Union Mob Strongarms A Single Schwarzenegger Supporter
Freedom of speech according to special interests.
“A single Schwarzenegger supporter struggles to hold her ground in a rally against the governor’s special election initiatives. Opponents tried to hit her with their signs and some blocked news cameras as she argued her point. The crowd turns quickly, grabbing her signs and tearing them up. Even a woman wearing an orange security vest rips up the “Vote Yes†signs.” (CBS 2 News, October 28, 2005)
See the video here, and here.
Since CBS News provides the report, we decided to do a search of their website for “schwarzenegger” and were surprised by what it yielded: not the stories (only two), but the ads. We discovered an anti-Prop. 75 link, titled “Arnold Wants to Silence Californians,” sponsored by the AFL-CIO.
Upon clicking the link, we are brought to the union’s site and a promotional page that declares:
“Don’t Let Arnold Silence Youâ€â€Take Action Now to Stop Prop. 75
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his corporate backers are tired of unions getting in the way each time they try to cut funds for our schools, hospitals, health care, infrastructure and public safety. The whole point of Proposition 75 is to shut us up and get us out of their way.”
They must be projecting. Because it sure looks like that’s exactly what they were doing to the woman in the video.
“Public employee union activists showed the utter hypocrisy of their campaign against the special election initiatives on Thursday at a rally in LA’s Pershing Square,” reports CC4Truth.
While $115 million has been spent by public employee unions to oppose the reform initiatives and promote a message that the voices of their members will be silenced if Prop. 75 passes, an angry mob of dues paying union members showed what little respect they have for free speech.
Two Los Angeles television stations caught on tape a hyped up mob of union activists intimidating and roughing up a woman who had the courage to speak out in favor of the four reform initiatives.
Whipping the crowd into a frenzy was none other than Speaker Fabian Nunez, who was a featured speaker at the rally in Pershing Square. At the very least, Nunez - a former union organizer himself - has a duty to issue a public apology to this woman on behalf the union bosses who control him. That is, unless the Speaker believes that violence and thuggery are acceptable forms of public expression.
With every call to action, the unions are desperately trying to rally the troops and confuse the public. Same strategy as always.
We hope California voters know better.
UPDATE: (10/29)
GatewayPundit is reminded of another example.
Clark Baker wonders why Dems are turning a blind eye?
Michelle Malkin has picked up the story
Welcome readers!
RELATED:
Special Election: Gov. Schwarzenegger
Takes The Stage On T.V.
Unions Raise More Than $80 Million
To Defeat Schwarzenegger’s Initiatives
(includes many more links)
October 28th, 2005 at 1:31 pm
California’s Propositions
On November 8 the voters of California will cast their votes on 8 ballot measures that could have waited until next June.
Here is a perspective.
October 28th, 2005 at 8:37 pm
I am a Republican, and I work for one of the unions you see in the video — the purple shirts of the Service Employees International Union (for me it’s a job, not a lifestyle).
SEIU activists are the some of the LEAST democratic, tolerant and respectful people I’ve ever met. Intimidation is a common strategy, even among staff members. It’s not surprising at all to see this woman treated so badly at a union rally.
October 29th, 2005 at 3:22 am
Arnold vs Unions
According to an AP article, Govenor Schwarzenegger is promoting a special election ballot, which has raised the ire of Democrats, who see this as a means to weaken the political clout of public employee unions.
The initiative would require the un…
October 29th, 2005 at 8:33 am
Arnold vs. the Union Thugs
Sounds kinda’ like the script for a movie. Suffice it to say, things are getting heated out in the Golden State. The Union crowd has spent an estimated 115 million so far in opposition to proposition 75 which would require…
October 29th, 2005 at 9:01 am
Somewhere in the process, these “public servants” have forgotten what public “servant” means. I am not suggesting that they be treated like slaves. But it would be nice if they remembered that they are employees. My theory is, if you don’t like your job, find another one.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:34 am
Reminds me of the Protest Warriors who went to Crawford to be part of the anti-Sheehan rally. They had ironic signs signalling their pro-war bias in smaller print. The pro-Bush counter-protestors didn’t take the time to read the signs, thought they were pro-Sheehan, and proceeded to grab the Protest Warriors’ signs and stomp on them, tear them up and send the wimpy Protest Warriors scurrying.
Also reminds me of that young male Republican caught on tape during the GOP convention last year acutally kicking a protesting woman after she had been knocked to the ground. Now that’s outrage! Kicking a woman while she’s down.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:49 pm
Jim Jones, I don’t believe that for a second. We have many pictures and video of Dems intimidating Republicans (especially lonely girls like above), but I have never seen any of Republicans intimidating Dems.
October 29th, 2005 at 1:05 pm
[...] California Conservative is on top of this story. [...]
October 29th, 2005 at 1:33 pm
Check out GatewayPundit’s recollections of union thugs picking on a 3-year-old girl.
Jim Jones’ story is as phony as his name.
October 29th, 2005 at 3:36 pm
Wow Jim - I’m retired LAPD and a licensed private investigator. Please post some info on the victim so that I can get investigators to check out your story.
October 29th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
What do you expect out of a guy named “Jim Jones”? He has drunk deeply from the LLL/Kos “reality-based community”* Kool Aid well.
*Their “reality” is much akin to the “reality” that people on LSD perceive to be “real”.
October 29th, 2005 at 4:58 pm
And what was the anti-union woman doing at a pro-union rally? If she pulled that during the heyday of unions, she’d be dead. They just tore her sign up and roughed her up a little bit? Very, very tame by historical standards.
I’m voting for Arnolds initiatives, but I think the unions have a right to rally in peace without being harrassed by the other side.
October 29th, 2005 at 5:56 pm
Conflict Resolution, Union Style
Unions, those strongholds of tolerance and rational discussion of ideas…
…well, if you call “rational discussion” attempting to attack people that happen to disagree with their ideas.
Yes. Those unions.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:32 pm
When $115 million doesn’t do the job, maybe a pop in the mouth will
Political Teen:
Two Los Angeles television stations caught on tape a hyped up mob of union activists intimidating and roughing up a woman who had the courage to speak out in favor of the four reform initiatives.
Whipping the crowd into a frenzy w…
October 29th, 2005 at 6:36 pm
[...] Others on the story: Malkin, California Conservative, Museum of the Left Wing [...]
October 29th, 2005 at 7:28 pm
This display is grotesque. The fact that one dissenter has to be brutalized by a group of “union” workers smacks of Totalianarism (which Hitler ruled by).
What will be next? Authorcratic rule by a few select people in the union? What will be the consequences of dissent? The lead pipe to the back of the head or a drive by shooting?
As a worker, I am disgusted with these actions. Higher wages are good - until the number of union members suddenly declines (due to unexplained actions).
Work well and live free.
October 30th, 2005 at 1:46 am
unions have a right to rally in peace without being harrassed
Yes, Bret, it must be a horrendous experience for the hundreds of poor union workers to have been oppressed by the girl.
/sarcasm off
October 30th, 2005 at 2:54 am
Kick Her Here’s a description.
October 30th, 2005 at 3:30 am
I suppose the SEIU spokespeople could make the same claim as the College Republicans from the story above: “this is an issue between the two people involved, and doesn’t reflect on the organization.”
In any event, this is an issue that always arises whenever demonstration mobs are mustered. Of course there will always be conflicting opinions for any issue that large numbers of people take interest. Of course it shouldn’t devolve to beating up your opponents. Of course free speech should be tolerated, regardless of the point of view.
But to Bret’s point above, we’re all adults here (or if you’re not, I think you’ll still get the point :-)
If you show up at the Our Friends Social Club in Queens wearing an FBI jacket, don’t expect to receive a warm handshake. If you show up to an ACT UP rally denying the link between HIV and AIDS, don’t expect to receive hugs and kisses. If you show up as Coretta Scott King at the next White Aryan Resistance rally, don’t expect a friendly ear.
Of course I’m exaggerating to make my point. Group action can become dangerous–but mostly when antagonized. And antagonization takes place when a small group of counterprotesters faces a large group deliberately to oppose their message. If they were equal in size, this would have been an old-fashioned rumble instead of a one-person beatdown.
Teddy
Ozone Park, Queens
October 30th, 2005 at 5:23 am
Teddy, you are talking nonsense: the Republican incident was one person (a nazi? a non-member? …) attacking one person. In the *many* socialistic incidents we have seen in recent years, it is *many* *members* against a few; read the above again: “Opponents tried to hit her with their signs and some blocked news cameras as she argued her point. The crowd turns quickly, grabbing her signs and tearing them up. Even a woman wearing an orange security vest rips up the “Vote Yes†signs.—
The lefties are very much more violent, not just in the US but anywhere. Few people dare to have conservative stickers on their cars, while lefties usually don’t have to worry.
October 31st, 2005 at 11:31 am
and these people have the audacity to call me an angry white male because i’m republican. hey dems, go f*ck yourselves.
October 31st, 2005 at 2:57 pm
Look - this wasn’t some innocent random protester here. She has been a mainstay of Rep activism and organizer of protests in L.A. for awhile. I’ve seen her here before. SO, it is not as though she didn’t know EXACTLY what her wading in to the crowd would do. That was her point - to provoke a reaction. So please don’t pretend this was just some poor wide eyed innocent girl. I certainly don’t agree with tearing up her signs and all, but what was she thinking? Kind of makes you wonder how much she got paid by the Team Arnold folks . . .
October 31st, 2005 at 4:14 pm
Rob,
Thanks for offering your perspective. If you’ve seen her before (and we presume that you participate in union gatherings), then it only makes our point stronger: Given that she was a “recognized” Arnold supporter, why would the the mob go after her? Better to ignore than to highlight.
No one is arguing that she’s a “wide eyed innocent girl,” as you say. She could be a professional protester. Doesn’t matter. The union has plenty, too.
But the issue is that the assembled union members did not allow her voice to be heard - albeit dissenting - which underscores the hypocrisy of their position. It’s not about freedom of speech, it’s about political activism for the union agenda and stifling any who disagree.
Very well. Just as long as union dues to pay for it are given with permission by their members. That’s what Prop. 75 achieves.
October 31st, 2005 at 5:18 pm
So just one political-philosophical question - do you think corporations should have to have an annual checkoff from each individual shareholder before they can use their sharholder’s money for political purposes? Or should labor unions unilaterally disarm? Isn’t this really the reason why alot of corporations are giving to this thing? I don’t expect Arnold to be true to his word about endorsing such a thing next year (BIG surprise) even though he said he would.
I mean, if companies don’t have unionized workers in the company, why are they giving huge sums to it when it wouldn’t affect them anyway? Answer - because they know if the unions political campaign funds are cut off or dramatically reduced, there will be open season on worker protections in Califrania through the ballot box.
It only affects public employee unions - you know your local first responders - the ones you guys called heroes when it suited you after 9-11 and waived the flag to get Bush elected, but now demonize as “union bosses”. It is despicable.
Look, I’m not a union member and the princple of democratizing how your dues are spent is a valid one (which already exists by the way) - but that isn’t really what is behind this thing. It’s really about bleeding the unions dry now so they can’t fight Arnold next year and he knows it. He os just too much of a coward to say it.
November 6th, 2005 at 5:09 pm
[...] [Related coverage: Union Mob Strongarms A Single Schwarzenegger Supporter] [...]
November 6th, 2005 at 5:48 pm
[...] [Related coverage: Union Mob Strongarms A Single Schwarzenegger Supporter] [...]
November 8th, 2005 at 5:45 am
[...] RELATED: Union Mob Strongarms A Single Schwarzenegger Supporter Whose voices are being silenced? [...]