LOL LouisJ..... it's the state of politics we have in today's world.... SAD and I think we have reached that tipping point where both parties are no longer good for the nation. We should just start from scratch, no?

In any event, I know that a way in which we end an discourse these days seems to be that we call our opposition names like Hitler... and I believe that it doesn't bode well for any civil conversation, but I found this article yesterday and I just had to post it....

May 1933: Hitler Abolishes Unions

On May 2nd, 1933, the day after Labor day, Nazi groups occupied union halls and labor leaders were arrested. Trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. This was the beginning of a consolidation of power by the fascist regime which systematically wiped out all opposition groups, starting with unions, liberals, socialists, and communists using Himmler’s state police.

Fast forward to America today, particularly Wisconsin. Governor Walker and the Republican/Tea Party members of the state legislature are attempting to pass a bill that would not only severely punish public unions (with exception for the police, fire, and state trooper unions that supported his campaign), but it would effectively end 50 years to the right of these workers to collectively bargain.

Just because the president has soo much been compared to Hitler by the Tea Party folks or repubs... should Obama do hitler style and just arrest Governor Walker? and all Opposition? I know that the tea party folks do not believe that Obama would do this because they know he aint Hitler... but it's good politics to call him one.

Now someone tell me that the budget shortfalls created by tax cuts for corporations in WI, coupled with taking more money away from union members isn't called "Redistribution of Wealth"... that's exactly the definition of redistribution of wealth. When you cut tax somewhere, someone else has to pay for it. In this case the public workers in WI. And tea party folks say the GOP is on the working man's side. Funny, if it weren't sad.

The unions have conceded to everything asked by Governor Walker because they know it is the right thing to do and they'd lose their power if they don't give in to Walker's request... but to strip the power of workers to bargain... forever in the state of WI is a blow to workers rights... and basic human rights, IMO... .no?

This is why I find politics in today's world very cynical...and distasteful..In any event, I'm out.... have a good weekend y'all.....it's finally a good weather out here in Texas.

LouisJ

TGIF. I know there is someone somewhere that will say it's President Obama's fault.

Louis,That's because they ...

Double-Speak What if you were (the one)

With Republican/Tea Bagger governors looting the middle class, to push through a crazy right wing greedy political agenda is nothing more than the right wing to commit abortion on the American middle class now. At first it was the poor working class. The Republican/Tea Baggers are representing the interests (protecting) the tax cuts for the rich, Wall Street and corporations by putting the burden on our nation’s poor, working class and middle class. This bum’s rush is for no-bid contracts as concluded by Gov Walker’s prank call is for none other than the Koch (prouonced coke) Brothers. Interestingly enough things do not go better with Koch.
Republican/Tea Bagger are the worst tools of anti-democratic, anti-American in this republic; and don’t believe the middle and poorer classes people in this democracy should have a voice; despite the fact that the function of these classes is building/built America. In the former case, building America is no longer of essence if the sock puppets of the Koch brothers such as the punk’d flunky Gov. Walker, andother govenors i.e. Kaish, Daniels, iRick Scott , and Christie continue on with their double standards.
Tax breaks; especially for the rich do not create jobs. Like it or not the rich do not put theier money is this american economy. as I’ve said so many times before jobs go off shore to the cayman Islands.
bill includes a provision that would allow the state to sell or contract out the operation of heating, cooling, and power plants without a bidding process and without consulting the state’s independent utility regulator

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's claim of a "budget shortfall" of $137 million. But Walker, a Republican, failed to tell the state that less than two weeks into his term as governor, he, with his swollen Republican majorities in the Wisconsin legislature, pushed through $117 million in tax breaks for business allies of the GOP. There is your crisis.
.
Now we can understand Walker's mantra: "Wisconsin is open for business." What a "popular," appealing position! Everyone likes to complain about bureaucrats and teachers -- lazy, incompetent and, withal, overpaid. Never mind that studies portray a public work force earning 8 to 15 percent less than similarly situated private sector employees, with the spread even wider among more educated workers.
The governor's "budget repair bill" has little to do with a budget shortfall and everything to do with breaking unions, starting with public employees and then perhaps moving on to others as well
Before the tax giveaways, the fiscal agency predicted a surplus for the state.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stanley-kutler/what-gov-walker-wont-tell_1_b_827104.html

So now it’s time to move along without the failure to communicate. progressive ideas of unions will speak to not denying the blood, sweat and tears of the real workers. Union and pre union workers have built/are building this country despite of the deliberately evasive, double -talk nonsense, and the fears of the puppets of the big corporations and the koch brothers. To lay off teachears is unequivocally anti-thetical to building America and it’s economy.
Kudos to the boeng contract.

Rightes, no matter how many FOX LIES & Rasmuseen polls they feed you, the “Thrill is Gone”. America is tired of corporate greed i.e. tax cuts for the rich versus job, education, and housing, cuts for the middle and poor people.

President Obama is being critized for not physically going to Wisconsin or Ohio. But, let’s not lose sight of what’s at stake here. Our nation is polarized enough. Should the president at this point go there, all the crazies in the right wing o-sphere who have been salivating to further polarize our nation will take this opportunity to make the union busting all about the President.

Let's see, 15 second blurb on the WI House passing a union busting bill this morning on the Today Show – followed with 3+ minutes on Kate & Wills & how much she spent to fix her teeth!

Not TOO obvious Comcast got some phone calls…

The LAST thing we can have is an informed electorate... uh huh!

@Tunde - EXCELLENT post & this has NOTHING to do with concessions!

By Blake Aued - Athens Banner-Herald

Published February 23rd, 2011

At Rep. Paul Broun's town hall meeting on Tuesday, the Athens congressman asked who had driven the farthest to be there and let the winner ask the first question.

We couldn't hear the question in the back of the packed Oglethorpe County Commission chamber, but whatever it was, it got a big laugh. According to an outraged commenter on the article, the question was, when is someone going to shoot Obama?

I've asked Team Broun whether that was indeed the question and haven't gotten an answer. The commenter accurately described the questioner and the circumstances, and no one has disputed his account.

Update: Broun's press secretary, Jessica Morris, confirmed that the question was indeed, who is going to shoot Obama? "Obviously, the question was inappropriate, so Congressman Broun moved on," she said.

Here was Broun's response:

The thing is, I know there's a lot of frustration with this president. We're going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we'll elect somebody that's going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.

He then segued into Republicans' budget proposal.

It is a Federal crime to threaten the life of the President, and Congressman Broun's attitude is let's move on. " INAPPROPRIATE," says his Press Secretary. It is amazing that a US Congressman or someone on his staff would not know that it is a crime, or at the very least, tell the questioner it is unacceptable and wrong to talk like that.

This is another example of GOP/TP leaders who lack the moral and testicular courage to denounce anyone asking a question with such implications. We can only hope no one got any ideas from this outrageous question and that the USSS will pay a visit to find out exactly what is on the questioner's mind.

All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good to men to do nothing.

Edmund Burke

Bev:

True, I saw those bogus polls and they have already been questioned. See below:

The mysterious poll of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's budget proposal making the rounds today was commissioned by the Franklin Center For Government and Public Integrity, a conservative not for profit based in North Dakota and Virginia that was founded by a former Republican operative.

The Franklin Center also has ties to the some of the groups that organized a pro-Walker rally last weekend in Madison.

"BREAKING: Poll Shows 71% of Wisconsinites Think Walker's Budget Changes are 'Fair'," said the release from the Franklin Center. Local and national news outlets cited it, including MSNBC. But no one, it seems, asked where the poll came from.

A previous Rasmussen poll of the Wisconsin situation conducted nationally showed 48% of American voters supported Walker, while just 38% supported the unions. That poll was criticized for asking leading questions that seemed to point respondents toward opposing the unions.

The questions on the Pulse Poll are different than those found on the national poll, and they're aimed squarely at Wisconsin voters. And despite what the poll's sponsors wanted to advertise initially, the results actually look pretty good for the unions.

More than half (56%) of respondents said Wisconsin state workers should have collective bargaining power. Just 32% sided with Walker and said state workers should not be allowed to collectively negotiate benefits and other compensation.

The respondents to the poll were evenly split on whether the Democratic Senators who fled Wisconsin to shut down Walker's so-called Budget Repair Bill should be recalled. Forty-eight percent said they would not be likely to support a recall of those Democrats and 47% said they would support a recall.

What's more, a huge majority opposed firing the hundreds of teachers who walked off the job last week, shutting down schools for several days.

Fifty-three percent of respondents said the teachers should not be fired. Just 32% said they should.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/group_pushing_the_group_behind_the_conservative_poll_of_walkers_budget_plan_wisconsin_poll_has_gop_ba.php?ref=fpa

I think that most people think that this can't happen to them. I see the elitists giving up nothing while the quickly vanishing Middle Class takes the biggest hits. Unions didn't cause $3.6B in deficits in WI---they're just convenient targets. I not the online polls are pretty evenly split as to whether unions have a place in the US now. Just watch your wages start dropping as unions disappear and listen to the far right's banter about abolishing the minimum wage--then you will get it.

So much disdain this morning First Read regulars.....vile, venom, hatred, etc.

WE MUST BE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT!!!!

Just watch your wages start dropping as unions disappear and listen to the far right's banter about abolishing the minimum wage--then you will get it

Sadly, I'm afraid by the time they finally 'get it', it's going to be too late sandtrich!

First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.

Martin Niemoeller

First Read Hosts. Cheers to you for recognizing and putting that recognition in writing--the media has not been doing its job to educate the public. Thank you.

Tunde A. Great post and a warning of what elimination of unions and bargaining rights means.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's claim of a "budget shortfall" of $137 million. But Walker, a Republican, failed to tell the state that less than two weeks into his term as governor, he, with his swollen Republican majorities in the Wisconsin legislature, pushed through $117 million in tax breaks for business allies of the GOP. There is your crisis.

How hard is it for you to understand that in order to budget properly, you have to look further than what is currently going on. Sure I agree that the budget for 2011 in Wisconsin could be deficit neutral, take a look at the following two subsequent years and see what happens to the deficit.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_90196216-3b66-11e0-a327-001cc4c03286.html

Here is a quote from this article.

So, it is clear that Wisconsin has some serious budget issues to face. Estimates say the state is facing anywhere from a $3.1 billion to $3.6 billion deficit in the upcoming two-year budget cycle.

That amount represents about 13 percent of total annual state spending, according to Andrew Reschovsky, professor of public affairs and applied economics at UW-Madison.

“The short answer is that we are arguably in a crisis ... but the crisis is the large size of the fiscal 2012 and 2013 budget gap, not the 2011 gap, which is relatively modest,” he says.

So there you have it, there is indeed a budget crisis.

Obama’s speech at the G20 Summit in Canada, June 27^th, 2010:

“And we have set up this fiscal commission who will provide reports starting in November -- and one of the encouraging things, although there was resistance, ironically, on the part of some of the Republicans who originally had been co-sponsors of legislation to create the fiscal commission and they, in fact, ended up voting against it -- what’s been encouraging, based on what I’m hearing both from Democrats and Republicans, is that there’s been a serious conversation there. People are looking at a whole spectrum of issues to get at what is basically a structural deficit that preceded this financial crisis.”

“And people should learn that lesson about me, because next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country, I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficits and debt step up, because I’m calling their bluff. “

Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-obama-g-20-press-conference-toronto-canada

So it looks like Speaker Boehner has asked Obama and the Democratic led Senate to “step up” on the deficit, except now Obama and Reid have flinched. And that’s perplexing, because Obama issued the above challenge, said he would lead by “presenting some very difficult choices to the country” and for people that concerned about the debt/deficit he will be “calling their bluff”. Looks like Speaker Boehner isn’t bluffing, he’s made the “difficult choices”. It looks “the folks who are hollering about deficits and debt”, that would be the Republicans, are stepping up and proposing solutions. Obama on the other hand has made his “difficult choices” by submitting a budget with a world record deficit of $1.65 TRILLION dollars. So where exactly are the “difficult choices” in the Obama budget?

So what exactly was Obama talking about when he said he would be making the “difficult choices”?

FR: “Democrats erupted after the vote, throwing papers and what appeared to be a drink in the air."

Children. The Democrats owned the assembly, Senate, and governorship in Wisconsin for 8 years, and did nothing to solve the budget problems, and in fact, created the problems Wisconsin sees today. Now they are angry that someone else has resolved the problem.

I will give the Wisconsin assembly this though, at least they stuck around, debated, and voted. They didn't run off like the cowards in the state Senate.

Tunde,

NAZI party evolved from National Socialist Germans Workers Party. Hitler used the unions the same way Obama has used them and will sell them out the same way. Look at HCR that thet campaigned so hard for - they can not afford it either, hence all the Obama waivers for the unions and friends. When the waivers run out, the unions are in the same boat as everyone else.

Taking money away from unions/teachers? What a joke?

FACT: Wisconsin teachers are paid an average salary of $51,000. Annualized to account for their 180-day work year, that’s $68,000, and that is in addition to their very fine benefits, pensions, and job security. The median household income — that is, total household income, including households with two or more earners — was $49,993 in 2009 in Wisconsin. Therefore, after adjusting for the different work years — and not including teachers’ unusually generous benefits — a typical single Wisconsin teacher earns 36 percent more than the typical Wisconsin home. [Matthew Shaffer NRO].

Why is Obama fighting Governors? Especially when you consider:

From 1999-2009, right-to-work states had a 3.7% increase in jobs; unionized states declined at 2.3%.

Real peronal income increased in right -to-work states by 28.3%; unionized states by 14.7%.

Growth in real manufacturing GDP for right-to-work states was 20.9%; unionized 6.5%.

All the growth and jobs are obvious - Could it be the $400 million unions contributed in 2008?

GM,

All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good to men to do nothing.

Edmund Burke

Hence - the birth of the Tea Party and everything going on in the states.

Good Men ARE doing something.

"We aren't doing our jobs when the populace is this misinformed. As a collective, look at how the court decisions striking down the health law get covered vs. the decisions to uphold it. And then look at the conservative media outlets and their coverage of this issue."

Thank you, thank you, thank you, First Read journalists. This is exactly what I have been saying for years. It's not even a question of bias, more like the dumbing down of TV news. Things are bad when Comedy Central is the most a trusted news source on TV. I hope to God other news outlets are having the same conversation behind closed doors.

MBeaty:

How hard is it for you to understand that in order to budget properly, you have to look further than what is currently going on.

So, the long term fix is to destroy the unions. That's the plan, right? Working people must suffer so that the corporate crooks who caused the Bush Recession can continue getting the undeserved tax breaks that were responsible for the deficit and, quite obviously, did NOT trickle down in the form of jobs.

Hence - the birth of the Tea Party and everything going on in the states.

Good Men ARE doing something

If calling for a sitting President to be SHOT is your idea of 'good' men doing something, you're much SICKER than I ever imagined...

Do keep posting though - let everyone see what a pathetic excuse for a human being you are!

TA: So much disdain this morning First Read regulars.....vile, venom, hatred, etc.

This is different, how?

And there is really nothing going well for the Democrats. No one understands ObamaCare, except that it appears to be just another expensive and poorly run government program. Gas prices are rising faster than the soon to be cancelled space shuttle fleet. Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan, the Obama administration is behind the curve on each of those. Record budget deficits, states eliminating their debts by cutting off the Democrats cash cow unions. Hasn't been going well for the Liberals, not well at all.

But at least the Obama's had a good time with their Tribute to Motown last night at the White House. It's always good for the President to take a break, recharge his batteries.

Hence - the birth of the Tea Party and everything going on in the states.

The Tea Party in Illinois are amusing themselves by tracking down the nomadic state senators from Wisconsin and Indiana.

Source: http://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/23/tea-party-forces-awol-dems-switch-hotels-whos-paying-their-expenses#

Nice to see the First Read withers wringing their hands over the public being misinformed.

Does that mean you regret sticking to the Obama campaign talking point on his campaign being funded by the "little" people with their paper route money, when that accounted for less than 25% of his take? You cannot actually mean yup will dispel that lie next time!

I will not hold mt breath.

You know an argument is running on fumes when both sides trot out the "nazi" comparisons...

JoAnnaSmith1---Blame the Democrats for 8 years in power in WI? All but 4 states are in deep financial straits, red and blue. The reduced revenue from property taxes do to foreclosures and the need to lower property tax due to the devaluation is the culprit. Add in state revenues for being paid out for unemployment, decreased sales tax revenues due to reduced spending. It's a National crisis that is owned by both parties--state and Federal levels.

This is what happens when the government does nothing about a financial crisis:

Great Depression

Main article: Great Depression in the United States

"Hoover's stance on the economy was based largely on voluntarism. From before his entry to the presidency, he was a proponent of the concept that public-private cooperation was the way to achieve high long-term growth.[39] Hoover feared that too much intervention or coercion by the government would destroy individuality and self-reliance, which he considered to be important American values. Both his ideals and the economy were put to the test with the onset of the Great Depression."

President Obama did not sit back and let this cycle repeat itself. Our economy is the largest consuming on earth. I'm sure glad he did act. You worry that the man might not work 24 hours a day. I have this gut feeling that he has to work harder than any president in history.

So the little Roselle chihuahua drags her butt across the carpet of another thread.

Can't or won't defend your comment - best to get all personal! lol

Oldest trick in the book Bobby!

Your fascination with an ass dragging dog commercial is very telling... have you thought of seeking some professional help?

You're beyond the point of embarassing yourself around here!

Feisty,

You're kidding right?

You want to debate anything I've said.

You can't and you know it. You never been have able to, never will.

Stay with what you do best red, your little purse crapper comments.

Feisty,..you just can't help yourself, can you?

POT calling the kettle black.............gosh, it really sucks when you get called out on your bullsh!t, doesn't it!

Good to see the Three Stooges out and about so early this morning... keep em comin!

I haven't had this many laughs all week!

*popcorns ready*

sandtrich: You worry that the man [Obama] might not work 24 hours a day. I have this gut feeling that he has to work harder than any president in history

Really? More than Washington? Lincoln? Jefferson? Roosevelt? Reagan? Truman? To name a few.

If Obama is working hard, he's working on the wrong things.

"Every time he sees a mouse he goes crazy." "Why?" "'Cause his father was a rat."
- Larry, Fred Kelsey & Moe (HORSES' COLLARS, 1935)

Tunde- read here

http://politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/22/lena-taylor/wisconsin-state-sen-lena-taylor-d-milwaukee-says-h/

It got the "pants on fire" rating.

Feisty can be the rich sophisticate who hires us to paint her mansion.

LOL Oh... alright you can be Moe!

Just so you know, Curly always has been my absolute favorite! ;o)

Moe, Larry, the cheese! Moe, Larry, the cheese!" (Curly in the 1935 short, Horses Collars)

JAS1:

Really? More than Washington? Lincoln? Jefferson? Roosevelt? Reagan? Truman? To name a few.

Reagan doesn't belong in the above list of hard workers. He never missed his nappy time. And while he was dozing somebody in his administration raised taxes, ballooned the deficit, and was doing illegal arms deals.

If Obama is working hard, he's working on the wrong things.

You mean like saving the auto industry? I know it must stick in you craw that GM is now turning a profit after Republicans gave their usual gloom and doom wrong predictions on the outcome. One thing you can say about conservatives, they really know how to make a living off of being wrong about most everything most of the time.

True American-2366567

Feisty,..you just can't help yourself, can you?

POT calling the kettle black.............gosh, it really sucks when you get called out on your bullsh!t, doesn't it!

Bullsh!t is you and the rest of the righties hanging on to every lie & fake poll FOX NOISE and the KOCH brother flunkies feed you.

Rep. Paul Broun gets town hall query: 'Who is going to shoot Obama?
[snip]

A constituent at a town hall for Georgia Rep. Paul Broun drew laughter on Tuesday when asked, “Who is going to shoot Obama?” and the Republican didn’t come anywhere near condemning the question in his response.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/who-is-going-to-shoot-president-obama/town-hall/

“The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president,” Broun said, according to the Athens Banner-Herald. “We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president … who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/50180.html#ixzz1EzCHqF

To my Progressive Patriot Friends, you guys are on fire today. GREAT WORK at pointing out the facts.

Thanks

Beverly:

Bullsh!t is you and the rest of the righties hanging on to every lie & fake poll FOX NOISE and the KOCH brother flunkies feed you.

I guess we could say the same thing about you continually repeating "fact's" that are really not true.

Just look up a few posts at the one where you claim that there is no budget deficit in Wisconsin. It was disproved in 1.10 and 1.21.

Houston: You mean like saving the auto industry?

So the auto industry would be gone if Obama didn't buyout GM? No cars would be being made at all?

Houston: I know it must stick in you craw that GM is now turning a profit

Oh, not at all. It just proves that if you bilk the bondholders, stockholders, and vendors out of their money, and pump enough billions of borrowed government dollars into a company, that it will somehow be functional.

Did you see this article. GM stock is now below it's IPO price from last year:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-02-24/gm-falls-to-lowest-since-ipo-as-rising-oil-threatens-trucks.html

Perhaps Obama should throw a few more billion into it, prop it up again?

FACT: Even though restricting bargaining rights over the long term won’t do anything to reduce the deficit immediately, public-sector unions will become more expensive the more political power they have — they, like everybody else, seek greater pay and benefits using the means available to them. So restricting public-sector unions’ political and bargaining power is obviously a component of restoring sanity to the budget in the long term. Krugman’s distinction of the power issue and the budget issue is without a difference.

RVZ555 - I have questions about your 'FACTS' as you have posted them. Maybe you can clear up some of these questions for me.

The snippet above - you state at a 'FACT' that, and I quote: "public-sector unions will become more expensive the more political power they have — they, like everybody else, seek greater pay and benefits using the means available to them."

OK, I can accept that as a SUPPOSITION. However, here are the questions:

1. You are making an ASSUMPTION that the public-sector unions will "become more expensive [with] the more political power they have." What evidence do you have to support this 'fact'?

2. You are also making the ASSUMPTION that just because the unions ASK for more money/benefits that they will get them. Part of the negotiatiing process is to ALWAYS ask for more than you expect to get. So what is the difference here with the unions?

3. You also state, and I quote: "So restricting public-sector unions’ political and bargaining power is obviously a component of restoring sanity to the budget in the long term." OBVIOUSLY? Whatever happened to the budget managers - governors/mayors/legislators - setting the parameters of what they can negotiate? Seems to me that the governors/mayors/legislators are lousy negotiators and are trying to cover their butts when they make bad deals.

4. How can you justify 'taking away' an entity's right to bargain/negotiate? Does that mean if a private enterprise that wants to negotiate for the job(s) in the public sector, would then be stripped of their right to negotiate as well? Does this set a DOUBLE-STANDARD when it comes to negotiations? What company would want to deal with a municipality/city/state if the could NOT 'negotiate' terms?

I dunno about these FACTS of yours, RVZ555, but your 'FACT' filled post really create more questions than it answers.

Note to self... Republicans do as I tell them to do... hmmm, this is a great opportunity to tell them to behave themselves and love others as themselves... but do they love themselves?

Hey Republicans, do you love yourselves? Self esteem issues? Lay on the couch.

Bottom line is that the Unions have accepted the pay cuts. Walker got his money as he wanted but now he is using the citizens of WI as hostages to bust the unions. If he has already got the concessions from the union why is he threatening to layoff 1500 people. He got the money. Just using the people as hostages just as they GOP/TP did in their stance on the tax cuts for the richest 2%.

RVZ555

MYTH: Wisconsin is not actually facing a deficit. Rachel Maddow on her February 17 show said, “Despite what you may have heard about Wisconsin’s finances, the state is on track to have a budget surplus this year. I am not kidding.”

Here's what seems to be an accurate report on the Politifact/Maddow argument:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rachel-maddow-and-politifact-are-giving-me-a-frakking-headache/

Basically, one part of a document sounded as if there was a surplus, until you got to a later part that talked about some unpaid bills. So I think Maddow was wrong about the surplus although budget stuff is so confusing I don't blame her all that much. However, Walker's tax cuts for corporations will in fact make the deficit even worse, and Maddow was absolutely correct in stating that Walker's attempt to take away union bargaining rights has nothing at all to do with the deficit. It's a naked power grab by the out-of-control nut case whom the people of Wisconsin unfortunately voted into office.

Pietro: Good job addressing RVZ's opinions dressed up in fact's clothing. The part about Maddow was the only thing he got right. Your point that about depriving unions from negotiating with the state would save money, then depriving companies from bargaining would only be fair.

I'll bet it would save a LOT of money if a law were passed forcing corporations to perform work for the state at a cost set by the state. Ironically, the law Walker is trying to ram through actually does have a no-bid provision, but it's not to save the state money, it's so that Walker can reward the corporate donors with overpriced contracts. Maybe the fake David Koch can get a piece of the action!

Bev.......I love it when you get so fired up....must have touched the "truth" nerve....lol

Amy B. Porland......sweetie, do you think you should be discussing "misinformed" voters when you don't even know who Trumka is?.....lol.

btw.....First Read, what happened to this story that you posted 3 hours age? Couldn't get the response you were looking for?

Congress: Searching for cuts in all the right places…LMFAO!!!!!

JAS1:

So the auto industry would be gone if Obama didn't buyout GM? No cars would be being made at all?

I see. It really DOES stick in your craw that Obama was right and the Republicans predicting doom were wrong as usual. You're so steamed about it that you need to come up with wacko conspiracy theories to explain why GM's profit isn't really a profit. As for the share price, notice the article says the rising price of oil having something to do with it. And that probably has something to do with the situation in Libya. Qadaffi says it's a plot by Al Qaeda that the US has something do with. His theories sound about as sane as yours.

Well Houston, I see you now introduced Qadaffi and al Qaeda into your story. Care to also include Hitler?

Bob-180... - fiesty is just the FR liberals idea of comic relief, nothing more. Just always trying to crack wise, I think her youthfull idol was Don Rickles.

Rather surprised that she is mouthing off again. She must want to teach you some new tricks on how not to be civil. Either that or she cooked up another batch of her patented Hate-r-aide for distribution to her wing nut buds.

At least she seems to have calmed down some, you really did hit a nerve about her like the little dog. Funny!

Pietro,

First, let thank you for an honest attempt to have an exchange by asking reasonable, thoughtful questions.

You are making an ASSUMPTION that the public-sector unions will "become more expensive [with] the more political power they have." What evidence do you have to support this 'fact'?

The following quote speaks for itself.

"We have the ability, in a sense, to elect our own boss." - Victor Gotbaum / NYC AFSCME

The union costs are direct and in-direct, immediate and delayed. Wages are obviously direct and immediate. But take what happened with the Milwaukee Public Schools a few years ago when larger pay increases were not politically justified and had an immediate cost consequence. MPS began paying health-care benefits even after employees retired! This is a cost that now has an unfunded liability of $4.9 billion! To teachers that don't even work anymore, outside of their pensions. Health-care cost? They sued to have Viagra added to their coverage adding millions to the states cost.

In-direct cost, the unions have made it impermissible to use student test scores in determining teacher pay. This makes them ineligible for $254 million in new education funds -"Race to the Top." The list goes on and on.

Bottom line - It is the unions against the tax payers. Obama has picked the side of unions. He has to - the Dems recieved over $400 million in union money plus an equal value of assistance in get out the vote, phone banks, poll watching, rally's, demonstration, counter demonstrations......

Obama and the Dems can not win with out unions, they know it and reward the unions by their protection, benefit give aways, bailouts etc. Very obvious.

Part of the negotiatiing process is to ALWAYS ask for more than you expect to get. So what is the difference here with the unions?

Again - see the Gotbaum quote.

OBVIOUSLY? Whatever happened to the budget managers - governors/mayors/legislators - setting the parameters of what they can negotiate? Seems to me that the governors/mayors/legislators are lousy negotiators and are trying to cover their butts when they make bad deals.

This IS EXACTLY WHAT WALKER IS TRYING TO DO!

He ask them pay 5.8% of THEIR OWN PENSIONS (why should tax payers pay 100% of union pensions), to give themselves the right to opt out - and it is considered "union busting". How benign is that negotiation remark? The teachers shut down the school systems. Unions are out of control - how do negotiate with that?

Again - thanks for your comments Pietro.

Pietro,

Forgot your #4 - private companies. Private companies bid for work and pay their own employee benefits from the contracted amount. Not a hidden/delayed cost to the tax payers.

But it does raise another example of the costs of unions. Many cities and federal government, in concessions to the unions to maintain their competitiveness, make requirements on government vendors, such as wages, that most of the time are above the private sector cost. The private companies are thus required to increase their cost - hence their service is another greater cost to the tax payers as result of unions.

american,

I couldn't care less about a harmless little chihuahua that runs out and tries to nip your ankles. Just stand your ground and if they get to close sometimes - just gently boot'em away. No hard feelings.

MBeaty

How hard is it for you to understand that in order to budget properly, you have to look further than what is currently going on. Sure I agree that the budget for 2011 in Wisconsin could be deficit neutral, take a look at the following two subsequent years and see what happens to the deficit.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_90196216-3b66-11e0-a327-001cc4c03286.html

Here is a quote from this article.

So, it is clear that Wisconsin has some serious budget issues to face. Estimates say the state is facing anywhere from a $3.1 billion to $3.6 billion deficit in the upcoming two-year budget cycle.

That amount represents about 13 percent of total annual state spending, according to Andrew Reschovsky, professor of public affairs and applied economics at UW-Madison.

“The short answer is that we are arguably in a crisis ... but the crisis is the large size of the fiscal 2012 and 2013 budget gap, not the 2011 gap, which is relatively modest,” he says.

So there you have it, there is indeed a budget crisis.

Okay, why did Walker give away tax breaks from the 2011 gap?

Even though the state had started the year on track to have a budget surplus—now, there is, in fact, a $137 million budget shortfall. Republican Governor Scott Walker, coincidentally, has given away $140 million worth of business tax breaks since he came into office. Hey, wait. That‘s about exactly the size of the shortfall.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rachel-maddow-and-politifact-are-giving-me-a-frakking-headache/

These changes will help the state fulfill its Medicaid spending on needy families of about $170 million; funding that the previous administration did not have in its budget. Maybe if Gov Walker was fiscally responsible he could return the tax cuts; then there would be a surplus, huh?

How 'bout Republicans focusing more on creating jobs and less on ramming through controversial bills that defend workers' rights, budget cuts aimed at slashing government employees and rolling back bedrock environmental laws?

Certainly, you should see it's not too difficult for Gov Walker to do the fiscally responsible thing rather than talking smack.

The union costs are direct and in-direct, immediate and delayed. Wages are obviously direct and immediate. But take what happened with the Milwaukee Public Schools a few years ago when larger pay increases were not politically justified and had an immediate cost consequence. MPS began paying health-care benefits even after employees retired! This is a cost that now has an unfunded liability of $4.9 billion! To teachers that don't even work anymore, outside of their pensions. Health-care cost? They sued to have Viagra added to their coverage adding millions to the states cost.

In-direct cost, the unions have made it impermissible to use student test scores in determining teacher pay. This makes them ineligible for $254 million in new education funds -"Race to the Top." The list goes on and on.

OK, Bob, let'stake what you are saying at face value. Here is where I have a problem with your logic.

Let's take a direct quote from your post. It is as follows: "But take what happened with the Milwaukee Public Schools a few years ago when larger pay increases were not politically justified and had an immediate cost consequence. MPS began paying health-care benefits even after employees retired!"

SO let me get this straight - because MPS SCREWED UP and didn't factor in the pay increases in THEIR budget - it is the UNION'S fault? C'mon, Bob, that doesn't pass the smell test.

Did the Unions force MPS to pay out these benefits at gunpoint? If they did, THEN - and only then - would I believe what you are posting here, Bob.

The fact of the matter is that the Unions do NOT HAVE THE CHECKBOOK. The States/cities/municipalities do. The States/cities/municipalities enter into deals with the unions. The states/cities/municipalities have to HONOUR those deals that they have entered into. These deals are binding and in force until the next negotiation round.

What is happening here is pretty simple. The managers of the State/city/municipality budget(s) were:

1) stupid,

2) incompetent,

3) both stupid and incompetent and

4) lousy negotiators.

So how is it that the UNION is the 'bad guy in this respect when we budget 'managers' fell down on the job?

OF COURSE the union, when negotiations come around, are going to ask for the moon. THey would not be good negotiators if they did not.

What is MORE telling to me is that the budget managers of the states/cities/municipalities ACCEPTED the terms of the deal. It is not the Unions that are at fault here because they were just ASKING for all of these benefits/perks. It is the fault of those who GRANTED these requests.

Why not go after those people, Bob?

I have to laugh at how people are so gullible into thinking that the unions are the 'evil empire within'. The Unions have no power to write checks, and they negotiate for what they get.

And yes Bob, I used the word GULLIBLE.

In Gov. Walker's case, he GOT all the concessions he wanted. However, that is not good enough. He wants to take away their RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE. I asked it before, and I'll ask it again - if the entity that the State wants to hire was a private corporation, would they be stripped of their 'right' to negotiate?

In a word - no.

So what is the difference with a Union negotiating and a private company negoatiating?

There is none.

Both have to sit at the bargaining table. Both have to submit a proposal. Both have to provide documentation on how they plan on doing the job(s) and with what resources.

So what say you, Bob?

He ask them pay 5.8% of THEIR OWN PENSIONS (why should tax payers pay 100% of union pensions), to give themselves the right to opt out - and it is considered "union busting". How benign is that negotiation remark? The teachers shut down the school systems. Unions are out of control - how do negotiate with that?

You see, Bob, I have an issue with the snippet of the remarks you've posted.

You seem to be pretty outraged about the PENSIONS that the Union is paying its members. Let's look at it this way. Let's just say that we had a private company do the work the union is doing.

1. Are you at all concerned about why the company is paying its CEO?

2. Are you at all concerned about how much goes into the company's employee 401K?

3. Are you at all concerned about how efficient the workers are?

The answer to all of the above is no. You actually praise the CEO for being able to make all of the money he does.

Yet you demonize the unions for doing essentially the same thing.

So why is that? Why do we NOT care what a percent their employees contribute to their 401Ks, but we have a SERIOUS problem with what percentage of the monies a union member makes contributes to their pension?

We do not demonize a private company for getting 'what they can' from a city/state/municipality, but cry FOUL when a Union negotiates a good deal for itself and its members.

We have no problem with a CEO making BILIONS on his 'business acumen', but you have a COW when a Union leader is making a few extra dollars.

Hypocracy is thine middle name, Bob.

But it does raise another example of the costs of unions. Many cities and federal government, in concessions to the unions to maintain their competitiveness, make requirements on government vendors, such as wages, that most of the time are above the private sector cost. The private companies are thus required to increase their cost - hence their service is another greater cost to the tax payers as result of unions.

OK, Bob, you are making this too easy for me.

Again, I am going to quote you directly, so I make sure I do not miss what you are saying. Here it is:

"But it does raise another example of the costs of unions. Many cities and federal government, in concessions to the unions to maintain their competitiveness, make requirements on government vendors, such as wages, that most of the time are above the private sector cost."

Let's examine a little closer here at what was posted. "Many cities and federal government, in concessions to the unions to maintain their competitiveness, make requirements on government vendors, such as wages, that most of the time are above the private sector cost."

Since when does a city/state/municipality make ANY concessions that are 'above the private sector cost'?

I wonder where you heard that from, Bob.

In MOST cases, not all, but most, the person who gets the job is the LOWEST bidder. So if what you are saying is true, Bob, which I do not believe it is, then it would be WISER for the city/state/municipality to go with the PRIVATE companies, would it not? If that is the case, then WHY BOTHER with dealing with a union in the first place?

Besides - the city/state/municipality didn't seem to have a problem with the cost when they negotiated their contract, nor did they have a problem with the compensation package(s).

All were APPROVED.

