PDA

View Full Version : Craven WI governor won't answer the question



Soflasnapper
02-20-2011, 07:34 PM
Wisconsin's governor was on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace today. Chris asked him, considering that the unions have said they will accept the trims to their benefits (to now make less take home pay to make contributions to their benefit plans in terms of medical costs and retirements), why won't he take that monetary concession, and why does he want to strip the collective bargaining rights for the future in terms of benefits and work conditions, plus change the dues payment, plus require the unions re-vote every year?

The governor didn't answer that at all but changed the subject to repeat how reasonable the demand that they contribute to their benefits is, relative to other states' unions required contributions.

Why? Because he doesn't want to admit that his purpose is indeed to break the unions, just as in the transition, he talked up the possibility that he would decertify the unions on his own (turned out he lacked that legal authority, so he's taking this back door technique instead).

If he thinks the people are with him on THAT, then he ought to make his case to them in the open. As it is, he is hiding his end game plan, precisely because the people would not agree to it, IMO.

I haven't seen these myself, but reports of polls I've seen are that the people oppose the governor in this fight between 51%-43%, and even 2-1, even BEFORE he admits what he's really trying to do.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nichols: [...] Look, Walker is cornered. He’s in a very tough position. You’ve seen the polls. You had a poll up showing a 51-43 split, there was one showing a two to one split. </div></div>

Qtec
02-20-2011, 09:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why? Because he doesn't want to admit that his purpose is indeed to break the unions, </div></div>

Thank you.

A blind man can see it but not the RW media and not the right leaning posters on this board.

The people protesting in WI can see it to.

Its amazing that the RWingers on this board complain about Govt interference in their lives and encroachment on their freedom but they agree with some jumped up mini fascist who wants to take rights away from people that their ancestors had to fight long and hard for.

Q...as usual, good post.

Gayle in MD
02-21-2011, 06:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its amazing that the RWingers on this board complain about Govt interference in their lives and encroachment on their freedom but they agree with some jumped up mini fascist who wants to take rights away from people that their ancestors had to fight long and hard for.

<span style="color: #660000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Bravo, excellent post, Q. </span> </span>

Q...as usual, good post.


<span style="color: #660000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Yes, two excellent posts! </span> </span> </div></div>

eg8r
02-21-2011, 12:43 PM
I applaud him for trying to break the unions even if he is not man enough to admit it.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
02-21-2011, 01:38 PM
I will be attending a Rally, tomorrow, in Annapolis, to get signatures in protest of the WI's governors attempt to destroy the Unions.

This constitutional right, to organize and unionize, must not be destroyed by the dictating, unAmerican actions of the Republican Party!

G.

LWW
02-21-2011, 05:14 PM
So, again, where in the COTUS is this right guaranteed?

What's that?

It isn't?

You made it up ... again?

LWW

pooltchr
02-21-2011, 07:37 PM
After she says something one time, it becomes her truth.

Failure to be able to differentiate reality from fiction.

Frequently repeating the same thing over and over and over.

Uncontrollable temper manifesting in frequent babbling and ranting.

Delusional in thinking that the people of one state really cares what someone from half way across the country thinks.

All signs of.......

Steve

Qtec
02-21-2011, 07:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.[1] The right to freedom of association has been included in a number of national constitutions and human rights instruments. (It actually is not included in the US Constitution, which is why it is debated.) The Constitution protects assembly, not association and the European Convention on Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

<u>Freedom of association in the sense of workers' right to organize and collectively bargain is also recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights</u> and International Labor Organization Conventions </div></div>

She was half right.

Q

Sev
02-21-2011, 09:16 PM
You know whats great.

Since the democrats have high tailed it out of town they are going to pass voter ID legislation tomorrow. They only need a simple majority.

After that if they may break the union bill into to parts so that each part can be passed by a simple majority.

And then they will continue on to further business.


Good to know the democrats are looking out for their constituents by leaving town.

I suspect their failure will get them all voted out next time around.

Sev
02-21-2011, 09:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.[1] The right to freedom of association has been included in a number of national constitutions and human rights instruments. (It actually is not included in the US Constitution, which is why it is debated.) The Constitution protects assembly, not association and the European Convention on Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

<u>Freedom of association in the sense of workers' right to organize and collectively bargain is also recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights</u> and International Labor Organization Conventions </div></div>

She was half right.

Q </div></div>

Hey did you notice the demonstrators were hold up signs with Stalin's closed fist?

Sev
02-21-2011, 09:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its amazing that the RWingers on this board complain about Govt interference in their lives and encroachment on their freedom but they agree with some jumped up mini fascist who wants to take rights away from people that their ancestors had to fight long and hard for.

<span style="color: #660000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Bravo, excellent post, Q. </span> </span>

Q...as usual, good post.


<span style="color: #660000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Yes, two excellent posts! </span> </span> </div></div> </div></div>

To bad you hero FDR was against collective bargaining.

LWW
02-22-2011, 02:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.[1] The right to freedom of association has been included in a number of national constitutions and human rights instruments. (It actually is not included in the US Constitution, which is why it is debated.) The Constitution protects assembly, not association and the European Convention on Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

<u>Freedom of association in the sense of workers' right to organize and collectively bargain is also recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights</u> and International Labor Organization Conventions </div></div>

She was half right.

Q </div></div>

Actually ... no.

LWW

LWW
02-22-2011, 02:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You know whats great.

Since the democrats have high tailed it out of town they are going to pass voter ID legislation tomorrow. They only need a simple majority.

After that if they may break the union bill into to parts so that each part can be passed by a simple majority.

And then they will continue on to further business.


Good to know the democrats are looking out for their constituents by leaving town.

I suspect their failure will get them all voted out next time around. </div></div>

This is made possible by the fact that most democrook legislators have no clue what the federal/state constitutions call for.

LWW

Qtec
02-22-2011, 04:47 AM
Freedom of assembly is in the USCON. <span style="color: #990000"> G was right about that.</span>

Fredom of association [in the sense of workers' right to organize and collectively bargain] is also recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights....which the US signed up to and is legally bound to uphold.

These are facts.



Q

Gayle in MD
02-22-2011, 06:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wisconsin's governor was on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace today. Chris asked him, considering that the unions have said they will accept the trims to their benefits (to now make less take home pay to make contributions to their benefit plans in terms of medical costs and retirements), why won't he take that monetary concession, and why does he want to strip the collective bargaining rights for the future in terms of benefits and work conditions, plus change the dues payment, plus require the unions re-vote every year?

The governor didn't answer that at all but changed the subject to repeat how reasonable the demand that they contribute to their benefits is, relative to other states' unions required contributions.

Why? Because he doesn't want to admit that his purpose is indeed to break the unions, just as in the transition, he talked up the possibility that he would decertify the unions on his own (turned out he lacked that legal authority, so he's taking this back door technique instead).

If he thinks the people are with him on THAT, then he ought to make his case to them in the open. As it is, he is hiding his end game plan, precisely because the people would not agree to it, IMO.

I haven't seen these myself, but reports of polls I've seen are that the people oppose the governor in this fight between 51%-43%, and even 2-1, even BEFORE he admits what he's really trying to do.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nichols: [...] Look, Walker is cornered. He’s in a very tough position. You’ve seen the polls. You had a poll up showing a 51-43 split, there was one showing a two to one split. </div></div> </div></div>

Even their hero has a forty percent disapproval rate, in NJ.

Interesting, so far the only thing Republicans show interest in accomplishing is more political maneuvers for throwing another election, killing more jobs, and throwing more divisive fire on social issues.

They are now the radical Party, known for fomenting civil unrest, and continued redistribution of America's wealth as possible, to the wealthy, on the backs of all else, as they continue to chip away at the Constitutional rights of the common man/woman, as they look the other way while the top CEO's hide their wealth, and America's esources for the future in the Cayman Islands, and elsewhere.

Same ol' same ol' /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Take a good look at Koch Brothers Fascist America.....and the End Of The American Dream, along with the Republican creation of class warfare.

G.

Qtec
02-22-2011, 06:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> They are now the radical Party,</div></div>

Well spotted G. The Conservative RW is now full of radical RW nut jobs who want to impose their radical views on the general population.

Under Reagan,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> the top marginal individual income tax rate fell from 70% to 28%,</div></div>

Coincidentally, the rich have got richer and the MC got poorer and the are still not happy. Now they want to break the Unions as they have done with ACORN and Planned Parenthood.

This is a war on democrats and democracy.

Q

Gayle in MD
02-22-2011, 06:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This is a war on democrats and democracy.

Q

</div></div>

Absolutely! Political Power is the ONLY thing Republicans care about, that and trying to re-write the Constitution, with the help of their RW activist Supreme Court, so they can more effectively do what they ALWAYS do, make the rich richer, allow them to hoarde their money away, crippling the recovery as they sit on their trillions, or hide them offshore, and all the rest of America, loses financial ground.

This is the Republican on-going War On The Middle Class, and those who vote Republican, are too damned stupid to "get it."

I've been watching this mess for many decades, it's always the same thing, and did you know, they're even talking about changing the child labor laws????


