We are 100% against trusteeship but not supporters of Obama . When we mentioned that to a few of our co workers a staff rep only a few years older than our kids said '' I don't know how you can be Union and vote republican '' We said we never have and never will vote republican . But we are damm sick and tired of voting for democrats who are only a lttle bit better.
We want all the troops brought home and Obama wants them redeployed to Afghanstan . We want the anti-Union Taft-Hartley repealed , Obama/Biden doesn't . We want the death penality repealed . Obama doesn't . Obama says he opposes the law that basically elimanates the right of personal bankruptcy. But his main man Biden is known as '' Senator Master Card'' because he helped ramm it thru the Senate. So how can we believe Obama on this ?
We could go on and on . Our point is that we oppose trusteeship because it would destroy the UHW/SEIU . Not because it hinders the G.O.T.V. effort for the Democrats . We respect the right of a majority of our brothers and sisters to disagree with us . But our UHW leaders and staff should support our right to work for candidates that we really support: Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez .

Yup - Nader and Gonzalez were talking about Taft Hartley at their recent stop. They're in Oakland on Tuesday, Santa Cruz today.

They also were bringing up a string of other reforms which are pretty basic and would be supported by 80% of the public - not radical at all. However, none of this will appear in the major debate. Can anyone else remember a long two weeks ago, right after the RNC convention, when the media spent about three days focusing on whether Obama meant to call Palin a pig, with his use of the common phrase "you can't put lipstick on a pig". Now, within the course of about a week, the Treasury, Whitehouse, and Federal reserve decided that global capitalism suddenly reached a crisis, and they dropped this $700b bailout on us - all in the same manner that you might respond to an unexpected earthquake.
A reasonable person might have thought that emphasizing the economy would have be a successful plan for Obama, given all that is about to happen, and our current high unemployment/foreclosures. I wouldn't say that he hasn't been talking about the economy, but how come he has been remarkably unable to get any economic issues aired, to the point where McCain and Palin are actually being perceived as more populist for working class people while Obama is the 'elitist' who uses college vocabulary. Couldn't he have countered that this summer with some key economic material? I'm thinking - even just informing the public about the debt level would be useful. In the 80s and 90s they were always talking about our national debt, but now I don't think people have been informed that our debt has essentially doubled in the last 8 years to $9 trillion (plus another trillion for this bailout). Maybe his advisors suck

I think that all unions should turn out at The Federal reserve bank to protest this corporate give away '' bailout ''
and no more foreclosures on working people's homes !
Both UHW and other SEIU locals should make this a priority , they should know how to mobilize. My Union (teamsters ) can turn out workers too but we have more resistance from our leaders.

I should have wrote that the UHW and other SEIU locals ''sure do know how to mobilize '' not '' should know ''
PS A couple of my neighbors attended the San Mateo protests. They were all pumped up afterwards.
i do agree with the Pro-Nader poster that those that are backing him or Cynthia McKinney or Gloria La Riva shouldn't be discriminated against .I'm backing Obama for all the usual reasons but , truth be told , i agree with Nader far more on economic issues and the wars than i do Obama.
And i wish i could vote for Obama but not for Biden ! He's been called the Senator from MBNA