Wisconsin votes anti-union bill in

[The T]

It depends entirely on the circumstances whether or not I will support or criticize it, so no, I do not.

So you support situational values? Essentially you are saying that if you can steal withoout getting caught- then it's OK? If you can get away without doing your job then it's ok? Sounds pretty chickenshit to me....

Anyway - As Obama inartfully reminded us once: "Elections have consequences. We won". Yep, they sure do.

I'm not so foolish to declare the world black and white. Nor will I be backed into a corner. If that's what you think I am saying that's on you, but I'm not going to address it seriously.

Elections do have consequences though, I agree with that. And so does the way you govern. Wisconsin is a finicky electorate from what I gather and I am very curious to see what they ultimately do with all this.

Face it sport. MOST of life is laced with YES/NO decisions.

You have yet to realize it.

 

[DiveCon]

I'm not so foolish to declare the world black and white. Nor will I be backed into a corner. If that's what you think I am saying that's on you, but I'm not going to address it seriously.

Elections do have consequences though, I agree with that. And so does the way you govern. Wisconsin is a finicky electorate from what I gather and I am very curious to see what they ultimately do with all this.

I am confused art, seriously, do you sppt. what the dem . senators are doing, s in staying out of state to prevent a vote?

At this point, yes. To me, the Governor has turned out to be a total dishonest douche in the situation.

how so?
he campaigned on doing just this and won easily

 

[Article 15]

So you support situational values? Essentially you are saying that if you can steal withoout getting caught- then it's OK? If you can get away without doing your job then it's ok? Sounds pretty chickenshit to me....

Anyway - As Obama inartfully reminded us once: "Elections have consequences. We won". Yep, they sure do.

I'm not so foolish to declare the world black and white. Nor will I be backed into a corner. If that's what you think I am saying that's on you, but I'm not going to address it seriously.

Elections do have consequences though, I agree with that. And so does the way you govern. Wisconsin is a finicky electorate from what I gather and I am very curious to see what they ultimately do with all this.

Face it sport. MOST of life is laced with YES/NO decisions.

You have yet to realize it.

You're blowin' my mind, Tommy.

 

[Dr.House]

I'm not so foolish to declare the world black and white. Nor will I be backed into a corner. If that's what you think I am saying that's on you, but I'm not going to address it seriously.

Elections do have consequences though, I agree with that. And so does the way you govern. Wisconsin is a finicky electorate from what I gather and I am very curious to see what they ultimately do with all this.

I am confused art, seriously, do you sppt. what the dem . senators are doing, s in staying out of state to prevent a vote?

At this point, yes. To me, the Governor has turned out to be a total dishonest douche in the situation.

The governor has been completely honest with why he's doing what he is doing... You just don't agree with what he wants to do...

To the point where you'll actually support the chickenshit actions of a bunch of fucking whiners....

Elections have consequences... Do the job you were elected to do, say your piece on the senate floor, and take the consequences...

 

[Article 15]

Let’s sum up our research.

Walker contends he clearly "campaigned on" his union bargaining plan.

But Walker, who offered many specific proposals during the campaign, did not go public with even the bare-bones of his multi-faceted plans to sharply curb collective bargaining rights. He could not point to any statements where he did. We could find none either.

While Walker often talked about employees paying more for pensions and health care, in his budget-repair bill he connected it to collective bargaining changes that were far different from his campaign rhetoric in terms of how far his plan goes and the way it would be accomplished.

We rate his statement False.

 

[The T]

I am confused art, seriously, do you sppt. what the dem . senators are doing, s in staying out of state to prevent a vote?

At this point, yes. To me, the Governor has turned out to be a total dishonest douche in the situation.

The governor has been completely honest with why he's doing what he is doing... You just don't agree with what he wants to do...

To the point where you'll actually support the chickenshit actions of a bunch of fucking whiners....

Elections have consequences... Do the job you were elected to do, say your piece on the senate floor, and take the consequences...

That isn't good enough so they are relegated as the following handily suggests...

 

[Trajan]

I'm not so foolish to declare the world black and white. Nor will I be backed into a corner. If that's what you think I am saying that's on you, but I'm not going to address it seriously.

Elections do have consequences though, I agree with that. And so does the way you govern. Wisconsin is a finicky electorate from what I gather and I am very curious to see what they ultimately do with all this.

