Stop Trashing Public Sector Workers and Our Labor Unions

An opinion piece in The Montreal Gazette last week written by Paul Moist, the President of the CUPE is reminding us that one thing we can be proud of as Canadians are  things like Universal Health care,  public education and many other social programs. 


I agree with him on one thing, now is not the time cut services. Not while in the middle of a recession. Some may argue we are in recovery others say we aren't; depending who you talk to and what you read. Folks are still losing their jobs; with that comes the increased need for public services and social programs.


Yet, the Quebec Government is proposing tuition fees for the CEGEPS (for those outside of Quebec: it's between high school and university; it replaces your grade 12), raising hydro fees as well as implementing service charges in an effort to reduce our deficit.  Moist suggests that the Charest government should never have cut income taxes. Yeah, I know, not a very popular idea and an idea that would send the right into a tizzy, but they would bitch about the paying tuition fees to send their kids to CEGEP, pay toll fees, a hike in their hydro bill, etc. In other words, another demonstration of how there is no way to win with the right.


Moist also says that over 80 000 jobs were cut across Canada just inside those first four months of the recession. Quel surprise.


He makes a good pitch about investing in the public sector. However, will anyone buy? Not ol' Stevie, that's for sure. By the looks of things, certainly not Charest, nor most other provincial governments.


The right like to bitch about the public sector and their unions. Case in point, Shona Holmes. In her facebook support group, she, egged on by Mario Coluccio, the managing director of CMPI in New York City who first recruited her to meet the press club and  to further his agenda and that of his group to make sure the U.S. doesn't get health care reform, has been trashing labour unions; mainly, nurse's unions. You can catch the discussion forum here. In that debate, one girl, a nursing student puts forth some strong arguements: 


"Unions are there to look out for the rights of the workers and advocate for their wages and working conditions. In the case of nurses' unions, this means also looking out and advocating for patients and clients as well. The working conditions of nurses are the conditions in which patients find themselves."  



I believe that this arguement best summarizes Moist's arguement in his editorial piece.


Needless to say, Shona Holmes as well as her husband and Coluccio continue to despise the public sector and their labour unions and to this day, continue to trash them. They still maintain that unions are what's really to blame for all of society's ills and maintain that patients would have better care without them.


Let's remember where Shona Holmes stands though. She is trying to dismantle our universal health care system in addition to trying to make sure President Obama's health care reform never sees the light of day.


 CUPE has come out against privatized health care in Canada. 


They are unfortunately not alone. Here is a letter to the editor from some affluent red-neck in Montreal in rebuttle to Moist's opinion piece:  

Re: "Public sector a good investment" (Opinion, Oct. 6).

Would you invest your money with Paul Moist, the president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees? Public-sector workers contribute zero money to government coffers, but here in Quebec they account for 60 per cent of government spending. Private-sector workers contributions are not enough to cover the bloated public sector payrolls as it is.

This year, when Quebec's deficit will reach $6 billion, the public-sector payroll amounts to $3.6 billion. The public sector is bankrupting the country and destroying the economy, and the only response from the union is , "Give us more money." Public-sector unions should be outlawed.

Tim Taylor

Beaconsfield

Well, Mr. Tim Taylor, take your kids out of public school then. Cut up your medicare card. Don't apply for old age pension. Oh, if you and / your family fall into a difficult situation, don't count on social services to help you out. Be careful what you wish for, chappy. One day, you will get old and sick or hurt. You may lose your job with no hope of another in the foreseeable future. Everyone is vulnerable.Beaconsfield is an affluent suburb of Montreal. Another example of one who doesn't realize his sheltered life in the 'burbs can fall apart one day and may have a need for one of our social programs. A public sector worker who cares enough to help. This is something anybody from the right should always remember, including Shona Holmes with her ritzy house with a pond in oh little town of Waterdown, Ont.

I work in the public sector. I'm an administrative agent for the Youth Protection Agency of Quebec and as such, I'm a member of CUPE.  As a high school teacher in the public school system in Montreal and a social worker, my parents were public sector employees who were also members of unions.  My father wanted to shape young minds; to share his knowledge of subjects like history, litterature and art. My mother wanted to help society's disenfranchised and to help families care for their sick relatives more effectively, to find suitable end of life care for  the terminally ill, to help the elderly get the resources they need to survive. Both of them cared enough about their work more than making a killing in the private sector.

A social worker  who works at the same Youth Protection Agency as I do, knows all too well what it's like to work on the front lines,  was none too amused with Mr. Tim Taylor's letter. She writes a rebuttle to his letter: 

Re: "CUPE leader all wet" (Letters, Oct. 8).

