New York Times writer Brookes Barnes has been covering the SAG talks meltdown. His previous piece about SAG President Alan Rosenberg was titled,"Guild Chief for Actors Is No Pacifist." Barnes paints Rosenberg as a reactionary, angry 'militant' of a leader:

"Aside from my family, I have two great loves in my life: acting and the fight for social justice," he [Rosenberg] said. "Oh yes, we are very serious."

Doesn't sound like an invite to negotiations. That and social injustice is not exactly the plight of actors in 2008...PAs, assistants, the people that have to tell Kirstie Alley she's funny...perhaps.

The article in today's NYT furthers this image:

The arrival of the long-scheduled elections puts SAG leaders in the awkward position of trying to convince the studios that they have the unwavering support of members while facing a referendum on their strategy. Alan Rosenberg, president of the guild, is most displeased.

"It is not productive to come out and attack leadership during a negotiation," Mr. Rosenberg said in an interview Friday. Asked if leaders might have made mistakes in the negotiations, he said: "It's a lie! We haven't bungled anything. We've been doing a phenomenal job."

Would he say it has been a 'heckuva job'?

The article continues:

Ms. Kate Walsh, speaking on a break from taping "Private Practice," agreed. "It's not about being moderate or rolling over in contract talks," she said. "It’s about putting ourselves in the strongest position possible. Diplomacy is not weakness."

Wasn't "Diplomacy is not weakness" a John Kerry bumper sticker?

Ms. Walsh and her cohort are not alone in their criticism. David M. Smith, associate dean of Pepperdine University's business school and a labor economist, said SAG's strategy in the talks could be taught "as lessons of what not to do."

Yeah, elect some cowboy bonehead (twice) to run your organization into the ground by a continued splintering brought on by his own ego and stupidity.

Jesus - can't Hollywood do ANYTHING original these days?!