Slippery Cenk Suggests Public Employees Need Unions To Negotiate With 'Corporate Executives'
James Taranto could be the best columnist around. Every day at his Best of the Web at the Wall Street Journal online, Taranto turns out an original, often unconventional, conservative take on the news, regularly managing to leaven the message with humor.
Rush today rightly extolled Taranto's column of yesterday, in which he made the point that there is a vast, inherent difference between private and public sector unions. In the former case, unions are negotiating against corporate interests. In the latter, unions are, by definition, organizing against the interests of the public itself.
Surely even Cenk Uygur understands this. So when Cenk suggests, as he did on his MSNBC show this evening, that without unions public employees would be "at the mercy" of "corporate executives," it seems fair to accuse him of . . . fraud.
Marvel at Cenk's three-card monty as he tries to pull the union wool over viewers' eyes. [Apologies for the video quality. Still getting up to speed in Texas, and actually resorted to using my iPod to videotape the show off the TV screen! Ain't technology great?]
Note: of course even the notion that unionless workers are powerless vis a vis private-sector employees is false. The laws of supply and demand continue to apply to non-unionized workers. Uygur's example of an employer simply firing a non-unionized employee seeking higher wages and replacing him with someone else is only true if the wage being demanded is above the market and the wage being offerred is at least at the market .