Will this Election even be Close???

[??????????]

To the person who mentioned the crucifiction of the great "war hero and patriot" Max Cleland, lets set the record straight.

1)Max Cleland did serve and should be commended for that.
2)Max Cleland should not be commended for the way he was injured because Cleland was not in combat when injured.  He got drunk with his friends and saw a grenade lying on the ground and picked it up.  And it went off...
3)Max Cleland was demonized rightfully for not voting for that bill because he wanted to make it chock full of union provisions.  His vote had more to do with the protection of benefits than the protection of lives.

He served honorably in the national military, but dishonorably in the senate.

Please....."chock full of union provisions?".....its amazing how you guys on the right buy into your own rhetoric. The version Cleland supported simply wanted the same union protections that are permisable under ANY OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY. No more and no less. Its the Republicans that striped those basic workers rights out of that one particular department under some lame a** notion that Bush wants the right to "freely move people around" without union worries. What a frekin Red Herring.

Face it.... the right is anti worker.....anti union, just have the balls to admit it.

And as far the Cleland service record, It doesn't matter how anyone loses three limbs while serving, you never question their patriotism after that kind of sacrifice simply because they oppose a particular piece of legislation. Shameless......

I'll admit it much like the IRS, I HATE[/u] Unions. They do not look out for their members and their only interest is money. They also cause the price of products to go up and if you don't believe me compare an American made car to a Japanese one.

[ATFFL]

There are good unions and there are bad unions.  Good unions look out for all their members and listen to them.

Bad unions look out either just for the leadership or the top few members of the union.

Bad unions include the teamsters, who went on strike in NY to prevent the papers from doing away with the job that was required to care for the teamsters horses while they were at the paper HQ.  THis strike was in the 90s, 1990s, not the 1890s.  That is a case of protecting the few (union boss sons who had the do nothing jobs) at the expense of every hard working member of the union who needed the money.

Sports unions are usually terrible looking out for the top few paid players at the expense of the vast majority of average players.

[??????????]

There are good unions and there are bad unions.  Good unions look out for all their members and listen to them.

Bad unions look out either just for the leadership or the top few members of the union.

Bad unions include the teamsters, who went on strike in NY to prevent the papers from doing away with the job that was required to care for the teamsters horses while they were at the paper HQ.  THis strike was in the 90s, 1990s, not the 1890s.  That is a case of protecting the few (union boss sons who had the do nothing jobs) at the expense of every hard working member of the union who needed the money.

Sports unions are usually terrible looking out for the top few paid players at the expense of the vast majority of average players.

I can not think of any union off the top of my head that has intentions other then itself. The worst are the AFL/CIO, Teamsters and the NEA (a terrorist group).

[ATFFL]

There are good unions and there are bad unions.  Good unions look out for all their members and listen to them.

Bad unions look out either just for the leadership or the top few members of the union.

Bad unions include the teamsters, who went on strike in NY to prevent the papers from doing away with the job that was required to care for the teamsters horses while they were at the paper HQ.  THis strike was in the 90s, 1990s, not the 1890s.  That is a case of protecting the few (union boss sons who had the do nothing jobs) at the expense of every hard working member of the union who needed the money.

Sports unions are usually terrible looking out for the top few paid players at the expense of the vast majority of average players.

I can not think of any union off the top of my head that has intentions other then itself. The worst are the AFL/CIO, Teamsters and the NEA (a terrorist group).

Of course you can't name them.  Good unions do their joba and get no headlines.  If a union goal is to get in teh news, it is a bad union because that is not what they should be doing.

[??????????]

There are good unions and there are bad unions.  Good unions look out for all their members and listen to them.

Bad unions look out either just for the leadership or the top few members of the union.

Bad unions include the teamsters, who went on strike in NY to prevent the papers from doing away with the job that was required to care for the teamsters horses while they were at the paper HQ.  THis strike was in the 90s, 1990s, not the 1890s.  That is a case of protecting the few (union boss sons who had the do nothing jobs) at the expense of every hard working member of the union who needed the money.

