a way to show how political walkers proposal is

[kaz]

flip it around.. and guess what the GOP reaction would be.
imagine if a newly elected Democratic governor and legislature proposed to deal with a budget deficit by first raising unemployment benefits and then pushing through a big corporate tax increase for all but the Democratic-leaning tech sector. For good measure, the package would also contain a ban on corporations making political donations without getting the permission of each shareholder, lest they use their power to repeal the tax increase and push the budget out of balance

guess what the gop reaction would be

What a stupid analogy

 

[Cecilie1200]

So are you actually trying to argue that the state doesn't fund fire departments? Don't regulate them?? How limitied do you believe the state's roll is as far as police and fire fighters are concerned? BTW walker exempted state police unions as well what excuse do you have for that??

In case you didn't know it there are are state fire departments and the state does fund fire departments in general.

Wisconsin Department of Commerce: Fire Department Contacts Safety and Buildings Division -

So he could have done similar to fire department and state police unions but chose not to.
Question, does walker's bill exempt fire fighter and police unions from the removal of recieving their dues through payroll??

Oh, for the love of Christ, stop topic-hopping. The question is NOT where their funding comes from, and how DARE you try to move the goalposts that way. The topic is whether or not firefighters are STATE EMPLOYEES, and regardless of whether the state gives funding to the cities and counties for firefighters, they are NOT state employees, any more than teachers are federal employees simply because the federal government gives grants to the states for education.

Now that you've shown everyone that you're a bullshitting poltroon who tries to change the parameters of the argument rather than just admitting he was WRONG, let's move on.

The state regulates a lot of things. Doesn't make everyone who works in a regulated industry a state employee. My state, for example, has scads of regulations involving the operations of bars and restaurants, but that doesn't make every waitress and bartender in Arizona a state employee, jackwad.

How limited do I think the state's "roll" [sic] regarding firefighters and police is? Well, for starters, it doesn't employ them. Which means it also doesn't negotiate their employment contracts. (What kind of roll would that be, btw? Whole wheat? Sourdough?)

As for Walker exempting state police unions, perhaps it was because THEIR contract demands weren't insane and strangling the state's budget. Good luck finding anyone in the mainstream media bothering to ask that question, let alone print the answer. They're too busy printing their own personal agenda on the subject . . . not that I think YOU mind.

Learn to read moron. There are are state firefighters and state police that fall under walker and yet he chose to exclude them. In other words, I didn't move the goal posts but that didn't stop you from lying about it did it?

"Now that you've shown everyone that you're a bullshitting poltroon who tries to change the parameters of the argument rather than just admitting he was WRONG, let's move on."

funny how you claim I moved the goal posts and then focus on the fact that there are state police that were excluded even as you make up excuses for their exemption out of thin air.

Thanks for the bs now if you could just admit that you are wrong and apologize for your false allegations it would be greatly appreciated. LOL

Blither, blither, blither. You screwed up, and we all know it, no matter how much you try to pretend NOW that you were only talking about state police, and your odd, mistaken notion that there are firefighters who are state employees, rather than local government.

You made a bullshit play, got called on it, tried to backtrack to "are you trying to say the state doesn't provide funding for police and firefighters? That they don't regulate it?" and when THAT didn't work, you tried to pretend you were talking about the state police. End of story, and no amount of face-saving bluster is going to fix it. You're done. NEXT!

 

[drsmith1072]

I asked two questions and you blurted out yes followed by meaningless drivel. Which is why I was asking you what you were talking about. So care to explain or is that too much to ask of you?

Maybe you should go back and read my responses. The Democrats in Wisconsin filibustered, and then ran when that did not work. I answered your question, and pointed out the differences between the Republicans in the Senate and the Democrats in Wisconsin.

So, again, do you have trouble comprehending English?

