A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

231,147 signatures required to repeal union busting SB 5 in Ohio

Posted: Jun 29, 2011

shattering the previous record of 902,450 set in 1998. The referendum will be on the Nov 8 ballot and by all indicators, it is GOING DOWN. Gov Kasich thinks they are all "misled." He must be referring to his own misguided governance.

Way to go, Ohio!

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/ohio-news/senate-bill-5-repeal-effort-sets-record-1196737.html

;

No, Kasich is correct. Unions have become criminal.nm - FormerUnionMember

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Try telling that to the 1.3 mil bipartisans who - delivered the signatures today,

[ In Reply To ..]
Are they all criminals too? The"card-carrying" republican police chief (or so he claims) is elated to see both parties in his state come together to reinstate collective bargaining. He probably does not appreciate being told negotiating with the city over the number of staff or police cars needed to effectively do his job is now against the law. Can't say that I blame him. Anyway, the only thing misleading them all is their governor.

Care to elaborate on your union horror story? Which union? What happened? Do tell.

And since there are over 11.5 million people in the state - those 1.3 m are....sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Are just a handful. And they certainly do not represent what is best. I would say not all are criminals, but many are and there are many who will follow the leader and some that are just plain ill-informed.

John Kaisch is not misleading us. He's doing what is right for us. The unions are not. The people who are misleading are the union thugs. Thank God we have people like John Kaisch.

1.3 is no where near close to even consider saying they are doing what the whole state wants. It's less than 1% of the state.

I agree. Kasich is trying to save the budget and save - Ohio. I am so sick of the unions. They

[ In Reply To ..]
have had their place in the past to protect employees, but they have gone overboard and have become very corrupt. The people under these union leader "thugs" become almost brainwashed. I used to be one of them.. no more.

Unions aren't for everyone - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
just like tatoos, smoking, drinking, premarital sex, promiscuity, birth control, abortion, gay lifestyles, inter-racial marriage, weekly church attendance, converting to Islam, military service, cult membership, gun ownership, hate speech, being a democrat, being a republican, ad infinitum...all of which are legal activities and matters of personal choice.

If unions weren't your cup of tea, no problem and more power to you for getting out. Your personal choice and your right. The buck stops here. Preventing you from removing others rights to choose to be or not to be part of them and attempting to eradicate them from the American landscape is also a matter of personal choice and a right, and one you are going to see vigorously exercised in the upcoming political seasons.

Umm--Looks like 10% to me - a lot for a referendum

[ In Reply To ..]
Got to love those republican math skills, again. Too bad they are so against public education.

Okay, so 10%. That is still not enough to - begin saying

[ In Reply To ..]
It represents the state. It does not!

Gotta love those democrats...always condescending.

But it is more than enough to get it on the ballot - for a referndum challenge.

[ In Reply To ..]
and is perfectly in compliance with Ohio's election laws. Does democracy scare you? Every voter is welcome to participate and as such what the whole state REALLY wants will become abundantly clear after the vote count.

Would you mind opening the post named "irrelevant..." under this same thread and answering the questions in the last paragraph about what the whole state was and was not voting for when they sent those reps to the capitol?

I agree. Gotta love those condecending democrats every bit as much as we love those name-calling pubs.

I am sorry. - However

[ In Reply To ..]
Whenever I point out your math mistakes, you always accuse me of being condescending. Perhaps you should just refrain from any type of math or graph activity until you can take time to brush up on those skills. Pointing out the errors in your thinking is not being condescending, I am just trying to enlighten you. Perhaps your other political thinking is wrong, too?

Ecuse me? - see message!

[ In Reply To ..]
You know I made a mistake. Have you ever heard of a mistake. I'm sure you think you don't ever make them, but I do. Nobody is perfect (at least us that is) I'm sure you think you are different.

I accused you of being condescending because you were. That's not an accusation, that's just the plain truth and you proved it once again in this post.

Perhaps you should not be telling people what they should or should not be doing. It is not your place. And then on top of that you say I accuse you of being condescending and in the very next sentence you do it again with your statement that I should refrain from any activity. Well excuse me for making a mistake - one of which I admitted.

And who the heck are you to tell anyone their political thinking is wrong. Why, cos its not what you believe.

People make mistakes. I know that's hard for you to believe but they do. Perhaps you should refrain from telling people their political thinking is wrong if they make a mistake on something. I know lots of politicians who are wrong on issues and make mistakes, but hey if they belong to your party that's okay.

