Party of Compassion

[Guest]

I noticed an article in the Daily Sun this morning that was revealing about Republicans - and in a Republican newspaper, too.

It said that the Republican led House of Representatives voted to slash $868 million from the Women, Infants and Children program which offers food aid and educational support for low-income mothers and their children.

This money would be used to fund a spending bill for farm subsidies. 72% of the country's farms are held by corporations and most of those pay little or no Federal income tax.

I would speculate the Republicans believe it is better to give farm subsidies to corporations which pay no Federal income tax but vote Republican than to give food aid and educational support for low-income mothers and children who vote Democrat.

[Guest]

I see there have been quite a few views of this posting - but no conservatives will write a response.

Obviously, even they can see the Republicans do not have compassion but only want to give money to big Republican corporations at the expense of low-income women and children.

Very sad indeed.

[Guest]

I see there have been quite a few views of this posting - but no conservatives will write a response.

Obviously, even they can see the Republicans do not have compassion but only want to give money to big Republican corporations at the expense of low-income women and children.

Very sad indeed.

Once again, doing a little homework beyond the snippet in the Sun that was extracted from a 3-day-old longer, syndicated article, leads one to a lot more information than what one poster here provides.

A former employee and client of WIC has good information at the links below, on how Food Stamps have been expanded greatly, and how once this family got onto Food Stamps (aka SNAP), "As soon as we qualified for Food Stamps, we were given more benefits than we could use in a month, so there was no reason to stay on WIC......."

Part of what has expanded Food Stamp eligibility is removing the cap on assets. (This would be why the $2 million dollar lottery winner in MI is still collecting food stamps 11 months after winning.
http://detnews.com/article/20110518/METRO/105180337/$2M-Michigan-lottery-winner-defends-use-of-food-stamps

http://wicwoes.com/2011/do-wic-cuts-matter

http://wicwoes.com/2011/cut-504-million-from-wic

[Guest]

Well TBug, ya know they would point out some miniscule example of abuse and lump all the recipients as lazy bums who don't want to work and just want a hand-out. Compassion is not in their vocabulary.

[Guest]

While ilovetv does not seem to have compassion for others - he or she may be the most compassionate person on Earth but just does not express it well.

I also love The Villages and our lifestyle here. We are very fortunate to have worked, saved, and been lucky enough to land in this slice of Heaven. However, we are a bubble here in the midst of some mighty depressed area. Take a look at Wildwood, Fruitland Park, Okwalha, Lake Weir, and some of these close-by places. There are people that need help.

Even if you do not think the slashing of the Women, Infant, and Children aid program to fund corporate farm subsidies just about borders on the immorality of the House of Representatives, I hope you have the compassion to do something to help families in need. This can be done through contributions to area food banks on a regular basis, special donations through your churches, and attending programs such as Seeds of Hope.

The VIllages has a great record of charitable giving. Please keep it up.

[Guest]

Part of the problem with the Food Stamps is the USDA is in control of it so the USDA makes the rules concerning eligibility. IMHO that is a conflict of interest. This is one of just many problems with the welfare system. With so many different departments responsible for different programs the rules are as hard to administer as the US income tax code. One hand doesn't know or care what the other hand is doing. Our government and its program rules and how they are administered has become a cluster ___ . Neither party wants to do what we elected them to do and clean up the mess. These programs are just the touch of the iceberg. Please don't take this out of context, I don't have a problem with our children having their needed food and medical needs taken care of. I have a problem when our children are going hungry and need medical attention. The US Government is giving billions of foreign political aid to countries who are not by any means our friends or allies. Our government is so full of corruption and waste that no politician has the kahua''s to get involved. Too bad, if waste and corruption were under control this country could and would have a starting point for something positive to happen to help rid this country of debt and to regain the lost respect of the rest of the world.

[Guest]

Tbugs, Before I criticize elimination or adding of a government program at any level I need to know several things: (1) What are the objectives of the program? (2) How is success defined? (3) What are the metrics that will be used to measure success? (4) How much success has been achieved against the projections?

I know that many believe that it is enough to say that,"It's for the children" or "It's for the poor" or "It's for unwed mothers", etc. Good intentions do not equate to good results. I have no knowledge of the programs that were eliminated or their costs and results. Can you provide this so we can either agree or disagree with the actions?

We need results on a cost effective basis, not just good intentions.

[Guest]

You know some folks think that there is a difference between forced compassion (taxation) and true charity. It is sharing the wealth because you want to, not because you are forced to.

[Guest]

We need to go back to the "You don't work, You don't eat." The work can be cleaning up the road ways, helping the elderly or something other than just sitting on your butt and playing games. If you have children, some of the money that you earn goes to pay for child care. They need a taste of "real life." I for one don't want to just give things to the "poor" the "children" and the "unwed mothers."

[Guest]

So, unless my 91-year-old granmother works, she doesn't eat?

[Guest]

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the
support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw
__________________________________________________ ___

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which
debt he proposes to pay off with your money..
-G Gordon Liddy
__________________________________________________ ____

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong
enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson

[Guest]

(1) What are the objectives of the program? (2) How is success defined? (3) What are the metrics that will be used to measure success? (4) How much success has been achieved against the projections?

ROFL, surly you jest? The liberal mind doesn't work that way.

Let me give it a try...

1. More votes and more dependency on the government for all your needs.

2. When more people depend on the government instead of themselves.

3. I guess that would be the government sensuous to see how many are actually on the take.

4. Depends on how many vote Democrat to keep the gravy train (paid for by others) alive.

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which
debt he proposes to pay off with your money..
-G Gordon Liddy

Ain't that the truth.

[Guest]

We need to go back to the "You don't work, You don't eat." The work can be cleaning up the road ways, helping the elderly or something other than just sitting on your butt and playing games. If you have children, some of the money that you earn goes to pay for child care. They need a taste of "real life." I for one don't want to just give things to the "poor" the "children" and the "unwed mothers."

I, for one, would not want to live in the world Figmo envisions. :yuck:

[Guest]

Figmo,

Hopefully you will have a change of heart once you move to The Villages and will not be stressed out anymore. I hold out hope and change for you.

[Guest]

...a whole lot of stuff that we're not going to be able to afford. Without going into the arithmetic again, if we kept Social Security, Medicare and the Defense budget untouched, we could eliminate ALL federal spending on everything else and still not produce a balanced budget. The problem is that dire.

We can't afford either the programs for women and children or farm subsidies, plus a whole lot of other stuff. If anyone thinks a balanced budget can be accomplished without life-changing cuts to discretionary spending, massive cuts to the defense budget, big changes to both Medicare and Social Security and yes, tax increases, show us all how it can be done.

The stage is being set. Today's papers announced that AARP will not try to defend no changes to Social Security. When the Congress finally begins to cut expenses with seriousness, the hue and cry from all idealogical corners will make the hub-bub in Madison, WI look like kindergarten child's play.

[Guest]

I'm afraid you are right VK. When it gets to a point in this country that a cut of $868 million represents a mere 13 percent of a taxpayer funded program, there is something seriously wrong. The proposals are also cutting $457 million, about one-third of the total amount funded annually, from a taxpayer funded program called Food for Peace which supports shipping US commodities to Africa and other places around the world.

Let's be real; how much will the 13 percent cut to the Women, Infant and Children program hurt? The program offers, “supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk.” I'd like to see how the money is actually used in the program. How much "food out of the mouth of babes" is actually going away? Probably not much. More like cutting the fat of the program.

[Guest]

__________________________________________________ ___

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which
debt he proposes to pay off with your money..
-G Gordon Liddy
__________________________________________________ ____




Well said! If I may add~IMHO~They propose to use your money because they have the mindset of "why should I have to do it if you don't!?!"

[Guest]

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the
support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw
__________________________________________________ ___

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which
debt he proposes to pay off with your money..
-G Gordon Liddy
__________________________________________________ ____

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong
enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson

Great quotes. It is about this time in the discussion when the "progressives" leave the room. The libertarian arguement is a pretty strong one.

