More About Democratic Party Corruption

Public unions are government turned upside down, where government workers rule the people not the reverse. To reiterate the point I've made elsewhere - what we have in public unions is corruption by definition.  Corruption is what you happens when public unions are allowed to make donations to political candidates. These donations originate as taxpayer dollars so the unions act as a conduit for money to be transferred from the treasury to the party - the Democratic party - which in return for the money does whatever the union wants.


I recall reading about how the Japanese were able to buy enormous favors in the legislature in Hawaii for ridiculously small donations. Accordingly, how much more are the public unions able to get with the insanely huge donations they are able to do through the use of taxpayers funds? Who would want to live in such a place, where those who work for government determine policy for the people?


As noted in recent articles, money from teachers unions goes not only to political donations made on behalf of teachers but other Democratic causes as well. So, in essence, what we have is that public unions are not merely funding the Democratic Party, they are the party - it is one big happy organization. It wouldn't be much of a surprise if we found that, like in the Democratic media, people who regularly work for the teachers unions also work for the party.


And where are the People with a capital"P" in this arrangement, how do they fit in? It is their children who are allegedly supposed to be taught by this monolithic entity. The answer is the People are there to be squeezed, while the unions deliver the least possible for the most possible - or even not possible. Don't for a second think that teachers will be held accountable for anything related to education either - we've seen how the unions respond to efforts to rate teachers. And here the teachers are somewhat right - the biggest factor in education is family, not school. But Democrats are hard at work destroying family in order to increase dependency on government - it is one of many ironies created by the new normal under the Democrats. Someone should ask Mayor Rahm in Chicago how the destruction of the family and increased dependency is working out in his city.

Who would argue that such a system is not corrupt, that allowing government workers to unionize and make enormous donations to ONE political party make sense, or is good government? And where was the Republican Party when all this was enacted, in fact where ARE the Republicans on this issue? We have yet to hear one word of complaint from Republicans, this recipe for corruption.  Republicans have turned out to be ridiculously easy to fool - on immigration, on spending, on public unions the Democrats have run circles around Republicans.


And when we do get complaints about the system, what we hear from Democrats is nonsense about workers "rights", as if there is somehow a "right" of public workers to unionize. However, there is no right under federal statutory law, the Constitution or anywhere else for public workers to unionize - these entities exist only as entities under state law, and the state can set the terms and conditions under which they exist. ANY terms and conditions.


In fact, Democrats have set the terms and conditions under which public unions exist, and they are this: the unions donate enormous amounts of money to the Democrats and Democratic causes and be part of the Democratic family of organizations, and in return the Democrats give the unions enormous benefits, essentially whatever they want.


It's a very nice quid pro quo arrangement, under which governments are driven into bankruptcy since the politicians rarely look beyond the next election. And why should they - under the arrangement in my state, for example. local elections are at different times than federal and state-wide elections, which gives more power to government workers since turnout for everyone else is so low.


It is mind boggling that we hear not one word from major media about this corrupt arrangement. No "Frontline" stories, no "60 Minutes" - nothing since it is Democrats who are part of this. Of course, if the donations were going to Republican candidates, we would hear about it endlessly.


And, naturally, the last thing on the minds of those in charge is education - this is all about money. The Democrats will always adhere to the line that teachers are always under paid, that there is never enough money for education, in fact isn't education a great issue on which to squeeze taxpayers? After all there isn't an anti-education lobby out there, and thanks to Democratic media, teachers have achieved virtual sainthood. Who can argue for less money for the people who teach your CHILDREN? Democrats are pros when it comes to making arguments that turn people's best instincts inside out.


In fact, the situation is rapidly going from corruption to repression.

The Democratic Party - The Most Corrupt Organization on the Planet: Part 2

In today's article, we discuss public unions, and how Democrats have used these organizations, which are also premised on corruption, as a method by which taxpayer funds can be directed to Democratic Party coffers.

There is an inherent evil in public unions, when such unions are able to contribute money to the campaigns of the very people and party responsible for hiring, salary and benefits.
When there are public unions the entire political system is corrupted, especially since such unions only give only to Democrats, which in return for the money gives the unions whatever they want. It doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to see how destructive this is - as can readily be seen in solid blue states, which are plagued by a combination of poor educational achievement and high taxes.

In short - and I've never heard any response to this  - if there has to be public unions (and there doesn't have to be, as the right of public employees to unionize is entirely statutory and what the legislature can give it can take away) why not forbid them to make political donations, or at the very least force unions to split donations between the parties? After all, it is essentially taxpayer funds that are being transferred.

Of course, since the Democratic Party benefit from such a corrupt system the Party would never agree to forbid donations. It's not even talked about. But, isn't there is something inherently wrong with funneling tax money through public unions? Heck, why not skip the unions and have the money go right from the treasury to the Democratic party coffers? (that's sarcasm). After all it's not much different from what's happening in New York, California, Illinois and other blue states.

Don't count on major media to echo what is in this article - such media is most certainly already working on the story that Wisconsin Republicans have destroyed the local school system. That this story is false is irrelevant to Democratic media.

