Dang, 10 th amendment

For this enormous flexibility in managing his work force, Mr. Obama can thank his own party.

...and that's why now the federal government is completely efficient and debt free, and we all lived happily ever after.

Way to demonstrate the innefficacy of eliminating collective bargining rights as a tool for achieving fiscal stability.

hey justine I like your sarcasim

NewMalthus: What "RIGHT" to collective barganing

So your argument is, that if federal workers can't bargain collectively, then state workers shouldn't be able to either?

Not much of a state's rights guy are you?

There are plenty of things that apply to federal workers that don't apply at the state levels. There is a whole separate judicial system for the military, for one thing.
Federal workers can reside in any state in the union, which would make it difficult for them to collectively bargain on salaries, for example, where a federal worker in NYC would arguably require a much higher salary than a federal worker in rural Alabama.

PS. I have a couple of relatives who work for the federal government, and trust me, they aren't complaining about not being able to bargain collectively. State workers are in a much precarious position, which is why they need the right to negotiate.

Fact: Those 2,000,000 million workers do include 600,000 military.

Fact: I stopped reading after that error.

Reagan was the only president in American history to have belonged to a union, the AFL-CIO affiliated Screen Actors Guild. And he even served six terms as president of the organized labor group. Additionally, Reagan was a staunch advocate for the collective bargaining rights of one of the world’s most famous and most influential trade unions, Poland’s Solidarity movement.

REAGAN: Ever since martial law was brutally imposed last December, Polish authorities have been assuring the world that they’re interested in a genuine reconciliation with the Polish people. But the Polish regime’s action yesterday reveals the hollowness of its promises. By outlawing Solidarity, a free trade organization to which an overwhelming majority of Polish workers and farmers belong, they have made it clear that they never had any intention of restoring one of the most elemental human rights—the right to belong to a free trade union

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/25/flashback-reagan-union-right/

I actually asked a couple of people who were against stripping the unions of collective bargaining rights if they actually knew what that meant. It turned out they didn’t and when explained to them that what this does is to make them more consistent with the bargaining available to federal unions. However, in the case of Wisconsin, the unions will still have better collective bargaining rights than the fed unions.

Upon hearing that, they then thought that maybe this was a good idea after all, especially since the state is broke.

I think there are many people who don’t understand exactly what they’re voting for or against.

You're joking right? The unions are nothing but a complete joke.... Take the Teamsters for instance.... How many more receivership's before the people wake up..... Look at what the average union BA makes..... Check it out.... unionfacts.com....

truthhurts....that is what you call hitting the nail on the head!!! Well said.It is too bad all these anti-union workers don't realize that their pay and benefits would be alot less if it wasn't for the unions..

Independent Redneck - *scratches head...so, Reagan was FOR unions before he was AGAINST them?

Cuz, he's best known for being a union buster...with the PATCO 1981 air traffic controller strike.

Perhaps, at the time, Reagan didnt "realize" the ball he was setting in motion, but today...plenty of conservatives consider him a personal hero for busting the unions, and allowing private employers to be not so fearful of going up against the unions.

Some may argue Reagan did the right thing, the air traffic controllers broke the law by striking - which they did do - and therefore he simply fired them.

However, the whole point of a the union was to BARGAIN - so all of this could have been resolved without a strike, by simply sitting at a table with them - listening to their concerns, and correcting problems that were valid - such as working conditions - and kicking to the curb the ones that werent, like asking for a 32 hr work week.

Instead, Reagan said F YOU - workers have no rights, goodbye...all of you.

What happened next, it took 10 years to train and replace all of those workers...and who knows how much longer to fully address the concerns they raised at the time (if they were ever addressed).

Bottom line - if you support busting unions, its because you believe workers have no say in the way the world works, only their wealthy employers.

So, this is what the message is: We want a Plutocracy, not a democracy.

And Gov Walker is doing his best Ronnie Reagan impersonation to finish off the job...

Great, thanks union labor laws, now what are you doing for us? Seems like you have done all that you can so see ya... bye bye!

In the 1980 presidential election, PATCO (along with the Teamsters and the Air Line Pilots Association) refused to back President Jimmy Carter, instead endorsing Republican Party candidate Ronald Reagan. PATCO's refusal to endorse the Democratic Party stemmed in large part from poor labor relations with the FAA (the employer of PATCO members) under the Carter administration and Ronald Reagan's endorsement of the union and its struggle for better conditions during the 1980 election campaign.

