"Big" Labor and elections

I am shaking my head after reading this article in Politico about Labor's "Big Revenge." It is unclear from the story who is actually going to be doing more than $450 million in spending on elections during the 2012 cycle. Alright, let's just assume it is the aggregate of organized labor, but the bulk of that chunk of change will probably be flushed down the toilet on TV and other advertising. Somehow, commercials are going to make a difference? Ads that so many of us fast-forward through while watching network programming on our DVRs? This is going to do little more than irritate opponents of workers and maybe inspire supportive head-nodding from sympathetic viewers. It will do nothing toward changing minds or building an organization that can endure the current full court press against collective bargaining or whats left of workers' rights. Almost $450 million in 2008 spent by the dwindling labor organizations... for what exactly? A tweek of healthcare and complete sycophancy toward wall st., the sworn enemy of workers. The one promise that candidate Obama made that broke my heart when he failed to even try to get it passed as President was the Card Check. The provision, whatever it could have ended up being called as legislation, that would have allowed workers to bypass formal elections that the bosses can rig and influence, intimidate, coerce, etc.
As a former member of two separate UAW locals and still a strong supporter in spirit, I have to say: Give it up, this strategy is a complete failure. Workers owe the Democratic Party... nothing. President Obama will win or lose on his own, nothing workers or their organizations can do will change that. Working people are no longer a core constituancy of the Democratic Party and the longer labor deludes itself that it matters on the national level the more opportunities closer to the grassroots will languish and be lost. Having Hilda Solis as Secy Labor is nice, but any positive of having a Secretary of Labor who doesn't actively dispise workers as during republican administrations is drowned out by the numerous wall street representatives in the cabinet and important policy positions. President Obama could have lobbied more for Congress to pass a Cardcheck bill while it was overwhelmingly Democratic, he could have put his foot down when teabag state governments decided to wage war on public workers and collective bargaining. He could have stood up more forcefully to advocate for workers' rights, or finally, finally forced the states to comply with federal labor laws. But that would have required effort, and distracted from safely guiding bailouts to the grubby-handed bosses and financial criminals.
No, we have to go back to the old ways. Trying to gain influence with people who don't need us and take us for granted is a fool's errand. That money could have been spent in 2008 actually organizing on the ground, you could pay laid-off workers and enthusiastic college kids to go out and talk to people about why you should have rights in the workplace. There has been analysis lately on how labor unions act like businesses and try to operate in the shadow of business operations. This is the ultimate in foolhardiness, working people are not another customer base or interest group. WE ARE THE PEOPLE! The atomized public that lives in fear at work could gain more in a 10 minute chat with sincere organizers than any number of TV ads. Instead of using dwindling resources to compete with the 1% and their unlimited resources, we need to reimagine how to bring back middle-class America.
Update I
"Many argue that labor needs a permanent presence in communities across the country to beat back [a rash of Republican-backed efforts in the states... that would make it harder for unions to organize] such attacks, even at the cost of devoting less money to electing candidates. Such an approach could still benefit Obama and other Democrats, but would not directly finance party activities." From Labor unions rethinking their role in politics in the LA Times.