Sports unions are usually terrible looking out for the top few paid players at the expense of the vast majority of average players.

I can not think of any union off the top of my head that has intentions other then itself. The worst are the AFL/CIO, Teamsters and the NEA (a terrorist group).

Of course you can't name them.  Good unions do their joba and get no headlines.  If a union goal is to get in teh news, it is a bad union because that is not what they should be doing.

I am so glad that Florida is a right to work state! At one time I did drink the 'Union is good' Kool-Aid.

[MODU]

There are good unions and there are bad unions.  Good unions look out for all their members and listen to them.

Bad unions look out either just for the leadership or the top few members of the union.

Bad unions include the teamsters, who went on strike in NY to prevent the papers from doing away with the job that was required to care for the teamsters horses while they were at the paper HQ.  THis strike was in the 90s, 1990s, not the 1890s.  That is a case of protecting the few (union boss sons who had the do nothing jobs) at the expense of every hard working member of the union who needed the money.

Sports unions are usually terrible looking out for the top few paid players at the expense of the vast majority of average players.

I can not think of any union off the top of my head that has intentions other then itself. The worst are the AFL/CIO, Teamsters and the NEA (a terrorist group).

I will throw my chip into the anti-union pot as well.  Most of today's unions are corrupt and no longer serve the purpose as providing for the welfare of them members.  However, there are a few good Unions out there, and most of them are "in-house" unions, such as that with CheveronTexaco's maritime union.  Instead of forcing their sailing force to travel across country in some cases in order to vote or attend meetings, their internal union representatives visit the ships, identify the sailors concerns, and then report back quarterly to the corporate office to provide a "state of the fleet" type of report.  And since the union representative positions are corporate jobs, working under human resources (if I remember the article correctly), the concerns are addressed without much friction or power struggle.

But for the most part, unions are an obsolete concept, which really do not serve the needs of the members anymore, but rather cost the members more in dues than they receive in benefits.

[struct310]

To the person who mentioned the crucifiction of the great "war hero and patriot" Max Cleland, lets set the record straight.

1)Max Cleland did serve and should be commended for that.
2)Max Cleland should not be commended for the way he was injured because Cleland was not in combat when injured.  He got drunk with his friends and saw a grenade lying on the ground and picked it up.  And it went off...
3)Max Cleland was demonized rightfully for not voting for that bill because he wanted to make it chock full of union provisions.  His vote had more to do with the protection of benefits than the protection of lives.

He served honorably in the national military, but dishonorably in the senate.

Please....."chock full of union provisions?".....its amazing how you guys on the right buy into your own rhetoric. The version Cleland supported simply wanted the same union protections that are permisable under ANY OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY. No more and no less. Its the Republicans that striped those basic workers rights out of that one particular department under some lame a** notion that Bush wants the right to "freely move people around" without union worries. What a frekin Red Herring.

Face it.... the right is anti worker.....anti union, just have the balls to admit it.

And as far the Cleland service record, It doesn't matter how anyone loses three limbs while serving, you never question their patriotism after that kind of sacrifice simply because they oppose a particular piece of legislation. Shameless......

It does matter how someone loses their limbs.  He was drunk and not in combat.  He should not be paraded as some patriot democrat who lost three limbs while acting stupid.  And you have a heavy misconception of union workers.  I will say that unions used to protect workers but now they do not.  They make them lazy.  There are people who have assembly job lines where they fasten a bolt to a part and make $35 an hour for their "labor".  Lazy people cannot hunt terrorism.  You have to be sharp.  Like I said, Cleland was only interested in benefits protection.

[platypeanArchcow]

There are people who have assembly job lines where they fasten a bolt to a part and make $35 an hour for their "labor".

Example please?

[??????????]

There are people who have assembly job lines where they fasten a bolt to a part and make $35 an hour for their "labor".

Example please?

Pick your big 3 car manufacturer. Ever wonder why the price of a American made car is so high? Not quality.