Pennsylvania Just Dropped The Hammer On Labor Unions In A Way That’s Long Overdue

With a new law, union strikers and activists in Pennsylvania lost what many argued they should never have had in the first place: legal cover to threaten their opponents with stalking, harassment, and even use of “weapons of mass destruction.”

Last week, Governor Tom Wolfe (pictured above), a Democrat, signed House Bill 874, a new law that would outlaw such harassment by union members involved in a labor dispute. Oddly enough, before this new law, unions had been allowed a free pass under Pennsylvania law to commit these acts without incurring the wrath of law enforcement if said harassment was conducted during a labor dispute of some type.

“I believe it is important to allow men and women to come together and their voices heard,” Gov. Wolf said in a statement. “I also believe that any form of harassment by employees or employers is unacceptable.”

“Under current law there is an exemption for a person who is involved in a labor dispute as defined in the labor anti-injunction act preventing a person to be charged with one of those three crimes.” Wolfe continued. “House Bill 874 simply removes those three exemptions and adds legislative intent to specifically say the legislature intends that the exemptions should not apply in labor disputes moving forward.”

In past disputes, union toughs had harassed the children and spouses of business executives–and at times threatened violence and even death to business owners–but those businessmen had no recourse under the law to prevent the harassment or have those who perpetrated the crimes arrested.

This represents a big win for the Keystone Chapter of the Associated Building Contractors.

“These loopholes have allowed for horrific activities disguised as legitimate labor disputes for years,” ABC Keystone President and CEO Kate McCaslin said at “Today, ABC applauds Governor Tom Wolf for signing this legislation into law that will provide for equal protection for employers and employees from hostile work environments.”

This new law will go into effect early next year.

Obama Just Revealed Something Huge, And Democrats Are Furious With Him About It

Democrats are reading dark news between the lines of Obama’s Pacific Rim trade deal, now that the long-secret agreement has finally been made public.

The vast volumes of the Trans Pacific Partnership deal were made public Thursday. The agreement covers trade among the U.S., Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia, Chile, Peru, Canada, Brunei, Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia. President Obama has said he will sign the agreement, which will go to Congress next year for an up-or-down ratification vote.

The United Steel Workers Thursday called the agreement “a dagger twisting in the heart of American manufacturing.”

“The American people deserve better and we can do better,” said Rep. Donna Edwards, D-Md. Edwards. She said that serious concerns had been raised during the years of secrecy shrouding negotiations.

“It may indeed be worse than we thought,” she said. Edwards said the agreement falls short in ways that include, “a lack of enforceable workers’ and human rights protections, environmental standards, enforceable currency manipulation rules, food safety standards, strong government procurement Buy American provisions, and enforcement to ensure American wages are protected.”

Edwards promised to work to reject the agreement when it comes before Congress next year.

The impact of the deal on the auto industry concerned Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich.

“The agreement’s lack of any meaningful protections against currency manipulation means millions of American jobs – in the auto industry and many other sectors – will continue to be threatened by foreign governments who attempt to tilt the global playing field in favor of their industries and against the United States,” said Dingell, who noted America has already lost 5 million jobs due to foreign nations’ currency manipulation schemes.

Dingell said the deal threatens American jobs.

“It…will reward countries that support sweatshops and abusive working conditions, at the same time putting even more American jobs at risk,” she said.

h/t: Fox News

Should School Test Standards Be Changed?

Well, maybe yes, maybe no, maybe both.

It seems the Obama administration is deciding that maybe standardized testing in K – 12 education has gone too far:

Faced with mounting and bipartisan opposition to increased and often high-stakes testing in the nation’s public schools, the Obama administration declared Saturday that the push had gone too far, acknowledged its own role in the proliferation of tests, and urged schools to step back and make exams less onerous and more purposeful.

While a similar statement (followed by concrete action) on foreign military adventurism might offer an unequivocal cheer from lovers of less government intrusion everywhere, I cannot say that this is always and everywhere true for standardized testing.  But I am getting ahead of myself.

The so-called Common Core standards seem to have broken the camel’s back:

States, led by the National Governors Association and advised by local educators, created the so-called Common Core standards, which outlined the skills students should have upon graduation, and signed on to tests tied to those standards.

As a new generation of tests tied to the Common Core was rolled out last spring, several states abandoned plans to use the tests, while others renounced the Common Core…

What is motivating this change?

… “I can’t tell you how many conversations I’m in with educators who are understandably stressed and concerned about an overemphasis on testing in some places and how much time testing and test prep are taking from instruction.”

It is the educators. So says Arne Duncan, the secretary of education.

Teachers’ unions, which had led the opposition on the left to the amount of testing, declared the reversal of sorts a victory.

On the left, parents and unions objected to tying tests to teacher evaluations…

More precisely, it is the teachers’ unions.

