@mur'phon- not arguing for whether or not unions should exist, though. May not be big on unions, but don't oppose their right to exist in the private sector. But many of the reasons unions are touted so strongly lie in claims that workers were being exploited and forced to work in inhumane conditions, not merely that they didn't get a bigger share (let alone any argument about what level of profit sharing they were entitled to) of the companies' profits. In that sense, they are largely redundant. Also, it might be a little easier to feel some level of sympathy for unions if they didn't spend money so lopdsidedly on one political party with their members' dues, regardless of how the members felt about it. This would be true whether it was the dems, reps, greens, etc.. that were the beneficiaries of such largesse.
@WCH--nothing misleading, let alone a lie
. FDR recognized the conflict of interest in public employee unions, never said whether he was sympathetic toward their perceived struggles. We saw w/PATCO what happens when public employees decide to "stick it to the man".