Right to Work States

Walmart employee for GOP Senate says folks w/tattoos & mohawks are UNEMPLOYABLE – Oklahoma

The GOP – Barney Taylor, a Walmart employee seeking election to State senate maintains that folks going to Walmart w/tattoos & mohawks are not employable

At political forum – the question to Oklahoma GOP state senate candidate (also Walmart employee) Barney Taylor: “Do you think its possible to be pro-life & deprive people of healthcare”.   Taylor responded that folks (coming in Muskogee Walmart where he works) covered in tattoos & green spiked mohawks,  are unemployable; and regarding their need for healthcare, he added “Why should we have to pay for you”.    This was videoed at the Armory center in Tahlequah, Oklahoma on October 9, 2012 at a candidate political forum sponsored by Tahlequah chamber of commerce. After the political forum in Tahlequah Oklahoma I asked Barney Taylor about his remarks at this forum about folks in Walmart w/tattoos & mohawks not being employable.   The context in which it was said led me to believe that Walmart did not hire job applicants w/tattoos & mohawk hairdos  or that at least it was his firm view of such people.   So I asked for more details.  He still maintained that such individuals are unemployable.  This interview was videoed at the Armory center in Tahlequah, Oklahoma on October 9, 2012 after a political forum sponsored by Tahlequah chamber of commerce. Barney Taylor is running for Oklahoma state senate district 9, which covers Muskogee & Wagoner county.   The election is November 2012. His opponent, Earl Garrison, a democrat is an incumbent. Garrison was not present at this forum. It was announced that Garrison could not be present due to prior engagement to attend a hall of fame induction of his friend. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCHwe0gSoVo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgSGF2e9qBU

Correlation Between “NON-Right-to-Work” Law & 2-Party-Consent Law

I’ve noticed a correlation between Forced Unionized States, Blue States and Two-Party-Consent-States.

1.  GROUP #1 –  Forced Unionized States = Blue States:

Currently, there are 28 “Non-Right-to-Work-States” (Forced Unionized), and all of them are Blue (democrats).   The question of WHY is rhetorical.  Apparently, these Forced Unionized States (particularly in public sector) are forcibly being used as collection agencies to garnish union dues from government workers.  And these garnishments are reportedly being used by the unions to finance democrat candidates.

2.  Group #2 – Two Party Consent States:

According to AAPS listing, there are 12 “Two-Party-Consent-States”. A “2-Party-Consent-State” requires that all parties must consent to conversations being recorded. Coincidentally ALL  12 “Two-Party-Consent-States” are also blue.  All “2-Party-Consent-States” except for 2 (Florida & Nevada) are forced unionized.  Yep, Florida and Nevada are the odd balls in this group.   I think the Unions that are set up in 2-party-consent states has something to do with this self-serving law.  Lets say, the government union in NY is trying to shake down the city for more money; and tells the worker to not plow snow in front of folks houses.   Obviously, the union boss will NOT consent to being recorded.   So what proof would the worker have that the unlawful order ever occurred.


Florida & Nevada, which are right-to-work states, may turn red (albeit they both are under the 2-party-consent rule).  Florida, unlike Nevada would probably be the 1st to change to a 1-party-consent rule.   Reason being is that Florida is located too close to other red 1-party-consent states that have right-to-work laws.  Also, it may be a challenge for Nevada to dump the 2-party-consent rules due to brothels & gambling activities.   Yep,  Nevada would be in a bind on this one considering that its a right-to-work state.

If the forced unionized states would get rid of the 2-party-consent rule, it may give workers confidence to blow the whistle (with proof) on union bosses.  Also, to get rid of 2-party-consent rule would be closer step to getting “right-to-work” law.

Map of Write to Work Sates by The National Right to Work Committee

Map of Write to Work States

2008 Electoral Map

2008 Electoral Map

One Party Consent States Two Party Consent States
Alabama New Mexico California
Alaska New York Connecticut
Arizona North Carolina Delaware
Arkansas North Dakota Florida
Colorado Ohio Maryland
District of Columbia Oklahoma Massachusetts
Georgia Oregon Nevada (see other statute)
Hawaii Rhode Island (see case law) New Hampshire
Idaho South Carolina (no statute, see case law) Pennsylvania
South Dakota Vermont
Indiana Tennesee Washington
Iowa Texas Illinois
Kansas Utah
Kentucky Virginia
Louisiana West Virginia
Maine Wisconsin (see other statute)
Michigan (see other statute) Wyoming
New Jersey

Relevant Links:


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers

%d bloggers like this: