Battle of Madison

#1

utgibbs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
7,394
Likes
0
#1
As if I have to ask, what do you think of the protests in Madison against the counter-revolutionaries in the WI legislature?

You may be surprised, I hope the protests fail.

But it's probably not for any of the reasons y'all believe.

Interested in your responses.
 
#2
#2
I think the democratic senators, are failing their job responsibilities, and the legislative process
 
#3
#3
The Ignorant Fishermen: Lucifer's Architect’s of Anarchy

The Left’s godless agencies and vehicles such as the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, MoveOn.org, ACORN, the Liberal Socialist media and press, Leftist activist blogs and groups, communist environmentalist groups, Hollywood, Porno-wood, the music industry, Leftist politicians, rogue activist judges, leftist academia, teachers unions, and liberal college faculties etc., have been combined into a massive wrecking ball battering and demolishing our very foundation, our laws (both natural and spiritual), our Judeo/Christian heritage, our values and morality, all logic and common sense, and all personal accountability and responsibility.
 
#7
#7
if they aren't participating, there's no legislative process

Not trying to be combative, but kind of like shutting down the federal govt or the mere threat of a filibuster preventing an item from coming to a vote? Neither side has clean hands on this matter.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#8
#8
Reminds me when the air traffic controllers were going to go on strike and Reagan fired all of them.
 
#9
#9
Not trying to be combative, but kind of like shutting down the federal govt or the mere threat of a filibuster preventing an item from coming to a vote? Neither side has clean hands on this matter.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

a filibuster requires members to be present, meaning they are participating in the process. What the democrats are doing in WI and IN is clearly unethical and possibly illegal.
 
#10
#10
As long as Walker and the GOP members of the State Senate decide to hold the line, then there is absolutely nothing the DNC members can do other than delay the inevitable. Eventually, there will have to be some mandatory measures, in order that the State continues to function, that must needs be passed. Walker seems sincere in his willingness to let the flow of paychecks stop; I doubt the DNC members will be as willing.
 
#12
#12
a filibuster requires members to be present, meaning they are participating in the process. What the democrats are doing in WI and IN is clearly unethical and possibly illegal.

Semantics. It's just different means to the same end. It all is obstruction.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#13
#13
Semantics. It's just different means to the same end. It all is obstruction.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

nonsense, the filibuster is provided for in the Senate rules. There are no such provisions for a walkout and abandonment of post.

Had the GOP tried this during the healthcare and stimulus debates, the left would have been apoplectic. Chris Matthews would still be flinging spittle into the camera.
 
#14
#14
nonsense, the filibuster is provided for in the Senate rules. There are no such provisions for a walkout and abandonment of post.

Had the GOP tried this during the healthcare and stimulus debates, the left would have been apoplectic. Chris Matthews would still be flinging spittle into the camera.

Not arguing right vs left. It is obstructionist tactics. This right vs left stuff blinds the hard core elements on both sides. It's ok if the side that espouses the ideas that one believes does it and not ok if the opposite side reciprocates. Partisanism 101.

Edit: Upon reflection of the matter, there are Senate rules that provide for such a tactic. It's called the quorum rule. I am not defending the tactic. I am merely pointing this out. Abraham Lincoln once jumped out of a 2nd floor window in Springfield to prevent a vote due to the lack of a quorum.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
Now that is news to me. Rather bold statement.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

that's why I included "possibly". If the democrats are hiding out on the taxpayers' dime, then it should be illegal. However, if they're spending their own money, more power to them, they're only hurting themselves.
 
#17
#17
that's why I included "possibly". If the democrats are hiding out on the taxpayers' dime, then it should be illegal. However, if they're spending their own money, more power to them, they're only hurting themselves.
Let me back up. I'm not questioning if it is illegal or not. I have no idea. But I just haven't heard that thrown out there. I assumed they were just taking advantage of a techical loop hole (within the process). But if it really is illegal, I have a hard time seeing how they would go about prosecuting these guys in this climate. Esp. with troopers and policemen starting to close ranks up there, as well. That situation could get interesting (for lack of a better word) if charges are made. You could have some 3rd World/Libyan type violence going on where state law enforcement is going against the governor.

That would be a crazy series of events.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
Like the Japanese in world war II. The Rebs. have awoken the sleeping giant. This will and effectively has spread to all 50 states. It will become a federal matter, either thought the courts or through the legislative process. I think Wis's Governor has stepped in the poo. Now he just needs to take a whiff.
 
Last edited:
#20
#20
The Governor's fiscal responsibility needs to spread to most states, especially
IL and California....IL just raised state income taxes, another 2%
 
#21
#21
A few thoughts:

1) the Dems are clearly the party of "no" here. simply irresponsible to walk out. elections have consequences (where have we heard that before).

2) where is the outrage at the uncivil actions of protestors? the outrageous signs, the shouting down of speakers in the legislature? they have behaved far worse than any TP rally but there is no peep about their actions.

3) interesting that the collective bargaining rights being fought over were already taken away from Fed employees by Carter I believe. Clinton and now Obama have done NOTHING to restore those bargaining rights. The whole "busting the union" rhetoric is just that - rhetoric. Wisconsin state employees would still have more collective bargaining rights than federal employees do.
 
Last edited:
#22
#22
A few thoughts:

1) the Dems are clearly the party of "no" here. simply irresponsible to walk out. elections have consequences (where have we heard that before).

2) where is the outrage at the uncivil actions of protestors? the outrageous signs, the shouting down of speakers in the legislature? they have behaved far worse than any TP rally but there is no peep about their actions.

3) interesting that the collective bargaining rights being fought over were already taken away from Fed employees by Carter I believe. Clinton and now Obama have done NOTHING to restore those bargaining rights. The whole "busting the union" rhetoric is just that - rhetoric. Wisconsin state employees would still have more collective bargaining rights than federal employees do.

1. Agree completely. Elections have consequences. Although I admire the mobilization of the legislature.

2. Absolutely ridiculous and completely ideological. Please, one example so we can critical engage this assessment.

3. You are absolutely right, except, I believe it was Reagan, not Carter.

I hope it fails as I believe we will truly have to hit a nadir before the forces of revolution are ready to sweep away the counter-revolutionary antithesis (Hegelian) of the last forty years. The revolutionary forces are in the supermajority, but the CR forces are certainly ascendent and powerful. I think they (rightly) feel cornered as a superminority, and thus know they are fighting for survival, and they know exactly what they want. Once the world of Grover Norquist comes home to roost, the supermajority will quickly understand what must be done, and the counter-revolutionary forces will be swept into the dustbin of history. Synthesis is coming.
 
#23
#23
Even Shepherd Smith, of Fox News, last week was saying that this is all about breaking the unions, not balancing the budget. The Dems have said that they would agree to BOTH of the financial conditions the governor had -- a contribution to the pension and paying towards health care. And in the amounts requested by the governor.

But he won't recede from the REAL issue here, which is taking away their collective bargaining rights.
 
#24
#24
Even Shepherd Smith, of Fox News, last week was saying that this is all about breaking the unions, not balancing the budget. The Dems have said that they would agree to BOTH of the financial conditions the governor had -- a contribution to the pension and paying towards health care. And in the amounts requested by the governor.

But he won't recede from the REAL issue here, which is taking away their collective bargaining rights.

Yes, I forgot to mention the real issue here. I certainly am pro-union / pro-collective bargaining (in fact, quite partial to the current Argentinian model). I'm being a little facetious in my hopes of its failure, although I would like to see the forces of counter-revolution put on the back foot.
 
#25
#25
But he won't recede from the REAL issue here, which is taking away their collective bargaining rights.
Collective-bargaining rights always seems a little oxymoronic in my opinion.

Collective-bargaining agreements restrict individual rights to negotiate contracts and create exclusive work atmospheres and industries. The less unions and collective bargaining agreements, the better.
 

VN Store



Back
Top