[Guest]

Interested to check out the view from the recievers of liberal compassion? Star Parker has written a wonderful book "Uncle Sam's Plantation". Enormous KUDOS to Star for her courage to become free and her courage to speak out about it! I have two young adult children who have recently graduated college and I have passed her book along to them. I hope that their generation can make a difference.

[Guest]

Slashing $868 million from a program to help low-income women, infants, and children to fund more money to big corporation farm subsidies?

Let's add one more quotation to those excellent ones listed earlier.

"Love your neighbor as yourself." - Jesus

[Guest]

Slashing $868 million from a program to help low-income women, infants, and children to fund more money to big corporation farm subsidies?

Let's add one more quotation to those excellent ones listed earlier.

"Love your neighbor as yourself." - Jesus

Excellent point T-Bugs. I loved myself enough to start working when I was 12 years old. I loved myself enough to continue my education while working full time.
I loved my child enough to make sure she got a job at 15. I loved my daughter enough to see to it that she finished her college education, all the while working 30+ hours a week to pay part of her expenses. She also joined my wife and me working with the needy in our community, oh and by the way, she was all of 6 years old when she began working in the food pantry.
Seems like work has always been part of our lives, whether paid or unpaid. I can't imagine a more important way to show love for others than to prepare them to care for themselves.
There is no such thing as undigified work, no job too menial to be taken to support oneself. To love your neighbor as yourself does not mean to give someone what they should be earning for themself. It does not mean doing something for someone that they should be doing for themself.
To love ones neighbor means to enable them to do for themselves, they'll feel better about it and I will too.

[Guest]

Excellent point T-Bugs. I loved myself enough to start working when I was 12 years old. I loved myself enough to continue my education while working full time.
I loved my child enough to make sure she got a job at 15. I loved my daughter enough to see to it that she finished her college education, all the while working 30+ hours a week to pay part of her expenses. She also joined my wife and me working with the needy in our community, oh and by the way, she was all of 6 years old when she began working in the food pantry.
Seems like work has always been part of our lives, whether paid or unpaid. I can't imagine a more important way to show love for others than to prepare them to care for themselves.
There is no such thing as undigified work, no job too menial to be taken to support oneself. To love your neighbor as yourself does not mean to give someone what they should be earning for themself. It does not mean doing something for someone that they should be doing for themself.
To love ones neighbor means to enable them to do for themselves, they'll feel better about it and I will too.

AMEN BRUTHA! ~Jesus also says that we should not muzzle the ox that powers the grain grinder. He also says that all work is profitable. Not sure that he advocates dehumanizing others by making them soley dependant on others for their sustenance.
I love Jesus more than life itself. I give generously to the charities that He directs me to give to. Just happens that it doesn't include abortion mills like Planned Parenthood, that perpetual the lie that an unborn child is less important than the choice his or her mother must make. That is just the tip of the iceberg of places where I have not been directed to give.
Anyway, I agrees wholeheartedly with BlueDog...Thanks

[Guest]

Right on BlueDog and Katz Pajamas. Liberals are so compassionate and loving and generous with other people's money. No one is stopping Bugs and any of the others to help out financially those who they feel are needy. Many do through charitable donations and volunteer work.

Jesus said "Love thy neighbor as thyself", as Bugs pointed out. I don't take that loving to mean "Confiscate your neighbor's money and spread it around as you see fit".

[Guest]

Slashing $868 million from a program to help low-income women, infants, and children to fund more money to big corporation farm subsidies?

Let's add one more quotation to those excellent ones listed earlier.

"Love your neighbor as yourself." - Jesus


If people followed this commandment, there would be no need for the government programs which operate by taking money from taxpayers at the threat of penalty and/or imprisonment if you fail to give your share.

[Guest]

OMG :yuck:

[Guest]

Agree with you, Dale.

It seems as though these conservatives would rather give money for big corporations farm subsidies.

72% of farms are now big corporations rather than family farms. Did you know that the family farmer can get $80,000 per year in farm subsidies, too? That is in addition to whatever they make without subsidies.

[Guest]

That's not true is it Tbugs? I don't think the number is that high. Where did you get that figure? The USDA numbers show something quite the opposite.

[Guest]

Compassionate or not is not the problem. The problem is poor management of these programs, and I suspect in many cases outright fraud and waste.