This governor has admitted that he hasn't even talked with the Unions. Another Republican dictator, who has stated he refuses any compromise.

Wait until they shut down the government, and no checks go out. I hope they do. That would at least wake up some of the voters.

Republicans are a despicable sort.

G.

LWW
02-22-2011, 07:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Freedom of assembly is in the USCON. <span style="color: #990000"> G was right about that.</span>

Q </div></div>

Your only problem is that isn't what she claimed.

Sorry ... but you have failed. Again.

LWW

Qtec
02-22-2011, 07:19 AM
Keep avoiding the real subject, why don't you.


Do you think others can't read?

Do you think they can't spot all your dodges?

Wake up.

Q

Sev
02-22-2011, 07:28 AM
Clueless in MD.

Qtec
02-22-2011, 07:45 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Clueless in MD. </div></div>

Sev..........just clueless...everywhere about everything.

Q

Gayle in MD
02-22-2011, 08:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Clueless in MD. </div></div>

Sev..........just clueless...everywhere about everything.

Q </div></div>

Check this out Q.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Last night Rachel Maddow revealed that Governor Scott Walker (R-WI) has a reputation for using a budget crisis to bust up unions while in power. Over the last week Walker has tried to push through a bill that would not only require public employees in unions to pay more for their pensions and health plans, but also to permanently give up their collective bargaining rights. The unions have agreed to the financial parts of the plan, but refuse to give up their collective bargaining rights in the future.</span> <span style='font-size: 14pt'> Walker has denied that he has any motive in breaking up the unions, but has refused to compromise on the collective bargaining rights issue. As Maddow illustrated, Walker has a past which involves using a “budget crisis” to get rid of a unions.</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Before he was elected Governor last fall Walker served a Milwaukee County Executive. While in that position Walker attempted to fire union security guards and replace them with private contractors from a firm in the United Kingdom called G4S Wackenhut.</span> <span style='font-size: 14pt'> The County Board then overrode Walker’s decision, but he went ahead with the move anyway under justification of a budget “emergency.” </span>


<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Later, an independent arbitrator determined that no real “emergency” existed in the country, and ordered the reinstatement of the union security guards who were fired. In addition, as Maddow points out, the hiring of G4S Wackenhut turned out to save much less money than Walker had predicted. With the ordered reinstatement, Walker’s move will end up costing the county about half-a-million dollars. Finally, and perhaps most damning, Wackenhut was subsequently involved in a scandal involving raunchy pictures taken of some of their personnel hired by the State Department in Afghanistan. In Milwaukee County Wackenhut ended up hiring a man with a criminal record as the security chief in charge of the county courthouse.</span> </div></div>


http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-i...ting-past-video (http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/rachel-maddow-reveals-governor-walker-r-wi-has-a-union-busting-past-video)

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Sev
02-22-2011, 08:14 AM
I heard last night that WI has over 80 billion in liabilities plus the 3.6 billion dollar deficit.

Only a democrat would see that as not a problem.

Qtec
02-22-2011, 08:22 AM
I heard last night that you are an escaped lunatic from an asylum.

Give yourself up. There's a good boy.

Q......... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Gayle in MD
02-22-2011, 08:24 AM
Actually, he's a crazy cat, with a machine gun. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Stretch
02-22-2011, 10:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, he's a crazy cat, with a machine gun. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

Na, he's just having a little fun on his way to school.......St.

Gayle in MD
02-22-2011, 10:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, he's a crazy cat, with a machine gun. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

Na, he's just having a little fun on his way to school.......St. </div></div>

Grade school, no doubt.

As a famous N.C. cyberstalker once wrote, before he became one himself:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">maybe some of the cooler heads might prevail and just ignore the garbage and not even respond. These are like children trying to get attention. If they don't get it here, maybe they will go elsewhere.
</div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Gayle in MD
02-22-2011, 12:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wisconsin's governor was on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace today. Chris asked him, considering that the unions have said they will accept the trims to their benefits (to now make less take home pay to make contributions to their benefit plans in terms of medical costs and retirements), why won't he take that monetary concession, and why does he want to strip the collective bargaining rights for the future in terms of benefits and work conditions, plus change the dues payment, plus require the unions re-vote every year?

The governor didn't answer that at all but changed the subject to repeat how reasonable the demand that they contribute to their benefits is, relative to other states' unions required contributions.

Why? Because he doesn't want to admit that his purpose is indeed to break the unions, just as in the transition, he talked up the possibility that he would decertify the unions on his own (turned out he lacked that legal authority, so he's taking this back door technique instead).

