Rather than seeing the Super Bowl as a big event for Indiana, Maddow’s guest, Indiana State Rep. Scott Pelath, sees it as a “national platform” for Big Labor “education” through disruption.

Indiana AFL-CIO union boss Nancy Guyott pulls no punches describing the chaos she intends to create; she has declared war on Super Bowl spectators. From Sterling Wong at Minyanville.com:

“They think they won a war because you fought this little skirmish like it was a war,” said Indiana AFL-CIO President Nancy Guyott. “I know the Indiana labor movement and our opponents haven’t seen nothing yet.”

So Super Bowl fans, the storming of Super Bowl Village on Wednesday was just a warm up for Big Labor’s Sunday fracas. Rather than working to make their current union members want to remain union members, Big Labor thugs would rather use their forced-dues-filled coffers to create chaos at the Super Bowl and in the streets of Indiana. Their goal is to disappoint millions of Americans and bring back legislation that compels people to pay to unions.

These Super Bowl shenanigans may become a game changer. Big Labor intimidation tactics may finally be seen for what they are: an attempt bully the nation. Maybe politicians like Pelath and commentators like Maddow will begin to feel the heat for embracing Big Labor’s thuggish tactics.

And, congratulations Indiana for giving Right To Work freedom Hoosiers so they can choose to join and pay for these thugs, or keep their own wages from them.

*** Just In *** Washington Post reports unions have backed down and will not disrupt the Super Bowl.  “The president of Indiana AFL-CIO is promising union members will not disrupt the Super Bowl festivities in Indianapolis”

Here’s a typical example, in which Giljum describes how to make labor negotiations “personal”–and note that at several points, his co-lecturer, Judy Ancel, laughs or interjects with approval:

Giljum: …we had to make him [the CEO] feel the concern and the anxiety that he was gonna have to live with. So we, you know, made all kinds of overtones about sabotaging the equipment, OK? We downloaded a lot of articles off of the Internet and laid them around the plant about, [Ancel: laughs] you know, this equipment being sabotaged and that equipment. That’s all they were–nobody was doing anything.

Ancel: You never said anything, did you?

Giljum: No, no. We just downloaded the articles and laid them out there, OK, for people to read. They–”Hey, look at this article I found,” you know. It wasn’t us, it was members that would do that. We had a group of guys that would always end up at the same shopping center, at the same church, as the CEO would on Sundays and that, in the evenings, OK? Wouldn’t say nothing, just kind of bumped into the guy and said, “Hey, how you doing,” that’s it. “How’s negotiations going? Heard they’re not going too well,” and then walk off, OK. [It] got to a point where, you know, the guy became very paranoid, very concerned, when he would walk out into the plant he would wear a flak jacket [Ancel: laughs], OK, and a helmet with a face guard on it, because he was afraid of being shot at…

In the original class footage, Giljum goes on to state that no one had actually threatened the CEO verbally (and doesn’t specify which company was the target), but indicates that he was clearly happy to have gained bargaining power through such methods. He advises students to do likewise, and “get a few guys to do a few things.” Ancel thanks him for his contribution without contesting his advice.

Here is the statement from Ameren.

We are appalled by the comments of the former business manager of a union representing our workers and employees of other companies and by the actions he describes in his lecture. If we ever had any evidence of sabotage at any of our facilities, we would have immediately notified law enforcement officials. We do not know of any such sabotage but would immediately turn over to law enforcement anyone who threatens our operations in any way. We have a policy of protecting anyone reporting information about sabotage or other illegal actions and encourage anyone to come forward with information about this. We have full confidence in our employees and have in place extensive security training programs and procedures aimed at protecting our facilities, our employees and the public.

Yet in Wisconsin, and elsewhere throughout the country, liberals find this tactic to be acceptable if not preferable.

This kind of intimidation has no place in our society. “We know where you live” is the inherent message here and it simply doesn’t belong. Then again these types of completely uncalled for tactics are par for the course on the left aren’t they?

Cross-posted at The Blast.

Follow Eyeblast.tv on Twitter and Facebook.

They can run, but they can’t hide. We’re gonna be over there this afternoon, and we’re gonna find you. And if you try to leave town without doing your job, we’re gonna chase you. And when you come back home, we’ll be there.

And now it’s all on video (skip to 3:37):

No, it wasn’t the Tea Party protest against the health care bill last month in Washington, D.C. It was the protest that union leaders staged in Springfield, Illinois this week, calling on state legislators to raise taxes–or else.

The threats were direct, they were physical, and they were made in broad daylight. Yet there was no outrage from a media that has, in general, been at great pains to cast the Tea Party movement as violent and extreme.

The man delivering the threats was Henry Bayer, director of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). But there are plenty of union workers who would prefer to keep their jobs without paying higher taxes.

A bipartisan consensus is emerging in Illinois that the solution to the state’s terrible financial mess–the second-worst in the nation after California–is to cut spending. In today’s Chicago Tribune, Democratic state senator Jack Franks writes:

Illinois doesn’t have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. State revenue this year is at the third-highest level in the history of Illinois. We have more money than we had in 2007… Those who see an income tax increase as the only solution do not understand the problem… We have to shrink the size of government through better accounting and restrained spending.

Illinois voters seem to agree. Gov. Pat Quinn, who took over from fellow Democrat Rod Blagojevich last year, is running on a pledge to raise taxes–and trailing badly against Republican state senator Bill Brady.

Our debt crisis, at the state and federal levels, could be solved by leaders from both parties who are prepared to grapple with fiscal reality. That is what people at the Tea Party demonstrations–who come from a variety of political backgrounds–have been advocating, peacefully.

But we will struggle to solve our problems in a climate of intimidation. It’s about time the media took notice of the violent rhetoric of those who want to force Americans to part with more of what we earn.

David Bego, a business owner in Indianapolis whom my fellow BG bloggers have referenced, gave an often emotional keynote speech outlining in great detail the nightmare experience of SEIU attacking his company. After telling the union he would not sign away the secret-ballot rights of his employees, he says the union responded that it would begin its attack, warning: “We enjoy conversation, but we embrace confrontation.”

In his book, The Devil At My Doorstep (Amazon), Bego writes:

One minute, we were enjoying the fruits of our labors minding our own business, and the next attacks begin lambasting the company as a “rat contractor” that cleaned buildings dubbed “Houses of Horror” for janitors who were exploited, intimidated, threatened, and abused all in the name of corporate greed. For the first time in our history, multiple National Labor Relations Board filings, frivolous charges with questionable evidence, would be filed against us for employee rights violations and for firing union supporters as the EMS image was dragged through the mud.

Americans have to wake up to what’s going on on shopfloors and in boardrooms across the country. U.S. businesses are being attacked and forced to swallow bad contracts and sign away employees’ rights to remain union-free — sometimes they are even denied the right to vote on whether they want to be union-free.

For those aware of ACORN and SEIU’s philosophical roots, an analysis of corporate campaigns by George Washington University professor Jarol Manheim uncovered strikingly familiar tactics and language:

• The corporate campaign was invented by the New Left in the 1970s, and by the 1990s was in widespread use by the labor movement. To date, unions have waged nearly 300 campaigns against employers, primarily, though not exclusively, to facilitate organizing.
• Corporate campaigns employ “power structure analysis” to identify and exploit vulnerabilities in the critical stakeholder relationships on which all companies depend. This broad strategic approach is then implemented through tactics that range from highly sophisticated financial and governance initiatives to street theater and even psychological warfare.
• Typically, the role of the corporate campaign today is to force management to accede to union demands for “card check and neutrality”—a process by which the union certification procedures administered by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are effectively circumvented. A recent innovation here is the substitution of non-NLRB elections for card check, which has been coupled with a widening attack on the NLRB itself.

(emphasis added)

MORE READING:

• For a great BG post on corporate campaigns, see this from Don Loos.
• For more information on the ways ACORN gets hired by unions for corporate campaigns, click here.
• For those interested, be sure to see how SEIU uses its vicious corporate campaign tactics on its own union brethren.

SEIU has been engaged in a fire-fight with the National Union of Health Workers. For SEIU, it isn’t enough that workers are unionized, but they must be unionized AND their dues flow into the purple political machine. The video features SEIU official David Regan, who ran the union’s voting campaign. Keep in mind, again, the “opponents” he mentions aren’t Republicans or businesses, but another labor union.

We hold out no hope that federal labor officials will seriously investigate SEIU’s fraud. Its President, Andy Stern, is, after all, America’s most frequent White House guest.

Still, that doesn’t mean the public shouldn’t be informed of SEIU’s actions. We have a treasure trove of information on SEIU’s fight with its fellow union. It is a story that will unfold here over the coming weeks.