I'm a CUPE member and a public-sector worker. I earn a salary. I pay provincial and federal income taxes and contribute to employment insurance and the Quebec Pension Plan. I also pay sales tax.

How can it be said that I contribute zero money to the government?

I also pay into a pension plan and make RRSP contributions so I won't be a burden on public funds when I retire. I'm not destroying the economy. Neither is my union. I pay union dues to support my union.

I work for the Youth Protection Agency. Our job is to protect our most valuable asset - children. We work to help children who have been abused or neglected regain their lives and become productive citizens. Sadly, we do not always succeed. We care deeply about our work; this is not the kind of job you do unless you care.

Public-sector workers look after children in daycares and hospitals. They teach our children in schools. They work with children with special needs. We contribute to society in many ways. We deserve better than to be blamed for all of the woes of society.

Margaret Godbeer

I can attest that I more taxes taken off my pay-checque working at the agency than I did working in the private sector and my salary is the same as it was in my previous job. However, I would never want to go back to the private sector (unless my life depended on it, of course).  No, not because I'm a member of CUPE or any other labor union for that matter. I would rather work toward the common good rather than working to line the pockets of some company. Same reason why my parents worked in the public sector. 

Moist also sees the need to not only maintain our services but to expand upon them, which would create jobs at the same time. He suggests to the Quebec government and other provincial governments. Who could say no to job creation during a time of job losses? Logically, no one, but, since when did our politicians, particularly those right of centre, did things logically?

So the next time anybody thinks about bashing the public sector and the unions who represent them. Remember, you and/or your family may need them someday, yes, even you Charest, Stevie, and the other politicians,  and you will want them to care enough about their jobs in order to provide the assistance you need.

Pro-Lifer puts in Her Two Cents About Obama Winning Nobel On the 'View'

We've heard every ridiculous reason from the notable right-wing fringe as to why they're against Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Everything ranging from 'He isn't George W. Bush' to 'He hasn't done anything' to yes, even the only reason Obama got it was so Europe can re-colonize America: They need America for European Socialism to work. That, by far, is still my all time favourite. 

We heard from King Rush & Prince Glenn, The Tea-baggers & every other Neo-Con. It was only a matter of time before the Pro-lifers would chime in to complete the wingnut hit-parade.

Well, who better to fill in for wingnut Elisabeth Hasselbeck than a brunette version of her?  Rachel Campos-Duffy, a has-been Reality TV star & is a blogger for Anderson Cooper's AC360 blog replaced Lissie today on the 'View'.  She has proven to be the brunette version of Lissie.

When Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar asked her what she thought about Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Duffy began with the list of the typical neo-con nay-sayer, finishing off by mentioning Mother Theresa. Following Goldberg's quip about Mother Theresa being a tough act to follow, here is where the fun begins: 

"I think of Mother Teresa and Mother Teresa said that we wouldn't have world peace until we ended abortion and I think personally, for me, that it's Obama's radical abortion position that makes him the least qualified for the prize."

While Mother Teresa worked tirelessly to help the sick and the poor, I think most of us disagree with that statement.  In fact, Mother Teresa's view about never being able to attain world peace until we end abortion,   is  far more radical than  President Obama's views on abortion could ever be. To be fair, Mother Teresa had never met American Neo-cons before. She never met the Evangelical far right. Most pro-lifers are also gung-ho about war and gun toting and, yes, the death penalty. All things even Hasselbeck and no doubt, Duffy support.

If we are going to use a potential nominee or winner's views on abortion as part of the criteria, wouldn't that have also disqualified Al Gore who won it two years ago? Granted, Gore was somewhat pro-life, but never supported overturning Roe v. Wade. He always respected a woman's right to choose. Hell, we may as well even disqualify Jimmy Carter. While he's personally against abortion; he supported the legalization of it and was even criticised by the ACLU for not offering alternatives to abortion. 

Who cares? Right? That's exactly my point; who cares if any  Nobel Peace Prize winner is pro-choice or pro-life. Obviously, those views have nothing to do with world peace or humanitarian efforts or public service. Apples and oranges here.

Duffy, go home to your perfect Brady Bunch world and leave the debating for bigger minds. Same advice Hasselbeck could use.

I briefly looked at the criteria for picking Nobel Peace Prize winners at their web site. There is the usual predictable qualities they look for such as humanitarian deeds, organizing peace movements and human rights struggles, but nowhere does it say anything about a potential nominee or prize winner having to be pro-life; in favour of abolishing abortion. Again, another point to knock that of Duffy.