If he thinks the people are with him on THAT, then he ought to make his case to them in the open. As it is, he is hiding his end game plan, precisely because the people would not agree to it, IMO.

I haven't seen these myself, but reports of polls I've seen are that the people oppose the governor in this fight between 51%-43%, and even 2-1, even BEFORE he admits what he's really trying to do.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nichols: [...] Look, Walker is cornered. He’s in a very tough position. You’ve seen the polls. You had a poll up showing a 51-43 split, there was one showing a two to one split. </div></div> </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Wisconsin Power Play
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: February 20, 2011
Last week, in the face of protest demonstrations against Wisconsin’s new union-busting governor, Scott Walker — demonstrations that continued through the weekend, with huge crowds on Saturday — Representative Paul Ryan made an unintentionally apt comparison: “It’s like Cairo has moved to Madison.”



It wasn’t the smartest thing for Mr. Ryan to say, since he probably didn’t mean to compare Mr. Walker, a fellow Republican, to Hosni Mubarak. Or maybe he did — after all, quite a few prominent conservatives, including Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Rick Santorum, denounced the uprising in Egypt and insist that President Obama should have helped the Mubarak regime suppress it.

In any case, however, Mr. Ryan was more right than he knew. For what’s happening in Wisconsin isn’t about the state budget, despite Mr. Walker’s pretense that he’s just trying to be fiscally responsible. It is, instead, about power. What Mr. Walker and his backers are trying to do is to make Wisconsin — and eventually, America — less of a functioning democracy and more of a third-world-style oligarchy. And that’s why anyone who believes that we need some counterweight to the political power of big money should be on the demonstrators’ side.

Some background: Wisconsin is indeed facing a budget crunch, although its difficulties are less severe than those facing many other states. Revenue has fallen in the face of a weak economy, while stimulus funds, which helped close the gap in 2009 and 2010, have faded away.

In this situation, it makes sense to call for shared sacrifice, including monetary concessions from state workers. And union leaders have signaled that they are, in fact, willing to make such concessions.

But Mr. Walker isn’t interested in making a deal. Partly that’s because he doesn’t want to share the sacrifice: even as he proclaims that Wisconsin faces a terrible fiscal crisis, he has been pushing through tax cuts that make the deficit worse. Mainly, however, he has made it clear that rather than bargaining with workers, he wants to end workers’ ability to bargain.

The bill that has inspired the demonstrations would strip away collective bargaining rights for many of the state’s workers, in effect busting public-employee unions. Tellingly, some workers — namely, those who tend to be Republican-leaning — are exempted from the ban; it’s as if Mr. Walker were flaunting the political nature of his actions.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Why bust the unions? As I said, it has nothing to do with helping Wisconsin deal with its current fiscal crisis. Nor is it likely to help the state’s budget prospects even in the long run: contrary to what you may have heard, public-sector workers in Wisconsin and elsewhere are paid somewhat less than private-sector workers with comparable qualifications, so there’s not much room for further pay squeezes. So it’s not about the budget; it’s about the power. In principle, every American citizen has an equal say in our political process. In practice, of course, some of us are more equal than others. Billionaires can field armies of lobbyists; they can finance think tanks that put the desired spin on policy issues; they can funnel cash to politicians with sympathetic views (as the Koch brothers did in the case of Mr. Walker). On paper, we’re a one-person-one-vote nation; in reality, we’re more than a bit of an oligarchy, in which a handful of wealthy people dominate. </span>


<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Given this reality, it’s important to have institutions that can act as counterweights to the power of big money. And unions are among the most important of these institutions. </span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>You don’t have to love unions, you don’t have to believe that their policy positions are always right, to recognize that they’re among the few influential players in our political system representing the interests of middle- and working-class Americans, as opposed to the wealthy. Indeed, if America has become more oligarchic and less democratic over the last 30 years — which it has — that’s to an important extent due to the decline of private-sector unions. </span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>And now Mr. Walker and his backers are trying to get rid of public-sector unions, too. </span>


There’s a bitter irony here. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>The fiscal crisis in Wisconsin, as in other states, was largely caused by the increasing power of America’s oligarchy. After all, it was superwealthy players, not the general public, who pushed for financial deregulation and thereby set the stage for the economic crisis of 2008-9, a crisis whose aftermath is the main reason for the current budget crunch. And now the political right is trying to exploit that very crisis, using it to remove one of the few remaining checks on oligarchic influence. </span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>
So will the attack on unions succeed? I don’t know. But anyone who cares about retaining government of the people by the people should hope that it doesn’t</span></span>.</div></div>
[/quote]


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/opinion/21krugman.html?src=me&ref=homepage