WISCONSIN:'Constitutional crisis'...Senate Orders Arrest Of Missing Democrats

[rightwinger]

OK genius.

Explain the difference between civil and criminal law. Did you know that, if you are the witness to a crime, you can be arrested and held to insure that you show up for trial? Does that make seeing a crime a criminal act?

What about contempt of court? You can be arrested for that, and thrown in jail until the judge gets over his little snit, does that make it a criminal act?

My guess is that, as usual, you are going to ignore me. Or, as you did recently, you are going to read my post, realize you are wrong, and pretend that you always held the position that the Senators could be arrested, even though they are not charged with a real crime. You will also pretend that you never said anyone was charging them with a crime.

You will not fool anyone but yourself if you do.

What's ironic and truly revealing about the right, there is no such thing as too much government when Republicans are in power. Yet you folks scream and whine fascism if a City council takes toy out of Happy Meals...you folks really need to look in a mirror.

translation- I am complete stranger to history.

link?

 

[Bfgrn]

OK genius.

Explain the difference between civil and criminal law. Did you know that, if you are the witness to a crime, you can be arrested and held to insure that you show up for trial? Does that make seeing a crime a criminal act?

What about contempt of court? You can be arrested for that, and thrown in jail until the judge gets over his little snit, does that make it a criminal act?

My guess is that, as usual, you are going to ignore me. Or, as you did recently, you are going to read my post, realize you are wrong, and pretend that you always held the position that the Senators could be arrested, even though they are not charged with a real crime. You will also pretend that you never said anyone was charging them with a crime.

You will not fool anyone but yourself if you do.

What's ironic and truly revealing about the right, there is no such thing as too much government when Republicans are in power. Yet you folks scream and whine fascism if a City council takes toy out of Happy Meals...you folks really need to look in a mirror.

First, I am not a Republican.
Second, while most tests score me leaning right, I am not a right winger either.
Third, how is this too much government?

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."


Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...


It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[The T]

What's ironic and truly revealing about the right, there is no such thing as too much government when Republicans are in power. Yet you folks scream and whine fascism if a City council takes toy out of Happy Meals...you folks really need to look in a mirror.

First, I am not a Republican.
Second, while most tests score me leaning right, I am not a right winger either.
Third, how is this too much government?

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."


Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...


It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Bananna Republic that is Responsive to Taxpayers?

Folks? You just can't make this shit up.

BuFu? You're absolutely fucking delusional.

 

[Trajan]

First, I am not a Republican.
Second, while most tests score me leaning right, I am not a right winger either.
Third, how is this too much government?

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."


Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...


It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Bananna Republic that is Responsive to Taxpayers?

Folks? You just can't make this shit up.

BuFu? You're absolutely fucking delusional.

the irony that the 'banana republic' milieu was dictated by the response from the dems escapes him completely.

 

[The T]

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."


Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...


It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Bananna Republic that is Responsive to Taxpayers?

Folks? You just can't make this shit up.

BuFu? You're absolutely fucking delusional.

the irony that the 'banana republic' milieu was dictated by the response from the dems escapes him completely.

As a matter of course it does.

 

[Care4all]

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."


Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...


It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Bananna Republic that is Responsive to Taxpayers?

Folks? You just can't make this shit up.

BuFu? You're absolutely fucking delusional.

the irony that the 'banana republic' milieu was dictated by the response from the dems escapes him completely.

Really? come onnnnn.....

they have had every right to be civilly disobedient....and to redress grievances and to assemble....imho! every right! I don't know how anyone can think otherwise...?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

In banana republics the opposition is usually hunted down and either imprisoned or shot, in Wisconsin they ran away to avoid doing their job. You are so right that it is all but impossible to tell the difference.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."

I do not claim to be a classical liberal. I do not remember exactly what I said, but it was along the lines that I consider myself to be a classical liberal because that is the closest to my beliefs. In other words, I see significant differences between what I believe and what a classical liberal believes.

You have also not hear me condemn the unions for actually doing it. As I said somewhere along the line, part of the job of a good staff is to present all of the options, even the most outrageous ones, When Walker said that the idea was considered, I did not have a problem with that, anymore than I have a problem with the Democrats and the unions actually doing it. If he had done it, and it turned out the way he thought it might, then you could talk about how he made things worse, and I would agree with you. As it is, I get to talk about how the unions and Organizing for America made things worse.

