Friday, February 22, 2008

Issue: Why Aren't Predateachers Fired? Teachers Unions. Why? See This:

8 comments:

christopher said...

I knew the legislation presented by Linda Flores is really a disguised attack on the Teachers Union. Way to easy to see. And too many states doin the same thing right now. You people should be better informed, because the Unionocrats know all about this.

Victoria Taft said...

Yes, I'm sure Linda Flores had only the teachers union in mind when she suggested a bill amendment that tried to crack down on confidential agreements to allow predateachers to go teach somewhere else. I'm sure she didn't have welfare of children in mind at all.
What we may be seeing Christopher is the myopic view of the teachers union which believes all union activities must be preserved regardless of whether children are left more vulnerable to abuse.
We know the teachers unions aren't in business to watch over children.
This is just another example...another brick in the wall to show the voter and taxpayer that their interests and the interests of their children come AFTER teachers unions' needs.
Sad, but true.

Klatu said...

christopher said...
I knew the legislation presented by Linda Flores is really a disguised attack on the Teachers Union.

Klatu said: SO -- Unions should not have ever been in the Government Sector, Period.
Unions are for Private sector
Businesses (MAYBE) and for Collective Bargaining and Wages, Nothing else. By Protecting Criminals(Predateachers) Prositutes and thats what they are they've out lived there usefulness and Unions actually maybe commiting crimes by protecting these Prositutes Predateachers pretending to be Teachers.

Hey "BS" how bout a statewide initative allowing Teachers to leave these worthless 1970's era Teachers Unions once and for all. Better Yet "BS" lets have at it an Initative saying Oregon is finnally a
"RIGHT TO WORK STATE" without being forced into a Union Period.

christopher said...

protecting children, yeah, right, this legislation is far to common right now in too many states to be really about protecting children. Its about taking the unions out, exaggerations will get you nowhere Victoria, it only makes you look bad.

MAX Redline said...

Its about taking the unions out,

Christopher, do you happen to know what percentage of the workforce is represented by unions today?

Say "pop", pull your head out of your butt, and perhaps you'll begin to realize that the reason why the vast majority of folks don't care much for unions is precisely illustrated by the fact that the teachers just shuffle pedophiles from one place to another - defending their own, rather than the children.

BEAR said...

If it wasn't o.k. for the Catholic Church, it ain't o.k. for the unions. If they want make their stand based on this issue, then it's time to destroy the unions, utterly!

tnr said...

What I do not understand is, that thay report parents who might disapline there child by spanking . Yet the hide , cover up , these teachers .

I see a big , i mean BIG law suit coming !

Scottiebill said...

John Derbyshire, an author and opinion writer, has written, "The quality of any product or service varies in inverse proportion to the political power wielded by those labor unions to which the producers or service providers belong".

This is extremely true in the case of the teachers' unions, regardless of which state they are in. And is especially true in the case of the pedoteachers, as Victoria has wisely and quite cleverly chosen to call these creeps.

These pedoteachers are one very important reason for public flogging should be brought back. Maybe even a pillory in Pioneer Courthouse Square for the exclusive use of pedoteachers and other pedophiles.