It’s already hard enough for Wisconsin union folks without the New York Times lying

Are you a little sad? Carrying some amount of dread? Do you sense that the union stand-off in Wisconsin will likely end badly?

I feel that way. The new Governor, Scott Walker, simply holds more power and influence than our union friends. He’s got the momentum, and he’s got the media, so he’s got the advantage.

Of course, when the New York Times acts professionally inept and dishonest in your favor, it sure makes union-busting easier. Six days ago, this was the hottest story in politics:

This thing:

Union Bonds in Wisconsin Begin to Fray
By A. G. SULZBERGER and MONICA DAVEY | February 21, 2011

JANESVILLE, Wis. — Rich Hahan worked at the General Motors plant here until it closed about two years ago. He moved to Detroit to take another G.M. job while his wife and children stayed here, but then the automaker cut more jobs. So Mr. Hahan, 50, found himself back in Janesville, collecting unemployment for a time, and watching as the city’s industrial base seemed to crumble away.

Among the top five employers here are the county, the schools and the city. And that was enough to make Mr. Hahan, a union man from a union town, a supporter of Gov. Scott Walker’s sweeping proposal to cut the benefits and collective-bargaining rights of public workers in Wisconsin, a plan that has set off a firestorm of debate and protests at the state Capitol. He says he still believes in unions, but thinks those in the public sector lead to wasteful spending because of what he sees as lavish benefits and endless negotiations.

“Something needs to be done,” he said, “and quickly.”

Gosh, something needs to be done. Sure, I’ll throw my good ol’ union and all my mates overboard. Got no choice. Why? Something needs to be DONE! This can’t go on! Jobs! Recession! Debt! Something! Everything!

How about . . lies! Turns out the story was bullshit before it hit 10 letters. Rich Hahan is actually Rich Hahn. And he’s not in a union. Nope, not, never was. Brand spanking new blogger Keith Olbermann writes:

Except the source, Rick Hahn, now admits that while he worked in union factories, he was never, you know, in a union per se. So why did the Diogenes of the Times, Mr. Sulzberger, believe he had found his honest union man? Because Hahn “described himself to a reporter as a ‘union guy.’”

And yes, Hahan/Hahn’s deception, intentional or accidental (and if you noticed the multiple spelling, yes, Mr. Sulzberger of the Times also got the guy’s name wrong) sat out there in the alleged newspaper of record for four days, during which nobody bothered to correct the sloppy, destructive reporting of the Family Heir. When they finally did, editors buried it inside.

And Sulzberger is the son of the publisher? Yep. Niiiiice. Let’s take a look at yer liberal media, shall we? Let’s look at all the workers Sulzberger interviewed for “Union Bonds in Wisconsin Begin to Fray”, the biggest story in politics a few days ago.

Rich Hahn wasn’t a union guy, we now know. Cindy Kuehn? “It’s about time the buck stops.” Not a union member. Crystal Watkins? “I don’t have any of that,” she said. Nope. Mary Kay Horter? “I don’t get to bargain in my job, either . . ” Definitely not: “. . her husband’s Chevy dealership had teetered on the brink of closing after General Motors declared bankruptcy, for which she blamed unions.” Dave Bergman? “There are a lot of people out of work right now that would take a job without a union . .” Self-employed bartender, working seven days a week, no way.

But wait — here we go, it finally gets a little better, just before the end of the piece:

In Whitewater, Ben Penwell, a lawyer whose wife is a public employee, said he saw no reason to strip away workers’ bargaining rights if they had agreed to benefit cuts.

“They’re willing to do what’s necessary fiscally without giving up rights in the future,” he said.

And Pat Wellnitz, working in his accounting office on Sunday, wondered why such bargaining provisions were needed if the real problem was simply saving money.

“That’s pretty drastic even for a staunch Republican,” he said.

But, then, the end:

. . others suggested that unions had perhaps had outlived their usefulness. Carrie Fox, who works at a billboard advertising company, said she hoped that the battle would encourage other governors to rein in public- and private-sector unions.

“I know there was a point for unions back in the day because people were being abused,” she said. “But now there’s workers’ rights; there’s laws that protect us.”

Not much in the way of pro-union anything. And none of those last couple union-tolerant folks is in a union that Governor Walker is stripping of powers. Actually, nowhere in Sulzberger’s piece is there anyone belonging to any union, anywhere. And yet, the New York Times heir apparent had the nerve to call it “Union Bonds in Wisconsin Begin to Fray.” Fox News only wishes it could be this deceptive and damning.