On August 3, 1981 the union declared a strike, seeking better working conditions, better pay and a 32-hour workweek. In doing so, the union violated a law {5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p.} that banned strikes by government unions. Ronald Reagan declared the PATCO strike a "peril to national safety" and ordered them back to work under the terms of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)

___________________________________________________________

Well we should emulate Reagan in “union busting” right? I mean after all he set the standard by “busting” PATCO Didn’t he? Nonsense. Reagan didn’t bust PATCO, PATCO busted PATCO. PATCO failed to honor their collective bargaining agreement and called for and participated in an illegal strike. All the Reagan Administration did was invoke the Rule of Law which PATCO refused to follow. While the outcome and some of the punitive measures taken could be viewed as unnecessarily harsh they were not unethical nor outside The Rule of Law.

Contrast this with what is going on up in Wisconsin. Governor Walker has consistently and repeatedly shown his willingness to act in any unethical manner he sees fit. Rather than follow the Rule of Law he chooses to ignore it or in some cases violate it. For the Governor of a State to act in this manner is wrong on so many levels that I’m not going to list them here.

The Right of Folks to negotiate for what they consider a just and honorable compensation for their work and thus their place in our society either as an individual or collectively used to be a basic human right recognized by both Republican and Democrat. It is one of the core values that made our society exceptional. To ask Us to repudiate it now is just basically and simply wrong.

Wet Willy "Upon hearing that, they then thought that maybe this was a good idea after all, especially since the state is broke."

You're making the connection that the state is broke because of the employee's collective bargaining, and thats a false connection. (is the fed doing fine financially all of sudden?)

When people are employed, the states were doing just fine...when people lost their jobs en masse - because employers wanted happier shareholders, not because they were struggling - suddenly states were going bankrupt. Unlike the fed, most of the states expenses are employee wages - not subsidies to big oil, or kickbacks to friends in states for contributing to their campaign, or paying off Tribal Leaders in the Afghanistan, ect...

Its not rocket science...the fewer people who are employed, the fewer people paying taxes. The less money people have in wages, the less they pay in taxes. The fewer employed and the less money those who are employed have, the less collectively they have to spend on the economy.

FYI - banks and businesses are sitting on trillions, doing nothing. You think THAT might be a reason why our economy is tanking? Im not a math major, but my thought is - if you've got 100 people holding 100 dollars, and 10 people manage to snag 90 of those dollars, the other 90 people arent going to fare too well with a collective 10 bucks between them. Just a thought...maybe im overthinking how this all works?

Of course, back to wisconsin - handing out a nice tax cut to businesses under the false lie that "cutting taxes spurs hiring" didnt help either. Those businesses didnt need those tax cuts, they arent hiring because there is no demand (ie no customers buying their crap) and there are no customers buying their crap, because we dont have jobs or money. And those who do have money, are terrified to spend it in case THEY lose their job. Its common economic knowledge - a business doesnt take the extra money they have left over and just hire employees because it helps the economy, no...they only hire when there is demand (as in customers buying so much of their junk they need more employees to handle the transactions). And thats not going to happen anytime soon...because, we are broke - collectively. We have no savings, we have nothing - collectively.

But yeah, lets cut more jobs/wages so that a select few can profit (the private business model), sounds like a brilliant recovery plan for america! *face palm

"I think there are many people who don’t understand exactly what they’re voting for or against."

and you should count yourself as one of them

Truthhurts: I have never belonged to a union but many times I wish I had. You are correct when you say "unions have problems" but, many forget one fact; the United States IS Union. And the United States was created by people who banned together as one. Common everyday people gave their lives for this union we so freely, (up until now) live. When the unions were created, men lost their lives then too. I would much rather see, conversation, negotiation and cooperation; over taking away the rights our ancestors fought.

No ONE person, should have more power or authority, when it comes to making a contract or deal. Neither wealth, power or bias, should be used, to influence bargaining. Scott Walker, John Kasich and the rest of the Republicans governors, have formed a Union of minds, to force the middle class, to take less then, what they earn and to work harder and longer, for the things the middle class have merited. What ever happened to " a fair days pay, for a fair days work?"

There are many days, in my career, when I worked overtime and short-handed, in a physically and mentally demanding job. I receive no reward except for the people who benefited from my dedication, as a nurse. And there are tmillions of people this country who do the same thing every day. They give until it hurts.

When I hear about the Koch brothers, who inherited their wealth, using their money to buy power and governors, something is very wrong with this nation of ours. Why, if you are a Republican or a Democrat; Union or non-union; would you allow wealthy people, to take what power, the middle class has left and crush it? In essence to are giving everything our ancestors died for, back to the kings!

Collective bargaining is the reason why we don't get paid $1 an hour anymore

Your business sense is poor. Unions do little to increase wages especially after you deduct union dues. If Company 'A' employs Fred at $1/hr but Fred brings in $4/hr of business then Company 'B' would step in and offer Fred $2/hr because they see the $2/hr net Fred represents. Company 'A' or Company 'C' would then have to decide if Fred is worth $3/hr or not. See Fred gets paid based on what he's worth not because of some intimidation tactics from unions. This is how capitalism works. Strong individuals thrive on their own merits and the unions thrive in harboring and protecting the weak.

IndependentThinker-796986

You may be independent but your certainly aren't much of a thinker. Many Federal employees are already unionized but without the right to strike. Such as the Post Office. I know you're too young to remember but the Post Office was on strike in the 70's and Nixon had the National Guard deliver the mail. Stop thinking and start learning a few facts before you open your mouth.

Living In Wisconsin " If the private sector people had not taken benefit and wage cuts to keep our places of employment open"...

i'll stop you right there, because in most cases that not WHY they had to take those wage cuts. Many employers offshored work - not to stay open and compete, but to make EVEN MORE MONEY than they were before.

And after the economy tanked in sept 2008 - many employers shed jobs, cut wages, furloughed employees...again, not to keep their doors open, but to improve their bottom lines - making their stocks look even better - so that their shareholders didnt cry and pout about how THEY were being negatively affected by the recession.

I work for a publically traded company - we took a furlough last year, despite record earnings every single quarter for the past 3 years. You see, the shareholders just werent "pleased" with their meager returns...

So we, the workers, had to chip in.

Im not sure exactly how much clearer the writing on the wall has to get...

*edited to add, there are plenty of companies not publically traded who didnt follow this trend, but you see...when the BIG EMPLOYERS do what they did, its the small employers who suffer, who then legitimately have to lay off people because there is no business, or business is slow...or there are small companies who are "getting by alright" but not "profitting like before"...who instead of being part of the solution, and mainting staff for as long as possible...simply shed jobs so that their personal bottom line is magnificent.

i think truthhurtssomtimes said it well

Jessica hope that answers your question a little better. The first part was in response to the rights questions. The seccond part was for you. As you can see unlike Walker and most of the other folks you see running around here spouting off a line of B.S. they don't know a thing about it. Reagan had a pretty good idea of Labor Unions,what they represent, and how to deal with them within the law. Walker has none of this background and while some might disparage Reagan as being a second rate movie actor at least I think you can see where he was about two or three times smarter than Gov Walker. Walker is just a WannaBe that's turning himself into a NeverWas right before everybody's very eyes.

unions blow. they had their time and place when the country was less civilized, but the fact is most of corporate america is doing just fine without and good talent gets higher pay through COMPETITION, not mandate. unions now are self serving greedy organizations. if you think anything less you are mistaken. if you want to defend unions, first clean them up and get them to fight for "fair" benefits - not for benefits better than the rest of us. it isn't about fairness anymore, it's about greed. all they do now is use their power and influence to extort exhuberent package deals. you know it - i know it - the whole world knows it - especially union members. so just freaking admit it already. the denial in this whole blog is disturbing to read.

1NewDay,

It's that basic principle that is being attacked in Wisconsin and other States right now. There is little talk about it in detail, but the real problem with what Walker is doing, is that he is setting himself up for being able to arbitrarily change any work rules that currently exist.

Really? That's what Governor Walker is trying to do? Funny, I thought it was the House, the Senate, and the Wisconsin citizenry that was doing it? You may not like it but that doesn't mean that it is wrong. A great man once said "Elections have consequences."

