Thursday, December 18, 2008

Catholics Must Believe in the Real Presence, the Assumption of Mary, and the United Auto Workers Union

Somehow I think I missed that last part in RCIA.

I saw this over at Vox Nova - An Anti-Union Agenda.

The comments are interesting and some show that the Unions we have in the United States are not exactly what the Popes are talking about.

In the comment sections I keep seeing this theme that is why are "cultural conservatives marginalized themselves by unnecessarily tying themselves to the anti-worker, anti-union agenda of conservative activists? "

First I am not exactly sure this true. Also many cultural conservatives are pro-union. Again people can have different views. I think many Americans pro Union or not are against things like CARD CHECK.

As to the bailout that is discussed I think the discussion here leaves out issues what is troubling many people including myself. Though this post is a tad better than the earlier theme of SOUTHERNERS hate the Midwest I saw there and elsewhere it still does not get to the core of the objections.

Also is the GOP internal memo so damning? Isn't a lot of it we need to know what the hell we are voting on?

Mickey Kaus hits on the concerns a great deal that I think many people have. See "Look at GM, and tell me strong unions are good for the economy" , Where Do Detroit's Inefficient Work Rules Come From? , The Trouble With the Bailout Deal .

Mickey Kaus is needless to say not some Republican cultural conservative. Be sure to read the very good link Kaus has in the first link to Michael Barone From Taylorism to Wagnerism article that also shows some of the concerns. Again it is a tad more complex and the current opposition is more diverse than I think the post at Vox Nova indicates

One other word on Republicans and others "marginalizing themselves" and the usual astute political analysis I see as to the GOP and the people in it

Kaus who as I mentioned is a Obama voting DEM went to the Democrat Convention and brought us this shocking news

See Dems rally against unions! - By Mickey Kaus - Slate Magazine

Things We Thought We'd Never See: Democrats Rally Against the Teachers' Unions! I went to the Ed Challenge for Change event mainly to schmooze. I almost didn't stay for the panels, being in no mood for what I expected would, even among these reformers, be an hour of vague EdBlob talk about "change" and "accountability" and "resources" that would tactfully ignore the elephant in the room, namely the teachers' unions. I was so wrong. One panelist--I think it was Peter Groff, president of the Colorado State Senate, got the ball rolling by complaining that when the children's agenda meets the adult agenda, the "adult agenda wins too often." Then Cory Booker of Newark attacked teachers unions specifically--and there was applause. In a room of 500 people at the Democratic convention! "The politics are so vicious," Booker complained, remembering how he'd been told his political career would be over if he kept pushing school choice, how early on he'd gotten help from Republicans rather than from Democrats. The party would "have to admit as Democrats we have been wrong on education." Loud applause! Mayor Adrian Fenty of D.C. joined in, describing the AFT's attempt to block the proposed pathbreaking D.C. teacher contract. Booker denounced "insane work rules," and Groff talked about doing the bidding of "those folks who are giving money [for campaigns], and you know who I'm talking about." Yes, they did!

As Jon Alter, moderating the next panel, noted, it was hard to imagine this event happening at the previous Democratic conventions. (If it had there would have been maybe 15 people in the room, not 500.) Alter called it a "landmark" future historians should note. Maybe he was right...............

P.P.S.: John Wilson, head of the NEA itself, was also there. Afterwards, he seemed a bit stunned. He argued pols should work with unions, in pursuit of a "shared vision," not bash them. But isn't this a power struggle where you have to bash the other side to get leverage, I asked. "Then you have losers," he answered.

So perhaps just perhaps people should be careful about judging the temperature of the American electorate on this issue. In fact is this not why the DEMS are so concerned about having Republicans support this because they want to make sure that "we all go off the cliff together" in a political sense and to give them cover?

No comments: