Anyone familiar with Brian Calley? (Snyder running mate)

Rick Snyder has named a running mate, Brain Calley. I can't find too much about his gun rights position but I did find this aticle-

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...amendment-march-at-the-michigan-state-capitol

I've seen him called a "strong conservative", and that he's anti-abortion and would like to make michigan a
right-to-work-state ( i can only dream), but not too much about 2A. Anyone familiar with him or his views?

detroit_fan said:

Rick Snyder has named a running mate, Brain Calley. I can't find too much about his gun rights position but I did find this aticle-

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...amendment-march-at-the-michigan-state-capitol

I've seen him called a "strong conservative", and that he's anti-abortion and would like to make michigan a
right-to-work-state ( i can only dream), but not too much about 2A. Anyone familiar with him or his views?

Click to expand...

I have worked with him. He is a nice guy and ultra conservative. He is pro-gun and has written letters to preemption violators for me (we are still working on it.). So he is a man of action. He is running for senator in my district. All in all a decent pro-gun candidate and would make a nice balance for Snyder

Venator said:

I have worked with him. He is a nice guy and ultra conservative. He is pro-gun and has written letters to preemption violators for me (we are still working on it.). So he is a man of action. He is running for senator in my district. All in all a decent pro-gun candidate and would make a nice balance for Snyder

Click to expand...

Thanks, that's what I was hoping to hear. Hopefully he can guide Snyder on some decisions that may come his way if they get elected.

That makes me feel a little better about Snyder.

Bronson

I like it! At this point the repubs could run a corpse out there and I'd vote for it before Virg got my vote. Looks like I can vote Snyder with a little clearer conscious.

That's more info then I received from Snyder's people set up at the Woodward cruise.

wright to work state?

detroit_fan said:

Rick Snyder has named a running mate, Brain Calley. I can't find too much about his gun rights position but I did find this aticle-

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...amendment-march-at-the-michigan-state-capitol

I've seen him called a "strong conservative", and that he's anti-abortion and would like to make michigan a
right-to-work-state ( i can only dream), but not too much about 2A. Anyone familiar with him or his views?

Click to expand...

What does "right to work state" mean if I may ask?

quarter horseman said:

What does "right to work state" mean if I may ask?

Click to expand...

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between trade unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or fees" a condition of employment. It allows people to get a job and not be forced to hand over part of their pay to a union if they don't want to join, but it still allows you to join a union by choice. Almost all of the jobs are either relocating or starting up in right to work states, like Boeing and Import car manufactures.

Heres a map of RTW states-

http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm

Michigan needs to be a "right to work" state. I hated having to be forced to give part of my paycheck to a union who in turn gave the money to politicians I didn't agree with. But, since the vast majority of them support liberal candidates who like to take money out of our pay checks, I guess it's only fitting that they do the same.

Anti-abortion & gun rights don't mix!

I've never understood how someone believes that being anti-abortion and pro-gun rights are consistent with liberty. On the one hand you want to government to tell someone that they can't control their body and on the other you want the government to be hands-off our guns. Do you see the disconnect here?
One of the main tenents of individual rights is having to put up with things and actions you don't agree with, but that don't harm you.
When you tell a woman she can't have an abortion you are making her a prostitute of the unborn child......

Everytime you vote for one of these individuals they grow stronger while we grow weaker. My hope is that someday people will just stop paying attention to politicians and they will just go away.

The problem of "right to work" laws, IMHO, is that it is a case of the state government interfering in what a company chooses to do. Much like an employer being mandated by law to be a "union shop" or "agency shop", these "Right to work" laws allow state governments to interfere with the ability of a employer to decide how it wants to run it's business. I would rather the state stay out of how a company chooses to run it's business as much as possible.

Shiawassee Mike said:

I've never understood how someone believes that being anti-abortion and pro-gun rights are consistent with liberty. On the one hand you want to government to tell someone that they can't control their body and on the other you want the government to be hands-off our guns. Do you see the disconnect here?
One of the main tenents of individual rights is having to put up with things and actions you don't agree with, but that don't harm you.
When you tell a woman she can't have an abortion you are making her a prostitute of the unborn child......

Everytime you vote for one of these individuals they grow stronger while we grow weaker. My hope is that someday people will just stop paying attention to politicians and they will just go away.

Click to expand...

