This Election Year Sucks…

… so bad that I don’t even have a reason to get registered to vote in November — or perhaps I do.

I’m sure I’ll get registered so I can vote in next year’s state elections, but I just don’t have much of a reason to vote this year.

I sure is hell can’t vote for neither the Republican or Democrat Presidential candidates because I don’t support Marxism.  I can’t vote for Congress because I don’t agree with Moran on any issues and Ellmore is a piece of shit liar — and a Socialist.

I may register for one reason — and this will surprise some of you — to vote for Jim Gilmore.

Now, I don’t agree with Gilmore on abortion, and I sure as hell don’t agree with him on foreign policy.

But, as an employee at the National Right to Work Committee, I realize how important it is to have a filibuster-proof Senate in order to stop Big Labor bills like the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill and a repeal of Section 14 (b) of the Taft-Hartley Act, wiping out ALL state Right to Work laws.

And, frankly, Jim Gilmore is a champion of Right to Work issues.

So I guess I’ll have to do some serious thinking about this.  Chances are I probably won’t register this year, but if I do, it’ll be to cast my vote for Jim Gilmore in order to help stop Big Labor from seizing total control of everything.

It just sucks because I would love to be out every evening, and every Saturday and Sunday phone banking and canvassing for a Republican — but I have none to do that for.

Damn.

Advertisements
Published in: on July 24, 2008 at 12:44 pm  Comments (10)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://theoldright.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/this-election-year-sucks/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

10 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Yay! Go out and vote for Gilmore!

  2. I have a quick question for you Mr. Old Right. You don’t support government regulation over business, correct?
    Then how can you advocate “right to work” laws that prevent free contracts between unions and business owners? If a business wants to contract with a union, then who is the government to step in and say “No”. Seems to me that an individual intending to work at a job was “forced” to join a union or not work there, then that individual could go work somewhere else. If there was nowhere else for the individual to work without being forced to join a union, then he should form a group and boycott. In the end, the market would work itself out.
    That can be argued against I’m sure. But the fact of the matter exists, and that is, there is an argument that government is interfering with labor.
    So, you do like government regulation when it’s beneficial to what you support, correct?
    –I have no dog in this fight Mr. Old Right. I just love a good argument.

  3. I know, but the problem is I would have to compromise some principles, therefore not sticking to my guns and being no different than the so-called “conservatives” who are holding their noses and voting for Juan.

  4. Ross said:

    “If there was nowhere else for the individual to work without being forced to join a union, then he should form a group and boycott.”

    It doesn’t matter if he forms a group and boycotts, he still loses his job because the National Labor Relations Act has granted Union Bosses the power to be the exclusive representative of all workers in a unionized workplace and therefore, without Right to Work, a worker cannot bargain for himself or refuse to pay dues in a forced unionism state, and, therefore, cannot work.

    A National Right to Work Law would not add one new word to current federal labor law. It would simply remove provisions from current federal labor law that currently authorize the firing of workers who refuse to pay union dues or “fees” to Union Bosses.

    In sense, it is deregulation…taking power away from the federal government and Union Bosses.

  5. Yes, but read my post again. Is it not true that right to work laws prevent free contracts between unions and business owners? If every worker said, “Hey, screw working here because I have to join a Union” and they all boycotted, etc., what would happen? I think Unions would lose their power because businesses wouldn’t not want to enter into contracts with them. Where am I going wrong?
    Again, it all goes back to government regulation. Seems as though it’s nice to have at times huh?

  6. Old Right, I leave you alone for two weeks and look at the mess you’re in…..

    Ross,

    It is not true. Right to work laws don’t prevent freedom of contract–they, in fact, insure it. The “closed shop” prevents the individual from making his contract with the employer. Prior to Taft Hartley, all we had was the NLRA and closed shops….but what else could we expect from socialists. You can’t tell a ‘worker’ to forgo a union job when he has mouths to feed just because it’s a union job. He’s not being given the freedom to choose.

  7. I see your point Oath. But my argument is that Right to Work laws prevent free contracts between unions and business owners. I understand that the “GOVERNMENT REGULATION” then gives the worker freedom to choose. Again, you can’t argue that there isn’t any government regulation here when you have right to work laws ultimately preventing free contracts between unions and business owners. I don’t care what the secondary effects are–it is what is.
    The point I’m trying to get across through all of this discussion is that government regulation isn’t so bad afterall. It’s funny how none of you will admit that!

  8. “But my argument is that Right to Work laws prevent free contracts between unions and business owners.”

    No, the government does this.

    As trillville pointed out, the National Right to Work Act wouldn’t add a single word to federal law. It would simple delete the provisions in federal labor law that require workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment. I’m not so sure how that is creating a government regulation.

  9. Yes, the government does this with the help of people who do not like unions and business owners entering into free contracts. OK, take all the laws you are talking about off of the books–just a clean slate. Now, what if unions and business owners desire to contract with one another? Who would prevent that? Government regulation. What a great purpose it serves.

  10. “OK, take all the laws you are talking about off of the books–just a clean slate.”

    This would definitely be my ultimate goal. I would love to see the Department of Labor abolished, the NLRB disbanded and the NLRA repealed.

    Now, if we ever did achieve a pure free market, which I would love to see happen, if the unions and business owners desired to contract with one another then that would be between the two. It would actually be up to the business owner, since it is his property after all.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: