- See all upcoming events
- Check out Hightower's past appearances and talks
- Find out how you can book Hightower!
Sign up for email alerts, from breaking news to weekly commentary:
In the 1970s, Lily Tomlin developed an iconic comic character she named Ernestine--a telephone clerk who took perverse pleasure from hectoring customers. Her character was a perfect portrayal of the arrogance of AT&T, the monopolistic telephone giant of that day. In one skit on on the TV show, Laugh-In, Tomlin had Ernestine delivering a TV pitch for the corporation:
"A gracious hello," she cheerfully began, speaking directly into the camera. "Here at the Phone Company, we handle 84 billion calls a year. So, we realize that every so often, you can't get an operator, or for no apparent reason your phone goes out of order, or perhaps you get charged for a call you didn't make. We don't care!"
[read more]| www.flickr.com |
All Flickr photos of Jim Hightower
To add your photos, upload them Flickr and tag them with jimhightower!

With his aw-shucks charisma and no-nonsense attitude, he dishes out what's wrong with the eroding...
[More info]

"I make a lot of money these days speaking to corporations, so I'd really prefer not to admit how...
[More info]

America is at an historic divide between rulers and rulees and the rulees are restless. Hightower...
[More info]
Have a gander at the whole store here...
Home | Contact | MDC | RSS | Privacy Policy | Copyright Saddle-Burr Productions, Jim Hightower, All Rights Reserved 1996-2009
MORE CORPORATE WAR AGAINST WORKERS
Chicken Little is loose again. Loose in the White House, the congress and corporate America.
The Chicken Littles are crying that if all new NAFTA-style trade deals are required to include protections for labor in all the countries involved – well, goodness gracious, the sky will fall!
What has them so panicky is a proposal by congressional Democrats to rein-in the labor abuses that have come with these corporate-written trade deals. Are the Democrats suggesting radical protections that would put an impossible burden on global business? Judge for yourself:
One provision would ban the use of child labor. Another bans slave labor. A third says that workers would have the right to form unions.
Aren't these good things? Not to the global corporate powers and their political protectors in Washington. They warn darkly that such protections would boomerang, for other nations would sue in international trade courts to overturn our state laws allowing such practices as lower-wage summer jobs for teenagers.
Excuse me, but an all-out foreign assault on American teenagers working a few weeks at the shore or in the hay fields doesn't seem terribly likely. Nonetheless, the battlecry of the powerful National Association of Manufacturers is: Defend the Teenagers! Indeed, NAM's top lobbyist, John Engler, is the Chicken Littlest of them all, wailing that subjecting state laws "to a foreign nation's challenge would be unacceptable."
Gosh, maybe John is ignorant of the fact that NAFTA, CAFTA, and other existing trade deals already subject our state laws to foreign challenges on behalf of global corporations – and that the NAM backed those provisions. Or... maybe John's just using American teenagers as a political screen to keep his corporate members from having to treat their global workers with some minimal fairness.
This is Jim Hightower saying... Yeah, that last one.
"Labor Rights Issues Stalls Trade Pact Talks," New York Times, April 21, 2007