Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Wisconsin state politics LOL!

Wisconsin state politics LOL! (Page 6)
Thread Tools
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 02:08 AM
 
What is it with the right wing/Glenn Beck obsession with George Soros? What is the argument, in a nutshell?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 07:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
What is it with the right wing/Glenn Beck obsession with George Soros? What is the argument, in a nutshell?
He's an eeevil currency/stock trader infamously known as the "Man who Broke the Bank of England". Beck, Alex Jones, and others believe he is one of the masterminds behind the New World Order/Bilderburg crowd. Soros funds several left of center groups, that fund other left of center groups, that fund.... and so on.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 10:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
Yeah, that's probably true. Except for Soros. I thought everybody knew who he was.
I've heard of him, but I sure as hell wouldn't recognize him, which was a large part of the original post.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 11:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
A CEO, a union steward, and a worker are at a meeting, when a dozen cookies are brought in.
The union member looks down at the cookies and says; "so we each get 8 cookies then right?"

*hint: someone else beat you to the joke.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 11:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
If the government agreed to it, gave you the right and then decides to take it away, that's okay?
Collective bargaining is not a right, it's a privilege granted to public workers through the political and legislative processes; the same processes that are constraining it.

In the I'm alright screw you world, I guess it would be.
Evidence of the dishonesty necessary for your arguments in general.

That last bit you posted just shows again that the deep end has embraced you.
Better this end should embrace me than to garner the acceptance of the other by espousing nonsense.
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 01:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
The union member looks down at the cookies and says; "so we each get 8 cookies then right?"

*hint: someone else beat you to the joke.
I know; you're so much smarter than those dumb union workers, aren't you?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 01:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
I know; you're so much smarter than those dumb union workers, aren't you?
Envy ?

-t
     
BadKosh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 01:55 PM
 
Would you agree that things might have turned out better if the Democrats had stayed in town and had an intellectual debate on the budget?

Will the Unions blame their current problems on the Democrats?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 02:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Would you agree that things might have turned out better if the Democrats had stayed in town and had an intellectual debate on the budget?
No. Politicians vote along party lines, not intellectual debates. Had Democrats shown up the Republicans would pass the law without any debate. There is no argument in the universe that would change their minds. Politicians regularly vote up one idea proposed by their own party, then vote down a nearly identical idea simply because the other side proposed it.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 02:40 PM
 
I was watching an interview last night with one of the Wisconsin 14. Don't recall which show offhand. He said they offered to come back immediately if Gov. Walker would remove the "collective bargaining" language from the current budget repair bill ... since the public employees have already agreed to the financial concessions the governor has demanded ... and then debate that provision as part of the larger budget bill that goes till June or July. Needless to say Gov. Walker has refused.

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 03:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I've heard of him, but I sure as hell wouldn't recognize him, which was a large part of the original post.
He's been in a lot of mainstream media lately, not just the right wing wackos. He's funding the Tides Foundation, reporters at NPR and other things, and I think he was a big part of the money or influence behind MoveOn.org.

Anyhow, he's been an influential guy since since the 70s and 80s. I figured more people would know who he was since he pays for and originates so many Leftist opinions in the media.
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 03:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
He's been in a lot of mainstream media lately, not just the right wing wackos. He's funding the Tides Foundation, reporters at NPR and other things, and I think he was a big part of the money or influence behind MoveOn.org.

Anyhow, he's been an influential guy since since the 70s and 80s. I figured more people would know who he was since he pays for and originates so many Leftist opinions in the media.

To be honest I've tended to ignore these charges against Soros because they've always seemed rather conspiracy theoryish/Glenn Beckish to me.

There are people that say the same sorts of things about Rupert Murdoch and probably others like him on the "other side", right? I tend to ignore this sort of thing too.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 06:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
I know; you're so much smarter than those dumb union workers, aren't you?
It's not about intellect OldMan, it's about turnip-milking naivete. As if money can just be created to fund their annual bargaining whimsy.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 06:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
He's been in a lot of mainstream media lately, not just the right wing wackos. He's funding the Tides Foundation, reporters at NPR and other things, and I think he was a big part of the money or influence behind MoveOn.org.

