RichmondPhilsFan wrote:There is nothing, either historically or in modern times, to suggest that the Republican Party would support a labor union strike.

Roger Dorn wrote:http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20120925_N_J__senator_wants_to_ban_replacement_refs.html

New Jersey state senator ready to introduce legislation banning replacement refs for professional sports played in New Jersey. Refs must have screwed up his fantasy team.

NEW JERSEY!

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Eddie Jordan wrote:It's a little humorous because the NFL situation boils down to ultra rich white guys similar to Mitt Romney unwilling to share a piece of their mutlibillion dollar pie that's hurting the overall product.

It's a private sector union locked out and not giving into the unreasonable demands of management. The workers are showing their value added, and that they truly deserve what they're asking for. Nothing wrong with what the refs are doing according to the GOP. The reason ownership has gotten away with it as long as they have is the NFL is for all practical purposes a monopoly. In any normal industry, with the labor lockout hurting the company's brand so badly, management would have settled weeks ago.

Please point to an example of a GOP politician supporting a union strike within the past decade.

For the most part I don't think politicians should intervene or comment on labor disputes unless they directly affect the functioning of government or national security type things. I can't really think of too many (any) instances of GOP politicians weighing in on either side of a strike involving private sector unions since I started paying attention to politics. Google tells me GWB invoked Taft-Hartley in 2002 to end a lockout of a longshoremen union on the West Coast, and they subsequently did well for themselves when they came to an agreement on a new contract.

Are you serious? Taft-Hartley is NAMED after two Republicans and was only passed after Truman's veto. And that was during a time when there were still extraordinary injustices in the workforce (not that there aren't still, but it was on an entirely different scale in the 1940s--no OSHA, no equal pay protection, no minimum wage, etc.).

There is nothing, either historically or in modern times, to suggest that the Republican Party would support a labor union strike.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Fair enough, but saying that my question isn't "particularly relevant" to your point is silly. You claimed that the GOP would say that there's nothing wrong with what the refs are doing (lockout or strike, it's essentially the same thing). My point is that history seems to contradict your statement, so I asked for evidence to the contrary.

JFLNYC wrote:I'm sorry JH, but you're being naive. The vast, vast majority of Republicans aren't "fine" with unions' exercising their rights through work stoppages or otherwise. They do everything within their power to cut unions' legs out from under them, whether procedurally or substantively or by simply trying to break a union.

The instance I posted earlier about House republicans' attempt at creating procedural hurdles is but one example. Other examples are legion, whether it's the Wisconsin situation or going back as far as possible. In terms of the modern Republican Party (i.e., post-Rockefeller Republicans) Reagan's breaking of the Air Traffic Controllers Union was the stake in the ground from which the Republicans have operated ever since.

Of course, it was set almost 100 years ago, but if you want too see a good example of my experience with Republicans' attitudes (if not actions) towards unions, just watch John Sayles movie "Matewan." Having grown up in the coal mining regions of Schuylkill County, I can tell you that the anti-union sentiment towards coal miners is not exaggerated. (In fact, if you want a close-to-historic portrayal of what coal miners faced before unions, I recommend the Sean Connery/Richard Harris movie, "The Molly Maguires," which is based on a true story of what happened in Schuylkill County in the 19th century).

Again, the movies were set in a time many years ago. But, at least in my experience, the position and tactics of the overwhelming majority of Republicans these days may have been cleaned up a bit for public consumption, but the underlying attitude hasn't changed much at all.

JFLNYC wrote:How in heaven's name does the difference between public and private sector unions tell us anything about Republicans' attitudes towards unions in general?

Here you can see Brown's staffers making "war whoops" and "tomahawk chops", presumably in reference to Warren's Cherokee heritage. Identified in video making the chop are Brown's Constituent Service Counsel Jack Richard (camoflage shirt) and -- we believe -- Massachusetts GOP operative Brad Garrett, front and center with tan baseball cap and gray hoodie, leading the whoops and chops.

Doll Is Mine wrote:#TheStench

Though Ryan had already decided to distance himself from the floundering Romney campaign, he now feels totally uninhibited. Reportedly, he has been marching around his campaign bus, saying things like, “If Stench calls, take a message” and “Tell Stench I’m having finger sandwiches with Peggy Noonan and will text him later.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/09 ... z27XpM4DQO

The Nightman Cometh wrote:Yeah, I believe hardly anything from that article.

The Nightman Cometh wrote:Yeah, I believe hardly anything from that article.

PowerPoint was released by Microsoft in 1990 as a way to euthanize cattle using a method less cruel than hitting them over the head with iron mallets. After PETA successfully argued in court that PowerPoint actually was more cruel than iron mallets, the program was adopted by corporations for slide show presentations.