What you said was so uncalled for. You have no right to tell anyone what they should "perhaps" do or don't do. And you have no right to tell anyone their political thinking is wrong. Besides you have no idea what my political view points on any of the issues. You make your statement based on what? That I wrote 1% or 10%. AND that I admitted to. Geez talk about running over a victim you just hit and knocked down with your car. So you go and base your decision that I should refrain from any political viewpoints because I made a mistake and put 1% instead of 10%. Well that tells me a lot about your thinking.

Fuzzy math - no1joe

[ In Reply To ..]
1.3 mil people out of 11.5 mil people = 11.3%.

However, if you take into consideration that approximately 23.5% of those 11.5 mil people are under age 18 (unable to vote), equaling 2.7 mil people, then the total voting population is 8.8 mil, raising that percentage to approximately 14.8%.

Further take into consideration that a certain number of that 8.8 mil were either not asked (curious as to whether they tried to petition active military, those who live out of the state part time, etc.) or unable to provide an answer, it would raise the percentage of those in support even higher.

That's still now here near enough to claim - they represent the entire state

[ In Reply To ..]
Fuzzy math is trying to finagle a way to make it look right when it isn't. The unions do not represent what the people of the state want.

Says you - no1joe

[ In Reply To ..]
Your first sentence is right on when it comes to the other post claiming that 1.3 million people equals less than 1% of the population of Ohio.

Your second statement is your opinion. At this point, without other information, you can't make an accurate calculation as to what percentage of the state wants what. However, for a "guesstimation" attempt, if 1.3 mil signed out of a population of 8.8 mil (11.5 - 2.7 under 18), you have a baseline estimate of 14.8% in favor. That's baseline. I seriously doubt that they petitioned every single resident of Ohio, so that 14.8% could very well go up or down. Guess we'll all have to wait and see which way it goes.

Evidently neither do the SB5 folks. Otherwise, 1.3 mil could not - have succeeded

[ In Reply To ..]
in bringing the bill out from behind closed doors and placing it on the ballot where it belongs. Again, not until Nov 9 will we know what the majority of Ohians think of the great GOP governors/reps 2010 bait-and-switch tactics and its immensely unpopular proceeds.

American people do not approve of union busting - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
Take a look at the polls. Two thirds of Americans do not approve of union busting and stripping collective bargaining rights. Those who approve of these union-busting measures are in the minority.

Irrelevant. OH requirements are OH requirements. - If you dont like them

[ In Reply To ..]
float a referendum petition of your own to have them changed and see how far you get.

Are you seriously saying that "many" of those petitioners are criminals who don't have minds of their own and are too out of touch to know what they are doing just because you do not agree with their political views? Really?

The referendum will be put up for a vote according to election law protocols now that the criteria has not only been met, but exceeded more than 5 1/2 times over. Only AFTER the results are in will you or anyone know what the whole state wants. At this moment, we can only say what you don't want and what 1.3 million petitioners do. If you are so confident that you speak for the whole state, then you should have no problem with subjecting the measure to the democratic process or a ballot challenge.

Did it ever occur to you that when Ohio sent their state reps to the capitol, in their wildest imaginations, they could not foresee national GOP agenda union-busting legislation being played out on their own turf? Which of those current reps actually campaigned specifically on gutting worker's rights? Can you provide specific examples? And while we are at it, please explain how making collective bargaining illegal balances state budgets. I would appreciate some specifics on that as well, as in dollars and cents, which are what comprise budgets.

Agree agree!!! - Ohioan

[ In Reply To ..]
Couldn't have said it better. I won't work for a company that has a union. There was a time and a place for a union. Now a union serves the lazy.

how did this get here.. - Ohioan

[ In Reply To ..]
it was supposed to go up under the 11.5 million post. :(

Yeah. Those police, firefighters, teachers, and nurses - sure are a lazy bunch.

[ In Reply To ..]
Oh brother (rolling eyes). It does not get more ridiculous than this.

You aren't the only one rolling your eyes - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
This anti-union and anti-public employee talk really gets old. How do these people think American workers gained any rights in the workplace? It was because of union representation...geez!

Geez squared. - Unbelievable. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Unions used to be a GOOD thing. They have become - far too powerful and actually abusive.

