IAFF Supports Obama

[jcoppola 52]

Not to get too political here, but the IAFF has put it's support behind Barack Obama for the 2008 Presidential Election. As a member of the IAFF, I am quite upset and suprised at this move, as I would have thought the IAFF, in it's infinite wisdom, would have supported a man who is veteran of the US Armed Forces, a national war hero and former POW. Instead, our leaders have chosen to back a man who has a lot of ideas and has offered no explanations on how he will accomplish them.

I am quite perterbed over this endorsement and I am positively voting for John McCain in the election.

Joe C.

P.S. I am glad to have made this post my 500th.

[Goose 188]

Very scary. But, i guess that's the beauty of this country...at the end of the day you get to vote for whoever you want for whatever reasons you wish.

[x129K 1,393]

[Guest Photounit]

Great, I have been really looking for a reason not to vote for Obamma...... Now I have it! Only kidding........ They all STINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Beachbum 1]

I have to agree with Joe C. It is very shameful in the IAFF's decision to support him, all these promises and nothing to back it, amongst other things I will leave out because it will cetainly get this thread deleted.

[Danger 160]

I know nothing about why so I can't back this up, but my father is a former union president (IBEW 320) and still very active and he says that McCain would love to destroy organized labor and he'd vote for the other guy no matter who it was. So maybe that is the reasoning.

Edited August 18, 2008 by Danger

[jcoppola 52]

I know nothing about why so I can't back this up, but my father is a former union president (IBEW1320) and still very active and he says that McCain would love to destroy organized labor and he'd vote for the other guy no matter who it was. So maybe that is the reasoning.

I would totally agree that the Democratic Party has a better record with supporting labor unions, and the IAFF almost ALWAYS supports the Democratic candidate.

[Beachbum 1]

The United States is in trouble no matter who gets elected to office. Good thing for checks and balances.

[Goose 188]

I know nothing about why so I can't back this up, but my father is a former union president (IBEW 320) and still very active and he says that McCain would love to destroy organized labor and he'd vote for the other guy no matter who it was. So maybe that is the reasoning.

And Obama will destroy this country from the top down. If he gets elected, you'll be more worried about dodging car bombs than your union. Ontop of that, hes going to tax us all to kingdom come, add layer ontop of layer of ineffective bureaucracy and is hell bent on destroying our health care system.

[pjreilly 6]

It is an outrage. But work is only part of my life I am electing a President for the good of the country. The IAFF is putting the labor spin on this guy and sandbagging McCain for his labor views. He may have ideas, but they must be approved before they make drastic changes. There is no way I would leave the fate of this great country to a man who wont cover his heart during the pledge of allegiance, would not wear a flag on his lapel until urged to do so by his campaign, and a corrupt politician. Not to mention his religious affiliation. Reverend WRONG

[M' Ave 1,466]

GOOD! Something new is what this country needs. Obama may not be perfect, but he's a lot better than an irrelevant, OLD man who's a little too closely aligned with Bush. McCain won't survive two terms, I bet he can't make it through 1. It's sad, but he's not in shape to be president. God bless him for his service to this country, but that doesn't make you presidential material.

[FFPCogs 863]

I have to agree that this country is in deep s*it no matter who gets elected, but it usually is at election time. Maybe that's because all our problems are repeatedly hammered upon by the candidates for soundbytes blaming the "other" guy or party. Once elected it gets awfully quiet regarding all our ills again...just business as usual. The President isn't a dictator, (although some have tried) and they must work with the Congress so.....

Does it really doesn't matter who gets elected anyway? The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, jobs will still be flooding overseas, the economy will still suck, we'll still be in Iraq, we'll still be in Afghanistan...sh*t we might end up in Georgia toe to toe with our old nemesis the Ruskies (anybody remember duck and cover) or bombing the crap out of Iran.

I'm a devout cynic when it comes to politicians and their ideas and promises. That being said, I'm also a firm believer that if you don't vote you have NO right to complain (although the Constitution says otherwise). So yeah it does matter who get elected.

For me McCain is less of a liar and opportunist than Obama and he's is (or at least was) an honorable man who suffered greatly when he could have gone home...he actually thought about someone other than himself. I believe somewhere in this man that integrity still exists, and even a little integrity is far better than what we've done to ourselves with the last few Presidents..yeah Good 'ole boy Bill too. Also having worked in a war zone to support the military, I would much rather have a man in the Oval Office who has actually served in the military, and more importantly is himself a war veteran, sending our young soldiers off to war. And at war we will most likely still be.

I'm no Karnak or Nostredomus, but it has been suggested based on previous elections that the new President may very well be tested by our enemies within his first year in office. Bill Clinton elected Nov. 1992, first WTC attack Feb 1993, GWB elected Nov. 2000...well we all know the rest. Who will be better suited to deal with this dreadful prospect when it occurs, a soldier, war veteran, veteran Senator involved in foreign affairs and miltary committees or a novice 1st term senator? It's 3am John has already answered the phone...it's still ringing at the Obama's.

