You want to know who REALLY killed the Twinkie?
Unions, my friends, did not cause the demise of Hostess, the company that became famous as the maker of Twinkies and other wonderfully sweet snack items. Oh no. Only the foolish and uninformed would ever believe such a naive explanation. And I know that you are much too smart to be foolish and uninformed, which is why you come here to learn about how the world really works.
No, the real explanation begins here:
Need I say more?
“But wait!” I can hear some of you say. “Are you claiming that Michelle Obama killed the Twinkie in some sort of a conspiracy?” Let’s examine the evidence, shall we:
As the noted political expert and Fox News guest Victoria Jackson explains:
“Michelle is a snake.
She is so deceptive. This whole ‘food thing’ she is innocently pushing, is slyly making the government the controller of our children’s food … out from her forked tongue slipped a buzzword, on the Jay Leno show tonight. She actually used the words, ’sustainable food, organic food.’ These are Agenda 21 words. They mean GOVERNMENT CONTROL.”
That’s right, Victoria: Government control. And Agenda 21, that devious plot by which the United Nations is attempting to seize control of the United States and all its bodily fluids. Following the dictates of Agenda 21, the U.S. government is clearly trying to dictate to the American people what we can and cannot eat. Do you think it’s an accident that they delayed this until after Hussein’s re-election, when he no longer has to worry about running again? Do you think they would have won if this had slipped out two weeks ago?
There are no accidents. There is no such thing as coincidence. It all makes perfect sense, once you think about it hard enough.
Other well-known experts agree with Jackson. As Clyde Lewis at IntelHub points out, Agenda 21 is all about buzzwords such as “environmentally unsustainable.” And what is more “environmentally unsustainable” than fat people?
The point ought to be obvious even to liberals by now:
Proud Americans, denied their Twinkies by Agenda 21
“Is it at all surprising that the latest scapegoat is the Obese and how they are now the new target of derision? The Obese consume more than the average human on the planet, they have more health risks and are considered a burden on the idea of global sustainability.
There is in essence a global conspiracy against the obese. It is once again a crisis that has been created by the planners of the global agenda.
It goes against their plan to keep the world order on the brink of starvation. The agenda of the globalists is to tighten the belt on resources and those who consume the most resources will be the first to be considered for the culling….”
That’s right. Face the frightening truth, America. Michelle Obama, as part of Agenda 21, has killed the Twinkie as part of her war on fat people. (Look at her arms. Do you know anybody else with arms like that? Coincidence again?)
Once you know these things, many other things just fall into place, don’t they?
Just yesterday, the Centers for Disease Control released data claiming that the rate of diabetes in the United States is soaring, particularly in the South. Linda Geiss, a supposed “expert” at the CDC, wants us to believe that “the rise in diabetes has really gone hand in hand with the rise in obesity.”
How … convenient.
The foolish and uninformed might think that it’s just coincidence that such an announcement was made JUST ONE DAY before the Twinkie was secretly droned. And it’s just coincidence that they’re focusing SPECIFICALLY on the South. But those of us in the know — and now that means YOU! — understand that there is no such thing as coincidence.
For example, is it coincidence that one of the best ways to fight obesity and diabetes is through exercise, like walking and biking? And that walking and biking is conducted on walking paths and biking paths?
And that walking paths and biking paths are recommended under Agenda 21?
The motive is clear. But how could this plot be implemented?
At the beginning of his administration, you may recall, Hussein bailed out the auto industry, saving hundreds of thousands of union jobs. It just didn’t make sense at the time: Why would a president do that, just to save all those American jobs?
Well, now we know. It comes straight out of the Saul Alinsky playbook. When the opportunity came, Michelle and Hussein called in that favor from Big Labor and insisted that the unions go on strike to kill the Twinkie, putting an end to an important American symbol.
If you ever wondered what Hussein meant when he promised to “fundamentally transform America,” now you know.
Now you know.
– Glenn Beck
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
429 comments Add your comment
RGB
November 16th, 2012
10:40 pm
By the time Dear Leader gets finished with it, he’ll blame the demise of Twinkies on George W. Bush.
blObama gets so accustomed to blaming things on other people, he just can’t help himself.
@Look:
Are your serious? Based on your insistence that we couldn’t cut a dime from the budget, why not triple spending each year.
Are you unaware that the federal government’s share of GDP has grown from 18% under Clinton to 24% under Barry. Were there skeletons all over the street when Slick Willie was in the White House.
How’s this for starters:
End the Dept. of Education (since it doesn’t educate anybody) and the Dept. of Energy (since they don’t find, produce, promulgate, or create energy). Kill the green energy subsidies, the Dept. of Commerce and most of the EPA. Then the following day….
Look before I leap...
November 16th, 2012
10:47 pm
“Just wait till the government gets more “involved” enough to argue our food choices are threats to the health, safety and welfare. Progressives don’t tend to favor too many choices.”
