Norma Rae Webster is a minimum-wage worker in a cotton mill that has taken too much of a toll on the health of her family for her to ignore her Dickensian working conditions. After hearing a speech by New York union organizer Reuben Warshowsky, Norma Rae decides to join the effort to unionize her shop. This causes conflict at home when Norma Rae’s husband Sonny assumes that her activism is a result of a romance between herself and Reuben. Despite the pressure brought to bear by management, Norma Rae successfully orchestrates an election to unionize the factory, resulting in victory for the union and presumably capitulation for the demands. When Reuben first comes to the factory he tries to get all the workers to start a union, but is soon chased out of the small town. Days later, Norma Rae shuts down her machine and stands on top of her work table striking. Soon the whole factory is with her and a union starts.

Back in the day, companies like the one depicted in this movie, abused and mistreated their workers.  In many ways, they were slaves, working for pennies while management lived like kings.  Unions helped correct this wrong by organizing workers against the company.  This was a very good move because it forced companies to do the right thing.  Back then, there was very little justice.

Unions were needed back then to remind owners and managers that the working class deserve better.

But I’m not so sure unions are needed today.

In a fast-moving world, there isn’t a company in the United States that could hid from this kind of mistreatment.  The ones that can hid are usually criminal in nature, but I’m talking about legitimate companies.  Company owners and managers today are looking to do their best for their company as well as their employees.  But today, unions enjoy a power they shouldn’t have gotten in the first place: political clout.

Unions made sense back when information was closely guarded and living standards were low.  They did their patriotic duty to make sure that no one was getting hurt on the job and if someone was hurt, the company would take care of them.  They did their civic duty by encouraging all union members to help out each other in times of need.

Today, all employees, whether they are in a union or not, enjoy workman’s compensation.  All employers are required to pay a federally-mandated minimum wage.  Finally, there are laws on the books now for employers to provide a safe working environment.

So, what exactly do we need unions for now?

Unions today have too much power.  In fact, their ability to fund-raise on behalf of an entire party (Democrats) is mind-blowing.  When unions have the ability to bully a company into either unionizing or having a protest outside their doors, it shows that they are no longer interested in helping their fellow workers.  They’ve become what they sought to fight: a big organization that takes advantage of those less fortunate.

Why are unions heavily invested in the health care bill?  Most union workers get health care either through their company or through the union itself.

Why do unions care if an Eagle Boy Scout cleans up park?

Why do unions want to punish good teachers to reward bad teachers?

Are unions still needed in some sectors of the market?  Probably.  But when unions start doing things that are counter-productive and only care about their own self-interest, they stop being community advocates and become thugs that feel entitled to the world.

The White House wants people to report “disinformation” to flag@whitehouse.com.  Barack Obama has even said he doesn’t want people who disagree with him to “do a whole lot of talking“.

This is nothing short of a desperate “President” trying to scare his critics into backing down.  But, hey, if he wants to get a whole bunch of e-mails, that’s his business.  I think We the People should report our neighbors for spreading disinformation.  And I say we start with the Obama supporters.

No doubt that this community activist has enlisted a large army of kool-aid drinkers into doing his bidding.  To level the playing field, we should do the same.  In the next week, I’ll be debuting a website where fellow conservatives can report Obama supporters.  Upload pictures of their bumper stickers (including license plates).  Use the Freedom of Information Act in your state to obtain their address, phone number, and any other identifying information.  That information will be publicly displayed for people to see.

Unlike the White House, this list will not be illegal since the information is publicly available.  What people decide to do with the information is not up for the state to decide.

Once I have the website up and running, I’ll make another announcement on this site and on Twitter.

They didn’t take food stamps, or WIC, or anything like that.  They just worked hard to raise my sister and me.  Save as much money as they could, bought a house in the suburbs, and sent us to college.

This is the American dream that I know.  You come from nothing and raise a family.

I don’t understand why people see the government as someone to take care of them.  My parents didn’t have to get help from the government.  Why should anyone else?

Today, we have social security (the biggest Ponzi scheme in the history of the WORLD), medicare, medicaid, Section 8 housing…and now, the government is going to offer healthcare.  Why should this be a government responsibility?

No where in the Constitution does it say that the government is supposed to be a rich uncle who provides everything for you.  People have used the preamble in Section 8 to justify these programs (“Congress shall…provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”, emphasis mine).  This never meant individual welfare.  While the government does have a vested-interest in the health and wellbeing of it’s citizens, it must do so by providing the environment to thrive, not just hand out help.

Allow me to digress a bit to illistrate this point.  Late last week, I attended a neighborhood watch meeting.  A few of the residence in my community came by and heard an officer share what’s going around the neighborhood.  What was interesting was that this was the first time any of us met each other for the first time.  One resident, who lived there since the community was built, said that this was the first time for her to meet me.  (I moved in about a year and a half ago.)

This is very common: people who are neighboors have never met each other.  Only see each other as they pass by.  Only see the need to talk to them because their music is too loud or the grass hasn’t been cut.  Sometimes, they won’t even do that!  To avoid confrontation, many will just call the police and make a complaint.

So instead of walking over and asking kindly as a neighbor to cut the grass, turn down the music, they call the goverernment.  This woman who had lived in the community since it was built said, “It’s a sad reflection of our society.”

I say it’s a sad reflection of ourselves.  We wouldn’t need the government to babysit us if neighbors helped each other eagerly.  We’d help eacher eagerly if we got to know each other personally and not just by an address.  Everyone goes through hard times.  The government should not be the first place someone turns to for help: it should be their neighbors, friends, and family.

If we simply took the time to get to know each other, we wouldn’t need any of these government programs.  If anything, the government would look at our communities and say, “Wow, what can I do to make sure these communities flurish?”

I’d answer, “Absolutely nothing.”

Despite what you’ll hear from either the libs or the conservatives, the case is about the constitutional right of the people amending their own constitution.  It was not about gay marriage.

The court decision to uphold the initiative is the correct one.  The court, ruling 6-1, said:

In a sense, petitioners’ and the attorney general’s complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California Constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it.

This brings integrety to the constitution.  It means that any measure approved by the people would be amended as voted.

Consider the opposite: let’s say that the court ruled that the constition cannot be ammended by the people.  Prop 8 is void.  So what if the LGBT community wanted to pass an amendment saying that marriage is for anyone and everyone?  Because the court ruled that amendments by the people must first be approved by the court, people can say that amendment isn’t really the will of the people, fosters racism, insensitivity, etc.

This was a good decision not because it protects marriage, but because it protects the constitution of California.

First a disclaimer: This is probably going to be one of the most controversial posts I’ve written.  I say this for several reasons: First, I don’t think America is ready to hear it.  Second, I will be reflecting on the state of society.  Third, I will be talking about a minority group who has historically been singled out for simply having a different skin color than what was considered normal.  Please understand that the thoughts and ideas addressed here should be considered as a whole.

It’s closing onto two weeks since Obama was christened as the new President.  Before he was sworn in, I wrote how Obama would first be judged as a black president before he would be judged as a president.  I stand by this article.  I will, however, be expanding on this post.

Yesterday, the Republican National Committee nominated their first black chairman.  Being a republican, I’m excited by this, even though I don’t really pay attention to the going-ons of the national committee.  But I don’t think I’m excited for the right reason.

People have said that it’s historic that a black person can become president after decades of racism.  Overcoming all adversity, fulfilling Martin Luther King’s dream.  But what was his dream?

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I believe that Obama was voted president not by the content of his character but the color of his skin.  And now, to avoid the label racism, the RNC is following suite.

Obama’s character has been questioned since his nomination.  His pastor, his relationship with a known and convicted terrorist, his lack of any credible leadership experience were completely ignored because of one reason: “change”  It didn’t matter to the American people what kind of change.  Obama could have been white and won the election.  But the fact that he is black gave America the opprotunity to forgive themselves of any racial prejustice they had.  The election was about change but race was what Obama ran on, whether he knew it or not.

The racism that is currently permiating America is very subtile.  People are so afraid of being called racist that they will do things they normally wouldn’t do so they can avoid being labeled one.  Consider the appointment of Roland Burris.  Before he was appointed, Obama and his fellow democrats announced that they would not honor any appointment by now impeached Rob Blagojevich.  Obama was ademant that any appointment by Blagojevich would be tainted.  His stance changed when Burris was appointed. Blagojevich, counting on the fact that Burris is black, knew that the Senate would have to seat the only black senator.  If they didn’t, they would be labeled a bigot.  Obama suddently backs down and quietly tells the Senate to seat Burris, completely ignoring the fact that several days ago, he wouldn’t support any person appointed by Blagojevich.

Racism comes in many forms.  Anything done to treat someone different because of the color of their skin is racism.  If a black person is denied access to a building because he’s black, that’s racism.  But if that same black person is encouraged and ushered into the building because he’s black, it’s still racism.

I couldn’t help but overhear one of my co-workers the day after the election.  He called several people and asked if they helped write history.  It’s sad because the only reason it was history was because Obama is black.  If he was white, would there have been the same pomp and circumstance?  If he was white, would there have been mad hocking of merchandise?  If he was white, would we even be having this conversation?

America, you are racist, even if you do it with a smile on your face.  Yes, let put black people in power to make yourselves look good.  Let’s completely ignore everything else because you want to save face.  You don’t want to be called racist, right?

I’d rather be labeled a racist and judge a man by his character than be labeled “open-minded” because I support Michael Steele.  Racism has turned from hatrid to undeserved respect.  As a real minority, I find it sickening.