Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Should HRC lose her union endorsements for trying to stop workers voting in NV?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:05 PM
Original message
Poll question: Should HRC lose her union endorsements for trying to stop workers voting in NV?
And workers of color at that.

And should the mostly-white NEA apologize for trying to stop workers of color from voting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. What a stupid fucking question
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'll take that as a "no".
And thanks for posting, Mr. President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. oh dear, once again no proof of your assertion. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. That's what the suit against the "at large" caucus sites was about.
The Culinary Workers(who are basically workers of color)weren't going to get to vote without those sites being in place.

The NEA(almost all white)wanted to make sure they didn't, because the Culinary workers weren't pro-HRC.

Therefore, an attempt to stop workers of color from voting, in the name of giving a white candidate an unfair advantage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Well how about


letting unions basically control the caucus site and the workers forced to caucus in front of the union reps twisting their arms to vote for their candidate.

Is that still pretty for you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Your description is false..
Nobody was going to be suppressed, and the Democratic Party, not the union, was going to be running the sites. It would have been a victory for no one but racists and reactionaries if the "at-large" sites were stopped. Nothing positive was going to come for it, and a lot of people wouldn't have had the chance to vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Your first point is bullshit...
Employers are supposed to let their workers leave to vote!!!

Your second point is bullshit too, unless you can prove yourself to be a mind-reader.

Since points one and two are bullshit, your conclusion is too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. If my second point is false, explain this:
Why was the suit to block the "at-large" sites filed only AFTER the Culinary Workers endorsed Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #16
29. How long after?
And how long does the process take? And who is noted as the person or organization that filed? Hmmm???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #16
33. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
35. And how do the Clinton's figure into this?
Just because another Union (the nurses) decided to file a suit how does it have anything to do with the Clinton's. I think you are trying to smear the Clinton's with nothing to back up your assertions. Show me some evidence that puts the Clintons in this or explain why you choose to smear them in this way..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
5. A better question might be...
Is it fair to have a voting facility come to one set of people? Or, why does the rest of NV have to go out of their way to vote and these people do not?

I think the casino owners are greedy little bastards and they are making a big deal out of this instead of giving their workers time to go vote like they are supposed to do!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
7. For a completely legal action taken by OTHER PEOPLE?
And I am so pleased that the Obama supporters believe all "people of color" think and want the same thing. After all, how can you tell them apart?

Let's see... there are white people and then there are..."people of color"...all the rest in a great big invisible lump.

But it's good that you feel you can speak for every one of them. I'm sure they'll show their appreciation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. The NEA is a white and white collar union. It has little if any minority representation.
Doesn't it bother you that a union with that makeup tried to interfere in the voting rights of another union with a different makeup.

You can't defend the NEA suit and still be progressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Exactly!
This action was not started by Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. I'm NOT an Obama supporter. I oppose actions that make it harder for
people of color to vote. And you and I both know there was no chance of getting the casino owners to let their workers to take time off to vote. Companies with minority workforces never agree to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. I'm a color!!! And it isn't white!!!!
I'm pink, dammit!!!

Casper the fucking ghost is white, and unless you are albino, no one is white.

I'm so sick of racial divides and the nomenclature that drives it! On my kids' school cards, in the section marked "race", I would either write "three legged" or "Anglo-Saxon" or "Celtic".

I'm sick of this bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I used to think that it was conservatives who bemoaned "identity politics"
but I am starting to get a feel for what they were talking about.

While I am an Obama (1a) and Hillary (1b) supporter, I almost wish for the "good ol'" days of having white guys run against each other. :dilemma: At least then, discussion dealt with policy positions and character questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Enough already with the semantics. This is about stopping
African American and Latino American workers from voting on Saturday. NEA members don't NEED the at-large sites(although I believe anybody would be allowed to vote at them if they wished)because the overwhelming majority of NEA members have Saturday off.

This isn't about the casino owners. And it isn't about anything progressive. It's the equivalent of Sam Gompers personally stopping A. Philip Randolph from voting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Exactly so. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
31. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. Tell it to the Judge, pink person. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #15
27. Exactly. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
30. Enough already about keeping people from voting!!!
It's a damn lie!!! Every state has laws pertaining to employees being allowed to leave their place of employment in order to vote!!! Nevada's laws are much like California's, and MOST states have the same laws in this matter!!

<snip>

Any registered voter may absent himself from his place of employment at a time to be designated by the employer for a sufficient time to vote, if it is impracticable for him to vote before or after his hours of employment (must be liberally construed to achieve its purpose of ensuring that employees have an opportunity to vote). Such voter may not, because of such absence, be discharged, disciplined or penalized, nor shall any deduction be made from his usual salary or wages by reason of such absence. Application for leave of absence to vote shall be made to the employer or person authorized to grant such leave prior to the day of the election.


http://www.nae-online.org/faq.html#Answer17

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #15
34. Anyone who's ever negotiated LV Strip area traffic ANY day of the week
Edited on Fri Jan-18-08 12:25 PM by blondeatlast
ought to applaud a sensible move by the NV Democratic Party. I've done it many times and it's a clusterfuck wrapped in a nightmare 24/7. It literally NEVER lets up, not for a moment.

The Party was right--and the timing of that lawsuit INTENSELY suspicious.

I hate to pick sides when it comes to a union, but the CWU settlement was more than fair, and if the teacher's union wants to negotiate something with the party concerning the caucus, I welcome them to do so. This is sour grapes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 06:32 AM
Response to Original message
18. how about changing the poll to......


Should Obama lose his Union endorsements for endorsing the union busting bastard known as Reagan.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rAVES Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. endorsing a dead man huh.. Ive heard it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
19. "Obama should lose his Union endorsements for endorsing the union-busting bastard known as Reagan."
Well said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. its about putting it into perspective


I'm fucking furious these people are aiding Obama who just dissed Bill Clinton's legacy and lumped him in the same breath as Nixon and then endorse Reagans supposed movement of "change" that fucked so many of us over.

Total Bullshit, i hope this really brings the arrogant git down.

I do not want someone at the head of our who thinks like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #21
37. I don't want either of them. My concern here is with vote suppression
And really, BOTH of them could fairly be called "arrogant gits" depending on the situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
22. HRC is not my #1 choice, but that is a stupid question.
She, and Bill, play hard-ball politics better than most (not sure that this is meant as a compliment). She just got caught playing hard ball with the wrong group. If union still want to endorse her, so be it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
23. Yeah, because i'm damn sick of rove tactics that the clintons are using. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Except the accusations of Rovean tactics are false--i.e., Republican-style dirty politics.
Edited on Fri Jan-18-08 07:42 AM by Perry Logan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. It went from hillary running to the clintons running, who's the boss- i like bill, he was right for
Edited on Fri Jan-18-08 07:47 AM by deacon
the time and place, but this has melted down into rovian bullshit- they chose the path, and i don't find it hard to see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. Pretty much every accusation made at DU against Hillary's campaign has been debunked.
Edited on Fri Jan-18-08 08:02 AM by Perry Logan
This is my observation. Just look at the threads. There are invariably several excellent debunkings of every accusation--debunkings which the Obama people simply ignore.

This is classic Republican politics--make up false accusations about your opponent...then repeat them endlessly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 08:07 AM
Response to Original message
28. Sad to see unions fighting each other. I strongly support the CWU and the NVparty,
but no to both as it would weaken both unions.

The matter needs to drop quietly but I'm a pragmatist and I know it won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC