Hey, Rachel, did you read the “Employee Free Choice Act” bill?
J. Justin Wilson has the vid and administers the spanking:
Rachel Maddow has always been in the bag for big labor, even before she joined MSNBC. Despite that, I gave her more credit than this. During last night’s show she told her viewers to “read the bill,” with the bill being the deceptively-named Employee Free Choice Act. Then, claiming that it’s “really simple to explain,” she doesn’t turn to the bill, but rather to Rep. George Miller’s fact sheet, which was issued by the Democrats on the House Labor and Education Committee…
…If Maddow’s viewers actually took her advice and “read the bill”—not the partisan hack job “fact” sheet she pretended was the bill—they would read that if a union turns in cards representing more than 50% of a company’s employees, “the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection.“
***
Related: Sen. Ben Nelson doesn’t like what he’s seen of Card Check so far.
More on the Senate Democrat wavering from the WSJ:
Key Senate Democrats are wavering in their support of legislation that would give more power to labor unions, dealing a setback to labor’s top priority as businesses warn of the damage the bill would cause.
The battle over the “Employee Free Choice Act” — expected to be introduced Tuesday — is seen as a power struggle among labor unions and businesses, as well as a test of whether moderate Democrats and Republicans will push back on Democratic congressional leaders and the Obama administration.
At least six Senators who have voted to move forward with the so-called card-check proposal, including one Republican, now say they are opposed or not sure — an indication that Senate Democratic leaders are short of the 60 votes they need for approval.
The legislation is divisive and distracting, said Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln in an interview Monday. The Democratic lawmaker, who was previously seen as a supporter, said the Senate should focus on creating jobs and improving the U.S. economy. “I have 90,000 Arkansans who need a job, that’s my No. 1 priority,” she said. The legislation, she said, would be “divisive and we don’t need that right now. We need to focus on the things that are more important.”
Sen. Lincoln is one of several moderate Democrats expressing doubts about the Employee Free Choice Act. The bill would allow unions to organize workers without a secret ballot, giving employees the power to organize by simply signing cards agreeing to join. A second provision would give federal arbitrators power to impose contract terms on companies that fail to reach negotiated agreements with unions. Both provisions are strongly opposed by business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers.
Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu and Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor are among the Democratic lawmakers who have backed off their previous support.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Hey Rachel Maddow, take your own advice! READ THE BILL! | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- Buffet and Welch to Obama: Stop Pushing Liberal Agenda During Crisis! | The Great Illuminator
- A Basic American Right - the Secret Ballot - Under assault in Washington DC | Pirates! Man Your Women!
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Democrats
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Founding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-ShirtDoug Ross @ Journal
» BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Boston Globe Climate Beclownment SpectacularRadio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist RemarksDoug Ross @ Journal
» The CRU Climate Scam In 90 SecondsHot Air
» 3rd quarter GDP 2.8%, not 3.5%
Of course, whenever minorities succeed it can’t possibly have anything to do with them and everything to do with affirmative action.
But of course, I am sure you, just like MNUSMCDavid, read Maddow’s thesis cover to cover and also sat in on all her classes.
And I doubt a white lesbian would threaten to call anyone a racist.
And you’d be wrong. Rachel turned down both the Rhodes and Marshall scholarships but decided to take the Rhodes after finding out it wouldn’t be awarded to anyone else.
Interesting piece on what’ll happen to secret ballots w/Card Check:
Secret Ballot: Dead or Alive?
She went to class? At Oxford? What does she think pubs are for?
The absolute most disappointing thing about England was that all the pubs closed at like 11pm. The only places that stayed open and served past that were god awful dance clubs and I would rather spend a Sunday in church with atheling than go to one of those.
There was another girl in class, she studied hard and added meaningful and applicable discussions to the class. Single mom, hated her.
I had a study group, another girl was there who was also a single mom and a minority, she said, I can’t stand single mom, I am a single mom and don’t see my child as a burden as she seems to do.
And, I have seen Maddow’s show, if her thesis is anything like her scowling one sided opinion pieces, then I pretty much could expect what she would write. I live in California, you must not know enough white lesbians then. I have a white lesbian who is a good friend of mine, she is a good person, but will use her status to get ahead. She knows I don’t agree with that, but she would tell me to deal with it and do it anyway.
So you are prejudiced against white lesbians because of your experience with your friend?
Yes, I am a racist. I’ve was called one for the last 8 years. I accept it, I’m out of the closet.
Again, why are you equating lesbianism with race?
fine, homophobe….
She’s a mixologist. Seriously. Talks about the art of mixing drinks all the time.
I know that she’s an unabashed liberal but there is no one on any of the nighttime shows that gets into policy like she does. She goes way, way beyond the talking points. She also goes after liberals. Mark Penn especially.
Fox news’ opinion shows goes after conservatives all the time too, however liberals do not see it that way.
I agree. For me, the draw to her show is the wonkiness of it. I like policy talk with a touch of snark. I also enjoy all the talk about liquor.
