Originally Posted by
tsquare
I don't understand. Some of you people have been complaining about Moak for a long time. If I knew how to do it I would go back and quote some posts about how he should be impeached for A,B and C. Yet it was all apparently internet bloviating. Or was it? Now since someone says all these things are true, it makes me wonder why those proceedings were never initiated. Instead, it was more "effective" to go out and attempt to burn down the house, instead of removing the rats. Caplinger's motives are becoming a lot more clearer with this.....
TSquare,
As with all history, the reality was very nuanced. Most of what Lee Moak did served us well. Overall, our profession is in much better shape than when he first took office.
Lee Moak has a tremendously effective political machine; smart, loyal, they are disciplined. I do not know where the decision making core is, but once the decision is made execution is done so quickly and quietly that by the time we here pick up on it, "the deal is all done but the shoutin'. " I respect the machine and nearly to a person, they are good folks. They know how to work together.
Reformists can not take the machine head on and survive, politically. We are too fragmented, too independent, we lack the homogeneity of the Moak machine. The current reality is that a reform minded person must get themselves elected then try to remain relevant so as to influence the end result. A few Reps blow up on occasion, but do they win the issues? I can't think of a time the "blaze of glory" approach worked.
As for the DPA, it was never about fixing ALPA. Decertification campaigns are designed to replace the union, not fix it. Worse, the DPA had no real interest in fact, or historical accuracy; they just wanted mud to throw at ALPA. Since the mud wasn't real, it did not stick. Emotions waned in a season.