First I abhor corporate bailouts (period). Secondly there are very legimate reasons why people need help and in some cases because of various diabilities will always need help. We should help these folks and we should encourage them to help themselves without pulling the rug out from under them. There are many people out there free loading and controls need to be built in to turn that around. My concern is that some pols will throw the baby out with the bathwater. i agree we need to cut back on some programs my concern for the truly needy is that the government acts based on political motivations. What I am saying is before you begin discussion define the situations were assistance is needed and examples where you see fraud/waste and solutions. A military vet totally disabled may need permanent or temp assistance depending on the possibility of vocational training, etc

[Guest]

I just cannot believe we have Americans who are either so selfish or so brainwashed. Corporate welfare,attavks on unions,unfathomable military spending,taxbreaks for the wealthiest....nothing said. And to talk about wasteful spending and not mention the defense budget is just wrong. It is the most wasteful of any of our programs. I don't get it. And this work or starve garbage is just that,garbage. Most Americans are hard working,honest people. Those who beat the system are in the minority and the money they steal isn't equal to one Abrams tank or one nuclear sub. Instead of screwing the disadvantaged and the poor how about going where the real stealing is taking place. Oh I forgot,those are the groups with the biggest lobbyists and the biggest payouts.Its easy to attack people and groups who are not represented,it takes no guts.

[Guest]

Thank you, Waynet. Amazing what kind of response this posting brought. I knew the right wing-nuts were crazy all the time - but not selfish to the point they have showed themselves to be in their posts.

Just a couple of them showed some compassion for others - most were just mean-spirited haters.

[Guest]

Absolutely right on waynet.

[Guest]

Ahhh, we have a liberal love-fest on this thread. Glad to be of service. I've got the song you can all listen to as you revel in your collective aggrandizement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3MiD_U4CHQ&feature=related

[Guest]

Richie, my friend - I know you just wanted to be included in the love-fest with Actor, Dale, Waynet, and me. See, chilling out over a Yeungling serves a good purpose, doesn't it?

Anyhow, I did enjoy the clip of Joan Baez. I met her on Aug. 28, 1963 at the Lincoln Memorial at the Freedom March when Dr. King made his I Have A Dream speech. I also had the honor that day to meet Martin Luther King, Jr. Quite a day for an 18 year old kid from the all-white 'burbs.

[Guest]

Richie, my friend - I know you just wanted to be included in the love-fest with Actor, Dale, Waynet, and me. See, chilling out over a Yeungling serves a good purpose, doesn't it?

Anyhow, I did enjoy the clip of Joan Baez. I met her on Aug. 28, 1963 at the Lincoln Memorial at the Freedom March when Dr. King made his I Have A Dream speech. I also had the honor that day to meet Martin Luther King, Jr. Quite a day for an 18 year old kid from the all-white 'burbs.

I have to admit, in all honesty, that I've been a fan of Joan Baez for many years myself. She brings me back to my hippie flower power days of wine and roses and peace marches on Washington D.C. When I returned from southeast Asia, I was not a happy knee-jerk patriotic American boy.

But time goes on, I grew up and raised my family and I left my childish notions behind and reinvigorated myself in the value of our country and our freedom. I want my son and my daughter and their children to have the same chance to excel in our country without having the government riding on their back and holding the reins.

I know you don't believe it, but the country that you enjoyed is not the country that is being created by the people you support.

[Guest]

I think I'll keep my "childish" notions Richie. :yuck:

[Guest]

Ahhh, we have a liberal love-fest on this thread. Glad to be of service. I've got the song you can all listen to as you revel in your collective aggrandizement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3MiD_U4CHQ&feature=related


Richie come join the love fest. Don't be such a hater. Man, those dudes are even quoting scripture. Peace, love and give the government your money to help people man. That will give you more time to chill. Sit back and play golf and let somebody else look after the poor starving babies and mothers.