Nonetheless, they had every right to do exactly what they did, except for where they camped out in the capital past the closing hours. That was trespassing, which they knew, and they were hoping Walker would allow them to be arrested.

Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

Where did I say his plan was a good one? Why do politicians never lay out detailed plans during the campaign? Should we start impeaching every person who breaks a campaign promise? Why are you not railing against Obama for doing the exact same thing you are railing against Walker for doing?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...

The irony of what you just said is so profound that it deserves to stand without comment.

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Another person that likes to throw around quotes like they mean something. Since I have personally argued on this board that we should not sit idly by while anyone lives a single day in slavery, consistently rail against the police and prosecutorial overreach in this country, and believe that rights are not granted by the government, I think you are going to come up short in a comparison here.

Besides which, Walker is not trying to take away anyone's freedoms or rights, he is just trying to deal with a union that uses its collective bargaining muscles to force school districts to buy over priced health care insurance from a company it owns. In the real world that is graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest. You would be screaming to high heaven if a company run by a Republican was forcing the government to do something like that.

Want to throw around another quote to prove that you are not actually thinking?

 

[Bfgrn]

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."


Here are some very basic ethics and morals issues for you to ponder:

If Walker's plan is such a good one, WHY didn't he lay this out during the campaign? If we profess an allegiance to the Constitution, our founding documents, the tenets of our founding fathers and the representative republic they created, then isn't it an ethical and moral obligation that the rhetoric and campaign promises of our candidates and the policies they create be copacetic? And when these representatives gain office, and their actions reveal that their rhetoric was merely a ruse to gain power, who among us should stand by, or allow our fellow citizens to be steamrolled and trampled?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...


It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Bananna Republic that is Responsive to Taxpayers?

Folks? You just can't make this shit up.

BuFu? You're absolutely fucking delusional.

the irony that the 'banana republic' milieu was dictated by the response from the dems escapes him completely.

You folks on the right have NO idea what a democratic republic means. It really doesn't matter to you right wingers how unethical and devious a Republican Governor is, even one who would place thugs in a crowd of law abiding families, hands over $140,000,000 of state money saved to cover revenue shortfalls to corporate lobbyists and special interest groups, then punishes the hard working people of the state by trying to ram through a draconian bill that will strip worker's rights, severely damage the public schools in the state by huge cuts, but finds money for private schools and even LOWERS the requirements for teachers at private schools. The bill allows Walker to sell public utilities to no bid private cartels, and what do we hear from the right? YEA!!!!. Crush those fucking teachers, nurses, EMT's and snowplow drivers. And the Democrats are breaking the law because they refuse to lay down in the street and let honest, hard working people be crushed.

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.
Abraham Lincoln

 

[DiveCon]

Bananna Republic that is Responsive to Taxpayers?

Folks? You just can't make this shit up.

BuFu? You're absolutely fucking delusional.

the irony that the 'banana republic' milieu was dictated by the response from the dems escapes him completely.

You folks on the right have NO idea what a democratic republic means. It really doesn't matter to you right wingers how unethical and devious a Republican Governor is, even one who would place thugs in a crowd of law abiding families, hands over $140,000,000 of state money saved to cover revenue shortfalls to corporate lobbyists and special interest groups, then punishes the hard working people of the state by trying to ram through a draconian bill that will strip worker's rights, severely damage the public schools in the state by huge cuts, but finds money for private schools and even LOWERS the requirements for teachers at private schools. The bill allows Walker to sell public utilities to no bid private cartels, and what do we hear from the right? YEA!!!!. Crush those fucking teachers, nurses, EMT's and snowplow drivers. And the Democrats are breaking the law because they refuse to lay down in the street and let honest, hard working people be crushed.



Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.
Abraham Lincoln

none of which actually happened, but dont bother yourself with FACTS

 

[Trajan]

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.
Abraham Lincoln

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." Alexis de Tocqueville

 

[Big Fitz]

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.
Abraham Lincoln

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." Alexis de Tocqueville

DeToqueville discovered that in the 1700's.