I see it a little differently, when your not pregnant your body is your own, and the gov't should have no say, but once you become pregnant it is not just your body, it is also the baby's. If you can be charged with murder for killing the child as soon as it comes out why shouldn't you be charged with murder if you kill it while inside you? Also, it's not just the womens child, the fathers deserve equal rights. Many ways to see this issue obviously, just wanted to present mine.

DrTodd said:

The problem of "right to work" laws, IMHO, is that it is a case of the state government interfering in what a company chooses to do. Much like an employer being mandated by law to be a "union shop" or "agency shop", these "Right to work" laws allow state governments to interfere with the ability of a employer to decide how it wants to run it's business. I would rather the state stay out of how a company chooses to run it's business as much as possible.

Click to expand...

So do you think it's fair for a union to force a worker to give up part of his pay? Is it really gov't telling you how to run a business if they just say you can't force someone to do that? I see it as looking out for workers rights. If I got a job where there is a union what right do they have to take my money if I don't want to join? The real issue though is that the jobs are going to right to work states, there's no denying that, so we can watch them all leave and open up down south and out west, or we can try and get them to come here. It seems to me the hostile union environment of MI doesn't seem to be too good for new business growth.

detroit_fan said:

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between trade unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or fees" a condition of employment. It allows people to get a job and not be forced to hand over part of their pay to a union if they don't want to join, but it still allows you to join a union by choice. Almost all of the jobs are either relocating or starting up in right to work states, like Boeing and Import car manufactures.

Heres a map of RTW states-

http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm

Click to expand...

Thank you for that information, for some reason I have not heard of this, but I dont work for a union thank god! so maybe thats why I'm ignorent on the topic.

detroit_fan said:

So do you think it's fair for a union to force a worker to give up part of his pay?

-No one is forced to give up part of his pay since no one is forced to seek employment at any particular place BTW,Union jobs pay more, about 15% more after dues have been paid, on average, than non-union jobs. So you would rather make $100.00 a day with no union dues than make $115.00 after union dues are paid?

Is it really gov't telling you how to run a business if they just say you can't force someone to do that?
Yes. How is it OK for the government to say that a business owner has to operate under this rule? There are some very good reasons why a business owner may want to demand union membership. So, basically you are saying that the government needs to step in and stop this; to force companies to operate their business by legislative dictate? Historically, BIG business like the auto companies and major chains like Walmart, etc. are the ones who oppose this. In fact, the smaller the company, the more likely the owners are to support unions. http://mycrains.crainsnewyork.com/executive_inbox/2010/06/surprise-entrepreneurs-have-a.php

I see it as looking out for workers rights. If I got a job where there is a union what right do they have to take my money if I don't want to join? -No one is forced to join since no one is forced to seek employment at any particular place.

The real issue though is that the jobs are going to right to work states, there's no denying that, so we can watch them all leave and open up down south and out west, or we can try and get them to come here. It seems to me the hostile union environment of MI doesn't seem to be too good for new business growth.
-Actually, a number of studies have shown that RTW laws have little effect on job growth IF one controls for state's tax rates and cost of living. In fact, one study even finds that climate (weather) has a larger influence than either cost of living ot RTW laws. Michigan's problem is purely that it's Small Business Tax structure is terrible.

Click to expand...

IMHO, RTW laws are just a false hope of economic salvation being pushed by large companies; a cry for government intervention in the economy.. so much for "limited government".
I believe that every person (business owner, worker, self-employed, whatever) has the right, to the greatest degree possible, to decide for themselves how they want to conduct their lives and their businesses. If a business owner doesn't want a union, the government should not force them to have one. If they want a union, the government should not force them not to have one. If you want to work as a union member, go work at a place that has union representation. If you don't want to work for one, don't go work at such a place.

Back OT, I like that he seemingly supports the 2nd amendment.

DrTodd said:

IMHO, RTW laws are just a false hope of economic salvation being pushed by large companies; a cry for government intervention in the economy.. so much for "limited government".
I believe that every person (business owner, worker, self-employed, whatever) has the right, to the greatest degree possible, to decide for themselves how they want to conduct their lives and their businesses. If a business owner doesn't want a union, the government should not force them to have one. If they want a union, the government should not force them not to have one. If you want to work as a union member, go work at a place that has union representation. If you don't want to work for one, don't go work at such a place.

Back OT, I like that he seemingly supports the 2nd amendment.

Click to expand...

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, I disagree with you though.

It just a little more interesting-

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2010/08/tea_party_to_nominate_cooper_f.html#incart_hbx