FONT SIZE | RSS FEEDS EMAIL THIS PRINT THIS POST A COMMENT EMAIL ALERTS
View all blog entries
December 2008
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Nov   Jan »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
Monthly archives
Now we know

How much do Republicans hate unions, especially powerful ones like the United Auto Workers? Previously, the answer to that question involved some speculation. But thanks to the financial crisis rocking the county, we can now objectively quantify the answer.

Republicans hate unions so much they’d rather let the Big Three automakers go out of business and see thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people forced out of work. And that’s a lot of hate.

Chief among the hatemongers is our own U.S. Sen. John Ensign, who is working harder than he has in a long time (on anything but his golf swing) to destroy any chance American automobile companies can stay in business. And that’s ironic, considering that:

  • In 2001, after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Ensign backed $15 billion in bailouts for American airline companies hit hard by days of no-fly rules. (Remember that number, readers. It will become significant shortly.)
  • Ensign signed an Oct. 2, 2001, letter urging the federal government seeking easier federal loan-guarantee terms for airlines.
  • In 2007, Ensign stood up to defend the Big Three automakers when they were threatened with higher gas-mileage standards. “They [Big Three executives] laid out the numbers and the numbers that were in the Commerce [Committee] bill, they said, would destroy the domestic auto industry,” Ensign told the Associated Press at the time. (Presumably, destroying the domestic auto industry with higher fuel economy was a bad thing to Ensign at the time.)
  • Experts predict that auto company bankruptcies will cost the government more than the $15 billion auto companies are seeking, since the government will collect less in taxes and pay out more in unemployment.
  • Ensign voted for the $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, which is 46 times larger than the $15 billion carmakers are seeking.
  • Ensign actually encouraged the use of bailout funds for general economic stimulus, although he’s now balking at using that money for carmakers.

Despite his own hypocrisy and the facts, however, Ensign has led the opposition to the auto bailout bill this week. Consider:

  • On Dec. 10, Ensign and fellow anti-bailout senators (including, we are compelled to note, whoremonger David Vitter) held a media availability to talk about the auto bailout.
  • On Dec. 11, Ensign’s staff sent out a notice that he would speak on the Senate floor that day in opposition to the auto bailout.
  • Later on Dec. 11, Ensign voted against ending debate to bring the bailout to a vote.
  • Today, after hearing the White House may use some of the $700 billion previously approved by Congress to go ahead with automaker relief, Ensign called on the White House to take that option off the table. “By keeping the [debt relief] funds as a last option, the White House significantly undermined any potential negotiation,” Ensign said in his statement. With [debt relief funds] as a backstop, the concessions that had to be made could not be taken seriously.”

And you know the concessions Ensign was talking about, right? (Hint: It was not just the appointment of a “car czar” to oversee the use of the relief funds.)

The fact is, Ensign and his fellow Republicans hate unions, because unions represent something they fear the most: The aggregation of power in hands that are not rich and, presumably, Republican. It’s the same reason Republicans hate trial lawyers, a free education for everybody, universal health care and even the very notion of public property. All of those things offend the very notion of the “ownership society” and their unique interpretation of the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.

And now we know just how much they hate unions, don’t we?

UPDATE: He doesn’t explicitly say so in this clip (hat tip to Desert Beacon), but Ensign appears to be making the case that he’d support a bailout for Las Vegas casinos — which manufacture nothing — before he’d support one for Detroit — which manufactures something.

Post a comment!
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. By publishing a comment here you agree to the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the Online staff.
9 Responses to “Now we know”

Have we thought of it? We did it, for five years, while working as the Review-Journal’s political columnist! We found Vin to be one of the brightest people we’ve ever met, and, to our surprise, we found we agree with him on many issues, not least the Second Amendment and our shared love of guns.

We will not be so bold as to claim we won any of those debates, but we most certainly learned a lot from them. And we’re proud to say we can count Vin among our friends, even if we disagree on politics.

Written by: Steve Sebelius on Wednesday, Dec. 17, 2008 at 9:47 AM

Clearly, there is not enough virtual ink in the Internets to correct all of your kudzu-like political and economic fallacies. Have you ever entertained the thought of debating Vin Suprynowicz on the benefits of taxing the Nevada economy during the recession, the benefits of Nevada’s failing public schools, etc? It would be an interesting mano-a-mano spectacle.

Written by: Rob on Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2008 at 9:50 PM

You forgot…

7. Blog reader sets up straw man argument about socialism and knocks it down, thus proving … that he can set up a straw man and knock it down.