It took 130 years for this to be discovered by congress... and it's grown worse since.

The good news as we sit here teetering on the edge of the republic's collapse is that we are still redeemable. The better news is that with our new knowledge of the failings of man and politics, we can implement new rules to prevent this from ever happening again... if we have the stomach and political will to implement them and make public service distasteful to the greedy and corrupt.

 

[Bfgrn]

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

In banana republics the opposition is usually hunted down and either imprisoned or shot, in Wisconsin they ran away to avoid doing their job. You are so right that it is all but impossible to tell the difference.

You claimed to be a 'classic liberal', well here is a fact: ALL forms of liberalism believe in justice, honesty and ethics. Yet I hear nothing from you or the right calling out Walker, even after the revelations his phone conversation reveal with who he thinks is billionaire donor David Koch. He admits he will lie and offer to negotiate with Democrats to get them back in the Senate, then pass the bill with NO negotiations. He admits he contemplated placing troublemakers in a crowd of schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, snowplow drivers and their children, but the ONLY reason he didn't do it;
"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."

I do not claim to be a classical liberal. I do not remember exactly what I said, but it was along the lines that I consider myself to be a classical liberal because that is the closest to my beliefs. In other words, I see significant differences between what I believe and what a classical liberal believes.

You have also not hear me condemn the unions for actually doing it. As I said somewhere along the line, part of the job of a good staff is to present all of the options, even the most outrageous ones, When Walker said that the idea was considered, I did not have a problem with that, anymore than I have a problem with the Democrats and the unions actually doing it. If he had done it, and it turned out the way he thought it might, then you could talk about how he made things worse, and I would agree with you. As it is, I get to talk about how the unions and Organizing for America made things worse.

Nonetheless, they had every right to do exactly what they did, except for where they camped out in the capital past the closing hours. That was trespassing, which they knew, and they were hoping Walker would allow them to be arrested.



Where did I say his plan was a good one? Why do politicians never lay out detailed plans during the campaign? Should we start impeaching every person who breaks a campaign promise? Why are you not railing against Obama for doing the exact same thing you are railing against Walker for doing?

It is ironic that you folks on the right 'preach' about our Constitution and limited government, until you gain power. THEN the Constitution is an enemy and truth is a menace. And heavy handed government over We, the People is suddenly sanctioned, cheered and defended...

The irony of what you just said is so profound that it deserves to stand without comment.

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Another person that likes to throw around quotes like they mean something. Since I have personally argued on this board that we should not sit idly by while anyone lives a single day in slavery, consistently rail against the police and prosecutorial overreach in this country, and believe that rights are not granted by the government, I think you are going to come up short in a comparison here.

Besides which, Walker is not trying to take away anyone's freedoms or rights, he is just trying to deal with a union that uses its collective bargaining muscles to force school districts to buy over priced health care insurance from a company it owns. In the real world that is graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest. You would be screaming to high heaven if a company run by a Republican was forcing the government to do something like that.

Want to throw around another quote to prove that you are not actually thinking?

The unions have agreed to accept ALL of Walker's fiscal demands, but he refuses to negotiate collective bargaining. So this is not about economics, it about union busting. In Walker's phone conversation, he admits he is out to bust the union by his illicit of Reagan and the air traffic controllers. So he is intent on taking away people's rights. And Walker and the so called liberal media has failed to tell people the truth that he is cutting their pay.

Gov. Scott Walker says he wants state workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to "contribute more" to their pension and health insurance plans.

Accepting Gov. Walker' s assertions as fact, and failing to check, created the impression that somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

How can that be? Because the "contributions" consist of money that employees chose to take as deferred wages – as pensions when they retire – rather than take immediately in cash. The same is true with the health care plan. If this were not so a serious crime would be taking place, the gift of public funds rather than payment for services.