I am confused art, seriously, do you sppt. what the dem . senators are doing, s in staying out of state to prevent a vote?

At this point, yes. To me, the Governor has turned out to be a total dishonest douche in the situation.

Well, let me add an example...

When Medicare was passed in 1965 Johnson had the senate 68-32. He had a house majority as well ( 293-140).

The battles even then were fierce over Medicare, (which was a version created for the elderly a bill called initially Kerr-Mills, because even with his majorities he could not get universal health care).

So, as a former master legislator he knew 1 thing, he needed sppt. from reps. , in order not only to pass the bill, but to ensure the bill would SURVIVE.

He spent 2 years crafting it and compromising and making the final bill that came to pass; with almost half of the senate reps ( 17 of 32) and 70 republicans in the house ( exactly half).

Why is this important as an example?

Because, last year a bill probably the largest and most invasive bill certainly compared to Medicare ever crafted in congress was passed solely along a party line vote, by the majority, period.

You see now the angst, the division the gnashing of teeth as half the country was left to ponder their fate, the fate that elections put members in office and they vote and the chips fall were the election of specific party members put them.

Now, all of a sudden this isn’t good enough?

Do you see how fundamentally and from a practical standpoint unfair that is?

 

[The T]

I'm not so foolish to declare the world black and white. Nor will I be backed into a corner. If that's what you think I am saying that's on you, but I'm not going to address it seriously.

Elections do have consequences though, I agree with that. And so does the way you govern. Wisconsin is a finicky electorate from what I gather and I am very curious to see what they ultimately do with all this.

Face it sport. MOST of life is laced with YES/NO decisions.

You have yet to realize it.

You're blowin' my mind, Tommy.

However you choose to describe it.

 

[Article 15]

I am confused art, seriously, do you sppt. what the dem . senators are doing, s in staying out of state to prevent a vote?

At this point, yes. To me, the Governor has turned out to be a total dishonest douche in the situation.

Well, let me add an example...

When Medicare was passed in 1965 Johnson had the senate 68-32. He had a house majority as well ( 293-140).

The battles even then were fierce over Medicare, (which was a version created for the elderly a bill called initially Kerr-Mills, because even with his majorities he could not get universal health care).

So, as a former master legislator he knew 1 thing, he needed sppt. from reps. , in order not only to pass the bill, but to ensure the bill would SURVIVE.

He spent 2 years crafting it and compromising and making the final bill that came to pass; with almost half of the senate reps ( 17 of 32) and 70 republicans in the house ( exactly half).

Why is this important as an example?

Because, last year a bill probably the largest and most invasive bill certainly compared to Medicare ever crafted in congress was passed solely along a party line vote, by the majority, period.

You see now the angst, the division the gnashing of teeth as half the country was left to ponder their fate, the fate that elections put members in office and they vote and the chips fall were the election of specific party members put them.

Now, all of a sudden this isn’t good enough?

Do you see how fundamentally and from a practical standpoint unfair that is?

That bill was watered down over and over to try and garner GOP support. That said, I get that there are a lot of people pissed about it.

In this case, the Governor has gotten the concessions he needs to fix his budget "crisis" but his real motivation has been revealed now.

 

[DiveCon]

Let’s sum up our research.

Walker contends he clearly "campaigned on" his union bargaining plan.

But Walker, who offered many specific proposals during the campaign, did not go public with even the bare-bones of his multi-faceted plans to sharply curb collective bargaining rights. He could not point to any statements where he did. We could find none either.

While Walker often talked about employees paying more for pensions and health care, in his budget-repair bill he connected it to collective bargaining changes that were far different from his campaign rhetoric in terms of how far his plan goes and the way it would be accomplished.

We rate his statement False.

wow, what a shock
a liberal news source says its false

 

[Article 15]

Let’s sum up our research.

Walker contends he clearly "campaigned on" his union bargaining plan.

But Walker, who offered many specific proposals during the campaign, did not go public with even the bare-bones of his multi-faceted plans to sharply curb collective bargaining rights. He could not point to any statements where he did. We could find none either.

While Walker often talked about employees paying more for pensions and health care, in his budget-repair bill he connected it to collective bargaining changes that were far different from his campaign rhetoric in terms of how far his plan goes and the way it would be accomplished.

