Labor Unions are a business just like business is a business. Whats wrong with our schools? Labor unions. Teachers are working fewer and fewer hours, and are not answerable to the administration and fight measurement at every corner. This is the main problem with public education today. Of the 1000 things the Bush Administration has done wrong "No Child Left Behind" was not one of them. Granted, they did not fully fund it - but the truth that Unions are about benefits for union members, the union corporations and related organized crime families, and not about the customer, which in the case of the schools - is me!

There is hypocracy in politics - Politicians want everyone's support - duh! Most Americans don't belong to or believe in Unions and never will. Unions are screwed - because Unions have screwed America.

Yes, Mr. Conason, we do deserve more.

We deserved more than we got from Mrs. Clinton's husband, who saddled us with NAFTA (200,000 jobs moved out of Ohio alone in the first four years of this abomination) and a Labor Board that sided with business.

I live in one of those Rust Belt, flyover states. You know, we're the people who grow the food, process it, drive the trucks that get it to you. We work in the automotive industry, building cars and their spare parts. We work in the health care industry, at the hospitals where you go when you're desperate for the best care.

And we deserve to make a decent living.

I have been a member of a union for 20 years, and those who say that it is always unions vs. management are off their foreign-made rockers. After six years of a wage freeze (yes, freeze -- while my housing, gas, food and other costs of living have all gone up), I took an 8 per cent CUT just to help the company I work for get its head above water. And so did the other loyal workers here.

The management? After all was said and one, they got a raise.

We deserve more. If Clinton can't properly vet the people who work for her, well, the rest of us can. For this issue and the Iraq War, I won't vote for her.

"I voted against unionization, because it is not in my best interest to have some (already rich) union boss taking a chunk of my paycheck."

As someone that's been involved in unions for 20 years, (having been a member of the UAW, of UNITE-HERE, & of the OPEIU), you are obviously totally clueless about where union dues go, (& I have a feeling totally clueless about most other union aspects).

FACT-Union dues are a total of two hours of your regular weekly wages taken out each month.

FACT-Three quarters of your union dues go directly to you local union, to be used as the members vote on.

FACT-The other quarter that goes to the International is divided up to pay for lawyers, organizers, & yes officers of the International. Every union willingly provides a breakdown of where your dues go.

All of the anti union comments I've read sickens me. If you're stupid enough to fight a group that WILL help you, then you don't deserve to even be an American worker. Go live under a bridge somewhere & starve to death while upholding big business.

I voted against unionization, because it is not in my best interest to have some (already rich) union boss taking a chunk of my paycheck.

He's literally her top advisor? Or one of her top advisors?

It seems that supporting either main party is a vote against your own interests. Sometimes, one party is a little worse than the other.

Also, don't forget the fundamentalists. They are out to make the nation a better place for everyone by bringing everyone to the proper flavour of christianity. They want to save everyone. Their relentless evangelical efforts overpowered the GOP and put at least one man in the oval office.

Oh well, people get the government they deserve. The fundamentalists learned to control the primaries because too few others cared to go vote.

As to voting green in protest, why not. I do it often. Sadly, the local greens don't put people up for some offices in the belief that they thereby endorse the democrat. Stupid. They'll never be a major party until they settle on core green values (versus fringe democrat) and fight for every office they can get.

It's not what they are voting for that matters. It's what they think they are voting against: black folks (they use another word), Mexican aliens, homos, wimmin libbers, elitists (they mean educated), atheists (they mean non-Christians), and traitors (they mean people against the war).

I really do know people like this. Some of them are relatives. If I point out that they are voting against their own economic interests, they will say thing like "I ain't no socialist." I think some of them do realize that they truly are voting against their own interests in the dimmest recesses of their minds, but to actually acknowledge this would be to admit their own failures. They still think that America is the greatest country in the world because everyone who works hard can do just fine. Then they take off their gimme caps, wipe their brows, spit and get in their pickup trucks and drive away -- to nowhere.

I once had a woman tell me that she wasn't sure she wanted her children to go to college because she "didn't want no in-tool-heck-chuls" her family. She don't have any, neither.

In a nutshell, isn't that the defining quality of a Republican? Someone who votes in his own self-interest over everything else? And Democrats vote more for the greater good in general? Even if someone votes for the Republicans against his own self-interest, he probable believes he's voting in his own self-interest.

No matter how many times a Republican tells me his candidate is "doing what's best for the country," it never sounds sincere. Either that, or the person comes off as a complete kool aid drinking tool. The Democrats are far from perfect, but there's something to be said for voting for the party that actually believes that government can make a positive difference under the right circumstances.

How anyone can believe that it's a good idea to put someone in charge of the government who fundamentally is against the concept of said government working to benefit the greater commonwealth--as opposed to the top 2% tax bracket--is beyond my comprehension. "Yeah, let's elect a guy who hates the government he's supposed to be in charge of..." great idea!