Saturday, September 02, 2006

Some thoughts on Lindeen and Labor Day


The Billings Gazette is reporting on Greater Yellowstone Central Labor Council's picnic in Billings this Monday. Jon Tester and Monica Lindeen will be in attendance as they are both endorsed by Montana labor. This set me to thinking, while we know where Monica stands on energy (witness the bio-bus) as compared to Rehberg, but who is better for Montana's workers?


To start with, Lindeen has very high rankings from Montana AFL-CIO, Montana Public Employees Association and the Montana Progressive Labor Caucus. She has consistently voted in favor of labor and workers over corporate interests. To me, this is the sort of vote that we need representing Montana in the House.


Has Rehberg been sticking up for Montana's workers? Well, he has extremely low ratings by AFL-CIO, American Federation of Government Employees and just about every other labor group out there. However, he makes up for those low rankings by looking out for corporate interests. Corporations love Rehberg. Is that what we really need in Montana? Another stooge looking out for big business? Nope. Not on your life.

Find out for yourself. Look at the records. Go over and visit Monica at Lindeen.net. This is so important for Montana, Rehberg is flying under the radar in this election. Don't let him skate by again.

14 comments:

Mark T said...

Other than manning some phone banks, labor support isn't worth much. Their day has passed.

Your very general comments about Rehberg are kind of an automated slur - are corporations bad?

Bill K said...

Dear Mr. Mason:

I would like to send you a complementary copy of my new book (no obligation). If you are interested, please tell me where to send it.

Title: Progressive Logic: Framing A Unified Field Theory Of Values For Progressives. ISBN: 0-9773717-1-9

(See some early reviews on Amazon at: http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=br_ss_hs/103-4342426-7620663?platform=gurupa&url=index%3Dstripbooks%3Arelevance-above&keywords=progressive+logic&Go.x=10&Go.y=11 )

Progressives have had great political successes in the past. We can learn the lessons of that past, and repeat those successes in the future.

Progressive Logic distills the principles of value that have actually come out of the past political triumphs of progressives in the US, from abolition through the labor movement, the civil rights movement, and the New Deal Those principles form a single logic of values - progressive logic. The basic value premise of progressive logic is "all persons always deserve positive regard." The evidence from the past shows that American progressive activists and voters have shared this basic premise for generations, but without being fully aware of it.

As George Lakoff has shown, we progressives need to try a new approach for communicating our policies to the people. Democrats and Republicans seek votes with vague slogans and manipulative sound bites. But this approach alienates as many people as it attracts.

Framing issues in the terms of progressive logic will manifest honor for Americans as intelligent, rational, and other-regarding people. This new approach to communicating with the public is sure to attract attention to our candidates and issues.

Activists, speechwriters, journalists, and campaigners can easily use progressive logic. With its power of persuasion, and because it honors the intellects of the people, it will change the way Americans vote.

The reader will see how progressive logic can be applied on such issues as:

*Criminal justice system reform;
*Consumerism and the loss of community;
*The quality of life revolution;
*Abortion and the right to die; and,
*Religion in politics.

The book shows that using progressive logic can be the winning strategy for bringing about a new "New Deal."

We progressives need to know more of our past, precisely so that we can repeat it!


Available at amazon.com for $14.95 + s/h; or, through Baker&Taylor.
Also available at the author's web site http://www.empathicscience.org/proglog.html
for only $10.00, free s/h.

Yours,

William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.

wjkellpro@aol.com

Ph.D. Political Science, 1984
University of California, Santa Barbara
BA, MA, San Francisco State
Bio at: http://www.empathicscience.org/about.html

Shane C. Mason said...

are corporations bad

No Mark, not all corporations are bad. Corporatism is bad and is otherwise known as fascism, you know the Moussolini quote

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."

We are in danger in this country of merging the two. Our legistltures must look out for people first. If the people are taken care of, business will do fine. The same is not always true the other way around.

Other than manning some phone banks, labor support isn't worth much. Their day has passed.

Only because it suits corporations.

Craig said...

The AFL-CIO has as little to do with workers as the NEA has to do with education.

Both are now interests that are so large that they are only interested in perpetuating themselves.

Much like corporations, that way.

Shane C. Mason said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shane C. Mason said...

You know what Craig, we have to go on something. The AFL-CIO bases their rankings on how often the candidate voted their postion on bills they found 'important'. Now, this is up to the reader to determine whether they find the same bills important. Though I am hoping we have the shared assumption that labor interests are really American interests. I know that many folks don't feel this way, though I think that they might be missing a historical perspective.

The best thing we can all do is look at the voting records for ourselves and judge from the source. Not everyone has the resources or time, skill to do this. The use of 'interest groups' as a 'general barometer' can be a shortcut. For those people who can't or wont take the time, I am here as a completely biased and fully partisan voice.

That's my job. It is what I do. :)

Craig said...

**Though I am hoping we have the shared assumption that labor interests are really American interests.**

At one time, this may have been true. The labor movement was useful, but has now long outlived its usefulness.

If you want to talk a historical perspective, compare and contrast the rise and fall of labor unions today to the rist and fall of guilds.

Shane C. Mason said...

If they have outlasted their usefullness, it is partly because a campaign has been waged against them by corporate interests. I will admit that their has been corruption and bloat in Unions. The fact is that we need them now more than ever.

Bob Funk said...

i'd be interested in knowing why you think rehberg is "flying under the radar." i think most montanans don't even know there's a race here for the congressional seat.
http://thewillard.blogspot.com/

Shane C. Mason said...

why you think rehberg is "flying under the radar."

This can mean two things, I will answer both.

1. What makes me think he is flying under the radar?

Well, you hardly ever hear anything from him. He is not making press releases or doing tour dates. Check his website.

2. Why do I think he is 'campaigning' this way?

Well, by keeping a low profile he puts the owness on Lindeen to even even create a debate. The fact that the montana press is ignoring this race pretty much gives him a free pass. That means that it is our hands to bring the race to him.

andybhammond said...

Last time I checked, these corporations you like to slam employ a lot of people, provide affordable health care, 401K opportunities, advancement opportunities, etc.

Without these big corporations, we would not have the prosperous society and the way of life we enjoy today.

Shane C. Mason said...

Andy,

Glad to see that you made your way over here. It will do you some good.

Without these big corporations, we would not have the prosperous society and the way of life we enjoy today.

What makes you say that? Is it true or just a popular misconception?

What I will say is that I am not against large corporations at all. I am against putting the interests of large corporations against the very people who make them profitable. The manner in which corporations are running today (quick profit, fast growth) will probably not be a good thing for them or us in the long run. You see, the way CEO's move around from job to job, no one seems as concerned about building and growth in a sustainable nature as they do in making this years dividends look good.

Montana is made of people, not corporations,

Andy Hammond said...

Shane,
Sure there are bad corporations out there. There are bad and greedy CEOs as well. These make the most news, of course.

Most, however, in my opinion, are well run and take good care of their most valuable asset, their people.

I recommend a book called Good To Great by Jim Collins. He focuses on many companies who are in business for the long run and have built a strong a sustainable business.

Remember that Corporations are made of people too.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.