The Glade 4.0

So what I see is that someone is claiming the the SEIU is forcing it's affiliates to contribute, and the SEIU claiming that they don't coerce their members.



That said, there are some procedural items on this that look pretty fubar.

I would consider this:



more than a "scintilla of evidence", and far more than a he said/she said dispute.

Let's say that I don't trust Fox news to report actual facts. The article claims that it's requiring contributions, but the SEIU is claiming it's not.

It is interesting that the Commission overruled their general counsel, but it would appear that it within their legal ability and I don't know enough about the specifics to make an informed decision on if it's irregular or not.

Really, the most upsetting thing about that article is the claims about how botched the appeals process is, in regards to the timing of the documents being released. But again, this is Fox news and it's entirely possible that they could have followed the appeals process successfully and are just being ***** about it.

You don't trust Fox News to report actual facts, but when the Pew Center released its audit and polling of major media news in the U.S. and found Fox to be most reliable and unbiased ...

I mean, if you don't trust them, do you find CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, NBC, ABC, and CBS totally unreliable?

_________________

Link?

SEIU Constitution as enacted in 2008

The relevant portion of the Constitution:





If you take some initiative and look further into the constitution, you will see penalties for not doing so, which is coercion. Whats more, this is directly including in each member dues a mandatory portion to be funneled into the PAC and because they tied penalties to the payment of these dues, it is directly prohibited by FEC law.

Oh, geezus, it's been posted on the Glade at least 3 times. There's also this one from the Public Policy Polling.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... al_126.pdf

_________________

That link doesn't support this statement Khross:



Unless you meant to say "most trusted by the public", and not most reliable and unbiased.

Nah, I'm digging up the Pew one, because I forget it was heh.

Oh, here it was ...

http://www.journalism.org/node/13436

Fox's coverage of the election was most balanced among the major cable news outlets. EiJ is a Pew Group.

_________________

Thanks Ladas.

Ok, first off the Pew article is only focused on the election coverage, not their overall quality. Second, I would expect that Fox would view McCain negatively overall, because he was trying deperately to be "moderate" during that election, which pissed off the core conservatives that Fox represents, so in my view that would artificially skew the results.

To answer your earlier question, I don't really trust any of the major news agencies. They are far too focused on sensationalism (mainstream media) or pushing an agenda (Fox) for my tastes. About the only news source I trust is NPR and maybe PPT (Prairie Public Television).

Except NPR has become exceedingly left of center and focused on "human interest" stories of late ...

I mean, hell, Robert Siegel is openly antagonistic to anything not-Obama party line. I'm not sure the Fourth Estate is actually useful in the US anymore.

_________________

I guess I haven't heard that from Siegel, but I don't listen to all things considered as much as I used to.

That said, I still find them to be the most balanced and factual.

I also have the benefit of living in Minnesota, which has the most supported public radio in the country, which has meant that the programming is top notch. MPR is just as good if not better than NPR in some areas.

...

Heh, Minnesota is full of crazy liberals. This is the state that questionably elected Al "Keep Counting" Franken.

_________________

Actually, it's a pretty balanced blend of liberals and conservatives. The rural parts of MN are anything but liberal. While we have folks like Al Franken, we also have folks like Michele Bachmann.

Al Franken ... Aizle, Al Franken ...

_________________

LOL, Al is positively sane and center compared to Bachmann dude. That woman is batshit crazy. Additionally, one of the next up and coming Republican candiates for president is from MN. Our current governor Tim Pawlenty.

That said, I hated voting in that election for Al. Talk about the lesser of 2 evils.

Michelle Bachman is pretty centrist, Aizle. You're drinkin' to much Minnesota water if you think she's some far right wingbat.

_________________

BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

You're being ridiculous about Fox News.

In any case, the article is not reporting that they are requiring contributions. The article is reporting that the FEC determined that they were. If the FEC hadn't made that determination, the entire article wouldn't exist in the first place.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Public programming of any sort balanced and factual? That's hilarious.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yes, yes, laugh all you want, but the fact that people think Michelle Bachman is some crazy conservative wingnut is proof of exactly how far left the center has been moved.

_________________

If you think this is hilarious, you ought to see boards with a non-American leftist bent. I've seen places claiming Obama is a centrist and talking abou how far right America in general is because our left is near the European center.

Of course, the fact that the reason for this is the absurd leftward drift Europe has made for about 65 years now escapes them. Inevitably the claim is made that sicne there are more countries in Europe, they set the standard and America is out on a limb. Appeal to popularity much?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I would say Fox and CNN both present facts, however they will spin or stress with a right/left bias. Sometimes they can go over the edge, but by and large they are pretty good.

MSNBC however is the channel that I simply would not trust period, even for basic facts.

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

Bachmann looks to be a pretty standard center-right candidate to me, no idea where you get the idea that she's a far-right wingnut. The only thing I've ever seen from her that qualifies as far right are her comments about the gay community.

Certainy over the years the center has moved left. That is the way of the world. What is humorous is that folks here are trying to use the center of say 30-50 years ago as still being "center" and railing about how everyone is left wing.

This issue is that the "center" has changed and you guys are no longer in it. That isn't wrong or anything, but claiming that right wing sensabilities are "center" is incorrect.