Posts Tagged ‘SEIU’

The Hidden Conspiracy

March 3, 2011

As Chairman Zero presses ahead with his illegal health care scam I reflect on some of the scams we have been dealing with for years. For example the American Medical Association (AMA). I was going to link to their site right here but the first page is already trying to recruit you so I opted out. If you must, find it yourself but I won’t be an enabler. A great organization, looking out for the American people, right? Wrong. First off it’s headquartered in Chicago. Read into that whatever you want I am just not a fan of big cities much less Chicago. But beyond that it is basically the doctor’s union. Their motto is ‘Helping Doctors Help Patients’. If you know anything about Hippocrates and the Hippocratic oath you know this should be a huge understatement but let’s not sit on formalities.

Most recently they have done such things as strongly support the findings of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). First off what are they even doing with this issue. I can see them getting tricked by the IPCC’s report as it was fraudulent but they have not retracted that statement. And most recently they have again ‘strongly supported’ obamacare. Now that it has been ruled un Constitutional what do they plan to do. I believe they have their pointy head firmly directed into the wind and they intend to ride out the storm in hopes that Zero will prevail. Is this the sort of thing an organization that cares about the people should do?

An economist named Milton Friedman accused them of filing lawsuits against chiropractors and osteopathic physicians for the unlicensed practice of medicine. There is a book, Profession and monopoly, that has quite a bit on them. See that here. They claim that the AMA limits the supply of doctors to drive up the cost of medical care in America. Sound familiar? Are we starting to see a trend here? Always follow the Benjamins.

My own personal thing is colds, flu, and cancer. I believe they have thrown enough money at these things to have a cure. I truly believe that the AMA has restricted that material in one way or another because their membership makes too much money studying and treating them to cure them. Sick? Yes. True? I believe so. What am I going to do about it? I’ve just done it. The ball’s in your court.

The AMA is not your friend just like the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is not your friend and the United Auto Workers (UAW) is not your friend. If you think they are, you are deceiving yourself and playing a very dangerous game with the future of this country and your children. These people will trade you and yours for an extra dollar a day. And when push comes to shove they will shove anybody under the bus as Zero is starting to find out. So, until next time, screw environmentalists.


February 24, 2010

There’s a lot of talk about Scot Brown being a disappointment. I don’t know how you feel but personally I expected a lot more. Of course I based my thinking on the thought that anyone who drives an old truck must be all good. I suppose I should have been considering the obvious, he’s a Republican from Massachusetts.

I guess he’s better than a Kennedy but here’s the thing. The Founding Fathers envisioned a congress where the average guy would leave his productive job and go “serve” in the congress and then go back home to his productive job. I read where the average salary in America today is $40,000.00. Who can afford to get elected on that kind of money? I will venture to say that we haven’t had an “average guy” in congress for many moons.

The type of jackal that runs for office today is normally backed by many a pocket-book all looking to get fatter, not skinnier. By the time an “average guy” gets in office he owes so many favors that he feels obligated to honor that he will inevitably produce votes like Mr. Brown’s “jobs bill” vote. He should be the poster boy for campaign finance reform.

Here’s a quick overview of my plan for campaign finance reform. Nobody spends more than $100,000.00. NOBODY! Not the Pres, nobody. No donation can exceed $100.00. This means all donations, corporate, personal, organization. The NRA can give you no more than $100.00. The SEIU can give you no more than $100.00. GM, GE, Mobil, McDonald’s, Fred Farkel, the girl up the street, the homeless guy on the corner, all no more than $100.00. If you can’t find 1,000 donations maybe you shouldn’t be running. All monies must be donated, none of your own.

Hey just a quick shot from the hip. Maybe one of you “average guys” out there can draft something up and introduce it. Probably not because congress has become a wealth building endeavor hasn’t it? That’s right, they’re rich when they go in and they’re even wealthier when they come out. Plus they usually have brokered a six figure income consulting some super-corporation after retirement. A retirement funded by the American people. What a scam. Oh well, until next time, screw environmentalists.

The McCain-Feingold Act

January 21, 2010

The McCain-Feingold Act was ruled unconstitutional today by the Supreme Court. What does this mean? Well that is a complicated answer. McCain-Feingold in itself is not that old (2002), but the crux of the act hearkens back to the turn of the twentieth century when robber barons used their wealth to elect politicians that would do their bidding.

Valid arguments can be made both ways. It is, after all, freedom of speech, but who’s speech? Who speaks for the SEIU, GM, the AFLCIO, or GE? I rather think the First Amendment protection of free speech applies to individuals. Does that include individual entities? Then the questionable aspects of the candidate being beholding to the corporation or organization that funds the ad comes into play, as was the case with the robber barons.

I think the ruling is correct. The freedom of speech must be preserved. But this freedom must apply only to individuals. The individuals hiding behind these corporate and organizational names should not be insulated from prosecution and law suits by the same laws that allow them this freedom of speech. An individual should be put forth to stand accountable for the good as well as the bad if an organization desires this kind of consideration from the American people.

A case in point is when I worked for a large automobile manufacturer I was required to belong to a union, even though I did not want to. The union donated to the Democrat Party. I did not like that either. If this is the case I should have been able to bring suit against the individual who made this decision. Does that sound fair? I don’t recall a vote at the union hall to see if we were going to donate. They just did it.

Let’s look at that logically. I had to pay a portion of my income to a group just to keep my job. That sounds like the old protection money the gangsters took from merchants so they didn’t put them out of business. Next they took that same money and gave it to a cause that I not only did not believe in, but at the time, worked against (I was a Republican). What’s that quote about a man being made to pay for something he abhors?

At any rate, we’ve gone back in time about a century on this law. Is that good? I don’t know. It seems like it should be so why do I have all this fear?