I think they should go bankrupt. Unions didn't cause it -

• Have a question for the labor unions.... - sam
  • Notice how he got rid of the GM - Trigger Happy
    • What the unions have done lately - Mythbuster
  • I think they should go bankrupt. Unions didn't cause it - - greedy CEOs & bad cars caused it. (nm) Topaz
    • UAW is definitely to blame for GMs current situation. - Trigger Happy
    • First of all.... - Trigger Happy
  • Hey sam - nice to see you back - New Englander
    • No it isn't. - >>>>>>>>>>>>>
      • Yes, it is. - Old part-timer

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the readers gets sick of reading them. I also have included the URL's for verification of all of the following facts.

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.

Verify at: http://tinyurl.com/zob77

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/ TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare and Social Services by the American taxpayers.

Verify at: http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html

9. $200 Billion dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSC RI PTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US .

Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana,
crossed into the U. S. from the Southern border.

Verify at: Homeland Security Report: h ttp:// tinyurl..com/t9sht

12. The National Policy Institute, estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.'

Verify at: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf

13. In 2006, illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances to their countries of origin.

Verify at: http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm

14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One million sex crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States ..'

Verify at: http: // www.drdsk.com/articleshtml <http://ww w.drdsk.com/articleshtml >

The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR AND IF YOU'RE HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY; IT IS $338,300,000,000.00 WHICH WOULD BE ENOUGH TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY......... .

Are we that stupid? YES, FOR LETTING THOSE IN THE U.S. CONGRESS GET AWAY WITH LETTING THIS HAPPEN YEAR AFTER YEAR!!!!!

If this doesn't bother you then just delete the message. If, on the other hand, it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, I hope you forward it to every legal resident in the country including every elected representative in Washington , D.C. - five times a weekfor as long as it takes to restore some semblance of intelligence in our government policies and enforcements....

Nobody has the balls to say the word.  We print Monopoly money because we don't have anything else.  Try spending that before long.

Enough is enough already!

//

is negotiate bloated hourly pay rates and pension plans.  The car manufacturers, of course, agreed.  Couple that with executive pay and bonuses, the effect has been to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. 

I believe it was a triad, the unions, executives, and government meddling that has killed the auto industry.

Let's not leave out the government's part in this - long before the bailouts, government mandates and standards for manufacturing cars other than what people wish to buy.  And since the government could not ban SUVs and trucks (apparently what many consumer wanted and still want) it attacks them in a different way. 

We've all read claims that SUVs are 'responsible for highway deaths.'  Why?  Because the SUV driver walked away and the family of four driving a roller skate did not? Look for gas prices to go back up to four bucks and stay there. That will be to force us to drive tiny death trap cars.  People were actually buying them when gas prices were high, but sales dropped when the per-gallon price got back down to two dollars. 

Maybe there will also be some kind of tax based on vehicle size or weight, either on purchase, or to scoop more of us into the governmentm maw, a federal surtax when we reregister our current cars. 

to be something we would do on a country wide basis.  I mean...what is the point if you can't leave your state because other states don't accept them.  I meant this as a country wide thing.  If the whole country recognized civil unions with the same benefits as marriage kind of thing.  I guess I wasn't specific enough. 

As it goes, same sex marriage is only accepted in the states that allow it.  I mean...you have to live in those states to have the rights of marriage...right?  Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one because I really don't know. 

At first we were told the outsourcing was to cut labor costs.  Only after this campaign rhetoric took hold did the issue of taxes come up.  Now I ask you, if the reason for outsourcing is taxes, what the heck?  Didn't Bush CUT taxes.

It seems that American people have lost the reasoning side of their collective brains.  When I quit working a few months ago I was making LESS than I made in the 80s.  How is that possible?  The cost of medical care has not gone down.  The cost of medical insurance has not gone down.  I posted some time ago about a local hospital that laid off their most experienced nurses, not a few of them, ALL of them, and hired new graduate nurses to replace them at lesser wages.  What was that about?  They got away with it though.  Anything to increase the bottom line profit.

This is true in every industry.  They like to blame labor for everything.  Well, how the heck can you buy a $2+ loaf of bread and $5 gallon of milk on minimum wage, ya know?  Take gasoline for example.  Sure it has gone down the last days but is it back where it was when oil was what?  $86 a barrel or whatever?  No and it never will be.

So that car you drive.........how much do you think of the price tag is labor? 

These things are what really aggravates me.  People just can't seem to use reasoning power any more.  I'll give you an example:  After my husband lost his job in the CF fiasco, he drove for awhile for a friend who owns a trucking company.  I went with him on a trip.  He picked up a load of beef in Boonesville, AR, hauled it to Chicago, no problem.  Then they sent him somewhere in Ohio to pick up a load of vinegar to take to Florida.  Got to Ohio and I forget the reason but he couldn't pick up the vinegar. Then he was sent (empty) to Logan (?), Kentucky where he picked up 40,000 pounds of chocolate covered doughnuts which he delivered to Phoenix.  In Phoenix they told him that most of that load would be routed back to Atlanta.  Now what kind of sense does that make?  Taxes the problem?  I would say poor management is a bigger problem than taxes OR labor.