So why is it that YOU have a problem, Bob? Do you think the cost is too high? Maybe we should have a chat with the person who APPROVED this package to be paid, dont you think? Maybe THEY didn't have a problem with the cost.

Why don't we just ask them why they approved these contracts if they are so detrimental to the state/city/municipality?

As far as a state/city/municipality needing to make concession to a union to 'stay competitive', that is just a crock and is a laughable statement. A city/state/municipality has many avenues at its disposal to 'stay competitive', so why is the union the ONLY entity that the states/cities/municipalities have to make concession to?

If what you say about being competitive is true, Bob, then that state has BIGGER problems that the unions that it contracts.

Look, Bob, here is the deal - you ingesting the 'party line' without thinking it through. Many of your 'arguments' are not even good arguments. I wold suggest that you ask your 'sources' some of the questions that I am asking because I believe they are selling you a bill of goods.

In the interest of communication here, I would just like to be able to address the merits of your argument and not just debunk talking points. Maybe you should sit down with a union member and take a walk in their shoes for a day or two. MAYBE you will find that what you are being fed is incorrect; maybe you will have a little better insight into why things are the way they are.

Pietro,

The unions say here is a ton of money and organized campaign support,

You pat my back - I'll pat your back.

If you don't understand that, if you require a "gunpoint" standard as proof ....... you are an imbecile.

Sorry I wasted our time, mistook you as someone being half intelligent and reasonable.

MBeaty:

How hard is it for you to understand that in order to budget properly, you have to look further than what is currently going on. Sure I agree that the budget for 2011 in Wisconsin could be deficit neutral, take a look at the following two subsequent years and see what happens to the deficit.

Then why wasn't WALKER looking at it when he rammed home $117 million in new tax breaks that Wisconsin could ill afford? Wasn't HE looking down the road? Why not?

And then explain to me why public workers should pay for Walker's irresponsibility with their bargaining rights IN ADDITION TO THEIR PAY CONCESSIONS. Concessions which, by the way, have already been going on for years and years.

And how does that explain the part about selling off power plants to the lowest bidders? Or even without bids? To get the best price, he should AT LEAST accept bids, right?

Pietro:

In the interest of communication here, I would just like to be able to address the merits of your argument and not just debunk talking points. Maybe you should sit down with a union member and take a walk in their shoes for a day or two. MAYBE you will find that what you are being fed is incorrect; maybe you will have a little better insight into why things are the way they are.

AMEN, Pietro, and not just Bob. Bob has demonstrated over the past week that he has no real understanding of what teachers do. But there are also folks out here who evidently don't think police are unionized and work for $10 an hour, as well as many who have no idea about the REAL history of public sector bargaining in Wisconsin, which for the past 20 years has been all ABOUT concessions. I think we could find many who don't know that other states where there are no public unions are also facing similar, or in most cases worse, budget crises. Like Texas. Just to name one.

We seem to be getting some revisionist history lessons here today. Now for the truth:

Hitler used the Unions to garner support to help him get elected. Later he had the Unions dismantled and their leaders killed because he feared their power and ability to organize people could be used against him, once the Unions figured out they were being used. The Union leaders had a lot of inside information that could have ruined Hitler.

Everyone should read a few books on the third reich, hitler and ancient Rome, they are very informative and show that we Americans either do not know history or we fail to learn from it. Once you read and become educated on the facts then maybe you will have a new perspective on the current political environment. Additionally, find someone that grew-up in a socialist or communist country and ask them what they see happening to the United States. I've worked with people from Germany, Iran, India and France, I have neighbors from China, Italy, Russia and Bangladesh they all have some very interesting stories, that well have scared the heck out of me.

My advice is to stop the bickering and pick up a book or two, start a few conversations with those neighbors you've never spoke to, open your mind, your ears, shut your mouth and learn the truth. It's not only going to shock you but you'll appreciate the forewarning.

Bob:

The unions say here is a ton of money and organized campaign support,

You pat my back - I'll pat your back.

If you don't understand that, if you require a "gunpoint" standard as proof ....... you are an imbecile.

Sorry I wasted our time, mistook you as someone being half intelligent and reasonable.

What do you think that the Koch brothers expected from Governor Walker for the $3.4 million they spent on ads attacking his opponent in the 2010 election? Or was that just from the generosity of their compassionate conservative hearts? And if so, then why did Walker jump to take a phone call from David Koch when, since the day he took office, he has refused to take ANY phone calls, even from state legislators?

And before you start disparaging other people's intelligence, Bob, I think you should publish your own college transcripts, or maybe just your own ACT and SAT score. You're right about one thing, though. If you were looking for someone who is only half intelligent with whom you could converse comfortably, you were looking at about the right level. Pietro, on the other hand, is way too far above you, Bob.

Kate ~

My advice is to stop the bickering and pick up a book or two, start a few conversations with those neighbors you've never spoke to, open your mind, your ears, shut your mouth and learn the truth. It's not only going to shock you but you'll appreciate the forewarning.

No, they won't. They'll just demonize YOU for it and accuse you of fear-mongering.

Attention Fox lovers and Maddow lovers:

Indeed Ms. Maddow has attacked Walker's assertions about the budget. Here is the difference between Fox and MSNBC/Maddow.

If Maddow is wrong, she will own up and correct her error. You can also rest assured she will not repeat that error. (Contrast that with Hannity's video editing for instance. Falsifying crowd attendance. Remember that, Fox acolytes?) If she is correct, she will defend herself more than adequately. My money is on Maddow.

Regardless, the cuts in revenue given up by Walker have been more than matched by union concessions. Walker is a liar, a lackey for the rich, and a disgrace to his office.

The unions say here is a ton of money and organized campaign support,

You pat my back - I'll pat your back.

If you don't understand that, if you require a "gunpoint" standard as proof ....... you are an imbecile.

Sorry I wasted our time, mistook you as someone being half intelligent and reasonable.

Again, Bob, what makes the union - if they wanted to spend their money in support their THEIR candidate - any DIFFERENT than, oh, I dunno, say, the Koch Brothers, who are spending THEIR money on the Candidate(s) of their choosing?

I am sorry you feel that way about me, Bob, but since we are just talking here, is the name calling REALLY necessary? is it because I do not agree with your premise, theorems or conclusions, I am an 'imbecile'?

OK. Fair enough.

Thanks for the conversation, Bob.

Okay here's a difference between koch backing a candidate and the union. If the koch bros are backing a candidate it is because they expect the candidate to help them, the rich - who do not need any help. For the last 20 - 30 years, the rich have been running congress passing bill after bill to make things better for them and worse for us (common person - or maybe you are rich). People like you are buying into their garbage and hate talk cuz oh wow - you are cool and tough. In the process, you are ruining America for any kind of person who would like to work and have a decent life.

Pietro,

OK, we'll try again.

If Koch believes, supports Walker's agenda, beliefs and supports the candidate with his own money that's fine. If Walker represents the will of the people and doesn't do what Koch would like, what happens? Walker losses Koch's support, but has still honestly served the people. The teachers don't walk off, deny services. The people lose no money, no lost services - nothing.

Public Unions? Unions take the taxpayers money in the way of involuntary dues, have the government take the money out of the pay checks and give it to the unions. The union money is from the tax payers. The tax payers money is then used to give to a politician who supports the union by giving more of the tax payers money to the union. Who is representing the tax payer. The tax payers money is being used against the tax payer. If the politician goes against the union, the union shuts down the schools and denies service to the tax payers. How does this politician honestly serve the people?

He can't. Even FDR stated that public unions were unthinkable and intolerable. (Google it)

Albert Shanker, president of the American Federation of Teachers stated:

"When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interest of school children."

How does that serve the people? He could care less - only concerned about the unions and their political power?

I didn't call you an imbecile. I said if you had to have a gunpoint standard you were an imbecile. Self evident.

You decide for yourself if the above makes sense. I doubt it will, liberals are emotional not rational and tend to ignore the obvious. You are what you are - but it is completely your decision.

Public Unions? Unions take the taxpayers money in the way of involuntary dues, have the government take the money out of the pay checks and give it to the unions. The union money is from the tax payers. The tax payers money is then used to give to a politician who supports the union by giving more of the tax payers money to the union.

OK, Bob, let's start again. Let's start with your notion that the taxpayer's money is being used to fund unions. Do you have ANY citations - anything - that shows that taxpayer money is used? It is my understanding - and those reading that know better than I should definitely chime in - that the MEMBERS of that union pay dues to the Union, NOT the Taxpayer. I really cannot think of any time where I have seen where the public has funded a union, and I grew up in a union household.

Provide some sort of documentation that shows the public funds a union and then we have a basis for discussion that will support your premise.

Who is representing the tax payer. The tax payers money is being used against the tax payer. If the politician goes against the union, the union shuts down the schools and denies service to the tax payers. How does this politician honestly serve the people?

This snippet is not really clear, but I'll take a stab at it. The taxpayer is being represented by the city/state/municipality that contracts with the Union. So if you are saying that the taxpayer's money is being used against the taxpayer, I don't see it.

If a politician goes against a Union, then the union shuts down the schools (and denies service to the taxpayers)? Well, if I am reading this correctly, a Union cannot just 'shut down' anything with cause (and that is a breach of their agreement with the city/state/municipality). I do not have all of the specifics of a 'typical' Union contract, but I am SURE there are places where 'resolution of differences' are spelled out in great detail.

If there is goingto be a strike, there usually an announcement. The Union doesn't just 'walk off' the job without giving the state/city/municipality notice and this usually happens when negotiations break down.

I dunno, Bob, it looks like I am debunking talking points again. You are assigning waaay too much power to what a Union can and cannot do, and much of what you are saying I cannot substantiate. here is where discussion leads to learning - maybe there is such a case that I am not aware of. Maybe I was wrong in my assessment. But, with no proof showing that the taxpayer pays for the Union, then I cannot tell if what you are saying is truth or just another talking point.

Geez'

Do you not understand that the tax payers fund the schools? Do you not understand that when the government writes a pay check to a teacher it is paid for by tax payer money? Do you not understand that when the government writes that check for taxpayer funds, it deducts union dues, takes that tax payer money and sends it to the unions? How is that not tax payer money that is funding the unions?

One on the things Walker wants to do is to have the teachers write their own checks to the unions. This is what the unions are so upset about. If the teachers have the right to decide, without losing their job, the unions lose their power.

Have a good weekend Pietro.

Do you not understand that the tax payers fund the schools? Do you not understand that when the government writes a pay check to a teacher it is paid for by tax payer money? Do you not understand that when the government writes that check for taxpayer funds, it deducts union dues, takes that tax payer money and sends it to the unions? How is that not tax payer money that is funding the unions?

One on the things Walker wants to do is to have the teachers write their own checks to the unions. This is what the unions are so upset about. If the teachers have the right to decide, without losing their job, the unions lose their power.

OK, I see now. You and Bill, Fairfax, VA must be drinking the same water. That is a VERY FINE hair you are splitting, Bob.

This is how the process works.

1. The taxpayer gives money to the State in the form of taxes.

2. The State/municipality/city then turns around and PURCHASES services that the municipality needs.

3. The recipient of that Contract is a Union.

So this is where the disconnect is - you think that because the city/state/municipality pays the Union in a Contract for services that the municipality/city/state needs, that it is paying the Union fees.

I see. Got it.

The problem is this - the MEMBERS of the UNION pay the UNION fees, NOT the taxpayer. The taxpayer - through the proxy of the municipality - is purchasing the SERVICE OR GOOD that entity, in this case a Union, provides.

Purchasing a good or services is NOT the same thing as FUNDING, Bob.

and your other point - where the government writes a check for taxpayer funds, deducts union dues and sends that monet to the unions? Gotta show me some proof of that, Bob. Sounds to me you are conflating taxpayer funds, paycheques and deductions from a MEMBER'S paycheque for union dues.

One final point - the unions in WI have already conceded any gains of benefits. What they are fighting for is the right to continue to do collective bargaining - in other words, they want to be able to negotiate the best deal they can utilising collective bargaining as a method of that bargaining. They want to be ablr to bargain without having one hand tied behind their back. Gov. Walker wants to peg their bargaining of their wages to the CPI, which will be no more than 3-5%.

I know that no private company would accept those terms (I know I wouldn't). Why would you expect that the union would?

That's ALL this whole episode in WI is about.

I am still debunking your talking points, I see. Oh welll... I guess you cannot help yourself.

Bob,

Once the paycheck is in the hands of the Union Worker, having done their job, it is THE WORKER'S Money, NOT Taxpayer's money. Yes, the taxpayer paid for the services that the worker did, but once the pay goes out it is No Longer "Taxpayer' money, it is rightful wages and the worker can spend them how and where they like.

Debunked, and Badly again Bob. Go back to school and get a REAL Education before you start to try to pass your lies, obfuscations and misdirections past us!

In retrospect - and in fairness to Bob - I can see where all of this 'who is paying whom' can get a little confusing.

Bob's contention is that because the STATE is paying the TEACHERS directly, who are a part of the UNION, that the STATE is deducting Union fees from the Teacher's paycheque and sending that money to the Union. Since the teachers are State employees, then why is the Union getting the money for those teachers being employed.

Did I get that right, Bob?

If there was a private company that was doing the same job, then the state would pay the private company, and the private company would then disburse the monies to their employees.

THIS is where the contention is that the tax monies are being used to pay for Unions.

I think I understand your contention completely. Now.

Frankly, Bob, since I am not a lawyer, I cannot - and will not - answer that question without going over the fine points of how this 'arrangement' is situated between Union and municipality.

But I will find out.

That still doesn't change the fact that Gov. Walker is trying to cut out the ability ofthe Union to negotiate.

LouisJ:

You say "The only mandate TEA drinkers like is the mandate to spread hatred." But then you turn around and make a hate-filled comment like, "If Ensign supports a brothel in Nevada, he's obviously trying to change to being a mormon..."

Look in the mirror at who is spreading hatred. And you say that "Mr. Conservative and Miss Information were married..." Again, look in the mirror at who's misinformed.

Don't throw insults at a whole group of people, especially when you obviously don't even know what they believe.

Hypocrisy annoys me... a lot.

While I don't support Romney, I have to go with him on this one.

First, individual states should and do have the right to experiment with a health care system that requires every resident in their state to have insurance (I believe Hawaii also has one), but I have a problem when the federal government mandates it, because states can easily change it if they find it doesn't work. That's far more difficult at the national level.

Second - It provided a nice 'test case' to see if mandated care will really 'lower the cost curve', and the evidence in Massachusetts seems to be that it had the reverse effect. Too bad the evidence from Massachusetts was not considered while 'debating' (laugh) HCR.

Having been both a governor and a successful businessman, perhaps he would be a welcome change from the pro-union 'community organizer' we now have running the country, especially since Romney has actually 'created jobs' in the private sector and seems to know what it takes.

ROY WILSON-336103

See, your point about Romney may have been properly considered if you didn't resort to trying to reduce president Obama to just a "community organizer"... even though Obama was simply a lawyer and a senator before becoming president, he has created far more jobs that Romney would have in his lifetime - imagine if Romney had inherited the Great Bush Recession; he would instantly lower taxes (stimulus)... and the fat cats would take the lil money they make and run for the hills.

Remember, when Bush left office, we were losing 800k jobs per month.... so excuse me if the unemployment went higher than 8% that Obama promised - he under-estimated how much bush and his admin destroyed the economy. Since then, the economy has been recovering... but according to you, he gets no credit for all his done. Well, I'm sure you will never learn, being blind for your hatred for the current administration. Good luck with your hate though.... I feel sorry for ya.. and hope you get better soon.... and have a nice weekend.

And Bob, do YOU not understand that anytime a teacher or other public employee buys ANYTHING with money they EARN -- it's not a gift, Bob -- they are paying for it with taxpayer money? If they buy widgets from you, Bob, you are taking in taxpayer money. Which you then recycle through your own taxes.

Bob. Seriously. This is how an economy works. Unless you're suggesting that a public employee should work for free -- that's slavery, Bob, and last I heard it was abolished -- then there's no helping that they are being paid by the government. Or are you suggesting we don't need public employees? I guess your garbage doesn't stink, Bob. Maybe we'll just vote to let your keep your tax money and leave it where it lies. No police service for you, Bob, and no firefighting service, either, since you don't want to pay value for them. No using the national or the state parks, either. Or the interstate highways. Or public hospitals and clinics. No food inspection for you or your family. No schools for your children, grandchildren, or other family members. No driver's license for you, Bob, since you don't want to pay for regulation of the roads or the salaries of the state patrol -- they have a "union," too, Bobby. No vaccines for you. No benefit from government-sponsored research into cancer or communicable diseases. If you get sick, suck it up, Bob. No federal student loans for your family members. If you live near the ocean, no levies, and no coast guard services. If your little dinghy is adrift, we'll just let you keep drifting. If you're drowning offshore, then you drown. If you have an accident and are pinned in your car, you can stay there. No military protection for you, Bob. No libraries, no public holidays, and the sheriff won't come when you call. Like that guy down south, we'll let your house burn down.

And when it does, you'll holler, just like he did. You'll scream, "why didn't government save me from myself?"

But at least you won't have had to pay anybody's salary out of YOUR taxes. And don't be surprised if they don't spend any of THEIR money in your business, either.

And don't scream foul because nothing is just what you get when you don't want to pay.

If teachers or other public workers want to spend the money they earn on unions, how is that YOUR business, Bob, anymore than it's MY business whether you use prostitutes with the money you get when I buy a widget from you? After I've earned it -- speaking figuratively, as I'm NOT a public employee -- it's NOT your money anymore, Capiche?

Pietro:

Bob's contention is that because the STATE is paying the TEACHERS directly, who are a part of the UNION, that the STATE is deducting Union fees from the Teacher's paycheque and sending that money to the Union. Since the teachers are State employees, then why is the Union getting the money for those teachers being employed.