[Guest]

You guys are quick to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a heartless Republican or Conservative. I'm none of the above.
I'm a lifelong Democrat who has spent a huge part of my life working with the disadvantaged. This is not my profession but it is my passion.
I am however, a thinking Democrat. You don't fix problems by simply shoveling money at them. There are far too many families who have been on public assistance for generations. I see young mothers with multiple small children and no father to help, financially or in parenting. I see too many people who work very hard in low paying jobs while others have never had a job and probably never will. Wouldn't it be better to get these folks into training programs for real jobs that will pay a living wage? Training not just in the actual job skills but in learning a basic work ethic.
I'm afraid some of you have a very narrow, prejudiced view of the world. There are serious problems out there which require a more pragmatic approach. Keeping people in poverty generation after generation is truly heartless.

[Guest]

The GOP could get away with cutting $800+M from the WIC program *if* they weren't increasing Big Farm subsidies. You put those two together and you have a PR nightmare.

[Guest]

I think I'll keep my "childish" notions Richie. :yuck:

Never expected anything different Dale. It's nice to know we understand each other, though.

[Guest]

Richie come join the love fest. Don't be such a hater. Man, those dudes are even quoting scripture. Peace, love and give the government your money to help people man. That will give you more time to chill. Sit back and play golf and let somebody else look after the poor starving babies and mothers.

Maybe you're right BK. Let me take another toke and I'll ponder it some more. Look at all the colors..............

[Guest]

The GOP could get away with cutting $800+M from the WIC program *if* they weren't increasing Big Farm subsidies. You put those two together and you have a PR nightmare.

You're right of course considering the lobbyists who control campaign finance, and the Red States being in the country's heartland, and the Iowa caucuses fast approaching, that the Republicans are focused on their own interests on this one.

It's politics as usual, and the liberal media focus as usual. There are plenty of stories of Democrat proposed actions or inactions related to campaign money, that are not in the general public interest, and are not the focus of media scrutiny. But, that's life in the big city.

[Guest]

Maybe you're right BK. Let me take another toke and I'll ponder it some more. Look at all the colors..............

Natural man. Natural. lol

[Guest]

Richie: I completely agree with you there.

But, as we all know, the Supreme Court declared, in essence that Money=Speech for corporations.

I wonder what the consequences would be if the concept of the corporation as an 'artificial citizen' were revoked and replaced with a much more limited set of rights and responsibilities.

And as I was typing that, another thought occurred to me... Isn't that sort of the same as wanting to rescind the citizenship of "anchor babies"? (Just read a column on the burgeoning Chinese industry of anchor-baby-tourism to give rich Chinese a long-term way to get out of China by taking maternity trips to the US)

The only difference is that "anchor babies" are real people and corporations are not.

I wonder what the Founding Fathers would think of the concept of our corporations buying up the government. I know Jefferson thought there was little in life that was more dangerous than a bank (the mega-corporation of it's time)

[Guest]

Richie: I completely agree with you there.

But, as we all know, the Supreme Court declared, in essence that Money=Speech for corporations.

I wonder what the consequences would be if the concept of the corporation as an 'artificial citizen' were revoked and replaced with a much more limited set of rights and responsibilities.

And as I was typing that, another thought occurred to me... Isn't that sort of the same as wanting to rescind the citizenship of "anchor babies"? (Just read a column on the burgeoning Chinese industry of anchor-baby-tourism to give rich Chinese a long-term way to get out of China by taking maternity trips to the US)

The only difference is that "anchor babies" are real people and corporations are not.

I wonder what the Founding Fathers would think of the concept of our corporations buying up the government. I know Jefferson thought there was little in life that was more dangerous than a bank (the mega-corporation of it's time)

Are not companies, in effect, a gathering of people? How do you legally differentiate a person from his business? No matter what you decide, I'm sure a smart lawyer will figure out the loophole.

[Guest]

I agreed with citzen primarily because it restore balance of power wherein Unions had a distinct advanayage and hence the Democrats.

However, I believe that allowing corporation and unions that much power corrupts our political system.

Let me give you an example. There is a charity that became a major political event in our corporation. It actually became a part of the promotional process. It got so bad that if managers did not contribute what the corporation viewed as the limited contribution it went in their file as a negative toward leadership. I had been asked to be a captain and managed 98% of our goal. As a HR guy people would come in and compalin that they were being forced to conribute a higher % than their salary increase.

