everyone is in agreement in a given area, why would anyone need to express their viewpoint? You need to convert people when they disagree with you, not when they agree.
Other things are more important than protecting unborn human rights? Like what? Tell me about any other form of violence or injustice which kills a million human beings a week around the world? There is nothing more important than safeguarding human life and prenatal homicide is the worst killing ever. It should be addressed before anything else.
Finally, I want to be very clear about this:
You are NOT a Catholic. The Catholic Church has taught for 2,000 years that you must accept every article in the Deposit of Faith to be a true Catholic. Catholic teaching is the revealed word of God and you cannot dissent from any of it (you apparently dissent in a lot of areas) without committing blasphemy, heresy, etc.
Disagree with the Church if you will, but if you do, you are considered to be
disagreeing with God, saying you know better than God. This means that you are not a true follower of Christ and therefore NOT a Catholic.
This is especially the case if you support an unspeakable evil like unlimited prenatal homicide.
No one who supports the killing of ALL members of the human species in the first nine months of life and taking from each of us our entire human lifespans can be a Catholic or any other Christian.
And in respect to the teachers’ unions – they support Planned Parenthood. Why in the world would an organization, who is dedicated to the education to children want their future students dead? Taking aside the moral argument – this makes no business sense at all.
With the unions, they have sometimes emphasized the wrong things – and this is definitely one of them. We should NOT put money toward killing off our customer base. Why should we send money to an entity that fails to report suspected abuse? PP fails on both of those accounts.
And lastly, the unions looked the other way when supporting the youth in avoiding their parents in authority. That comes back to bite the schools, when the youth then don’t respect the teachers, or the school authority also.
We should be supporting the very best in our youth – high work ethic, high moral ethic, high skills and high character. When we avoid our responsibilities, when we put other items first and not the welfare of children first, we lose.
Some of the bargaining for the teachers’ unions has been misguided – and all the members have to go along with the upper authorities, which have lost their way on quite a few issues.
Unions have to shape up, and that is one of the reason why now things are a bit dicey.
Jerry –
I’m late to the game, but as the daughter of a union carpenter, and as someone who’s spent quite a few years working in a non-union capacity in a union environment, I really appreciated your post. :) The difference I see daily in how the SAME EXACT person in charge will treat non-union employees versus union employees has always spoken volumes to me about how vital it is for management to be legally bound to respect the rights of workers. There are lots of problems with unions, but there are more problems with no-unions, in my experience. And I mean problems for both the employees and for the general public, who benefit from the safety regulations and experience that come with a union environment (I work in technical theater).
I am in a management position, in case that’s relevant.
…and more evidence that female homosexuals are missing the gene which carries a ‘sense of humor’.
Oh, for heaven’s sake. We have enough ignorance from trolls on this site, we don’t need it from the regulars.
I know absolutely nothing about unions, except that when my mom was still teaching she didn’t want to join either teachers’ union (there were two at the school she taught at) because they were always fighting each other and she didn’t feel the need to join a union anyway.
Regarding the first cartoon and the idiots claiming Jill is evil for thinking it’s funny – um, you complainers do know it was drawn by a pro-abortion liberal, right? Maybe you can complain to Signe Wilkinson for daring to draw the cartoon.
I find it harder every day to take those calling themselves “feminists” seriously.
Most of the Church’s other social teachings are not controversial because most everyone is in agreement that things like poverty and war are bad or that the working class deserves some form of organized representation
vis-a-vis the owners of the means of production.
Joan, once again, it’s hard to know where to begin. In the first place, it’s impossible to take a sweeping statement like the above seriously. Everyone in agreement on the social issues? The negative opinions you’ve heard here about the usefulness of unions should give you pause if nothing else does.
Every one of the Church’s teachings is controversial in the Church itself. Catholics might generally agree, as does the rest of the populationi that “war is bad” but many of them disagree with the Church’s particular teachings on what a just war is. Huge numbers of Catholics themselves were ready to mutiny when both John Paul II and now Benedict XVI came out against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many Catholics think JPII was heretical for suggesting the death penalty isn’t always the best punishment for murderers.
I honestly think you spend all your time either with your own mirror or the (hopefully) very small number of “Catholics” who think exactly like you do on everything.
Which is part of why, as a Catholic, I find it frustrating that the Church devotes such a disproportionate amount of time and effort to hammering on the tiny fraction of social issues that are extremely volatile when it could focus on things where there is plenty of common ground.
First of all, do you have any statistics on how much time the Church spends on each issue (remember, you can’t use the amount of news reporting, since you’ve just admitted it’s slanted toward the “controversial”)? What makes the amount of time the Church spends on an issue “disproprotionate”? The fact that joan thinks it is?
In reality, the fact that an issue is volatile means that people need guidance on it. And wouldn’t you agree that it’s precisely the “volatile” issues that need the Church’s attention, rather than the ones on which people all agree? – if there could every be any.
And looking at the matter pragmatically and not ideologically, there’s really no excuse for the Church to be more strident about social wedge issues that aren’t really going anywhere anyway, when there is plenty of work to be done in far more important
Fortunately, the Church is not committed to looking at things either pragmatically or ideologically, but with the mind and spirit of Christ, from whom she has the mandate to teach as He commanded. If an unjustice is being committed, and a large number of people do not understand it’s an injustice, as in the case of abortion, then the Church really needs to speak louder on that issue, whether joan likes it or not. The very fact that people don’t know it’s an injustice makes it more important. And the issue of abortion is anything but “not going anywhere.” Thanks to the efforts of many inside the Church and out, the tide is turning. Abortion is going to end up on the ash heap of history.
Marauder says: February 28, 2011 at 11:48 am
…’and more evidence that female homosexuals are missing the gene which carries a ‘sense of humor’.’
“Oh, for heaven’s sake. We have enough ignorance from trolls on this site, we don’t need it from the regulars.”
==============================================================
Marauder,
Perhaps it might be helpful to you if I give attribution for the ‘joke’ to the comedienne from whom I first heard it.
Bonnie McFarlane.
No, Bonnie is not a product of gender reassignment surgery or a transvestite.
Bonnie has a ‘gift’ for discerning and exposing the lunacy of ‘political correctness’.
http://comedians.jokes.com/bonnie-mcfarlane/videos/bonnie-mcfarlane—lesbians
Alexandrea: “There are lots of problems with unions, but there are more problems with no-unions, in my experience.”
That’s funny, because in my experience, my union job abused my efforts and my non-union job rewarded my efforts.
In my (teamsters) union job, everyone received the same raises, regardless of work effort. It was also nearly impossible to fire anyone, even for missing work because of a hangover. So, as a result, nothing got done by the leechers, leaving all of the work to be done by the real workers. However, we were paid the same, for doing more and working harder.
In my non-union job, my employers recognized my specific efforts and ability and gave me raises above and beyond the average worker. As a result, I make nearly double what the least effective employee makes. I am actually rewarded for my efforts.
That’s not even considering the destructive effect of unions on the growth of our economy.
To put it simply, unions protect the lazy and the selfish. Employers want good employees, so the hard workers are protected by any smart employer naturally. I know this also from a management point of view.
I don’t think any of it is funny, Oliver. I am fortunate to work with a union where hard work IS rewarded, not always with raises in hourly pay but with more opportunities for hourly work.
Unfortunately, my personal experience shows quite well that employers don’t always treat hardworking employees well. It would make sense if they did, but lots of things that make sense don’t actually or always happen. That’s just my experience. A good boss is a great thing but not a guarantee, and when you toss healthcare or a bad economy into the mix, individual workers don’t always have the opportunity of simply walking away from a bad boss in numbers great enough to actually change the behaviors.
Alexandra:
I really do appreciate your observations. I do support Gov. Walker’s proposals to rein in the excesses and abuses in Wisconsin. But at the same time there are some powerful reasons why unions exist that extend beyond wages. Management is full of people with all sorts of differing capabilities and motivations. I have seen some really nasty people given a little bit of authority who in turn made decisions that had nothing to do with logical production issues, but more so to massage their own egos. If that was the worse of it it would be tolerable. But often those same mischief makers would be decision makers when it came to input on performance assessments and even have a say in termination proceedings. Needless to say the end result is often a travesty.
