Are we to believe that Dillard is “the lesser of two evils,” and we have no choice? Are we tired of “the lesser of two evils” argument? Then why are we perpetuating a rigged system and, thus, losing our representative democracy? Why are we not fighting against hypocrisy and corruption? Why are we not challenging the Democratic/Republican One-Party Money System?
“…There is nothing idealized or romantic about the difference between a society whose arrangements roughly serve all its citizens (something otherwise known as social justice) and one whose institutions have been converted into a stupendous fraud. That can be the difference between democracy and plutocracy” –Bill Moyers (The Great American Class War…).
A “rigged system” compels unions to donate, and sometimes waste, large sums of their membership’s money in order to compete in this plutocratic circus. Our unions should have worked diligently at funding and endorsing an independent candidate.
The Dillard Option: "The Lesser of the Two Evils"?
“It's a plan that will fail. In the 2010 Republican Primary there were about 750,000 voters in Illinois. We can expect roughly the same in March. Rauner is polling at 40% - 20 points more than Bill Brady who is in second place. Dillard is last, polling at 11% or somewhere between 70 and 90 thousand votes.
“…The union leadership would require every IEA member and every other union member (although the state AFL-CIO has endorsed Quinn in the primary) to vote for Dillard. That will not happen. The IEA can give Dillard a quarter million bucks for ad buys. But what they cannot do is get out the vote. That requires a state-wide organization that the IEA has let flounder.
“You know how many members they got to the last IEA lobby day for our pension? Less than 500. We once could turn out thousands. I can tell you that more IEA members know about the IEA Dillard endorsement from my blog than they do from the IEA. I don't mind being called a purist in the context of the kind of gross political calculating that goes on these days. But this won't work even at a purely tactical level.
“…I have never said anything good about Bruce Rauner… Four years ago (long before almost anyone else), I was writing about the connection between Jonah Edelman, Stand for Children and Bruce Rauner. That was when the IEA was cozying up to SFC, Edelman and Rauner on Senate Bill 7. [Look at] Dillard's voting record. On pensions and social issues like marriage equality (on which Rauner actually IS Better), how are they different?
"The Illinois Republican Party and all four of its candidates are in the grasp of the Tea Party Right. To make a distinction among them is looking for 'a needle in a haystack'... In pushing this Dillard endorsement, the IEA is praising Dillard as pro-education. What will the people think of us when we tell such lies?” (Fred Klonsky).
"Unions, organizations formerly steeped in the doctrine of class struggle and filled with those who sought broad social and political rights for the working class, have been transformed into domesticated partners of the capitalist class. They have been reduced to simple bartering tools. The social demands of unions early in the twentieth century that gave the working class weekends off, the right to strike, the eight-hour day, and Social Security have been abandoned” (Chris Hedges).
ReplyDeleteGet a grip people, the Republicans are not going to protect your pensions.
ReplyDeleteThere are nearly 30 states with Republican governors and the people who got hurt the most under their dictatorship rule were the teachers, students, public employees and their pensions.
Both the Republican and Democratic parties are one and the same “Money Party,” corrupted by briberies (campaign funding) made legal.
ReplyDelete