Consider the lusciousness of this – the reason the federal government wants to reduce standardized testing has nothing to do with the students; it is because the teachers are failing the test.

Now, returning to the question that is the title of this post, and my answer to this question: Should school test standards be changed? Well, maybe yes, maybe no, maybe both.

There is something close to 55 million K – 12 students in the United States. 55 million. Let the number sink in.

Those of you who are parents consider – even in your small sample size of about two children per family: does one size fit both of your children when it comes to their interests, how they learn, how they study, how they progress, etc.?  To ask the question is to answer it.  Yet here we have a one-size-fits-all testing regimen for 55 million.

For some students, the regimen may be just fine; for most, I am certain that the regimen is wrong.

Just remember, they aren’t changing it because of the failure of 55 million students to conform to a one-size-fits-all curriculum; they are changing it because the test scores are used to grade the teachers, and the teachers are failing.

You see, they aren’t giving up on one-size-fits-all 55 million – they just want to try on a different size:

“I still have no question that we need to check at least once a year to make sure our kids are on track or identify areas where they need support,” said Arne Duncan, the secretary of education, who has announced that he will leave office in December.

How would he know – does he have a close relationship with each one of 55 million of them?

“What happens if somebody puts a cap on testing, and to meet the cap ends up eliminating tests that could actually be helpful, or leaves the redundancy in the test and gets rid of a test that teachers can use to inform their instruction?” asked Michael Casserly, the executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, an organization that represents about 70 large urban school districts.

Who can say what is “helpful” for each one of 55 million students?

The administration said it would issue “clear guidance” on testing by January.

Apparently, the federal government can say.

Rest assured, nothing in the new testing regimen will come close to examining the pillars of the religion that is the American state.

Reprinted with permission from Bionic Mosquito.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

On The Eve Of The Debate, Hillary Clinton Marched Up To Trump’s Doorstep And Did THIS

Hillary Clinton took her floundering campaign right to the GOP frontrunner this week when she held a press availability out in front of one of Donald Trump’s Las Vegas hotels on Tuesday. Clinton berated the real estate mogul for his stance on illegal immigration and unions.

Clinton took advantage of an invitation to speak before a protest sponsored by about 500 members of the Culinary Workers Union, which is trying to organize workers in Trump’s Vegas hotel. The former Secretary of State was the only Democrat candidate to accept the invite.

Urging workers to “say ‘No’ to Donald Trump,” Clinton denigrated Trump as a mere entertainer.

“Some people say Donald Trump is entertaining,” Clinton said to the union crowd. “I don’t think it’s entertaining when someone insults immigrants, when someone insults women.”

“If you are going to run for president, then represent all of the people of the United States,” she added. “I wanted to come by to lend my voice to all yours and I wish you well in these efforts.”

Clinton stressed that workers should have the right to unionize, and that she would protect those rights if elected to the White House.

The Culinary Workers Union has been trying to unionize Trump’s hotel workers for years, with seemingly little to show for the effort. In fact, Donald Trump’s son, Eric, said that the workers at the hotel are generally happy with their jobs.

“For years the union in Las Vegas has been trying to unionize this hotel, and they have been incredibly unsuccessful,” Trump said. “We have an incredible group of employees who have categorically rejected unionization.”

Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been bedeviled by sliding polls and dogged by persistent questions over her likely illegal use of private email servers when she was secretary of state. In one of the most recent polls, Clinton slid 10 points in the days just ahead of Tuesday’s Democrat debate.

h/t: NewsMax

NYC Just Did Something Astonishing For One Of America’s Most Infamous Traitors

Ethel Rosenberg was sentenced to death for treason in 1953 by the US, along with her husband, Julius Rosenberg. She was convicted of helping pass atomic secrets to the Soviet Union.

Now, she is being honored by the New York City Council.

Three council members praised Rosenberg, a Lower East Side resident, for “demonstrating great bravery” in her role in a 1935 strike against the National New York Packing and Supply Co. After she joined the workers’ union at that company, she became a supporter of the Communist Party.

The council members also said that she had been “wrongfully” executed by the United States.

Councilman Daniel Dromm, D-Queens, stated: “A lot of hysteria was created around anti-communism and how we had to defend our country, and these two people were traitors and we rushed to judgment and they were executed.”

Soviet spies such as the Rosenbergs were integral to Soviet efforts to build a bomb.

Because of their spying operations in the West, the Soviets knew of the Manhattan Project before even the FBI.

The Soviets ended up detonating their own atomic bomb in 1949, much earlier than expected.

At the peak of their arsenal in the 1980s, the Soviets had approximately 45,000 nuclear weapons in their stockpile.

What do you think of Ethel Rosenberg being praised by the New York City Council?