Funny. A great many of people who consider themselves supporters of the conservative movement are quite content to tell me that I can’t buy booze on a Sunday (and in some locations, ANY day of the week) and they want to restrict where I can light up a perfectly legal Marlboro.
ghetto investor
November 16th, 2012
10:50 pm
Vintage Bookman. Barely a mention of unions destroying jobs out of pure greed. It’s all a right-wing conspiracy to make the beloved obama’s look bad. No matter that families are now hurting because selfish people overplayed their hand to get gold-plated benefits while providing little value in return. All the while being warned (really over 3 years) that their time is running out. My favorite is that Jay loves the right-wing nut stories with no sense of irony over the notion that there are left-wing nutcase conspiracy theories out there. He’d hate hearing how similar to Rush he really is.
RF
November 16th, 2012
11:03 pm
“It is a BAD idea to say your company is profitable, pay your exec’s based on that and then ask your workers who actually make your products to take a pay cut.”
Precise summary of 21st century capitalism. Even as they ignore their own declining incomes, the neocons are all at home practicing their smiles as they say “Oh thank you Mr. Scrooge” while they scrub the floors for their newly minted real American bosses…
Look before I leap...
November 16th, 2012
11:10 pm
@RGB
Explain to me where I said we could not cut a dime from the federal budget?
And your cuts total about $120B – where is the other $1.2T coming from?
Your comment about % of GDP is interesting but misleading.
During the Clinton years, total government spending was about 33% of GDP, the feds spent over half that amount (55%) During the height of the recession, the total gov spending number jumped to 42% of which the fed jumped to 57% of that number.
RF
November 16th, 2012
11:11 pm
“Are you unaware that the federal government’s share of GDP has grown from 18% under Clinton to 24% under Barry”
Here’s a little information on that:
“Much of that increase has come from mandatory spending, including Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. Those programs have expanded mostly because of the recession, which has prompted more people to apply for Medicaid and Social Security, as well as the growth in people hitting retirement age.
“How much do you lay at the recession’s feet versus the president’s policies?” said Josh Gordon, policy director at the Concord Coalition, a fiscal policy group. “The aging of the population can’t be blamed on the president.”
Many safety net programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps, automatically expand during economic downturns. And in the face of prolonged high jobless rates, Congress has authorized extending federal unemployment benefits to a record 99 weeks. The initial extension was passed under President Bush.”
http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/25/news/economy/obama_government/index.htm
And another source:
“Total federal outlays during the first three fiscal years of the Obama administration averaged 24 percent of Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, which measures the value of all final goods and services produced in our economy. That was an all-time high in peacetime.
It certainly is above the 17.1 percent in the Eisenhower years, 18.1 under Kennedy-Johnson, 19.1 under Nixon-Ford and 19.2 percent in Clinton’s time.
However, it was 21.9 percent over the eight Reagan years and was 22.9 percent in 1982 and 1983, a period of recession less severe than the most recent one. From that to the current 24 percent is not so great a leap. Whether an increase of 1.1 percentage points over three decades really represents out-of-control growth of government is a subjective question readers must decide for themselves, but it doesn’t particularly alarm me.
The more important thing to recognize is that growth in outlays over recent decades has been driven almost entirely by two factors: the aging of the population that is driving up Social Security spending; and increases in health care costs that drive up spending for Medicare, Medicaid and all other federal health programs.
Each year’s Economic Report of the President contains convenient spreadsheet tables with outlays summed into categories. Spending on general government operations is tabulated under the rubric of “other.”
This category excludes defense and foreign relations, interest on the debt, Social Security, all health programs and all “income support” programs from unemployment compensation to housing subsidies.
It includes day-to-day running of all Cabinet departments except Defense and State and virtually all smaller bureaus and commissions, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and all the domestic civil works of the Corps of Engineers.
As a fraction of GDP, spending on such general operations is well below levels that prevailed from the mid-1960s to the late 1980s. In other words, while the absolute number of dollars spent has increased, it has not grown as fast as the overall economy. Moreover, this is true even though the rate of economic growth since the mid-1970s has been slower than it was in the first 30 years after World War II.
Furthermore, the common idea that our so-called welfare spending is soaring also is far from true. The “Income Security” category of the same report includes food stamps, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, the federal share of unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, Section 8 and other housing subsidies, and all other nonmedical “transfer payments” that one might think of as welfare.
Again, considering this relative to GDP, the trend since 1975 has been sideways, showing no long-term increase. It rises during recessions and falls during economic expansions. It currently is at exactly the same level, compared with GDP, as it was in 1983, another recession-recovery year. Take either of the two, and one still is below the levels that prevailed in all years from 1975 through 1982″
Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/11/16/2348187/data-on-federal-government-show.html#storylink=cpy
appleseed
November 16th, 2012
11:17 pm
Craziest union event.Not letting Alabama power crew help in NY to restore power because they did not belong to IBEW.The demise of the twinkie caused by GWB aka DUMBYA….
Look before I leap...
November 16th, 2012
11:56 pm
@RF
You are confusing them with facts.
The wingnuts abhor facts.
Hence the popularity of Fox News and Rush.
Here is MY opinion on what’s needed:
This country has serious issues that need to be addressed
None of the top 25 issues involve reproductive rights or who marries whom.
We need leaders with vision and guts
Anyone who is elected to public office and uses that office to personally feather his nest should be marched to the nearest public square and shot for treason
The country’s economic aristocracy should be be rewarded for creating decent paying jobs and philanthropy. Beyond that, they should be viewed by the government the same as the 99%
Compromise is key – no side should (or will) ever get everything they want.
Jm (LL)
November 16th, 2012
11:58 pm
sorry. unions did kill the twinkie
first, it was the strike and concessions (or lack thereof) that put twinkie out of biz
second, it will probably be obvious to the intelligent after the assets are sold including the brand at it is restarted as a non-union operation that can make a profit
Logic
November 16th, 2012
11:59 pm
Union’s are not needed in this day since the passage of federal laws to protect the workers over the years. Hostess should be allowed to offer the jobs to folks who want to work at the wage Hostess can afford to pay and still make a profit on their products.
K
November 17th, 2012
12:15 am
Nope, it was the unions. Stop defending them, you commie.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
12:30 am
Look at it another way. Imagine that Hostess had agreed to a contract with a major supplier of, say, flour. Imagine that, claiming potential bankruptcy, Hostess had already negotiated a lower flour price with that supplier. Now it says, nope, we need to pay you even less than that for your flour.
That’s essentially what has happened, except we’re dealing with labor, not flour. In this case, the labor supplier said no, no deal, you’ve already backed out of earlier promises and we’re not going down that road again.
That’s the labor supplier’s fault?
—————————————————-
It does not matter whose fault it is, it is water under the bridge…The supplier of flour has the choice to continue the relationship, or end it. If they end it, then Hostess has the right to go out and find another supplier and negotiate better terms. So Hostess should be able to go fine new employees willing to work for less. You think the union would be OK with that?
Weak analogy Jay. You get an F in logic
Fred ™
November 17th, 2012
12:31 am
The level of talk radio/fox news stupidity exhibited here makes bunnies cry.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
12:34 am
No Jay, there are many many people willing to work the Hostess jobs for less money, and since the skill level needed to do the jobs is very low, many people can benefit by a free system. You think the unions would let that happen, you know, allow people to get jobs to pay their bills? No, they want their union cut. Sounds like the Mafia to me.
HENRY
November 17th, 2012
12:36 am
THE UNION GOT WHAT IT DESERVED. I HAVE TWINKIES ON SALE NOW ON EBAY FOR $50 EACH. THAT’S A BARGAIN. THANK GOD FOR THE FREE MARKET. GO GET ‘EM FAT FOLKS……………
Look before I leap...
November 17th, 2012
12:47 am
@Jay don’t:
Well I don’t know the skill level required to make Twinkies.
But regardless, if the available labor pool is as vast as you claim, then why go the route of liquidation?
Why not simply lock out the bakers and hire scabs?
There is something fishy in the story – and they need the permission of the court to actually liquidate.
Poke 'em with a Stick
November 17th, 2012
12:49 am
But we need the fat people. Obesity is a planned conspiracy masterminded by the Doomsday Preppers as a sustainable food source. Don’t worry lumpy, something even better than twinkies is inevitable!
Fred ™
November 17th, 2012
12:56 am
Wow. You add late night weekend drunks to the usual mix of batsht crazy talk radio/Foxbots and the stupid reaches epic proportions.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
12:56 am
Well I don’t know the skill level required to make Twinkies.
But regardless, if the available labor pool is as vast as you claim..
I don’t know the exact qualifications needed to cook Twinkies, and I don’t think you need an advanced degree… but it is my understanding that we have vast array of unemployed people willing to learn.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
12:57 am
Fred, instead of being prejudice and categorizing people you don’t know. Make a statement.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
12:58 am
Fred, how about the 18000 people who lost their jobs. What should they do?
Look before I leap...
November 17th, 2012
1:02 am
@Jay don’t
Well thanks for not answering the question:
Why would a $2B company decide to fold when they could hire unemployed people willing to learn?
Something is rotten in Denmark and it ain’t the Twinkies, since we know they last forever (well 25 days anyway).
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:14 am
Why would a $2B company decide to fold when they could hire unemployed people willing to learn?
Something is rotten in Denmark and it ain’t the Twinkies, since we know they last forever (well 25 days anyway).
Well, the assets of a 2b company are generally worth more than the company when the expenses are 3b.
But I suspect that the decline in the sugar bread biz is contributing factor too. Maybe the liquidation is a ploy to hopefully get the current employees to understand the situation and accept the wages they will have to pay the scabs so they don’t have to deal with all the Union issues scabs will bring?
Or maybe they just don’t want to Eff with it anymore.
I think it might be the latter….Why don’t the union pool the money to buy the assets, manage the company, and treat the employees as they think they should be treated….Your turn.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:18 am
Fred, where did you go? I miss your well thought out problem solving analysis.
wes
November 17th, 2012
1:19 am
If I had built another business, and it somehow became unionized, I would just close it down and get out while I still had a few dollars left. They served their purpose some 80 years ago, now they are just bankrupting our cities with their overpaid salaries and exorbitant pensions. Cannot be fired so there is no incentive to do good quality work. Nothing any union can do, in which a Private Co. can’t do better and cheaper, not wasting good money. Be part of the solution, not the problem.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:21 am
wes, Flower shut down their union 20 years ago. They ain’t shutting down.