Anyhow, he's been an influential guy since since the 70s and 80s. I figured more people would know who he was since he pays for and originates so many Leftist opinions in the media.
The problem here is that very little of him is mentioned on the Daily Show, Colbert Report, Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos.
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 07:15 PM
 
ebuddy: have you noticed that authors like Diane Ravitich and the Waiting for Superman authors (so I've been told, I haven't seen this yet) point to Finland as an example of a country that has done very well in international test scores and other standards? In Finland they don't teach to the test like they do here, tests are not stressed the same way they are here, and their schools are 100% public and 100% unionized.

Perhaps this conversation needs the context of what is going on in other countries that seem to be faring better, rather than just looking at other states in our own country?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 07:18 PM
 
According to these results there is not really a correlation between teacher pay and student performance:

10 States Where Teachers Are Paid The Worst: 24/7 Wall St.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 07:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
The problem here is that very little of him is mentioned on the Daily Show, Colbert Report, Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos.

I'm well aware of Soros and his power, I just haven't decided whether the attention given to him by the right is in proper proportion to where power and influence that impacts us all actually exists.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 07:46 PM
 
Soros was blown up to be a liberal media puppetmaster because Robert Murdoch was being constantly hammered by liberals for being a dishonest, rightist propagandist. Basically, a limp excuse to scream "Look, they do it too!"
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 09:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
I was watching an interview last night with one of the Wisconsin 14. Don't recall which show offhand. He said they offered to come back immediately if Gov. Walker would remove the "collective bargaining" language from the current budget repair bill ... since the public employees have already agreed to the financial concessions the governor has demanded ... and then debate that provision as part of the larger budget bill that goes till June or July. Needless to say Gov. Walker has refused.

OAW
Where the **** have you been? That has been the demand since they left, and what this whole thread has been about. He shouldn't give in to that demand and he won't. I hope those lazy ****s enjoy their pink slips.

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 09:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
According to these results there is not really a correlation between teacher pay and student performance:

10 States Where Teachers Are Paid The Worst: 24/7 Wall St.
Find a place other than huffpo.

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2011, 09:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I'm well aware of Soros and his power, I just haven't decided whether the attention given to him by the right is in proper proportion to where power and influence that impacts us all actually exists.
Oh yeah, you only jump to conclusions of tea partiers.

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 5, 2011, 09:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
ebuddy: have you noticed that authors like Diane Ravitich and the Waiting for Superman authors (so I've been told, I haven't seen this yet) point to Finland as an example of a country that has done very well in international test scores and other standards? In Finland they don't teach to the test like they do here, tests are not stressed the same way they are here, and their schools are 100% public and 100% unionized.

Perhaps this conversation needs the context of what is going on in other countries that seem to be faring better, rather than just looking at other states in our own country?
Folks have a tendency to entertain direct comparisons between various US systems and other, much smaller systems abroad. For example, the population of Finland is 5,338,395 and the population of Minnesota is 5,303,925. For perspective, California alone is 7 Finlands.

Many are arguing to allow State-by-State autonomy with regard to administering public education in that they might be governed more effectively. I agree with this and the Finland example may be one that affirms the argument having nothing to do with whether or not it is 100% union. One need only to look to the performance of private and parochial school systems in the US to know that union !(necessarily)= success.
( Last edited by ebuddy; Mar 5, 2011 at 09:28 AM. )
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 5, 2011, 02:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Folks have a tendency to entertain direct comparisons between various US systems and other, much smaller systems abroad. For example, the population of Finland is 5,338,395 and the population of Minnesota is 5,303,925. For perspective, California alone is 7 Finlands.
Maybe when I have more spare time I'll research how our top performing states fare against other countries.

Still, regardless, having so-called dumb states is no less of a problem, no?