I'm sorry about your dad's experience.  People used to do things like that.  I recall my late father-in-law, worked for the fire department in Fort Worth and he said during the depression they did the same thing, worked less so the ones with less seniority could keep a job.  They all suffered but they suffered together and somehow they all made it as did your parents.

I am just horrified at the apparent digress of intelligence in this country.  It seems people believe anything the news media or anyone else tells them.  Seems they have totally lost the ability to reason and God forbid that anyone should think of anyone other than themself.

All that said, feel free to go ahead and believe that companies are outsourcing jobs because of labor costs or taxes.  The unionized workers, under Reagan, started taking wage concessions, that is taking a DECREASE in pay to keep jobs.  How did that work?  Don't believe I've heard of any of the victims of outsourcing even being offered a pay cut to keep the jobs in this country.  Certainly not the Rheem plant in Fort Smith that the other day laid off the last 600 workers.  They sent most of their production to Mexico a few years ago.  Fort Smith they say is dying because of outsourcing.  Their reason?  They say, it's "labor costs."  Well, then, how is it that people can't afford to pay their bills with all the excessive wages they're supposedly receiving. Obviously the next in vogue EXCUSE will be that taxes are lower in other countries.  B.S.!!!!!!!

Some union members are afraid to vote for better benefits or strike because management threatens to move, like the other posters stated.

Case in point: A small manufacturing shop. Union wanted higher wages or strike, and health care benefits to stay the same, both in cost and care. The union wanted a $.25 an hour raise. Owner said No. Union asked for $.15. Owner said no. Union said strike. Workers said no. They were afraid the owner would shut down and they had their jobs for 30 years.

The union steward fought for better benefits but when the workers voted against the better benefits, the company won. Two weeks later, the steward was laid off, along with a member of my family just because he was friends with the union steward. That was 3 years ago. The workers are still working for the same hourly rate this year. How's that for being fair?

I was a member of the Teamster's. When we went on strike for better wages back in the ྂs, he company threatened to move out.. We also wanted (women) equal pay for equal work because we did the same work the men did, but got paid $.25 an hour less.  They moved and 100 jobs were lost. So, you see, companies still have the upper hand, not unions. They only want your money anymore. They really don't care about the workers.

Two husbands who were union workers.  One IBEW, one Teamster.  BOTH said there were workers who didn't carry their share of the work load...not much different than MTs who cherry pick for instance.

#1 IBEW husband said at the time or Reganomics, when Ronald Reagan, himself a card-carrying member of the actor's union, said he would break the unions, it would be the downfall of the American workers.. Regan succeeded in breaking the backs of the unions.   When union workers lost the ability to bargain, they had to start taking wage concessions......and guess what?  Union wages went down, so did non-union wages follow suit.  When union workers got better working conditions, better wages and better benefits, so did non-union workers.

#2 Teamster husband is a radical retired Teamster.  While he also complained that there were lazy workers who rode on the backs of the hard-workers, he also said that the union does not support such and more times than not the union would uphold the firing of such a person.  He has a Teamster retirement that is the envy of most people and he has retiree health care benefits even though we pay about $700 a month for that.  While he was working, his union dues were around $35 a month and that covered our insurance.   Teamster retirees today will not enjoy those benefits.

Do some research on the history of unions.  Might not hurt to watch the movie Norma Rae as well. 

his own personal reasons.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php

The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.

Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."

Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.

In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.

"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"

Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.

Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.

Conversations With Bush The Candidate

Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.

The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.

I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."

Debating The Timeline For War

But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.

The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.

On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"

I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."

"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …

"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.

Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.

Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"

Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.

Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."

Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.

Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.

in AR's post that she was against it.  Instead, she acted as if the topic has no place on this board and shouldn't be discussed... like some kind of dirty little secret.

The *attack the messenger* technique has been used constantly in the last 5 years by the current administration (and his followers) when someone gets too close to the truth.  Don't believe me?  Ask Valerie Plame.

Same old.  Same old. 

But, it IS the RNC, so they are damned either way with socialists oops I mean democRATS like yourself. 

I received a call from an friend who was so upset and said Obama called Palin a pig in lipstick.  I responded, surely no, you must be mistaken.  Obama is running for office of the President of the United States.  Why would he ruin his chances of winning by calling this lady a pig.  That doesn't sound like rational behavior for a presidential candidate.  However, to my surprise I opened several different news sources (both liberal and conservative) and sure enough he did.  I'm thinking why, why in the world would you fall down that path of being so low that you would call Palin a pig saying "you can put lipstick on a pig and it will still be a pig".  If he was trying to make a joke in reference to her joke about the difference between a soccer mom and a pit bull is lipstick, this joke could not have come at a worse time for him.  How in the world is he going to explain that one.

