Phatscotty wrote:They said they will make them, it's incorrect to say they have been made. There has been debate for the last 10 days, filled with testimony for 17 hours a day (at least one of the days). Tragically, The democrats are refusing to attend.
LOL... I said public debate. Public comments were cut off 4 days after the bill was created, then brought up for immediate vote. The Democrats apparently could not filibuster, but could avoid a quarum. Not saying I agree with the tactic, but still.
Phatscotty wrote:I would be furious if I lived in WI. Whatever they hope to achieve for their end game, I think it will backfire on them and Democrats may very well not be welcomed back into WI for a few terms. It's not unrealistic. Here in Minnesota our Congress has been democrat for 30+ years. Until 2010 anyways, where the Republicans won both the House and the Senate. Huge strides in MN. We are currently battling over spending billions more or cutting billions now.
We will see. I don't live in WI. The Republicans have definitely not been acting above board in this one.
thegreekdog wrote:On Jim Crow - Jim Crow laws are hardly akin to state employees collective bargaining. As far as I know, the state employees have the same right to vote as everyone else in Wisconsin (and had the same right to vote prior to the election of Governor Walker).
I'm only comparing Jim Crow to the Voter ID laws. The laws started as a Jim Crow law from Southern Democrats, and today's Republican party has resurrected it.
thegreekdog wrote:On Jim Crow - Jim Crow laws are hardly akin to state employees collective bargaining. As far as I know, the state employees have the same right to vote as everyone else in Wisconsin (and had the same right to vote prior to the election of Governor Walker).
I'm only comparing Jim Crow to the Voter ID laws. The laws started as a Jim Crow law from Southern Democrats, and today's Republican party has resurrected it.
Ah, okay sorry.
Here's an interesting website that shows tax burdens by residents by state... please note where Wisconsin ranks (and please note where my own state - New Jersey - ranks).
Symmetry wrote:They conceded the cuts in pay and benefits a while ago. Yeah- this is about busting unions (not those that contribute to Republican causes of course).
It only took the election of a Republican legislature and governor and the threatened cutting of collective bargaining.
I'll ask the question again - why should we let state employees bargain with the people who they got elected? How can this be considered bargaining at all?
I missed this earlier. It is a good question.
In truth, I think public employees should only have "unions" to promote basic worker safety and similar universal conditions that might not be considered by the average citizen, but which are important. I believe most of us can understand pay and benefits well enough to control that
HOWEVER, this seems to be much more than just an attack on public unions.
thegreekdog wrote:On Jim Crow - Jim Crow laws are hardly akin to state employees collective bargaining. As far as I know, the state employees have the same right to vote as everyone else in Wisconsin (and had the same right to vote prior to the election of Governor Walker).
I thought the crow reference was to the ID bit?
Yup, and of course in this case it's an attack only on collective bargaining for unions that don't usually support Republicans.
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
If I lived in WI, I would move to hold a new election and impeach the lot. (probably just as well I don't live there...)
You mean the Republicans who ran on these union issues last fall yet still won large majorities? A new election wouldn't replace those people as those people are the ones the public already supported.
Phatscotty wrote:They said they will make them, it's incorrect to say they have been made. There has been debate for the last 10 days, filled with testimony for 17 hours a day (at least one of the days). Tragically, The democrats are refusing to attend. I would be furious if I lived in WI. Whatever they hope to achieve for their end game, I think it will backfire on them and Democrats may very well not be welcomed back into WI for a few terms. It's not unrealistic. Here in Minnesota our Congress has been democrat for 30+ years. Until 2010 anyways, where the Republicans won both the House and the Senate. Huge strides in MN. We are currently battling over spending billions more or cutting billions now.
I can't help but believe if the political situation were reversed that you wouldn't be furious at all, but rather you would be deeply contented that the Republicans would take that action.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
If I lived in WI, I would move to hold a new election and impeach the lot. (probably just as well I don't live there...)
You mean the Republicans who ran on these union issues last fall yet still won large majorities? A new election wouldn't replace those people as those people are the ones the public already supported.
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
Phatscotty wrote:They said they will make them, it's incorrect to say they have been made. There has been debate for the last 10 days, filled with testimony for 17 hours a day (at least one of the days). Tragically, The democrats are refusing to attend. I would be furious if I lived in WI. Whatever they hope to achieve for their end game, I think it will backfire on them and Democrats may very well not be welcomed back into WI for a few terms. It's not unrealistic. Here in Minnesota our Congress has been democrat for 30+ years. Until 2010 anyways, where the Republicans won both the House and the Senate. Huge strides in MN. We are currently battling over spending billions more or cutting billions now.
I can't help but believe if the political situation were reversed that you wouldn't be furious at all, but rather you would be deeply contented that the Republicans would take that action.
Give me an example of the opposite and I will give you an honest detailed answer. Try not to push the envelope as far as you can because then it probably won't work.
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
If I lived in WI, I would move to hold a new election and impeach the lot. (probably just as well I don't live there...)
mobocracy eh?