Many are arguing to allow State-by-State autonomy with regard to administering public education in that they might be governed more effectively. I agree with this and the Finland example may be one that affirms the argument having nothing to do with whether or not it is 100% union. One need only to look to the performance of private and parochial school systems in the US to know that union !(necessarily)= success.
State by state autonomy would definitely allow for experimentation and copying of successful models, but again, at some point doesn't it make sense to look at the totality when accessing education in this country rather than just focusing on our best states?
     
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 5, 2011, 03:01 PM
 
Gov. Scott Walker Has Lost The War
Gov. Scott Walker Has Lost The War - Rick Ungar - The Policy Page - Forbes
In what may be the result of one of the great political miscalculations of our time, Scott Walker’s popularity in his home state is fast going down the tubes.
Are Wisconsin Republicans preparing to break with Walker?
The Plum Line - Are Wisconsin Republicans preparing to break with Walker?
I don't know if these reports are true or not, and we should treat them with caution. But we now have two news outlets, one local and one national, claiming GOP defections from Governor Scott Walker may be in the works. The Wall Street Journal reports:
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 5, 2011, 10:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
I said earlier in this thread that this would cause a backlash against the Republicans, and I'll stand by that. The country isn't as Republican as some of the vocal loonies in the Tea Party (and more than a few here) would like to pretend. Start cutting even more benefits and laying off too many more working people, and the polls, and the resultant votes, will show that there are only so many people who are stupid enough to believe that the economy is going to get better by a few folks getting richer. Talk about naive turnip milking.
( Last edited by OldManMac; Mar 5, 2011 at 10:37 PM. )
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2011, 09:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
State by state autonomy would definitely allow for experimentation and copying of successful models, but again, at some point doesn't it make sense to look at the totality when accessing education in this country rather than just focusing on our best states?
There may be regional anomalies that a broad "one-size-fits-all" scheme cannot acknowledge. I do agree with your sequence of events however as we have a tendency to "standardize" without having first established best-practice.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2011, 10:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
I said earlier in this thread that this would cause a backlash against the Republicans, and I'll stand by that. The country isn't as Republican as some of the vocal loonies in the Tea Party (and more than a few here) would like to pretend. Start cutting even more benefits and laying off too many more working people, and the polls, and the resultant votes, will show that there are only so many people who are stupid enough to believe that the economy is going to get better by a few folks getting richer. Talk about naive turnip milking.
The debate is heating up no doubt about it. It should be noted however that 77% of the people that voted for Walker still support him with over 62% strongly supporting him. The remainder of those that disagree with the plan are just concerned over the contentious nature of it and will come around in due time. Others are watching for sure and if he and fellow Republicans cave at this point it would be disastrous.

If you're going to try to turn a statement of mine around on me, it'd help if the context of the statement remained relevant. Otherwise it just comes off as passive-aggressive bs.
ebuddy
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2011, 11:08 AM
 
So, since around page 3 I realized that this issue is not about Wisconsin's budget, or even about Wisconsin, but about the conservative agenda in national politics, and the 2012 Presidential Election. Why am I throwing out the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" card?

Because a similar thing happened in 2003: statehouses across the country deliberately brought up a contentious issue all at once (at least, the ones controlled by Republicans). After several states put the issue on the map, many referendums appeared on ballots for 2004 (which, coincidentally, also had a Presidential election going on). I'm convinced that issue led to increased Conservative voter turnout, which led to a Republican victory in that year's Presidential election.

Yup, I think that public union-busting is 2012's "Gay Marriage" debate. If I'm right, though, there are several key differences which make me think the national Republicans behind this miscalculated:

- In 2004, the Republicans simply had to hold Bush's votes and bring a few more Conservatives to the polls to hold on. Obama is the incumbent this time around, and if the Republicans want to defeat him they need to actively convert Obama 2008 voters to the other side in 2012, which is more difficult, especially when you're insulting a large portion of them in the process, which leads to....

