Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThinkSnow99. Show ThinkSnow99's posts

    Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    Dems missing from Wis. Capitol ahead of union vote




    MADISON, Wis.—Police officers were dispatched Thursday to find Wisconsin state lawmakers who had apparently boycotted a vote on a sweeping bill that would strip most government workers of their collective bargaining rights.

    The lawmakers, all Democrats in the state Senate, did not show up when they were ordered to attend a midday vote on the legislation.

    The proposal has been the focus of intense protests at the Statehouse for three days. As Republicans tried to begin Senate business Thursday, observers in the gallery screamed "Freedom! Democracy! Unions!"


    Republicans hold a 19-14 majority, but they need at least one Democrat to be present before taking a vote on the bill.

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/02/17/wisconsin_senate_to_vote_on_anti_union_bill/?p1=Well_Politics_links

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (the Wisconsin state equivalent of the Congressional Budget Office) recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

    In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

    But Walker is maintaining the state is broke and that rolling back the rights of unions that didn't support his campaign for office is necessary to fix a budget shortfall.  Even though taking away collective bargaining rights won't remove any dollars from the State's finanial obligations - unless the bill gets passed and he startes taking away employee entitlements.  Interestingly, law enforcement and firefighter unions are exempt from his plans.   Also interesting is that the law enforcement and firefighter unions largely endorsed his candidacy for Gov.

    But I digress, back to the financials and away from the political debt settling.  So if Wisconisn is "broke" the why did the governor in his first month in office approve $140 million in new special-interest spending that includes:

    • $25 million for an economic development fund for job creation that still has $73 million due to a lack of job creation effectively creating a $25 million hole which will not create or retain jobs.

    • $48 million for private health savings accounts, which primarily benefit the wealthy. A study from the federal Governmental Accountability Office showed the average adjusted gross income of HSA participants was $139,000 and nearly half of HSA participants reported withdrawing nothing from their HSA, evidence that it is serving as a tax shelter for wealthy participants.  (HSA participants contribute pre tax dollars lowering their tax liability on earnings, thus can be used as a tax shelter if those particpants don't use the money)

    • $67 million for a tax shift plan, so ill-conceived that at best the benefit provided to ‘job creators’ would be less than a dollar a day per new job, and may be as little as 30 cents a day. Furthermore the state already has 73 million in reserve for job creation, so why is this necessary?  Hint:  Its another tax giveaway. 

    BUT THE STATE IS BROKE!

    Walker is using the office of the governor to conduct political warfare, brazenly, on those who had the audacity to endorse a different candidate for office, and this is clearly obvious since he felt it necessary to carve out exemptions for the unions that supported him.  He is also trying to cover a budget shortfall that was largely created by the giveways that were the very first acts he committed to as Governor.  

     

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThinkSnow99. Show ThinkSnow99's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    How do you feel about Democrats (or any party) not showing up to vote because they may not agree with the result?  

    We elect them to vote.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
     
    "Walker's moves are prompted by the state's vast deficit. The alternative, he says, is to lay off thousands. Nonsense, charge the marchers: Just raise taxes. Unions and allies have for years been demanding more sales taxes, new business taxes and higher taxes on other people's incomes, all to keep the state flush and generous. We're taxed enough already, said a voting majority in November. Not yet, insist the unions that have become the largest players in Wisconsin politics precisely to counter any such voter sentiment."

    ....Recall how we got here. How is it that only in desperation will unions accept a deal that still leaves them better off than everyone else? How did we achieve not just next year's $3.3 billion deficit but the decade of structural deficits before? Easy: It's because labor costs for years have been outstripping taxpayers' capacity. That in turn was caused by officials, elected in a union-dominated political environment, buying labor peace via benefits, where it's harder for voters to see the costs adding up."

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    So basically, Damian shows the Republicans are FOS as is the implication of the thread's originator.... 

    ....Bobin and Newtster completely dodge that so they can rant on about Democrats and Unions.



    So typical.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThinkSnow99. Show ThinkSnow99's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]So basically, Damian shows the Republicans are FOS as is the implication of the thread's originator....  ....Bobin and Newtster completely dodge that so they can rant on about Democrats and Unions. So typical.
    Posted by WhatIsItNow[/QUOTE]


    So I guess you're OK with elected officials fleeing the State to avoid a vote.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    So I guess you're OK with elected officials fleeing the State to avoid a vote.