Have an election, seat the overwhelming winners in power, and overthrow them 50 days later. Wonder if anything you like will be overthrown too?
Gosh, we've not heard about Republicans wanting to impeach anyone for ludicrous reason, have we now?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
If I lived in WI, I would move to hold a new election and impeach the lot. (probably just as well I don't live there...)
You mean the Republicans who ran on these union issues last fall yet still won large majorities? A new election wouldn't replace those people as those people are the ones the public already supported.
They got the things they ostensibly ran on - the union cut their benefits. And the rich people got their tax cuts. People would not have gotten elected saying they wanted to eliminate the ability of teacher's unions to bargain collectively.
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
thegreekdog wrote:
Correct... as far as I'm concerned Governor Walker is not going far enough (although, why would anyone want to anger police or firefighters)?
If I lived in WI, I would move to hold a new election and impeach the lot. (probably just as well I don't live there...)
mobocracy eh?
Have an election, seat the overwhelming winners in power, and overthrow them 50 days later. Wonder if anything you like will be overthrown too?
Gosh, we've not heard about Republicans wanting to impeach anyone for ludicrous reason, have we now?
Not to get into it, but lying under oathe is an impeachable offense.
Fascinatingly, I wasn't referring to Clinton. But don't let that get in the way of your knee-jerking. It's a good thing that knee-jerking goes well with tap-dancing, or you'd be in serious coordination trouble.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
if you were talking about someone specific, than go right ahead and identify who you are talking about, and then you can relieve me of my tap-dancing punishment
Anybody listened to the fake Koch call to Walker yet?
It's pretty annoying that liberal groups are resorting to Tea Party tactics, but at least there doesn't seem to evidence of entrapment or editing this time. Also, nowhere near as damning as some want it to be, but still doesn't make the guy look like he's solely interested in the people of Wisconsin.
Pretty bizarre stuff.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
Symmetry wrote:Anybody listened to the fake Koch call to Walker yet?
It's pretty annoying that liberal groups are resorting to Tea Party tactics, but at least there doesn't seem to evidence of entrapment or editing this time. Also, nowhere near as damning as some want it to be, but still doesn't make the guy look like he's solely interested in the people of Wisconsin.
Pretty bizarre stuff.
I'm pretty sure impersonation is a crime if Walker wanted to pursue it (the situation was on Kelly's Court Thursday, but I can't find a video yet). I'm assuming by "Tea Party tactics", you're referring to the undercover videos and acting at places like Planned Parenthood and ACORN? If so, those are acting jobs and not impersonating a specific person. It's a subtle difference, but an important one under the law.
Symmetry wrote:Anybody listened to the fake Koch call to Walker yet?
It's pretty annoying that liberal groups are resorting to Tea Party tactics, but at least there doesn't seem to evidence of entrapment or editing this time. Also, nowhere near as damning as some want it to be, but still doesn't make the guy look like he's solely interested in the people of Wisconsin.
Pretty bizarre stuff.
I didn't listen to it, but I read an article on it (from a non-conservative news source - ABC). It seemed pretty innocuous to me.
Phatscotty wrote:if you were talking about someone specific, than go right ahead and identify who you are talking about, and then you can relieve me of my tap-dancing punishment
I think the point is that none of this is about any one party or, particularly, any one politician.
Its ironic. The one truly honest president we have had in recent times was likely Jimmy Carter... and yet, he is considered rather stupid, and ineffective.. go figure!
Phatscotty wrote:if you were talking about someone specific, than go right ahead and identify who you are talking about, and then you can relieve me of my tap-dancing punishment
"Birth certificate!" comes to mind.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
Phatscotty wrote:if you were talking about someone specific, than go right ahead and identify who you are talking about, and then you can relieve me of my tap-dancing punishment
I think the point is that none of this is about any one party or, particularly, any one politician.
Its ironic. The one truly honest president we have had in recent times was likely Jimmy Carter... and yet, he is considered rather stupid, and ineffective.. go figure!
It IS ironic and unfortunately. It really is. Unfortuntely, I think it's true (though NOT about his being stupid...he was not...just ineffective).
I DON'T however think it's because he was honest that he was ineffective...if anything, that's what allowed the Camp David Accords to even get to that point. I just think circumstances conspired to make him much less effective than he could have been.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
Symmetry wrote:Anybody listened to the fake Koch call to Walker yet?
Hadn't heard about it, actually. Seems like a pretty disgusting thing to do (though sadly, not surprising).
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
Symmetry wrote:Anybody listened to the fake Koch call to Walker yet?
Hadn't heard about it, actually. Seems like a pretty disgusting thing to do (though sadly, not surprising).
Why is that? I haven't actually listened to it, and from what I've heard, most of what Walker said can be explained as sucking up to a ungodly rich donor - although a Madison police chief disagrees with me, there. To me, though, it's the level of access that an absurdly rich non-constituent can have, and the amount of influence on legislation that money affords. Who does Governor Walker pick up the phones for? I may be wrong here, but the sheer power money has on creating policy seems to have increased accordingly as the overall share of wealth the rich controls has grown.
