QC Examiner

Illinois teachers want unlimited use of sick time for child birth and adoption.”

What does “unlimited use of sick time” have to do with how our children will learn and compete in a global society?

Get real! Teacher unions don’t care about our children, they’re about more bennies, pay and time off for TEACHERS!

And there is a difference between fat and happy union teachers and our children’s ability to learn and compete globally—not that a Democrat controlled state like Illinois would even THINK of placing our children above their paymasters in the unions.

Sheesh! No wonder people are fleeing Illinois like rats from a sinking ship.

PART II (02/29/08): This is the second half of my rant—the first has to do with giving teachers and their unions an inch and their inclination to take a taxpayer financed mile.  The second part of this rant has to do with the idiots who gave them the inch in the first place—-the dullards we send to Springfield.

How the unions decided the teachers were entitled to unlimited use of sick time for childbirth and/or adoption is because when our brilliant lawmakers amended the Family Medical Leave Act to allow adoptive parents the same right to time off as birth parents, they “forgot” to include the limit on the number of paid sick days that could be used.

The two Silvis teachers who took the originally allowed 6 weeks off also took another 6 weeks off and now demand to be paid for it, and their union says it will sue for their right to take as much time off as they want, which is what the idiot-produced law says they can do.  School districts, and taxpayers, would be forced to pay both the teacher and a substitute for as long as the teacher felt she wanted/needed to be absent—could be 18 years.

Now taxpayers are confronted with a well-financed union threatening schools to put up—or else!  Is this really the best use of taxpayer money—– to make unions even richer than they are now?

Daniel Henninger explains why Hillary Clinton is losing to a three-year senator:

Partly because she’s running in the wrong century. Hillary’s politics is the world of Eleanor Roosevelt, when it was all being born anew. The Washington of LBJ’s Great Society in the mid-1960s was alive with policy debates–among Democrats. By now, the Democratic Party’s ideas are largely generic. Everyone noticed that the Democratic presidential candidates were largely singing from the same script. Health care, public schools, green energy, the eternal shafting of the middle class, the unions, protecting Social Security and Medicare. This common script means that the Democratic primaries are largely an audition. The candidates are reading for a role. The lines are known.

Well, OK but why is Obama surging ahead?

The part, however, is challenging. The Democratic platform may be familiar, but it is also infused with the quality of a dream. Actually, the word “dream” gets used a lot in Democratic rhetoric. What are essentially bureaucratic arrangements, such as health insurance or after-school programs, are promised as “universal.” Meanwhile, “the middle class” is being offered a version of never-never land–total public protection from the traps and betrayals of the private sector, which as been reduced to a kind of Grimm’s Fairy Tale abstraction, the wolves.

If you are selling a dream you need the best possible salesman to make it seem somehow possible. They found him in Barack Obama.

ZZZZzzzzz

Well, let’s hope.

According to an article in the QCTimes, both Denny Jacobs and Mike Boland have declined to run for Rock Island County Democratic chairman to replace John Gianulis.

From the article, it appears that Phil Hare minion, Rock Island County Treasurer Luann Kerr is set to become chairman.

What are Kerr’s credentials? Why did the Democrats choose a faceless bureaucrat rather than a strong leader?

I think it’s safe to say that Kerr will be a Politburo puppet and will be getting her marching orders from Hare, Jacobs and the other elites.

Remember: in RICO Democrat politics it’s not WHAT you know, it’s WHO you know.

Spiders play dead to get laid.

From Barack Obama in a Q and A with US Magazine:

US Magazine:
So, boxers or briefs? Bill Clinton said he wore boxers in a 1992 interview with MTV.

BO: I don’t answer those humiliating questions. But whichever one it is, I look good in ‘em!

Both of our wonderful Senators, Durbin and Obama, have devised legislation known as the Patriot Employer Act. Obama has let it be known that this legislation, first introduced in August ‘07, would be one of his major priorities should he be elected president.

And what does this bill entail?

1. Companies called “patriotic employers” would be favored with tax breaks; “unpatriotic employers” would be punished.

2.  A “patriotic employer” is one which:

a) Pays at least 60% of employees health care premiums;

b) Has a position of neutrality in employee union organizing drives;

c) Maintains or increases the number of full-time workers in the US relative to the number of full-time workers outside the US;

d) Pays a salary to each employee not less than an amount equal to the federal poverty level;

e) Provides a pension plan.

Whew! It seems the “patriotic employer” is an employer who marches in lockstep with every policy promoted by Big Labor.

I do understand what is going on here. Obama is campaigning in Rust Belt states that have been hit hard by the loss of manufacturing jobs, and this act will presumably restore/create  jobs lost over the decades—or at least give The Faithful what they want to hear. 

Unfortunately, this “Patriot Employer Act” is not grounded in the reality of the marketplace, which is that businesses hire a work force they can afford to pay and still make money. Forcing business to raise wages and benefits above market rates will lead to fewer workers being hired.  That just a fact.

Aside from this act being used to whip up The Faithful, this is also a sop to Big Labor which has spent over 300 million dollars buying Democrat politicians and is demanding something in return for its sizeable investment.

We should hope and pray for two things:

1. That the Democrats ultimately wise up to marketplace reality, or barring that;

2. The GOP takes back control of Congress.

Otherwise the Democrats should have a plan in place to deal with the massive unemployment that is sure to come from all this Democrat “patriotism”. 

ADDED: Two European economists have written an excellent article about Obama’s Patriot Employers Act called The Dangerous Protectionism Of Barack Obama in which they call Obama’s proposal “reactionary, populist, xenophopic and just plain silly.”

So much for Democrats restoring honor, respect and trust to our country throughout the world. Yeah, hit ‘em in the pocketbook—that’ll make ‘em love us!

UPDATE 02/28/08: Besides the Europeans, now our neighbors are angered and appalled: Canada and Mexico are rebuking the top Democratic presidential candidates, senators Clinton and Obama, for vowing to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement and threatening to pull out of the pact altogether if America’s neighbors refuse.”

Considering all the hysterical screeching the Democrats have been doing for the last 8 years about how GWB has lost the respect and love of “the world” and his “my way or the highway attitude”, the Democrats show an amazing affinity with both traits, don’t you think?

Gennifer Flowers, who had a 12 year affair with Bill Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas, says she will be auctioning the tapes she saved of their conversations. A Japanese collector offered her 5 million dollars for the tapes back in the 90s.

When questioned about the timing of the auction, considering Mrs. Clinton is fighting for the POTUS nomination, Ms. Flowers gave the quote of the day:

I don’t need to hurt Hillary. She’s doing a fine job of that herself, along with her idiot husband.

There’s a strong chance White House hopeful Barack Obama’s name will surface at indicted political fund-raiser Tony Rezko’s trial, which is to begin next week.

To say nothing of the deep doo-doo Blago is in by being publically identified as Public Official “A”.

Michael van der Galien has an intriguing idea:

It’s a shame that America is so greatly divided among partisan lines that a say, McCain-Obama ticket isn’t an option. That would be quite the ticket, wouldn’t it? Obama, the young, seemingly inspirational VP, McCain the highly experienced moderate Republican, with terrific national security and foreign policy credentials.

This isn’t the first time I’ve thought the the best POTUS/VPOTUS ticket would be combining people from both parties. The GOP is always stronger on foreign policy/national security issues, and the Dems are stronger on domestic issues.

A GOPer as POTUS would be preferred, since he/she is the Commander-in-Chief, but the VP would be in charge of domestic policy, with POTUS having final say. This would go a long way in moderating the extreme partisanship we have experienced since the Clinton years.

It would be the best of both worlds, in my view.