Oliver claims:
“To put it simply, unions protect the lazy and the selfish.”
Yes, that can happen. But on the other hand it can work the other way where the a__ kissers who are also usually “lazy and selfish” are the ones who get promotions in a non-union environ. Union rules are intended to prevent all kinds of favoritism that can come into play with the way people are treated, paid, and considered for promotions in the workplace. Those same rules can indeed reward some non-productive employees. It is not perfect but my life experience has shown me time and again that labor is often regarded as a commodity and the workers treated as such.
Mary:
Thanks for your comments. We are on the same team 99.99% of the time, and I would like to think you could see my thinking as it applies to this situation. Here is the problem: in an industrial union where some of our members were barely literate (unlike trade unions where members usually have extensive classroom and on the job training) there is an inherent problem of assuring equality of treatment in the workplace. I could give many examples but one will suffice in getting the point across. It happened one very cold winter day when one of our men was outside clearing ice from the walkways and breaking icicles that posed threats to personnel and equipment should they fall. It was about zero degrees and he worked for hours. The steam from the processing equipment (much like a refinery) was causing ice to cake on him. He was no youngster and neither was he in great shape physically. By the end of the day he was frozen stiff, caked with ice! I will never forget one of the supervisors pointing at him and laughing about how stiff he was–never mind that a fellow human being was suffering! This mentality unfortunately is not all that unusual in many factory environs where those unable to speak well for themselves are not treated fairly or even paid a living wage. And ours was one of the better places to work! Getting into things such as packing houses with high speed production lines things get really bad on the labor end of the work. It was not my original inclination to get invoved in union leadership but the reality of the situation was that labor/management relations were poisoned (both sides contributed to this) thru the years and they (management) ended up making things really difficult on the union members. Again, I understand that often union members are not angels either.
yor bro ken, it’s perpetuating stereotypes because A) not everyone at Feministe is a lesbian and B) not every lesbian goes along with the pro-chioce movement. It’s like if Al Sharpton and his supporters got angry about something inoffensive they claimed was racist and people characterized that as “proof that black people have no sense of humor.”
Mar,
I stand corrected.
Ellen Degeneres and Rosie O’Donnell have a sense of humor.
I do not believe it would be stereotyping to point out that race pimp Al Sharpton’s sense of humor, like his outrage, is selective.
[Sexual orientation, unlike ethnicity, is a choice.]
I have spent enough time at Feministe website to reach this conclusion: The hosts and devotees share these common denominators:
1. abortion advocate
2. democRAT
3. liberal
4. lesbian
5. feminist
6. humanist/paganist
7. self absorbed
8. a tendency to ‘conflate’
9. no discernable ‘sense’ of humor
I have not encountered a single republican, conservative, feminine, christian, nuturing female.
While the heterosexuals may not proclaim their sexual preference, the homosexuals are quick to identiy theirs.
I have not encountered a single female at feministe who has a ‘sense’ of humor.
That is not stereotyping.
Pointing out a propensity for flannel shirts, work boots and birkenstocks is not stereotyping if it is true.
There is some factual basis for ‘profiling’.
While not all the hosts and devotees share all 9 of the traits I have listed, one can draw still draw conclusions from females who manifest most of them.
While not all lesbians lack a sense of humor, most liberals do, especially when it is their golden calf that is being skewered. Most, the overwhelming majority of lesbians are liberals.
“I do not believe it would be stereotyping to point out that race pimp Al Sharpton’s sense of humor, like his outrage, is selective.”
The correct analogy would be you saying that black people, not Al Sharpton, have a selective sense of both outrage and humor. It isn’t incorrect to point out individual people’s actions or personality traits. It is incorrect to attribute those actions and personality traits to whole groups of people who have one or more things in common with the individual in question.