[ In Reply To ..]
WAKE UP AMERICA! Geez yourselves. Ignorance is bliss ??

Oh, yeah, like I am going to reveal personal info. - I can tell you the union was intimidating

[ In Reply To ..]
making members feel they had no choices, especially in that they expected everyone to vote for only Democrats. THAT in itself is criminal, and it happens all over the country. Unions believe they are "entitled" to so many benefits that the private sector must pay for themselves, then the taxpayer helps the unions. Its all gotten old and way out of proportion.

Asking for the name of a union is personal information? - Who knew?

[ In Reply To ..]
How did they "make YOU FEEL" you had no choices? Hypnosis? Drugs in the coffee pot? Subliminal messaging? Did they threaten to fire you if you did not vote for democrats? How did they take charge of YOUR feelings and gain control over them? I find that positively fascinating. Please elaborate.

The fact that union mgmt and large numbers of their members are democrats is not exactly a secret. That this would become apparent in meetings is no suprise either, but unless they abused their authority or instituted policies that threatened your job, reduced your pay or benefits, obstructed your upward mobility or otherwise employed discriminatory practices against GOP and politically independent members, it is not CRIMINAL for them to elect representatives who best serve their interests, for heaven's sake.

Wow. When did it become despicible for employees/workers to aspire to the best benefits they can possible get? MTs express this desire all the time. Job-seekers place just as much emphasis on the nature of their employee benefits as they do on salary when accepting or declining offers, whether they are applying for private or public sector jobs. Oh, I get it. Public employees are paid with taxpayer dollars, so they belong to some subclass of the employee pool underbelly, are supposed to settle for less and are not allowed to spend their SALARIES which they have EARNED on good benefits. This is a privilege reserved strictly for non-union workers. NOT.

Unions negotiate good benefits and fair employer/employee contributions structures. The benefits are not free. They come with a pricetag which is paid out of their paychecks just like any other workers. Without them, many employers behave just like the MTSOs do and simply exploit their workers straight into the poor house.

Question. How do taxpayers "help" unions?

answer - anon

[ In Reply To ..]
Growing up in Michigan in the heyday of the United Auto Workers, I long assumed that labor unions were part of the natural order of things.

That's no longer clear. Last month, the Labor Department reported that private-sector unions lost 834,000 members last year and now represent only 7.2 percent of private-sector employees. That's down from the all-time peak of 36 percent in 1953-54.

But union membership is still growing in the public sector. Last year, 37.4 percent of public sector employees were union members. That percentage was down near zero in the 1950s. For the first time in history, a majority of union members are government employees.

In my view, the outlook for both private- and public-sector unionism is problematic.

Private-sector unionism is adversarial. Economic studies show that such unions do extract premium wages and benefits from employers. But that puts employers at a competitive disadvantage. Back in the 1950s, the Big Three auto companies dominated the industry and were at the top of the Fortune 500. Last year, General Motors and Chrysler went bankrupt and are now owned by the government and the UAW. Ford only barely escaped.

Adversarial unionism tends to produce rigid work rules that retard adaptation and innovation. We have had a three-decade experiment pitting UAW work rules against the flexible management of Japanese- and European-owned non-union auto firms.

The results are in. Yes, clueless management at the Detroit firms for years ignored problems with product quality and made bonehead investment mistakes. But adversarial unionism made it much, much harder for Detroit to produce high-quality vehicles than it was for non-unionized companies.

As economist Barry Hirsch points out, non-union manufacturing employment rose from 12 million to 14 million between 1973 and 2006. In those years, union manufacturing employment dropped from 8 million to 2 million. "Unionism," Hirsch writes, "is a poor fit in a dynamic, competitive economy."

Moreover, federal laws passed since the 1950s now protect workers from racial and sex discrimination, safety hazards and pension failure. They don't need unions to do this any more.

Public-sector unionism is a very different animal from private-sector unionism. It is not adversarial but collusive. Public-sector unions strive to elect their management, which in turn can extract money from taxpayers to increase wages and benefits -- and can promise pensions that future taxpayers will have to fund.

The results are plain to see. States like New York, New Jersey and California, where public-sector unions are strong, now face enormous budget deficits and pension liabilities. In such states, the public sector has become a parasite sucking the life out of the private-sector economy. Not surprisingly, Americans have been steadily migrating out of such states and into states like Texas, where public-sector unions are weak and taxes are much lower.

