A letter from the boss, about the presidential election
Wikimedia Commons | Altered by Dan
In a June 6 conference call with the National Federation of Independent Business, GOP candidate Mitt Romney urged businessmen and women to tell their employees how to vote. That practice was illegal until the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. Since then, more and more employers have been threatening their workers’ livelihoods and pensions, depending on the election’s outcome. The following imagines such a letter from a Roanoke company president. It originally ran on this blog Oct. 19.
Dear valued employee of Roanoke Widget Co.,
Thank you for being part of a wonderful team. The past five years have certainly been trying, but you have helped keep this company in business. We are seeing record profits, just like many other American corporations.
How did we do that? Let us count the ways:
First, we laid off 40 percent of our work force. (Accounting was the only department where we added people, to help tally all those extra profits we made by slashing payroll). If you are receiving this email, it means you’re one of the lucky 60 percent that kept his or her job. Congratulations!
That doesn’t mean you didn’t get the shaft, of course. You remaining workers have had to pick up the slack for the boneheads we axed. Meanwhile, we cancelled all overtime — overtime pay, I mean. Comp time? Ha! Just try it!
And don’t you dare report us to the Wage & Hour board, unless you want to join your former colleagues over at the unemployment office. Grousers, we know you griped to your congressman, state senator and state delegate. Do you think they care? They’re our guys — not yours, you fools. They told us all about your complaints.
Second, your wages have been frozen since 2007. Well, not exactly. During that time we increased workers’ cost of health insurance while at the same time we have lowered the benefits. We blamed this little trick on “Obamacare,” ho, ho. But the reality is, it saved us millions.
Yes, we have heard some of you muttering this amounts to “back door” pay cuts. That’s true. We know who you cynics are, and soon, you won’t have to fret about any more “back door” cuts to your salaries. You’ll be heading out the front door, ha, ha.
Now let’s get to the real reason for this memo, which other companies are sending out as well. As you know, there’s an election coming up next month.
It’s no exaggeration to say the outcome is very important to the owners of Roanoke Widget. If the current administration returns to office, we’ll be forced to cease our operations.
Mitt Romney | AP
That means you won’t have a job. So if you want to keep yours, you better darn well vote for Mitt Romney.
Why are we doing this? We place the blame on “burdensome regulations,” but the real reason is a little more complicated. Yes, we’re making records profits, and this company has never been stronger financially.
The bottom line is, we’re doing it out of spite.
We Roanoke Widget owners simply hate President Obama. We believe he’s a communist, and that if he’s re-elected he will nationalize our widget operation. The 2013 Obama government will seize all the company’s assets. So we’re going to beat him to the punch. We’ll shut down, move the assets overseas, out of the government’s reach.
You may be wondering what us owners will do without all that corporate income we’ve been raking in for the last four years.
The answer is simple. Some of us will be vacationing on our new yachts. Others will be bottom feeding on rental real estate — have you notice how much rents have soared lately? Of course you have. Most of you hourly slobs are renters.
The truth is, all your hard work in the past four years has helped us amass quite a bankroll. We could have used that to hire back many laid-off workers. But in the short-term, that would have aided the nation’s economic recovery. And that would be against our long-term interests.
Pline | Wikimedia Commons
Our bankroll is so big right now that we owners could conservatively invest it and earn the same amount in dividends and capital gains. And that’s what we plan to do if Obama is re-elected.
Not only are tax rates lower on those forms of income, but cashing dividend checks is a lot easier than it is to get out of bed, hop in our Cadillacs and drive down to this plant. Where we listen to you ungrateful wretches mutter about how you’ve been treated unfairly.
You probably wonder why we won’t shut down if Romney wins. The answer is simple. With him in office, we can make even more money. Our taxes will be cut (yours will probably be raised though). Besides that, we expect the new administration will swiftly outlaw unions and repeal other socialist-inspired legislation that has hurt our nation for decades. Such as child-labor laws.
With those gone, we can get even tougher with you. You think losing your pensions two years ago was bad? Under President Romney, we might cut health insurance altogether, or replace you higher-wage workers with lower-cost (and healthier) kids. Your paid vacation may be history. By squeezing you further, we’ll make more money off your labor than we would if we invested our bankroll and sat on our asses.
You may be wondering how we’ll know if you voted the right way in the Nov. 6 election. That’s probably because you naively believe your ballots are secret.
Wikimedia Commons
That used to be true, back with the old curtain-style voting booths. But it isn’t the case any longer, now that Diebold and a few other computer-voting machines pretty much control the market. Technology is a wonderful thing, eh?
So have a great Nov. 6. Remember who butters your bread. And make sure you’re not late to work that day, or that you try to get out early so you can go vote.
Unless you sign an oath that you’ll vote for Mitt, of course. In that case we’ll bus you to the polls and give you beer to drink on the ride. For which you will be paid, of course. At overtime rates!
See you at the mandatory employee assembly Nov. 7 — where you’ll find out if you still have a job.
SINCERELY,
The Roanoke Widget Company President
October 28, 2012 - 1:30 PM
How do you spell sensationalism? Not even Glenn beck throws this stuff, and that’s saying something.
Dan, I’m looking all over for share link. Where the heck is one so I can post this to facebook?
This column is amazing. I absolutely love your editorial style.
Have a great day!
Dear Supreme Court,
Thank you for giving us the best government that money can buy.
Suzie, et al commence howling.
