The Republican Governors Association is running this ad:
If you clicked on this ad (well, you cannot click on this ad on this site, but I saw it on YouTube – there is a corresponding commercial, too), it takes you to a page where you can donate money to the RGA.
Before I say anything about the situation in Wisconsin, I have a question about the format of this ad: why are the words ‘the,’ ‘as’ and ‘we’ italicized? Why is ‘Scott Walker’ in a different font than ‘Support’ and ‘defend,’ and maybe the rest of the ad? I would also argue against using the word ‘defend’ in an ad – although not from a legal standpoint, the word ‘defend’ tends to imply that somebody did something wrong, and that’s not the sort of message I would want to convey in my ad. If anybody wants a quick lesson in photoshop (or the basic logic that is employed when creating an ad) , I’m happy to oblige.
I just don’t understand why Governor Walker wants to take away the union’s rights to collectively bargain. In my view, that pretty much dissolves the union, and just because you’re wearing a suit and not brandishing a baseball bat doesn’t make you any better than your union busting predecessors. I’ve heard the argument that unions have outlived their usefulness, but I tend to disagree – of course, the people I’ve heard make that argument are rich people who don’t need a union’s protection.
It’s a matter of record that the Republican National Committee has over $20 million dollars of debt, and I don’t know if that figure includes any debt owed by the RGA or if this ad is how they’re trying to raise money, but I certainly hope not. I don’t understand how Republicans (in general, not specifically Gov. Walker) can make the argument that they favor fiscal responsibility when the most recent Republican president outspent every other administration in history (including President Reagan, and that’s impressive) and their National Committee spent over $20 million they didn’t have on election expenses. $20 million dollars is a lot; it’s like they over spent by $20 bucks or $20,000. – and that’s what taking away collective bargaining is all about, right? Saving money? Or at least, that’s the argument I’ve been hearing, but not understanding.
It’s OK to ask people to donate money to your cause, but when it’s busting a union, that’s a tough sell, not to mention that it feels inappropriate in a, “we-need-money-to-keep-from-paying-people-a-negotiated-wage” sort of way. Depriving people of the right to assemble and reason out their differences seems to go against the American way – isn’t that what we’re all about?
I welcome debate on this! Drop some comments!