One share, one vote!
 

I really didn't mean to start a labor-law melee. I brought up the Meyerson column because the point he made re how employee preferences towards their union must be expressed as matter of law -- by secret ballot or otherwise -- seemed responsive in some way to whatever Slave was trying to say. To the extent that Slave professed indignation that a worker's right to a secret ballot might be done away with by the card-check legislation, presumably then he would have a problem with the 9/29 NLRB decision. Except that we know that he wouldn't, because his concern was tactical, and his abiding principle is that unions and Democrats are evil and lazy, and his response would be identify some other purported hypocrisy on the part of The Left somewhere else.

One share, one vote!
 

My point was that the guy who wrote and, by implication, you, are intellectually lazy. But not evil, although the guy who wrote it might be.

One share, one vote!
 

The blogger? Oops, I mean the Washington Post op-ed writer? Who wrote the thing misquoting the NLRB web site? Oops, I mean the thing that described the NLRA accurately?

You should quit while you're behind. With your schtick here, you're the last guy to accuse anyone else of intellectual laziness.

One share, one vote!
 

ummm, the one person who understands labor law said it was bullshit, and the panels were different and ahhhh, an op-ed is an opinion. and he isn't saying Bush changed the act, he packed the board with hacks. did the board's webpage change under bush?

402-20

For Spanky
 

Grab a baton and join me in front. I'm wearing a fuzzy swe...er, hat.

One share, one vote!
 

I was - perhaps badly - pointing out that a union worker's dues, notwithstanding his affiliation, automatically go to a Dem candidate.

Joining the union, he effectively "pledges" his support of the Dem candidate.

Unlike the VA nonsense, that monetary vote is binding.

This conference is a fucking embarrassment.

Maybe you should impeach him.

One share, one vote!
 

Your synopsis of aV's posts is considerably less accurate than that op-ed.

One share, one vote!
 

Parents -- this is what happens if you let your kids read The National Review. Just say no.

Sebby got pegged by NFH's grandma
 

You would be surprised how good some 46-year olds look when you meet them at a dark bar and have been drinking.

One share, one vote!
 

That Papist rag? Bitch, please.

Sebby got pegged by NFH's grandma
 

I'd hit that sober, just because. I dig the Mrs. Robinson thing.

One share, one vote!
 

I think that magazine is pretty funny. It's also an amazing example of how a clever writer can dance completely around the other side's near logical and near infallible proposition for 3000 words and come up with a counterpoint.

It's a great example of ideologues being their own worst enemies.

One share, one vote!
 

Indeed. All those millions of rank and file Republican AFL-CIO and Teamsters members would be shocked.