White House won't cross picket line for event

[IDemo]

Source: Associated Press

updated 3:00 p.m. MT, Fri., June 5, 2009

WASHINGTON - Steering clear of a messy labor dispute, the White House on Friday said Vice President Joe Biden and other members of President Barack Obama's Cabinet have scrapped plans to attend a national mayors' conference in Rhode Island rather than cross a picket line of local firefighters.

In a statement to The Associated Press, presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs said the Obama administration will redouble its efforts to work with the nation's mayors in other ways. That includes a fresh invitation for the mayors to come to the White House.

But for now, the list of premier guests at the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Providence, R.I., next week just got a lot shorter.

Even as the White House was announcing its decision, the mayoral group's Web site promoted that its confirmed guests included Biden, senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, Attorney General Eric Holder, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and other administration officials.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31129424/

[mikehiggins]

1. If true, refusing to cross a picket line is NOT steering clear of anything

People supporting unions do not cross picket lines. People dismissing union have no problem with crossing picket lines. Obama is making a statement and a pretty clear one at that.

Once again the AP puts a right wing spin on something.

Nothing to see here, folks. Keep on moving...

[No Elephants]

4. Absolutely correct. AP is always full of it.

[uppityperson]

17. I agree. that it is not "steering clear" but respecting the picketers. eom

[Seldona]

28. Excellent point.

Steering clear? At best it is poorly worded, at worst it is right-wing spin. Either way the result is the same, catapulting the propaganda. Pathetic.

[PatrynXX]

30. Only one problem I've ever had with unionized employees....

they usually could care less about part time workers. I've been in part time work, safety rules don't always apply to part time work. They work long hours all at once. Companies that aren't unionized have been safer overall than companies I've worked for that are. Some unions are better than others on part time workers.

[Arctic Dave]

34. Unions are not the ones you should have problem with.

Safety regulations apply to ALL personel, the company is the one that is breaking the rules if they are not providing you with adequate safety training, gear, etc.

[IDemo]

2. This should have the Rushians in a frenzy

"Obama has attacked America's mayors and simultaneously embraced socialistic unions!!!!"

[Ken Burch]

31. That would be the group of "America's mayors" that have been made powerless

by decades of Republican cuts in aid to the cities?

[pinto]

3. Kick

:kick:

[Lone_Star_Dem]

5. Good for them!

Respecting a picket line is respecting the union worker's rights!

[Wizard777]

7. Ditto that!

[bluestateguy]

6. I'd like to hear some more praise from the fools who say Obama does not support unions

I'll wait...

[scentopine]

15. Why flame bait?

I hesitated to dignify this with even a brief reply. The subject here is Biden not Obama. Biden's record is one of the most pro union in congress. A trip with top gov. officials would have required a huge amount of support from fire and rescue teams. The decision not to attend is partly political and partly logistic. If the teachers were on strike, I assure you there would be no trip cancellation.

In Obama's case, sweeping and flowery rhetoric need to converge to legislative priorities. While Obama's rhetoric could power wind turbines, that isn't good enough. The employee free choice act is also waiting. Let's see him get that passed. Or will it be another course reversal to appease the mushy center right-wing and slave states.

I'm not waiting for anything. Instead I'm actively involved in keeping Obama honest on at least some fraction of the rhetoric that seems to hypnotize people. Bush was a horrible speaker. However, he was extremely able to get his priorities into legislation as corrupt as they were. The sweet talk from Obama, so far, is mostly sanguine rhetoric.

When Obama reverses himself on torture and trials for gitmo prisoners and government accountability and transparency, its not his fault. When vp doesn't cross fireman's union, its because Obama is supporting unions. This inconsistency would be humorous if there weren't so many serious constitutional principals at stake.

[uppityperson]

18. wtf?"Respecting a picket line is respecting the union worker's rights! " is flamebait?

You hesitated to dignify that with even a brief reply since a lengthly one would be more in depth?

