Union-Bashing Right-Wing Media Stars Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly Are AFL-CIO Union-Affiliated Members!

  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Feb 27, 2011 8:33 PM GMT
    http://www.alternet.org/news/150054/confirmed:_union-bashing_right-wing_media_stars_hannity,_limbaugh_and_o'reilly_are_afl-cio_union-affiliated_members/

    I guess Unions are not that evil?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 8:38 PM GMT
    Rofl!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 9:23 PM GMT
    jprichva saidDon't worry about our local rightists' heads exploding.
    They won't touch this thread with a ten-foot pole, because there's no good response and they know it.

    I'll touch it because in the case of O'Reilly, the headline and first few paragraphs strongly suggest he hid his union membership. Only later, buried in the story, is there a paragraph that effectively refutes this:

    In the same segment where O'Reilly blamed government financial woes on union benefits, he not only said he was an AFTRA member, but that his membership had benefited him in the past. "On a personal note, I'm a member of a union, AFTRA, and when I was working at 'Inside Edition' some years ago, the King World company tried to renege on pension benefits," said O'Reilly. "AFTRA took them to court and the case was settled. If the shop had been non-union, we might have been stiffed."

    A lot of hot air and dishonest as well. Maybe they didn't think their loyal followers would read the whole article.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 27, 2011 9:33 PM GMT
    Shocked I tell you ............

    Shocked and dismayed icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Feb 27, 2011 9:40 PM GMT
    Of course !
    It's just like union member Southbeach, biting the hand that feeds him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 9:46 PM GMT
    Of course they're unions. They know it's important to maintain their pay, benefits and protect themselves. They just don't want anyone else to have that advantage.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 10:10 PM GMT
    icon_rolleyes.gif

    The issue has never been unions in general but rather public unions. Public employees should not have the power to jeopardize the stability of government by unfairly bargaining for better perks than the rest of private sector workers by using taxpayer money.

    The benefits and pay of public employees should be subject to the vote of the people because they are working for the people.
  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Feb 27, 2011 10:18 PM GMT
    Overall I admit my ignorance that I really don't know much about this issue like other people here, I just found this article to be amazing as those right wingers have been bashing unions for a long time!

    mocktwinkie, I think it's clear that the unions are ready to cut pay and other benefits, I have hard time believing this issue is to secure "Stability of Government"

    WI has been pretty stable no?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 10:27 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidicon_rolleyes.gif

    The issue has never been unions in general but rather public unions. Public employees should not have the power to jeopardize the stability of government by unfairly bargaining for better perks than the rest of private sector workers by using taxpayer money.

    The benefits and pay of public employees should be subject to the vote of the people.


    Check out how well putting things up for constant majority vote has worked out in California.

    Also, is the general public really in a position to determine how much an engineer should make? Or a real estate attorney or a maintenance worker?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 10:53 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie saidicon_rolleyes.gif

    The issue has never been unions in general but rather public unions. Public employees should not have the power to jeopardize the stability of government by unfairly bargaining for better perks than the rest of private sector workers by using taxpayer money.

    The benefits and pay of public employees should be subject to the vote of the people.


    Check out how well putting things up for constant majority vote has worked out in California.

    Also, is the general public really in a position to determine how much an engineer should make? Or a real estate attorney or a maintenance worker?



    Maybe it's because their demands aren't reasonable?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 11:21 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidicon_rolleyes.gif

    The issue has never been unions in general but rather public unions. Public employees should not have the power to jeopardize the stability of government by unfairly bargaining for better perks than the rest of private sector workers by using taxpayer money.

    The benefits and pay of public employees should be subject to the vote of the people because they are working for the people.

    If that is true, then the police and firemen unions should be included in WI. This is purely politically motivated.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 11:32 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    dglater saidhttp://www.alternet.org/news/150054/confirmed:_union-bashing_right-wing_media_stars_hannity,_limbaugh_and_o'reilly_are_afl-cio_union-affiliated_members/

    I guess Unions are not that evil?


    Nope.

    Union thugs have intimidated the major broadcasters into forcing anyone who is on-air talent to have to be a member of AFTRA, whether they like it or not.


    Guilds have existed for thousands of years, SB. AFTRA includes what used to be called the Actor's Guild).