We rate his statement False.

wow, what a shock
a liberal news source says its false

Yes, a fact checking website that is also in a public battle with Rachael Maddow over their criticism of her commentary on the situation in Wisconsin is clearly liberally biased in this case. You're so good.

 

[DiveCon]

Let’s sum up our research.

Walker contends he clearly "campaigned on" his union bargaining plan.

But Walker, who offered many specific proposals during the campaign, did not go public with even the bare-bones of his multi-faceted plans to sharply curb collective bargaining rights. He could not point to any statements where he did. We could find none either.

While Walker often talked about employees paying more for pensions and health care, in his budget-repair bill he connected it to collective bargaining changes that were far different from his campaign rhetoric in terms of how far his plan goes and the way it would be accomplished.

We rate his statement False.

wow, what a shock
a liberal news source says its false

Yes, a fact checking website that is also in a public battle with Rachael Maddow over their criticism of her commentary on the situation in Wisconsin is clearly liberally biased in this case. You're so good.

actually, not
that one is a different news paper

 

[Ravi]

ravi is an idiot

no YOU

ah, the art15 response
you can even be original
fuck off pissant

You are too
stupid to see that you
are being mocked

 

[DiveCon]

no YOU

ah, the art15 response
you can even be original
fuck off pissant

You are too
stupid to see that you
are being mocked

no, i fully kinow what you are doing
you are another fucking MORON

now you can FUCK OFF too

 

[Trajan]

At this point, yes. To me, the Governor has turned out to be a total dishonest douche in the situation.

Well, let me add an example...

When Medicare was passed in 1965 Johnson had the senate 68-32. He had a house majority as well ( 293-140).

The battles even then were fierce over Medicare, (which was a version created for the elderly a bill called initially Kerr-Mills, because even with his majorities he could not get universal health care).

So, as a former master legislator he knew 1 thing, he needed sppt. from reps. , in order not only to pass the bill, but to ensure the bill would SURVIVE.

He spent 2 years crafting it and compromising and making the final bill that came to pass; with almost half of the senate reps ( 17 of 32) and 70 republicans in the house ( exactly half).

Why is this important as an example?

Because, last year a bill probably the largest and most invasive bill certainly compared to Medicare ever crafted in congress was passed solely along a party line vote, by the majority, period.

You see now the angst, the division the gnashing of teeth as half the country was left to ponder their fate, the fate that elections put members in office and they vote and the chips fall were the election of specific party members put them.

Now, all of a sudden this isn’t good enough?

Do you see how fundamentally and from a practical standpoint unfair that is?

That bill was watered down over and over to try and garner GOP support. That said, I get that there are a lot of people pissed about it.

In this case, the Governor has gotten the concessions he needs to fix his budget "crisis" but his real motivation has been revealed now.

You’re making a mitigation argument that has no bearing. I am sorry but that doesn’t hold water. You don't get to decide what the party elected to power presents or doesn't in a bill absent the power you are given as stipulated by law.


The facts are; according to the new paradigm Representative democracy is dead.

If an election results in a Democratic Exec., house and cloture proof senate majority as there has been in many congresses and bills are brought forth, voted and the majority collects the votes necessary, it becomes law.

If a Republican majority is elected, the system is no longer viable in democrat’s eyes, they will simply not participate, in effect you are vetoing the bill absent the legal power to do so.

Therefore Republicans are not allowed to govern in the capacity the system has provided AND that the democrats have themselves been party too.

Welcome to the Banana republic.

 

[Trajan]

oh and I have to make an edit here to my post on the previous page....my bad.

this ;

So, as a former master legislator he knew 1 thing, he needed sppt. from reps. , in order not only to pass the bill, but to ensure the bill would SURVIVE.

shoould read as-

So, as a former master legislator he knew 1 thing, he didn't need sppt. from reps. , in order to pass the bill, but to ensure the bill would SURVIVE.

 

[skinz]

Being a non-union worker in the biggest union state (NY), I am very happy to see what the WI Gov is doing!! The creation of unions was a good thing when they were created....it stopped the oppression of workers by big companies (etc).

However, things have gone too far the other way. I am watching these protestors complaining how their lives will deteriorate so badly with the loss of union negotiations....ie "I will never be able to get the health coveraged I do now" etc, etc, etc...

Union members have become too pampered & privelaged...they have such a sense of entitlement it is ridiculous. Well, it is time to "drag them down" to where the rest of us live down here in the middle class struggling in this bad economy!