Thus, state workers are not being asked to simply "contribute more" to Wisconsin' s retirement system (or as the argument goes, "pay their fair share" of retirement costs as do employees in Wisconsin' s private sector who still have pensions and health insurance). They are being asked to accept a cut in their salaries so that the state of Wisconsin can use the money to fill the hole left by tax cuts and reduced audits of corporations in Wisconsin. ref

You slander with "In the real world that is graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest". Well if that were true, the proof would be apparent. Because public unions have been negotiating contracts with government in Wisconsin since 1959. For your premise to be true, then the wages of public employees should blatantly expose your premise of 'graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest'...They DON'T.

Wisconsin’s state and local employees earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn $61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn $82,134 in wages and benefits. ref

 

[Big Fitz]

The unions have agreed to accept ALL of Walker's fiscal demands, but he refuses to negotiate collective bargaining.

After decades of abuse by WEAC in state and local elections, I don't blame him. Unless there is either a total ban on them spending ANY money in politics, or even giving to political action campaigns, They should be busted. I would also accept all union contracts requiring a public referendum vote to accept or veto them.

But without either of those two concessions by the union, collective bargaining in public unions must go because it is too prone to abuse and corruption.

 

[Care4all]

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.
Abraham Lincoln

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." Alexis de Tocqueville

you know trajan, that last line sounds good, until you google who actually negotiates with teachers each year....

EACH SCHOOL DISTrict negotiates with their own teachers, NOT some politician in their Capital....

fyi....i googled it, after you had mentioned such earlier, and i said i didn't know how that worked....

care

 

[Trajan]

First, you are a right winger, nothing you have ever posted contradicts that fact.

Second, see first

Third, the continuing saga of Gov Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin resembles a Banana republic, not a democratic one. Yet you and the rest of the right wingers defend every action by this guy and the Republicans. There is nothing he could do that would draw your ire.

In banana republics the opposition is usually hunted down and either imprisoned or shot, in Wisconsin they ran away to avoid doing their job. You are so right that it is all but impossible to tell the difference.



I do not claim to be a classical liberal. I do not remember exactly what I said, but it was along the lines that I consider myself to be a classical liberal because that is the closest to my beliefs. In other words, I see significant differences between what I believe and what a classical liberal believes.

You have also not hear me condemn the unions for actually doing it. As I said somewhere along the line, part of the job of a good staff is to present all of the options, even the most outrageous ones, When Walker said that the idea was considered, I did not have a problem with that, anymore than I have a problem with the Democrats and the unions actually doing it. If he had done it, and it turned out the way he thought it might, then you could talk about how he made things worse, and I would agree with you. As it is, I get to talk about how the unions and Organizing for America made things worse.

Nonetheless, they had every right to do exactly what they did, except for where they camped out in the capital past the closing hours. That was trespassing, which they knew, and they were hoping Walker would allow them to be arrested.
[/SIZE][/FONT]


Where did I say his plan was a good one? Why do politicians never lay out detailed plans during the campaign? Should we start impeaching every person who breaks a campaign promise? Why are you not railing against Obama for doing the exact same thing you are railing against Walker for doing?



The irony of what you just said is so profound that it deserves to stand without comment.

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Another person that likes to throw around quotes like they mean something. Since I have personally argued on this board that we should not sit idly by while anyone lives a single day in slavery, consistently rail against the police and prosecutorial overreach in this country, and believe that rights are not granted by the government, I think you are going to come up short in a comparison here.

Besides which, Walker is not trying to take away anyone's freedoms or rights, he is just trying to deal with a union that uses its collective bargaining muscles to force school districts to buy over priced health care insurance from a company it owns. In the real world that is graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest. You would be screaming to high heaven if a company run by a Republican was forcing the government to do something like that.

Want to throw around another quote to prove that you are not actually thinking?

The unions have agreed to accept ALL of Walker's fiscal demands, but he refuses to negotiate collective bargaining. So this is not about economics, it about union busting. In Walker's phone conversation, he admits he is out to bust the union by his illicit of Reagan and the air traffic controllers. So he is intent on taking away people's rights. And Walker and the so called liberal media has failed to tell people the truth that he is cutting their pay.

Gov. Scott Walker says he wants state workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to "contribute more" to their pension and health insurance plans.

Accepting Gov. Walker' s assertions as fact, and failing to check, created the impression that somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

How can that be? Because the "contributions" consist of money that employees chose to take as deferred wages – as pensions when they retire – rather than take immediately in cash. The same is true with the health care plan. If this were not so a serious crime would be taking place, the gift of public funds rather than payment for services.

