PDA

View Full Version : A Modest Victory in Wisconsin.



Sev
03-12-2011, 07:22 AM
Considering all the wailing going on by the mad maiden of Maryland, it appears a bit disingenuous when looking at her home state.
Lay off the swamp water.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261885/very-modest-victory-madison-editors

<span style="color: #000000">March 10, 2011 5:35 P.M.
A Very Modest Victory in Madison


The political theater under way in Madison invites both Democrats and Republicans to imagine that something more significant has transpired there than is in fact the case: <span style="color: #990000"><span style='font-size: 20pt'>By curtailing the collective-bargaining powers of some government-employee unions, Wisconsin merely joins the ranks of Colorado and Maryland — not precisely hotbeds of right-wing extremism.</span></span> In liberal Maryland, which extends collective-bargaining rights to some, but not all, government workers, this must all seem particularly overblown: The state is home to a great many employees of the federal government, many of whom belong to public-sector unions that do not enjoy the extortionate powers until now invested in Wisconsin’s union bosses.

Gov. Scott Walker and the sober Republicans in Wisconsin’s state legislature are celebrating a victory, to be sure, but it is in truth a modest one: Under the new law, government workers will vote annually on whether they wish to be represented by a union, and the state will not be compelled to extract union dues from employees’ paychecks on behalf of the unions. Health-care and pension benefits for government workers will be set by the people’s elected representatives outside of the union-dominated collective-bargaining process, and wage increases will be indexed to inflation. Government workers still will enjoy salary-and-benefit packages that in most cases exceed what those workers could hope to command in the private sector, along with such hard-to-price benefits as enhanced job security.</span>

Soflasnapper
03-12-2011, 11:40 AM
Rolling back 50 years of existing law in WI IS a big deal, so much so that even a GOP Senator admitted it was 'radical' (before he then voted for it anyway some weeks later).

Wisconsin is a unique state with regard to progressivism and unions, and comparing it to the status quo in other states that never had these laws, when Wisconsin has had this law for 50 years, is incorrect.

The linked article states the real agenda, which is defunding the left through destroying the unions and their money base.

Consider, if a union has no collective bargaining power, then what can it do in the interests of the workers? If it can do nothing for the workers any more, AND the state has now arranged for annual recertification of the union (also never the law in WI), my guess is that within a couple such annual cycles, the workers may very well all leave the union. WHICH IS THE PLAN AND THE GOAL, hidden behind allegedly only state fiscal concerns.

So this 'modest' victory claim is a lie. Had Walker campaigned on 'put me in, and I'll make sure to kill all the public worker unions,' he would not have been elected. Which he knew, so he lied about his real agenda.

This is 'government' by ambush, deception, and lies, contrary to the will of the people. And the host of the right cheering wildly after this event are in no way wrong, which itself gives the lie to the linked article.

ugotda7
03-12-2011, 11:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rolling back 50 years of existing law in WI IS a big deal, so much so that even a GOP Senator admitted it was 'radical' (before he then voted for it anyway some weeks later).

Wisconsin is a unique state with regard to progressivism and unions, and comparing it to the status quo in other states that never had these laws, when Wisconsin has had this law for 50 years, is incorrect.

The linked article states the real agenda, which is defunding the left through destroying the unions and their money base.

Consider, if a union has no collective bargaining power, then what can it do in the interests of the workers? If it can do nothing for the workers any more, AND the state has now arranged for annual recertification of the union (also never the law in WI), my guess is that within a couple such annual cycles, the workers may very well all leave the union. WHICH IS THE PLAN AND THE GOAL, hidden behind allegedly only state fiscal concerns.

So this 'modest' victory claim is a lie. Had Walker campaigned on 'put me in, and I'll make sure to kill all the public worker unions,' he would not have been elected. Which he knew, so he lied about his real agenda.

This is 'government' by ambush, deception, and lies, contrary to the will of the people. And the host of the right cheering wildly after this event are in no way wrong, which itself gives the lie to the linked article.

</div></div>


No, the real agenda just might be an actual choice in funding rather than extortion through unions....imagine that?

pooltchr
03-12-2011, 12:31 PM
Oh, My! You don't mean to say that Wisconsin just changed their laws to become more like Maryland? I wonder why people from Maryland were fighting this change.