This letter reminds me of a real threatening letter… one that was sent out on October 8, 2012. Below is the full email sent out to all of his employees. It doesn’t surprise me that bullies like this carry forward their childish fits into the real world. Hopefully, this poor excuse for a human will in fact retire and let a real person take over the business and run it properly.
Subject: Message from David Siegel
Date:Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:58:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: [David Siegel]
To: [All employees]
To All My Valued Employees,
As most of you know our company, Westgate Resorts, has continued to succeed in spite of a very dismal economy. There is no question that the economy has changed for the worse and we have not seen any improvement over the past four years. In spite of all of the challenges we have faced, the good news is this: The economy doesn’t currently pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration. Of course, as your employer, I can’t tell you whom to vote for, and I certainly wouldn’t interfere with your right to vote for whomever you choose. In fact, I encourage you to vote for whomever you think will serve your interests the best.
However, let me share a few facts that might help you decide what is in your best interest.The current administration and members of the press have perpetuated an environment that casts employers against employees. They want you to believe that we live in a class system where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. They label us the “1%” and imply that we are somehow immune to the challenges that face our country. This could not be further from the truth. Sure, you may have heard about the big home that I’m building. I’m sure many people think that I live a privileged life. However, what you don’t see or hear is the true story behind any success that I have achieved.
I started this company over 42 years ago. At that time, I lived in a very modest home. I converted my garage into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you. We didn’t eat in fancy restaurants or take expensive vacations because every dollar I made went back into this company. I drove an old used car, and often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business — hard work, discipline, and sacrifice. Meanwhile, many of my friends got regular jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a nice income, and they spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into this business —-with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford to buy whatever I wanted. Even to this day, every dime I earn goes back into this company. Over the past four years I have had to stop building my dream house, cut back on all of my expenses, and take my kids out of private schools simply to keep this company strong and to keep you employed.
Just think about this – most of you arrive at work in the morning and leave that afternoon and the rest of your time is yours to do as you please. But not me- there is no “off” button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have that freedom. I eat, live, and breathe this company every minute of the day, every day of the week. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. I know many of you work hard and do a great job, but I’m the one who has to sign every check, pay every expense, and make sure that this company continues to succeed. Unfortunately, what most people see is the nice house and the lavish lifestyle. What the press certainly does not want you to see, is the true story of the hard work and sacrifices I’ve made.
Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn’t. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I’ve paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the costs of running a business have gotten out of control, and let me tell you why: We are being taxed to death and the government thinks we don’t pay enough. We pay state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers compensation taxes and unemployment taxes. I even have to hire an entire department to manage all these taxes. The question I have is this: Who is really stimulating the economy? Is it the Government that wants to take money from those who have earned it and give it to those who have not, or is it people like me who built a company out of his garage and directly employs over 7000 people and hosts over 3 million people per year with a great vacation?
Obviously, our present government believes that taking my money is the right economic stimulus for this country. The fact is, if I deducted 50% of your paycheck you’d quit and you wouldn’t work here. I mean, why should you? Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, that’s what happens to me.
Here is what most people don’t understand and the press and our Government has chosen to ignore – to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Instead of raising my taxes and depositing that money into the Washington black-hole, let me spend it on growing the company, hire more employees, and generate substantial economic growth. My employees will enjoy the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But that is not what our current Government wants you to believe. They want you to believe that it somehow makes sense to take more from those who create wealth and give it to those who do not, and somehow our economy will improve. They don’t want you to know that the “1%”, as they like to label us, pay more than 31% of all the taxes in this country. Thomas Jefferson, the author of our great Constitution, once said, “democracy” will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate business, not kill it. However, the power brokers in Washington believe redistributing wealth is the essential driver of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change they want.
So where am I going with all this? It’s quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company. Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.
So, when you make your decision to vote, ask yourself, which candidate understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn’t? Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions and you should know who might be the one capable of protecting and saving your job. While the media wants to tell you to believe the “1 percenters” are bad, I’m telling you they are not. They create most of the jobs. If you lose your job, it won’t be at the hands of the “1%”; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country.
You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, so will your opportunities. If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about.
Signed, your boss,
David Siegel
Article about said letter.
http://gawker.com/5950189/the-ceo-who-built-himself-americas-largest-house-just-threatened-to-fire-his-employees-if-obamas-elected?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_twitter&utm_source=gawker_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
Obama is now officially the Welfare President. Welfare spending increased 32% under Obama.
Justin,
I do not see much threat in this letter at all. It sounds rational and factual.
First Churches, now workplaces. Wow, all those people worried about Big Brother might want to re-think where the real danger to their freedom, privacy and self-determination lies.
If Romney thinks it is a swell idea for your boss to “inform” you of the repercussions of this election, how is he going to feel about us when he is the nation’s “boss”? I know the right wing cannot put 2 and 2 together, but the rest of us have no excuse for allowing this to even become a fringe thing.
Do we not have an adversarial enough relationship between management and labor? Do we need to be “put in our place” over whom we support in an election? This is wrong on so many levels. I saw a Roanoke company van this morning with a Romney/Ryan bumper sticker right next to the company name. This has gone too far folks. And if you don’t believe me, think how you would feel if that had been Obama asking bosses to help him out and “explain” this to their workers or if that had been a company you use with an Obama bumper sticker? See the problem now?
I want everyone to note that BobH (apparently) has called something I wrote “rational and factual.”
