Electing Tyler Nixon: Gerald Brady and the Unions

Here's an interesting question for voters in Delaware's 4th House District.

Fact: Gerald Brady is employed as the Executive Director of the Delaware AFL-CIO.

Fact: Gerald Brady has solicited and received over $5,000 in campaign contributions from unions (including the Delaware AFL-CIO) over the past two years.

In 2006:
Delaware AFL-CIO--$600
Political Education Committee, Local 1238 IBEW--$300
ABC Educational Fund Local 27 [Baltimore MD]-$100

In 2007:
FOP State PAC--$200
PAC Local Union No. 451 --$200
Local 42 PAC Asbestos Workers --$300
Delaware Building Trades --$200
Bricklayers & Allied Crafts Local 1PA/DE PAC Fund--$600
Plumbers & Pipeﬁtters Local No.74 PAC--$600
Wilm Police/Fire Pension Task Force--$100
ABC Educational Fund Local 27 --$100
F.O.P.State PAC Fund--$400
IUOE Local 542 --$400
Carpenters Local #626 --$600
IBEW Local #313 --$300
Politial Education Committee, IBEW local #1238--$300

Grand total (not including what Gerald has socked away so far in 2008): $5,200

Now the question: How is it not a conflict of interest for the Executive Director of the Delaware AFL-CIO to be soliciting and receiving campaign contributions from the organizations he is paid to coordinate?

Democrats--both liberal and progressive--are encouraged to try their hands at this one.

There will be a test later.

Libertarian/Republican Tyler Nixon for the Delaware House of Representatives!!

Comments

Anonymous said…

The reason why labor unions contribute to Gerald Brady's campaign is because he's a exceptional state representative and a good man. His performance the past two years in Dover has demonstrated this. He's succeeded in passing eleven pieces of legislation in his first term, that's pretty impressive. It's not a conflict of interest, it's called doing a great job.

October 21, 2008 at 11:23 AM

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog