Monday, March 14, 2011

How Long Before Christians Are Actively Persecuted in England?

Eunice and Owen Johns
I think it would be useful to begin this article with a brief statement of the facts. Eunice and Owen Johns are an elderly couple from Derby, who fostered a number of children in the 1990s, and who recently offered their services again to Derby City Council. Their offer was rejected on the grounds that, as fundamentalist Christians, they might teach any children in their keeping that homosexual acts were sinful. They took legal action against the Council, arguing that their beliefs should not be held against them. On the 28th February 2011, judgment was given against them in the High Court. The Judges ruled that, where the laws against discrimination are concerned, sexual minorities take precedence over religious believers. Because Mr and Mrs Johns might not remain silent about sexual ethics, there was a danger to the “welfare” of children taken from their homes by the Council.

The Judges insisted that this did not represent a “blanket ban” on the fostering of children by religious believers. There was no issue involved of religious liberty – no precedent being set for wider discrimination by the authorities. It was simply a matter of child welfare. You can read all this for yourself on the BBC website.

Abortion Activists Exposed: Like Starbucks, I Want Planned Parenthood on Every Corner

A new video has produced exposes some of the extremist views of the most hardcore abortion advocates. The video shows pro-abortion activists at a rally supporting abortion until birth and forcing taxpayers to pay for abortions.

The footage has interviews and comments interspersed featuring pro-abortion activists promising to have an abortion if getting pregnant and gloating about past abortions. Two women brag that they are medical students who will do abortions after graduation.

Source: Fox Nation

Union Myths

The biggest myth about labor unions is that unions are for the workers. Unions are for unions, just as corporations are for corporations and politicians are for politicians.

Nothing shows the utter cynicism of the unions and the politicians who do their bidding like the so-called "Employee Free Choice Act" that the Obama administration tried to push through Congress. Employees' free choice as to whether or not to join a union is precisely what that legislation would destroy.

Workers already have a free choice in secret-ballot elections conducted under existing laws. As more and more workers in the private sector have voted to reject having a union represent them, the unions' answer has been to take away secret-ballot elections.

Under the "Employee Free Choice Act," unions would not have to win in secret-ballot elections in order to represent the workers. Instead, union representatives could simply collect signatures from the workers until they had a majority.

Why do we have secret ballots in the first place, whether in elections for unions or elections for government officials? To prevent intimidation and allow people to vote how they want to, without fear of retaliation.

This is a crucial right that unions want to take away from workers. The actions of union mobs in Wisconsin, Ohio and elsewhere give us a free home demonstration of how little they respect the rights of those who disagree with them and how much they rely on harassment and threats to get what they want.

It takes world-class chutzpah to call circumventing secret ballots the "Employee Free Choice Act." To unions, workers are just the raw material used to create union power, just as iron ore is the raw material used by U.S. Steel and bauxite is the raw material used by the Aluminum Company of America.

The most fundamental fact about labor unions is that they do not create any wealth. They are one of a growing number of institutions which specialize in siphoning off wealth created by others, whether those others are businesses or the taxpayers.

There are limits to how long unions can siphon off money from businesses, without facing serious economic repercussions.

The most famous labor union leader, the legendary John L. Lewis, head of the United Mine Workers from 1920 to 1960, secured rising wages and job benefits for the coal miners, far beyond what they could have gotten out of a free market based on supply and demand.

But there is no free lunch.

An economist at the University of Chicago called John L. Lewis "the world's greatest oil salesman."

His strikes that interrupted the supply of coal, as well as the resulting wage increases that raised its price, caused many individuals and businesses to switch from using coal to using oil, leading to reduced employment of coal miners. The higher wage rates also led coal companies to replace many miners with machines.

The net result was a huge decline in employment in the coal mining industry, leaving many mining towns virtually ghost towns by the 1960s. There is no free lunch.

Similar things happened in the unionized steel industry and in the unionized automobile industry. At one time, U.S. Steel was the largest steel producer in the world and General Motors the largest automobile manufacturer. No more. Their unions were riding high in their heyday, but they too discovered that there is no free lunch, as their members lost jobs by the hundreds of thousands.

Workers have also learned that there is no free lunch, which is why they have, over the years, increasingly voted against being represented by unions in secret ballot elections.

One set of workers, however, remained largely immune to such repercussions. These are government workers represented by public sector unions.