MeetInTheMiddle
November 17th, 2012
1:23 am
@Look before I leap : Brother, you are speaking the truth when it comes to our leaders. We disagreed earlier on some issues but I couldn’t agree more with “compromise is key.” We need to get together and solve some things. Also, you misunderstood my comments earlier. I said we make more than $250k and never said I need $200K in reserves. The $250k is the gov benchmark, not mine. While our conversation earlier tonight was great, you and NY misunderstood: the $50K and $250K were generic numbers. My niche requires a substantial amount of capital to be available at short notice, which is unfortunate for tax purposes. BUt, despite our differences, I applaud you for speaking your mind and asking for compromise, although i think you are mistaken in this case with regards to the union dispute. The only thing I would say is when you talk about the Fox News/Rush crowd being ridiculous, you have to realize that the proggies on the other side are just as ridiculous. The left and right have lost their way…
appleseed
November 17th, 2012
1:24 am
I think interstate like the rest of coop’s just take advantage of all loopholes pay little taxes,high salaries,and that don’t leave enough to pay union wages.This is all GWB’s fault.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:29 am
Again, the question is, if the assets are available, and the unions are so concerned about the workers, why don’t the teamsters buy the assets and run the company as they think it should be run?
Buhler?
MeetInTheMiddle
November 17th, 2012
1:32 am
@ Jay don’t no business: You are exactly right. The union leadership is concerned with preserving their positions of power, not the people that depend on them.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:32 am
Funny. A great many of people who consider themselves supporters of the conservative movement are quite content to tell me that I can’t buy booze on a Sunday (and in some locations, ANY day of the week) and they want to restrict where I can light up a perfectly legal Marlboro.
Look, with ya on the booze, but I think the Marlboro is a liberal thing.
MeetInTheMiddle
November 17th, 2012
1:36 am
Once again, spot on. Conservatives tell you not to buy alcohol on Sundays, liberals tell you not to smoke a cigarette anywhere but the moon. Yet another fact that proves both sides are basically the same.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:37 am
Funny, progressives are about “change”. Well, the sugar bread industry is changing. Jay tries to make it a right wing fringe paranoia issue, but it is not. It is just change, and for the good, sorta like not having to kill trees to distribute information is good. BUT, the composition of the labor market also changes. But unions don’t want that, now do they.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
1:41 am
Middle, you are the first person I have ever run across that “gets it” . Anger is our #1 issue. It is all about blame….yet, the first step in dealing with anger is getting past blame. I thought progressives knew that?
Jay is as toxic as Rush…..ANGER AND HATE…..
MeetInTheMiddle
November 17th, 2012
1:46 am
Yep, and while both sides are reaming the public in the backside, they are each telling us “the other guy is screwing you.” Get past the anger and hate, debate in an honest and respectable manner, and then let’s get something accomplished. Good vs evil is a joke; we have honest differences in how we view the role of government, but that doesn’t make one of us evil and one of us righteous. Whatever side of the fence you are on, you have way more in common with the guy on the other side than the political class ever wants you to believe.
I am a Maker- Takers suck!
November 17th, 2012
5:25 am
Conservatives are 10 X better than a Taking LIberal. You need help, do you turn to a worthless liberal? A liberal can’t even cover their own bills and expenses, how can they help you. Sure, the worethless dominate the country, but who actually apys the bills and does the work? Thats right, conservatives. Luiberals may win every election from now till the end of time, but a Conservative is a superior human being. Liberal women LOVE killing babies. What kind of a sick animal kills their baby. Women are placed on this earth to protect and murture babies at all costs, not kill your ownb off spring. Really sick! Every gov”t employee (teachers, firefighters, police, etc…) that supports big gov’t is part of the problem.
You are welcome, liberal pukes, for paying all your bills. Enjoy your worthless, non-satifying life. I will EARN enough for us both. Once the Gov’t does not need your vote, you will be terminated, with the explanation being we can no longer afford to support you. But certainly you didi not think your free ride could last forever! You are now to large a drag to support, I am sure you understand. Roll around in your own mess liberals. Without conservatives, you and Jay bookman will starve. You make me sick!
Travis McGee
November 17th, 2012
6:41 am
This is just going to create a black market for homade Twinkies. Clandestine Twinkie Kitchens will begin springing up to meet the demand.
Those things are as addictive as crack and will not go away just because Hostess folds. Unsavory characters will be standing on street corners selling Twinkies in ziplock bags.
This could become a legitimate public health issue.
rc
November 17th, 2012
6:46 am
Had to be George Bush.
dcb
November 17th, 2012
6:51 am
You make a lot of sense to me, Jay. But you forgot one thing – it’s the beginning of the “Michelle for President” campaign, also. Yes – you heard me. It’ll come down to Hillary verses Michelle for the Dem’s presidential candidate in ‘16. You know how it is …. once you get a taste of living in the White House you’ll do anything to stay in there. And pity the poor Secret Service and White House staff. No real choice for four more years – one of two of their least favorite and least appreciate presidents of all time. That is if entitlement programs continue to grow as likely under our Dem administration with entitlement programs now shown to win elections, and the GOP remains inflexible in their insistance on no increase in taxes for the “rich” ….
Joel Edge
November 17th, 2012
6:52 am
Good one, Jay. See what you come for the rest of these companies that will soon be closing.
Uncle Stonewall
November 17th, 2012
7:13 am
Jay,
I would attempt to articulate numerous points explaining why your sarcasm-laden viewpoint is stupid and incorrect and your satirically written article isn’t nearly as clever as you think, but why waste the page long dissertation when I can make my point in two simple sentences:
1) You are probably the biggest douche in the entire southeastern USA. Extra vinegar. Extra baking soda.
2) Your wife looks like a man wearing a wig and clearly wears the pants in your family. I have a feeling that if you don’t write columns like this, it gets awfully frosty in the household with two last names.
sparta_bubba
November 17th, 2012
7:23 am
Little Debbie’s are fine, but my tastes run more to Big Debbie’s. Have less trouble with the law and cholesterol with Big Debbie. Upkeep is higher though.
sparta_bubba
November 17th, 2012
7:23 am
Little Debbie’s are fine, but my tastes run more to Big Debbie’s. Have less trouble with the law and cholesterol with Big Debbie. Upkeep is higher though.
NullOp
November 17th, 2012
7:47 am
I don’t give a damn about Twinkies being gone but the demise of the jobs associated with their manufacture is a shame.
Fedup_11
November 17th, 2012
7:48 am
18,000 jobs lost. Stand by for hundreds of thousands more to get pink slips. All this is and was predictable. The sad part of this is, those losing jobs will become another dependent of the few remaining federal income tax payers; not sustainable. The Obama agenda will be realized. Get ready folks….there are consequences for poor decisions. Every day, more notices of layoffs, Stryker, a medical equipment company, annouced 1,200 pink slips. And now that the election is over, Obama is turning on all the new regulatory agencey requirements….. will choke the private sector. These regulations are immune to Congressional oversight…….they have a life of their own. Gubmint control of private lives is about to kick into hyperspeed. Enjoy your decomcracy.
AU Liberal in ATL
November 17th, 2012
7:52 am
Unions negotiate, they do not dictate. Everything they get for their members is agreed to by the suits. Consider this fact. Without unions you would not have company paid health insurance, paid vacations, profit sharing or even a 40 hour work week. When unions win for their members everyone shares in the victory. Unions are not the problem. Greedy fat cats, over paid CEO’s and Wall St. bankers are the problem.
Think I’m a typical liberal? I’m fine with that. I’ve got it right. I get it. I know what the hell I’m talking about.
ideas
November 17th, 2012
8:00 am
Thw Bookman Twinkie defense. Boy you are more far out than I could even imagine. Along with all of the kooks on this blog who follow you….
Mike Geigerman
November 17th, 2012
8:01 am
And now you can take your 18,500 non union jobs over to the healthy fast food chain de-lites
and make the world a better place. Can anyone say Benghazi !
Baroccoliobama
November 17th, 2012
8:06 am
Sarcasm doesn’t work when it actually is the TRUTH
Mike Geigerman
November 17th, 2012
8:06 am
@ AU Liberal.. When we grew up working for IBM we had health insurance, pensions, and a sense of family. With unions it’s generally us against them we ” the company” as a team. Unions and lawyers have added so much to what once was a great America. Just call us Greece in waiting now.
Baroccoliobama
November 17th, 2012
8:07 am
Kum Bi Ya
Jaybo
November 17th, 2012
8:08 am
This is hilarious. Only a bed wetting liberal could say that the nation’ s crackdown on obesity is what caused hostess to go out of business. Twinkles and other treats are sold in every grocery and convenience store in the US. Huge demand.
Love that these people pay their union dues and hold up their anti-business signs. Have fun going to goodwill and the soup kitchen for thanksgiving and Christmas! Losers.
Damn right I’m a republican.
Old Guy
November 17th, 2012
8:29 am
This article upset me so much that I had to run to Krispy Kreme and stock up for Foodmageddon. As soon as I post this, I am headed to the grocery store to stock up on Tasty Cakes.
daffyshow
November 17th, 2012
8:43 am
Great sarcasm!
But in all seriousness, Jay, people who want to solely blame the unions nor management for Hostess demise are naive, ignorant, or blinded by their prejudices against one group over the other. Rarely do companies fail solely to bad management or bad union bosses. Usually it’s a combination of factors within and outside of management and union bosses control, and it appears that in Hostess’ case (given this is the second trip through bankruptcy), it is a combination of all the above.
daffyshow
November 17th, 2012
8:44 am
Actually meant “or management”
Morality?
November 17th, 2012
8:53 am
Socialist labor union killed twinkies and they are trying to kill our beloved Wal-Mart. Down with Socialism.
aps
November 17th, 2012
8:54 am
This is a huge win for the unions. I see a replay of Eastern Airlines. To this day the unions still say that they “won” that battle. No airline, no jobs, but we won. Have you seen Trumka? It’s all Bain’s fault. “Trumka” Jay would never believe a union could actually be even slightly responsible for a companies demise.
The Truth
November 17th, 2012
8:56 am
You’re explanation is certainly a strong contributing factor, however years of extortion by unions didn’t lend any help to Hostess’ situation. Anytime you have a collusive group of individuals that band together to force an organization to provide excessive salary and benefits to undeserving employees, you are eventually going to have problems. I’m glad these useless union punks will no longer have jobs. Hopefully Flowers Foods buys Hostess and moves the production facilities to the south where we don’t put up with those POS unions!