Sigh. Dues deduction is an item negotiated between the school district and the union. It's done for the convenience of everyone as an add-on for payroll purposes. Just like, if there was a garnishment, the school district would be forced to take money out of the employee's check to pay it to a creditor, except that in this case the school district has to AGREE to do it. The school district isn't paying its own money to the union, it is merely acting as a conduit to pass the employee's money to the union. Schools could, of course, hire a private payroll service to do the same thing, but it makes no difference in theory.

As B.Honest has also said, the main point is: Once the public employee has earned the money, it no longer belongs to Bob. Or does the fact that the government pays its employees somehow give Bob the right to tell them where they can spend it? Maybe Bob thinks it does. but he'd be wrong. And next time a public employee buys something from Bob, they'll tell him how to spend THAT money because it's also taxpayer money.

See how HE likes it.

Pietro,

You may be starting to get it.

I will be in the morning.

Have a rebuttal for you Anna too. You are way off.

To feisty and all the other liberals on here arguing with hard right conservatives, I'd like to try and save you a little time with a few nuggets of unpalatable truth.

1. When you tell them that Hitler destroyed the unions and banned abortion and had many positions in favour with the republican party they don't care.

2. Most of them probably don't much care about the holocaust either, after all, despite the republican party's supposed love of Israel republican voters have currently installed one jewish congressman in the house compared to the two dozen or so democrats have voted for. If they actually cared about minorities, they would hardly be suggesting the same 'show me your papers' tactics that hitler used on jews be used on latinas.

3. They aren't going to listen to any opinion that is at odds with their world view because they know that the republican model will give them an unfair advantage over minorities in race and religion, and they're essentially cheats.

4.They're never going to show outrage at a threat to the president's life because they hate him, and many of them secretly wish he would get shot, as they wrongly imagine it would make it easier for them to regain power.

5. The only reason the modern conservative shows so much outrage over hitler comparisons is because history has vilified him. the truth is many of them, being fascist themselves, actually agree with many of his positions.

6.Conservatives, even female ones, really don't like women. Hence all the woman killing legislation currenty coming out of the house.

7.None of this should be a terrible surprise. Hitler did not exist without support, and there are still many people who think that way, there are always those in any soceity who will betray their fellow citizens for some perceived advantage, after all, there were supporters at the pro Gaddaffi rally today, were there not?

In conclusion, any argument with these people will enrage you and change nothing. Anyone listening to Rush Limbaugh has long since abandoned reason.

The internet is where people come to show who they really are without consequence, and now that they have, all liberals need to do is resist their attempts to bring a great nation to it's knees for their own greedy, savage ends.

Very well put Kara, Thank You!

TEA Party = Tax Evading Americans Party....with a few right wing-nuts thrown in too!!

Pietro,

The big issue is that you see the union as an entity providing a service for the government as a private sector vendor would. The difference is that most private sectorvendor go through a competitive bid bid process. Their employyees work for them and are paid by them. The unions have no competition. The teachers (in this case) are not employees of the union - they are employees of the government. Unions are not paid for the teaching service.

The government writes the tax payer funded check to the teacher. The government reserves money from the teacher, collects all teacher dues, and sends the tax payer funded money to the unions. The teacher and the tax payer have no say, no voice. The teacher never sees one penny.

Walker simply wants to save the state millions of dollars spent on collecting the money for the dues, give the money to the teacher and let the teacher keep the money for itself, apply it to their other needs, or send their money to what ever political party they want.

Freedom - what's wrong with that. Union busting - yea, probably, they don't seem to survive when Americans have choice, when there is no coercion.

Tax payer? Who protects the tax payer from union abuse, the politician who was put into office by the unions? Grow up.

Tell you what Pietro, say Walker negotiates with the unions and says the tide has turned, the Republicans are in power and if the unions want to maintain their power, they need to pay the Republicans 91% of all political donations. The unions say OK.

You happy with that? You want your tax dollars being confiscated from the teachers with out their say to be given to the Republican puppet unions that give the money back to the Republicans to be elected?

Hardly - the left craps itself if Walker suggests teachers even have a choice to write their own check to the union.

Kara,

What an utterly ignorant post.

The NAZIs believed in national health care, abortion, gun control, were anti-church, anti-individual, on and on. Almost every social issue was the same as the progressives of today. Big government, anti-capitalism, belief in the state not the individual.

Gaddaffi? Give me a break.

Wasn't it Reagan that busted Gaddaffi with a few bombs in his tent. Wasn't it Bush that told Gaddaffi that he needed to give up the nuclear stuff unless he wanted to be drug out of a hole like Hussein? Obama is clueless.

BTW- So are you.

Bob, give it up, you are just plain WRONG about your SUPPOSITIONS about Union dues being taxpayer monies. Once it is allocated to the TEACHER or WORKER it is NO LONGER TAXPAYER MONEY, it belongs to THE WORKER, who is paying their Union Dues. The Unions do NOT work for the Government, the WORKERS do that, the Unions work for the WORKER. The Unions give the political donations to those that the WORKERS decide, through their votes. You are OBVIOUSLY IGNORANT on the entire procedure, so give it up and admit that you know NOTHING on the subject other than what you have been told to post by misinformed, or lying, misanthropes on the so called right. This is NOT about saving the workers money from the unions, it is about removing protections for the workers that the Unions have provided and getting rid of the Democratic strength of the workers.

Get real and stop spouting your lies and disinformation, no one is buying it! AND you totally have the Nazis mixed up with someone else, they were some of the biggest capitalists around, fascist to the core and totally controlled by the War Machine Corporations and Banks of the time. Go back to school, a real school, and actually study these subjects instead of listening to Limbaugh, Beck and Palin, they ALL had massive troubles in school, Limbaugh was a HS Dropout and Drug addict, Palin spent over 4 years getting her 2 yr degree because she kept flunking classes. Come back when you have FACTS, not twisted, mixed up, biased opinions!

Bhonest - oh how well you fit right in with what kara posted. See you have been imbiding fiesties Hate-r-aide again. How sad for you and how well you wear siasd like a badge of honor. Perhaps you need to expand your education beyond highscool and read up on Germany from 1918 to 1939. Even watching the history channel would help.

Kara, that was about as well rounded point I have seen on this board. But don't fret over the dialogue... we're well aware of their narrow-minded world view and the fact they are zombies... I don't get upset about anything, much less some 12 year old behind a keyboard. I very much enjoy poking my stick at them though, they provide entertainment to an otherwise entertainless day at work. Speaking of which, this is Saturday... I'm out.

:^/)

“Meticulous attention,” the president insisted in 1937, “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.”

The great progressive FDR said the above - Public unions are unthinkable and intolerable.

How obtuse can you guys be.

Want to argue, argue with FDR. I don't come here to convince the deluded liberals, I come here for any independents that interested. I think my comments supported FDR, Shanker quotes etc. more than stands on its own.

With regards to the Nazi, the were anything but believers in free enterprise, free market capitalism. They believed in state cronyism and their relationship with Krupp and Rheinmetall where exactly the same as Obama's with GE.

Asinine to suggest they were the "biggest capitalist around."

The NAZI (National Socialist German Workers Party) were for national health care, were anti-capitalism, believed in ending class distinction, believed in gun control, believed in abortion, believed in heavily taxing inheritance, were anti-church (including nativity scenes too), pushed for organic food control - that nutrition is not a private matter, Himmler was a certified animal rights activist, they were anti-smoking, ........

To any independents out there, does the above sound like Obama's agenda, or the Tea Party?

Also for any independents - read "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. It's all perfectly laid out.

bob-1805084, it's kinda funny because I brought Hitler into this thread's conversation... my intention was to actually show how much Obama was not like Hitler... but the quotation I added probably conveyed the wrong impression since it likens Walker to Hitler... for that I apologize - to everyone.

One thing though is that your last post lists a bunch of stuff Hitler did and then you compared it to the Obama administration to support your point.. first off, from those you listed... provide your fact that Obama is anti-capitalism or believed in ending class distinction? a lot of the things you listed, we all believe in to a certain extent for each individual, it is to their own degree.

If I want to be like you, I will list a bunch of things that are more scribed to the GOP and say... "see, the GOP are more like Hitler"...but the difference in both of us is that I know it's a lie and my intentions would just to slander the GOP. I wont stoop that low and I think you shouldn't do the same either... I've read some of your post in the past and know that you are smarter than that. If some liberals on here erk you soo much, you shouldnt stoop to their level. It's the best way to reach those independents that you are trying to reach. Alrighty, hope you look at this post from its positive aspects (glass half full).

Bob, bob, bob, where do I start?

“With regards to the Nazi, the were anything but believers in free enterprise, free market capitalism. They believed in state cronyism and their relationship with Krupp and Rheinmetall where exactly the same as Obama's with GE.

Asinine to suggest they were the "biggest capitalist around."

Yet somehow Volkswagen managed to get its start as a private company as Nazism arose. Mercedes built the cars and trucks that carried the Third Reich without being nationalized. Siemens Corporation contracted to build the ovens at Auschwitz. Auto Union managed to survive as a privately held company, to be renamed Audi at a later date.

No less a Fascist than Benito Mussolini said "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."

As far as state cronyism is concerned you’ll do a lot better connecting Scott Walker with the Koch brothers, Dick Cheney and the corporate lobbyists who wrote the Bush Administration’s energy policy in secret, and anonymous funding of the Republican Party by the US Chamber of Commerce.

“The NAZI (National Socialist German Workers Party)”

Oh, WORD GAMES!! Sorry, “Socialist” was just a word in their name, with as much application as saying Republicans must be Communists just like the People’s Republic of China. Socialists were actively rounded up and killed or sent to the concentration camps.

“ were for national health care,”

Germany had national health care since 1871…Hitler had nothing to do with it.

“ were anti-capitalism,”

Addressed above. Simply a lie.

“ believed in ending class distinction,”

No, he believed that his crazy focus on the “Aryan race” transcended class distinction, an entirely different thing.

“ believed in gun control,”

Like every totalitarian regime.

“ believed in abortion,”

For purposes of “racial hygiene”, yet another aspect of their Social Darwinist tendencies

“ believed in heavily taxing inheritance,”

And freely granted exemptions for favored individuals…another expression of their crony capitalism.

“ were anti-church (including nativity scenes too),”

That’s just wrong.

But all that I heard had the effect of arousing the strongest antagonism in me. Everything was disparaged--the nation, because it was held to be an invention of the 'capitalist' class (how often I had to listen to that phrase!); the Fatherland, because it was held to be an instrument in the hands of the bourgeoisie for the exploitation of' the working masses; the authority of the law, because that was a means of holding down the proletariat; religion, as a means of doping the people, so as to exploit them afterwards; morality, as a badge of stupid and sheepish docility. There was nothing that they did not drag in the mud.

- Adolf Hitler, on listening to Social Democrats, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2

The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means the acknowledgment of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism is hostile to religion is a lie.

- Adolf Hitler, speech to members of the Nazi Party on the Nazi-Vatican Concordant, July 22, 1933

“ pushed for organic food control - that nutrition is not a private matter, Himmler was a certified animal rights activist, they were anti-smoking, ........”

Now you’re just grasping at straws.

“To any independents out there, does the above sound like Obama's agenda, or the Tea Party?”

Asked and answered.

“Also for any independents - read "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. It's all perfectly laid out.”

There’s your basic problem. Jonah Goldberg is a hack and a liar who’s been disproven extensively. http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/01/liberal-fascism-response.html

Tunde,

Sorry, I forgot about this thread till Feisty re-posted John's reply on another thread.

My response was to Kara. I don't like the Hitler / Nazis stuff and do not throw it out, but I do respond to those that do by pointing out the similarity of the social agendas.

I could have gone on too. Hitler and Obama are both great orators, charismatic politicians with no real life experience, ideologues, narcissists, ....... but you are right, it doesn't matter that Hitler was born in Austria, a lot closer to Germany than Hawaii is to mainland America. It is un-necessary and helps nothing.

With regard to Obama being anti-capitalism - look what he has done to the energy industry. Look at the government controls he has put on everything. Obama is big government all the way, not free-market capitalism.

Thanks for your comments, Tunde.

Bev:

Very true it also gives them control over Medicaid as well. I see another AZ on the horizon here.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

Bev:

Very true it also gives them control over Medicaid as well. I see another AZ on the horizon here.

Good morning

That is a very astute observation; Navy, so do I.

Don't forget Florida: Gov.Scott’s radical budget proposal would also privatize large areas of state services, including juvenile justice facilities, Medicaid, and some hospitals.

Medicaid is a mess already, juvenile facilities are a joke and some of those hospitals here in florida are so mis-managed it's not even funny and guess what until now no one has bothered to look at them. If Scott does not improve Florida he will be voted out..Trust he is being watched.

here is a LoL for you . about 15 years ago Tennessee had a go with judges owning probation services. pretty soon " jay walking " became a supervised probation offense ..... after that was found to be absurd . those same judges just ran for re-election to different positions . i am watching scott as well i moved to fla . to escape some of the lunacy. it appers i might as well just stayed at home

IR:

Nice way to end the week. The GOP/TP is looking for scape goats to cover their actions and they seem to think the Unions are the weakest link to go after. They give tax cuts to corporations and the rich artificially driving up their deficit and then claim they need to make DRACONIAN spending cuts on the backs of the Middle Class. This is the agenda of the Koch Brothers, Karl Rove's Group(s) and the US Chamber of Commerce along with a bevy of other right wing "Special Interest Groups".

Walker has backed himself into a corner and he cannot back down now, even though his GOP/TP country men have said he is overreaching on the Collective Bargaining issue. He created his own demise.

Absolutely excellent post, IR - thanks! :o)

Is this President spineless?

I watched Donny Deutch yesterday defend the President's leadership style as being results orientated. This justified the way he sits on the sidelines until necessary and then he swoops in it the end to complete the deal (and claim the credit). The examples of this are healthcare, Egypt and now what is occurring in Wisconsin.

But what has happened on the issue of the deficit, debt and taxes? He claims the Democratic position that the budget cannot be balanced solely through spending cuts. Therefore, at some point revenues (taxes) must be raised to close the gap. At the end of last year President Obama was given a perfect opportunity to raise revenue and close the deficit. He did not even have to propose legislation, just allow the current rates to expire. He has already reversed on campaign promises, the individual mandate being the most obvious, so breaking his tax promise would not have been the first big reversal. The raising of these tax rates would also align with his political convictions of wealth redistribution ... "We have to spread the wealth around". So why did he cut a deal to maintain the Bush tax rates? He disagrees with them politically,they would raise revenue for social needs and investments in education and energy and would lower the debt over the next 10 years.

The conclusion I have reached is that he did it for political expediency as it is in effect another 1T stimulus to the economy. I believe he concluded that his re-election chances would be improved by maintaining these tax rates. He ditched his principles for political gain. He did this at a time that we are borrowing 40 cents for every dollar we spend. Why did he not show political courage, tell the country that we could not afford these tax rates and the time to tighten our belt had come?

Because he is spineless.

Morning Nash glad to see you Ace. You know what the Mountain Folk say. A Day without Nashville is like a day without Sunshine. Hope all is well other side of the mountain.

Now there you go this morning Alan bringing all this spineless talk around. Instead of looking at that old jar as half empty why don't we look at it as half full. He made a deal. We needed additional stimulus to keep the ecomomy going forward and that was the only way he was going to get it. If the outcome benefits all in the short term and the economy recovers maybe we will see increased revenues in the future. I see nothing spineless in setting down at the table and making the best deal you can to beneifit the most folks that you can.

well,

Alan, NJ, as much as I am usually a knee jerk Obama defender, I see the truth in your criticism here. We can not afford the continuation of the Bush tax cuts much longer (certainly not for the wealthiest.)
President Obama did not follow the recommendations of his own deficit reduction board.

I do think the President is a master politician, however, and he is manuvering to get leverage to use in his second term to get what he wants. Obama is a long-vision kind of guy, in my book (OK, maybe I am slipping back into Obama defense mode here), and I believe he will get results that will surprise you before he's done. (Who would have thought we'd see the repeal of DADT, a major bill on Healthcare reform passed, the resurgance of Detroit, increased oversight of Wall Street, and withdrawl of troops from Iraq, etc. all in two years of his election?)

Excellent, IR.

It puzzles me why Americans have allowed themselves to be used as pawns in a game of chess, why we no longer think of each other as people and not political enemies, why one party demonizes certain sectors of workers, why Limbaugh and his ilk proudly declare fire fighters and police officers heroes after 9/11 and ten years later refer to them as "bottom feeders and freeloaders". My conclusion is that too many no longer respect others, too many no longer agree to disagree and do so with respect, too many no longer accept that We the People are in this together, instead too many see it as "my way or the highway". Too many fail to realize that compromise is the foundation of the U.S. of America, compromise is the very essence of democracy.

All is well IR . . . a little windy . . . but well . . . thanks for the kind words . . . you're a keeper! :o)

Alan:

Good to see you . . . don't agree with your comment . . . but that's no surprise, right? :o)

The thing that strikes me is that many of the folks who want to criticize the President's "spine" often don't get real specific about what there actually is that the President can do. I mean, unrest in a foreign country does not really bend to the President's words.

And the deficit and the budget are ultimately the purview of the Congress, which is a non-serious and corrupt body set up to perform political theater. "Spine" is not the issue . . . corporate money used to mislead the public and influence the process more than our votes is the problem.

But it is convenient to have a nice one-man scapegoat for everything no doubt.

Independent Redneck Va.

I have to agree with Nashville_fan. Hi Nash it's always good to read your optimistic posts.

Folks the Schoolteacher down the street isn’t my “enemy” Having woke up beside one for 33 years that kind of relationship would have made my life pretty miserable.

IR my experience is the same. My mother taught school and was most definitely not a menace to society. In fact, I can remember her taking some of me and sisters & brother prized possessions giving them to less fortunate children because she thought we weren't using them. I also remember being in the stores and other neighborhood functions where little children & their parents ran up to her hugging her.

My uncle was a fire chief who came home as a fire fighter suffering from many burns.

In regards, to Planned Parenthood they want to commit abortion on society. I can't imagine why the right wing would ignore the positive things the Planned Parenthood did such as Birth Control, Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), general health care.

