Footwedge;419579 wrote:We already did that in 06 and 08.

And it's time for a fresh enema.

I Wear Pants;419578 wrote:I can't disagree with you there. Which is why I send letters to my congressman fairly often.

I've sent Charlie Wilson several mails/emails, and I always get the same pre-fab letters back.
It's useless to try to call his office. Nobody ever answers the phone. If you're lucky, you might get a voice mail.

Footwedge;419579 wrote:We already did that in 06 and 08.

And look what we got in their stead.

believer;419628 wrote:And it's time for a fresh enema.

And a set off fresh new assholes.

CenterBHSFan;419982 wrote:I've sent Charlie Wilson several mails/emails, and I always get the same pre-fab letters back.
It's useless to try to call his office. Nobody ever answers the phone. If you're lucky, you might get a voice mail.

That doesn't stop me from sending that douche letters and emails.

The only email I have ever sent him was after he voted for the Health Care scam...I told him he would never get my vote in any future election.

That's not a very good way to go about it imo. Why would he listen to you if you're never going to vote for him again?

^^^If enough "never going to vote for him again" folks never vote for him again I suppose the point is moot.

I'm not saying you should vote for him again. If you don't like what he did then don't vote for him. It's just that while he's in office telling him you'll never vote for him again doesn't give him much incentive to listen to you does it. (Not that he would anyway but that wasn't my point)

^^^Understood but my point is that the douche bag needs to listen because I have a hunch there are a lot of "never going to vote for him again" voters ready to shit can him.

Well yeah. But when have most of our politicians been smart? And when have most of our citizens had long enough memories to not vote for the incumbent. It's almost as if many people say "oh, he was in office and he's on the ballot again, he must not have done anything terrible or he wouldn't have gotten the nomination."

1. I think Charlie Wilson needs to hear what his constituents think, even the bad stuff.
2. I also believe that there's probably enough party line voters and "old timers" in the Ohio Valley to get him reelected.
3. I can't sleep, haha!

^^^My guess is Charlie's not sleeping much these days either.

believer;421086 wrote:^^^My guess is Charlie's not sleeping much these days either.

By the time stamps of your posts, seems to me ole Charlie ain't the only one having sleepless nights.

Footwedge;421093 wrote:By the time stamps of your posts, seems to me ole Charlie ain't the only one having sleepless nights.

There is no time for sleep when a socialist regime change requires constant vigilance.

This will certainly make businesses want to invest and hire ...................

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-04/obama-promises-labor-leaders-he-ll-pursue-union-friendly-agenda.html

Change we can believe in ..........................

Quaker -.
How in the hell can the USA be competitive when they are strangled by union wages and union featherbedding in the international marketplace?
How is the Obama regime going to create jobs by making American wages and productivity less competitive?
If our competition, i.e. China, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, aren't paying union wages and reducing productivity, then how can the USA compete?
When what's left of our manufacturing base moves overseas in order to compete with the aforementioned countries, how will it be Bush's fault this time?

So those of you who oppose union wants workers to have to work for shit wages and be able to get screwed with for doing nothing wrong??

If amazes me that when they don't need them,Conservatives hate unions. But when they get screwed at a unionized job,they run right to the union

gibby08;441972 wrote:So those of you who oppose union wants workers to have to work for shit wages and be able to get screwed with for doing nothing wrong??

If amazes me that when they don't need them,Conservatives hate unions. But when they get screwed at a unionized job,they run right to the union

Unions in the big three automakers and look what happened. Yep, they really are doing the job they did when first put together.

You continue to amaze us.

gibby08;441972 wrote:So those of you who oppose union wants workers to have to work for shit wages and be able to get screwed with for doing nothing wrong??

If amazes me that when they don't need them,Conservatives hate unions. But when they get screwed at a unionized job,they run right to the union

Actually, as somebody who was a member of ALF-CIO union, I KNOW that in today's world, the union can hurt you just as much as it can help you.
I remember the days of going to the meetings, being handed all the propaganda pamphlets and flyers, listening to lectures about what a God-send NAFTA was going to be... ::: sigh ::: ... and I believed it.
Those were the days. Not really.

Oh and by the way:

The AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest labor group, may spend more in this year’s midterm elections than the $53 million it put into the 2006 midterm campaign, the group’s deputy director, Mike Podhorzer, said yesterday.

Man... that kind of money sure could help alot of union families out there to help pay their bills and put food on the table.

But, the politicians need it more!!!!!
Sacrifice for the sake of the party!!!!!

"And the union people crawled away" - Billy Joel

gibby08;441972 wrote:So those of you who oppose union wants workers to have to work for shit wages and be able to get screwed with for doing nothing wrong??

When you opine for the workers in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, the Philipines, Indonesia, China, North Korea, and Vietnam to be unionized, then I might be agreeable with you. Until then, having this anvil and yoke around the American worker makes us less competitive and less productive in the international marketplace. Liberals love to whine and wail about how we've lost our manufacturing base in the USA, but do NOTHING to bring the standard of living and living wages to human levels in the countries listed above. You can NOT have it both ways. These countries are the culprits, not American entreprenuers and capitalists.

$53 million put into a campaign/election??? Looks like Obama and the dems need new campaign finance reform!!! I remember Obama telling us that he would take special interest groups out of Washington.....what's this???? Hey Gibby, what's up with those great unions buying political favor with their dues??? What about the members that don't want their dues going to a marxist/leftist gov't?? Unions are good?? That's what you are telling us, right?? LMAO

BGFalcons82;441924 wrote:Quaker -.

If our competition, i.e. China, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, aren't paying union wages and reducing productivity, then how can the USA compete?
When what's left of our manufacturing base moves overseas in order to compete with the aforementioned countries, how will it be Bush's fault this time?

I don't think Quaker has ever blamed Bush for anything. As for the labor in the aforementioned countries, nobody wants these 3rd world country workers to make union wages. But they should be paid a lot higher than the slave wages they are presently receiving. Henry Ford broke the Wall Streeter's demands for slave labor rates in the 1910's. He all but doubled the wages of the assembly liners, and without any collective bargaining group forcing his hand. As a businessman....this was shear genius on his part....with his company growing by leaps and bounds. Companies that view their workers as nothing more than a "cost' on their income statement, are penny wise and pound foolish.

There is "comparative advantage" and "absolute advantage" when it comes to international trade. Comparative advantages lead to healthy growth of all nations, poor or otherwise. Absolute advantage results in a feudal system by and large.

Whether we like it or not, fair trade agreements would and should be negotiated by both European countries and North America. Until his happens, the US economy will continue to be flushed down the proverbial shitter.

Anyone want to join me ... NOT MY PRESIDENT ....
I said it early and nothing has change and hopeless

gibby08;441972 wrote:So those of you who oppose union wants workers to have to work for shit wages and be able to get screwed with for doing nothing wrong??

If amazes me that when they don't need them,Conservatives hate unions. But when they get screwed at a unionized job,they run right to the union

How many union workplaces have you been employed in and what unions have you belonged to? For that matter, where have you worked that you've been messed with for no reason? I'm guessing you're talking out of your ass, as usual.