I aked two questions, that's more that ONE question. You only gave one answer, and you have the nerve to question me about comprehension?? LOL

So can you show that a filibuster actually occured and that it is allowed in wisconsin?? Funny how you make claims and fail to provide anything to back it up.

actually if you look back at the comments of the poster i was talking to before you injected yourself into the debate without knowing the topic you can see that he was clearly talking about elections have consequences. Funny how the right didn't seem to believe that when they lost in 08 and still railed against almost everything obama campaigned to do as he tried to follow through with his promises.

Funny how you cannot see the difference. The right, by which I assume you mean the Republicans, fought every step of the way for what they believed in, and stuck around even though they knew they would loose the vote. Do they know elections have consequences? Of course they do, Obama told them, and they lost.

Yet, in Wisconsin, the Democrats prefer to run away and shut down the government rather than live with the consequences. They are not fighting, they gave up. So tell, what is the point you think you are making? And, more specifically, what the fuck is it you think you know that I do not?

You are still missing the point. The previous poster said that the right won the election therefore the left should just accept what the right wants to pass and that is why I brtought up how the right didn't do that when obama and the left won. Are you caught up yet or are you still lagging behind??

BTW it's also funny how you fail to acknowledge the fact that i was talking about 08 after obama got elected and was met with obstruction from the right in spite of the fact that "the people had spoken" and you jumped up to 2010. Yet you try to criticize my comprehension?? LOL

Following the parliamentary procedure is obstructionism if you think your side is on top, yet ignoring it is perfectly justified if you think your side is loosing.

Got it.

funny how obstructionism only matters when it's the right that aren't the ones doing the obstruction. LOL BTW thanks for exposing your own hypocrisy as you contradict yourself by defending obstructionism from the right and condemning it on the left.

Uh go back and read what you posted about teachers unions and the BS you tried to stick into my mouth about police and firefighters. I ask you questions in the hope that you will better explain the your posts and your only response is to attack and avoid. LOL

You go back and read it. I did not post anything about the teachers unions, I posted absurd explanations for Walker's thinking because you insist on raising a non issue. I personally have no idea why he is doing what he is doing, and think he is wrong for doing it that way. It is, however, irrelevant to the real issue here, which is that the Wisconsin fleebaggers are wrong. If you take my attack of Walker's position personally than I would suggest that you have some serious issues.

LOL So you didn't post anything about the teachers unions but you admit that you did?? LOL way to contradict yourself in a single sentence moron. LOL

 

[Jarhead]

I asked two questions and you blurted out yes followed by meaningless drivel. Which is why I was asking you what you were talking about. So care to explain or is that too much to ask of you?

Maybe you should go back and read my responses. The Democrats in Wisconsin filibustered, and then ran when that did not work. I answered your question, and pointed out the differences between the Republicans in the Senate and the Democrats in Wisconsin.

So, again, do you have trouble comprehending English?

I aked two questions, that's more that ONE question. You only gave one answer, and you have the nerve to question me about comprehension?? LOL

So can you show that a filibuster actually occured and that it is allowed in wisconsin?? Funny how you make claims and fail to provide anything to back it up.



You are still missing the point. The previous poster said that the right won the election therefore the left should just accept what the right wants to pass and that is why I brtought up how the right didn't do that when obama and the left won. Are you caught up yet or are you still lagging behind??



funny how obstructionism only matters when it's the right that aren't the ones doing the obstruction. LOL BTW thanks for exposing your own hypocrisy as you contradict yourself by defending obstructionism from the right and condemning it on the left.

Uh go back and read what you posted about teachers unions and the BS you tried to stick into my mouth about police and firefighters. I ask you questions in the hope that you will better explain the your posts and your only response is to attack and avoid. LOL

You go back and read it. I did not post anything about the teachers unions, I posted absurd explanations for Walker's thinking because you insist on raising a non issue. I personally have no idea why he is doing what he is doing, and think he is wrong for doing it that way. It is, however, irrelevant to the real issue here, which is that the Wisconsin fleebaggers are wrong. If you take my attack of Walker's position personally than I would suggest that you have some serious issues.

LOL So you didn't post anything about the teachers unions but you admit that you did?? LOL way to contradict yourself in a single sentence moron. LOL

There you go again...showing how severe a reading comprehension issue you suffer with.

