Unions Back Fox News

I've done a lot of writing on unions and how essential they are to the progressive movement.  There's another strand of unionism, though, and that's a self-interested and self-dealing crew of insiders that are no different from any other entrenched group within the Democratic Party.  This is why unions often cause the movement serious problems.

Danny Thompson, leader of the Nevada State AFL-CIO, noted, "When the DNC approved Nevada's new position, we were chosen because we would be a state that would highlight populations and issues not given fair representation in the previous nominating calendar.  We are excited that issues Nevada and the West face will be highlighted and want as broad an audience as possible to receive this message.  We think it will be refreshing to have FOX News have to broadcast a discussion of the characteristics that distinguish Nevada, including a growing labor movement."

D. Taylor, Secretary-Treasurer of the 60,000-member Culinary Union called on those who have focused on Fox to look at the larger political picture.  "Nevada was chosen as an early caucus state because of its diversity.  Our members are diverse, the State's voters are diverse.  There is no purity in newscasts.  We can all find flaws with each channel.  What we know is that FOX is the most-watched newscast and that it will be a positive thing for the people who watch FOX's newscast to have exposure to the issues and voices that will be participating in the Nevada presidential caucus.  When we limit ourselves to only those that we agree with, everybody loses."

Rusty McAllister, president of the Professional Firefighters of Nevada, noted that, "Many of us who will be participating in the presidential caucus process represent constituencies with a wide range of beliefs.   We want all of our members to receive information about the candidates and their platforms.  It is a step forward for Nevada if we have all networks, including FOX, addressing the issues that make our State unique."

The machinations here aren't clear to me, and I don't get why unions want to reify a news station that constantly engages in union bashing.  It is interesting that lots of the union leaders are talking about a diversity of voices.  And hey, if Fox News and Air America were cohosting a debate, that wouldn't be a bad compromise.



Display:


Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 1)

Stockholm Syndrome!


by SandThroughTheEyeGlass on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:35:07 AM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

You have to keep in mind this thing is really Howard Dean's brainchild. And Howard Dean controls the Democratic purse strings. And Harry has to run again for election in '10. And Harry's not getting any more popular here at home. And the "Western Majority Project" is a money-raising PAC with Harry as the co-chair. So 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 =....

1. Has anybody actaully seen and read the agreement with Fox?

  1. Is this agreement classified top-secret material or can any 'ol Joe Six-PAC see what their party has committed to?
  2. Just what are the "concessions" the NDSP and Collins made to Fux?
  3. Why is our local county party being told they're going to have to come up with money to support a debate they had no say in?
  4. Why is the Western Majority Project so super secret?
  5. What's the connection in the timing with Collins leaving the NDSP throne, the contract being signed with Fux, and the New West Project being changed to the Western Majority Project?
  6. How much are the unions paying up for the debate?

Would sure be interested in answers to some of these and a whole lot more questions. Yep, sure would........


by texex on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:44:09 AM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

These are extremely good questions.

Again there is a blogger over at taylormarsh.com that might be able to provide some of those answers?

This is a huge story IMO.


by SandThroughTheEyeGlass on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:54:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

If it's Johnathan Abbinett, FORGET IT!


by texex on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:31:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Why?


by SandThroughTheEyeGlass on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:03:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hold leaders responsible for decision (none / 0)

I am not familiar with the particular unions that are pro-Fox but many organizations and leaders become corrupted over time and instead of promoting the welfare of the members are primarily concerned with their own self-interest.  If or when Fox fails to do a good job everyone must hold all those who made the decision responsible for it.


by realtime on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:56:59 AM EST

Re: Hold leaders responsible for decision (3.00 / 1)

Well, folks who are familiar with the Culinary Workers know that they bear no resemblance to the profile you suggest.  In recent years, the Culinary Workers have been at the front end of a resurgence in labor organizing and activism in a Western right-to-work state, which is an achievement of historic proportions.  They're the Nevada affiliate of UNITE-HERE, which is one of the most progressive, innovative and principled unions in the country.

Choose to agree or disagree with the union's specific political choices, but jumping to the conclusion that they're "corrupted" (or, for that matter, that they're "a self-interested and self-dealing crew of insiders that are no different from any other entrenched group within the Democratic Party") is ridiculous and irresponsible, and employs some of the worst stereotypes of the labor movement to make a very cheap point.


by Woodhouse on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:19:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think we need to put the pressure on the (none / 0)

candidates because we are getting nowhere with the Nevada Dems.