Unmentioned: The millions of retirees whose lives are sustained by socialist Social Security and Medicare. The millions of Americans who have benefited from a good public education, who are now contributing members of society and paying taxes. The socialist roads that get goods and services around the country every day, which we all use for “free” thanks to our gas taxes. Hell, the Internet itself — which enables you to post here — was an invention of our socialist government.

Written by: Steve Sebelius on Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2008 at 7:51 PM

Let’s see…

1. Socialist Federal Reserve creates housing and stock market boom by lowering interest rates and flooding the market with cheap credit, creating false prosperity which leads to devastating economic collapse. It took about 200 years to hit $5 trillion. Socialist intervention in the last few months boosts that to $13 trillion plus!

2. Socialist unions destroy GM and our production base.

3. Socialist public education turning out more illiterates than ever. Socialist intervention in college education via gov’t grants and loans push up college prices to unheard of levels. Without this intervention, prices would have to drop to the point where consumers (students) could afford them.

4. Socialist programs are bankrupting the federal government and many local state governments.

5. Socialist Federal Reserve is destroying the dollar. Just check what $1 could buy in 1917 compared to what $1 can buy today. Inflation is caused by the government increasing the money supply.

6. Excessive benefits and pay to government workers (higher than private sector in most cases) are bankrupting many states. Just wait and see what happens when the stock market doesn’t return to previous levels for years. Taxpayers will have to cough up the money for the underfunded defined-benefit pensions.

7. Socialist bailouts reward bad Wall Street investment decisions.

Yeah, sure. Socialism works!

Written by: Rob on Sunday, Dec. 14, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Socialism doesn’t work? Really? Do you live in America? Because if you do, you’ve been living in a quasi-socialist country since at least the early 1930s! (Don’t just take our word for it; ask the R-J editorial page!)

Programs like Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, and the like are socialist programs, Rob. We’re only talking now about the degree to which this country embraces socialism.

We will tell you that when the numbers are honestly compared, there is about a $10-per-hour difference in American wages and foreign wages. Why? Better benefits, negotiated by collective bargaining. And banding together to demand a better deal is as American as, well, our socialist tradition.

Welcome to the country, by the way. We think you may like it here.

Written by: Steve Sebelius on Sunday, Dec. 14, 2008 at 9:57 PM

Sebelius, you’re such a dinosaur. Your columns sound like they’re straight out of the Daily Worker. Socialism doesn’t work. Even Europe is moving away from socialism. Several European countries have adopted non-Marxist flat income taxes. Even Russia has a 13% flat tax!

Compulsory health care (universal is a warm and fuzzy misnomer) is also a big government failure. Look at Canada. It’s actually illegal to pay for private health care. Yet private health clinics are springing up all over the place. Why? People would rather break the law and pay for private health care instead of suffering or dying while waiting on a long list for rationed treatment and operations. Thousands even visit the US each year for treatment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/international/americas/28canada.html

BTW, care to tell us how much in “slave wages” the workers in Japanese plants in the US are making? You know, the plants that aren’t begging for taxpayer handouts? Also, care to tell us whether you drive a car from a Japanese company or one from a union-plagued US one?

Written by: Rob on Sunday, Dec. 14, 2008 at 12:34 PM

No, “R-J,” the UAW wants to see a strong auto industry, but one that doesn’t require them to work for slave wages. It’s tough, when they have to compete against foreign companies in countries where governments give everybody health care, or foreign manufacturers doing business domestically in states where governors have given away the store in terms of tax breaks and other incentives to set up shop.

Why should workers always be the ones to make concessions, take cuts in pay, work with worse benefits?

Written by: Steve Sebelius on Sunday, Dec. 14, 2008 at 10:44 AM

Lame. So I gather these unions thugs would rather NO auto industry, and NO jobs, rather than make reasonable concessions to bring their members’ compensation more in line w/ other auto makers in the US?

A better question to ask would be how much does Big Labor hate American business.

Written by: RJ on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2008 at 4:32 PM

…Brillant article Steve, it looks like the Republicans have revived the olde war wounds. The rust belt versus dear olde Dixie.

…No one has mentioned the excess capacity these new plants have down South whereas if Germans go on strike in Munich. B.M.W. can just turn on capacity to supply more vehicles for market thus leaving the German worker with one less powerful tool to face management with.

Written by: ...Temujin..Khan..of..the..Yakka..Mongols... on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2008 at 7:03 AM
CityPics
Community photo sharing
View reader photos and share your own at CityPics