 

[drsmith1072]

he's an idiot
Police and Fire are either city or county(depends on the area)
sometimes they actually have regional districts, they did in St Charles County MO

It's funny how you can't actually counter anything I say and can only neg rep and attack me personally. LOL

funny how i just DID
moron
now fuck off asswipe

here is my post.

Yes you are WRONG. Firefighter and police unions represent state workers but they are exempted.
So much for putting the spin aside, it looks like you put it front and center.

and here is your troll

he's an idiot
Police and Fire are either city or county(depends on the area)
sometimes they actually have regional districts, they did in St Charles County MO

So can you show how anything that you said countered anything that I said??

I didn't think so.

Thanks for trolling. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Oh, for the love of Christ, stop topic-hopping. The question is NOT where their funding comes from, and how DARE you try to move the goalposts that way. The topic is whether or not firefighters are STATE EMPLOYEES, and regardless of whether the state gives funding to the cities and counties for firefighters, they are NOT state employees, any more than teachers are federal employees simply because the federal government gives grants to the states for education.

Now that you've shown everyone that you're a bullshitting poltroon who tries to change the parameters of the argument rather than just admitting he was WRONG, let's move on.

The state regulates a lot of things. Doesn't make everyone who works in a regulated industry a state employee. My state, for example, has scads of regulations involving the operations of bars and restaurants, but that doesn't make every waitress and bartender in Arizona a state employee, jackwad.

How limited do I think the state's "roll" [sic] regarding firefighters and police is? Well, for starters, it doesn't employ them. Which means it also doesn't negotiate their employment contracts. (What kind of roll would that be, btw? Whole wheat? Sourdough?)

As for Walker exempting state police unions, perhaps it was because THEIR contract demands weren't insane and strangling the state's budget. Good luck finding anyone in the mainstream media bothering to ask that question, let alone print the answer. They're too busy printing their own personal agenda on the subject . . . not that I think YOU mind.

Learn to read moron. There are are state firefighters and state police that fall under walker and yet he chose to exclude them. In other words, I didn't move the goal posts but that didn't stop you from lying about it did it?

"Now that you've shown everyone that you're a bullshitting poltroon who tries to change the parameters of the argument rather than just admitting he was WRONG, let's move on."

funny how you claim I moved the goal posts and then focus on the fact that there are state police that were excluded even as you make up excuses for their exemption out of thin air.

Thanks for the bs now if you could just admit that you are wrong and apologize for your false allegations it would be greatly appreciated. LOL

Blither, blither, blither. You screwed up, and we all know it, no matter how much you try to pretend NOW that you were only talking about state police, and your odd, mistaken notion that there are firefighters who are state employees, rather than local government.

You made a bullshit play, got called on it, tried to backtrack to "are you trying to say the state doesn't provide funding for police and firefighters? That they don't regulate it?" and when THAT didn't work, you tried to pretend you were talking about the state police. End of story, and no amount of face-saving bluster is going to fix it. You're done. NEXT!

Funny how you focus on one comment and take it out of the context of the whole all so you can pretend that i am wrong because you choose to ignore the context that one statement was in as well as the complete content of my post. Here is my whole post again let's see if you can read past the first two lines.

So are you actually trying to argue that the state doesn't fund fire departments? Don't regulate them?? How limitied do you believe the state's roll is as far as police and fire fighters are concerned? BTW walker exempted state police unions as well what excuse do you have for that??

In case you didn't know it there are are state fire departments and the state does fund fire departments in general.

Wisconsin Department of Commerce: Fire Department Contacts Safety and Buildings Division -

So he could have done similar to fire department and state police unions but chose not to.
Question, does walker's bill exempt fire fighter and police unions from the removal of recieving their dues through payroll??

In case you missed it, the link I provided gives an example of a state operated fire department oh and I see no real comments about state police and troopers coming from the right and how their unions are exempt so I guess you are conceding the point that he could have included them but chose not to.