    Dems yes...it's Repubs he'd have a problem with
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    I hear the union put out a picture of the Govenor in crosshairs stating "don't retreat reload"

    Oh, my gosh the humanity!!!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    A simple reading of history discredits that simplistic characterization of unions.  Before unions, many workers were discriminated against, cheated out of pay and overtime, harassed and abused by their overseers.  Children were likewise abused and used for cheap labor. Many workers were beaten and even killed when they tried to organize. (see: Bread And Roses Strike, 1912, Lawrence, MA)

    The primary purpose of unions was to bargain collectively for workers' rights, equitable pay/benefits and acceptable working conditions.  The decline of unions is in direct proportion today with the number of jobs shipped overseas as well as the diminished earnings of the working class and the enormous gap in wealth between the richest americans and everyone else.

    Unions are not perfect, but before teachers' unions, teachers were among the least paid, least benefitted of post college-educated professionals in this country.  There's also an argument to be made that if unions still held collective bargaining power for health benefits, they would swell the health care insurance rolls enough to pool together and control costs.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats : So I guess you're OK with elected officials fleeing the State to avoid a vote.
    Posted by ThinkSnow99[/QUOTE]

    So I guess you're OK with Republicans being 100% FOS twits scare-mongering about unions  - hypocrisy because, as noted, they love unions....  ....if the unions are supporters.

    Posted by DamianAllen:

    ________________________________________________________________
    The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (the Wisconsin state equivalent of the Congressional Budget Office) recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

    In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

    But Walker is maintaining the state is broke and that rolling back the rights of unions that didn't support his campaign for office is necessary to fix a budget shortfall.  Even though taking away collective bargaining rights won't remove any dollars from the State's finanial obligations - unless the bill gets passed and he startes taking away employee entitlements.  Interestingly, law enforcement and firefighter unions are exempt from his plans.   Also interesting is that the law enforcement and firefighter unions largely endorsed his candidacy for Gov.

    But I digress, back to the financials and away from the political debt settling.  So if Wisconisn is "broke" the why did the governor in his first month in office approve $140 million in new special-interest spending that includes:

    • $25 million for an economic development fund for job creation that still has $73 million due to a lack of job creation effectively creating a $25 million hole which will not create or retain jobs.

    • $48 million for private health savings accounts, which primarily benefit the wealthy. A study from the federal Governmental Accountability Office showed the average adjusted gross income of HSA participants was $139,000 and nearly half of HSA participants reported withdrawing nothing from their HSA, evidence that it is serving as a tax shelter for wealthy participants.  (HSA participants contribute pre tax dollars lowering their tax liability on earnings, thus can be used as a tax shelter if those particpants don't use the money)

    • $67 million for a tax shift plan, so ill-conceived that at best the benefit provided to ‘job creators’ would be less than a dollar a day per new job, and may be as little as 30 cents a day. Furthermore the state already has 73 million in reserve for job creation, so why is this necessary?  Hint:  Its another tax giveaway. 

    BUT THE STATE IS BROKE!

    Walker is using the office of the governor to conduct political warfare, brazenly, on those who had the audacity to endorse a different candidate for office, and this is clearly obvious since he felt it necessary to carve out exemptions for the unions that supported him.  He is also trying to cover a budget shortfall that was largely created by the giveways that were the very first acts he committed to as Governor.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dazydo. Show dazydo's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    This is only the beginning, one of these "marches" is going to get ugly, if it's not the Teachers Union (teachers can't fight), it'll be the teamsters, or the UAW, or SEIU.

    These unions are going to fight back, and Obama is going to back them, be because you "always leave, with the date that brought you".

    And it will cost him the 2012 election, people are desperate. the Dems are backed by unions, it becoming obvious to the people that there is a lot of fat to be cut from the big unions, pensions, etc.

    Wait a minute, the people have a voice in America?  C'mon you libbies, tell me that the people don't have a voice!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]This is only the beginning, one of these "marches" is going to get ugly, if it's not the Teachers Union (teachers can't fight), it'll be the teamsters, or the UAW, or SEIU. These unions are going to fight back, and Obama is going to back them, be because you "always leave, with the date that brought you". And it will cost him the 2012 election, people are desperate. the Dems are backed by unions, it becoming obvious to the people that there is a lot of fat to be cut from the big unions, pensions, etc. Wait a minute, the people have a voice in America?  C'mon you libbies, tell me that the people don't have a voice!
    Posted by dazydo[/QUOTE]

    So, the unions aren't allowed to march because it 'might' get ugly, but the tee partee frauds - stepping on people's heads - are?  Read the constitution you pretend to love so much.