Barack Obama is probably the most union-friendly president since Lyndon Johnson. He has obviously been unable to stop the decline of private-sector unionism. But he is doing his best to increase the power -- and dues income -- of public-sector unions.

One-third of last year's $787 billion stimulus package was aid to state and local governments -- an obvious attempt to bolster public-sector unions. And it was a successful one: While the private sector has lost 7 million jobs, the number of public-sector jobs has risen. The number of federal government jobs has been increasing by 10,000 a month, and the percentage of federal employees earning over $100,000 has jumped to 19 percent during the recession.

Obama and his party are acting in collusion with unions that contributed something like $400,000,000 to Democrats in the 2008 campaign cycle. Public-sector unionism tends to be a self-perpetuating machine that extracts money from taxpayers and then puts it on a conveyor belt to the Democratic Party.

But it may not turn out to be a perpetual-motion machine. Public-sector employees are still heavily outnumbered by those who depend on the private sector for their livelihoods. The next Congress may not be as willing as this one has been to bail out state governments dominated by public-sector unions. Voters may bridle at the higher taxes needed to pay for $100,000-plus pensions for public employees who retire in their 50s. Or they may move, as so many have already done, to states like Texas.

Obama's Democrats have used the financial crisis to expand the public sector and the public-sector unions. But voters seem to be saying, "Enough."
-Michael Barone

The answer is Corporations want to totally decimate the working classes. - Unions and Democrats are the last representatives

[ In Reply To ..]
Watch Hot Coffee on HBO and see how Karl Rose, Chamber of Commerce, and Republicans have taken away your rights. They are coming for your 5 cents a line next.

That is such garbage.. and its the UNIONS who - basically take members hostage!!

[ In Reply To ..]
I should know. I was a member in the past.. intimidating union leaders are crooks.

Thank you for the fine print reference - at the bottom

[ In Reply To ..]
letting us know the identity of the author, Fox News contributor Michael Barone. To complete the reference, I am providing the title(s) of the piece (he used more than one), which you so conspicuously omitted: Public-Sector Unions Bleed Taxpayers to Help Dems was one. Adversarial Unions, Collusive Unions was another. Below is a link to one of the many conservative publications that carried this article.

There is so much garbage here it would take the whole day to attack it all, so I will confine myself to two of the most blaring examples. To hear Barone tell it, unions single-handedly brought down the auto industry, an easily debunkable notion by simply reviewing the mountains of data that barely mentions unions (except when reporting their cooperation with the restructuring phase) once you take the research beyond the right-wing ragosphere. Hello. Now hear this. Unions do not and never did OWN the auto industry, it being a group of private corps with millions of shareholders that appear daily on the stock exchange. Any regressive decisions that resulted in its decline were made by CEOs (such as failing to read the writing on the wall about rising fuel prices and react accordingly by abandoning their beloved SUV products in favor of fuel efficent ones).

The other preposterous assertion is that unions are no longer needed on account of those federal laws passed since the 1950s to protect workers from racial and sex discrimination, safety hazards and pension failure. As my example of the BS factor in this folly, I have chosen child labor laws which were not passed until 1938 (after Depression-Era adults became desperate enough that they were willing to work for the same pittance wages paid to children). This occurred only after decades of organized activism. Hundreds of thousands of children are still exploited as we speak as US farm labor, some of whom work 10-hour days. The National Council on Safety has dubbed this the second most dangerous occupation in the US. If you follow the second link in support of this, you will see the picture of a 12-year-old girl picking cucumbers in Michigan...right under Barone's nose in his very own state. Despite this, we have active GOP and tpot initiatives which aim to repeal these laws.

As long as corporations are founded on corruption and greed and remain free of regulation and oversight, there will be a place for union to serve as watchdogs and to give voice to workers from all types from all walks of life.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/02/08/public-sector_unions_bleed_taxpayers_to_help_dems_100206.html

http://www.kintera.org/c.nlIWIgN2JwE/b.5800699/k.393C/US_End_Child_Labor_in_the_Fields/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx

Thank you for your well-written post - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I wish I had more time to write excellent,thoughtful posts such as this. But, since I don't, thank you very much.

Just one of the 14 million unemployed blowing off a little steam here. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
A line or two of recognition and support of these issues helps more than you can imagine. Thanks.

the new union label - look for it

[ In Reply To ..]