Mook, I love you and I like Maddow. But Mark Penn is not a liberal. He is a mercenary.
See, this is why we get along.
You like the way she delivers her message, in the same way many people like the way Rush delivers his message. Most of the people in her are not going to like the way she delivers, they may use the lesbianism, which I really don’t believe matters, to them either, my point is that I am not impressed by Scholarship titles, I find them suspect today. What people have said in here is no where near the nastiness you will find on left wing sites, where people talk about Rush.
No. Your point was she did not earn her scholarship, but rather, it was handed to her because of her sexual orientation.
Okay, I take that back….
I have seen her show and to me, she does not carry herself, or sound like what I would expect from a Rhodes Scholar. Her sexual orientation has nothing to do with it. I did not mean to generalize the way she received that honor. How about, I am curious as to how she was chosen to study at Oxford. I have no idea, but perhaps there were more worthy people, because I have known some real smarty pants who carry themselves well. Better?
Better.
Excellent point.
Here’s the way I see things re: commentators. I don’t have to agree with everything or even anything they say in order to respect their work. I don’t agree with Rush on a lot of things but I have the utmost respect for his intelligence and his talent. He never gets caught off guard and that takes a lot of hard work and preparation. On the other hand, I have no use for Olbermann because he’s essentially become a lefty O’Reilly. Maybe a little bit deeper but not much. I think Debbie Schlussel can be borderline crazy at times but her work in regard to jihadists is positively epic. I’ll never write someone off just because I don’t agree with them. But I will write them off if all they do is parrot talking points and try to be the loudest person in the room.
Iz gots no beef wif Rush either.
I really thought I would like Olbermann, but find him pretty insufferable, even more so that O’Reilly.
I like what you like about Maddow, her wokiness. And I think she is kinda cute.
Even some of the libs see how toxic this is to their re-elections. That is a measure of how far Obama is over reaching.
In the Democrat Party “pro-choice” is a privilage only afforded pregnant females and homosexuals.
The rest are to submit; that is their choice.
LOL! Sorry, had to laugh.
Yes, Billy Jeff Clinton is way more Rhodes Scholarly.
/snark
At times, I have to remind myself that God is in control of all of this. Not that He is directing it, necessarily, but that His plan will ultimately win out. Psalm 2 (NIV) is my favorite passage in regard to this topic. It’s very comforting to me. I hope it helps you as well:
Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the LORD and against his Anointed One.
“Let us break their chains,” they say, “and throw off their fetters.”
The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord scoffs at them. Then he rebukes them in his anger and terrifies them in his wrath, saying, “I have installed my King on Zion, my holy hill.”
I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, “You are my Son today I have become your Father. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession. You will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”
Therefore, you kings, be wise; be warned, you rulers of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear and rejoice with trembling.
Kiss the Son, lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.
How do you know that they’re “woefully unrepresented?” I’m sure there are quite a few – probably most – homosexuals who remain mercifully silent as to their sexual proclivities. Besides which, neither you nor anyone else knows with any real certainty what percentage of the population is homosexual so you don’t know if they’re underrepresented or not, do you?
But more importantly: even assuming that you’re correct, why do you care? Are you equally concerned about the the representation of other groups? Vegetarians? Episcopalians? Single-malt Scotch drinkers?
Really, what an odd thing to worry about.
Rachel loves single-malt scotch!
Sorry, I had to.
And this is why I love Rachel.
Hey Mook…
Have you gotten an answer yet about what Rachel said that was wrong or how she deceived her viewers yet?
Just wondering.
This silly dyke is way over her brain power.
Sadly, and I am being sincere, they’ll be represented very well on the “goat” side of the Judgement Seat.
No dice, Chap. I’m thinking we probably shouldn’t hold our breath.
Did someone say single malt? It just woke me up out of a deep sleep.
The great thing about being human and acknowledging it…there is almost always some common ground that you can agree on. I actually enjoy discussing points of contention sharing a dram of the uisge beatha. When the discussion gets heated, you can always remark on the fine taste, and bring it back to earth.
As of 10 years ago, Oxford was pretty barren when it came to pubs. Coffee houses a plenty, though.
Yes, the 11:00 pub closing was annoying, as was most businesses closing at 5:30 weekdays and all day Sunday.
Does anyone think that Rachel Maddow is trying way to hard to look like a female perversion of Sean Hanity?
Did either of you read Michelle’s post?
John,
If you listen to Rachel she clearly says she is reading the “Cliffs Notes” version from the Committee. And every thing she said is seemingly factually correct. At least no one has yet to point out something that wasn’t.
Also, read the actual text of the Bill and tell me how that is supposed to be read on TV.
Perhaps that’s why she wears her little brother’s suits.
If she gets NBC’s ‘Deal or No Deal’ gig, will she shave her head to look like Howie?
Failed radio host then gets picked up by MSNBC. Why? To fill the homosexual quota along with Olbermann and Matthews. No thanks, I’ll stick with FoxNews where there’s both brains and beauty….JUST LIKE MICHELLE MALKIN!