Hey but if the polls are right, none of this matters and we'll be playing "hail to the Chief"' Obama. As a proud American I will always honor, support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, regardless who's President.

Cogs

[Guest MVFD334]

I can not understand for the life of me how someone can be called "Commander and Chief" yet they never served a day in the combat yet alone in a branch of service. We all know that presidents are nothing more than puppets controlled by congess and lobbyist, but irregardless I feel its a smack across the face to those protecting our county with their lives.

With that said why blame if IAFF? They are backing the individual that they feel is going to support them and not try to hurt them. I dont think their decision is based on who's more American, or who has the answers to questions that dont affect them. A person can be a total P.O.S with no morals, but if they are going to do good for you and keep money in your pocket do you really care?

And ditto that to those who complain but dont vote. Neither man might not be right but people paid in blood for you to choose.

[Oswegowind 17]

Our Country has its troubles, but where would you rather live????

President's can only get done what Congress will allow them. The problem is, every elected official has THEIR OWN agenda and fight against each other constantly. Of course this is much better than Communism or a dictatorship, but the same problems that we think should be fixed were someone else's solution to another problem. I don't foresee any of us living in shacks with tin roofs anytime soon, and this too will pass!

[ny10570 745]

IAFF is a union. Republicans have enacted legislation that makes it easier for businesses to suppress unions and have tried to curtail some of the protections offered by union membership. They will always go with the pro union party unless their candidate clearly a threat to their cause. The presidet only has so much power. The fact that Democrats will most likely be in charge of both the house and senate has much more to do with the direction our country will take in the coming years. A Republican president could definitely put some breaks on Democrats with his veto power the Dems will control the general direction of policy for the next two years. If its as bad as so many of you think then the backlash will hand the legislature back to the Republicans.

Seeing as how many years went into planning both those attacks I'm pretty sure thats a coincidence. After Regan was elected in '80 there were 3 bombing in '83, in '88 the PanAm bombing over lockerbie, and then there were our home grown duo in '95 who attacked Oklahoma City. The person in office does not dictate who is going to attack or when they're going to. They hate us for who we are and what we represent. They will continue to plan ways to try and disrupt our way of life no matter how hard we hit them or how far we try and pull back within our own boarders.

[FFPCogs 863]

"Democracy is the worst form of government...except for all others"

Winston Churchill

nuff said

[SageVigiles 1,194]

I know of very few unions that do not support democratic candidates.

[on the job 68]

I have to agree with Joe C. It is very shameful in the IAFF's decision to support him, all these promises and nothing to back it, amongst other things I will leave out because it will cetainly get this thread deleted.

WHAT GIVES??? first the IAFF is telling me where and who I SHOULD NOT work for on my "B" job.

Now.....there telling me to support Obama.

[FFPCogs 863]

WHAT GIVES??? first the IAFF is telling me where and who I SHOULD NOT work for on my "B" job.

Now.....there telling me to support Obama.

Well at least they haven't demanded sanctions against those who excercise their freedom of choice in the voting booth....YET !!

[EXDC203 38]

Did the IAFF poll its members to see who the majority wanted to endorse? If not my hand would be cramped writing letters to as many union officials as I could.I dont see how a union as big as IAFF would blatenly disreguard the indivdual feelings of its members.

[FFPCogs 863]

Common wisdom tells us:

Democrats = pro organized labor

Republicans = anti-organized labor

The truth is that's horsesh*t. What matters is what the rich get at the expense of the rest of us "peasants". GWB didn't create the current mess...Washington, the whole corrupt bunch of them, DID !!

And I wouldn't have it any other way...man I'm glad to be an American. Where else can one speak the truth..as they see it.

Cogs

[gamewell45 258]

Did the IAFF poll its members to see who the majority wanted to endorse? If not my hand would be cramped writing letters to as many union officials as I could.I dont see how a union as big as IAFF would blatenly disreguard the indivdual feelings of its members.

If your unhappy with the leadership of the IAFF, then you should vote to remove them next time you have elections in the union for officers.

[FirNaTine 370]

I know one thing McCain is strongly against and that's Affirmative Action. He's got my vote!

[mfkap 0]

I know one thing McCain is strongly against and that's Affirmative Action. He's got my vote!

That is very true.. he has been FIRMLY against it for almost 3 weeks now. For about 10 years before that, he actually supported many aspects of it. I guess that counts as strongly against as long as you are one of those people who don't let facts get in the way. If you want a list of the over 70 position changes he has had since going from "maverick" to "courting the right wing" you can visit http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops?t=3 . Of course you won't, but it doesn't make it not true.

