October 28, 2010

Buffalo Teachers Union Boob Defends Taxpayer-Funded Boob Jobs

We’ve never hidden our absolute disgust with Phil Rumore, the Buffalo Teachers Federation’s odious president. Heck, we can’t even write his name without adding a negative adjective to his job title.

Watching the public sector union slimeball defending a teachers’ union benefit that cost Buffalo taxpayers $8.9 million in just one year, though, was just too much for us. At the same time that Buffalo schools are crying poverty and warning of draconian layoffs, the tenured and unionized teachers are using their health insurance for every conceivable nip and tuck:



Now, a normal person might have some sense of shame at getting caught receiving such an obscene benefit, particularly at a time when school taxes are skyrocketing out of control. But not Phil Rumore.

No, Rumore made a wild assertion—and here we’ll quote directly: “Our teachers are getting older and a lot of the women are coming up with cancer and cancer is very prevalent in this profession so unless you know the specifics or what it's for, I don't know.”

Um, wow. Aside from the grossness of Rumore’s attempt to win sympathy and some sort of moral high ground, we’re just stunned that WGRZ reporter Josh Boose didn’t even, you know, flinch. We mean, Phil Rumore doesn’t represent nuclear reactor operators. His union isn’t full of coal miners or shipyard workers. There is absolutely no aspect of the Buffalo Teachers Federation’s jobs that would increase their individual risk for cancer.

Now, we’re not denying that cancer may be in play here, and of course we wish only the best for those suffering from that disease. But for Rumore to attempt to link cancer to one of the safest professions we can think of is not only ludicrous, it’s an embarrassment.

Unfortunately, Rumore’s defense of the indefensible is just too typical of what we’ve seen from public sector unions in this state for far too long. Next Tuesday, we have a chance to begin fighting back—and reducing boobs like Phil Rumore.

1 comment:

Songarden4 said...

For real???? I believe most insurance policies cover cosmetic-repair surgery after such things as mastectomy therefore there would really be no need for an additional cosmetic rider.