To write things like this: "I'm not waiting for anything. Instead I'm actively involved in keeping Obama honest on at least some fraction of the rhetoric that seems to hypnotize people. Bush was a horrible speaker. However, he was extremely able to get his priorities into legislation as corrupt as they were. The sweet talk from Obama, so far, is mostly sanguine rhetoric."

Thank you for not being brief. It is good for posters to make sure we understand their viewpoints and you have done so.

[stlsaxman]

25. scentopine was responding to post #6... check the upper right corner of his/her post.

[uppityperson]

27. Aha, missed that. thank you. Some of what I wrote stands though...

bluestateguy: "I'd like to hear some more praise from the fools who say Obama does not support unions"

scentopine: "I'm not waiting for anything. Instead I'm actively involved in keeping Obama honest on at least some fraction of the rhetoric that seems to hypnotize people. Bush was a horrible speaker. However, he was extremely able to get his priorities into legislation as corrupt as they were. The sweet talk from Obama, so far, is mostly sanguine rhetoric."

me: Thank you for not being brief. It is good for posters to make sure we understand their viewpoints and you have done so.

[Cha]

20. Why your dirty "Flamebait" on President Obama?

This is about the admin's policy..the Buck stops with Obama.

What a hypocritical post.

[rosesaylavee]

8. Good. This sends a message.

[surrealAmerican]

9. I wonder how many of the mayors will follow their example.

[bitchkitty]

10. Wow, this is wonderful!

Very comforting to an old leftie like me! Maybe there is hope for this country under Obama.

[Vidar]

11. Good for Biden.

[McCamy Taylor]

12. Excellent!

[anonymous171]

13. Finally a president who respects Unions. nt

[Kingofalldems]

14. Excellent! Repubs would have ran across the picket line

[Arkana]

16. And then turned around and spat on the picketers.

[n2doc]

22. McCain would have had them arrested! n/t

[Cha]

19. Good and Good Luck

to the Firefighters!

[Mari333]

21. good for Biden!!!! nt

[Mithreal]

23. Yay for Obama and Biden and all the rest of us! nt

[stlsaxman]

24. That's Our Joe!!!!

[Jim Sagle]

26. Now THIS is a change WORTH believing in.

:thumbsup: to the Obama administration.

[readmoreoften]

29. Status Quo. Democratic presidential candidates don't cross picket lines. It's career suicide.

I learned this from my local union president when I was on strike. I was somewhat impressed that Clinton wouldn't cross our picket line. She said any Democrat with presidential ambitions doesn't cross picket lines because if they did their career would be over. This is change from Bush, of course, but nothing more than status quo for Dems.

[crikkett]

32. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are not candidates. n/t

[Abq_Sarah]

35. Of course they are

When a President, Senator or Representative is elected to his first term, the campaign machine starts to grind for the next election. It isn't until the second term (in the case of a President) that they have the luxury of not worrying about reelection. That isn't to say that President Obama would cross a picket line in his second term because I don't believe he would but it's not accurate to say they're not candidates.

[scentopine]

33. You are 100% correct and it is an important note.

No way Biden would cross that line. And I respect him for that.

I think there are many younger folks who post without a good frame of reference. People are so hopeful for any sign, that even reversing a policy that permitted torture is considered a major progressive move forward. If you've come into political awareness as a young voter, you literally grew up in a country that encouraged torture. Historically the US never had a formal policy allowing torture until Bush. It isn't a huge victory to get that undone. Neither is Joe B's not crossing the line.

What would be a huge victory and a signal of change is for the perpetrators of wall street fraud and torture to be punished. It would be a huge victory to get a good employee choice act passed. It would be a huge victory to stop outsourcing, hemorrhaging jobs and sheltering taxes. A victory is getting single payer health care on the table. And it would be a huge victory to move us left of the center conservative policies that are slowly suffocating the middle class.

With every municipal budget under stress as a result of the wall street crooks, crossing that line would have been a slap in the face. I won't give credit for the status quo no matter how passionately people proclaim it a brilliant move by a cunning chess master.

[JI7]

36. so if Dems consistently do something that is good you will refer to it as status quo ?