- When you're playing with the politics of division, it helps to pick the right group to marginalize. In 2004, not many people were willing to stick their necks out to defend gays by giving them rights they had not enjoyed previously. This time around, they picked a more politically powerful group that is much more visible. While it might energize the Republican base, it has the potential to also energize the Liberal base against the agenda. (And I still maintain that getting Liberals to agree on anything is a difficult task, so Republicans shouldn't try to help them.)

The irony, of course, is that while we were all paying attention to Wisconsin, Obama may have handed the Republicans a better "Gay Marriage"-type issue: Gay Marriage, or specifically recent decision to no longer defend DOMA on constitutional grounds. I wonder what makes him think that re-opening that debate will lead to different results in 2012? (Especially since if Bush stopped defending a law because he thought it was unconstitutional, Liberals would have had his head on a platter over it.)
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2011, 11:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
The debate is heating up no doubt about it. It should be noted however that 77% of the people that voted for Walker still support him with over 62% strongly supporting him. The remainder of those that disagree with the plan are just concerned over the contentious nature of it and will come around in due time. Others are watching for sure and if he and fellow Republicans cave at this point it would be disastrous.

If you're going to try to turn a statement of mine around on me, it'd help if the context of the statement remained relevant. Otherwise it just comes off as passive-aggressive bs.
Your opinion is duly noted.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2011, 12:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
So, since around page 3 I realized that this issue is not about Wisconsin's budget, or even about Wisconsin, but about the conservative agenda in national politics, and the 2012 Presidential Election. Why am I throwing out the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" card?
While I understand your point about political posturing on hot-button issues that seek to separate the parties in preparation for elections, one cannot pretend there isn't a mathematically-verified budget shortfall in Wisconsin and elsewhere. i.e. there is a problem in need of correction regardless of whether or not one agrees with the tactics or the philosophies used in so-doing. I've not heard any better ideas coming from those staunchly opposed to Walker's move, have you?

Because a similar thing happened in 2003: statehouses across the country deliberately brought up a contentious issue all at once (at least, the ones controlled by Republicans). After several states put the issue on the map, many referendums appeared on ballots for 2004 (which, coincidentally, also had a Presidential election going on). I'm convinced that issue led to increased Conservative voter turnout, which led to a Republican victory in that year's Presidential election.
When has this not been the case? Governors now are particularly emboldened by the redistricting that has occurred since the transfer of party-power in November that transcended the congressional elections into state-by-state Republican victories across the country and believe they have the edge for years to come. They are making extremely bold moves just as Democrats did in Congress when they felt they were spending their political capital on a plurality mandate.

Yup, I think that public union-busting is 2012's "Gay Marriage" debate.
"union-busting" is simply more partisan rhetoric and posturing from the other direction AFAIC. I think Walker is losing control of the message and had better get his mug out in the public more frequently, but there's no certain union death here and the proposal is actually quite fair when you look at the details. Like I said, this is a matter of communicating to the public, something Republicans have been uniquely inept at the past several years.

If I'm right, though, there are several key differences which make me think the national Republicans behind this miscalculated:

- In 2004, the Republicans simply had to hold Bush's votes and bring a few more Conservatives to the polls to hold on. Obama is the incumbent this time around, and if the Republicans want to defeat him they need to actively convert Obama 2008 voters to the other side in 2012, which is more difficult, especially when you're insulting a large portion of them in the process, which leads to....

- When you're playing with the politics of division, it helps to pick the right group to marginalize. In 2004, not many people were willing to stick their necks out to defend gays by giving them rights they had not enjoyed previously. This time around, they picked a more politically powerful group that is much more visible. While it might energize the Republican base, it has the potential to also energize the Liberal base against the agenda. (And I still maintain that getting Liberals to agree on anything is a difficult task, so Republicans shouldn't try to help them.)
I partially agree here and would add that in this case it is not only taking the fight to "unions" in general, but to teachers specifically that has made this as contentious as it is to the public. That's the problem with public services unfortunately, they are all vitally important services and to take them on is... well it's not for the faint of heart. Walker wins if he and his fellow Republicans remain resolved on this issue, stay in the public eye speaking on the terms of the proposal as they relate to the explosive growth of public sector employment, expenditure, the long-term result of collective bargaining on statewide budgets, and direct comparisons to "you and me" in the private sector. He's losing that message to all the noise going on at the State-house and has got to pull himself and his party together yesterday.

