The setting was one of those faux-intimate chat-shows that are the staple of late-night French TV, with minor celebrities and media types swapping small-talk over a candlelit dinner.
With the wine flowing, host Thierry Ardisson laconically invited guests at the cosy soiree to name the politician who harboured the guiltiest secret and unwittingly unearthed a major sex scandal.
For me it was with Dominique Strauss-Kahn that things went super-wrong! exclaimed a pretty young blonde writer named Tristane Banon, and went on to claim that the then highly-respected former French finance minister had tried to rape her.
WSJ from a week ago, so it could've already been posted, but I don't miss much...
The NLRB's action, which Boeing will challenge at a hearing next month, is a big deal. It's the first time a federal agency has intervened to tell an American company where it can and cannot operate a plant within the U.S. It lays the foundation of a regulatory wall with one express purpose: to prevent the direct competition of right-to-work states with union-shop states. Why, as South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley recently asked on these pages, should Washington have any more right to these jobs than South Carolina?
For years, unions argued that right-to-work laws were bad for workers and for the states that passed them. But with the NLRB complaint, they've essentially thrown in the towel. If forced unionism is better for the economy of a state, why would the NLRB need to intervene to keep Boeing from leaving Washington? Why aren't businesses and workers moving operations to heavily unionized places like Michigan, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania and fleeing states like Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina and Texas? EXCELLENT question. Raw union power? For the most part, unions have outlived their usefulness, but the money and power live on.
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/21/2011 11:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
not to mention Washington state is a highly corrupt far left wing political swamp that enjoys the veneer of their own sense of entitlement and self importance. Oh, yeah, and they cant balance a budget either......
#2
Well I guess Boeing can always move their plants offshore.
This is an outright violation of the 13th Admendment.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Forcing employees to SERVE a union by giving up part of their earnings is a soft form of involuntary Serviture.
But then the Democrats never had a problem with Slavery.
"Becker failed to win Senate confirmation to a five-year term last month after two Democrats joined Republicans to block his nomination."
Posted by: Frank G on the road ||
05/21/2011 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Boeing should call the NLRB's bluff.
Start construction in South Carolina. They won't have to do much: an opening ceremony with the ceremonial shovel of dirt will do. Just make it clear that they are going to ignore the NLRB.
The NLRB then can go to court, which puts the onus on them to explain why their action is lawful. It also puts the Obama administration on the hook for shutting down construction, factory and assembly jobs in the run-up to the election (yes, yes, SC is a Pub state, but this will reverberate).
The Obama administration doesn't like being challenged. So challenge them.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/21/2011 18:13 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Push back is right! Think South Carolina's authorities will allow this rump board to stop it? To paraphrase: "how many armies does the NLRB have?" Let the festivities begin. I'd like to see SEIU, Trumka, et al march on SC. Let the baton's wail!
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/21/2011 18:34 Comments ||
Top||
#6
This is pure Marxism. Info on each and every individual on the Board is going to be published. Shine a bright light on these cockroaches.
#7
Steve White, they have already finished construction. They spent a LOT of money and were scheduled to start production next year.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
05/21/2011 19:47 Comments ||
Top||
#8
NLRB BOARD
Wilma B. Liebman was designated Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by President Obama on January 20, 2009... Prior to joining FMCS in January 1994, Ms. Liebman was Labor Counsel for the Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen from 1990 through 1993. She served as Legal Counsel to the International Brotherhood of Teamsters for nine years
Craig Becker was sworn in as a Board Member on April 05, 2010, following his recess appointment by President Obama. ... served as Associate General Counsel to both the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations.
Mark Gaston Pearce was sworn in as a Board Member on April 07, 2010, following his recess appointment by President Obama. Pearce practiced union side labor and employment law at Lipsitz, Green, Fahringer, Roll, Salisbury & Cambria LLP.
Brian Hayes was sworn in as a Board Member on June 29, 2010 by Sen. Mike Enzi at his offices in the Russell Building. He has argued a number of significant labor cases before the Federal Courts of Appeal; and regularly counseled clients regarding compliance with the full range of state and Federal labor laws including OSHA, FMLA, Title VII and the Fair Labor Standards Act.
#10
But they can't, can they? They have too much investment in US military contracts and politicians to actually try to call the Feds on this. My guess is that the planes will be constructed in Washington or else SC plant will be union.
President Barack Obama, facing criticism from some lawmakers that U.S. military action against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is about to become illegal, said Friday the mission would benefit from congressional support.
Obama did not explicitly ask Congress to authorize the action he ordered in March to protect Libyan civilians, as his critics say is demanded by the 1973 U.S. War Powers Act.
Instead, he suggested U.S. involvement in Libya was now so limited that Congress's authority was not needed.
If even one tanker airplane is supporting the mission, you need to go to Congress. That's what the WPA says. It's your job to lead on this one, Bambi, so send a resolution to the Congress and ask for their support. You'll likely get it. But then you're on the hook, which is what you're trying to avoid.
As usual.
"I wish to express my support for the bipartisan resolution ... which would confirm that the Congress supports the U.S. mission in Libya and that both branches are united in their commitment," the president said in a letter to top lawmakers.
"It has always been my view that it is better to take military action, even in limited actions such as this, with Congressional engagement, consultation, and support."
Obama notified Congress on March 21 he had ordered military action against Libya as part of a multinational coalition.
That made Friday the 60-day deadline to seek congressional authority for the action under the War Powers Act. But the White House indicated it did not view the current level of U.S. military involvement in Libya as reaching that threshold.
"This is a narrow U.S. effort that's intermittent and is principally to support the ongoing NATO-led and U.N. authorized mission," a White House official said. "The U.S. role is also not only one of support but the kinetic pieces of that effort are intermittent."
#3
He's a smart politician. His base would kill primary him if he asked for authorization. It would be his war. But if the Republicans give it to him for free, well, he'll just have to do whatever his generals say. He got bi-partisan support after all.
#5
The real Constitutional war powers act is the legislative control of the purse strings. The Trunks, lacking any backbone, will just go along rather than go back to the Donk resolutions from the 70s which cut the funding for operations in Vietnam and the South Vietnamese. All they have to do is swap out names and reintroduce it loudly pointing out its basically a Donk document. Wimps that they are, they won't.
Forcing this would at least make the administration articulate exactly why the hell we're there which, I suspect, can't be sold to the public.
#7
Please, don't call it a war. For now it's a 'Narrow U.S. Effort with intermittent kinetic pieces'. Not exactly bumper-sticker material but hey it's a work in progress.
Oh and BTW, here's a couple of overlooked nuggets from Obama's speech regarding Libya.
"The opposition has organized a legitimate and credible Interim Council."
And...
"Across the region, we intend to provide assistance to civil society, including those that may not be officially sanctioned, and who speak uncomfortable truths."
Sounds like real soon somebody might be gettin their presents.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