    It is the Actors Guild that makes that requirement of Broadcasters to use only professional actors at professional rates (like piilots demand airlines use only pilots and not not just anyone who says "hey I can fly a plane I can be the pilot or you at half the price."



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 11:33 PM GMT
    Caslon17000 said
    mocktwinkie saidicon_rolleyes.gif

    The issue has never been unions in general but rather public unions. Public employees should not have the power to jeopardize the stability of government by unfairly bargaining for better perks than the rest of private sector workers by using taxpayer money.

    The benefits and pay of public employees should be subject to the vote of the people because they are working for the people.

    If that is true, then the police and firemen unions should be included in WI. This is purely politically motivated.


    There is a much greater life risk to those jobs -- and he couldn't potentially jeopardize the operations of government.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 27, 2011 11:59 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Upper_Canadian said
    Guilds have existed for thousands of years, SB. AFTRA includes what used to be called the Actor's Guild).


    How quaint.


    Yes isn't it? They decided centuries ago to use a word that would sound just archaic enough in future to sound like it had some history to it. Weren't they clever, SB?

    Poor little simpleton wouldn't be expected to know what a Guild was or that one could not practise any trade without apprentice to a guildsman, but you could try looking it up, simpleton.

    Those age-old practises of professional pactitioners being the arbiters of who gets to claim to be professionals in their craft still continue to this day, only now the term Guild is still used by the Director's, the Writer's and the Screen Actors Guilds).

    The Actors Union has just been referred to as AFTRA since television & radio artists came under one umbrella.


    SB is not to be regarded wih contempt but with pity for he is as his maker decided he should be: "special" in His eyes. We must be firm but patient with him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 5:23 AM GMT
    dglater saidOverall I admit my ignorance that I really don't know much about this issue like other people here, I just found this article to be amazing as those right wingers have been bashing unions for a long time!

    mocktwinkie, I think it's clear that the unions are ready to cut pay and other benefits, I have hard time believing this issue is to secure "Stability of Government"

    WI has been pretty stable no?




    Nice thread post, dglater.

    And, yes - it is "amazing" that the same right-wingers who have been spewing out rabid anti-union rhetoric for days are actually UNION MEMBERS.
    Amazingly hypocritical and disgraceful.
    Which is sadly just business as usual for the right-wing propaganda peddlers.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3280

    Feb 28, 2011 6:51 AM GMT
    i think Private Sector Unions are a good idea.

    But in the Public Sector, the unions get to negotiate with a buinsess that has no real possibility of bankruptcy. Therefore they are not afraid of asking for more and more. They also unlike the private sector, get to choose there managers or bosses ( indirectly) by using dues to support and elect politicians. The politicians that eventually negotiate these agreements.

    Example John Corzine former Governor, who in NJ negotiated sweetheart union contracts. With his Ex-Girlfriend. ( sounds real legit).

    I think private sector unions are good. And the examples such as Aftra SAG, etc mentioned above are private sector.


    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, state and local government employees earned total compensation of $39.60 an hour, compared to $27.42 an hour for private industry workers-a difference of over 44 percent. This includes 35 percent higher wages and nearly 69 percent greater benefits (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf).

    The government is a guaranteed employer, its not going to go out of business. I think some sensible employee protections are a good idea. But not the money funnel that these bargaining agreements create.

    Walker should just privatize every sector that is giving him trouble, and let them have there collective bargaining and be done with it. Then what would be the complaint?
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 28, 2011 10:37 AM GMT
    musclmed saidi think Private Sector Unions are a good idea.



    Really then......

    Then why did the republican legislature try to do just that?
    Take away bargaining rights by PRIVATE unions
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 11:10 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie saidicon_rolleyes.gif

    The issue has never been unions in general but rather public unions. Public employees should not have the power to jeopardize the stability of government by unfairly bargaining for better perks than the rest of private sector workers by using taxpayer money.

    The benefits and pay of public employees should be subject to the vote of the people.


    Check out how well putting things up for constant majority vote has worked out in California.


    I know, right? Direct Democracy is like crack cocaine --- immensely destructive, addictive and it eats up all your money.

    As a shareholder, I unfortunately *don't* get to vote on the pay of the executive board of companies I own shares in---I wish that I could!
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3280

    Feb 28, 2011 2:38 PM GMT
    GQjock said
    musclmed saidi think Private Sector Unions are a good idea.



    Really then......