Steve

Soflasnapper
03-12-2011, 01:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No, the real agenda just might be an actual choice in funding rather than extortion through unions....imagine that?
</div></div>

It's a national effort funded by billionaires to cripple their remaining dwindling opposition to gain everything (more) they want. It has little to do with Wisconsin, per se, except they aimed high in their current blitzkrieg to take down the leading state with regard to union rights.

Because it is just too costly to profits not to kill, maim, poison, pollute, and about destroy all creation in the pursuit of still more power and wealth in the service of Mammon.

ugotda7
03-12-2011, 01:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No, the real agenda just might be an actual choice in funding rather than extortion through unions....imagine that?
</div></div>

It's a national effort funded by billionaires to cripple their remaining dwindling opposition to gain everything (more) they want. It has little to do with Wisconsin, per se, except they aimed high in their current blitzkrieg to take down the leading state with regard to union rights.

Because it is just too costly to profits not to kill, maim, poison, pollute, and about destroy all creation in the pursuit of still more power and wealth in the service of Mammon. </div></div>


Maybe you should get a second/third opinion from George Soros and Jeffrey Immelt about this?

pooltchr
03-12-2011, 02:07 PM
These endless conspiracy theory ideas are so much fun.......

Of little value.....but fun

Steve

Sev
03-12-2011, 02:57 PM
Then why do unions exist in right to work states???

ugotda7
03-12-2011, 03:01 PM
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....cookies.

Sev
03-12-2011, 03:04 PM
HAHAHAH!!! Was just eating a chocolate chip cookie. Toooooooo funny!!! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Soflasnapper
03-12-2011, 05:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Then why do unions exist in right to work states??? </div></div>

Because they can still collectively bargain for those who chose to join them.

Soflasnapper
03-12-2011, 05:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">These endless conspiracy theory ideas are so much fun.......

Of little value.....but fun

Steve </div></div>

There is nothing theoretical about the now-long-term plan to 'defund the left,' and that breaking union power and money is one of the key components to that plan. But you're right that it is a conspiracy.

Qtec
03-13-2011, 04:40 AM
He doesn't get it. maybe this might help..

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>WI Senate GOP Leader Admits On-Air That His Goal Is To Defund Labor Unions, Hurt Obama’s Reelection Chances</span>

A prank call from a man purporting to be petrochemical billionaire David Koch to Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) a few weeks ago revealed that Walker had crafted his “budget repair” bill in a bid to crush the labor unions. The revelation was at odds with the GOP’s public argument, that removing collective bargaining rights has something to do with the state’s budget deficit.

FITZGERALD: Well if they flip the state senate, which is obviously their goal with eight recalls going on right now, <u><span style='font-size: 14pt'>they can take control of the labor unions.</span> If we win this battle, and the money is not there under the auspices of the unions, certainly what you’re going to find is President Obama is going to have a much difficult, much more difficult time getting elected and winning the state of Wisconsin.</u></div></div> link (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/09/scott-fitzgerald-obama/)

Q

pooltchr
03-13-2011, 07:30 AM
Do you not think that when the Dems were in control, that their efforts at the so called campaign reform were designed to reduce the Reps ability to raise funds?

You didn't have any problem with that, did you?

Steve

Soflasnapper
03-13-2011, 12:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you not think that when the Dems were in control, that their efforts at the so called campaign reform were designed to reduce the Reps ability to raise funds?

You didn't have any problem with that, did you?

Steve </div></div>

Since president Theodore Roosevelt (R) and Nixon (R) were the presidents when the most significant campaign reforms were passed, and W (R) the president when McCain/Feingold passed, it's hard to argue these reforms were one-sided in favor of the Democratic Party.

If you'd like to read a comprehensive take on ALL campaign finance law changes, Larry Sabato's Encyclopedia of American Political Parties and Elections has a credible account, which see here. (http://books.google.com/books?id=d-379E2mFmYC&pg=PA147&lpg=PA147&dq=corporations+forbidden+campaign+contributions+1 900s&source=bl&ots=IBq8i0lvbw&sig=v16D8rWLkn_vzWhTd99Fv_OuHfg&hl=en&ei=lQp9TfGBNquy0QHj7pXrAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Sev
03-13-2011, 04:33 PM
Unfortunately all the reforms were also a failure.

It is said that Obama is going to have the first 1 billion dollar campaign in 2012 should he run.