DUMB, DUMBER & DISHONEST -- OBAMA, BOEING AND NLRB

The story of Obama the NLRB and Boeing is not a new story, but each time I hear an acolyte, apologist, shill or just an ignorant person (Leslie Marshall most recently) try to defend NLRB's position in trying to deny Boeing the right too operate their manufacturing plant in South Carolina, I find it incomprehensible. That is, except for the fact that I have learned to expect the worst from this administration. The incomprehensible had now become the expected!
How can anyone be so stupid, if not stupid then dishonest, to say his major focus is to create jobs and concurrently  have a goal to increase exports by 50% by 2015 and have his shill (Craig) in the NLRB prevent operations of an airplane plant that would employ 3,800 now and more later??? Our major exports are airplanes. It's even worse when they also rant about China when China is likely to be a big competitor in building airplanes. Yes, Mr. President, it is entirely possible that you are setting up China to help them do what they already want to do. I'm again reminded that he is "brilliant" -- by proclamation but not by demonstration.
But he's in the company of many more.
How many people even think about how many jobs, and whole industries, unions have destroyed? How many care??

Comments

  1. Randy McC13 September, 2011

    What ever happened to the House Un-American Activities Committee?

    This NLRB action is just about as Un-American as you could possibly imagine. It doesn't get any worse than this.

    In degree this action only differs from the Yacht Industry, which was decimated by the trashing of the wealthy who buy such items, by just a very small amount. It was foolishly thought to bring in untold amounts of money from these evil wealthy who buy such items. It crippled an entire industry.

    It is not much of a stretch to imagine the Government badmouthing iPads and iPod Touchs and iPhones. After all, they are gadgets for the wealthy are they not? Not useful for anything. Just a toy. (I hasten to add that this is sarcasm and the sarcasm flag is now set to zero.....)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

AMERICAN AIRLINES -- MORE ABOUT UNIONS AND CH 11

I apologize for the structure of the post below, with no segmentation, but the system refuses to do it my way. To my post yesterday re AMR's chapter 11 filing relating my experiences over many years flying with AA, an AA pilot wrote a thoughtful comment that caused me to think a bit more about the precursors to conditions of their bankruptcy. Frankly, I have what is perhaps too much experience with trade unions and their excesses, but know less about others such as the airlines. After learning more about the negotiations of AA with their unions, I now think it's justifiable to post the comments below. I've seen too many industries destroyed by union excesses coupled with management incompetence in caving to excess demands. Start with coal (dead for many years), steel, textiles, shoes, electronics manufacturing, and more.  The Detroit 3 (once the big 3) deserves special mention. As their costs rose to $72/hour (fully loaded) and costs in the southern industry w
Read more

LEFTIST MIND-SET OF TODAY -- REFLEXIVE, THOUGHTLESS SUPPORT FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

"Trying to persuade a prejudiced mind is as Sisyphean as trying to open a closed mind is Quixotic." Mann, May 2012 In a blog post herein below on May 1, 2013, I outlined what we who manage people and enterprises know as absolutes about performances of people who are put into management and supervisory positions for which they haven't requisite qualifications. For those who have progressed through several jobs to their level of incompetence, this is known as the Peter Principle as defined by Laurence J. Peter. In all likelihood, all who have managed people for any length of time have seen this principle played out. While Peter's observation applies to progression through multiple job levels, if a person is put into any job for which he is unqualified, the concept is also valid. Elective political positions is where I see this most often played out. The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States is the most significant example of this in my lif
Read more

ETHANOL -- The worst mandate ever gets even worse

When politicians get control of science and the inept or dishonest scientists, nothing good comes of it. There are many examples -- global warming (aka climate change) is the most prominent. The ethanol mandate, although a part of the climate change mania, stands on its own as arguably the most ridiculous mandate of all time. President Jimmy Carter, who was influenced by a misguided college professor, can be charged with the mistake of promulgating the ethanol mandate.  Of course, Al Gore is the politician who played the global warming issue like a drum and has benefited financially from it. Use of ethanol in motor fuel is not a net positive either in costs or in impact on the environment.... enormous hype to the contrary notwithstanding. Ethanol does not have the positive effect on the environment as touted. It has only about 60% of the specific energy of petroleum fuel, which begs use of more fuel to achieve the same energy as petroleum fuel. And, so it does. I have my own experie
Read more