Neo Cons on Obama Nobel Prize: Tea-Baggers Hostile Take-over of the GOP--Thanksgiving Edition of Brain Drain Fun--Revised

Top eight Neo-con Attacks on Barack Obama winning the 

Nobel Peace Prize, from Huffington Post

Agree or disagree with the decision to award Pres. Obama with the Nobel Peace Prize,  these notable Neo-cons will always find ways of making bigger asses of themselves. Some you've heard.

8. That famous Rush Limbaugh line about the Taliban: "Something has happened here that we all agree with the Taliban and Iran about and that is he doesn't deserve the award.

- Oh Rush, who's the traitor now?  I'd be happy to send you to Iran...by row-boat!

7. Now for some convaluded logic and wishful thinking (although, sadly, looking more real) from Bill Kristol: "Obama will be kicked out in 2012, based on the fact that the Soviet Union collapsed a year after Mikhail Gorbachev won a Nobel Peace Prize. "

-Billy Boy! If we were to use your logic, Obama would not only be kicked out in 2012; but the U.S. would collapse. Where would you go, then, you bungling fool? 

6. Here's a goody from Glenn Beck, every neo-con's God. This one is particularly funny: "Obama doesn't deserve the prize, but the Tea Party protesters do." He credited an "extraordinarily powerful" global progressive network for bagging Obama the win."

-well, Glenn may have a point about the Tea-bagger's hit-parade; they did show up without guns.

5. Erick Erickson, playing that ol' race card; crying affirmative action here: "President Obama must have been picked to meet some Nobel Peace Prize "affirmative action quota."

-Yes, Erick everytime they award a black man, an angel gets his/her wings

4.  John Bolton, Mr. Mustache here looks like he forgot to take that metamucil in his pic: obviously still sore about not getting confirmed as ambassador to the U.N. He offers nothing interesting unfortunately; just says Obama should have turned down the prize. But go to the site and look at his pic: it just screams alot more than a cheesy mustache, constipation and sour grapes.

3. National Review's Andy McCarthy says the prize is already damaged goods, because Yasser Arafat once won it.

-Well, if the prize is damaged goods, why should he care who wins it from here on out?  Me thinks he's damaged goods.

2. Limbaugh, again: never satisfied not being the biggest ass-hole, so, here's another brilliant quip of his: told Newsweek that "the Nobel gang just suicide-bombed themselves."

- Do I really need to elaborate here?  Maybe he wished he'd done it first.

1. Brian Kilmeade: "wonders whether Obama delayed his decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan to win the Nobel."

-Help me out here: delaying his decision to send more troops to win the Nobel? Hmm!  If  Obama's only ambition was to win the peace prize and use whatever stategy to win: wouldn't it have just made more sense to bring home all the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Here's my favourite attack thus far;  from this wingnut, Dick Morris: 

"The Nobel Prize to Obama: Europe's Bid to re-colonize America": the title of his blog. He seems to think the Norwegians nominated Obama because, get this, Europe needs to conquer the  U.S. in order for European socialism to work. Click the above link to read the rest of his insanity. It is quite entertaining.

Funny, I always thought European countries under socialist governments were doing quite well without the U.S. After all, didn't Norway come first in a U.N. study not long ago?? 

Sad, but even worse, Right-winge Canadian talk-radio hosts just aren't much better. Speaking of Which...

Ryan Doyle's New Buddy

Remember that red-neck host of Toronto's CFRB I'd been ranting about? Well, the evening following his inaccurate and hateful  review of Michael Moore's new movie, ever so proudly announcing that non other than Sean Hannaty was his new ally. 

We all know how credible ol' Sean is don't we? Go view the videos at Red Tory's blog here and the third video will be here. After viewing all the videos, all I saw was an excitable Hannaty with Michael Moore remaining calm and laughing at him during various rants.

Congratz Ryan, now you're like Sean. Time to graduate to Rush  Limbaugh now, boy. 

Tea-baggers Planning Hostile Take over 

...of the GOP

Well, according to Politico, the Tea-Baggers have certainly been busy. In addition to wanting to oust the Obama government in anyway possible, they are also attempting a hostile take-over of the GOP. 

"...tea party forces are confronting the Republican establishment by backing insurgent conservatives and generating their own candidates — even if it means taking on GOP incumbents."

You see, Dick Armey, a former GOP congressman, chairman of the anti-tax and limited government advocacy group FreedomWorks, which helped plan and promote the tea parties, town hall protests and the September ‘Taxpayer March’ in Washington has a problem with certain Incumbent Republican centrists remaining in power.  Long story short: like the bible, they are just not conservative enough:  

“If you can’t take it seriously, we will look for places of other employment for you.”

They want to back insurgent conservatives and generate their own candidates: 

Ah, here once again, is Erick Erickson! (I do wonder if that's his real name?): 

“Grass-roots activists need to start infiltrating the party,” said Erickson. “The only way to start getting [the establishment] back is to start pounding them with every fist we have.” 

Well, he is going easy on the GOP: he's only going to go after them with his fists:  his tea-bagger friends show up to Democrat Town Hall meetings with guns.

Happy Turkey Day, All!

Time For the Pope to Set an Example

As I'm sure most of you, one of the vows future priests and nuns take is that of living in poverty; a humble life. To be fair, most priests live modestly in Church Presbyteries or perhaps in a house or apartment on church land.


The Catholic clergy are forever trying to persuade us to give to charity or to volunteer; to help those less fortunate than ourselves.


This week-end's sermon at my parish was reminding us 


"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."  from the Gospel according to Matthew. 


The priest reminded us how  a life of unabashed greed with little charitable endeavour is a sin. I thought it was interesting he would choose to give this sermon this Sunday of all weeks; a week after Michael Moore's new movie came out; not even a week after we hear about nut-jobs rewriting the bible to include the gospel of free markets, hatred and intolerance. Even funnier; I seriously doubt this particular priest has even heard of Michael Moore or even about the Evangelical Christian far-right, as he is very new to Canada and barely speaks English or French. Coincedence or not, it is important to be reminded about the consequences of greed.


As mentioned, the priests and the bishop Moore interviewed confirmed that capitalism, corporate greed were immoral and definitely not  compattible with the teachings of Christ. We heard Moore and those priests cite the Gospel According to Luke. 

"But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation."

" And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God."

I could go  on citing such examples from the bible, but we all get the idea.


I saw an interesting piece on this morning's Huffington Post.  Sarah Silverman sends the pope a message video, strongly suggesting he sell the Vatican in order to end world hunger. 


"You preach to live humbly, and I totally agree. So now maybe it's time for you to move out of your house that is a city."

She has a point. I would go further in saying that currently, the pope is setting a bad example on not only the Catholic Church but to everybody, no matter what denomination. In her video, she does make a persuasive arguement. However will it be persuasive enough to Pope Benedict XVI, himself??

Good pitch, but I don't think the pope would go for it. (sigh) Hope does spring eternal, doesn't it? It is high time the highest member of the Catholic clergy and perhaps one of the most influential people in the world set an example.

October 15: A Date for Wingnuts

Looks like October 15 will be a busy day for wingnuts all over. Will President Obama need to hide out or flee the country?


Before I get to the scary silent video I just came across at Crooks and Liars, let's start with this whackjob of a blogger who calls herself Voting Female. According to this blithering idiot, Judge Joel Schneider of the U.S. district of  New Jersey has given Obama has until October 15 to produce documents proving he is indeed an American citizen. She has a mountain of links pertaining to this subject; of course all neo-con blogs and news media sites. I thought I would google this info to attempt to find it documented on main stream media pages. Quel Surprise! I couldn't find one. Google spit out pages & pages but all neo-con blogs and small neo-con news pages. I stopped searching after page five, I mean, if this were documented  with the main stream media like New York Times, Washington Post, MSNBC, and CNN, it would have been at the top of the Google search data right? Not even a result from Faux News: every Neo-con's favourite channel. My question is, if main stream media hasn't reported this one way or another; where are all these wingnuts getting their info?


Now for some real scary stuff. I came across this story at Crooks And Liars not even an hour ago. Comes complete with cryptic creepy video made by some idiotic fringe group who call themselves the National Militia, Soldiers of Freedom threatening Obama et al to leave; to just go away or else! Below is the video: 



As Crooks and Liars points out, this supposed militia group is nothing more than some weirdo in his basement. They're probably right.


However, this reminds me of that John Perry of that Newsmax column, suggesting a military coup d'etat to overthrow the Obama government. I blogged about this not too long ago. Read my posting here.


Funny how these paranoid fools who are soooo afraid of  'socialism' partly due to folks like Stalin and Mao. However, in fantasizing and perhaps even planning some coup d'etat, I venture they will be more oppressed; just in the wrong direction. Anyone remember General Augusto Pinochet? Is that what these wingnuts want? Who knows? I've heard so much craziness lately, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these clowns have a framed picture of General Pinochet on their wall.