It is in the candidates best interests to not appear on the Fox debate.  With two years of campaigning, there will be plenty of other debates to attend.

 


by Yoshimi on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:00:06 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 0)

         "I don't get why unions want to reify a     news station that constantly engages in union bashing"

Uh, cause maybe there ain't no such thing as a news station that doesn't?


by Bob Smith on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:03:44 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

CNN just ignores unions.


by Matt Stoller on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:04:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

And Air America supports unions.


by Matt Stoller on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:05:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 0)

Yesterday I was with you, now I'm apalled.

Matt Stoller writes:

There's another strand of unionism, though, and that's a self-interested and self-dealing crew of insiders that are no different from any other entrenched group within the Democratic Party.

That is one heck of a charge and posters here have added their thoughts, to yours, on Unions being "corrupt" and "dinasours". Could you please be specific and identify which unions you are identify as being bad for the progressive `movement'?

One more thing, if you want to change the Fox debate over to an Air America function...you should probally know that Air America does not have contracts with either the AFTRA, the IBEW, or the IATSE.  In truth they are not a completly closed shop, the two comedy writers they have on staff are Union....but thats it.

This is a damning accusation that you use to justify your position and it is important that you back up this harsh comment.


by timlhowe on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 04:13:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I thought Lou Dobbs was a union supporter? (none / 0)


by Yoshimi on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:10:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Fox was working overtime trying to link Harry Reid with the Abramoff scandal.  Is Harry throwing them a bone to stop potential swiftboating?  

There isn't much or anything there but ...


by David Kowalski on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:09:49 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Just poking around but found out a 30 second spot on the Academy Awards sold for $1.7 million.

Say the Nevada debate is only 10% as interesting (make me down for 0%), then that's $340,000 per minute the stations charges for ads.

Q: What's the cut to the NDSP and/or the Western Majority Project for putting together the debate for Fux to sell?
A: Nobody knows but Collins and Harry and they ain't talking.

Anybody out there know if their local party is being tapped to pay for the debate and how much?


by texex on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:29:22 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Unions have seen their day come and go.  

Labor is going to have to create a new way, like coalesing with consumers, to seek wage and benefit protection.

The wal-mart bill for example was not a 'union' bill per se.  Times are changing and labor will have to  move with it.  Unions are a dinasour.


by aiko on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:54:20 PM EST

Be careful what you wish for (3.00 / 1)

You are right, "Times are changing and labor will have to move with it". And just in case you don't know, unions have changed, and they have gone through a transformation. The essence of the transformation was the split in the ALF-CIO, resulting in two labor federations, and their different ideas with regards to supporting political campaigns rather than engaging in organizing workers.

The Change to Win Coalition, which represents about one half of unionized workers, would rather put their resouces, financial and human, into organizing workers rather than contributing to lost cause politial campaigns. In the 2004 presidential campaign, organized labor contributed over 100 million dollars and thousands, and thousands of campaign workers; as well as, facilities for political campaigns to work out of. What did organized labor get? Nothing! Not even a thank you from John Kerry during his concession speech.

So be careful of what you wish for. If unions decide not to participate in the 2008 election, you'll see alot of blue turning red.

John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C


by jfoster on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:10:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Be careful what you wish for (none / 0)

In 2004, the PA AFL-CIO supported the Republican Specter for reelection. I remember seeing all those Democratic yard signs in front of union households with tape over Joe Hoeffel's name. Did Arlen thank the unions in his victory speech? Are you happy with what he did as Judiciary chair?


by joyful alternative on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:47:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Be careful what you wish for (none / 0)

Actually Arlen did thank the trade unions for their support, he is also a sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act, walking the walk, so to speak, and he does have high rating from AFL-CIO, otherwise I'd just as soon see him go.

Under the Clinton Administration, not one piece of legislation beneficial to trade unions.

Quid pro quo, bro.

John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C


by jfoster on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:58:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 0)

"Unions have seen their day come and go."

But who's going to make up for the 40% of total Democratic contributions?  Nevermind the 180,000 people on the ground during the general elections?

Unions are already working on consumer issues and have been for a while.  Look at the Building Trades for example in terms of construction and servicing industries.  Here's one site, for example, that belongs to a union that is providing free home inspections to Arizona residents - www.acecoalition.org


by PaulVA on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:28:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

The old and stereotyped face of unions, which had as much inclination to doing its real business in smoke filled back rooms as either party ever did, belongs to the era when Democratic machines ran things and their bouts of corruption were disaffecting many. Unions are not, in and of themselves, any great seat of enlightenment.  The fact that they represent workers, at least in theory, is what makes them exceptional in the political landscape.  The workers they represent, in practice, are not particularly liberal and certainly not immune to sirens of the right pitching security from terrorism through military force: foxy arguments.
I found some evidence, circumstantial at best, for lingering good effects in states where union political clout once dominated...but I think it is vital to pick apart the monolith and to deconstruct the stereotypes of organized labor so that its own members can see where their personal interests are severved and where they are not.  Your role as a powerfully insightful commentator is an ideal platform from which to do the dissecting...except your readers may not include enough "rank and file".
by greensmile on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:33:39 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 0)

What makes unions exceptional, in the political landscape, is that they can come up with 100 million dollars for a presidential campaign. In addition to the money, they can provide substantial voters, see the link,

http://blog.aflcio.org/2006/11/08/the-un ion-votes-the-difference/

Just curious, which union are you going to be deconstructing, assuming that you are a member of a union, since you seem to have so much insight. Or are you, you know, the elitist type, who knows what is better for workers than the workers themselves.

Most union members know where there personal interests are served; in negotiated contracts with good wages, good benefits, retirement security, and mechanisms to guarantee fairness on the job.

John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C


by jfoster on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:21:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Most union members know where there personal interests are served; in negotiated contracts with good wages, good benefits, retirement security, and mechanisms to guarantee fairness on the job.

That's a little too facile.  It depends which union - many members of unions don't even know they are unions.


by Matt Stoller on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:51:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are out of touch (3.00 / 0)

Maybe you know more about the trade union movement than I do, but I doubt it. Your superficial perspective on trade unionisn is not uncommon in the so called, "progressive blogosphere". Like I mentioned before, it's this elitist attitude that keeps the progressive movement disconnected from the mass of the American voter.

John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C


by jfoster on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 04:54:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are out of touch (3.00 / 0)

That's a little too facile.  It depends which union - many members of unions don't even know they are unions.

I mean what the f does that mean?

my goodness...im new to this site...how do you we not call this what is...arrogance and elitism? Yesterday, I posted a scoffing comment on his suggestion to "primary" various members of Congress we've busted our butts to get elected and he sent me a `Warning' telling me to "watch it!"  What do we have here with this guy, a young leader or a young punk?  A smart guy or a smart ass?  I wrote today as soon as I saw this post and have awaited a reply, but as yet, have recieved none.  I asked him to identify precisely what unions he was talking about.  I sent this page and discussed it with the press office at the afl.  If he doesnt identify who he meant by his words, back them up or withdraw them, Im going to conclude that we have a budding new demigod in this `new' progressive.  (I keep thinking the who lyric, "here's the new boss - same as the old boss", when I read this fellow.) If he mispoke, or wrote without thinking....well, ok...but if he actually has as little respect for the Union movement as these words expressed (I have tried to find the other writing on Unions that he referred to but couldnt find it) Im gonna make sure that these word and this attitude is understood by the political directors of the various unions. Ive been made very nervous by the words Ive read from this fellow in the week that I have been here. Like him, Ive used the word progressive to describe myself for years now, but in truth Im a leftist.  But Im also someone who NEEDS the Democrats to win.  As many as possible.  I consider myself a Harkin-Wellstone Democrat.  I tell you one thing, if Senator Wellstone read this posting, young Stoller would have gotten a pasting today and a history lesson thrown in to follow.  If Senator Harkin saw this Id bet he'd get another one tommorow and then this opinionator would have to go into hiding.  

I saw that AFSCME funded someone on this site to go to the Nevada candidate scrum.  I wonder how Mr. McEntee would respond to this post?  Think he'd like it? Its tone is so disrepectful.  I dont think Gerald McEntee likes being  disrected, how did it feel to you?


by timlhowe on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 06:14:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why not have a Blogger Candidate forum the same (none / 0)

day?  This is brilliant:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2 /27/131541/814


by Yoshimi on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:34:37 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Maybe it's because union members watch Fox News? A union's sole responsibility is to its members and that's how it should be.