...

Like she said, one has to get beyond the - right-wing ragosphere

[ In Reply To ..]
to access an accurate analysis of the issue. Your post is an excellent example of this. Wow. Cutting and pasting the entire Wall Street Bailout page of the family friendly akdart.com site. Impressive work.

Reminds me of the bibliography for Chapter 12 of Mein Kampf. - LOL.

[ In Reply To ..]

Another one of those posts where there is a catchy back story - but

[ In Reply To ..]
but when you start asking questions, things just don't add up and so you can only assume it is another "falsehood."

That's good--I was starting to worry Ohio was going to have to move to Texas or Florida. - Nm

[ In Reply To ..]

Similar Messages:

Nov 10, 2011
What is wrong with this picture? Class warfare? Just plain old greed. Sotheby's is in a labor dispute with the unionn that represents the art handlers working at the New York City auction house. The contract between the two parties expired on July 1st, 2011, and despite ongoing negotiations, there has been no agreement on a new contract. Local 814's stance is that because of Sotheby's record profits for 2010 (over $680 million), Local 814 should not be giving in to any of S ...

May 25, 2011
"looking into" lowering taxes on banks. Coincidentally, he is a former banker. Keep them coming republicans. ...

Jan 19, 2010
Iraq has begun collecting signatures for a class action lawsuit on behalf of people killed or wounded in incidents involving US security firm Blackwater. It will seek compensation for a number of such cases, the office of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said. Incidents include the 2007 killing of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad's Nisoor Square. Last month, a US judge dismissed charges against five Blackwater guards over those killings, which Iraqi officials described as "regrettable". Immediately ...

Jul 28, 2017
I'm sort of on the fence about this and am wondering what others feel. ...

Nov 24, 2012
The full article is at the link below; a few excerpts here: "In Texas, talk of secession in recent years has steadily shifted to the center from the fringe right. It has emerged as an echo of the state Republican leadership’s anti-Washington, pro-Texas-sovereignty mantra on a variety of issues, including health care and environmental regulations. For some Texans, the renewed interest in the subject serves simply as comic relief after a crushing election defeat. But for other proponen ...

Jan 21, 2013
Michelle? "The ceremonial lunch President Obama and his former congressional colleagues are eating Monday tops out at 3,000 calories, according to a website that has tallied up the luxurious menu of lobster, bison and apple pie." Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/21/obama-gut-busting-lunch-menu-tops-3000-calories/#ixzz2Ie6KMAFC ...

Mar 25, 2010
passed by the House and the Senate and signed by the president? Did this EVER happen? To my knowledge, not. Where are the Republicans going? Resorting to violence? What a shame! BTW: Bush never vetoed a bill. He signed each one and then added "signing statements," and made his own rules, circumventing the Constitution, claiming wrongly that he could do this since he had the highest executive power. ...

Nov 11, 2014
Does Josh Gruber's admission there was "lack of transparency" bother me personally? Sure it does. But considering most members of congress were lawyers previously, which are pretty much like glorified used car salesmen, this is not exactly a news scoop. In the clips I saw, Gruber also said that though he wished things had been done differently, it WAS important we pass this law, as well as there was virtually no difference between Romneycare and Obamacare. Even if the House cou ...

Jan 18, 2017
warning that 27 million people could lose their insurance and premiums would skyrocket. ...

Jul 03, 2017
You can kiss your transcription pittance jobs GOOD-Bye. Many of you had better be careful what you wish for...turning healthcare upside down will not bode well for the non-revenue aspects of hospitals. ...

Jul 18, 2017
From what I have heard, if they repeal the healthcare bill known as Obamacare, it does not take effect for 2 years. What are your thoughts on repeal for the sake of repeal? ...

Jul 28, 2017
.. ...

Feb 03, 2011
www.repeatitnow.org ...

Sep 04, 2012
If you are in any of these states, vote Republican Texas, Ohio, Arizona, Indiana, Nebraska, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland. ...

Jan 11, 2017
The debate is over. We do not need to repeal Obamacare; it will repeal itself. Two words summarize why: risk pool. The ACA is founded upon a stunning misconception of the very definition of insurance. Its advocates have mistakenly conflated two unrelated concepts: insurance and welfare – or, more to the point, risk and charity. People buy insurance in order to mitigate risk. We buy fire insurance because there is a slight chance that our house will burn down. If we cannot afford ins ...