What's especially puzzling is the relative silence of the Republican leadership on the corrupting influence of public unions. Even Christie never discusses public unions in terms of its corruption of the political process. This silence confirms the expression that Republicans, when it comes to their own self interest, are truly the "party of stupid." One example among many, why else would the Republicans continue to fund public broadcasting when it is so hostile to Republicans, and looks at every issue from a Democratic point of view (and, with Pacifica a radical Democratic point of view)?

As for Wisconsin, it is but a small and fragile victory in a depressing political landscape. Well entrenched public unions will not be so easy to remove in other states, especially when the Republican leadership does not recognize this for the critical issue that it is. Without strong leadership support the voters will never be told how corrupting such unions are to the political process, and a difficult task becomes impossible.

The Democratic Party - the Party of Institutional Corruption

 SO WE HAVE public sector unions funneling what is essentially taxpayer money to politicians of one party - Democrat - in order to elect compliant legislators in order to get wages and benefits.
It shouldn't have been allowed, and the only reason it has been unremarked is that it benefited the Democrat Party, so the national media let it alone.  The national media adopts the policy that whatever helps Democrats is good, no matter how poisonous.

So: Democrats have public sector unions funneling taxpayer money to Democrat party coffers. Institutional corruption.

Democrats also used welfare policies to destroy the African American family, leading to crime, dependency and lack of education. And full time government dependency. And a small group of black Democrat leaders, including Obama, ride the poverty gravy train to wealth and power. And not to forget importing immigrants to vote Democrat who take jobs and benefits away from traditionally done by African Americans.

60 YEARS the Democrats have had to improve the inner cities and conditions are worse then ever. The Democrat Party, the party of the KKK and Jim Crow does it again to African Americans proving that it is still the scourge of the black people.

Again, corruption on an institutional level.

And again, a media helped - by adopting a doctrine known as 'political correctness' under which Democrat Party manipulation of African Americans is not mentioned.

Latinos should take note of the consequences of taking the poison handed out by the Democrats. Think of Detroit as the Democrat paradise - the end result of Democratic policies.
The Democratic party as an entire political party built on corruption, run by a small number of mostly white, mostly men, supported by a media that is mostly white, almost entirely male.

You have to be seriously stupid or seriously corrupt to be a Democrat or support a Democratic candidate. And you have to be seriously detached if all you are doing to defeat the Democrats is sitting at your computer and blogging.  So...get going - call your local Republican and Tea Party leader and GET INVOLVED!

• Edit
• Reply

THE EDUCATION PROBLEM SOLVED - AGAIN

After reading another article on a teaching program "which really teaches children to read" I shake my head in wonder.  Every years or so another piece comes out like this, where the assumption is that there is some teaching panacea out there that will somehow change things around, that the problem with education in this country is the way we are teaching. Every year or so you read it, a brand new program that, THIS TIME, teaches children. Then time passes, the solution proposed fades away, until the next time we hear that - THIS method, THIS time, will work.

It is a poor joke, these methods, and just another way to detach money from taxpayers. There is no substitute - NONE - for TWO parents involved not only with their children's education, but all of their children's development. Parents who will work with educators to find the right way to teach. Problem solved, right?

Well, close, but not quite.  It helps - lots and lots - if the children are in a culture that values education. Since American culture, that is popular culture, in which our children are immersed since birth and is now synonymous with American culture, puts zero value on education.  In fact, our culture that places value not on education, but on failure. The heroes fail, but what is never shown are the consequences of failure - the dead end jobs, the awfulness of not having only enough money for the basics. What is not shown is the sheer ugliness of being uneducated.

No, you cannot tell media what to program, but involved parents can tell children what to watch, or you can toss out the television entirely. It won't be missed. Perhaps if more people did that, or understood that every time they watch something they make an endorsement. And right now most of what is being shown is pure poison.

The other part of this is the politics of single parenthood. Can we - finally - admit that this is not a recipe for good parenting, despite anecdotal examples to the contrary? And maybe the expression, "we stayed together for the children" was something that did make sense - that people should understand that having elected to bring a child or children into the world, that they should buck up and shoulder the consequences, which include staying together and getting along with your spouse/partner?

And maybe we can also agree that subsidizing single parenthood is not a good idea, that there has to be more consequences than a check and food stamps every two weeks.

This issue is infuriating, since it deals with children, who are being punished on a massive scale since as a society we have fallen for the nonsense that has been broadcast at us since the 1960's. And African Americans most of all. Are we even allowed to say that the African American family is in ruins, leading to crime and lack of motivation to get an education, without running into some politically correct reinforced silence, meant only to protect those who are responsible? And to keep the poverty gravy train running?

As a society we need to face the fact that experiment in moving away from the two parent family has been an utter disaster - which has affected some groups more than others. Hopefully, we are not like Humpty-Dumpty and we can put the pieces back together. If it can be done at all.

Because if we can't solve this then we are finished as a first world nation, and the consequences of failure is poverty on a scale not seen for generations.