Naked Capitalism Link of the Day

Today's link: Ohio GOP may invite backlash with tough stance on unions, at the Washington Post.  From the story:

Grendell is not known as a big-union supporter, and he backed "85 percent" of the measure in Ohio. But, he said, several aspects of it went too far: a ban on collective bargaining for police officers and firefighters; a provision giving government the final say in contract negotiations; and another provision, which he believes is unconstitutional, that blocks public workers from talking to elected officials during contract talks.
Ohio Republican leaders have moved quickly on the measure - which also makes going on strike a criminal offense for virtually all government workers - with little effort at compromise. That approach could turn off a broad swath of voters, especially if they come to see it as more of a politically-motivated move against unions than one necessary to balance the state's multibillion-dollar budget shortfall.
"Taking on the fire and police, from a political perspective - it's illogical," Grendell said. "I can't explain it. I can't justify it. The ad that is going to be fatal to Republicans is going to be the fireman carrying the baby out of the burning building. How do you counteract that?"

So it is OK to kick around teachers and nurses, but bad to mess with firemen or policemen?  Wisconsin's bill would exempt firemen and police officers too.  What's with the Republican crush on men in uniform?
Later in the article:

Seitz said that history is not on the side of Republicans. In the late 1950s, the last time the Ohio legislature tried to go after unions - by passing a right-to-work law - not only did the unions get the measure on the ballot the following November and defeat it by 2 to 1, but Republicans also subsequently lost the governorship. Ohio lawmakers have been leery of union reforms ever since.
One reason Ohio Republicans are moving so quickly this year is to control the timing of a challenge to the law. Ohioans may challenge any law within 90 days of its passage by collecting enough signatures to trigger a referendum at the next general election.
By planning to fully enact Senate Bill 5 by April, Ohio Republicans are ensuring that such a challenge would appear on the 2011 ballot rather than in 2012, when Obama will be up for reelection - and a more union-friendly electorate is likely to turn out. (emphasis mine)

The low Democratic turnout and high Republican turnout in 2010 put them in power. They want to take advantage of another low-turnout election to solidify their changes. 

Other lawmakers are proposing a right-to-work law in Ohio.  I have to ask, if Ohio is such a pro-union state in which businesses avoid locating here, could someone please explain all the Honda plants and Honda suppliers located in Ohio?  As far as I know, Honda doesn't like unions, and yet they are still here, and expanding.  It is all about politics.  Republicans are not conservatives, they are radicals, slashing and burning through existing civic structures to help establish an oligarchy, from whom they hope to benefit financially.