Independent Redneck Va.

Excellent Post IR,

Last Night on HBO, Thurgood was on, a well play version of the life of justice Thurgood Marshall. Played by Lawrence Fishburne.

The Event you mention in your opening of your post would have NEVER been Possible if Not for Thrugood Marshall some 25years earlier when he first challenges Separate But equal in local State courts.

I did not realise he began the fight for school disegration in late 30s and though the 40s arguing cases in Texas, south Carolina, and not just the south, in Baltimore as well.
One of his first cases was a cases against the school of Baltimore, in this he augured that it was unconstitutional to pay black teachers 40% less than whites as well as black teachers had to clean and scrub floors in the class rooms. All men are equal under law. HE won. His Mother was a school teacher. I did not know that.

He also fought a case against the Us Army and Douglas MacArthur, yes our great American hero refused to integrate his troops in the Korean theatre of war. he was the last to be made to integrate his forces some 4 years after president Truman ordered the full integration of the armed forces.
I did not know that.
Once he used the flaws in the Jim crow laws as they pertained to the constitution, he said that Brown verses Board of education was the end of the jurnoey. states tried to argue that all they needed was time to achieve seperate but equal, but the winning point, was that black children were suffering sociological trauma from seperate but equal and that Now was the time, not 2 years later. to save the children from further trauma and it was unconstitutional Under the law, as all men are Equal under law. he showed that black children hated them selved by being singled out and kept seperate from whites children, as if they were bad. He won. It took from 1954 to 1963, (9 years) when the University Of MS finally admitted a black student.

So as we see this wild west show being played out on Wisconsin lets not forget where we have come from. Teaching children should not be where our conflict is at but How do serve our children the best way we can. Instead of taking away from our future we must sacrifice for the future.

I'm sure if Justice Marshall were here (he would be 103 years old) he would argue Wisconsin should not have singled out only certain employees, that if some workers were going to looses bargaining right than they all should. all men are equal under law. you can't pass laws that single out only certain people, Jim Crow laws. Now i'm not saying Governor was a racist or any thing like that but if hope you see where I'm going. If scott walkers want to take away barganing rights, then he must do it to all state employees not Just some.

This was must see TV and everybody need to watch this.
as it was ending i got even more enraged at Clarence Thomas, and the Goof that put him there to replace a truly great man.

Obama spineless? Who knows. Obama sure came after Wisconsin's governor, calling his actions an "assault" on the unions.

Obama clueless? Most definitely!

@Nash

I accept spineless was a bit strong. Mainly used to evoke a response. However, I stand by the premise. I disagree with your analysis that this was the congress. On this issue nobody had to do anything. President did not have propose legislation, congress did not have to find the votes. In fact if we are to believe reports, the President removed his own party from the negotiations. Now, because of this feckless deal we are each a further $2,500 in debt. This is what happened in state and local government. They used one time deals in the hope that the future would turn out better. We are 10% of our income to the debt every year for the foreseeable future. Imagine that you ear $50,000 a year, you already have a mortgage of $20,000, but instead of paying down you're adding $5,000 more a year, so in 10 years you'll actually owe $70,000. That is what we are doing as a country. An opportunity presented itself last year to change this trajectory but it was ignored. There was no leadership.

@Amy..thanks. I hope you're right.

Great post, IR. I never though I'd be quoting Richard Nixon, but he often referred to the "silent majority." I'm hoping that applies here--in these difficult economic times, with families stretched working more than 1 job to make a living, I think day-to-day life takes so much energy that the silent majority is too busy to speak up. At least I hope that is what it is.

P.S. I heard a rumor that the Dew Drop is featuring a Motown revue this weekend--can you confirm?

Great comment Steeler Fan . . . and so true . . . hope you have a great weekend!

P.S. Alan, what I find curious is that you blame the President for going along with the tax cuts, yet you continue to vote for those who advocate we keep them forever. Weird.

Joanna, talk about spineless,

lets look back in history,

The only reason kennedy interviened in the civil rights movement was because it was plastered on the news every night. and bobby was being a pain in his ass to do something, and public opinion was against him. he did not do that because he was this great guy on the side of blacks. it was politics

While Eisenhower was forcing integration in Arkansas, he wimped out in MS, Alabama and Georgia, and he left that up to the next president. what a spinless man.

President Eisenhower also did not force his commanders to integrate the armed forces as Truman ordered 4 years earlier.

Obama spineless that your opinion, and your welcome to is as strange as it is.

I don't vote Republican. In fact I would say that my favorite Senators would be Warner, Webb and Fiengold. I blame the President in this instance because he missed an opportunity and discarded his principles in the process. I don't really care about his principles as he's a politician so I expect this. However, I do believe in spending less than revenue. I was appalled by Bush and his two unfunded wars, and the concept of Medicare-D as way of buying the senior vote. All examples of politicians using our money to buy our votes. This is why I am pleasantly surprised by Chris Christie.

Thank you Alan without the attempt to stir things up your position is much clearer. Don’t agree with it but at least me and everybody else can talk about it. That’s what we're here for I think.

Joanna You and I had the conversation about my Dear Old Redneck Daddy teaching me that life was to short to dance with ugly partners several months ago. You ain’t got no prettier in the interim so don’t expect a cha-cha today.

Alan. Spineless? Really? President Obama took a great deal of heat from progressives for negotiating the tax cut compromise. The GOP declared they would block every other piece of legislation unless they got their "unfunded" tax cuts for the richest 2%; therefore, they held 98% of Americans hostage. The way I see it is the GOP was spineless for expending its energy defending tax cuts for 2% of the population who needed NO economic stimulus and whose wealth grows daily. No, President Obama is not spineless, far from it but he is very smart. In compromising on the tax cuts, look at everything that was passed in the Lame Duck.

President Obama and democrats succeeded in passing and signing into law more major legislation than had been accomplished since LBJ and did it in less than 2 years. He has kept 85% of his promises; the others he is working on or have been blocked by legislators. He brought the economy back from the brink of depression, saved the American auto industry, saved and created jobs, etc. No, spineless is a GOPTP talking point used only to deflect the accomplishments of President Obama into a negative campaign slogan.

Steeler Got old Drive -By talking to Gladys, Smokey and Stevie even as we speak. Shucks I heard this morning that Aretha is fixing to start performing again but I think this week end would be a little soon but She's got her own section in the Juke Box...................Hey to you to Bev and thank you for the kind words this morning you know I always look forward to you stopping by

I accept spineless was a bit strong. Mainly used to evoke a response. However, I stand by the premise. I disagree with your analysis that this was the congress. On this issue nobody had to do anything. President did not have propose legislation, congress did not have to find the votes. In fact if we are to believe reports, the President removed his own party from the negotiations. Now, because of this feckless deal we are each a further $2,500 in debt. This is what happened in state and local government.

Alan, NJ: Spineless? No, not by a long shot. SHREWD? Absolutely.

Look, Alan, you are falling for the oldest okie-dokie trick in the book - misdirection. You want to blame the President for not letting the Bush tax cuts expire. OK, fine, that is your perogative. But here is how I saw the deal being played out:

1. The Republicans were not going to budge on the Bush Tax Cuts. The President knew this. The Democratic Blue Dogs in Congress at the time were NOT going to support the Bush tax cuts being ended either. So the President has no support from his party and no support from the Republicans. What is the best move? Take the deal. Extend the tax cuts for 2 years.

The beauty of this move is that the President made it LOOK like he was weak when he actually traded for a BETTER hand. Now the Republicans are slapping each other on the back saying that they 'GOT HIM', but did they really? We will still have to deal with this issue in 2012, and with the House Republicans/Tea Party overreaching as they were EXPECTED to do, does that deal look so bad?

2. You have to really watch this President to see what he is up to. Time and time again, we see him triumph with things that seemed to be 'dead'.

A. Remember Hillary Clinton's 'Shame on you, Barack Obama' rant? While she was ranting, the President was ripping off 12 primary wins. When she looked up, he had the nomination. She looked at her people and said, 'what happened?'

B. Remember the Health Care Bill. It was DOA after Sen. Snake-in-the-Grassley put in all of that toxic legislation in it. The Republicans were united against the HCR bill. The President came out, and in a matterof 1 week, humiliated the Republicans publically and ended up passing the HCR bill into law. The Republicans and most right-wingers, at the time, looked at each other and asked: 'what just happened here?'

C. Remember the Lame Duck 111th Congress. The Republicans had DADT bottled up in the Senate. Somehow, the bill made it through and onto the President's desk, and DADT was repealed. The hard-liners were looking at each other saying, 'what the HELL just happened?'

Do you get my drift, Alan?

Those are just 3 of the MANY legislative achievements that this 'spineless' President has accomplished with unprecedented obstruction and hinderance.

The Bush Tax Cuts are going to be addressed in one way or another within the next 2 years. Your 'assessment' of the situation is premature because the game isn't over yet. Like any good poker player, you may lose a hand or two, but you are in for the long haul.

Alan:

What magic words could President Obama say or magic action could he take to make the crooks in Congress raise their own (and their billionaire donors) taxes?

Do tell.

Laurence Fishburne put on a great performance last night. I know it had to be difficult to do that solo for so long. Hats off to Mr. Fishburne.

@Pietro So your position is that it was shrewd political move to set up a 2012 election where one of the issues will be whether tax rates go up? Let me guess that by that time it will be a race to the bottom in that the two candidates will be trying to buy our votes with our (borrowed) money again. So from a political aspect I do not think it was a good move. From a fiscal point of view I am appalled, and the more I see the debt we are piling up the more appalled I become. BTW I think that fiscal issues totally outweigh social issues so if you are saying it was a quid pro quo for DADT then I still think it was a bad deal. DADT will be irrelevant when a debt crisis hits.

@Nash "What magic words could President Obama say"..."I will veto any bill attempting to restore the Bush tax rates".

Jeff: Obama spineless that your opinion, and your welcome to is as strange as it is.

I never said Obama was spineless. Read what I wrote again. Obama isn't spineless, especially for things he thinks are important, like the cash cows for the Democrats, ie, the unions. Obama gets pretty agitated when someone messes with his unions.

Now if we can get Obama just as focused on deficit reduction as he is on preserving the unions, we might have something the benefits the country.

Pietro:

Great post!

Alan:

Who do you think can hold out longer: the unemployed or the rich? If you recall, the same Republicans who say we can't afford to extend unemployment benefits use a different math when justifying the tax cuts for themsleves and their friends.

Your "solution" is great if your objective is to be "right" and "win" political fights. Not so good if you are trying to govern and actually help the folks at the bottom whose wages are stagnant (if they can find a job at all), have no health insurance or access to a doctor, and are having their home foreclosed.

The President did what was best for the most vulnerable in our society, a group that is rarely considered since they can't afford to buy votes in Congress or ads on cable.

@Nash

I believe the extension for unemployment rights was being held up because there were no offsets. Again, leadership would be offering to find those offsets. How about the F35 engine for one? This is the problem with the current Senate Democrats. They are going to look foolish when they can't agree to a 2B cut in federal spending per week. In a budget of1.35T Democrats cannot find anything to cut. It's ridiculous. (Apart heating assistance for the poor). Politically they are toast.

Alan:

What I can't figure out is why you completely absolve the Republican Party and their leaders of any responsibility to lead?

@Pietro So your position is that it was shrewd political move to set up a 2012 election where one of the issues will be whether tax rates go up? Let me guess that by that time it will be a race to the bottom in that the two candidates will be trying to buy our votes with our (borrowed) money again. So from a political aspect I do not think it was a good move. From a fiscal point of view I am appalled, and the more I see the debt we are piling up the more appalled I become. BTW I think that fiscal issues totally outweigh social issues so if you are saying it was a quid pro quo for DADT then I still think it was a bad deal. DADT will be irrelevant when a debt crisis hits.

Alan, NJ - I understand your frustration with the budgets and the deficits. However, you are expecting the President to 'fix' all of the financial ills that not only took 30 years to become evident, but are protected and defended by the Republicans, Tea Party and some of his own Democratic Party (Blue Dogs)!!

So the President, in your mind missed an opportunity to 'fix' the budget issues? With WHAT support? How was that going to happen?

Yes, I realise that many of the decisions that are made are through a political prizm. That is the unfortunate circumstance of being the President of the United States. President OBama has made peace with that; how come you cannot?

This President jsut traded a really crappy hand for a strong hand in 2012. Will 1 year REALLY make THAT much of a difference when we have been crapping in our hands for the past 30 years? Will 1 year REALLY matter in the grander scheme of things when the problem can be addressed and FINALLY solved when the political climate has changed?

You, Alan, are expressing the very thing that is KILLING our society - I call it 'Iwantitnow-itis'. What this President has shown is that he as PATIENT and he is willing to let the 'noisy' people have their say while he quietly - and definitively - solves the problem.

I used the Health care Reform and DADT as examples on how this man works. I was NOT making commentary on 'social issues'.

It looks like you've missed it again, Alan.

Let's reboot/restart and watch CLOSELY what the President does.

One last thing - there is a debate going on about high-speed rail right now, and as a part of the Stimulus, there was many allocated to build the foundation for that high-speed rail.

The money was offered to the states and many have rejected that money. What the President has done - quietly, in the background - has laid the foundation for us to be less dependent on foreign oil. When gas prices rocket to $6.00/gallon, there is going to be a loud clamoring for public transportation and alternatives to driving.

When the inevitable happens, those Governors that turned down the money for high-speed rail are going to look like real idiots - kinda like Gov. Walker looks right now - and people are going to want to know WHY the money was 'given away' when t could have been used for jobs and to help the state economy.

You heard it here first.

Pietro and Nashville Fan,

Good spirited and thoughtful responses from two of my favorite posters. However, I have to agree with Alan, NJ.

Coming from a purely partisan outlook, it was not a good political move for Obama to extend the tax cuts because he will have to face the calls for another extension in the middle of his campaign for re-election. I he couldn't nix the cuts after the 2010 losses there is no way he can "Politically" nix them during the campaign. Swift boat ads will abound - Evil sounding announcers will shout. "He is going to raise your taxes!" Ominous music will play over a montage of shots of Obama frowning.

Looking at things fiscally, billions of dollars were given away in the extensions. Not only will that money not be coming in as revenue but it is going towards the deficit. Double whammy.

I agree, Obama has won some issues and has done a lot against the status quo loving politicians in his party and the blatant opposition of the GOP. However, I don't want him to become part of the status quo Beltway boys.

As I think we can all agree appropriate cuts need to be made to defense, even to some redundant or non functioning discretionary spending programs; but the deficit can't be balanced on cuts alone. As it is with state governments you can't have you cake and eat it too. Government services, protections and freedoms are not free. Sorry to say it but revenues have to increase, corporate taxes and personal income taxes have to go up. There is no way around it.

Obama made a statement that MSNBC was playing last night, he said - "I would rather be an exceptional one term president vs. a mediocre two term president.

Here is one progressive looking for his exceptionalism.

@Nash. I don't absolve them. When they propose their cuts there had better be plenty at the DOD. In the case of the tax deal last year they stood by their principles of lower taxes. I found it fiscally irresponsible at the time and supported the expiration of all the Bush rates. My point was they fought for their principals. The President went against his.

@Pietro. I understand that things are not going change overnight, however, last year was opportunity missed to change the trajectory. His proposed budget was also very disappointing. On the high-speed rail, I really don't understand the rational. We are a suburban society unlike China and France. Even if we had rail links the local infrastructure would not support its use (unless you propose to spend more to upgrade the local train systems which would not be operationally profitable). Also, there is only one high-speed rail link I know that earns a profit, Paris to Lyon. Trains also have a single point of failure. In competition with airlines the airlines are heavily taxed and still are making a profit (currently).

Yellowdog:

I do understand what you and Alan are saying . . . but I have grown weary of the laser focus on President Obama and his spine . . . lol . . . President Obama is dealing with the reality of the situation . . . and I concede it is not pretty.

I guess to close it all out this is my over riding point: this really doesn't have a thing to do with President Obama. It has to do with a broken and corrupt political process that has "the people" always negotiating at a disadvantage.

Most corporations operating in the U.S. pay ZERO taxes, so if they kick in a penny it will be a start. Everyone is okay with huge subsidies for corporations and private businesses (NFL stadums on the public dime anyone?), but if a teacher gets a cost of living increase, its time to destroy the union.

We are all being played. And the Republican Party and their billionaire sponsors have us all analyzing why the President wears mom jeans and doesn't "talk tougher" about the Middle East.

A nation full of suckers is what we are.

P.S. Alan: How is standing by principles that don't work a virtue? That is a big part of the problem.

JAS1 - Obama gets pretty agitated when someone messes with his unions.

Actually, Obama is keeping strangely silent on what is going on in Wisconsin and the rust belt. Being that issues in Wisconsin and Indiana and Ohio et all will play highly in his re-election campaign I can't figure it out.

Do I expect him to rally at the Madison capital, no? How about a show of support for teacher's and union workers in a speech about job creation. A big part of the stimulus goals were in saving jobs was it not? Here is an opportunity to spread that message.

@Nashville

I am proud to say Obama is my President. He is doing his job or trying to while the GOP puts up roadblocks. Agree wholeheartedly about misplaced focus from the voters maybe even from me time to time. :}

@Nash If he wasn't president there wouldn't be a laser focus. Would you prefer that?

GM will not pay taxes on their 4BN profit. One of the ways not to pay taxes is to right off profits as R&D. This had huge support from progressives last year. Further, although the super-rich benefit from dividends so does every retirement fund including teachers pensions. I of the issues facing the states right now is that their investments are not returning 8%. So if you want to tax corporations more you'll reduce public sector pension funds....nice catch 22.

I said they stood by their principles I didn't say I thought it was virtuous.

Alan,

I don't want to tax corporations more, I want them to pay any taxes at all.

Also too, if the objective is to raise revenue, why not get it from those who have profited from the current system, instead of those who are paying rising costs with decreasing wages?

What's more logical?

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes

(Google the title if the link doesn't work.)