The irony, of course, is that while we were all paying attention to Wisconsin, Obama may have handed the Republicans a better "Gay Marriage"-type issue: Gay Marriage, or specifically recent decision to no longer defend DOMA on constitutional grounds. I wonder what makes him think that re-opening that debate will lead to different results in 2012? (Especially since if Bush stopped defending a law because he thought it was unconstitutional, Liberals would have had his head on a platter over it.)
True and to boot, what's to stop the next Administration from making the same case against Obamacare? If one sworn to uphold law can simply ignore it because he or she disagrees with it, this does not bode well for his signature legislation going forward.
ebuddy
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2011, 01:51 PM
 
One of the things that I think the GOP is losing sight of here in its quest to cripple political contributions to the Dems is one of the core constituencies of the Reagan coalition. It was Reagan Democrats that gave the GOP a working majority in the US political system. And many of them were in fact union members. The backlash we are witnessing here may be just the beginning.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2011, 01:59 PM
 
Countdown to when the Lefties are gonna explain how the WI Democrat's returning and giving in is a victory for the Democrats.



-t
     
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2011, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Countdown to when the Lefties are gonna explain how the WI Democrat's returning and giving in is a victory for the Democrats.



-t
This is why ignoring what you don't want to hear makes you look like a ....
     
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2011, 02:53 PM
 
Probably be ignored by some here, but what the hell,
The Answer Sheet - Jon Stewart's hysterical defense of teachers
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 07:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
One of the things that I think the GOP is losing sight of here in its quest to cripple political contributions to the Dems is one of the core constituencies of the Reagan coalition. It was Reagan Democrats that gave the GOP a working majority in the US political system. And many of them were in fact union members. The backlash we are witnessing here may be just the beginning.

OAW
The fact is that there's a lot of union members who are union members because they have to be, not because they believe that their ability to succeed in life is tied to the threats made by the guys who take their money. These are typically not one-issue voters who candidates will lose votes from if they decide to do something reasonable that their union bosses don't like. These are some of the types of people who made up the "Reagan Democrats."

Remember, Reagan's the guy who fired the striking air controllers and remained popular.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 07:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Probably be ignored by some here, but what the hell,
The Answer Sheet - Jon Stewart's hysterical defense of teachers
I'm guess that "hysterical" is the key word here.

Here's a funny one. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...explained.html
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 08:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
The fact is that there's a lot of union members who are union members because they have to be, not because they believe that their ability to succeed in life is tied to the threats made by the guys who take their money. These are typically not one-issue voters who candidates will lose votes from if they decide to do something reasonable that their union bosses don't like. These are some of the types of people who made up the "Reagan Democrats."

Remember, Reagan's the guy who fired the striking air controllers and remained popular.
And, of course, there are some union members who see value in the union. Rather than bust the unions, why not make it so people have a choice? It'll have the benefit of making the unions less powerful, while still allowing freedom of choice in the matter.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 09:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Rather than bust the unions, why not make it so people have a choice? It'll have the benefit of making the unions less powerful, while still allowing freedom of choice in the matter.
Unions are not outlawed by Walker.
All he does is put them back on equal footing with Federal workers.

Anyone who understands the system must agree that government employees and unions can not be granted the same rights (like full collective bargaining) than union members in the private sector. It just doesn't work to have workers of a monopoly excerpt that much power.

It's really funny that Washington understands that, always was opposed to give collective bargaining to their workers, but no Obama that hypocrite is acting like Walker denies the WI public union the right to life.
Obama is such a f*cking hypocrite.