Great piece Dan..
I could not believe even Romney
would actually do this the way that he did.
This guy deals with a bizarre set of morality
benchmarks (lying for the Lord being a small piece).
The audio of this made me think “my God this country is lost”
Supreme Court in 2000…to business as usual 2012..
Hanging Chads? Another nightmarish November?
…Make a bunch of money…give some to the church and buy the presidency. Life is indeed good for those with no conscience .
Everyone’s alone in the voting booth and can do whatever they like. As for that crass buffoon Siegel…what can you really say about a “time share mogul”.
I worked for NFIB when I lived in Kansas, traveling all over the state enlisting small business owners. At this point, they’re not differentiating themselves from the Chamber at all…genuine small businesses have no reason to join. Their interests aren’t being represented.
No Dan,
Please check your ego at the door (I know how hard this is for you to do).
What I said was the letter that Justin posted was rational and factual.
I figured out where yours was going about 3 words in, and didn’t waste my time.
Why do you think I referenced my post that it was to JUSTIN?
Clear the liberal crap (sorry for the redundancy) out of your mind and see if you have anything left Dan. I was referring to the David Siegel letter.
BobH, Did you not read this?
“You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, so will your opportunities. If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about.”
Do you think this was an invitation to his employees? Or a threat? Sadly letters like this are being sent out all over the country. Using fear tactics, instead of factual evidence to get your point across.
BobH, are you used to such tactics? Do you use such tactics yourself? I prefer to think for myself. I know from facts, not speculation, that Romney is a liar, a thief, and a tax evader. No thanks. I will support a president that leads with intelligence and his heart. I will choose a president that picks a country up as a whole not just the rich, arrogant, bullies who don’t want to pay their fair share. But, I suppose when Obama wins, the republicans will just blame the devil. Obama won because we took prayer out of schools… OK. Every threat a republican utters is superfluous, and baseless. Romney may have written off 47% of the country, but he also lies at least 47% of the time.
JT
“Sadly letters like this are being sent out all over the country.”
Then being made up and printed in the paper. Vicious cycle we’re in.
“The wheels on the bus are fall-ing off,
fall-ing off, fall-ing off,
The wheels on the bus are fall-ing off,
Obama’s goin’ down”
Gee Dan, sounds as if you have the Obama brown on your nose and I bet that you get that tingle up your leg when he speaks like Chris “the wuss” Matthews. By the way, when is the liberal rag that you are employed going to come out and endorse Obummer? Probably afraid to, circulation is hurting enough especially when they have people trying to hand them out at Kroger certainly gives that impression. I just say “no liberal crap for me” and walk off.
BobH,
Why are you being so defensive? You act like you are in support of a habitually lying bully. Dan’s letter came rather close to what was written by the rodeo clown, Siegel. Look, the fact is this, these types of employers are taking the personal, rational decision out of the hands of the free thinking person by using threats. I think that it is disgusting, and I could not imagine threatening anyone to force them to think like myself, or to achieve my goals. You can be the boss at work, but stay the hell out of my moral conscience, and my freedom to choose.
JT
As the US moves closer to being a banana republic…[thank you US Supreme Court for the Citizen's United decision]…we have fulfilled almost all the criteria – and a Romney presidency would do nothing but move us closer to – “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the banana republic of America…”
Here’s the check list:
Election fraud and voter intimidation √
Stratified class system √
Economically impoverished lower class √
High income inequality √
Ruling plutocracy – a small wealthy and corrupt clique √
Country run for private profit √
Profits from private exploitation of
public lands is private property √
Debts incurred from private enterprise
become the public responsibility √
Large part of economy and politics are controlled by corporations √
Reliance on foreign capital √
The only piece missing is the US is not yet dependent on a limited agricultural product. Otherwise, we could soon see “democracy” as we know it in the rear view mirror…Romney would become the face and “dear leader” for the cabal of Koch brothers et al – in essence the ruling plutocrats.
BobH, I guess that unions doesn’t make the same threats, right pal? I guess when your big eared empty suit loses you will be slobbering and crying with Chris Matthews. Speaking of a liar, your man dances a pretty mean jig also and as far as picking the country up you know his record, just won’t admit it. Lower than whale crap at the bottom of the ocean.
Justin,
If Seigel’s letter threatened employees that they better vote for Obama, BobH would be foaming at the mouth about it right here on this blog. But because he agrees with it, he’s defending it. He will defend to his dying breath the right of anyone who say something he agrees with.
Hey folks, calm down.
At least seigal isn’t deducting dues from their paychecks and sending that money to obama.
Obama and Romney have spent roughly the same amount in this campaign.
Citizen’s United…PFFFFFFFFFFTTT!
You libbies like a rigged game.
Get over it.
Frank, At least the dues that is going to, Obama, comes from the US of A! Romney is so used to shutting companies down and shipping them to China, I am surprised only 90% of his donations to his election campaign came from millionaires… instead of 100%. With Romney’s record, I am sure he even tried to outsource the job of VP. Apparently, Hitler was unavailable.
What I do not understand about you die hard republicans is the fact that you are so used to being lied to by your republican/conservative leaders, you are willing to accept anything that comes out of their mouth. Rather than doing the research yourself, and reading and listening to something other than Fox news may help your decision in not only choosing president, but in other things; like how women should be looked at as something other than a baby factory and someone who gets you a beer. Some people are poor and ignorant because of policies that were put into place by someone like Romney. Romney’s actions never match with the words that flow from his sociopathic mouth.