Also, have we just given up on trying to convince people we're right? Pure base strategy, give up on the rest?


by CT student on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:52:13 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Matt Stoller writes:

There's another strand of unionism, though, and that's a self-interested and self-dealing crew of insiders that are no different from any other entrenched group within the Democratic Party.

That is one heck of a charge and posters here have added their thoughts, to yours, on Unions being "corrupt" and "dinasours". Could you please be specific and identify which unions you are identify as being bad for the progressive `movement'?

This is a damning accusation that you use to justify your position and it is important that you back up this harsh comment.


by timlhowe on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:27:42 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 0)

Matt says,

"This is why unions often cause the movement serious problems"

The problem with the progressive movement is that it doesn't connect with the majority of Americans. The reason the progressive movement doesn't connect is elitism. Matt's anti-union statement is a classic example.

John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C


by jfoster on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:38:59 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (3.00 / 0)

Brother...John,

I agree completely.  I have been at this site for a week (home with an ice injury, damn) and have written back and forth with quite a few nice people here, but I am getting very worried about the absolutism of some of the posts I have read here.  I have worked Democratic politics for decades now and always know that no matter what, workers are who we are fighting for and the Unions are the soul of our party. In truth, most political players come and go, but the Unions are the one constant in our struggle.  (You know the struggle that we have been fighting for years before the birth of the Internet)  Since I have been here on this site, I have been angered by attacks on our candidates, members of Congress who fight for our people and now these snide comments about the AFL-CIO State Fed chair in Nevada and Unionism in general.  The cliches that I have read above make my heart boil.  My God, I want this young fellow to identify specifically which Unions he thinks are dangerous to `His' progressive movement.

One more thing, if you want to change the Fox debate over to an Air America function...you should probally know that Air America does not have contracts with either the AFTRA, the IBEW, or the IATSE.  In truth they are not a completly closed shop, the two comedy writers they have on staff are Union....but thats it.


by timlhowe on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 03:20:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's just push back by the Nevada dems (none / 0)

They are starting to feel the heat.

Here's my idea to nail them.


by Hesiod Theogeny on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:39:00 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

Results of new KOS poll: Do you approve of the way Senator Harry Reid is doing his job? Yes 41%; No 35%; Undecided 25%. ....of Howard Dean? Yes 87%; No 7%; Undecided 5%. ....of Nancy Pelosi? Yes 83%; No 10%; Undecided 8%

Is it possible that harry is becoming as unpopular as Bush? Lies, damn lies, and statistics about our glorious Majority Leadass.


by texex on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 02:40:31 PM EST

give it up matt (none / 0)

The deal with Fox news was a terrible mistake and that mistake has now been noted.  The dems will just have to live with it for now, too many people will lose too much face for them to back down now.  And if they do you will see a blast from the rightwing noise machine that will be picked up by the natl' media; that will just put us on the defensive.


by syvanen on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 03:08:11 PM EST

Do you actually watch Fox News? (none / 0)

I don't, since they suck. But maybe they aren't that bad, I mean I really have no idea, but if you base your opinion of them on whats worst about them, they'll look worse then they are.

Anyway, it's just one debate. Lighten up. It's not the end of the friggin' world.


by delmoi on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:20:08 PM EST

Re: Unions Back Fox News (none / 0)

"Texex" I'm going to let that one pass...

...dear MyDD readers, go to www.taylormarsh.com and scroll down to my Guest Column "Fear & Loathing in the Las Vegas Poltical Jungle!" and make sure and follow the links and read the commentary - that will help with the back story on the Nevada Democratic Parties Tom Collins!

I'm a recently ostracized Nevada progressive that has spent the last few years deeply and broadly involved in the NSDP - I'm the founder and past State Chair of the Nevada Democratic Veterans & Military Families Corps Caucus...

...I'm legit, check out my bio at http://www.vegascommunityonline.com/John athanAbbinett.htm - I'm a well known, state-wide, Veterans Advocate and Activist.

There is a cancer on the Nevada Democratic Party under Tom Collins and especially in Clark County under Liz Foley - they are DINO's and must resign or be removed and new, REAL DEMOCRATS, need to be elected ASAP!

Nevada Progressives need all the help they can get from the "netroots" - thanks for reading and writing and all you do for our Democracy!


by J L Abbinett on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:45:39 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.