DNC caught trying organize protests in Wisconsin

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ ... tests.html

Well we know the Dems are in bed with the Unions, and Obama is in on it too. We've now seen how out of touch the left is with the general public.

So the DNC is standing up for the human right to organise? Sacrilege! Don't you know that the DNC is supposed to stand only for abusing human rights? The DNC shows principles - now that's something to celebrate. You'll say that this is just a cynical attempt to protect people who support it? So, why not condemn the GOP for its association with the besieged and totally impoverished and put upon Chamber of Commerce and its incessant complaints, its culture of whining?

What do you mean "caught?" Why shouldn't the DNC be engaged in political activism? Is that not their sole purpose for existence? Are you surprised that the Democrats are pro-union?

I really don't see the surprise or outrage. There's a political dispute going on in relation to state employees, and a large liberal group is working to support the workers. You can very well take the opposite stance, but why on Earth would you be surprised at their stance? And how is this some nefarious plot? They weren't "caught" doing anything because they weren't hiding it or creating front groups and astroturf movements.

There is plenty of money out there that they won't touch. Why? It's not "low-hanging fruit". The private sector workers have been looted and now they're setting their sights on the public sector workers and are whipping up the Culture of Envy to get their victims to cheer the creation of new victims. Meanwhile the billionaires who caused the trouble and have the money remain protected and above the reach of any law, as effectively they are the law.

What is wrong is educators, medical profesionals, and certain others I will circumspectly not enumerate going on strike.

I see nothing wrong with lawmakers going on strike - perhaps it should happen more often - but it is childish.

Um, doesn't the first amendment guarantee the right to peaceably assemble? Leave it to a right-winger to deny anyone that right.

I don't see the issue. The republican party blew a gasket when it was about taxes on the richest. Why can't unions do the same for their own interest. One cannot be economically precious only when it suits the donors.

How is this any different from the Brooks Brothers Brigade or any other republican organized action?

Inuyasha -

while I tend to agree [though it is funny how rarely we say "cronies" referring to people with whom we agree], I do not think there is any constitutional clause or principle restraining the Chief Executive from political activity, or limiting the types of political activity in which he may engage. In fact there is plentiful precedent for politically active presidents.

Whatever I may think of the ethics, I don't think one can stop it, and I believe many would say he has an obligation to poke around in politics, and maybe does not do it enough.