While oil could replace coal, while U.S. Steel dropped from number one in the world to number ten, and Toyota could replace General Motors as the world's leading producer of cars, government is a monopoly. Nobody is likely to replace the federal or state bureaucracies, no matter how much money the unions drain from the taxpayers.

That is why government unions continue to thrive while private sector unions decline. Taxpayers provide their free lunch.

Source: Real Clear Politics

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Liberal media cover up Obama's HUGE flip flop on Camp Gitmo!

The three evening newscasts on Monday and the morning shows on Tuesday mostly ignored Barack Obama's abandonment of a campaign pledge to close Guantanamo Bay and end trials of detainees there. NBC's Today, CBS's Early Show and ABC's Good Morning America all covered the story only in news briefs. Yet, when President Bush was in the White House, the networks obsessed over the issue.

Today's Ann Curry called the move to resume military trials there a "stunning reversal," but the network allowed just two brief anchor reads during the four hour program. ABC almost completely ignored the development. Monday's World News skipped the topic entirely.

On Tuesday's Good Morning America, Juju Chang offered a single mention, explaining, "And an about-face from President Obama on Guantanamo Bay. He is resuming military trials for terrorism suspects held in Cuba, two years after he pledged to close the prison."

Chuck Todd on Monday's Nightly News managed to shove the news into the end of a story on another topic. He added, "Now, Brian, I've got one other important note here from the White House. No issue's bedeviled this President more than trying to keep his promise of shutting down the prison at Guantanamo Bay." Yet, for a problem "bedeviling" the President, NBC didn't seem terribly interested.

CBS's Katie Couric blandly related the development in a news brief.

Yet, when George W. Bush was President, the coverage was far different. According to a 2006 study by the MRC's Rich Noyes, between September 11, 2001 and August 31, 2006, the nightly newscasts on the three networks devoted 277 stories to Guantanamo Bay. Noyes explained:

Most of the network coverage of Guantanamo Bay focused on charges that the captured al-Qaeda terrorists were due additional rights or privileges (100 stories) or allegations that detainees were being mistreated or abused (105 stories). Only 39 stories described the inmates as dangerous, and just six stories revealed that ex-detainees had committed new acts of terror after being released.

Network reporters largely portrayed the Guantanamo inmates as victims, with about one in seven stories including the word "torture." The networks aired a total of 46 soundbites from Guantanamo prisoners, their families or lawyers, most professing innocence or complaining about mistreatment. Not one report about the Guantanamo prisoners included a comment from 9/11 victims, their families or lawyers speaking on their behalf.

On the May 19, 2006 CBS Evening News, guest anchor Bob Schieffer complained, "Has the U.S. prison for terror suspects at Guantanamo become more trouble than it's worth? Even those who created it have to be asking that question tonight. It has generated reams of bad publicity for the United States, today a UN committee said it ought to be shut down because it violates the Geneva Convention..."

Additionally, Politifact, which is keeping track of Barack Obama's broken promises, has yet to update its Guantanamo section.

This is how the Barack Obama campaign described the then-candidate's promise:

Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. Guantanamo has become a recruiting tool for our enemies. The legal framework behind Guantanamo has failed completely, resulting in only one conviction. President Bush's own Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, wants to close it. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, wants to close it.

The first step to reclaiming America's standing in the world has to be closing this facility. As president, Barack Obama will close the detention facility at Guantanamo. He will reject the Military Commissions Act, which allowed the U.S. to circumvent Geneva Conventions in the handling of detainees. He will develop a fair and thorough process based on the Uniform Code of Military Justice to distinguish between those prisoners who should be prosecuted for their crimes, those who can't be prosecuted but who can be held in a manner consistent with the laws.

Transcripts of the scant coverage can be found below:
Story Continues Below Ad ↓

JUJU CHANG: And an about-face from President Obama on Guantanamo Bay. He is resuming military trials for terrorism suspects held in Cuba, two years after he pledged to close the prison. His plan to try terror suspects here in the U.S. has run into strong opposition in Congress.


ANN CURRY: In a stunning reversal President Obama signed an executive order to resume military trials in Guantanamo, just two years after vowing to close the controversial facility. The order also creates a formal system to keep detainees in prison there indefinitely.


CURRY: In a stunning reversal, President Obama signed an executive order to resume military trials at Guantanamo just two years after vowing to close the controversial facility. The order creates a formal system to keep detainees in prison there indefinitely.