SOURCES: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/20...n-reverses.html

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/John_McC...ivil_Rights.htm

"It doesn't take a great deal of effort to get shot down" - McCain

[ny10570 745]

The union is looking out for its best interest. It is your job as an educated voter to look at both candidates equally and based on their record, rhetoric, history, etc and make a decision based on who best serves you. Whats more important, who the candidate the IAFF chose or why they chose him. The IAFF has zero votes in the election. The members do and its up to them to choose their candidate.

[ffdude13 5]

Did the IAFF poll its members to see who the majority wanted to endorse? If not my hand would be cramped writing letters to as many union officials as I could.I dont see how a union as big as IAFF would blatenly disreguard the indivdual feelings of its members.

maybe the IAFF didn't poll it's members, but it is like you said. The union is very large, thus the board members/officers of this union made an overall decision that will benefit the union because the democratic party traditionally as well as in this current election are for organized labor. many people fail to realize that the Republican Party is actually against organized labor, however attract the blue collar votes by relating to them as more american with more military service etc. and many people will not vote for someone like Obama because of his color, religion, and lack of military service although in the end none have to do with the power and progress of the IAFF. in the end, the IAFF board/officers are just doing what they are suppose to, maintain and expand the presence and power of their union.

[calhobs 110]

As far as I know no union ever polls there members, the same as newspapers when that pick there candidate they do not poll there readers to pick whom they are picking. The IAFF picks who they think there members will benefit from. It has nothing to do how American they feel the person is. It does not matter if the person was in the Military, just because you where in the Armed Services does not mean you are a good or even a decent leader. I think the bigger issue is that some people are using Obama’s inexperience as an excuse not to vote for him, when the real reason is the color of his skin.

[FFPCogs 863]

As with any union the IAFF throws it's support behind the candidate that best suits their goals at the time. Nothing wrong with that. Even if they (or any) union were to poll it's membership there would always be those who voted the "wrong" way, and wouldn't agree with the endorsement. That's why union members have elected their leadership..to make those choices for them. Here again complain all you want..that's your right. But you can only change it by voting on the next ballot.

It may very well be that lack of miltary experience is not a factor in ones leadership abilities. There have been decent Presidents who were not military men, and some rotten ones who were. For me that experience is but ONE factor in who I think would make a better leader, as they are the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. There are many other factors to consider when stepping into that booth. A big one nowadays is the economy. Well when it comes to decisions about that, no matter the party affiliation it is ALWAYS about benefiting the rich, and always will be. NAFTA, well I recall the story in the news a few months back about an Obama aide in "private" consultation with our Canadian friends reassuring them that Obama will be NO threat to NAFTA..no matter what rhetoric he spews to the public. That was a back story...hmmmmm could it be favoritism on the part of the liberal media. Foriegn Affairs..well let's see Obama took a nice trip overseas to visit our allies..I guess that makes him an expert. National Security...Obama experience = NONE. On top of all that yes Barack Obama is an Afican American, and like it or not, as distasteful and utterly ridiculous as that fact may be in 2008..it WILL influence the votes of some. Personally, I could care less if a candidate is black, white, blue, green or yellow, it's about who I feel is the better man for the job based on their track record and current positions (where's Colin Powell when we need him).

John McCain has a long history of service to this country and the people of AZ. Barack Obama doesn't...yet. It may turnout that he will make a fine President, and I might vote for him..in 2012.

It's all academic anyway..the country wants a change and ANY Republican candidate would be seen a 4 more years of GWB right or wrong.

Cogs

Edited August 19, 2008 by FFPCogs

[firecapt32 282]

With out getting to deep in this--the IAFF has their convention--each local is given information on what will be taking place at the convention.That information is given to every local from the 5 man local to the 10,000 man local.

Each and every depegate has the right and oppourtunity to get up and to speak on the convention floor. so every memebr of the IAFF is represented at the convention. If you local doesnt go or cannot afford to go ,you can give your votes to a local that is going and with that, give them instructions on how to vote. That being said all IAFF member in some way have a say in what the Union does and in what direction it goes.

The IAFF is a labor organization and a well respected one at that s-o of course it does leand a little to the left but thats ok.

If you look at the IAFF web site you can see the comparasions that they are useing to make the decisions on endorsments.

Are they right not all the time-but they are there for the members protection,safety and help.

We are in a Country that allows us to have so much freedom in who we choose and how we go about choosing the leaders of our nation so make your decisions on election day with your head and your heart.

[ny10570 745]

Don't forget Coggs Bush and Clinton both has zero experience when they were elected. Bush was regularly mocked for how little he knew and Clinton was seen as rube from Arkansas. Bush won on religious and family values and Clinton won on his charm an public persona. We never elect the best candidate but it it somehow works out.