Coming from a purely partisan outlook, it was not a good political move for Obama to extend the tax cuts because he will have to face the calls for another extension in the middle of his campaign for re-election. I he couldn't nix the cuts after the 2010 losses there is no way he can "Politically" nix them during the campaign. Swift boat ads will abound - Evil sounding announcers will shout. "He is going to raise your taxes!" Ominous music will play over a montage of shots of Obama frowning.

Yellowdog - I disagree. President Obama had a REALLY crappy hand (like having 5 different cards in Deuces Wild Poker Game and no deuces) with the Bush Tax Cuts. Politically, this was a brillant move because, o nthe draw, he drew 5 NEW cards (to elaborate on my poker analogy). ANY new cards were better than what he was holding, so that was the smart move to make.

NOW the President has a better hand - and he has drawn a couple of deuces (and we are playing Deuces Wild). That makes it easier to either 1) bluff and take the pot, or 2) actually win the pot outright with the 2 deuces he is holding. Metaphorically speaking, the deuces the President has is the GOP/TP overreaching (and we are seeing that play out) and the other deuce is the improving economy.

So does giving up $700 Billion for 2 years - that he can recoup when he goes all-in and wins the pot - worth the risk? With the cards the President has, absolutely.

Looking at things fiscally, billions of dollars were given away in the extensions. Not only will that money not be coming in as revenue but it is going towards the deficit. Double whammy.

Let's face it - the President wasn't going to win on that issue anyway. He knew that. So why not cast off the bad hand and get a new one? Besides - with the deficits building over 30 years, what is another 18 months? That is like a blink of an eye in the grander scheme of things.

I agree, Obama has won some issues and has done a lot against the status quo loving politicians in his party and the blatant opposition of the GOP. However, I don't want him to become part of the status quo Beltway boys.

You have to remember that this man is doingthis with NO SUPPORT. He has no support from the GOP, the Tea Party, and many of his OWN Party. Have you seen the DNC ANYWHERE lately? Where the HELL are they? They should be in the face of the media touting what 'their guy' is doing in the face of incredible adversity.

Again - the President, I believe, understands the game, and he is playin it on his own terms - and winning. The 'Beltway boy' are hating him because they cannot defeat him - he has out thought, outplayed and out manouvered them at EVERY turn and it is driving them crazy (hence the crazy talk about being a Muslim and having no Birth Certificate).

As I think we can all agree appropriate cuts need to be made to defense, even to some redundant or non functioning discretionary spending programs; but the deficit can't be balanced on cuts alone. As it is with state governments you can't have you cake and eat it too. Government services, protections and freedoms are not free. Sorry to say it but revenues have to increase, corporate taxes and personal income taxes have to go up. There is no way around it.

I agree with you - revenues HAVE to increase before we can even attempt to attack the deficit. However, The President is doing this all by himself with NO Support (except from the electorate, and that support is tenuous at best). With The GOP/TP holding the purse strings, and there being no mood for tax increases, he has to bide his time. It will hurt long enough until the electorate is begging for some relief, and at that point, he will ask the electorate to put pressure on their elected officials to bring about some change. UNtil then, we will creep along like we have been.

@Pietro. I understand that things are not going change overnight, however, last year was opportunity missed to change the trajectory. His proposed budget was also very disappointing. On the high-speed rail, I really don't understand the rational. We are a suburban society unlike China and France. Even if we had rail links the local infrastructure would not support its use (unless you propose to spend more to upgrade the local train systems which would not be operationally profitable). Also, there is only one high-speed rail link I know that earns a profit, Paris to Lyon. Trains also have a single point of failure. In competition with airlines the airlines are heavily taxed and still are making a profit (currently).

Alan - I disagree. Last year was NOT an opportunity - it was a trap that was set to steal the political capital that the President had built up in the Lame Duck Session. It was like the show Deal or No deal - you make the decision to take what is given you and you have a crappy deal, or you WAIT a bit and THEN make your deal. You have to see what is before you before you start jumping at what LOOKS like a good deal.

As far as high-speed rail is concerned - Yes, it is true that we are more surburban and rural than not as a country. However, like the railroads in the 1860's where everyone wanted to build a town close to it because of the economic prospects that rail brought to that town, we have the same situation.

Rural towns are struggling to survive because they usually have one or two employers that support that town. For example, when DHL pulled out of Ohio a few years ago, the counties that DHL supported are now looking at OFFICIAL unemployment rates of 19 and 22%. There has been NOTHING to replace the money that DHL was bringing to those counties, and those counties are overwhelmingly conservative and vote Republican.

Here was a GOLDEN opportunity to bring some much needed revenue to a struggling county, and the Governor said NO. What will happen is that those counties will continue to struggle. Those counties are also paying the HIGHEST price for gasoline, so the people are actually being kicked when they are down.

What if they had an alternative? What if they were able to take the train into the 'big city' to work?

That would be a game changer, wouldn't it?

The common mantra that i hear all the time about high-speed rail is that it is not cost effective and no one will ride it. Well, high-speed rail provides transportaion between taking an airplane and driving a car. When I am in Europe, I take the train most of the time because it is fast and efficient. I will only fly if the train trip is over 5 hours or if I am pressed for time. The cost of flying in Europe is on par with the cost of trains, and yes, I know that many are heavily subsidized.

The bottom line, Alan, is that this give the travelling public some choices, and with choices, business decision are made. When business decisions are made, money flows... you get the drift.

America is changing because it HAS to. It is being left behind in the global economy. If we don't engage soon, it will be too late and the US will no longer be the economic superpower it once was.

Actually, Obama is keeping strangely silent on what is going on in Wisconsin and the rust belt. Being that issues in Wisconsin and Indiana and Ohio et all will play highly in his re-election campaign I can't figure it out.

Do I expect him to rally at the Madison capital, no? How about a show of support for teacher's and union workers in a speech about job creation. A big part of the stimulus goals were in saving jobs was it not? Here is an opportunity to spread that message.

Actually, Yellowdog, the President is doing exactly what he needs to. With all of the rancor around what Gov. Walker is doing, THAT is a more potent campaign message than anything he can say at the moment. By staying out of the situation in WI, he is letting the PEOPLE get MAD at the situation so that THEY will do what is necessary to move the State - and the nation - forward.

and it ain't gonna be supporting the GOP/TP if they can paint Gov. Walker as the 'poster boy' for what the GOP/TP looks like when they govern.

Frankly, I don't have that kind of patience, but then again, I am not the President either.

Alan:

I believe the extension for unemployment rights was being held up because there were no offsets.

What a total laugher. Do you realize how stupid that sounds?

Unemployment benefits are still held up, while the extension of tax breaks for the wealthy, a MUCH BIGGER NUMBER, went through without any resistance from the "responsible" republicans, even though they had no offsets, either.

Who's paying for those, Alan? The unemployed, that's who. Feel proud.

So everyone thinks that corporations dont pay any taxes. I believe that they pay taxes, SSI, unemployment and benefits for every employee that works for them. So lets take more money in taxes and cut jobs, is that really what you want to do?

Time will tell Pietro.

It can cut both ways with the President's wait and see approach to Wisconsin. He is being politically cautious because he doesn't want to be blamed for interferring with local politics and further inflame the Tea Party. What he fails to admit is that the Tea Party will never look on any action that he does favorably. If the President lets Walker overplay his hand and bust the unions the only thing Obama will gain is righteous indignation. Will he then make a speech that the GOP/TP is out of touch and overreaching and paint Walker as a bad guy?

Democrats sitting on the sidelines is a big reason that could be blamed for the overwhelming defeat in Nov. What happens if Obama sits on the sidelines for this and the union movement is dealt a crushing blow? His speech afterwards might be viewed as political grandstanding. Although it may make some agree with him that the TP is overreaching the casualties will be too high.

He is taking a big gamble. Come this time next year, he might not see as many supporters up that way. However, being that I'm not from that part of the country I really don't know.

Always good talking to you.

Democrats sitting on the sidelines is a big reason that could be blamed for the overwhelming defeat in Nov. What happens if Obama sits on the sidelines for this and the union movement is dealt a crushing blow? His speech afterwards might be viewed as political grandstanding. Although it may make some agree with him that the TP is overreaching the casualties will be too high.

Yellowdog - your post above explains what happened in November. Let's face facts - the Dems were a fractuous group to begin with. Almost all of the Blue Dogs that lost their seats. I personally would have preferred to see 'real' Republicans in those Blue Dog seats because if the person is going to vote like and act like a Republican, there might as well BE real Republicans.

At least we would have known how they would vote and would have expected them to oppose the President. Th Blue Dogs were all over the place, and the President spent a LOT of political capital trying to address their concerns. This is why we got the 'waterded down' Health Care Law as well as other things that should have been passed without issue.

In this particular case, the Republicans had an 'in', and that 'in was the Blue Dog Coalition.

As far as the union situation is concerned, it is a State's issue, and that resolution should come from the State. I do not see any value of the President getting involved in the situation in WI. Gov. Walker is doing a FINE job committing political Hari Kari all by himself. The President would provide a distraction - probably enough for Gov. Walker to weasel himself out of the corner that he painted himself into. I think the President is smart enough to let someone who is hanging from his own petard take care of his own problems.

Is it a gamble? I don't think so. I think that with the current political climate - which will get crazier with the budget battle that is looming - he is making the right call on this one. What was a gamble was thinking that Sen. Harry Reid would win his seat with the withering opposition he faced. maybe it wasn't, but it sure looked like a gamble to me.

I enjoy talking with you as well, Yellowdog.

As a off note here, How many really know what a petard is?? It was a wide mouthed cannon like device used to blast down castle gates and walls. The phrase "To Be Hoist on your own petard" refers to a petard that was not properly set/braced that blew back in the setter's face, leaving the gate/wall undamaged and causing great damage amongst the ranks of the setters.

An excellent example is Pinkerton Walker and his attempts to bust the Unions and the fake Koch phone call where he shot himself squarely in the foot.

Hoist on his own petard indeed!

I do. I learned it from reading The Swiss Family Robinson, in which there is a chapter called, "The Pinnace and the Petard." They had to use the petard to blow a hole in the big boat to get a little boat out the hold so they could use it. I still don't know how they would have gotten it out of the hold if the big boat hadn't shipwrecked.

Anyway, I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE Pinkerton Walker. That's got to be spread around.

gosh lets see, who pays for SSi and unemployment ?? I Encourage you to read your pay stub. lets also look for the medicare/caid box . just saying .

davwin and beachbum:

Human people have to pay Social Security tax and income tax. Why should the corporate people be any different?

And considering the fact that the corporate people pay the human people barely enough to keep up with the cost of living while they bank fat profits every year, not really buying that violin solo for unemployment either.

Nice try though. Truly.

Jody,

Excellent job – you covered two of the topics I was going to post. All signs point to the Teapublicans being on the wrong side of many current issues.

Jody:

Excellent post: Clear and to the point. Would you mind sending this post to the DNC so they can have some talking points? They need to be saying what you have stated so well.

Jody, this is a great post, congratulations.

I agree with Dennis too, the Teapublicans (I like that 'name') will be the losers in the final analysis.

Jody:

Nicely done, Kudos.

I think the public is starting to see the consequences of returning Republicans to power under the new Tea Party brand - voters thought they were electing "real people" instead of politicians to office, and instead they got real nut jobs with an ideological agenda to enact, instead of pragmatic solutions.

In Maine, the new governor promised putting people before politics, but so far, he has been the most partisan, divisive governor in recent Maine history. Just yesterday, we learned he has fired Dr. Dora Mills, who was the unbiquitous face of public health on local TV during the swine flu outbreak, and other health crisises, since her hiring during the Independent governor Angus King's terms, fifteen years ago. This motherly woman is the sister of a prominent Republican politician, and of a former Attorney General who served during the Democratic governor's term. But, my goodness, Dr. Mills opposed repealing the ban on BPA in children's items, so out she goes. 15 years worth of experience and a figure of public trust out the door. For what? So some corporations can continue to put poison in our children's sippy cups. That's the Tea Party's real agenda: no compromise, no allegience to science or public health. Anything to make the corporate polluters happy.

Jody--I wish you were going to be the gues on Meet the Press---I'd tune in for that!

The Goldman Sachs study really scares me---you'd think Republicans would trust them of all people and listen to what they are saying-no one argues that eventually steps will have to be taken to deal with the deficit. We did it once before and left the Clinton years with a surplus. Why won't they follow that model? Maybe because it doesn't resonate with their base.

Thanks fellow libs. Oh, hadn't thought of sending it to the DNC. Me on Meet the Press, now that would be fun.

The report concludes that the GOP House cuts will be a drag on the economy reducing GDP by 2% and called it economic insanity. The point is this: the government needs to rein in spending, there are areas that can be cut without harming economic growth but draconian spending cuts will simply drive the country back into recession. Perhaps that is what the GOPTP hopes, bad economy and 2012 looks better for them. I would prefer to think the GOPTP simply skipped Econ 101....but know that it is more likely they would rather win and if the economy suffers and more people lose their jobs as a result, "so be it" said Speaker Boehner.

Jody ~ Thanks for reinforcing my own recent economic decisions. To add to this we have unrest overseas that shows no signs of abating, the ongoing war, rising oil prices, and the additional drag on the economy that will be caused by precipitously cutting the disposable income of public workers, which will in turn cut tax revenues both directly and indirectly, deepening the deficit situations.

By the way, I hated Econ 101, too. That was Milton Friedman. But I loved Econ 102. That was Paul Samuelson.

Time to hunker down, folks.

It's collective bargaining, not independent. Pooled resources for employee protection and rights. Unions address many issues such as health care, pensions, workplace practices and so and so forth. Employees can go to union reps to get the information on how to deal with matters. There are a lot of factors that involve the need for collective bargaining.

Chris Let me see if this helps and keep in mind that like you I have always worked outside of Unions in Right to work States. Most time I'm negotiating an employment contract as an individual. As such I have on occasion sent the contract to my Attorney to verify provisions. He could also act as my Agent and I would have to compensate him accordingly. Most cases that is what Unions and collective bargaining accomplish and the Union dues would be considered compensation for the Agent. They're just doing it for groups rather than individuals

Chris, in fact, if this were limited to pension and benefit programs, very little would change.

Suppose the unions were only allowed to bargain for wages, with pension and benefits decided by the legislature. Since those same "taxpayer representatives" are elected, they are subject to the same pressures that have given way to the truly ridiculous contracts that unions enjoy today. Unions spend extraordinary amounts to elect people friendly to their agenda, and have no compunctions about using that clout to force legislation beneficial to them.

Doubt me? Ask yourself why the unions agreed so readily to the contribution levels demanded in Wisconsin- for a period of two years. What happens in the interim? An election. That they think they can win.

The ONLY solution to this crisis is to give the workers the same basic right most other people have- the right of association. Let the workers vote on whether or not to retain the union. If the unions are doing a good job for the membership, they should have no problem retaining the rights to representation- and, not incidentally, union dues.

It is singularly unAmerican to FORCE people to join a union, and to fork over cash to them monthly, without their consent. I would like to see all union membership on a voluntary basis- in other words, open shops- but I think most people would be willing to settle for a system whereby the membership gets to vote yearly on re-certifying the union.

If unions are so wonderful, they have nothing to fear from elections.

Thanks for the information. Now I have a bunch more questions in my head.

Indepentent, I understand how that works for contract jobs, but how does this affect the average state employee? Are all the state jobs in Wisconsin contract jobs? For example, does a clerk at the DMV have to negotiate a contract before being hired or are they interviewed and hired like a cashier at a retail store? (I'm using the DMV as an example because it was the first state agency that popped into my head.) Why can't they go in and negotiate directly with their bosses the way I do at my job?

Louis J. You neglect to mention Unions sometimes price themselves right out of a job. My father worked for GM for over 35 years and the fine UAW sent those jobs to Mexico. Can you say Detroit anyone?

Chris basically all jobs are a contract union or not right to work state or not. Higher end jobs generally involve more formal contracts but a individual clerk for instance whether state or private has at least an implied contract to perform a certain service for a certain price following certain regulations and practices. All the Union is doing is by force of numbers giving a better bargaining position and protecting thier members from being treated unjustly in the Market place. They also spend a lot of money in training programs and enhanceing qualification to make sure that when one of thier members is hired whoever hires them are getting a qualified person. So basically the contract is still between the individual and who ever hires them at whatever advertized rate. . Parts of the whole Union vs individual thing is a little more complicated but the basics are the same contract wise.

" Why can't they go in and negotiate directly with their bosses the way I do at my job?"

You negotiate with your boss? In Maine, you can get fired trying that. It's a tough place to work.

I worked in a non-union call center for six years and had my hours reduced, got repeatedly laid off and re-hired, and never had health insurance, all according to the companies' "business needs" while their executives received huge bonuses.

Then I worked in a unionized call center, at a newspaper, actually, where I was shocked to have to pay union dues, but realized it was worth it when I got health insurance, a dollar more an hour than when I worked at the non-union job, and paid vaction time.

That's just my experience, your results may have been different.

No, Chris, it means there are no more union representatives to do the bargaining; it means workers cannot "bargain" for anything; the workers would be subject to the whims of the powers in charge, no voice, no place to demand smaller class room sizes or better fire protection equipment or bullet proof vests, no one to defend unfair practices.

Independent, thanks for clearing that up for me. You've been a big help. I still don't understand why an individual needs union representation and can't do these things on their own. Sorry, it's just my inexperience with unions that has me thinking this way.

Amy, yes I have been able to negotiate with my bosses in every job I have ever had. It's one of the things that we do when doing our yearly performance reviews. I sit down directly with my supervisor, we discuss my performance for the past year and then we talk about what we think would be a fair pay raise for me. The max my company offers is 7%, and I usually get 6.5%-6.9%. I have always had health care and retirement planning as part of every full-time job I have had. I honestly couldn't tell you if my health care benefits are considered "good" because I have never actually used them. For the record, I work in warehousing and distribution in a non-union warehouse. I'm sorry that your past experiences were not good ones in a non-union workplace. Maybe you just had a douche for a boss. Haha.

