The Occupy Wall Street Movement is truly fascinating. They seem to show up everywhere now. I guess they got tired of Wall Street. Newt Gingrich had his speech interrupted by some of them yesterday. I guess they’re also tired of free speech. What exactly do they want?

Well, some of them apparently aren’t all in for the cause . . . unless, of course, the cause benefits them personally. I think they still have an ally in the White House.

The cartoon above is referring to a pipeline project that will not only create jobs but will help America become more self-reliant in energy production.

So why is Obama nixing this project? I thought he was trying to create jobs. Hasn’t he said that’s his number one priority? Could it be that he’s not really serious about that? In fact, he seems to be bowing to the environmental extremists on this one, putting himself at odds with unions, another one of his key constituencies. It must be hard juggling all those interest groups all the time.

I have a novel idea. Why not just do the right thing? I know that’s kind of radical, but he might want to give it a try for a change.

So what else has been happening this week besides presidential politics? Well, there were some other elections. In Ohio, Big Labor outspent the opposition and demagogued so successfully that the voters overturned the legislature’s law that attempted to control the collective bargaining power of government unions. They hail it as a victory. That’s because they think short-term and don’t stop to consider that this vote only worsens the financial situation. The result?

Those same Ohio voters, apparently confused by the concept of having a consistent philosophy of government, then rejected the individual mandate of Obamacare. Well, at least common sense prevailed on that one.

Back in Congress, Attorney General Eric Holder had to testify before a congressional committee about the Fast and Furious debacle. He refused to acknowledge that the plan to allow guns to migrate to the drug cartels led to the murder of a Border Patrol agent. He continues to act as if he’s not really responsible for those who operate under his authority. Does anyone see a pattern here?

Why bother?

Also hard at work was the so-called Super Committee trying to come up with a proposal for deficit reduction that both sides can agree on. Democrats walked out at one point. I can see the media spin on this one now:

Let’s not omit the president from this overview. In Europe for a G-20 summit, he and the French president found something to agree on—they both can’t stand Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The only problem is that the microphones picked up their comments; they didn’t know they could be overheard trashing the Israeli leader. Well, you know, he’s just such a pest!

Of course, he might have some legitimate concerns.

There’s a new urgency in President Obama’s desire to create jobs. He’s certainly pushing for the passage of his new [?], improved [?] jobs bill. He keeps repeating two words over and over:

Good thing it’s a credit deal. I mean, otherwise we might actually have to pay for it sometime. Well, that seems to be how some people think—or don’t think. But here’s how it really works:

You see, that money doesn’t just appear by magic. It does have to come from somewhere:

The bill also is loaded with wonderful incentives for business:

Sounds a little difficult. So who really benefits from all this?

And why is that so important to this president?

Everything is now all about November 2012.

Yesterday’s post highlighted the lack of civility we’ve been hearing from one side of the political spectrum. One of the examples I gave was Teamster President James Hoffa. Sometimes the best cartoons show up after I comment on an issue or event. Like these:

The large unions are the greatest beneficiaries of President Obama’s largesse. Stimulus money flowed into their coffers. If he should happen to be voted out, they lose big time. In order to maintain their prominent place at the feeding trough, they will pull out all stops. Of course, they have good reason to be worried:

That’s why the president took to the airwaves last night to awe the nation with his breathtaking initiatives to turn things around:

Hmmm. Where have we heard that before? Oh, that’s right—in nearly every Obama speech for the last three years. Sure has worked wonders thus far, hasn’t it?

Labor Day 2011. Is this really something I want to celebrate? Let me begin Biblically with a passage that speaks to the concept of work and wealth creation. It’s from Deuteronomy 8:16-18:

In the wilderness He fed you manna which your fathers did not know, that He might humble you and that He might test you, to do good for you in the end. Otherwise, you may say in your heart, “My power and the strength of my hand made me this wealth.” But you shall remember the Lord your God, for it is He who is giving you power to make wealth, that He may confirm the covenant which He swore to your fathers.

What does this passage say to me? First, God is our provider. Second, whenever we take credit ourselves for building up wealth, we are forgetting who gave us the abilities we possess. Third, God is not opposed to wealth creation, to working hard to provide for ourselves and our families; He just wants us to do so with the right attitude of gratitude for His blessings.

This is a good starting place. No matter how wealthy one becomes, it means nothing in the Lord’s eyes if that person does not acknowledge Him. No matter how diligent a worker one may be, again it means nothing if it isn’t intertwined with an appreciation of the gifts and abilities provided by Him.

This particular day, Labor Day, is supposed to honor the average worker. A couple things need to be understood first. There should be no dichotomy created between those who labor as entrepreneurs and executives, on the one hand, and those who perform what are called blue-collar jobs. Everyone works. There is no particular dignity attached to either management or “labor.” Anyone who carries out his job with gratitude, and who sees it as a calling from God, is honored by Him. There is no reason to assign greater honor to those in blue-collar positions.

Yet Labor Day seeks to do that. Why? Well, this won’t go over well with some, but I’ll venture here anyway. The roots of the holiday stem from a socialist agenda that pits management against workers. Throughout labor history, socialism and communism have played a significant role. And the reason they were able to make inroads into the movement is that some in management made such poor decisions that they, in effect, pushed people toward the socialist solution.

This history of labor unions is spotty at best. We could start with the Haymarket riots that erupted in Chicago in 1886. A strike led to violence in which policemen were killed. Then there was the Homestead Strike in 1892 against one of Andrew Carnegie’s steel plants. It turned into a pitched battle where strikebreakers were attacked and killed. Two years later, the Pullman Strike against the railroads also got out of control. The workers at the Pullman factory had legitimate grievances, but when federal troops arrived to protect the running of the trains for mail service, again riots ensued. Railcars were tipped over; buildings were set on fire; people were killed in the melee. It took great force to stem the violent tide.