Shame shame Barack Obama.  This has to be one of the lowest comments anyone can make about another candidate. - Not funny!  Why would you go and ruin any chance you had that people may have thought you had a little bit of "class" to you.

I haven't watched MSNBC but am curious as to how they are going to respond.  How can they support someone when this is his opinion of other people.

Talk about low class.  One more reason I will not be voting democrat this election. 

Subject: Bet Ya didn't hear about this on NBC Family with Down Syndrome Child Meets John McCain and Sarah Palin September 9, 2008 ((( BEGIN PHONE TRANSCRIPT WITH RUSH LIMBAUGH ))) RUSH:  Kurt in Pittsburgh, hello, sir.  Nice to have you on the EIB Network, and how about the Steelers defense? CALLER:  How about those Steelers, huh? RUSH:  How about that? CALLER:  Hey, listen, Rush, longtime listener, first-time caller, one of those Bible, family, gun clingers from western Pennsylvania. RUSH:  Thank you. CALLER:  And I wanted to share a story with you.  A week ago last Saturday we went to the Palin-McCain rally in Washington, Pennsylvania, was the day after he announced her, and we have a five-year-old daughter with Down syndrome, and we made a sign that said: "We Love Kids with Down Syndrome."  So when they pulled in their bus, the sign did catch their eye (McCain and Palin and the rest of their family) it caught their eye, we could tell, they gave us a thumbs-up from the bus, so we were all excited just by that -- RUSH:  Wait, wait, wait.  Who gave you the thumbs up, McCain and Palin? CALLER:  McCain, Palin, Cindy McCain, we could see them from the bus. We were in a position where we had eye contact with them -- RUSH:  Oh, cool! CALLER:  My wife was holding our daughter. RUSH:  Very, very, very cool. CALLER:  It was really cool, Rush. I was like, "Wow, that's awesome," because I love Governor Palin and so I thought that's really neat.  So then we moved around as the bus was getting ready to pull out, we kind of positioned ourselves so we could just wave them on and a Secret Service agent came up to us and said, "Hey, can you come with us?"  I was like, "Do we have a choice?" RUSH: (laughing) You shouldn't have worried.  It's not the Clinton administration. CALLER: Right. So we accompanied them up the hill, we went right to the bus, where it was, and Governor Palin, Senator McCain, Cindy, Todd Palin, they're all standing there. We're in this inner circle with just us and them, and the Secret Service agent, and they came right up to us and thanked us for coming out, said they loved our sign, and Governor Palin immediately said, "May I hold your daughter?" and our daughter Chloe, who's five, went right to her, and I have some pictures I'd love to send you maybe when I'm done here, but Governor Palin was hugging Chloe, and then her little daughter brought their baby Trig who has Down syndrome from the bus, he was napping, and Chloe went right over and kissed him on the cheek, and my son Nolan who's nine, he thanked her. RUSH: This is amazing. CALLER: I will send you all the stuff, Senator McCain was talking to my son, and we thanked him for his service, and he asked my son if he wanted to see the bus, and we were hanging out and it was very surreal. I felt like we could have had a pizza and a beer with them, they were so warm. RUSH: You know what? I want to put you on hold. I want Snerdley to give you our super-secret, known-only-to-three-people here, e-mail address. CALLER: I will send you everything, Rush. RUSH: And then could you send us these pictures? Would you mind if we put them on the website? CALLER: I would be honored, and my main thing is they are warm, kind, genuine people, and they represent the best of this country. RUSH:  That's right.  And when you send these pictures, make sure you identify them.  I mean, we'll know Palin and McCain, of course.  Identify yourselves. CALLER:  I will, I will identify everybody in the picture, Rush, and God bless you for being a beacon of hope and truth in this country. RUSH:  Oh, no, no.  It's nothing, it's nothing.  You're doing the Lord's work. CALLER:  Well, we're very blessed and I want people to know what a blessing it is to have a child with Down syndrome. These kids, they're angels. RUSH:  That's the thing.  There's always good to be found in everything that happens.  It may be a while before it reveals itself. CALLER:  Absolutely. RUSH:  Right, and when she hugged my daughter I said, here's the difference, this candidate embraces life and all its limitless possibilities. RUSH:  All right. CALLER:  That's what she is. RUSH:  Terrific, okay, I gotta run here, but I'm going to put you on hold. CALLER:  Thank you, Rush. RUSH:  Thank you, Kurt.  I really appreciate it. ((( END TRANSCRIPT )))

you didn't agree with everything in that propaganda.  Therein lies the problem.  Don't put stuff out there as fact if you don't agree with it.

Sorry the Dems didn't have enough votes to pass the bail-out without their Pub counterparts.  They are all a greedy bunch of vipers and I intend to vote AGAINST my Senator (Democrat) and Represent (Republican) when they come up for re-election and I have told them so!  Both have voted to support big business in their district and gone against the will of there constituents on every issue.