 

[drsmith1072]

Maybe you should go back and read my responses. The Democrats in Wisconsin filibustered, and then ran when that did not work. I answered your question, and pointed out the differences between the Republicans in the Senate and the Democrats in Wisconsin.

So, again, do you have trouble comprehending English?

I aked two questions, that's more that ONE question. You only gave one answer, and you have the nerve to question me about comprehension?? LOL

So can you show that a filibuster actually occured and that it is allowed in wisconsin?? Funny how you make claims and fail to provide anything to back it up.



You are still missing the point. The previous poster said that the right won the election therefore the left should just accept what the right wants to pass and that is why I brtought up how the right didn't do that when obama and the left won. Are you caught up yet or are you still lagging behind??



funny how obstructionism only matters when it's the right that aren't the ones doing the obstruction. LOL BTW thanks for exposing your own hypocrisy as you contradict yourself by defending obstructionism from the right and condemning it on the left.

You go back and read it. I did not post anything about the teachers unions, I posted absurd explanations for Walker's thinking because you insist on raising a non issue. I personally have no idea why he is doing what he is doing, and think he is wrong for doing it that way. It is, however, irrelevant to the real issue here, which is that the Wisconsin fleebaggers are wrong. If you take my attack of Walker's position personally than I would suggest that you have some serious issues.

LOL So you didn't post anything about the teachers unions but you admit that you did?? LOL way to contradict yourself in a single sentence moron. LOL

There you go again...showing how severe a reading comprehension issue you suffer with.

really?? Got any specifics to offer?? LOL funny how you right wingers only seem to post in vague generalities and unsubstantiated BS.

 

[DiveCon]

It's funny how you can't actually counter anything I say and can only neg rep and attack me personally. LOL

funny how i just DID
moron
now fuck off asswipe

here is my post.

Yes you are WRONG. Firefighter and police unions represent state workers but they are exempted.
So much for putting the spin aside, it looks like you put it front and center.

and here is your troll

he's an idiot
Police and Fire are either city or county(depends on the area)
sometimes they actually have regional districts, they did in St Charles County MO

So can you show how anything that you said countered anything that I said??

I didn't think so.

Thanks for trolling. LOL

fuck off you pedantic pissant

 

[jgarden]

BREAKING: Wisconsin Voters Launch Recall Campaign Against Eight GOP State Senators

This morning citizens from around the state took the first steps by filing recall papers against key Republican Senators who have stood with Scott Walker and pushed his partisan power grab that will strip thousands of middle class teachers, nurses, librarians and other workers of their right to collective bargaining. And we learned just last night that their disastrous budget that will cut millions from our schools and universities. . . .

Make no mistake, these Republican Senators are vulnerable to recall for their radical partisan overreach. Senator Randy Hopper won his last election by just 184 votes. And Alberta Darling won her last race by only 1,007. By recalling just three of the eight Senators [Democrats] are targeting, [Democrats] can regain control of the Senate.

Under Wisconsin law, supporters of this recall effort now have 60 days to collect an amount of signatures “equal to at least 25% of the vote cast for the office of governor at the last election within the same district or territory as that of the officeholder being recalled.” The amount of signatures necessary to trigger a recall will vary from district to district, but will range from about 15,000 to 21,000 signatures per recalled senator.

If the supporters succeed in collecting enough signatures, the result is an effective “do over” election. The incumbent will automatically be a candidate in the election unless they resign from office, and Democrats and members of other political parties will be allowed to nominate opponents. The winner of a recall election is seated as soon as the election result is certified.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), who was inaugurated last January, will be eligible for a recall in January of 2012.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/02/wisconsin-recall-2/

Although Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) is not eligible for "recall," 8 Republican state sentors are eligible - and it will only require a swing of 3 seats to change the current balance of power.

Instead of playing political "hardball," perhaps Governor Walker should have been more conciliatory when he had the chance!

According to "Scott Walker Watch," many of these 8 Republican state senators are aleady close if not over the critical number of signatures required and its only the 1st day!

http://scottwalkerwatch.com/?page_id=933
*********************************************************
Senator Alberta Darling (8th Senate District) - Recall 20 300 signatures

Senator Sheila Harsdorf (10th Senate District) - Recall 15 500 signatures

Senator Luther Olsen (14th Senate District) - Recall 14,500 signatures

Senator Randy Hopper (18th Senate District) - Recall 15,268 signatures

Senator Glenn Grothman (20th Senate District) - Recall 20,000 signatures

Senator Mary Lazich (28th Senate District) - Recall 20,900 signatures

Senator Dan Kapanke (32nd Senate District) - Recall 15,400 signatures

 

[drsmith1072]

funny how i just DID
moron
now fuck off asswipe

here is my post.



and here is your troll

he's an idiot
Police and Fire are either city or county(depends on the area)
sometimes they actually have regional districts, they did in St Charles County MO

So can you show how anything that you said countered anything that I said??

I didn't think so.

Thanks for trolling. LOL

fuck off you pedantic pissant

So I guess I will take that to mean that you can't show how anything that you said countered anything that i said.

Thank you for trolling. LOL

 

[DiveCon]

here is my post.



and here is your troll



So can you show how anything that you said countered anything that I said??

I didn't think so.

Thanks for trolling. LOL

fuck off you pedantic pissant

So I guess I will take that to mean that you can't show how anything that you said countered anything that i said.

Thank you for trolling. LOL

fuck off you pathetic asswipe

 

[DiveCon]

BREAKING: Wisconsin Voters Launch Recall Campaign Against Eight GOP State Senators

This morning citizens from around the state took the first steps by filing recall papers against key Republican Senators who have stood with Scott Walker and pushed his partisan power grab that will strip thousands of middle class teachers, nurses, librarians and other workers of their right to collective bargaining. And we learned just last night that their disastrous budget that will cut millions from our schools and universities. . . .

Make no mistake, these Republican Senators are vulnerable to recall for their radical partisan overreach. Senator Randy Hopper won his last election by just 184 votes. And Alberta Darling won her last race by only 1,007. By recalling just three of the eight Senators [Democrats] are targeting, [Democrats] can regain control of the Senate.

Under Wisconsin law, supporters of this recall effort now have 60 days to collect an amount of signatures “equal to at least 25% of the vote cast for the office of governor at the last election within the same district or territory as that of the officeholder being recalled.” The amount of signatures necessary to trigger a recall will vary from district to district, but will range from about 15,000 to 21,000 signatures per recalled senator.

If the supporters succeed in collecting enough signatures, the result is an effective “do over” election. The incumbent will automatically be a candidate in the election unless they resign from office, and Democrats and members of other political parties will be allowed to nominate opponents. The winner of a recall election is seated as soon as the election result is certified.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), who was inaugurated last January, will be eligible for a recall in January of 2012.

ThinkProgress » BREAKING: Wisconsin Voters Launch Recall Campaign Against Eight GOP State Senators

Although Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) is not eligible for "recall," 8 Republican state sentors are eligible - and it will only require a swing of 3 seats to change the current balance of power.

Instead of playing political "hardball," perhaps Governor Walker should have been more conciliatory when he had the chance!

and if the recalls fail, they will look even worse
btw
there are also recall campaigns being started for the absent 14 pussies

 

[Jarhead]

I aked two questions, that's more that ONE question. You only gave one answer, and you have the nerve to question me about comprehension?? LOL

So can you show that a filibuster actually occured and that it is allowed in wisconsin?? Funny how you make claims and fail to provide anything to back it up.



You are still missing the point. The previous poster said that the right won the election therefore the left should just accept what the right wants to pass and that is why I brtought up how the right didn't do that when obama and the left won. Are you caught up yet or are you still lagging behind??



funny how obstructionism only matters when it's the right that aren't the ones doing the obstruction. LOL BTW thanks for exposing your own hypocrisy as you contradict yourself by defending obstructionism from the right and condemning it on the left.