    And I dare say I can't get any uglier than those tee partee rallies...I haven't seen that many ugly white people together since the docks at the last 'conservative cruise'. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dazydo. Show dazydo's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats : So, the unions aren't allowed to march because it 'might' get ugly, but the tee partee frauds - stepping on people's heads - are?  Read the constitution you pretend to love so much. And I dare say I can't get any uglier than those tee partee rallies...I haven't seen that many ugly white people together since the docks at the last 'conservative cruise'. 
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    C'mon Marty, by the time the unions are done, this country will be burning in all of the major cities. 

    Put that in your constitution and smoke it.
     
    They are allowed to march, they are not allowed to break the laws of this nation, which they will do in time. 

    Wanna bet on this one Marty?

    I don't recall any charges brought against the tea-party folks, except for the racial epithets that were.... oh, never mind.......
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]A simple reading of history discredits that simplistic characterization of unions.  Before unions, many workers were discriminated against, cheated out of pay and overtime, harassed and abused by their overseers.  Children were likewise abused and used for cheap labor. Many workers were beaten and even killed when they tried to organize. (see: Bread And Roses Strike, 1912, Lawrence, MA) The primary purpose of unions was to bargain collectively for workers' rights, equitable pay/benefits and acceptable working conditions.  The decline of unions is in direct proportion today with the number of jobs shipped overseas as well as the diminished earnings of the working class and the enormous gap in wealth between the richest americans and everyone else. Unions are not perfect, but before teachers' unions, teachers were among the least paid, least benefitted of post college-educated professionals in this country.  There's also an argument to be made that if unions still held collective bargaining power for health benefits, they would swell the health care insurance rolls enough to pool together and control costs.
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    Unions have outlived their intended purpose and now are part of a corrupt establishment of entitlement and mediocrity.  If you have ever had the opportunity to work around open shop workers and union workers there is a huge difference in attitude and production.

    Union work rules are developed for the lowest comon denominator.  They were required at the turn of the last century, but the pendulum has swung too far and unions have been turned into company killers, just look at the auto industry.  Public sector unions are just a bad if not worse with the sense of entilement.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats


    Which rightwing moonbat said this about the dangers of public employee unions?
    "Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government….The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.....[a] strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to obstruct the operations of government until their demands are satisfied. Such action looking toward the paralysis of government by those who have sworn to support it is unthinkable and intolerable.”
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats : I haven't seen that many ugly white people together since the docks at the last 'conservative cruise'. 
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    That is a very racist and bigotted remark; regardless of your race!

    We see alot of intolerance in the name of tolerance.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats : That is a very racist and bigotted remark; regardless of your race! We see alot of intolerance in the name of tolerance.
    Posted by sk8ter2008[/QUOTE]

    ROFL.  That attempt gets an "E"; for Effort, of course...
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats : I think you meant to say " a simpleton's reading of history". Unions, have long outlived their usefulness to our society. DO you relly think that if we threw the unions out of schools where they have no business belonging that we would return to 1912?? How about some recent history of huge technology companies like IBM, Microsoft, Google and more? They are really like coal mine companies right? You are desperate to cling to antiquated notions.  THe buggy whip was useful at one point in time. Then society evolved. We invented automobiles and buggy whips are more of a sign of animal abuse than anything else. Put your thinking cap on Matty. Would you want your child taught by some slug that was protected by a union??? Your argument about health care needs more thought. The basic problem with healthcare cost is not insurance. It is the cost of the service that the insurance finances. Would you still be making your suggestion if union members paid 100% of their insurance costs?
    Posted by Newtster[/QUOTE]

    Newt:  Quit talking about stuff you know little or nothing about.  Most every kid in Massachusetts is taught by a member of a union unless they are in a private, parochial or charter school.  Massachusetts ranks quite high in the academic achievement of its students and this is done through union teachers (not in spite of them).  If you want to see this change take unions out of the equation: without protective bargaining rights it would be very difficult to keep people in the profession.  And there are already ways to get rid of the incompetents: pressure administration, it's their job, not the union's.  If anyone is a "slug" in this discussion it would be the person who talks about something he sees only from afar and manages to offhandedly insult good people actually working in the field.  It's all politics to you, but for others, its their life's work.
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    "bargaining rights it would be very difficult to keep people in the profession.  And there are already ways to get rid of the incompetents: pressure administration, it's their job, not the union's."

    Couldnt have said it better, Reuben. The union could care less about the children and education; their job is to extort money and power from craven politicians, whose vote they purchase through coerced union dues...
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from RevWright. Show RevWright's posts

    Re: Crybaby Wisconsin Democrats

    www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=040f4619d0511a6537e233c49302c0fd&plckUserId=040f4619d0511a6537e233c49302c0fd" target="_parent">Reubenhop  condesending as usual. Yawnnnnnnnn
     

Share