Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Bill Fletcher, Jr. distorts history to fit in with his support for Obama and the Democrats.
At a
meeting in Milwaukee hosted by a group of rank-and-file workers who are
members of AFSCME where I was asked to make a presentation on the need
for a "21st Century Full Employment Act for Peace and Prosperity," one
of the participants informed me that the Harvard educated Bill Fletcher,
Jr. spoke at a conference about labor history in Wisconsin.
While in Wisconsin I met with several other people who attended this conference, too.
I understand Fletcher made the erroneous claim that the Taft-Hartley Act was the beginning of the big business attack on labor.
Why does Bill Fletcher, Jr. knowingly falsify history in this way?
Fletcher is well aware that it was the fight between labor and Wall Street's organizations like the Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, etc. that marked the beginning of Wall Street's attack on labor which one of the results was the Taft-Hartley Act.
But, why does Fletcher intentionally omit any mention of this ferocious and bitter hard fought struggle over the "Full Employment Act of 1945" which labor lost?
Because, if Fletcher mentioned this struggle over the "Full Employment Act of 1945" he would then have to explain that this Act would have required the president and Congress to attain and maintain full employment; and, then, Fletcher and his left-wing Obama supporters would have to explain why they are pushing the Democrat's agenda of continuing to make full employment a voluntary "goal" instead of pushing forward a labor agenda making full employment a mandatory requirement.
Fletcher and his Obama supporting pals are afraid of a huge battle that would be a rematch of the fight over the "Full Employment Act of 1945" because then Democrats would be held accountable every time they mouthed the words, "jobs, jobs, jobs."
While in Wisconsin I met with several other people who attended this conference, too.
I understand Fletcher made the erroneous claim that the Taft-Hartley Act was the beginning of the big business attack on labor.
Why does Bill Fletcher, Jr. knowingly falsify history in this way?
Fletcher is well aware that it was the fight between labor and Wall Street's organizations like the Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, etc. that marked the beginning of Wall Street's attack on labor which one of the results was the Taft-Hartley Act.
But, why does Fletcher intentionally omit any mention of this ferocious and bitter hard fought struggle over the "Full Employment Act of 1945" which labor lost?
Because, if Fletcher mentioned this struggle over the "Full Employment Act of 1945" he would then have to explain that this Act would have required the president and Congress to attain and maintain full employment; and, then, Fletcher and his left-wing Obama supporters would have to explain why they are pushing the Democrat's agenda of continuing to make full employment a voluntary "goal" instead of pushing forward a labor agenda making full employment a mandatory requirement.
Fletcher and his Obama supporting pals are afraid of a huge battle that would be a rematch of the fight over the "Full Employment Act of 1945" because then Democrats would be held accountable every time they mouthed the words, "jobs, jobs, jobs."
I give Kevin Zeese a lesson about full employment.
Kevin,
I have kind of set for myself the task of getting politicians to understand the difference between full employment being a "goal" and a mandated "requirement." This is a dirty job; but someone has to do it.
Do you understand the difference between a "Full Employment Act" which makes full employment a "goal" and one that makes full employment a "requirement?"
As the Attorney General of the Green Shadow Cabinet, I think we have a right to expect you to:
1. Acknowledge you understand the difference; and,
As the Attorney General of the Green Shadow Cabinet, I think we have a right to expect you to:
1. Acknowledge you understand the difference; and,
2. Tell us which you support.
It would be helpful to all concerned that the Green Party provide its position on these two points, too.
I am assuming you agree with me that we all have a right to have these two points answered?
Have you read the "Full Employment Act of 1945" and the Congressional testimony? Here is a link. Click on the very top "botton/tab" in the upper right-hand corner.
You may consult "Black's Law Dictionary" or any common dictionary for the definition of a "goal" and a "requirement."
Let me make it easy for you. Here are the definitions.
Let me make it easy for you. Here are the definitions.
Perhaps you are like those Canadians and figure a "goal" is a point scored in hockey? My grandkids think a "goal" is a point scored in soccer. Well, there is another definition of "goal," too:
goal
noun \ˈgōl, chiefly Northern especially in 1b & 3a also ˈgül\
: something that you are trying to do or achieve
: an area or object into which a ball or puck must be hit, kicked, etc., to score points in various games (such as soccer and hockey)
: an area or object into which a ball or puck must be hit, kicked, etc., to score points in various games (such as soccer and hockey)
: the act of hitting, kicking, etc., a ball or puck into a goal or the score that results from doing this
Here is the definition of "requirement:"
re·quire·ment
noun \-ˈkwī(-ə)r-mənt\
: something that is needed or that must be done
: something that is necessary for something else to happen or be done
Here is the definition of "job:"
job
noun \ˈjäb\
: the work that a person does regularly in order to earn money
: a duty, task, or function that someone or something has
: a duty, task, or function that someone or something has
: something that requires very great effort
JOB
1
a : a piece of work; especially : a small miscellaneous piece of work undertaken on order at a stated rateb : the object or material on which work is being donec : something produced by or as if by work job>
2
a : something done for private advantage job>
3
a (1) : something that has to be done : task (2) : an undertaking requiring unusual exertion job to talk over that noise>
— on the job
Examples of JOB
- He took a job as a waiter.
- She has a high-paying job on Wall Street.
- She's trying to get a job in New York.
- The new factory will create thousands of jobs.
- They offered him the job but he turned it down.
- The blood's job is to carry oxygen to the different parts of the body.
- Construction of the bridge turned out to be a bigger job than they had expected.
- It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it.
Here is the definition of "full employment:"
full em·ploy·ment
noun
noun: full employment
- 1.the condition in which virtually all who are able and willing to work are employed.
I hate to think what my job will be like when I have to start explaining to all of you what a real living Minimum Wage is or what causes poverty. Then if we get into the complex world of "cost of living" and "standard of living"... oy vey.
Alan L. Maki
For more information on "full employment," check out:
http://fullemploymentnow.blogspot.com/
http://fullemploymentnow.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)