The Political Discussion Thread

[mad_gater]

yup...and everytime you open your mouth you give away your ignorance on basic human reproductive biology

[mad_gater]

Basic Human Reproductive Biology 101:

ovum = haploid cell = cannot grow and develop into a human being on its own (only half the information for being a human person is present)

sperm = haploid cell = cannot grow and develop into a human being on its own (only half the information for being a human person is present)

ovum + sperm = zygote = grows and develops just like any other human person (because ALL of the information for being a human person is present in the zygote)

[Annoyed]

who said anything about forcing anyone
in fact strangely enough the few unions he does support are mostly the anti-democracy unions:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepo...292416091.htmlcells have rights? what about ovums then? (it'd only be fair)

what about passive smoking? smoking in presence of pregnant women?
is the fetus' life still of value in that context? or is the tobacco indu$try in its right?yo that's interesting
so the life of the unborn loses its value once it's born?



what about a pregnant woman who can't afford healthcare? (that one's a toughie)

1: I am aware of the war between Walker and the state's employee unions. Quite frankly, I'd be happy for him to be the next Governor of NY State.
To a large extent, NY State government is owned and operated by and for the benefit of the state's employee unions. As a result of the spending required to operate this liberal paradise, the tax rates make this state consistently among the worst 5 in the U.S. as far as business climate. As a result, most of our good paying jobs have moved to lower tax states.

If he doesn't get elected, as far as I'm concerned he can come clean house in NY next.

I am not completely sold on Walker yet, but on this issue, he is dead right.

2: I really don't want to get into a discussion on abortion. Been done to death.

[SoulReaver]

he still favours some state employee unions (very specific ones) more than other politicians do

[aretood2]

To be honest, I don't understand why conservatives have beef with unions in general in the first place. It seems largely a non-governmental situation.

[mad_gater]

probably because most of them are nothing more than middlemen that you have to pay in order to get or keep a job these days

[SGalisa]

To be honest, I don't understand why conservatives have beef with unions in general in the first place. It seems largely a non-governmental situation.

I don't know if my complaint is a conservative issue or not. Just for background, I have had to live with extremely tight, conservative budgets, because working 2 jobs wrecked havoc on my health, and didn't help my hubby's health either when he tried to spring ahead by working a 2 jobs. So, we've had to rely on 2 salaries total income, not 3 or 4 for total income. And since I wanted to be a mom, not work my entire life, my work skills are NOT in the high scale engineering side of life. It took my hubby 25 years, before he was finally able to settle into a job he liked, until the company closed its doors. Next place pulled the same closing doors threat. By the time a person is nearing 60 years old, and still has NO retirement to survive on, life is what it is -- grin and bear it. Been there, done that and lost count at how many times the rug's been pulled out from under us.

--- Now, on to the subject of Unions ---
Let me just say that my hubby got shafted by nearly every union he was forced to join.
When our finances were dangling into a dark oblivion and relying totally on *faith* one week and one paycheck at a time, one of my hubby's previous employers had a union that decided they were going to go on strike if they didn't get certain benefits, etc. (I think my hubby left this place soon after this particular strike situation threatened our financial future.)

That was fine for most of the financially *secured* union members who had lots of extra cash in their savings accounts (or wherever they put it) to fall back on during in$ecure lean moments, but it was a serious financial set back problem for my hubby and me. We could never reach any financial security in about 20 years of our early marriage, because the pay rate for strike days/weeks (maybe into months on end) was about 60% of what his full salary was, or something far less than we could afford.

If my hubby worked, instead of participated in the "union strike," such action was frowned upon within the union. They didn't care if my hubby had no money to fall back on. They didn't care if a family is struggling to balance their budgets in hopefully buying a new home, so they don't have to rent and rely on landlords any more. The union(s) focus was to get their precious *strike* agenda going, and if any union members tried to go to work and crossed the strike lines, regardless of their own, personal financial status, that person got bullied and life became miserable working in that particular place -- for a very long, long time.

I spent many years with having maybe five or ten dollars (USA) left in my grocery money until my next payday (sometimes a few days away), and had to decide whether it would go to a few dollars of gas for the car, or food necessities. *God-forbid* if something broke down and we had an emergency to deal with. Such emergencies seemed to haunt us more than we could afford. It was basically the breaking point of our life, and neither of us felt the unions were as helpful as they claimed to be. There were other issues also going on where favoritism was being spread around to certain union members, so the persons at the bottom of the ladder rungs (us), got shafted so the *favored* member person could have such and such.

Sometimes unions are helpful and have great benefits, but sometimes those same benefits come at a hefty price (in joining and staying on as a member). Other times, unions are downright useless and a hindrance to a struggling family's personal situations. It all depends on who is controlling the union, and sometimes how much they approve of other members. They are also notorious for making life miserable for anyone who is not a member, to be bullied into becoming a member, whether that person can afford it or not.

