Do you want the Employee Free Choice Act? Do you want progressive federal judges?

[Unsane]

Then get off the "punishing Lieberman" kick, folks. There is a bigger and more important picture here. I think Obama realizes the GOP is gonna try to block each and every one of his attempts at getting ANYTHING done over the next four years. While what Lieberman has done is pretty crappy, I'm not ready to sacrifice America's future in order to "get revenge."

[Lerkfish]

1. that sounds like a false dichotomy to me, why aren't both possible?

punishing lieberman AND getting the Employee free choice act?

are you saying the viability of good govt. comes down to coddling one solitary benedict arnold? if so, our democracy is more screwn than we ever knewn!

[Unsane]

2. Because Lieberman will block cloture.

[Lerkfish]

3. but I must insist that the best response to an extortionist is to ignore them.

its better to work harder and convince other republicans to step across the aisle than to reward backstabbers with too much power.

of course, that is just my opinion, but I'm sticking with it.

[demosincebirth]

4. Maybe the senate dems should just take Lieberman to the wood shed and

leave it at that.

[Touchdown]

5. All Reid (or whoever replaces him) has to do is call the GOP's bluff.

He's never told them to go ahead and filibuster. He just lets them win.

The next time a goper threatens a filibuster, he should tell them to get a piss bucket and some food, because they're going to be there a long while. I can't see Inhoffe lasting more than an hour before he's ready to lay down.

[Unsane]

6. rather not have to go there

[Touchdown]

9. Reid never went there in the first place.

How to you know the Repugs won't pussy out?

[bigwillq]

7. All of this is making Lieberman more important

than he is. We don't need him. He is not a Democrat anymore. He is an independent. He should be kicked out of the caucus and stripped of his committee duties. We owe him nothing.

[PaDem]

8. Question about the Employee Free Choice Act......

can someone explain to me why the elimination of the private ballot is an important piece of this legislation? I can't seem to put two and two together on this one.

[GrantDem]

10. doesn't eliminate it...

Corporate anti-union talking point. It puts the choice to have an election in the hands of the workers where it belongs and not at the unilateral will of the employer.

[Unsane]

11. EFCA simply gives workers another avenue (majority sign up).

Workers can still have a secret ballot NLRB sponsored election if 30% of workers request it.

The secret ballot process is nothing like any democratic elections in our society because one side has all the power. The employer controls the voters’ paychecks and livelihood, has unlimited access to speak against the union in the workplace while restricting pro-union speech and has the freedom to intimidate and coerce the voters.

[Touchdown]

12. Wouldn't it be nice to have a second election for Obama, just to make sure?

That's what workers have to do now when they vote in a union. First a 50%+1 vote (usually in a=the form of card check). Second, a NLRB vote at the work site, supervised by company yes men... the so-called "secret ballot".

Nothing else in this Democracy has 2 elections. EFCA eliminates the second vote, bringing it in line with the rest of America.