Thus, state workers are not being asked to simply "contribute more" to Wisconsin' s retirement system (or as the argument goes, "pay their fair share" of retirement costs as do employees in Wisconsin' s private sector who still have pensions and health insurance). They are being asked to accept a cut in their salaries so that the state of Wisconsin can use the money to fill the hole left by tax cuts and reduced audits of corporations in Wisconsin. ref

You slander with "In the real world that is graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest". Well if that were true, the proof would be apparent. Because public unions have been negotiating contracts with government in Wisconsin since 1959. For your premise to be true, then the wages of public employees should blatantly expose your premise of 'graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest'...They DON'T.

Wisconsin’s state and local employees earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn $61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn $82,134 in wages and benefits. ref

what is the TC when you add in the DEFINED pension plan and forever medical benes?

 

[Bfgrn]

The unions have agreed to accept ALL of Walker's fiscal demands, but he refuses to negotiate collective bargaining.

After decades of abuse by WEAC in state and local elections, I don't blame him. Unless there is either a total ban on them spending ANY money in politics, or even giving to political action campaigns, They should be busted. I would also accept all union contracts requiring a public referendum vote to accept or veto them.

But without either of those two concessions by the union, collective bargaining in public unions must go because it is too prone to abuse and corruption.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

Public unions have been negotiating contracts with government in Wisconsin since 1959. For your premise to be true, then the wages of public employees should blatantly expose your premise of 'graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest'...They DON'T.

Wisconsin’s state and local employees earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn $61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn $82,134 in wages and benefits.

 

[Big Fitz]

And local elections are far easier to corrupt than even state elections.

Another reason for collective bargaining to go, local referendum on contracts, or banning all political activity by unions.

 

[Trajan]

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.
Abraham Lincoln

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." Alexis de Tocqueville

you know trajan, that last line sounds good, until you google who actually negotiates with teachers each year....

EACH SCHOOL DISTrict negotiates with their own teachers, NOT some politician in their Capital....

fyi....i googled it, after you had mentioned such earlier, and i said i didn't know how that worked....

care

ahhhh haaa!!!!!
they negotiate with the union I beleive, and who sits on the district board? And, if you check I am sure you will find walker making the point that this will return money to those districts btw. I think it would be helpful to check walkers prior job....he spoke to this.

 

[Trajan]

The unions have agreed to accept ALL of Walker's fiscal demands, but he refuses to negotiate collective bargaining.

After decades of abuse by WEAC in state and local elections, I don't blame him. Unless there is either a total ban on them spending ANY money in politics, or even giving to political action campaigns, They should be busted. I would also accept all union contracts requiring a public referendum vote to accept or veto them.

But without either of those two concessions by the union, collective bargaining in public unions must go because it is too prone to abuse and corruption.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

Public unions have been negotiating contracts with government in Wisconsin since 1959. For your premise to be true, then the wages of public employees should blatantly expose your premise of 'graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest'...They DON'T.

Wisconsin’s state and local employees earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn $61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn $82,134 in wages and benefits.

that line I added emphasis to, you should post the link it came from, I did, twice. 'Old news', and I spoke to the fallacy of that statement.

 

[Bfgrn]

After decades of abuse by WEAC in state and local elections, I don't blame him. Unless there is either a total ban on them spending ANY money in politics, or even giving to political action campaigns, They should be busted. I would also accept all union contracts requiring a public referendum vote to accept or veto them.

But without either of those two concessions by the union, collective bargaining in public unions must go because it is too prone to abuse and corruption.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

Public unions have been negotiating contracts with government in Wisconsin since 1959. For your premise to be true, then the wages of public employees should blatantly expose your premise of 'graft, corruption, and a conflict of interest'...They DON'T.

Wisconsin’s state and local employees earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn $61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn $82,134 in wages and benefits.

that line I added emphasis to, you should post the link it came from, I did, twice. 'Old news', and I spoke to the fallacy of that statement.

There is a link in the original post you failed to read and blurted out your reply to.

I see no links in your replies to me.