JT
If I build a company….Yes, Obama, I…ME…NOT YOU!!, I built that… If I build a company, I will say as I want. If I wish to urge my employees to vote a certain way, I certainly will. I will put forth my reasons why. I cannot follow you into the voting booth, so there is no plausable threat possible. Stating that I MAY close if candidate O is elected is not saying I WILL close. Stating that you fear that conditions fostered by candidate O will make it unpalatable to continue in business does not constitute a threat. The reality is that as long as the business remains profitable, it will likely stay open. Unless the business is completely under control of it’s founder, it may not even be his decision. Look at Apple. Jobs and Wozniak founded the company, but neither of them had authority to close it – or even issue completely unilateral directives after a few years had past. However, if that control IS all in the hands of one man or one group…if they OWN the business, they have every right to fold it up. It is the same right you have to quit a job. The employer owes you NOTHING other than the agreed upon compensation for your labor. Part of that compensation includes the safe working conditions, any benefits, perks etc.
I do not know Siegel. I had read his letter. I am pretty sure Dan got his article idea from it. The fact is, that Dan’s labor alone is not worth near what he gets for it. Dan gets the benefit of the existence of the Roanoke Times. He gets lifted up by the people that started the paper, by those that have nurtured the paper, and so forth. The fact is – a business founder does build that business, and the employee gets one heck of a lot of value from that.
wow, Justin,
You sound bitter…. you make Mitt out to be about as lousy a person as there could ever possibly be. Sociopath? Dude, get real.
And, you certainly aren’t in a position to lecture me, or anyone else.
Don’t worry. Be happy.
“Cycle-to-date comparisons of spending — that is, comparing spending at the same point in each cycle — show that non-party outside spending in 2012 was greater than that of the 11 previous cycles combined as of October 6. That’s $517 million so far this cycle, compared to less than $444 million combined for every cycle going back to 1990.”
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/the-october-surprise-majority-of-ou.html
“Romney and his Republican allies have consistently outspent Obama and the Democratic super PACs that back the president’s re-election; this week, the Romney side is outpacing Obama by a $36.5 million to $25.5 million pace.”
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/presidential-ad-spending-nears-900-million-20121019
And here is the kicker:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/25/romney-may-outspend-obama-but-not-beat-him-in-november-election.html
Re: Comment by Sandi Saunders — October 19, 2012 @ 8:48 am
Sandi,
True (small “l”) libertarians have long understood that the threats to freedom come from all such sources.
We understand that the threats to a republic based on democratic principles and the freedoms we support come from all forms of authoritarianism.
That despised authoritarianism can be any form of totalitarian government/control in which the authority of state and/or other related sources of power is used imposed onto many aspects of citizens’ lives (typically, not only all political and economic matters, but also the attitudes, values, and beliefs of its population — think of Suzie’s vision of governance, for example).
IMHO it matters little if the authoritarianism in question is ecclesiastical / theocracy, oligarchical, fascist, military dictatorship / warlords, socialistic, marxists / marxists-leninists / maoism, etc.
Some deontological libertarians, such as I, also fear the tyranny of the majority in an otherwise democratic principled structure.
So, once again we agree, I think. Or agree in part, in any case.
Working for a company with a union is a choice those people made up front, having your boss announce this crap, after you are hired or years into a business is a whole other kettle of fish and you “low effort” folks would know this and be screaming about it, if Obama supporting business owners did it. You do not need to accept the hypocrite tag for it to stick.
Wow, Ken Taylor, you have become so utterly consumed with vile hatred that you’ve lashed out at one of your own (post at 10:27). BobH does indeed support an empty suit, so at least you got that part right.
BobH – union man! Now that’s funny right there!
#20 You know, Ken Taylor, you should read more carefully. You might avoid showing off your vast lack of comprehension. Bob H is DEFINITELY a Romney guy and an anti-Dan Casey sort.
Reprobate.
#23 “Obama and Romney have spent roughly the same amount in this campaign.”
Provide some numbers for us, LC. And when you do, please include all the Super PACS and shadow groups.
“…you are so used to being lied to by your republican/conservative leaders…”
“Apparently, Hitler was unavailable.”
“Some people are poor and ignorant because of policies that were put into place by someone like Romney.”–Justin False
I would say that these sentences are quite representative of the current crop of liberal politicans and the liberal constituency as a whole. “I’m poor and it’s someone else’s fault!” “I am an ignorant fool, and it’s someone else’s fault!” “Republicans are Nazis!” “All conservatives and Fox News lie!” “Republicans hate women!”
Lol. Dude, go find a park to take over ( preferably one that at least has some port-o-johns this time).
Justin, look at this.
“Romney OUT-POLLING Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/robbins-report/2012/oct/18/romney-outpolling-carter-reagan-bush-i-clinton-bus/
hi sandi,
It’s not as simple as you make it sound.
If you are a meat cutter, brick-layer, pipe-fitter, truck driver, printing press operator, etc, and live in a union state (unlike Virginia), good luck finding a non-union job in your field. This kinda puts the lie to your comment, “is a choice those people made up front”, which means that many, many folks you refer to…don’t have the choice you so blithely say they do.
I believe that it was Hitler who said in Mein Kampf that people would believe anything, provided they were told it often enough and emphatically enough.
If the Boss tells his folks he MIGHT be closing the doors if they don’t vote a certain way, that’s some serious intimidation. Most people I know take what the boss says serious. Just because its legal doesn’t make it right. Justifying it by saying the boss can’t follow you into the voting booth don’t wash either.
We the people need to demand SOTUS abort citizens united and clean up the mess it’s made of our election cycle.
David in Salem, you just described the way to build a business that will either offend your employees/customers or cut your own throat. The idea that people will just accept such tyrannical rantings and respect the person delivering them is just a joke on you I suppose. Your choice? Yes. Your bad? yes.
Yes Dave Hicks we have come to agree on that very principle. I am well aware that the pendulum can swing too far for what I believe almost as easily as it can for what Suzie et al believes, ergo we must all be on guard against such tyranny, call it out, vote against it and certainly not agree with it for the sake of partisan gain on one issue or another. And yes, that means guns, speech, privacy, self incrimination, warrant-less surveillance and torture. It does not mean taking no action as opposed to any action, but we, as the only true restraint on power (and diminishing with each election), must be equally prepared to balk when it is “our side” as theirs, or the battle is over.
Currently who do you see that feels that way on her side?
Lower case matt, it has a name, Stockholm Syndrome, and there is help available. Some have managed to make the break for the border known as reality. I do not look for an Ed Lynch disciple to join them though. Sorry ’bout your luck.
@#33-matt
As per usual, matt, you don’t let me down with your ignorant, childish remarks, and regurgitated opinions. You keep proving my point that a republican/conservative cannot come up with a thought that is solely your own. (Dan’s thinking, “what shall we expect from a guy that spells his name with a lower-case “m”.) Which is kind of weird… If Obama is voted out, how are you going to afford your Redman, Busch Light, and the latest NRA magazine? I don’t expect someone who thinks the TV Show, “Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader”, as intellectual programming, to be able to contribute much to the conversation. But you could just stick to the Highlights for Children blogs and fight over why the color red is better than the color blue. You know the old saying, “I know you can’t help being ugly, but you could at least stay at home”, same concept here.
Here is a real quote for you;
“Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.”
-John Stuart Mill
I’m sorry….are Carter, Reagan, Bushes 1 & 2, and CLinton running against Rmoney?
Just False,
You need to step up your game. But, let’s take a brief look at your failure of a comment, just for fun.
“…your ignorant, childish remarks, and regurgitated opinions…”–Ha! This coming from a guy who implies that people who don’t think like he does are Nazi’s. Yikes. And speaking of regurgitated opinions and childish remarks, didn’t your first comment to me on this blog, maybe about a month ago, involve Highlights Magazine?(Sigh) Dude, at least be a bit more creative. That wasn’t even funny the first time.
“If Obama is voted out, how are you going to afford your Redman, Busch Light, and the latest NRA…”–I don’t use tobacco, never drink Busch, and have never puchased NRA magazine (although I do own several firearms). Now, let’s flip that question. If Obama is not re-elected, how are you even going to survive, right? No more food stamps. No more TANF and welfare. No more subsidized housing. No mo’ Obamaphowwwne. No mo’ gubmint healthcare. Mitt’s gonna take away all means for you to survive…because we all know working for a living is out of the question, right? Your parents will be forced to kick you out of the basement, and that means no more Playstation(Noooo!). Hell, you’ll be dead soon without Obama.
Unfortunately, the rest of your post is pretty weak. Usually I enjoy the give and take, but you don’t seem to be worth the time or the effort. You should hit up Steve C and JM White for pointers.
Good Lord. Dan, open the door!
Oops. Too late…
(Nooo! That’s a bad dog! Baaad dog!)
No matter what Obama does to lower taxes on small business, the RW machine continues to claim that Mitt Romney is their savior. Mitt Romney is protecting only 3% of what he calls small businesses. Those businesses are the Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds like Bain Capital. They make billions a year but because they hire only a few employees, Mitt considers them small businesses. Mitt does not consider the Mom and Pop companies, professionals, small manufacturing small business, they don’t even rank on his radar as they do not produce enough revenue to matter to him.
Obama cut real small business’s taxes a number of times and passed a health care act that will help lower their employees’ health care costs. You will not hear that simply because the money from the Hedge Funds and Private Equity bankers are the ones buying Mitt’s way. The other 97% of small businesses do not matter.
Re: Comment by Sandi Saunders — October 19, 2012 @ 1:05 pm
Currently who do you see that feels that way on her side?
—————–
By “her side” do you mean “the girl” who claims to always be / have always been right on everything (even when proven wrong) and who bodes no compromise in her dogma (religious, economic, political, etc) — which, in turn, bodes disaster for all involved?
If so, I suggest that the equating of “her” to a “side” might well be a defamation and character assassination of far too many folk on “the other side” of any particular debate.
In a way the “Suzie card” has become the “Hitler card” of the blog. Surely, we do not want to fall into the trap of a “Guilt by Association” fallacy by appearing to discredit an idea based upon such a disfavored individual associated with it.
I certainly don’t think “she” defines either the Republicans or the TP or even the majority of the Right Wing.
As always, YMMV (a concept that is beyond “her” grasp).
Rmoney = jealousy…lol, how childish
“Provide some numbers for us, LC. And when you do, please include all the Super PACS and shadow groups.
Comment by gdad — October 19, 2012 @ 12:06 pm”
please do as well as the overseas contributions that bambam is trying so hard to hide
jt you ignorant slut….(from the original snl)….Romney have saved more jobs than bammy ever knew existed. bambam on the other hand has given billions of our tax money to failing ‘green’ companies that have ALL gone bankrupt…..bammynomics..it shows he never studied economics
Every single employee who gets one of these emails should file a complaint with the NLRB and the FEC.
Re: Comment by dave — October 19, 2012 @ 4:11 pm
dave,
See: http://tinyurl.com/28zpz4j re: the personhood of corporations, the resulting free speech rights of corporations and other new-found constitutional equality.
As it is, now, I doubt that the NLRB or the FEC could do anything.
Given Justice John Paul Stevens’ tongue in his cheek taunt of the majority, I could not help think of The “City of London” (not Greater London) where “companies, limited liability partnerships, charities, trade associations, livery companies, churches and other religious bodies, banks and hospital trusts”, “sole trader or partnership” all get votes (“Bodies employing fewer than ten workers may appoint one voter, those employing ten to fifty workers may appoint one voter for every five; those employing more than fifty workers may appoint ten voters and one additional voter for every fifty workers beyond the first fifty”) — http://tinyurl.com/8zk9q9r & http://tinyurl.com/99ormz8
Given Stevens’ example (below) might that be in our future?
**
SNIP
Suppose that General Motors Corp., troubled that a candidate for Congress from Michigan was too favorable to the United Auto Workers, decided to do everything in its corporate power to defeat that candidate. So, aside from spending huge sums of its own money (none of it federal bailout money) to influence the outcome, it went to the office of the voting registrar in downtown Detroit. It sought to sign up, affirming that it was a citizen and resident of Michigan. Denied registration, it sued, claiming that, under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, it was a “person,” and, as a “citizen,” it was entitled to equal protection under the election laws. Would the Supreme Court buy that?
General Motors might already be halfway to winning its lawsuit.
SNIP
**
http://tinyurl.com/26vc7af
Dave Hicks
The Nlrb and the Fec might not ultimately be able to do anything. But just forcing the jerkwads who follow these practices to have to spend the time and put up with the inconvenience of defending themselves against all the claims might have a salutary effect on their willingnew to do it again. My philosophy in this case is, if you can’t crush them, you caqn at leaqst worry the hell out of them.
hey Sandi,
What about your response to my rebuttal of your bogus “worker’s have choices” comment? Eh?
Gotcha.
#47 IOW, neither you nor LC can or will provide the numbers. Thanks.
#43 matt has officially become the vilest creature on the blog. Insults about alcoholism and weight and calling women dogs. Not funny, just horribly disgusting. A true POS.
Dave Hicks, surely you have seen by now that as much as we may wish it, (loyal opposition and all that), Suzie is not an anomaly. She has too many minions nipping at her heals. She is merely the original here, and in fact some days, she is the sane one. Sad as it is to say, They are “the other side”. Which makes any effort to fight with truth or facts useless on them. You see that daily.
Can you say that Leon, Pistol Pete, Frank, matt, pammala, Lake Claytor, or Bob H and the occasional other right wingers who chime in are less belligerent in the face of facts?
MMDNV on that score.
Frank, given that only about 8 percent of private-sector workers are union members, your point is literally ludicrous.
Even if lower case matt was not offensive, childish and wrong often enough, he boasts that God’s man Wall Street Romney is gonna save his cuntry with “No more food stamps. No more TANF and welfare. No more subsidized housing. No mo’ Obamaphowwwne. No mo’ gubmint healthcare“. Joke’s on you fool!
#55…
#56…
#57…
Breathe Sandi, or your head is gonna explode.
#58:
matt, I’m sure Sandi and the rest of us will agree to continue breathing if you’ll agree to stop breathing.
Do you tell that to your dad Frank when he rolls for post after post?
hey Suzie, it looks like sandi is trying to make nice with you.
ok sandi,
I’ll take that “7.2% of private sector employees are unionized…”. Now, how many workers in non-union companies are threatened by their bosses regarding who to vote for? Ya think it’s smaller than 7.2% of the total work force?
Better yet, how many non-union employees in non-union states are forced to pay union dues…which then go to elect democrats supported by the unions? How does a big ol’ ZERO sound? Sounds pretty solid, don’t it?
Gotcha on both points.
Frank,
Re: “are forced to pay union dues…which then go to elect democrats supported by the unions” in any State.
Under the Taft-Hartley Act, a union may require that employees either join the union or be compelled to pay only that portion of union dues that is attributable to the cost of representing employees in collective bargaining and in providing services to all represented employees.
Please provide a citation in law that supports your assertion that employees can be forced to pay dues or fees to be used to elect democrats supported by the unions or other union political activities.
Water-boy Warren/Bobby Boucher,
Your ‘zingers’ lack zing. As old as you are, I figured you would have that down pat by now. (Sigh)
Careful, Sandi.
I don’t think the vet is open on weekends. The only option would be to put you down (not that anyone would be upset by that).
A REAL Letter from the Boss:
Yes, we cut your hours (and your pay) by 20 percent, but if you know what’s good for you, you’ll make the maximum donation to the Romney campaign!
Sincerely,
Arthur Allen, ASG Software Solutions.
Frank remains a moron and the only thing you “Gotcha” is, well, nothing. Pitiful. Paying union dues is a choice. Having your job threatened over how you vote is sick. No wonder you support it.
Lower case matt, do you think I am a dog because I piss on your idiocy so often?
hey Dave,
said another way, …in the real world, people go along to get along, in general…particularly those who want a job, or want to keep said job. many will agree to just about anything, as long as they get to get a job, or to keep their job. that’s real world stuff, dave, not lib prattle.
Actually matt, my vet is open on weekends. However, Sandi is not the one who needs to go. I think you are personally acquainted with the person who does though.
“…do you think I am a dog because I piss on your idiocy so often?”
-Sandi
Yikes. They grow em’ real ladylike out there in the sticks, don’t they?
It’s not about where you piss Sandi, though I imagine that has been a long and laborious process.
I think it has more to do with your hyperactive, lemming-like, butt-sniffing, bark at the wall blind loyalty to your own BS.
matt,
repubs don’t like women who aren’t always “ladylike” do they???
Nah, Ron. We just prefer em’ to have more teeth than the ones in Bedford. And you libs can keep all your femi-nazi “I fart louder than my husband” types, too.
Come on, Dan, matt’s weight, canine, poop, butt-sniffing, fart, hillbilly, etc. insults directed primarily toward Sandi have grown AT LEAST as boring as any exchange between MMM and me and are most definitely more offensive. Sandi obviously can more than hold her own and needs no help or protection, and I realize that by allowing these posts you’re letting matt show himself for the complete and utter dunderhead that he is, but isn’t enough enough?
#74
gdump,
You are not a good defender of the blog. You are just an ankle biter in a cheerleading outfit (and a diaper).
I agree with gdad. On a good day the comments here make Reddit look civilized, but matt’s telling Sandi she ought to be euthanized crosses a line the width of the Mississippi (for the record, I find Warren’s recommendation that matt stop breathing likewise repugnant, only less graphically so).
Comment by gdad — October 21, 2012 @ 10:54 am
Comment by Laura — October 21, 2012 @ 12:26 pm
———
Yup!
hey Frank
You go along to get along? With who? The TP? Why? Someone force you?
It would seem that if “going along to get along” was your thing, you would be supporting the predominant political theme of the blog.
Remember, folks, these are the folks who invented card check, union bullying, and forcing union workers to financially support the Democrat party .
Pretty rich, eh?
“Remember, folks, these are the folks who invented card check, union bullying, and forcing union workers to financially support the Democrat party.”
Union bullying? More delusion. Less than 8 percent of the private-industry workforce is union. As such, it’s impossible for them to bully anybody.
They get bullied a lot, though by the corpor-fascists.
hey dave hicks,
The comment in my last post was directly related to how I think many people will act in order to get a job, or to keep the job they already may have. “Going along to get along” is something many people practice in order to bolster, or at least not destroy, their employment opportunities.
Do you have ANY grasp of that?
#75 And that, matt, was even more simple minded and juvenile than average for you. And I can’t believe you suggested killing a poster on this blog.
Frankie wankie, mattie needs help.
Wow, I agree with gdad for once. Matt, that comment was WAY out of line. Be cool, buddy.
it appears to me that sandi brought “piss” into the discussion.
others might have used different words, but not good ol’ sandi.
Re: Comment by Frank — October 21, 2012 @ 8:26 pm
Yup.
OTOH, I have changed jobs (rather than “Going along to get along”). It is something many people of integrity practice in order maintain their ethics, support their moral values, etc.
Do you have ANY grasp of that?
Where would you draw the line rather than “Going along to get along” in order to bolster, or at least not destroy, your employment opportunities?
At what point do you prostitute yourself for the almighty dollar?
@85
+1
#84 So that justifies matt’s vile comments? Rationalize much, Frank?
Frank shows his true colors…once again. No wonder he is so proud of his son, lower case matt.
#84 Uhh, Frank, I’m not sure that was the kind of help matt was looking for.
Obama is now officially the Welfare President. Welfare spending increased 32% under Obama. Comment by Henry — October 19, 2012 @ 7:49 am
Henry, remember this old adage? “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone”…Let’s look at Romney’s food stamp record as Governor of MA 2002 – 2006:\
“The news this year [2006] is alarming: in low-income communities in Massachusetts, the extent of hunger more than doubled from what it was just three years ago. Findings from a recently released study show that hunger exists in an unprecedented 18 percent of households in these communities, up from 8 percent in 2003.”
[...]
“Over the past three years, food stamp enrollment in Massachusetts has grown by over 40 percent.”
http://www.projectbread.org/site/Search?q=The+news+this+year+is+alarming%3A+in+low-income+communities+in+Massachusetts%2C+the+extent+of+hunger+more+than+doubled+from+what+it+was+just+three+years+ago.+Findings+from+a+recently+&btnG=Search&output=xml_no_dtd&client=convio_frontend&sort=date%3AD%3AS%3Ad1&num=10&proxystylesheet=convio_frontend&oe=ISO-8859-1&ie=ISO-8859-1&entqr=3&ud=1&site=pbwh
Dan, Matt needs to go
Dan, Bill needs to go soak his head.
matt is right, sandi uses language like that, she must have one to do it with.
#90. Good call. Romney was not a good governor. His approval rating when he released the state from his custody was down to 37%.
#93, When Sandi used language “like that” she had plenty of cause.