During the Great Depression, FDR courted union favor and put the government on their side. FDR’s New Deal was very anti-business, and government encroached on areas where it had never been before. Result? The Great Depression never really went away until after WWII. Some analysts say that real prosperity didn’t return until the 1950s. Yet the unions had it good. Their power grew exponentially. Union leadership became part of the privileged class, not much different than highly paid executives.

Union membership has decreased dramatically in the past few decades. Union leaders fear their loss of power. The Obama administration has given them new life. Organizations such as the SEIU have figured prominently in administration circles. The latest battleground was Wisconsin where a new Republican governor and Republican-controlled legislature, facing imminent financial disaster, largely due to state expenses for union benefits, passed a law that cut back on union power in negotiating. Remember the scene? Protesters taking over the Capitol? Thugs menacing the families of legislators? Democrat politicians fleeing the state to try to stop the new law from being passed? The trashing of the Capitol building itself, which cost quite a bit to repair?

They lost anyway. Hopefully, this is an indication that their day has gone. By the way, that hated law has resulted in jobs being saved. Have you heard much about that from the mainstream media? I thought not.

Radicalism is alive and well in America. This past May Day, the SEIU coordinated a protest with other organizations of like mind. Which ones? Here are some pictures from that protest:

Posters honoring Vladimir Lenin and Che Guevara don’t inspire me.

On this Labor Day, let’s honor genuine, honest labor, whether it is classified as blue-collar, white-collar, or any other type of collar you prefer. Let’s remember that it is God who gives us the ability to make wealth, and let’s labor with gratitude for His provision. Above all, let’s do all that we do for His glory.

Back in the fall of 1981, Ronald Reagan had to deal with a public-sector strike threat. The union threatening the strike was PATCO, which represented the air traffic controllers. I’m sure they had some legitimate complaints, but they sought to risk the safety of all air travel passengers by their action. Reagan was firm with that government union, reminding the members that they had taken a pledge when they were hired not to strike. Reagan’s position was that no public-sector union had the right to play with people’s lives in that manner. Consequently, he warned them that anyone who did not report to work within 48 hours would be fired.

They didn’t believe him. They didn’t report for work. He fired 11,400 air traffic controllers. For President Reagan, it was a matter of the rule of law. It had to be upheld or we would plunge into chaos.

Yes, it took some scrambling to cover the missing controllers and to train new ones, but the skies remained safe regardless.

One interesting commentary on Reagan’s decision was that his firing of those workers was a powerful foreign policy move. Why foreign policy? The Soviets were watching, and they were learning just who this new president was and that he was a man of his word who would take action when necessary. They had to be careful in their dealings with him.

Reagan’s stand was the same as FDR’s, who had famously said there should be no public-sector unions with the right to strike. The liberal said this first, the conservative much later.

The Wisconsin public-sector unions have confused a right with a privilege. They were allowed certain privileges—wisely or not—and they have concluded they are now “rights.” They have recently been given a stiff dose of reality.

In fact, if anyone might have a better claim for going on strike, I submit it is a different group:

As Margaret Thatcher famously quipped [or at least a paraphrase of a comment she made], “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

The supply is not unlimited. Public-sector unions need to come to that stark realization.

Protesters have finally left the Wisconsin capitol, but estimates are coming in as to the cost of that occupation. We’re learning now it could cost as much as $7.5 million to clean up and repair the damage they have done to the building. Most of that, $6 million, is to restore the marble inside the building; another $1 million to do the same to the outside. As one commentator has noted,

Imagine how many teacher positions, textbooks, and new computers the state could buy with $7.5 million. … Remember when attendants at President Obama’s Inauguration Ceremony trashed the National Mall? But 9.12 tea party protesters along with attendants at Glenn Beck’s 8.28 Restoring Honor event left the National Mall squeaky clean?

That has something to do with respect for the country and for property. The current protesters, their protests notwithstanding, seem to lack respect not only for public buildings, but for the proper functioning of the government.

And while these rank-and-file union members take time off from work to declare their solidarity, I think it might be instructive to look at their leaders, and the benefits they gain from being in leadership. A new study by The Center for Public Integrity shows where a lot of those union dues are going.

The study identifies the ten largest unions in the country, whether private or public. It then details the salaries paid to the leadership and how the money is being spent on political activity. Here’s a summary:

• The largest union is the National Education Association [NEA] with 3.2 million members. Its president receives in salary and benefits $397,000 per year. The NEA spent $3.7 million on political activity for the 2010 elections, with 98% of that money going to Democrats.
• The Service Employees International Union [SEIU] comes in second with a membership of 1.8 million. Its past president, Andy Stern, who is a close confidant of President Obama, received slightly over $300,000 in 2009, then got a 5% raise the next year before he left the post. Nine other SEIU leaders receive more than $200,000 per year. Over the past two years, the SEIU gave $2 million to Democratic candidates and $8,500 to Republicans. Notice the difference?
• Third on the list is the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees [AFSCME], which is one of the fastest growing unions in the nation. Its president was paid $479,000 in 2009; ten others receive more than $200,000. Political donations in the past two years total $2.3 million for Democrats and $13,000 for Republicans.

I could go on, but if you are interested, check out the article at http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2964/.

Meanwhile, don’t tell anyone, but Ohio is poised to pass a similar law as the one proposed in Wisconsin, and it’s occurring without legislators leaving the state or massive occupation of government buildings. In other words, representative government is at work in Ohio. Elections do have consequences.