Jody, aren't the police and fire exempt from this? I thought I had heard that a few days ago. Has that changed? By the way, what is a decent classroom size? I always had 30+ students in my classes in grammar and high schools. I went to Catholic schools where we didn't have an enormous budget and I feel as though I received a better education than my friends that went to public schools did. I remember taking classes a year or two before my public school friends did and we were in the same grade. Of course, we didn't have olympic size swimming pools or a shop class in my high school.

ksw,

But rising labor costs are not the only factor. You mentioned that GM union labor priced themselves out of a job in some instances. Would you also agree that the steady decline of auto production and rising labor costs in Detroit were due to increased foreign competition?

Foreign competition that in many ways saw the market for smaller, affordable energy efficient vehicles several years even decades before detroit did. As the big three continued to design and market bigger less fuel efficient cars European and Asian car companies were able to make headway.

GM and other companies countered by shipping jobs overseas and across borders, making production costs for state side manufacturing look less viable.

I have worked in the private sector without union representation all my life. I agree with Chris in that as long as I have done my job properly I have been rewarded fairly. I have never seen an employee who did their job get treated unfairly. I have seen plenty of employees say that they have been treated unfairly but those were generally people who spent more time worrying about what everyone was doing instead of doing their jobs. I call them the whiners, they whine because someone is paid more than them but fail to take in consideration that person has different duties, they whine if they have to work through lunch once in a while, etc... Sorry but bottom line is unions have outlived their usefulness in today's economy. Labor laws are in place in most states to protect workers rights that are reasonable.

Chris, I would point out that studies show having a higher portion of unions in an area leads to higher wages for everybody, as non-union work places need to compete for employees with union shops. I've rarely had health insurance from my employer and I live in Maine, where unions are weak; you live in NJ, where, I assume there are more union shops. Looks like you may have been benefiting from the existence of unions all along, even if you never belonged to one.

If unions are so wonderful, they have nothing to fear from elections.

They do when gubernatorial candidates hide their true agendas.

If government officials are so doggone smart, then they have nothing to fear at the bargaining table.

At least, I think that's what the republican governor of Florida said. Heck, even Ed Rendell said that. He has bargained successfully with public employees, even winning disputes when the workers went on strike.

So, what's wrong with the other governors? Or wait. I've heard them talk, haven't I? Never mind.

Amy:

Looks like you may have been benefiting from the existence of unions all along, even if you never belonged to one.

No, no, Amy. Unions have nothing to do with it. Chris got where he/she is today through personal hard work and advice received by reading Ayn Rand. And when Chris gets fired tomorrow, it will be purely because of advice his/her employer got from reading Ayn Rand. And because there is no union. See?

Chris ~

always had 30+ students in my classes in grammar and high schools. I went to Catholic schools where we didn't have an enormous budget and I feel as though I received a better education than my friends that went to public schools did. I remember taking classes a year or two before my public school friends did and we were in the same grade. Of course, we didn't have olympic size swimming pools or a shop class in my high school.

How naive you are, Chris. I'll just betcha that you didn't have special needs kids in those classes, either, and, as your parents were paying tuition for you, you knew that you would have to behave or face them. I have personally taught English classes with 30 or more students in them, and while I had no trouble managing my classroom, I can tell you honestly that you don't give as much attention to each of 30 papers as you do each of 15 or 20 papers because you just don't have time. Class size has consequences, Chris, or do you think teachers should just keep doing more and more work, into infinity, without getting paid more for it? Is that how YOU negotiate YOUR salary? I highly doubt it.

By the way, just for the record, I went to a public grade school. There were two parochial grade schools in town, one Catholic and one Lutheran. When we all met in high school, I can tell you that the kids from those schools had the same attitude of superiority that you have. But the students who took the advanced classes were mostly those from the public school, and I can also tell you with 100 percent confidence that I did better in high school than ALL of my classmates from both of those parochial schools. I'll leave it to your imagination to guess how I know that. So what's your point? That's just an anecdote. Some students do well wherever they go. And some don't. In this town, two of the four public high schools, at the least, do better achievement-wise than the large Catholic private high school and are among the best schools of any kind in the nation, year after year after year. Despite their nasty old unions. Because that's what this town expects and pays to support.

As for your wage increases, good for you. But I can tell you that you're not the norm, even in the private sector. Even so, why do you think you deserve those kinds of increases and others don't? What's so special about warehouse work that you think it is somehow more worthy than what public workers do? Do you have some reason to believe that public employees couldn't do your job just as well as you can? Trust me, they can. Why are you resentful when they want to do as well as you? But they don't -- at least not around here -- even with unions. Teacher salaries are capped here, and have been since about 1994. They don't get anything like the increases you get. Concessions, especially on wages, have been the rule for many years. It isn't going to get better when the unions are gone. Public workers clean the streets and plow the roads. In some places, they still pick up the garbage. They teach children, they run libraries, they're nurses, social workers, planners, foresters, highway workers, police and firefighters. They're investigators, lawyers, administrative law judges. They're not the enemy. They're your next door neighbors. Why do they not deserve to make a decent living, while you think you should get big raises every year, for warehouse work?

Again, by the way, just who do you think buys the products your company sells? Do you sell to the government directly? Who pays for those products? Do you sell to public employees? Who pays for those products? Do you live on the public trough, Chris? A lot of private sector workers do, even though they think they collect a private paycheck and resent paying the taxes that eventually get recycled back into THEIR wages. And what do you think will happen to your company's revenue, and that of other companies, when public employees can no longer purchase the goods and services that support your salary? When they can no longer purchases homes or cars. Do you really think all of this Ayn Rand selfishness has no consequences?

I'll tell you one thing, Chris. There won't be any more swimming pools for public schools. There won't be art, music, shop,or any of the extras that enrich education and people's lives. Special needs students won't get the services they need and will become an even greater burden on society in the future. Your sacred Catholic school never dealt with those kids, Chris. They get dumped back on the public schools. And there isn't going to be any money for them after this. God forbid you should ever have a special needs child. Because no one will want to pay any taxes to help YOU. I know I won't, anyway. You want to keep yours. Why shouldn't I keep mine?

Wow, Anna. That's a nice long rant there. Let me counter with one of my own.

What I was pointing out in my previous post was that my schools did what they had to do with less money and resources than public schools have. Yes, we had 30+ students in my class. There were kids that did better than others. It's like that in every classroom. Were any of them "special needs" students? That depends on your definition of "special needs". Are you talking about students that were mentally handicapped? If so, then no, we didn't have any in my school. Are you talking about kids who aren't genius level intellects like yourself? Then, yes, we had them. I noticed when I was in school that some students learn better than others and did better in some subjects than others. My teachers did take the time to work with those students either after school or on weekends on their own time. I don't know if they were compensated for that time or not. I was a kid. It wasn't really a concern of mine back then. All I do know is that my teachers did the best job they could educating me and preparing me for the real world. They didn't coddle us or try to make us feel good. They taught us to the best of their ability. If we failed, we failed; if we got an A, we got an A. But we learned to do better the next time, no matter what our grades were.

For the record, I did not lead a charmed life and my parents had to work and sacrifice to put my brothers and I through school. They choose to send us to a Catholic school because they wanted the best for us and they felt the Catholic schools in our area were better than the public schools. I had no choice in the schools I went to as a child and looking back, I am happy with what my parents did and I wouldn't change a thing.

Now, I never said that my job was special or anything like that. I know that anyone who is trained properly can do just about any job out there, including mine. But I work hard and do my job to the best of my ability every day. My boss sees that and rewards me based on my performance. I don't need a union rep or anyone else to go to the table for me and fight that battle. We are free to join a union if we want to. My company does not hinder that. However, no one in the location I work for has opted to join a union. No one. We are all treated fairly and we all the same opportunity for advancement in my company. There are some that work hard and are rewarded handsomely and there are those that coast by and do as little work as possible and then complain that they are being treated unfairly when they have a poor review and get a poor raise. I choose not to be one of the latter. Why is that a problem?

You asked why I think I deserve a good raise, it's because I go to work every day and do my job to the best of my ability and I do it the way it's supposed to be done. I don't shirk my duties at work and I don't take anything for granted. I worked very hard to get where I am in life because I never want to be the person at the bottom of the pile again. I may never reach the top, but I will never, ever stop climbing. My question to you is, why don't you feel that way? Why do you feel as though you are owed something by me because I am successful? Why do you think everyone should have the same opportunities if they are not willing to work for it?

As to those teachers you talk about that have had their salaries capped since 1994, what's stopping them from going someplace else to find a more gainful employment?

I am not naive. I see what goes on and I learn from it. I've never read Ayn Raynd or care to. I see what the successful people do and learn from their example. I don't think I'm being selfish. I know who my customer base is. They are everyone. They are doctors and lawyers, teachers and homemakers, hair stylists and cashiers at McDonald's. They work in the public and private sectors and they all come and purchase our products. They are Americans like you and me. And I do everything in my power at work to make sure that my products go out to them and are sold to them on perfect condition. I don't care who they are or what color they are or how much they make. they are my customers and I treat them all the same: exactly as I would like to be treated.

Thanks! :)

Michael:

Nice post you have hit many of the issues we have been discussing here for a long time. The Media does not report journalism anymore. It is more about political comment and often times has no basis in facts, just more rhetoric to push an agenda that many of the media have.

Michael, great post, education of the voter and by the voter is key.

Keep Posting your view points are welcome and needed. Peace

They all seem to know what is going on at the Jersey Shore, who wins Dancing With the Stars and American Idol, that Lindsey Lohan is in trouble again, that Charlie Sheen is a fool, etc., saw Avatar 10 times, you get my drift.

If people would spend a fraction of the time they spend on mindless stuff that does not affect their lives or the future of their children on meaningful information gathering to make informed decisions when voting which will affect their lives and the future of their children. we would be a lot better off.

Excellent post, Michael. Voters no longer understand how government works, the media too often engages in discussing trivia chatter rather than taking a strong informative stand. Add that to voters simply too willing to buy what politicians say rather than do their own research into the subject and the facts.

Michael

The people are not "ignorant masses" they are busy. Most young people with families, house payments, school loans and often more than one job don't have the time to check on anything but the weather. When I had a growing family do you imagine for one minute I knew or cared what was going on in Wisconsin? Much of life has changed but Mom and Dad's job hasn't and it does not leave a lot of time for news or trying to figure out who is telling the truth when it gets close to election day. I will agree that this is not a good thing but it is what it is.

I think the majority of people vote on what impact it will have on their life and not for the good of all mankind. Politicians believe this also because they have target messages for certain areas. Both parties figure out the talking point or blown out of proportion half truth to tell each group.

You want some information, well I have it ! Gov. Walker is paid $137,000 and change. Average WI teacher paid 56,400. Walker gets FREE HOUSING!!! FREE HOUSING!!!! He also gets a tax payer paid car (not sure if the tax payers provide FREE gas, but I would think so). Teachers pay for their housing and don't get FREE CARS! Walker also gets a FAMILY HEALTH care plan for $89/mo. Walker DOES NOT pay a dime into his taxpayer funded pension plan. So you see, the TEACHERS are NOT the RICH ones the Governor and the RICH he gave the tax cuts to are. Thank you.

NJNB,

May be you can start with promoting more democracy here at home. And less of falsehoods and fear mongering.

You mean promoting democracy like allowing people to actually choose whether or not to belong to a union? And/or allowing them to vote on whether or not to retain the union?

Because, I am all over that. You, too?

no joe, no bo, nj

Something tells me you have never seen the need for a union because you've never had to work to support yourself. Am I right or am I right?

Have you ever gone without health insurance, no jo? Have you ever had your paycheck split into two checks, after you've worked over 40 hours in a week, because your employer didn't want to pay overtime? (cause I have.) Have you ever been laid off for a month when the person you were hired to assist went into the hospitol briefly and you lost your health insurance, all because the agency you worked for didn't want to cover your premium for that month? Turn off FOX and meet the real world No Jo. You could start by getting a job.

Amy, I have been working since I was 14.

Have you ever cleaned houses for the summer people, and been paid less than minimum wage? I have. Have you ever served at their parties, where they were "too busy" to pay you that night, so you would have to come back- again and again- to get the money you earned?

They taught me EVERYTHING I needed to know about the hypocrisy of the liberals- who 'care' about the 'poor and working class'.

I have had a union job- I was a teacher before I left to continue my education- and I learned to loathe the unions, who seem to exist to protect the rights of the lazy and incompetent. Ever hear of "rubber rooms", Amy? They exist for teacher who are SO egregiously unsuited for the classroom that they must be removed- but, even then, they cannot be fired. So, they report to buildings expressly to accommodate them where they sit, day by day, doing nothing at all- but collecting their paychecks until the day they retire.

I have been buying my own health insurance for YEARS, because my health issues demand a level of coverage not provided by my husband's employer. Before that, I had insurance through the school board- after that, I opted for my husband's coverage, which was superior to that provided by my own employer. Once I became a consultant, I could have gone on my husband's insurance, but, as I said, I needed a higher level of coverage than was provided. So, I pay for it. It's a choice.

I do not know what you do for a living, but I can tell you, your life will be much better if you stop seeing yourself as a victim of circumstance, and start making decisions about your own life. We all co troll our own destinies, no matter what life throws at us.

You can work with what you have, or blame fate, government, or others for your circumstances. I chose the former- and I am much happier for it.

Amy B, Portland:

Good morning and thank you for the kind words yesterday. We are seeing the same tactic they (GOP) pulled in November with the tax cuts for the richest 2%. Governor Walker has gotten his concessions from the union, so he has the budget cuts he wanted from them. He then turns around, after getting the money, and says he is going to lay off 1500, 5,000 or 10,000. Why, he got the budget concessions so the deficit is off the table. He is using the threat of layoffs to bust the unions just like the GOP used the their tax cuts for the 2% as a bargaining chip. No tax cuts for the 2%, no tax cuts for the middle class. Same repugnant tactic.

I chose the former- and I am much happier for it.

Will someone bust out a violin & pass me a tissue?

If she claims she's 'happier for it' - then I'll take bitter & miserable anytime... lol

NJNB - the modern day Joan of Arc!

no joe, no bo, nj

Amy, I have been working since I was 14.

Have you ever cleaned houses for the summer people, and been paid less than minimum wage?

Oha No Jo don't act like you were curing cancer by doing that, my great grandmother cleaned homes for 1 dollar per week to feed her family while her husband was a Pullman porter making 2 dollar per week. and they were not 14.

i had a paper route i worked everyday and made 5 dollars a week and that was in 1974. i also delivered groceries for 50 cent per delivery, we all have worked like that so don't act like you were working there to feed your 3 kids. i did it to buy a bike, a Schwinn Continental bike. my mother wanted me to understand what a dollar was worth and it took me 3 summers to earn enough to buy that bike and i still have it 35 years later.

Honestly, No Joe, your daily anti-Obama rants get more trivial and petty by the day.

The bullies are the GOPTP governors, the public workers are their targets and the GOP Govs intent is to steel the public workers' lunch money.

Bravo, President Obama, for standing with the protesters, condemning the violence of dictators but doing so without dragging America into the Libyans fight. The less involved the United State is, the better chance the Libyan fighters have to succeed. This, like Egypt, Tunisia, Yeman, Iran is NOT OUR FIGHT, it is the fight of the people in those countries.

Until I retired, I worked my entire adult life. I also worked as a teenager babysitting 4 little ones under age 5 and was paid $.50 an hour for it; worked summers cutting the rotten spots out of tomatoes for $.65 an hour, 12 hours a day, 6 days a week; worked full time while attending college nights. What I cannot abide are people like NJNB whose very comments declare themselves to be superior, not just superior to other posters, but superior to the President of the United States simply because they have a different ideology.

"Have you ever cleaned houses for the summer people, and been paid less than minimum wage?"

Uh, yes, I have, I live in Maine, remember?

I could write a book about my experiences working in daycares, as a home health aide, in restaurants, in call centers and retail stores, but the basic story would be: low wages with health insurance, better wages with no health insurance and a union job with a living wage and basic benefits.

I have a B.A. degree and I did intern in schools, however I decided teaching was not for me. There are five people in my immediate family who work in schools and they do an awesome job, but I couldn't take it, myself. I'm sorry your school had many bad teachers. Makes you wonder why the administration hired them in the first place and why better candidates aren't attracted to teaching. If unions have made teaching such a cushy job, then why aren't are brightest college graduates competing for teaching jobs?

So which is it

people of a country who desire to overthrow a government antagonistic toward us

or

the Middle East on the brink of a long, drawn out war that will destroy our allies and strengthen our enemies

The last time that we got involved in the Middle East, we destroyed the balance of the region (simplistic, short version - Saddam's army was keeping Iran in check), caused the price of oil to skyrocket, and created more animosity towards the United States.

We need to stay out of meddling in Middle East politics and embrace the leadership that exist and work with it.

We need to stop worrying about the price of oil, since we cannot control it and our attempts to have a historical tendency to backfire.

We need to focus on the problems here, in the United States, stop worrying about political agendas (both left and right), and focus on solving the problems of the American people, all the American people, regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic class.

We need to focus on rebuilding our education system, so that our children can get a great education in our public schools.

We need to stop trying to balance tax cuts for wealthy on the backs of the middle class as a way to cut the deficit. Trickle down economics has a three decade history of failure.

We consider ourselves to be the world leader, yet we are in the middle of the pack for life expectancy, education and health care. We need to refocus our country on what is important to the future of it, for ourselves, our children, and their children.

Politicians (and internet warriors) of both parties need to remember how to discuss and debate issues to find a middle ground that is in the best interests of the people of this country and not the ones filling their re-election war chests.

We used to be the greatest country in the world and we can be that great again. But we need to remember what is important: health and education, not wealth, lead to happiness. As every parent teaches their children: Treat others the way you want to be treated.

Read the post, David. It is both.

We should have encouraged the Iranians, who were ready to overthrow their illegitimate regime last summer.

Obama could not think of a thing to say, until it was too late to have any effect. He MIGHT have signaled that life would be better over there in the absence of U.S. sanctions. He MIGHT have attempted to have the lines of communication- you know, Internet, cell phones, Twitter- kept open- and secret from the government.

He did not. And, please, spare me "the Iranian people did not want our help". Lech Walensa said all the same things, but secretly accepted the aid of Reagan, Thatcher, and the Pope.

He COULD be doing the above for the Libyans- but, instead, he waits a week, and makes a lame, mediocre statement.

We could have two NEW allies in the Middle East, rather than losing those we have. By the way, has Obama said anything, anything at all, about Bahrain? You know, where the Fifth Fleet is moored?

Fix our public schools? How, exactly? More money? In New Jersey, the worst of the public schools spend SIX times more per student than the best schools. Money will not fix them. Try something else.

The economy is stagnant, and an oil shock should send it spiraling down. The fantasy fixes Obama proposes will not help that.

Even if we started drilling now, this crisis cannot be averted. But, that is okay- I mean, it cannot possibly interfere with the Obamas social schedule, so all is right with the world.

Right?

How assinine are you, have you forgotten the past, the last decade or are you like most Republicans, you just have selective memory. Remember we are still in Iraq and aphganistan. What is the leadership from that Republican party doing about the middle east oh yea the same thing your doin just throwing darts hoping they stick to give you all something to rally behind. UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!

Whilst I step over the steaming pile of hyperbole from NJ, David, your post is right on the money.

We need to concentrate on rebuilding AMERICA for once and let the people around the world solve their own problems. We see that policy actually worked in Egypt, and the Egyptian people love us for our LEADERSHIP and guidance. Remember where there were signs that said 'Yes we can too'?

Now THAT is leadership. We provide an example that people want to emulate.

You're absolutely right, no joe. George W. Bush would not have done such an insensitive thing.

He would have gone golfing. Or maybe cleared some brush.

At least that's what he did after receiving that memo about how Al Qaeda was determined to attack within the United States. Bush knew the value of vacations better than anyone in making you prepared to do your job.

That's probably why he was so relaxed in that classroom in Florida on September 11.

Music would have spoiled the whole mood.

I have been buying my own health insurance for YEARS, because my health issues demand a level of coverage not provided by my husband's employer. Before that, I had insurance through the school board- after that, I opted for my husband's coverage, which was superior to that provided by my own employer. Once I became a consultant, I could have gone on my husband's insurance, but, as I said, I needed a higher level of coverage than was provided. So, I pay for it. It's a choice.

Do you realize how dangerously close you are coming to saying, "I walked five miles to school through snow, sleet, rain, and freezing cold, and if that was good enough for me, it's good enough for you."?

Well, it's not.

Drilling is not and has never been the solution, we need to learn discipline and use less oil.

We have no allies in the Middle East and no matter how many government changes there are, we will still have no allies in the Middle East. Until we change our attitudes and stop believing that the oil under their ground is our God-given right, they will, to some degree, hate us. The best thing we can do, is leave them to their struggles, support the governments that are there, and let the passage of time help our cause. The cultures of the Middle East is not focused on today, it is focused on the long term. Until we understand their culture, match our goals to it, and stop applying military and economic pressure to them, we should not expect allies in the Middle East.

And thank you for the Iranians were ready to overthrow their government last year comment - I hear the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale too.

As for fixing public schools, there is no quick, painless, or easy answer. But right now, no one is looking at the question either. We need to be able to evaluate teachers, reward the good ones, weed out the bad ones. There does need to be more money for teachers, in order to draw better candidates to the profession, accompanied with reform. I would recommend using programs like the one Bill Gates has set up to test ideas in small environments, to determine what can work on a large scale setting.

If you are truly interested in the topic, I would recommend reading "Teachers Have It Easy", edited by Dave Eggers, Daniel Moulthrop, and Ninive Calegari. They interview, met, and sat in with hundreds of teachers, outlined things that are working for some, things that aren't for others, as well as what drove quality teachers from the profession.

Why are you still wasting thought on social schedules? I think it is a pretty safe bet that no one reading this is working 16 hours a day, 7 days a week, so why would we expect our leaders to?

Anna Molly - No Joe forgot to include that she walked uphill both ways through the sleet, snow and rain.

Pietro, Columbus, Ohio

Anna Molly - No Joe forgot to include that she walked uphill both ways through the sleet, snow and rain.

No Jo also forgot to include the fact when she was cleaning homes she did it with out soap, a bucket and a wash rag.

she did it with out soap, a bucket and a wash rag.

She used her tongue - Lord KNOWS her mouth is BIG enough!

Pat:

Welcome back!!! Seeing your post made my day!

You are so right on. The main stream media has not been doing their job and Fox has never been a responsible news source. It's folks like yourself who continue to say what needs to be said.

Dear Pat, Bravo, well said. We have missed your voice and style, you write so well and with great heart.

Hope all is well, dont be a stranger. Have a great weekend,

When you have lost the support of the media, you're cooked

I agree with you Pat, thankfully, today we have a 'little thing' called the internet that can't be silenced...

It's NOW up to US to speak for the poor & working class!

Good to see you, I've missed you!

*standing ovation!*

Pat, that was a most powerful, educational, and moving post. Thank you so much for it.

Hey, speaking of music...

Papa was a rolling stone. Wherever he laid his hat was his home…

It was so so awesome to see Motown celebrated. The music that came out of Detroit in the 1960’s was mesmerizing. But if I had to pick one, just one, who was over and above them all, it would be The Temptations. Classic classic music they gave us. The Supremes were wonderful, we had all their records. But the Temptations? Man were they good. Whenever they were on tv, we couldn’t keep our eyes off them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltRwmgYEUr8

I've got sunshine on a cloudy day.
When it's cold outside I've got the month of May.
I guess you'd say
What can make me feel this way?
My girl (my girl, my girl)
Talkin' 'bout my girl (my girl).

But it was just my imagination running away with me. It was just my imagination, running away with me. hmm hmmm

Love it.

Thank you dear friends here at First Read. I had to write about this book. I just had to. Just when I think I know so much, I realize I know so little.

Yay, Pat is BACK!

Ron Indiana,

Concerning your comment about Fox... Since I see comments like this, I took a couple of weeks to watch Fox and MSNBC to try to compare. There is no way I can watch every show...

Cavuto vs. Ratigan:

The format of the shows are the same and sometimes the same guest appears on both (like Steve Moore). Each host has opinions as do the guests -- I've seen the same guests /info on Kudlow saying the same thing.

The Anchor Shows (after 9 am):

The same deal - if however "Fox" states that Obamacare will bankrupt America, this is an opinion since 2014 hasn't arrived. If MSNBC thinks Obamacare will save America, again its an opinion. Either way, this doesn't equate to lying.

Brett Baier vs. Czenk:

The formats are very different. Brett is a news show (think World News of the past) followed by a panel with mixed guests. Czenk is a likable guy with a good sense of humor but the show format is more like Hannity.

So far, after 2 weeks I just don't see the validity of the Fox Noise/Fox Lies... I see opinions.

One final comment, I have yet to read or hear negative comments about Greta - so I checked it out. She's very good as a host and spends most of her time asking questions, hammering both sides on gov't waste, seldom interrupts and she honestly has very little time to lie since she lets her guests do most of the talking.

I do welcome any info on either station that is purposely throwing out misinformation or simply lying.

Krell

That's a very interesting comparison, however, as a regular viewer of Brian William's NBC broadcast, I have to say I have never heard him say that Obamacare will save America. In fact, I have sent quite a few corrective emails to Mr. Williams because he spends more time on reporting the Republicans' push back agaist Obama then he does on the contents of the Healthcare reform bill, the fact that it REDUCES the federal deficit by trillions of dollars over time, it does not ADD to the deficit, or any kind of in depth reporting on why our current healthcare system is not sustainable.

Just my experince from watching NBC. I don't watch FOX so I can't address how often you hear FOX anchors report that the passage of 'Obamacare' will REDUCE the federal deficit, not ADD to it.

Have you heard that dicussion on FOX?

Pat:

Welcome back and one heck of a post on your first day back. Supreme my friend, just supreme.

Pat now that is finer than frog hair split two ways Made my day to see you this morning Thank You

Amy,

My reference to Obamacare was just an example - and maybe a poor one. I was simply trying to make the point of opinions vs. lies. I don't know how many times I read that Fox Lies.

You may have seen earlier in the week the group of protesters in front of the Fox studio in NY. One guy was yelling "Fox Lies" and the street reporter was asking him for one example - the guys reply was something like "all the time, just tune in"... no one can take a reply like that seriously.

I should add that I did hear (on various sources) that Walker say WI has a budget problem. The other day Rachel M and Ed S both opened their shows by saying WI does not have a $$$ problem. I don't live in WI so I wouldn't know. In this case, someone is not telling the truth.

I don't watch Williams but its good that you care and write in. As for the HC law... I'm just a regular guy but I still don't buy how adding 30+ million people to a program will lower the cost. That defies logic. In the perfect world maybe. Do you know what will happen (or is supposed to happen) when the waiver program ends? I'm suspicious to believe that all the waiver holders will gladly hand them in and volunteer to pay up. Plus, I'm willing to bet that millions will prefer to pay the fine.

RVZ555: Will The DREAM Act ever see the light of day again or are we just going to keep making the same mistakes over and over and over?

Glad you liked my post. (snark)

Stay tuned for more. Much more.

Us black people luv you back RVZ555!

P.S. Let's ask the Native Americans whose illegal and whose not, mmmmkay?

Superb post, Pat, beautifully written.

Rick. No worries republicans will always have something to whine about. It is their natural state.

Rick:

If they cannot find one, they will make one up anyway.

Hi Patrick, I said much the same earlier in the week, when I referred to the sleeping giant awakening.

The happenings in WI have caught the attention of the electorate as nothing else has and we can only hope their attention will still be there in the next election.

Mamma. If we keep up the pressure on the "liberal media" not to bury the story, it will

It will Patrick. See my first post above. The story was featured on "Daily Rundown" today, these kind of things need to have bright sunlight on them for any consequences to follow.

Have a great weekend. I like to see your post, often very succinct.

Patrick:

Good posts to end the week. Have a great weekend my friend.

Good Morning Nash, great post.

Perhaps following the events in WI, the American people will be more inclined to believe that corporations are not always their friend. It is not in the best interests of the middle class voter to vote for those handsomely paid and supported by big corporations.

Research, Research Research.........before voting.

Have a great weekend

Good morning to you Gingerbread Mamma . . . I'm on a diet and your name sounds really delicious this morning . . . don't get too close . . . lol! :o)

It is funny reading the posts today from some of the usual people. Governor Walker has won the pay concessions from the Unions, he has or will have the spending cuts he wanted. So, that is a done deal, the deficit is basically off the table. So my question is why the layoffs? He got the spending cuts he wanted so money is NOT the issue here. He is using the same tactic that the GOP used in November to get the tax bonuses for the richest 2%, period. He is trying to use the union employees as a bargaining chip to destroy the Unions. He is basically trying to use the Union Members against themselves.

These guys are beyond repugnant and morally/ethically corrupt. It is all about power and wealth for the "Sugar Daddy's" that funded his election. It is called "pay back time" and his boosters are calling in the favors.

This is just about busting the Unions and I have said so since day one. The fact that the unions have accepted the new pay cuts, etc. and he is continuing to not compromise says only one thing. He is a "Union Busting" thug, clear enough for you all.

navy,

i think this is could go to the supreme court, on the ground that he only singles out certain employees, again this is reminds me of the segregation laws of the south that were against a certain group of people. all men are Equal Under Law.

This is not equal under law.

I suppose we should just start calling him Pinkerton Walker, USN, lol, it about fits the truth of the matter!

Well said, Nashville Fan. One good thing that Walker has done is to remind people, union or nonunion, that their rights are being systematically eliminated. This is a wake-up call.

I agree. I also appreciate First Read's introspective acknowledgement of media's failures and hope it helps lead every media outlet (well, FOX won't bother except Shep Smith) to focus on facts and on what is really happening; time for them to dig in the weeds and tell us what they find.

Bob:

That's better, no swear words, civil tone, more respectful. That's one step forward

Attacking Feisty is two steps backward.

*Stand & Applause Bill*

I'm LMAO!

You should write like that more often, might get you some more green 'stars'! lol

BTW: Don't think you're comment of agreement with me yesterday went unoticed! ;o) & sorry Billy it is you who still needs that clue!

Have a good weekend!

Bill, you are truly one in a million! lol

The one thing I can say is that I read the entire thing this time . . . an improvement over yesterday. :o)

See ya next week.

Bill..LOL a tale of the absurd is always good for a laugh. Clara? deer in the headlights look? Nah, you got that picture wrong amongst a few other impressions.

But a big improvement over earlier this week.

Considering the state of the country and the world, I did not think I had a laugh left in me.

Thanks, Bill

Bill - you do have a way with words. I definitely laughed reading your narrative.

Make sure you sharpen your sword on Monday, though. You'll need it.

P.S. I lurk with the best of 'em, and YES, you are wrong. Always.

Happy Friday!!

Bill:

Well written and funny. I seldom laugh out loud, but you did create a smile. As for the horseshoes, they will kick the Raven's butt again next year.

Have a good weekend Bill.

Thank you Thank you, Bill! I woke up in a wonderful mood this morning, and you have just made the rest of my day!

And I'll second "Truer words were never spoken". I'll be referring back to this post regularly, when the nonsense that's spread around here gets a little too deep.

Bill that there is just fine like frog hair split. Have a good weekend BTW I'd be a little more careful about the company that you and your new found clue keep. A fellow is know by that doncha know.

Thanks for the comments, glad you all had a yuk. Have a nice weekend.

bill - well done, I think redneck is a little jealous doncha know.

Enjoy the weekend!

Very nice Bill! I do see one flaw in your story......Fiesty never had a clue to give you.

Other than that, great story!

Hey, Bill. Ever find the expiration date for the HCR bill? If it was passed by reconciliation, it must have an expiration date, a sunset date.

Unfortunately, the fall into this "Nazi-facism" abyss started as a crack with R. Reagan when he allowed the GOP to oust sensible Goldwater style republicans. The crack widened as Bush Sr. took over. Opening of the crack stalled with Clinton, even though the Gingrich tried as hard as he could to race us there. Then came Bush Jr., and the crack became a chasm, changing American values and ideals permanently. While Obama and the democratic congress tried shore up the crack, there just wasn't time before tea partiers joined the GOP to make the final rush. 2012 will indeed be the last/final turning point. Unfortuately, too many voters are too uninformed - but that being said, I have been able to convince a few of my republican friends in the last few months to renounce their party and change their status to independent. Perhaps we may scathe through 2012 better off .. without the religious right, and the multi-national cooperations running the show.

Skip, RedDev, terrific posts. It scares me to think that many people are oblivious to what is happening. Absolutely Reagan started us down this perilous path--anti-Government, anti-union, anti-women's rights, tax cuts for the rich and famous, business oriented voodoo economics, and the list goes on.

Jody, are you oblivious to what is happening? Anti womens rights? what are you talking about? So called voodoo economics worked and the nation experienced 25+ years of prosperity as a result. What is happening now if you care to open your eyes and look is another liberal democrat running under the "hope and change" banner ala Jimmy carter 1976 (the last liberal wacko to occupy the white house is running our country into the dirt. Sky rocketing gas prices and unemployment, global unrest the last thing we need is four more years of liberal san francisco kookdom. Wake up!!! your ilk created this mess

no sir "trickle down " economics never worked for the other few million of us . please give that whole put more money in the hands of the 2% thing a rest.

Bob:

Real political dialogue requires three or four paragraphs. Simply to say that someone is stupid is not dialogue, it's bullying. There are some excellent writers on FR. Read what they have to say, think about their position, and take the time to write a thoughtful response.

"We are witnessing the rise of a new Nazi party in America"

This is what passes for real political dialogue? Is there a thoughful response to such tripe, other than cackling at leftist moonbats trying to out-extreme each other?

Bob 18

"Leftist Moonbats"? That's your idea of intelligent discussion?

Your average response can be summed up in six words, "Oh, yeah, so's yer old man!"

From a historical standpoint America is at the tipping point. We could go either way. Forget everything you think you know, forget your self-image as a righteous conservative and open your eyes.

Look at the tone of your very own posts! You demonize the left, you call the left or liberal bloggers names and belittle their discussion points. But you offer nothing of substance in response.

Look at history Bob. Look at the patterns in what has gone before. Human beings are creatures of habit. We are DOOMED to repeat our history because we are self-delusional and cannot look at ourselves or our situations objectively.

Of course you don't see it. You ARE it! Do you think that Hitler, or Goebbels or even the rank and file Nazi party members realized what they were doing? No. Hitler saw himself as the savior of Germany. The average German fell into lock step with the Nazi because they gave the Germans a scapegoat to blame for of all their miseries, the "Jews, gypsies and communists".

You and your conservative friends do the same thing every day calling people "leftist moonbats" and worse.

Bob, step back, take moment, look in the mirror and realize what you are becoming. Do what the average German in 1933 did not do. Stop, think, recognize the moment you are in before it's too late.

Once the roller coaster gets to the top of the chain-hill and tips over the edge gravity takes over and the the ride has begun. At that point you cannot stop it. That's where we are today, we are at the top of the chain-hill with the roller coaster just about to start it's downhill run. 2012 will be that tipping point. If we don't pull back we are in for one hellish ride.

Bob, be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.

Tell ya what, Skip... The lefties began the derogatory banter a long time before the Tea Party... frankly I got tired of the flame calling, but finally recognized this as the leftist, socialist methodology for marginalizing anyone who disagreed with their positions... take it for what it's worth. If you're going spew BS, be prepared for the blowback. K?

term limits , flat tax ,and the line item veto . those are real things we should do . whats your ideas ?

i am not left, i am not right , i am a citizen trying to get things better . where is your point ?

wow my vote did all that gosh i shoulda voted king george the 2Nd as a write in then .