Check out: http://tinyurl.com/8p9m39y
**
Firing (or Threatening to Fire) Employee Based on His Vote
Eugene Volokh • October 29, 2012 12:04 pm
I’ve recently heard some uncertainty about whether employers may fire employees based on how they voted, or threaten to fire them based on how they voted. The answer — based on my own research — is that all states have laws that ban this sort of conduct as to state elections, and the federal government has a law that bans this sort of conduct as to federal elections.
Most of the laws specifically ban employer retaliation or employer threats. Others, including the federal law, use more general language, for instance by prohibiting “intimidat[ing], threaten[ing], coerc[ing], or attempt[ing] to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person … to vote as he may choose.” But those courts that have considered the question have read this language as applying to economic retaliation and not just violence. See United States v. Bd. of Educ. of Greene County, 332 F.2d 40, 44, 46 (5th Cir. 1964) (concluding that the refusal to renew a year-to-year employment contract based on a person’s exercise of her right to vote could be “intimidation”); United States v. Bruce, 353 F.2d 474, 476–77 (5th Cir. 1965) (likewise, as to property owners’ decision to bar a person from their property, when this decision seriously interfered with the person’s ability to work as an insurance premium collector); United States v. Beaty, 288 F.2d 653, 656 (6th Cir. 1961) (likewise, as to landlords’ retaliation against their sharecropper tenants); see also Smith v. Stechel, 510 F.2d 1162, 1164 (9th Cir. 1975) (so reading a similarly worded statute that applied to housing rather than to voting); Reg’l Econ. Cmty. Action Program, Inc. v. City of Middletown, 294 F.3d 35 (2d Cir. 2002) (likewise as to another similarly worded statute).
Some of the statutes impose civil liability, others provide for criminal punishment, and others specifically provide for both. But given recent caselaw on the “wrongful discharge in violation of public policy” tort, it seems likely that most state courts would impose civil liability for violation of the criminal statutes as well.
SNIP
**
How timely!
Check out: http://tinyurl.com/8p9m39y
**
Firing (or Threatening to Fire) Employee Based on His Vote
Eugene Volokh • October 29, 2012 12:04 pm
I’ve recently heard some uncertainty about whether employers may fire employees based on how they voted, or threaten to fire them based on how they voted. The answer — based on my own research — is that all states have laws that ban this sort of conduct as to state elections, and the federal government has a law that bans this sort of conduct as to federal elections.
–Comment by Dave Hicks
Dave Hicks,
I have no doubts such conduct is illegal. But what’s happening now is a slightly different end-around. The employers are saying:
“Dear valued worker at ABC whatever:
“I would never tell you dear employees how to vote — wouldn’t THINK of it. Has never crossed my mind, I SWEAR. I’m just telling you what may very well happen if/when Obama is re-elected:
1. A third of you may be laid off
2. The company’s contribution to your pension my be cut or ended altogether.
3. All kinds of other mean, nasty bad job-related s—.
So, go ahead and vote whichever for whichever the candidate you believe is best. But I hope you’ll keep my thoughts on this matter in mind as you make that decision.
THE BOSS”
————————
As a related aside, I had a conversation last week with an employee of a local business that has fewer than 10 employees. The very religious owner told the employee that’s it’s vital for Romney to win because if he doesn’t, “Obamacare” is going to decimate this person’s business, because of the penalties businesses will HAVE to pay for not providing health insurance to workers. Employee hours will have to be cut, if the business is able to remain open, etc. The employer was very serious about all this; claimed the business’s accountant had been very clear.
This (and some other things) were clearly said with the intent to influence the employee’s vote. How can I tell?
Because then then the employer ASKED WHO THE EMPLOYEE WOULD VOTE FOR. The employee’s semi-cryptic reply (“the candidate who’s most Christ-like, of course”) seemed to mollify the boss.
I’m not making this up.
Now, either the accountant lied to the business owner, or the business owner is confused about the law, or the business owner is lying. It has to be one of those three.
Because under ACA, there are no penalties for not providing insurance for businesses with fewer than 50 employees.
More:
http://tinyurl.com/8jskjvg
**
May an Employer Require Employees to Show Up at a Pro-Candidate-X Rally?
Eugene Volokh • October 29, 2012 6:36 pm
I blogged earlier today about whether employers may fire employees based on how they voted (no), and whether employers may urge employees to vote a particular way (generally yes). But may employers require employees to participate in campaign activity, such as by showing up at a rally supporting a particular candidate?
It depends on the state. Many states have statutes that bar employer retaliation based on employee speech or other political activity, and some of those statutes also bar requirements that an employee participate in such activity, though the language is ambiguous:
SNIP
**
——————-
http://tinyurl.com/9sz2tnx
**
Threatening to Fire Someone for Signing an Initiative or Referendum Petition = Improper Influence on a “Voter”?
Eugene Volokh • October 29, 2012 6:56 pm
State statutes in Maine, New Hampshire, and Utah ban “improper influence” on “voters.” Each provides, with immaterial variations, that,
A person is guilty of improper influence if he … [t]hreatens any harm to a public servant, party official or voter with the purpose of influencing his action, decision, opinion, recommendation, nomination, vote or other exercise of discretion….
“Harm” means any disadvantage or injury, pecuniary or otherwise, including disadvantage or injury to any other person or entity in whose welfare the public servant, party official or voter is interested.
Both states’ laws define “voter” as, essentially, a person who is “registered to vote.”
SNIP
**
As usual good stuff from Eugene Volokh.