-t
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 09:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
And, of course, there are some union members who see value in the union. Rather than bust the unions, why not make it so people have a choice? It'll have the benefit of making the unions less powerful, while still allowing freedom of choice in the matter.
As mentioned, we aren't talking about unions in general. And as far as "freedom of choice" goes - did you watch the link I posted?
( Last edited by stupendousman; Mar 8, 2011 at 09:49 AM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 09:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
As mentioned, we aren't talking about unions in general.
The sad thing is you no doubt believe that.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 12:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
One need only to look to the performance of private and parochial school systems in the US to know that union !(necessarily)= success.
The problem with that comparison is that private schools are generally well funded, especially Catholic schools. Public schools are not. So the problem may not necessarily be union, but whether or not you can convince residents to actually pay taxes to properly fund schools.

Seems to me Walker is moving for an all-private school system. No doubt receiving huge kickbacks.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 01:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
No doubt receiving huge kickbacks.
Facts and links, please.

-t
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 04:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
To be honest I've tended to ignore these charges against Soros because they've always seemed rather conspiracy theoryish/Glenn Beckish to me.

There are people that say the same sorts of things about Rupert Murdoch and probably others like him on the "other side", right? I tend to ignore this sort of thing too.
The rumors are probably true about Murdoch, too.

I've heard about Soros trying to take over the world for 20 years now it seems. Before Glenn Beck even quit drinking I think. The "theories" about Soros aren't theories; there's a strong link between him and the world's propaganda makers.

Let's make no mistake about it - there's a whole class of rich folks who ARE working to take over the world, or some portion of it, or perhaps some part of the markets, at any given time. It's not a big group, but they're out there.

There's a whole other bunch of other people who are trying to pull one over on the populace via the politics of fear alone, and not all of them (just most) are Democrats.

Soros got tired of just trying to BUY influence outright, or speculating to topple markets, and is now deeply involved in the business of social conditioning.

He's also in cahoots with China I think. Jim Rogers is one of the biggest Sinophiles out there, and he's one of Soros' buddies. Specialty: FUD re: the American way of life, and American exceptionalism.
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 04:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
There's a whole other bunch of other people who are trying to pull one over on the populace via the politics of fear alone, and not all of them (just most) are Democrats.
Most being Democrats.
That is so wrong it's retarded.

Forget the last 10 years, Peter King's actions alone are sowing the seeds of paranoia.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 05:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
The sad thing is you no doubt believe that.
I believe that I know what I was referring to. Correct.

As to Soros, he's got a long record of using his fortune to influence politics and world markets in a way that will move world culture to the left. Capitalism is great for him, but no one else should really have unfettered access to it. You can call that a "conspiracy" if you want. I don't think he really tries to keep it a secret. He's openly bragged about his efforts to topple world currencies for instance.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2011, 05:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Facts and links, please.
The kickbacks are purely speculation. However, I doubt any politician would try so hard to achieve such a disruptive goal if there wasn't anything in it for them.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2011, 02:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Most being Democrats.
That is so wrong it's retarded.

Forget the last 10 years, Peter King's actions alone are sowing the seeds of paranoia.
King doesn't have to sow paranoia. The actions of radical Islam speak for themselves. The other 99.999 percent of Muslims can speak for themselves too; hearings shouldn't make any difference.
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2011, 02:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
However, I doubt any politician would try so hard to achieve such a disruptive goal if there wasn't anything in it for them.
Makes me wonder who paid off Obama to press for the Health Care Reform.

-t
     
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2011, 06:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
King doesn't have to sow paranoia. The actions of radical Islam speak for themselves. The other 99.999 percent of Muslims can speak for themselves too; hearings shouldn't make any difference.
King's hearings smack of McCarthyism and will only increase the fear and paranoia.
And no comment on the retarded belief that,
There's a whole other bunch of other people who are trying to pull one over on the populace via the politics of fear alone, and not all of them (just most) are Democrats.
Republicans are the party of fear as the Bush years have shown and what has that got you, more fear and paranoia.

Be like the turtle and retreat into your shell, ignore anything that doesn't fit your view and maybe it'll go away.
How sad.
     
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2011, 06:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Makes me wonder who paid off Obama to press for the Health Care Reform.

-t
The electorate? Ya think?
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:03 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2