Whether or not bad things will happen either October 15 or another day;  between those threats and  of course clowns like Schafly rewriting the bible; the U.S. is becoming a scarier place.  I venture to say more so than the civil unrest in the 60s and early 70s; at least the population had actual meaningful causes like ending the war in Vietnam, civil rights movement, racial equality, equality for women: To progress. Now we see tea-baggers, birthers and other neo-con propaganda spoon feeding Americans with hate, greed, racism, etc: Going backwards.


If these clowns do succeed with a coup d'etat; I'm wondering if they're going to like the result.

Who Will Rescue Christianity From Christians?

Can Christianity be rescued from Christians is what Frank Schaeffer, the author of Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back & the upcoming book: Patience With God: Faith For People Who Don't Like Religion (Or Atheism) & writer for Huffington Post said on the Rachel Maddow show awhile back. A sub-culture he called the Far Right Evangelical Christians. More like a cult.

Schaeffer says we have to move past them & leave them alone on their proverbial hill top; that one cannot organize village life to suit the village idiot, in this case, the Evangelical Far Right.


I can't introduce this any better than Rachel Weiner of the Huffington Post: "Lo and behold, the Bible has gotten too liberal, according to a group of conservatives. And it needs a little editing." Yikes! Surely, Jesus must be shaking his head at this one. 


Now if we were in humour mode & believed this was some kind of joke, here's how Rackjite.com's suggestions for bible 'revisions':



There was his moment of anger.

"I shall take 10% on all transactions in this temple! Or the whip!"

On being a good Christian...

"Rich men shall ride on camels while the poor shall have needles in their eyes."

"If one strikes you on the check, turn on them without mercy."

"Do unto others before they do unto you."

"Only through Free markets shall you gain the Kingdom of Heaven."

The Sermon on the Mount, known as the C-Attitutes?

"Blessed are the assholes for they shall own the Earth."

"Wretched are the peacemakers who shall be done in."

"The poor shall inherit hunger, pain and disease."

The last supper...

"Take this wine and this bread as my blood and as my body. In doing so found a religion in my named based upon cannibalism and tomorrow's execution."

And of course those famous last words...

"Father, never forgive these bastards for they know exactly what they do!

 This is unfortunately, no joke. As Frank Schaeffer wrote in the Huffington Post, these are dangerous times due to threatening behaviour in God's name. Now, it seems that wingnuts like Schlafly are about to somehow make neo-con ideologies like greed & craziness official by rewriting the bible. Should we be scared shitless? You betcha!


This week, on Conservapedia, it seems they're going to suit their whims & rewrite the bible. It' too 'Liberal'. They want to remove all the so-called  'liberal' passages in the bible. The Old & New Testaments will be gutted beyond recognition considering they want to eliminate such phrases like helping the poor, healing the sick, forgiveness, etc. I'm still shaking my head at this. What's the matter?  Brainwashing not working anymore? They underestimated the American population's ability to read?


Or, perhaps they saw Michael Moore's movie, Capitalism, A Love Story & paid particular attention to the segments where two parish priests & a bishop from the arch-diocese of Detroit denounce capitalism & corporate greed as well as the segment where the priest is presiding over mass & giving communion  to the laid-off workers sitting in Republic Door & Window in Chicago.


Schafly & other such neo-con wingnuts must have been gasping for air on those segments.


Andy Schlafly founded Conservapedia because he felt that Wikipedia was too 'liberal' & 'Anti-Christian'. Here's what he had to say about Operation Pervert the bible beyond recognition:


“The trouble is, new translations of the Bible are done by professors at liberal universities who overwhelmingly voted for Obama,” Mr. Schlafly said. “Their political bias seeps into their translations and we felt it necessary to counteract that with one that uproots and eradicates any liberal bias.”


Here are just some of the items to be 'edited': 

1. Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
2. Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
3. Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level^[3]
4. Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;^[4] defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".
5. Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";^[5] using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
6. Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
7. Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
8. Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
9. Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
10. Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."

Also, no doubt, this new version would be sure to include the fact that President Obama is the anti-Christ.

Yeah, Mr. Schlafly, whatever floats your boat, man & of course, maybe even make millions with the sales of these new versions?? Gulp!


Rachel Maddow couldn't believe this was not a joke as she groans in her show: 




What's worse is that once this perversion is complete, it will be effectively marketed & become a best seller.


Who's more dangerous now? Fundamentalist Islamic fringe groups or the far right Christian Evangelicals? Honestly, I don't know anymore.


Can Christianity as well as other denominations be rescued?