Violence at Union Rally 2010

Shocking: Bigoted White Tea Party Woman Beats Petite Black Female Reporter
(originally posted October 09, 2010)

In case you missed it (and I’m sure you did) this past weekend it appears that liberal F-bomb droppin’ black women at “Unity” gatherings can beat the crap out of Caucasian girls without it making the evening news or hitting the blogosphere. One Emily Miller, a senior editor for HumanEvents who previously served as the deputy press secretary at the State Department and also served as an associate producer at ABC News, got pummeled like a rebel stepchild on October 2nd by a black liberal chick at the “One Nation Working Together” (cough) rally in D.C.

The intro and the headline are deliberately misleading in this sardonic article.  The point being made is that white-on-black violence receives much more attention from the MSM than the opposite.   "Much More" .. in the sense of ALWAYS, as opposed to NEVER.

I'm not sure that the Racial element is important, as much as is the Liberal element.

Looking at the embedded video, I saw a lot of people wandering around with Union t-shirts, with the purple of the SEIU (Service Employees International union) ... whose members have also been videotaped assaulting 'other attendees' at rallies.





When I took employment at the local state university in 1998, I declined union membership.  I had been employed as a contract employee at the state capital the previous year for about six months, and I witnessed an SEIU march and protest there.  I did not like the ugliness I saw during that month.  The anger, and the rage was something I didn't need.

I had been a union member once, temporarily.

It was, back in the sixties, a necessary action for employment at a closed shop at the lumber mill where I took summer employment to work my way through college.  It was without strife, and I was glad to get $2.38/hour instead of the $1.25 I had previously been earning at summer jobs under the then minimum wage rules.  But although my father had been a union member (same "Union Shop" rule, in the timber industry) for much of his working life, it rankled me to give up so much of my pay for a summer job.  Still, I took the offer, and gladly.  I was younger then; naive, and much better looking.

But in the  latest-1990's it was a different story.  I saw, during that one-week strike, people who were prepared to do violence for pay and benefits.  I was much more disturbed than I had been during my military service.

So as a regular full-time employee in 1998 I chose to pay "fair share" rather than to affiliate myself with SEIU.  And I opted out of the frey. And I never had to wear the ugly purple t-shirt!

It's my considered opinion that labor unions are shooting themselves in the foot.   The UAW has shot themselves in their collective feet.  Detroit is a ghost town.  Constant strikes for increased pay, benefits and supplementary income are the reasons why the federal government had to bail out the auto industry during the Bush administration ... and why Fiat now runs Chrysler, instead of the other way around.

What I see in this video, and in my work experience, is a sense of entitlement which beggars belief!  There is the frequent display of arrogance, and that has resulted in violence at these rallies.

When given control of the political process by massed voting power, the 'dependents' and Organized Labor will always choose to vote themselves more governmental support .. more pay for less work.

Lenin was right.  .

• "totalitarianism and political violence"
• " ,,,  inequalities in the distribution of goods can be justified so long as they benefit the worst off"
• but "Rawls's model works on one fateful condition: that there is no resentment . . . Rawls doesn't take into account the irrationality of envy. In capitalist relations today, envy is crucial. Never underestimate the power of envy."

 And ...

"This excess of radicality concretely art­iculates itself in some kind of general moralistic outrage. You get a kind of abstract, moralistic politics in which you ­focus on groups which are obviously underprivileged - other races, gays and so on - and then you explode in all your moralistic rage. This has to do with what you might call our cultural, post-political capitalism, in which the most passionate struggles are cultural ones. A large majority of the left doesn't question liberal democracy and capitalism as such....."

Workers DO rule the world ... and sometimes they are not only running it into the ground, but they have become the new Aristocracy.   That's not a bad thing, until they escalate their demands so drastically that they undermine the economy of the businesses which employ them.

*Again ... look at Detroit. *

This situation will not get better, soon.  By that I mean, businesses will be closing their doors even more often, throwing more workers into unemployability, and the resentment will continue was more workers leave the labor force.

Never mind that they see no reason why they should not employ street violence as a means to an end.

Ultimately, owners are either closing their business because they cannot afford the labor costs, or because they can live on their savings and no longer need to deal with the violence.

Eugene V. Debs notwithstanding.