The Washington Examiner reported that Judicial Watch has
uncovered internal emails at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
that reveal a petty, whiny acting general counsel, who is jealous of the
publicity recess-appointed NLRB member Craig Becker has received.
The acting general counsel worries that he has not been getting due credit for the NLRB decision to attack Boeing Corp.’s building a second production line in the state of South Carolina, writing, “I didn’t read all of the meltwater articles, but some of the headlines tie Boeing to Craig. Unbelievable.”
Apparently, the acting general counsel is proud of his effort to have the federal government dictate plant-location decisions for private companies based upon political calculations.
Unfortunately for the acting general counsel, in a recent poll by “the polling inc.” conducted on behalf of Americans for Limited Government, 72 percent of registered voters thought it was a “bad idea” that the NLRB has the power to dictate where, that is, in which states, companies can locate their places of work or production facilities.
The House of Representatives has already acted to strip the NLRB of all pretense of power to make corporate location decisions as a direct result of the acting general counsel's efforts.
Of course the acting general counsel of the NLRB can also claim credit for launching a legal jihad against the states of Utah, South Carolina, Arizona and South Dakota, because their voters had the audacity to decide that they wanted to protect workers’ right to a secret ballot in deciding whether their workplace should be represented by a labor union.
Right now, the acting general counsel of the NLRB is actually suing the citizens of the state of Arizona, and is threatening to sue South Dakota, using taxpayer dollars to further the agenda of his Big Labor masters. This forced South Carolina GOP Rep. Jeff Duncan to introduce legislation to relieve the NLRB of these powers.
Of course, the acting general counsel is only “acting,” rather than the real general counsel, because he is so well-known in the U.S. Senate that no one wants to vote to give him the job permanently.
So there he sits, with “acting” before his title, uncomfirmable and desperately in need of attention.
And that is why I am not using his name, because this individual is supposed to be concerned with the law, not his own name plate and press clips.
So, Mr. Acting, when you read this article in your clips — and based upon your emails, we know you will — please know that I deliberately gave Craig Becker a mention by name — he is an appointed decisionmaker, albeit one I think is wrong.
You, on the other hand, are supposed to be a legal arbiter, and the job you have been doing in “destroying the economy” is deserving of ignominy, and your name will not be mentioned.