Let me add that I am not against unions. I am truly happy to hear / read other people having great security and benefits in the unions they have joined. But when any particular Union makes life (so) intolerable in dealing with either shaky employee relationships (teamwork that ends up *generic* YOU carrying most of the weight of the entire team around), or being forced to survive with insecure wages/salary pay -- during those precious *strike* times, I'm glad I'm not in a union.

[Coco Pops]

To be honest, I don't understand why conservatives have beef with unions in general in the first place. It seems largely a non-governmental situation.

Because unions cause trouble and demand rights for workers. Simple as that.

[Nolamom]

even though a very small percentage of American workers today belong to unions, unions are largely responsible for things like the 40 hour work week, time and a half for over time and so forth...

[Coco Pops]

even though a very small percentage of American workers today belong to unions, unions are largely responsible for things like the 40 hour work week, time and a half for over time and so forth...

See troublemakers...

That's why conservatives hate them.

[garhkal]

In a country that is bathed in sunshine how can you rail against solar power and renewable energy?

http://snip.ly/Y6we#http://www.thegu...o-solar-panels

I had to do a double take when i first heard that.. Why would anyone rail against solar energy, especially in a country that could reduce its need for fossile fuels as much as his would??

Otherwise, if the complaining is coming from TPTB controlling the lower levels of societies, it could be to deliberately force / put people into the dark (energy wise) in order to control them more.

From what i see, a lot of the times, its the exact same environmentalists complaining we need MORE 'renewable energy sources" that are the ones who complain when someone wants to put up a wind farm, solar plant or water fan farm etc..

oh joy, another male politician in favor of limiting women's rights

Why is it someone who is not for abortion on demand, is against woman's rights??

and calling PP a crusader for women's health is like calling Jeffery Dahmer a chef

the vast majority of the things PP's founder, Margaret Sanger, a blatant believer in eugenics, had to say did nothing but turn my stomach

The part that makes me laugh, is we rail against gun violence for all the 'lives' they take but Planned parenthood kills more babies (via abortions) than all the gun crimes put together.

but the funniest viewpoint is that of those who oppose both abortion & social welfare

Why is it funny to oppose abortion or 'welfare'? And who defines what social welfare is?

probably because most of them are nothing more than middlemen that you have to pay in order to get or keep a job these days

And to me, they seem more about how much they can rake in for themselves, rather than the people they are supposed to serve.

even though a very small percentage of American workers today belong to unions, unions are largely responsible for things like the 40 hour work week, time and a half for over time and so forth...

And they are also responsible for almost every strike that has ever happened.

[Nolamom]

Why is someone who supports women's rights to control their own bodies a threat to American politicias?





Bodird

[Annoyed]

I don't really have a problem with Unions in the private sector. If company A raises its price or lowers quality in order to cover the cost of union contracts, I can simply go buy that product at company B. If company A then goes out of business, it's no skin off my nose.
(And the government has no business providing a bailout to company A, either. General Motors and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail.)

The problem is with unions in the public sector. The reason is that I have no alternative if their unions drive the cost of government through the roof.

[SoulReaver]

From what i see, a lot of the times, its the exact same environmentalists complaining we need MORE 'renewable energy sources" that are the ones who complain when someone wants to put up a wind farm, solar plant or water fan farm etc..

exceptions. virtually all pro-environment people support wind farms & solar plants

Why is it someone who is not for abortion on demand, is against woman's rights??

depends if they intend to punish the woman as well or just the doctor

Why is it funny to oppose abortion or 'welfare'?

I meant those who oppose both

And who defines what social welfare is?

those who need it are best placed

And they are also responsible for almost every strike that has ever happened.

what about state trooper & local law enforcement unions?

[mad_gater]

I had to do a double take when i first heard that.. Why would anyone rail against solar energy, especially in a country that could reduce its need for fossile fuels as much as his would??



From what i see, a lot of the times, its the exact same environmentalists complaining we need MORE 'renewable energy sources" that are the ones who complain when someone wants to put up a wind farm, solar plant or water fan farm etc..



Why is it someone who is not for abortion on demand, is against woman's rights??



The part that makes me laugh, is we rail against gun violence for all the 'lives' they take but Planned parenthood kills more babies (via abortions) than all the gun crimes put together.



Why is it funny to oppose abortion or 'welfare'? And who defines what social welfare is?



And to me, they seem more about how much they can rake in for themselves, rather than the people they are supposed to serve.



And they are also responsible for almost every strike that has ever happened.

I think using solar energy even as a secondary power source for the UK might be a bit problematic, given how seldom the sun seems to shine on the UK

that's why I'm not too enamored of either private or public sector unions these days....like I said most of them seem to be more like middlemen you have to pay hefty dues to in order to get or keep a job...not too dissimilar from the mafia-style "protection" rackets