This week Wictory Wednesday presents Max Burns for the US Congress for the 12th District of Georgia. He is running a tight race against Democratic incumbent John Barrow.
The Israeli war in Lebanon has shown what will happen if we pull out of Iraq… the terrorists will claim victory and emerge even stronger and more emboldened. Max Burns understands this and supports the troops to complete their mission. We should live in a society that respects and supports those who risk their lives for our benefit. Sadly, we don’t live in that society.
Max Burns understands that immigration doesn’t require reform; it requires actually enforcing the laws on the books. Not enforcing the law has led to lawlessness and before any question of guest workers can be introduced, law and order needs to return to that segment of society.
The infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” has shown us that even a GOP lead Congress can still waste money. That is why earmark reform and a line item veto is all the more necessary. When pork can be put into budgets without debate (earmarks), the line item veto allows voters to put the heat on the President to bring sense back to Congressional spending. The GOP has gotten half of the equation right in lowering taxes… now they need to cut spending. Max Burns supports this in the form of a balanced budget.
Families waste days and weeks each year trying to figure out their “fair share” of taxes. Not even the IRS can figure out the tax code… a book that is over 12 times larger than the Bible! Max Burns supports cleaning up the tax code so that families can clearly understand what the owe… and the IRS can even figure it out too.
Please consider donating or volunteering to the Max Burns campaign. Help turn this blue seat red!
This has been a production of the Wictory Wednesday blogburst. If you would like to join Wictory Wednesday, please see this post or contact John Bambenek at jcb (dot) blog [at] gmail {dot} com. The following sites are members of the Wictory Wednesday team:
Related Posts:
Wictory Wednesday has Returned!!Wictory Wednesday Presents Diana Irey for CongressWictory Wednesday: Rep. Mark Kennedy for US SenateWictory Wednesday Presents Thelma DrakeWictory Wednesday: Doug Lamborn for Congress
September 27th, 2006
Posted by
John Bambenek |
Elections, Politics, Wictory Wednesday |
3 comments
On FoxNews Sunday, during Studio B, there was a rather unremarkable segment on the recent uptick in Republicans poll numbers. For some reason the press likes talking about these silly little non-descript polls and endless debating what they “mean.” In this case a Democratic operative of little consequence talked about why it is good news for Democrats. What was interesting about the interview was not her comments about the polls but her comments about the Democratic agenda.
“It is not up to us to present an agenda, but for Republicans to prove their results” (best of my recollection). Translation: We don’t have to tell you what we’re going to do when we’re elected; you just have to hate the other guys. These comments were reminiscent of Kerry not wanting to present his economic agenda until elected during the 2004 elections.
Despite the fact that many Republicans have earned the right to lose their races in 2006, the shear hubris of telling voters that you don’t have to tell them what policies you will enact when elected shows an arrogant elite who has nothing but disdain for the voters. At least on every other day except Election Day.
When the Democrats presented their Congressional agenda if they were elected, that agenda had no connection to the issues that are most important to Americans. No position on Iraq was mentioned. Nothing about immigration was enunciated. They burned incense to the typical campaign slogans of “reform”, “cutting waste” and other such nuggets that are forgotten as soon as the ballots start being counted. The Democrats have presented no real agenda for any issue of importance to Americans.
At least with the Republicans, you know where they stand. They aren’t hiding anything. What policies are the Democrats trying to hide?
Related Posts:
DI Column Up: We Still Don’t Need a WeathermanDI Column Up: Votes Don’t Count if there is no Real ChoiceDI Column Posted: Don’t Get Stuck on StupidWhy You Don’t Piss Me Off…Much Better
September 26th, 2006
Posted by
John Bambenek |
Elections, National, Politics |
no comments
You can read the letter here.
Here are the highlights.
Mr. Bambenek also claims that academic professionals get 10 weeks paid leave per year. Even totaling our very generous vacation, holiday and sick leave does not reach 50 days.
Ok, you got me, it’s 48 days. I rounded up, shoot me.
For example, we heard from academic professionals who were expected to work 60+ hours/week for months on end and faced reprisals when they objected.
First, that makes them just like every other employee in the private sector. I did months of 90 hour weeks. Heck, talk to most law school grads who take their first job in a firm. One, they should ask what is required before they take the job. Two, they may or may not face reprisals, but for most objections, they are covered by whistleblowers protection… a benefit not afforded private sector employees. They can also… *gasp* find a new job.
Academic professionals are at the mercy of their immediate supervisor, who may not carry out University policy fairly. Even those of us with good supervisors are at risk because policies can be changed without notice and certainly without the input of academic professionals.
They can (1) talk to their supervisor, (2) talk to their department head, (3) quit. This is a free country and by pretending that the only recourse to an incompetent boss is to suck it up or unionize only ENSURES incompetent bosses stick around. The free market works when people choose, telling people they can’t choose sabotages the market. Also, because we work for a state agency, those policies CANNOT be changed without notice. Heck, most of them need to be approved through the UC Senate, the legislative body of the University. Some even need to take place in Board of Trustee meetings.
Forming a democratic union is the best way to ensure good working conditions so that academic professionals can continue to contribute to this campus.
This “democratic” union was formed to benefit a certain subset of academic professionals… those in the “visiting” category. Of 300 or so, only 60 voted in favor of unionizing. 20% is hardly democracy.
UPDATE:
The column in question is available here.
Related Posts:
DI Column Up: All Kids Left BehindAnti-Union??Union Busting?To filibuster or not to filibuster, that is the questionDI Column Up: Mass Taxing District
September 19th, 2006
Posted by
John Bambenek |
Chambana, Politics, Unions, University of Illinois |
one comment