In the New York Times today Benjamin Sachs has written a hysterical OpEd (that's hysterical as in "LOL" and hysterical as in the the type of thing to make heads explode) titled "How Pensions Violate Free Speech". This is his attempt to draw some equivalency between union political spending that until last week was done without the consent of their members, and the "citizens United" case, which we know from liberals has ended the world as we know it by allowing corporations to invest in political campaigns the same as the aforementioned unions. It's Mr Sachs claim that public pensions need to 'get back' the money that corporations spend on politics that the public union pensions membership doesn't agree with.
Even if this wasn't totally ridiculous on it's face, some public unions devote something like 40% of their expenditures on politicking - while corporations spend a much tinier amount. And the investment (by choice) in an equity designed to produce a gain for the pension is by no means the same thing as union dues collected under compulsion of the law which are designed to do... whatever the hell it is that unions are actually supposed to be doing other than corrupting the political system. But it's all the same to Benjamin Sachs.
Like I said... hysterical. Nothing more than "I'm rubber you're glue" taken to the point where it's treated as if it were a real idea on the pages of the New York Times. If anything, it demonstrates the twin axioms that if you give Liberals their way they would unravel all of civilization, and that you shouldn't take liberals seriously, - especially when they demand that you do.
It must be really quiet in their newsroom every day around Nap Time.