The chair of event ( President of the subsidiary) demanded thsat I go back and raise the additional 2%. I refused. I called our legal department in Home Office. They refused to get involved...obvious why. so the chair pulled in people and demanded they kick in more. what was this all about " afeather in his cap" Needless to say I never ever again contributed to that charity and eventual lft this company.

So that is a small example of why I am against corporation/union involvement

[Guest]

Rubicon: The hypocrisy is that the liberals only want corporations regulated concerning political donations. They exempted the unions from that law. Gee; I wonder why?

I'm not sure what your inter-office charity shakedown has to do with campaign finance, but it is an interesting story.

[Guest]

Yes, Richie, corporations ARE a collection of people. In that sense they shouldn't have TWO voices (one as the people and one as the corporation). The Voice of The People should suffice.

We The People vote. We The People are who the government is chartered to protect. We The People, not We The Oil Companies or We Big Pharma or We Big Agriculture.

I don't have a problem, per se, with corporations. I *do* have a problem with them buying our legislators.

I wonder what would happen if suddenly it were passed tha NO corporate OR UNION money could be donated to campaigns - with NO side-stepping the law by making "issues-based advertisements". You are a corporation or a union? Fine - THE FIRST AMMENDMENT DOESN'T APPLY TO YOU - IT APPLIES TO YOUR EMPLOYEES/MEMBERS.

It's interesting that I can't go to Wal-Mart and do any solicitation, but Wal-Mart can buy up the airwaves to make pitches to ME. (And, mind you, in general, I have a favorable opinion of Wal-Mart - just wish they did more 'buy America' like before)

[Guest]

Slashing $868 million from a program to help low-income women, infants, and children to fund more money to big corporation farm subsidies?

Let's add one more quotation to those excellent ones listed earlier.

"Love your neighbor as yourself." - Jesus

BBugs, I'd ask you again for was cut, the savings from the cut, the efficiency of the distribution of monies, what was the purpose and was it met, etc. However, I know that you do not believe in accountability in government programs. Intentions, not results count with you.

In quoting part of the Greatest Commandment, you missed what was being said. What was said was, "Love the Lord YOUR God with all YOUR soul, and all YOUR mind and with all YOUR strength. The second is this: Love YOUR neighbor as YOURSELF. There is no greater commandment than these. Christ's emphasis is on what YOU should do; not the church or the government. YOU.

The parable of the Good Samaritan makes this point - representatives of the church and the government (a priest and a Levite) pass by the injured man. The Samaritan came by and cared for the traveller with his own work and out of his own pocket. Christ's instruction to the people is to, "Go and do as he did."

In Mathew 25 he said, as a part of the parable of The Sheep and the Goat, “34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and YOU gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and YOU gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and YOU invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and YOU clothed me, I was sick and YOU looked after me, I was in prison and YOU came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever YOU did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, YOU did for me.’

The focus of Christ’s teachings was individual action and responsibility. He spoke of what we should do as individuals not what should be done by governments. Yes, you should pay your taxes and render unto Cesar that which is Cesar’s, but that does not give you a pass on your own individual actions. They are what is required of us to conform to the Great Commandment. I know you serve as a Salvation Army bell ringer and that is a good example of what we can do an d should do more rather than relying on the Priests and Levites.

[Guest]

My lord!!:yuck:

[Guest]

BBQMan,

I am impressed you remembered I am a Salvation Army bell ringer. Maybe you would like to volunteer a few hours this Thanksgiving and Christmas season with us? It would be appreciated by many people.

I am also impressed by your long post. I honestly do not know if there were government charities in Biblical times.

Good posting.

[Guest]

Rubicon: The hypocrisy is that the liberals only want corporations regulated concerning political donations. They exempted the unions from that law. Gee; I wonder why?

I'm not sure what your inter-office charity shakedown has to do with campaign finance, but it is an interesting story.

Richielion, my intent in telling the charity story was to cite an example of how a corporation/union can and will place political pressure on employees/members

When finishing school nights, I worked days and was forced to join two unions, Steelworkers and Teamsters and they didn't act any differently than above-mentioned corporation...the intimidation is invisible but its there