Early Show

JEFF GLOR: President Obama has reversed his decision on military trials at Guantanamo Bay. Two years ago, Mr. Obama stopped the trials of suspected terrorists and promised to close Gitmo in a year. The President wanted to try suspects like alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian court, but those plans were opposed by many in Congress. For the prisoners not being tried, their status will be revealed in a year and then every three years after that.

Nightly News

CHUCK TODD: Now, Brian, I've got one other important note here from the White House. No issue's bedeviled this President more than trying to keep his promise of shutting down the prison at Guantanamo Bay. So today the President ordered the Pentagon to reinstitute the military tribunals in order to deal with detainees still in Guantanamo, including the 9/11 conspirators like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The White House said today that they were forced to do this because it was clear Congress would not fund any program that was going to bring those detainees onto American soil to be tried in federal courts, Brian.

Evening News

KATIE COURIC: In other news, military trials will resume for terror suspects held at Guantanamo. President Obama today lifted the ban he imposed two years ago. And 172 detainees are still being held at Guantanamo, and the president has promised to close the prison. But Congress has blocked his efforts to have them tried in civilian courts here in the U.S.


Gallup: Obama job approval hits 2011 low

Barack Obama had enjoyed the longest Gallup winning streak of his presidency in 2011, buoyed in part by a lame-duck compromise on taxes and an impressive speech in Tucson. His approval ratings showed growth or held steady for seven weeks, three longer than any other period since taking office in January 2009. Now, however, with an incoherent response to unrest sweeping the Arab world and an abdication of leadership on the budget, his approval rating in Gallup polling have hit its lowest mark since mid-December:
President Barack Obama averaged 46% job approval the week of Feb. 28-March 6, his lowest weekly average since mid-December. Obama’s weekly approval rating had steadily improved from mid-December to late January, peaking at 50% during the final two weeks in January, before dropping below that mark in February.

Obama is now essentially back to where he was in the immediate post-election phase of 2010. The decline could be due to a number of issues the administration is dealing with, including the popular uprisings in the Middle East, the resulting higher gas prices, and disagreements with the Republicans in Congress about the best way to rein in federal spending.

Once again, Obama is losing support from independents and his own base:

Last week, an average of 79% of Democrats approved of Obama, down from 84% in late January. The president’s 43% approval rating among independents is down from 47% in late January, while his approval rating among Republicans is essentially the same (15% in late January and 14% now).

Andrew Malcolm gives a summary of the good news and the bad news:

There’s still plenty of time for a miraculous Obama recovery. An incumbent president’s reelection chances are usually tied closely to voters’ economic perceptions, centering on unemployment and gas prices. A separate Gallup survey finds Americans’ economic optimism dipping again in recent weeks, at the same time that gas prices began increasing significantly.

The good news for the Obama White House is that the 2010 approval averages show he remains wildly popular in the District of Columbia (84.4% approval) and in his home state of Hawaii (65.9%). That’s seven of the 270 electoral votes he needs to keep living in the White House with his mother-in-law.

The bad news is that last year Obama’s job approval went down in all 50 states.

A 46% approval rating isn’t exactly a number that guarantees re-election, but it’s not low enough to make it out of the question, either. As Andrew points out, the next election will focus on the same economic and financial issues as the midterms. Obama’s ability to win re-election depends on (a) the economy improving significantly, (b) demonstrating leadership on fiscal reform, and (c) the candidate the Republicans nominate to challenge him. Obama can’t control (c), but he can control the other two factors. And let’s face it — if the economy roars back to life under Obama and the jobless rate drops below 7% and Obama takes the lead on significant budgetary reform, he’ll win no matter who runs against him in 2012.

But that’s the rub. Obama’s only real option to grow the economy is to reduce the regulatory burden on the private sector, especially in the energy sector, and Obama is determined to go in the opposite direction. The White House could have triangulated on budgets after the midterms — after all, what says “changing the way Washington works” better than taking away the blank checks on which it operates? — but they have strangely ceded the field entirely. Obama won’t directly engage himself, and sent Joe Biden in for a bungee meeting before sending the Veep to the other side of the world in the middle of the budget impasse.

If Obama continues at this pace, a 46% from Gallup will look like a standing ovation by the time Obama has to start campaigning for re-election, and it won’t matter who the Republicans nominate to challenge him.