LOL So you didn't post anything about the teachers unions but you admit that you did?? LOL way to contradict yourself in a single sentence moron. LOL

There you go again...showing how severe a reading comprehension issue you suffer with.

really?? Got any specifics to offer?? LOL funny how you right wingers only seem to post in vague generalities and unsubstantiated BS.

First off...as many on the left that are thinkers will tell you...UI am not a right winger.
Secondly, I rarely post generalities and I most certainly did not in this case.
I simply expressed what anyoine with solid reading comprehension skills would have posted.
If you took that post as him talking about teachers unions, then you have an issue with reading comnprehension.

For example....

If I discussed how a a man who was a teacher had broken a leg while skiing...and I siad it was a bone head move for the man to ski a black diamond for his first run of the season.....would you say I am tralking about teachers being idiots or a skier doing something stupid?

Based on your post....you would say I was talking about stupid teachers.

And to most rational thinking people...that shows sad reading comprehension skills.

 

[drsmith1072]

fuck off you pedantic pissant

So I guess I will take that to mean that you can't show how anything that you said countered anything that i said.

Thank you for trolling. LOL

fuck off you pathetic asswipe

Thanks again for trolling and showing that you have nothing valid to offer. LOL

 

[DiveCon]

So I guess I will take that to mean that you can't show how anything that you said countered anything that i said.

Thank you for trolling. LOL

fuck off you pathetic asswipe

Thanks again for trolling and showing that you have nothing valid to offer. LOL

you get what you deserve, moron

 

[drsmith1072]

There you go again...showing how severe a reading comprehension issue you suffer with.

really?? Got any specifics to offer?? LOL funny how you right wingers only seem to post in vague generalities and unsubstantiated BS.

First off...as many on the left that are thinkers will tell you...UI am not a right winger.

your partisan posts show otherwise.

Secondly, I rarely post generalities and I most certainly did not in this case.

And yet that is most of what i see from you.

I simply expressed what anyoine with solid reading comprehension skills would have posted.

you posted an insult and a claim that you have yet to substantiate. What did I fail to comprehend??

If you took that post as him talking about teachers unions, then you have an issue with reading comnprehension.

For example....

If I discussed how a a man who was a teacher had broken a leg while skiing...and I siad it was a bone head move for the man to ski a black diamond for his first run of the season.....would you say I am tralking about teachers being idiots or a skier doing something stupid?

Based on your post....you would say I was talking about stupid teachers.

And to most rational thinking people...that shows sad reading comprehension skills.

Did you actually read what he said??

Maybe the other unions are not as pathetic as the teachers union.

seems to me that he called them pathetic. So what are you talking about and how does your analogy fit now??

So is that the only thing that you got wrong or do you have more false allegations and analogies that don't apply that I can easilly shoot down??

 

[grunt11b]

flip it around.. and guess what the GOP reaction would be.
imagine if a newly elected Democratic governor and legislature proposed to deal with a budget deficit by first raising unemployment benefits and then pushing through a big corporate tax increase for all but the Democratic-leaning tech sector. For good measure, the package would also contain a ban on corporations making political donations without getting the permission of each shareholder, lest they use their power to repeal the tax increase and push the budget out of balance

guess what the gop reaction would be

We have already lived through that, it was called the health care bill, pay back is a bitch, get over it, the power has shifted, you lose.

 

[DiveCon]

flip it around.. and guess what the GOP reaction would be.
imagine if a newly elected Democratic governor and legislature proposed to deal with a budget deficit by first raising unemployment benefits and then pushing through a big corporate tax increase for all but the Democratic-leaning tech sector. For good measure, the package would also contain a ban on corporations making political donations without getting the permission of each shareholder, lest they use their power to repeal the tax increase and push the budget out of balance

guess what the gop reaction would be

We have already lived through that, it was called the health care bill, pay back is a bitch, get over it, the power has shifted, you lose.

no no no

when democrats win republicans need to sit in the back and shut up
when republicans win they must bend to the will of the minority

havent you learned anything yet?