Jim
November 17th, 2012
8:59 am
Jay – While the industry may have changed to the detriment of the many of the companies products, the labor unions did not allow the company to be flexible enough to cut costs as needed. The company was not allowed to deliver cupcakes and loaf bread on the same truck because of the unions. What a huge waste. I am surprised you liberals are not all over that. Think of how much reduced pollution there would be if the company did not have to send different trucks for each of their product lines.
Atlanta1
November 17th, 2012
9:00 am
Union Rules said that Hostess Bread and Hostess Cakes could not be on the same truck. This alone tells you all you need to know.
Spin this one anyway you want Jay…
The Unions over played their hands and cost 18,000 union and non-union workers their jobs…
Shannon
November 17th, 2012
9:02 am
Management is definitely to blame. They have been in financial trouble for at least 10 years and they just recently gave all of their senior staff huge raises including tripling their CEO’s salary. That has nothing to do with their union employees but everything to do with really bad management.
The Truth
November 17th, 2012
9:03 am
Wal Mart should die. They killed small town America’s business districts. Wal Mart used to pride themselves on “made in the USA” – now they kill products made in the USA in favor of cheap, useless Chinese BS.
sdl
November 17th, 2012
9:15 am
Well it looks like nut jobs from both sides enjoyed their rants last night, and you had to tiptoe through the cow piles, but there were quite a few who had the same conclusion:
Income and Expense both have to be addressed; the suits in both labor and management have got to learn to compromise;
labor is not monolithic – one labor group agreed to work thru the bankruptcy process, the other did not, now all are unemployed;
we have seen a major shift from snack cakes, etc. being a sometime treat to overindulgence and obesity leading to “nannyism” – the government deciding what we should eat, drink, smoke, etc. (libs and cons BOTH to blame here);
and finally, to a changing work model. I have seen production methods and costs change in my lifetime. My Dad worked in a Mill. My grandchildren won’t. Business models still based on 60’s production can’t survive.
middle of the road
November 17th, 2012
9:18 am
We had a textile mill near where I live. They told the union that they were not profitable and that the union had to make concessions or else the plant would close. The union refused. The company closed the factory. Their decision. There are loft apartments there now.
This is the way that collective bargaining works.
When the union people don’t get their way and go for their guns, that is when it really gets ugly.
middle of the road
November 17th, 2012
9:21 am
If the union employees truly are invaluable or if the company is just using a negotiating ploy, then the union goes out on strike for a while, then the company caves and they agree to the union demands.
Or the company is so scared of a union strike that they give the union everything that they ask for (see American car companies), then the competition (from Japan) comes in and takes all their business with cheaper, higher-quality products, and then the US government has to bail them out.
middle of the road
November 17th, 2012
9:24 am
“Wal Mart should die. They killed small town America’s business districts.”
So you want us all to pay higher prices for products (even the poor) so that you can protect the inefficient “family in-town store”, right?
Liberal Pariah
November 17th, 2012
9:32 am
Little Debbie did it, in the Bakery with a Mixer….
Ron
November 17th, 2012
9:47 am
Not bad Bookman! Normally I don’t read your banal opinions on how things work, but this is good.
joe in tucker
November 17th, 2012
9:48 am
what are WhoreHouse Harry and Piglosi going to do for brains? No more DingDongs!!
The Truth
November 17th, 2012
9:52 am
Middle – yes, if the alternative is sending $$ and jobs to the damn Chinese.
You’ll pay 4 times as much in replacement costs for that cheap Chinese crap as you would for something made the right way here in America.
Peter
November 17th, 2012
9:53 am
Shannon. You hit the nail on the head……. The management…..
When you have a product in decline, a management team has the RESPONSIBILITY to create a new more profitable product, and add it to their line……. it is not like they couldn’t make something healthy ?
I am sure the writing was on the wall…… dinosaurs don’t change, thus they become extinct.
All those who blame the Unions…. did the Unions vote in the big pay raises for the upper management ? Please !
Lynnie Gal
November 17th, 2012
9:56 am
This Twinkie situation is serious, Jay! According to Agenda 21, section 203.5, people who know about the sinister Hussein plan for Collective Food Disbursement should have a stockpile of Twinkie’s in their bomb shelters to feed themselves and their children, alongside their military-grade assault rifles to defend their Twinkie supply from hungry, thieving neighbors who didn’t think ahead and plan for this assault. The whole survival of the human race depends on you, the Twinkie hoarder, because Twinkie’s stay fresh 500 years beyond their expiration date, being that they’re made exclusively out of chemicals that can’t be destroyed, even by nuclear explosion. Save the Union! Save the Twinkie!
Peter
November 17th, 2012
9:59 am
RGB
If you are going to kill Green Energy Subsidies, then we need to kill the subsidies to the Nuclear industry don’t you think ?
Or are Corporate Subsidies more important ?
F.A. Wright
November 17th, 2012
10:08 am
The liberal credo: Simple explanations for simple minds. As usual Jay misses the bigger picture. Between unions and Obamacare, you’re going to see a lot more of these companies going out of business over the next four years. But we all know that according to Jay and the libs, it’s all George Bush’s fault.
Ben The Independent
November 17th, 2012
10:31 am
Why not resolve the entire problem by mandating a Government Review Board that passes regulations that make all things illegal that are bad for your health. Then I can not worry about my workout, vitamins and diet control as my Uncle Sam will do that for me.