Flip-Flopper In Chief!

U.S. President Barack Obama backtracks on Guantanamo Bay, signing a new executive order that seems to agree with and vindicate the actions of former president George W. Bush on the same subject.

 With a spectacular backtrack, U.S. President Barack Obama reneged on a campaign promise to close down the Guantanamo Bay detention center and restart trials of detainees. The military prison, which holds suspected terrorists, will now stay open indefinitely, with Obama’s executive order to create a system for holding the terrorist suspects at the infamous prison.
In a statement, Obama attempted to quell backlash against the reversal of his stated pre-presidency intentions:

"Today, I am announcing several steps that broaden our ability to bring terrorists to justice, provide oversight for our actions and ensure the humane treatment of detainees," the President's statement said. "I strongly believe that the American system of justice is a key part of our arsenal in the war against al-Qaeda and its affiliates, and we will continue to draw on all aspects of our justice system - including [federal] Article III Courts - to ensure that our security and our values are strengthened," he said.

Administration officials continue to contend that this is not the breaking of a campaign promise, and that the president is still committed to closing down the Guantanamo Bay prison. However, many are questioning how endorsing the continuation of the facilities could indicate Obama’s continuing commitment to closing the facility. In fact, many observers of the situation believe that the Obama action follows the Bush-era stance on counter terrorism.

Some are stating that the growing bipartisan opposition to the proposed U.S. dentention center for holding and prosecuting terrorists held in Guantanamo Bay has forced the president to face the reality of the situation and backtrack. "The executive order recognizes the reality that some Guantanamo Bay detainees will remain in U.S. custody for many years, if not for life," the Washington Post said.

The American Civil Liberties Uniion (ACLU) publicly criticized the president’s actions. “The best way to get America out of the Guantanamo morass is to use the most effective and reliable tool we have: our criminal justice system. Instead, the Obama administration has done just the opposite and chosen to institutionalize unlawful indefinite detention – creating a troubling ‘new normal’ – and to revive the illegitimate Guantanamo military commissions," ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero said. According to the ACLU, President Obama has now institutionalized what the ACLU believes to be unlawful, indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and accused the president of going back on his word regarding Guantanamo.
"It is virtually impossible to imagine how one closes Guantanamo in light of this executive order," said Romero. "In a little over two years, the Obama administration has done a complete about-face."

Republican lawmakers praised the president’s order on Guantanamo, and claiming that the new executive order vindicated the much-maligned President George W. Bush. Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, stated, "I commend the Obama Administration for issuing this Executive Order," the Post reported. "The bottom line is that it affirms the Bush Administration policy that our government has the right to detain dangerous terrorists until the cessation of hostilities."

The new executive order applies to a minimum of 48 of the current 172 detainees at Guantanamo Bay, who are not able to be tried in a regular court, but who are too dangerous to move to another country, such as the U.S., for detention. Each detainee is to receive a written, unclassified review of his situation within 12 months. Those who continue to fight against the Guantanamo Bay detention do not believe that there are legal grounds for holding these prisoners indefinitely, but the new executive order asserts the Obama administration's apparent agreement with the Bush administration that the detainees at Guantanamo can be legally held under the laws of war—an assertion that has been upheld in federal courts.

A moment of Clarity?  A moment of SANITY?  Who knows...  Mr Fiip-Flopper strikes again!

Don't expect the MSM to report this in detail! Their love affair with NObama in incurable! Sadly!

I do know that if I was a dedicated leftist... I mean, a real heartfelt socialist like Obama... I'd feel totally and utterly betrayed and used by Nobama!  I'd feel disgusted and outraged at this flip flop on something so dear to my socialist leftist leaning heart!

Will THEY let him know they are outraged... I doubt it...  They are "useful idiots" unthinking, obeying, and moronic play things for him to exploit... Sadly, they are not clever enough to realise they are being played...

... And America continues to suffer because of it!

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Watch Glenn Beck - Restoring Honor (3 hours)

I provide both a high (high speed connection) quality, and low (if the high isn't working for you) quality for slower connections.


Higher Quality: (Lower quality version immediately follows below):

Lower Quality:

Fat Cat Union Salaries Exposed!

Highlights followed by complete article after jump:

These are the 10 largest unions, noting the number of employees who earn more than $200,000, leadership salaries and campaign contributions to federal candidates in 2009-2010.