    Then why did the republican legislature try to do just that?
    Take away bargaining rights by PRIVATE unions


    well did they? The whole right to work state is another issue.

    There is a competing right to not unionize, and not be forced to pay for something that will go to a competing politician.

    So overreaching you say? The whole "card-check" issue was completely un-democratic but was floated by the same people who champion this cause right now.

    right to work states are not slave labor camps.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 2:52 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    GQjock said
    musclmed saidi think Private Sector Unions are a good idea.



    Really then......

    Then why did the republican legislature try to do just that?
    Take away bargaining rights by PRIVATE unions


    well did they? The whole right to work state is another issue.

    There is a competing right to not unionize, and not be forced to pay for something that will go to a competing politician.

    So overreaching you say? The whole "card-check" issue was completely un-democratic but was floated by the same people who champion this cause right now.

    right to work states are not slave labor camps.


    Union dues are not used to fund political campaigns, which is illegal. The political work of unions are funded by voluntary contributions from members.
  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Feb 28, 2011 5:40 PM GMT
    I am glad there is a debate about unions over here... but the main point of this thread was to show the hypocrisy of the biggest anti union right wingers.
    If Hannity and Limbaugh were so against union they would "change" their status quo.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 8:27 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    dglater saidI am glad there is a debate about unions over here... but the main point of this thread was to show the hypocrisy of the biggest anti union right wingers.
    If Hannity and Limbaugh were so against union they would "change" their status quo.


    So their choice would be to resign from their jobs. While that would please all the liberal hens on here, that doesn't seem fair. In fact, the requirement that they be members of AFTRA in order to be on the air is quite unfair.




    O'Reilly has said very clearly - AS QUOTED IN THE OP ARTICLE - that his union has helped him in the past and protected his rights as an employee - so your claim that these guys would prefer to give up the rights and protections they enjoy as union members is total BS.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 8:48 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    rickrick91 said

    O'Reilly has said very clearly - AS QUOTED IN THE OP ARTICLE - that his union has helped him in the past and protected his rights as an employee - so your claim that these guys would prefer to give up the rights and protections they enjoy as union members is total BS.


    RickRick,

    When O'Reilly worked at Inside Edition he was working for scale.

    I can assure you that O'Reilly is NOT working for scale anymore and is receiving no benefits from the union.


    Which has nothing to do with O'Reilly saying:

    "On a personal note, I'm a member of a union, AFTRA, and when I was working at 'Inside Edition' some years ago, the King World company tried to renege on pension benefits, AFTRA took them to court and the case was settled. If the shop had been non-union, we might have been stiffed."

    Particularly since the issue was pensions not pay. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 8:49 PM GMT
    Unions are neither inherently good or bad.

    The bad stuff happens when the unions overreach and damage the economy and bottom line of companies and drive up the cost of government by demanding compensation that prices them out of the labour market - driving the companies to 3rd world labour for pennies on the dollar and governments to bankruptcy.

    We cannot discount the good that unions have done in the past, and a current role in preventing workers from being abused, but it is a two-way street.

    Many Unions have allowed themselves to become organs of the Democratic Party, and I have no doubt that the books get cooked more often than not when it comes to funding Democrat pols and using thugs to intimidate their opposition.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 28, 2011 9:02 PM GMT
    alphatrigger saidUnions are neither inherently good or bad.

    The bad stuff happens when the unions overreach and damage the economy and bottom line of companies and drive up the cost of government by demanding compensation that prices them out of the labour market - driving the companies to 3rd world labour for pennies on the dollar and governments to bankruptcy.

    We cannot discount the good that unions have done in the past, and a current role in preventing workers from being abused, but it is a two-way street.

    Many Unions have allowed themselves to become organs of the Democratic Party, and I have no doubt that the books get cooked more often than not when it comes to funding Democrat pols and using thugs to intimidate their opposition.




    The rich and many corporations have become "organs" of the Repub party.
    They have their own selfish interests and are not interested in the good of our country.
    THEY are the real enemy.

    And FYI - it's the selfishness of greedy corporations that has driven companies to seek out "3rd world labour".
    There's no way that American workers can ever work as cheaply as workers in third world countries.
    They have a lower cost of living in those locations and can get by on vastly less salary.
    If the unions cut their pay and benefits to the BONE, the greedy corporations will STILL keep sending jobs overseas.
    Union concessions would have zero impact on the corporate greed for cheap labor.