StopTheStupid
November 17th, 2012
10:34 am
I’ve never commented on Jay’s blog before so I feel all grown up now. But I couldn’t let this post go by without saying that it’s my favorite all-time Bookman post. Keep it up, Jay!
RF
November 17th, 2012
10:56 am
For all the union haters, here are a few facts to consider:
Hostess negotiated the current labor contract while trying to come out of bankruptcy. All of the capital raised at the company’s exit from bankruptcy – over $500 million – was based on those labor terms, all of which remain in place today.
In 2011, Hostess achieved less than $2.5 billion in revenues – a huge decline that accounts for the company’s cash problems. It’s own projections were 3.1 billion. In fact, one of the few areas in which Hostess achieved its forecast was in its labor costs, which remain entirely consistent with the original projections.
While the company failed to meet its income projections, it also raised CEO salary by 300%, from 750k to 2.25 million. It’s latest “offer” to the unions included pay cuts from 27-32% along with increased healthcare costs to employees and no donations to pension plans. The company admits its marketing of products along with general loss of revenue from the recession and failure to innovate and market properly led to the shortfall. Even if the unions had agreed to the offer, the company wasn’t doing much to keep up with market demands. In fact, the Teamsters union, which represent a chunk of the employees, had agreed to about 8% in pay cuts along with other concessions to management. The baker’s union was the one who nixed that deal and began the strike.
Bottom line: the company didn’t make the money, for various reasons, that it had projected and was pretty much doomed before the strike occurred. That just became a convenient scapegoat.
Thulsa Doom
November 17th, 2012
10:58 am
“If you are going to kill Green Energy Subsidies, then we need to kill the subsidies to the Nuclear industry don’t you think ?”
Peter,
Lemme help you out there little buddy. The difference is that nuclear energy works and has a proven track record. Solyndra doesn’t. Couldn’t figure that out?
Thulsa Doom
November 17th, 2012
11:02 am
“Bottom line: the company didn’t make the money, for various reasons, that it had projected and was pretty much doomed before the strike occurred.”
There is some truth to that. Failure to innovate and mismanagement were a good reason for failure. But to arbitrarily state that they were doomed before the strike is not quite true. Unless you’re Nostradomus and can see into the future.
“That just became a convenient scapegoat.”
And that is just one man’s opinion.
Vinny
November 17th, 2012
11:07 am
Interesting how bedwetting libs like Jay find that tens of thousands of people put out of work is amusing.
Typical bedwetting lib
Thogwummpy
November 17th, 2012
11:25 am
Yeah, Jay….we get the whole tongue in cheek mocking tone you’re taking. YET, it comes from someone who adopts every blame-Bush-bash-the-rich conspiracy that rolls down the deep Left pike. So, you’re hypocrisy is duely noted.
RF
November 17th, 2012
11:25 am
“And that is just one man’s opinion.”
True, but the facts of the financial situation are hard to blame solely on the unions. The deal the Teamsters accepted was basically 8% cut now which would be given back over four years. Workable deal that for some reason the baker’s union wouldn’t accept. We could debate whether there was still room for negotiation, but the numbers show the company was already in serious trouble, labor costs aside. Bad business decisions, along with 6 CEO’s over 8 years doesn’t paint the picture of a company that’s strong enough to survive the recession. It’s a tough balance to manage labor costs AND increase market share, and all the more difficult in a recession. And all the labor cost cuts in the world won’t fix a company that isn’t adjust advertising and products to meet consumer interest. Hostess is the #2 bread baker in the USA, but revenues were off by 600 million in 2011 alone. How much of that do you offset by reduction in labor costs and how long will that sustain a company that isn’t at least maintaining a good market share and revenue?
Moderate
November 17th, 2012
11:43 am
Argue as you will about conspiracies, obesity, etc. but the one overriding issue for me is….why didn’t Bookman wait till he sobered up or came off the drugs before writing his column. I don’t like his points of view very much, but he has generally written like a serious (but misguided) journalist. This sad attempt at satire should be beneath him, and whoever reviewed it.
holic
November 17th, 2012
11:46 am
You just lost what tiny bit of credibility you may have had publishing such bullscat. As you live in a fantasy of ignorant musings dispensed by the puppet masters who program your every thought, the TRUTH and the FACTS have no relevance. To wit: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-16/hostess-liquidation-curious-cast-characters-twinkie-tumbles
Now find yourself a hole in which to hide from the shame you so richly deserve.
Jay don't no business
November 17th, 2012
11:48 am
Well, regardless there are 18000 people out of a job. All I can say is here we go again.
Bob Andrews
November 17th, 2012
11:51 am
Jay, few people listen to Michelle Obama.
One particular Union killed Hostess, the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers Union (BCTGM). This Union that has 5,000 members at Hostess would not negotiate benefits and work rules changes. The BCTGM selectively walked out, thus 18,500 jobs are lost.
This loss of jobs will probably affect 40,000+ people who will terribly miss Hostess pay checks.
There is one good thing that comes from this sad story, activist Unions have lost another big chunk of their power in an ever declining Union workforce.
Hostess will either re-tool itself or sell it’s Brands and the products will be made in “Right to Work” States or in other non-Union facilities. Thank God, Georgia is a RTW State.