Jan 10, 2017
and makes a fool of himself. ...

Mar 09, 2017
Peter Nelson, my colleague at Center of the American Experiment, is one of the country’s leading experts on health care policy. On the Center’s web site, he urges conservatives to take a deep breath and understand the constraints that Congressional Republicans are working under. In particular, a full repeal of Obamacare must get through the Senate, which means it must get 60 votes. There are only 52 Republican senators. Therefore, the first bill that has been unveiled is intended to be pa ...

Dec 18, 2010
WASHINGTON — In a landmark vote for gay rights, the Senate on Saturday voted to advance legislation that would overturn the military ban on openly gay troops known as "don't ask, don't tell." The 63-33 test vote all but guarantees the legislation will pass the Senate, possibly by day's end, and reach the president's desk before the new year. The House had passed an identical version of the bill, 250-174, earlier this week. Repeal would mean that, for the firs ...

Nov 09, 2012
and this is a BIG but, he's abandoning the dysfunctional supply-side feed-the-rich economic plan Romney was running on. You know, the one from the Reagan and W eras that cost most of us bitterly while making a few very happy? Boehner also says he's willing to raise taxes and broaden the tax base (remember the no-tax-increase pledge almost all pubs had to sign?), so this is another good sign that we'll be able to pay some bills and speed up that economic recovery. Speaker B ...

Oct 20, 2016
nm ...

Jan 05, 2011
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press WASHINGTON – Eager to show who's now in charge, the House's new Republican majority plans to vote to repeal President Barack Obama's landmark health care overhaul before he even shows up in their chamber to give his State of the Union address. Though full repeal is a longshot — the House vote would be just the first, easiest step — they'll follow up with dozens of attempt ...

May 22, 2010
I heard through the rumor mill that Mayor Coleman of Columbus recenty decided to boycott Arizona, but I can't find any confirmation of this. Can anyone from Ohio (or anywhere else that might know the truth on this) tell me if this is true? Thanks ;) ...

Nov 12, 2012
recipients are having their food stamps reduced by $50 a month. Awww......that's a shame. I wonder how many of them voted for Obama. LOL. I don't wish ill on anyone, really, but I hope the ones who voted for his sorry self are the ones who lose their jobs first. Sometimes the only way to open people's eyes is to throw cold water in them. ...

May 04, 2011
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/04/small-business-owners-bush-tax-cuts-rich-repeal_n_857204.html I've always felt this way. Glad to see more people are coming to the conclusion that those tax cuts didn't help us as small business owners. My own business started down as customers had less money, and I got the tax cuts. Something just never seemed right about that. ...

Sep 05, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxoMEFR8z_Y ...

Mar 17, 2010
Pro-health reform demonstrators and anti-reform demonstrators gathered in front of Rep Kilroy's office to express their views. A man with a debiiltating neurological disorder was there in support of reform. The anti-reformers gathered around him and shouted "No handouts here!" and other such comments. Incidentally the anti-reform protestors who stated their neighborhoods to the local press ALL came from the oldest, wealthiest, snobbiest suburb in the city.&n ...

Aug 10, 2012
Ohio voting just got a little harder, not because early voting has been cut down, and not because of new ID restrictions. That's right. Republicans are doing everything in their power to ensure a win in Ohio. The latest tactic works on a county by county basis. County by county it is decided whether or not to extend hours at the voting sites. Each county has a commission comprised of two dems and two pubs. You would think this would be a good thing to extend hours in this state right? ...

Oct 05, 2012
http://washingtonexaminer.com/ohio-poll-romney-leads-51-48-among-those-certain-to-vote/article/2509947#.UG7vQU3A-gR ...

Nov 05, 2012
President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has devoted an unprecedented number of bureaucrats to finalizing new anti-coal regulations that are set to be released at the end of November, according to a source inside the EPA. More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non ...

Apr 02, 2013
I can't stand our justice system, I swear it makes me crazy! The news article, an Ohio man kills a 3-year-old child by having sex with her and suffocating her, which he ADMITS, but he actually gets a trial, because he is fighting the death penalty, because he didn't mean to kill her, he only meant to rape her! I mean, WHAT! He apparently was drunk and mad at his girlfriend (The child's mother) because she wouldn't have sex with him, so he decided to have sex ...