Rush: Workers- As Usual- To Blame

On October 9, Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the controversy arising from the sit-in begun on December 12 by members of the union at Republic Windows and Doors, which announced on December 9 that it would be closing. The Chicago company had stated that Bank of America had cut off its line of credit. (Bank of America- would that be the corporation which thus far has received $15 billion of bailout funds from the Taxpayers of America?) The President-elect has noted "when it comes to the situation here in Chicago with the workers who are asking for their benefits and payments they have earned, I think they are absolutely right.” But while Bank of America blames Republic and Republic blames Bank of America, El Rushbo (as he affectionately calls himself) knows the real villains are the workers (and, as always, Obama):

RUSH: By the way, Obama, IBD, Investor's Business Daily, has a pretty good editorial today on Obama encouraging these people to sit in. That's a violation of the law. It's not their property. They are not vacating this place, it's not their property, and Obama, who's a well-known street agitator, is illustrating his lack of understanding of what the presidency is all about. You don't encourage people to break the law. Of course, I know, it doesn't matter what he says. It's how he says it.

Not surprisingly, Rush neglected to mention the violation of The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act. WARN guarantees

You must receive a written notice 60 days before the date of a mass layoff or plant closing if you meet the conditions discussed in this brochure. If your employer does not give you the required notice, you may be able to seek damages for back pay and benefits for up to 60 days, depending on how many days’ notice you actually received.

Neither did the editorial cited refer to WARN. Instead, it urged "harmony between workers and management." It claimed "Obama's decision to ally himself with civic disorder is poor precedent" and "our republic would be better served by a stirring defense of the free-market, capitalist system from behind the presidential sea." (Never mind the $700 billion+ corporate socialism intitiated, and administered, by the right-wing Republican President.) It likens the sit-in to "that of a burglar who breaks into a home. Both have violated owners' property rights and infringed on the sanctity of private quarters."

Ironically, the situation is analogous to that of a burglary. The guy breaks into your home and points a gun, demanding you relinquish your jewelry, money, and other valuables, which you've accumulated through hard work. Apparently, IBD, and its right-thinking ally, Limbaugh, would have you plead with the burglar for better understanding, seeking "harmony." Instead, you whip out a 45 caliber Smith and Wesson, shoot, and end the burglary and the burglar. And we shouldn't be surprised (or discouraged) if, with the law, the union, and the ability to organize a sit-in (call it an "equalizer") on its side, the workers fight back and demand that their jobs not be taken illegally from them.