On a slightly different topic, now we need to rid Governments of any and all trace of public employee Union membership.
zeke
November 17th, 2012
11:55 am
Sorry Jay, but, just like with Eastern Airlines, the stupidity of union scum did in fact kill Twinkies! Yes there were some management errors, but, they could have been overcome! But the standard union agenda finally killed it! When Eastern folded the union bragging point was, “we killed Eastern”, never mind that about 4000 jobs were lost in the Atlanta area alone! This is the problem with unions. They are socialist. They are a scourge. They should NOT be Constitutional in a free Capitalist society!
nelson
November 17th, 2012
11:59 am
Jay is the only guy that could get 385 comments from a story as sorry as that. The brand names of all the Hostess selections is very valuable. It is like a movie company going out of business, the movies keep bringing in the royalties. i am desperate to make a comment. i thought my comments were highly sought till the Orlando Sentinel wanted to charge me to make them, what an insult, like charging Hemingway to write a book.
jj
November 17th, 2012
11:59 am
I am in the baking industry and have intimate knowledge of the IBC-Hostess debacle. They have been in and out of trouble since 2004. Yes senior mgt deserves some of the blame but at the end of the day they could no longer support their cost base. And YES Jay the union costs of labor and benefits played a huge part in it.
As usual you babble on about something you have virtually no knowledge of. Liberal good, conservative bad
jj
November 17th, 2012
12:00 pm
And one more thing
The brands will survive under a different owner, perhaps Georgia’s own Flowers Baking.
SBinf
November 17th, 2012
12:00 pm
Victoria wasn’t just playing a dumb blonde on SNL all those years, go figure.
Common Sense
November 17th, 2012
12:07 pm
The unions turned down a 25% stake in the company for an 8% pay reduction.
Hard to believe a 0% stake and no pay was the choice the unions made.
imma fatasse
November 17th, 2012
12:16 pm
it was either george bush or the war on drugs that killed hostess. if pot were legal, twinkie sales would be thru the roof
The Truth
November 17th, 2012
12:30 pm
Jay – please tell me you aren’t ignorant enough to believe that Michelle Obama has had such a profound impact on the eating habits of Americans that she’s the reason why Hostess will cease to exist…that’s beyond laughable.
Thulsa Doom
November 17th, 2012
12:40 pm
The Truth
November 17th, 2012
9:03 am
Wal Mart should die. They killed small town America’s business districts.
TheTruth,
Who the hell are you to determine what companie should die. First of all Walmart didn’t kill small town American business. The consumer did with his wallet when he decided of his own freedom of choice that Walmart offers him more products and at a cheaper choice than a family owned business. If poor and middle class people decide of their own volition and freedom that they would rather purchase lower cost goods at Walmart then that is their choice and none of your damn business. You can keep paying higher than normal prices for goods at the local family owned business. That is your choice. You do not however choose for others sport.
The Quiet people do the electing.
November 17th, 2012
12:44 pm
Twinkies and snack food brothers and sisters like HO HOs were invented in an era when US citizens, especially children, when not in school, were OUTSIDE playing. They were inside sitting after dinner. If it was light out, they were out playing baseball, soccer, tag, red light green light; LOTS of movement in their playtime. So Obesity was a very rare sight. Nowadays, you drive into a subdivision and you see NO kids outside. The McMansions occupy the entire lot so there is NO where to play ball or run. Couch driving, Cheetos eating, video game players have taken these kids place. Meanwhile, Hostess kept producing these same high fat, high sugar foods; they were OK if you were active. If you are not, they can be bad for your health overall if you eat too many, which a lot of folks do. Programs to educate folks about healthy eating and exercising are in our country’s best interest long term; not some vast conspiracy to control you like some wild eyed doomsayers exhort. Hostess, my childhood friend, has run it’s course and will forever live in American food lore, however, change is a good thing. My hunch is some smart folks will buy up the rights to making these products from the bankruptcy courts and we will see them again in some fashion.
Thulsa Doom
November 17th, 2012
12:45 pm
Tuthbe,
And one other thing sport. A lot of people who are store managers or at least dept. managers at Walmart started off entry level stocking shelves or as a retail associate. They worked their way up in a typical company that offers upward mobility to anyone willing to pay their dues. How far is someone going to advance in a small family owned business? How far in pay, advancement, benefits including insurance, etc can someone go in a small mom and pop store compared to a large corporation? Exactly.Now shaddup.
pb
November 17th, 2012
1:09 pm
The Truth,
I think Jay was being sarcastic?! ( He was playing along with the intense hatred some of the right wingers have of Michelle Obama, and everything she stands for.) He did a pretty funny column, actually. But problem is, in reality, the unions refusal to give any more concessions, did help ruin Hostess and Twinkies! Unions do have too much power, in many cases.
Ron
November 17th, 2012
1:23 pm
As usual bookman, you’re full of twinkies and their by product.
Mike
November 17th, 2012
1:47 pm
No Jay. It was just the union drones doing what they do. Joining the rest of the lemmings jumping over the cliff.Bankrupting the very entity they rely on for their living. If your time in the unemployment line distresses you union losers just keep telling yourselves ” We really showed them !” What a bunch of idiots.