Constant Conservative

The title is gratefully ripped off from the closer to Michelle Malkin’s latest on the UAW:

While carmakers soak up $17 billion in taxpayer bailout funds and demand more for their ailing industry, United Auto Workers bosses have wasted tens of millions of their workers’ dues on gold-plated resorts and rotten investments.

[...]

In May and November 2007, the UAW forked over nearly $53,000 for union staff meetings at the Thousand Hills Golf Resort in Branson, Missouri. In September 2007, the UAW dropped another $5,000 at the Lakes of Taylor Golf Club in Taylor, Michigan and another $9,000 at the Thunderbird Hills Golf Club in Huron, Ohio. Another bill for $5,772 showed up for the Branson, Missouri golf resort.

I do not play golf. I’ve been told that this is a serious lack on my part. My response is usually along the lines of “if you want me to hit something that small and that far away, I think I’ll use a rifle.” That aside, there is nothing wrong with people playing golf, or even for companies to pay for golf outings. There is, however,  something substantially wrong with what should be a not-for-profit organization (the UAW) spending union dues on such adventures.

I realize that hypocrisy is an overworked term these days. Full disclosure: we are all hypocrites in that our actions fail to entirely and completely measure up to our words. But is there not something terribly hypocritical about the activities of the UAW? They were started to ensure that the “the worker” got a fair shake from the “the factory” and was not taken financial advantage of in the process. Seems very much as though they are taking financial advantage of their members. Dare we say that the union has become the factory and will do whatever it can to perpetuate itself, despite the damage it might cause to the very people it claims to help?

Perhaps it is time for a massive retirement party–for everyone in the UAW who draws a salary from the union. I’ll help out with place settings and mints. Anybody want to get the balloons . . . ?