Union: National Education Association
Membership: 3.2 million
Assets: $216 million
The NEA, representing most of the nation’s teachers, has 31 headquarters officers and employees who earn over $200,000. The president, Dennis Van Roekel, received $397,721 in salary and benefits. Of the $3.7 million NEA spent on political activities in the last election cycle, 98 percent went to Democratic candidates. The NEA has 98,000 members in Wisconsin. Before taking the helm in 2008, Van Roekel received pay increases averaging more than 4 percent a year as NEA vice president. In 2009, public school teachers were paid a national average of $54,319 and received raises ranging from 2 percent to 4 percent over the previous five years.

Union: Service Employees International Union
Membership: 1.8 million
Assets: $187 million
The SEIU, whose membership has increased in recent years, has been organizing hospital, home care and nursing home workers, along with local and state government employees, janitors and security officers. The union has nine headquarters officers and employees who earn over $200,000. The former president, Andy Stern, was paid $306,388 in salary and benefits from the union in 2009. In his final year, Stern got a 5 percent pay boost, which came on the heels of the union growing by more than 88,000 members. Stern resigned in 2010 and was replaced by Mary Kay Henry, formerly the executive vice president. Over the past two years, SEIU gave almost $2 million to Democratic candidates and $8,500 to Republicans. It has 18,000 members in Wisconsin.

Union: United Food & Commercial Workers
Membership: 1.3 million
Assets: $157 million
The UFCW, whose members work in meatpacking, food processing and retail grocery stores, has 17 headquarters officers and employees who earn over $200,000. The president, Joseph T. Hansen, received $360,737 in pay and benefits in 2009. Of the $1.9 million the union donated to political candidates over the past two years, 99 percent of it went to Democrats. The union drew criticism from members in 2004 for paying outgoing president Douglas Dority $709,000 in salary and benefits and for keeping retired officers on the payroll with six-figure salaries. At the time, more than 250 UFCW employees across the country were being paid more than $100,000.

Union: International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Membership: 1.3 million
Assets: $175 million
The Teamsters, whose origins date to the horse- and mule-team drivers of the late 1800s, represents truck drivers and a wide array of blue-collar and government workers. Eight headquarters officers and employees received more than $200,000 in 2009.
The president, James P. Hoffa, was paid $362,869 in pay and benefits. Over the past two years, the Teamsters have donated $2.3 million to Democratic candidates and $46,500 to Republicans. Racketeering charges were filed against the union in 1989 after a Justice Department investigation that accused the Teamsters of being a “wholly owned subsidiary of organized crime.” Since 1992, the Teamsters have been overseen by an Independent Review Board.

Union: American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees
Membership: 1.5 million
Assets: $97 million
AFSCME, one of the fastest growing unions in the United States, was founded in Wisconsin almost 80 years ago. At union headquarters in Washington, 10 officers and employees receive more than $200,000 a year. Gerald McEntee, who was first elected union president in 1981, was paid $479,328 in salary and benefits in 2009. Over the past decade, his salary has increased at almost 4 percent a year. Over the past two years, AFSCME has donated $2.3 million to Democratic candidates and $13,000 to Republicans. In the 2010 elections in Wisconsin, AFSCME gave almost $83,888 to Democratic candidates. Half that amount went to the campaign of Tom Barrett, whose top 10 donors were unions. Barrett lost to Republican Scott Walker, who promised during the campaign to take on the organized labor if elected.

Union: Laborers' International Union of North America
Membership: 633,000
Assets: $134 million
The Laborers represent mostly construction workers in 500 locals in the U.S. The headquarters in Washington has 18 officers and employees who earn more than $200,000 a year, including 11 who earn more than $300,000. Terence O’Sullivan, union president since 2000, received $618,000 in salary and benefits in 2009. Of the $1.7 million donated to political candidates over the past two years, 95 percent went to Democrats. In 2006, the Laborers broke from the AFL-CIO to join a new, rival labor federation. In 2010, the Laborers rejoined the AFL-CIO.

Union: American Federation of Teachers
Membership: 887,000
Assets: $115 million
AFT is the smaller of the two teacher unions and also represents school support staff, higher education faculty and staff, health care professionals and state and municipal employees. At AFT’s headquarters in Washington, nine officers and employees earn more than $200,000 a year. Randi Weingarten, who was elected president in 2008, received $428,284 in salary and benefits. Of the $2.4 million donated to political candidates in the past two years, the union gave all but $10,000 to Democrats. In 1998, a proposal to merge the AFT and the much larger NEA was rejected by NEA members.

Union: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Membership: 685,000
Assets: $482 million
IBEW represents electricians, linemen and other public utility employees, along with some computer, telecommunications and broadcasting workers. Sixteen of the IBEW’s officers and employees in Washington earned more than $200,000 in 2009. Edwin D. Hill, the union president since 2001, received $375,767 in pay and benefits. Hill and other top officials received salary increases averaging at least 4 percent each in the past several years, even as membership declined by 5 percent. Membership peaked at about 1 million in 1972. The IBEW says a chief reason for the decline was a loss of union jobs when the Bell System was broken up and deregulation of the utility industry.

Union: International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers
Membership: 613,000
Assets: $147 million
IAM, which grew out of a secret meeting of 19 machinists in a Georgia rail yard in 1888, represents machinists and aerospace workers in over 200 industries. At the union’s Maryland headquarters near Washington, 34 officers and employees earn over $200,000 in salary and benefits. Robert Buffenbarger, who became president in 1997, received $284,975. Over the past two years, the IAM donated $1.98 million to Democratic candidates and $34,000 to Republicans. Popularly known as the machinists union, IAM is affiliated with the AFL-CIO.  Its membership jumped in the 1950s and 1960s with the growth of the airlines and aerospace industries. More than 1 million belonged to the union in 1968. In the early 1970s, membership began declining, a change the union blames on layoffs in the defense industry.

Union: United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America
Membership: 538,000
Assets: $1.2 billion
The UAW, founded in 1935 by automobile plant workers, currently represents workers at General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, along with workers in the aerospace and agriculture industries. None of the officers or employees at the UAW headquarters in Detroit earn over $200,000 a year. Ronald Gettelfinger, who resigned as UAW president in 2010, was paid $173,065 in salary and benefits. Elected to replace Gettelfinger was Bob King, a bargaining member at Ford’s plant in Dearborn, Mich. Over the past two years, the UAW donated more than $1.6 million to political candidates, and all but $3,000 went to Democrats. Union membership hit 1.5 million in the late 1970s, but a decline in the U.S. auto industry and opening of non-union plants in the South took its toll on membership. The UAW’s success over the years at negotiating higher pay and benefits, including one of the wealthiest pension and health plans for retired autoworkers, was blamed by domestic automakers and conservatives in Congress for the industry’s crisis in 2008 and 2009.

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Black Churches Blast Obama

A coalition of 34,000 black churches is blasting President Barack Obama's decision to stop defending the federal law that bans recognition of gay marriage.

The Rev. Anthony Evans, who heads the National Black Church Initiative, says Obama "has violated the Christian faith" by failing to uphold Jesus' teaching that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The Justice Department announced Wednesday that, at Obama's direction, it would not defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in a court case where it's being challenged.

As a result, Evans says black churches must "reassess their extraordinary support for him."

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says Obama is still "grappling" with his personal views on same sex marriage, but has long opposed the federal law as unnecessary and unfair.

Source: ABC News

Pro-Union Rallies Simmering with Violence and Hate Speech

The Boiling Over of the Liberal Mind is on full display these days, and it is not a pretty sight.

Union protesters in Wisconsin compared Gov. Scott Walker to former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and other tyrants. A sign showed him in a Nazi salute and screamed, "Heil Walker." Another said, "Hitler, Stalin, Walker." Still another showed a swastika next to his name.

New York unions also reached back to World War II, although with a twist. "Wisconsin: Our Pearl Harbor," wrote John Samuelson, president of the local Transport Workers Union, which represents transit workers. He railed against "enemies of labor and democracy."

But Paul Krugman proved himself the master of disaster comparisons. The bid to trim union power reminds the excitable New York Times columnist of the invasion of Iraq.

His argument, as best I can follow it, is that privatizing services and weaning people off government is exactly what Iraq was about, and we did it in Chile 40 years ago, too. Or something.
Wherever you look, the bile runneth over. Beyond making fools of themselves with juvenile comparisons, the "social justice" crowd is inadvertently proving that public-sector unions are a privileged class. Touch them and you die from a thousand insults.

Source: Fox Nation