Nancy "If Company 'A' employs Fred at $1/hr but Fred brings in $4/hr of business then Company 'B' would step in and offer Fred $2/hr because they see the $2/hr net Fred represents. Company 'A' or Company 'C' would then have to decide if Fred is worth $3/hr or not. See Fred gets paid based on what he's worth not because of some intimidation tactics from unions. This is how capitalism works. Strong individuals thrive on their own merits and the unions thrive in harboring and protecting the weak."

thats the funniest joke ive ever read, do you think all workers are sales reps or CEO's? Most of us are grunt workers, who work jobs that anyone could (and should) be able to do so long as you simply show up to work and put in effort. There is no way to measure what those workers bring to the company, how much they save the company money (versus costing it) and even more so - you're little scenario reads like Jim @ Superior Printing is going to knock on my door and say "Hey Jessica, I see that you are helping your employer to become one of the leading print companies in the industry, and I think YOU are personally responsible for that...id like you to come work on my team as a print production manager!"

hahahaha! thats just hilarious. I mean, I get it that CEO's and stuff working for high profile companies, thats how it is happening - but - their offering of a job to a person who THEY BELIEVE is the reason why the company they work for is successful (without that employee being the one to have offered proof, or even having any proof they can offer) isnt based on reality.

For example - my spouse is being laid off soon because her employer brought in a guy from another company - and his job was to "clean up the place" just like he did at his last place of employment. The thing is, if he sold his skills to his new employer as that is what he did - what proof does this new employer have that he actually did that? Short term success does not translate to long term - and saying "hey, look how much I saved this company money" does not mean "hey, long term, you'll still be saving money"...in fact, what happens too often is that after this guy moves on to the next company, they come to realize that he made a bigger mess than he fixed. And while maybe his eliminating of 15 depts - short term - saved money, in the long term it will cost them to fix all the new problems he's created by combining depts that cant adequately do what the previous depts did...and they might even lose customers because the customers are not happy with the new service levels. Which again, is not realized until after Mr. Fix It has moved on to his next adventure, reselling himself as the man who turns things around!

The point im trying to make is this: there's no way for an employer - in most cases - to confirm what you're selling about yourself, the only way to do that is to prove yourself when you DO get employed. which totally blows your stupid scenario apart...considering, one must FIRST get employed to prove oneself...and these days, thats like asking a 600 lb person to fit into an airplane seat, its just not happening.

Reagan never had a clue about anything his advisors did what conservatives always do ,blame others as that is the easiest target when confronted with complex problem, then go on to offer some ration of parsed words tell everyones eyes glaze over and we agree with you.

Developing apathy take constant chatter meaning nothing solving nothing, while distracting the masses with bait and switch.

Jessica you are spot on,, monopolies are not suppose to be legal but do you hear anyone saying why are there so many ' chains' holding the american market place to the bottom. NO lets blame the workers

A very Proud liberal FDR warned us about all of this and basic human rights is a product of liberals as is this nation.

Jessica 2.17

Obviously you’re one of those “from each according to their ability, to those according to their need” types.

You rail on about it’s not the unions that are breaking the backs of the taxpayers but big business and the wealthy because they won’t spend their money.

Well, listen up; it is the unions that are a huge part of that. Consider the following scenario during this “collective bargaining” process.

Well governor, we’re a big and powerful union with plenty of votes. You can either give us what we want and be assured of re-election or if not, look for another day job.

That’s collective bargaining for you which is why a couple of presidents considered it a foolish idea in the public sector. Interestingly they were both democratic presidents.

Perhaps it is you that should be counted among those union dregs and accept the fact that the era of the gravy train is at an end.

Stop polling liberals and you'll see those approve/disapprove numbers flip flop...

Why bother altering the polling method? Just announce the reverse of the outcome as they did on FOX News.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/23/fox-reverses-poll-union/#

"These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland...where unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

--Ronald Reagan, 1980 Labor Day Address

Let them bargain, but in the meantime lay off as many as it takes to get budgets under control. It seems like the senior employees want to keep their jobs at the expense of others so let them keep them and take up the slack, just like in the private sector.

@ Indiana: Don't fool yourself. If the Koch Brothers get their way, everything union workers fought and even died for will be stripped away.

Living in Wisconsin,

That would be THEIR jobs, not 'there' jobs. I guess you should have paid a little more attention to that union-member English teacher...

I wonder what the result would be if the poll asked;

Do you believe that public employees should be able to use taxpayer funded union dues to help elect politicians that the unions will negotiate with for better pay and benefits?

Do you believe that joining a union should be a requirement as a condition of employment for a public employee?

I suspect that when the voters understand what 'collective bargaining' really means, you would get different results.

I've got an idea! How about the Gov of Wisc start cutting wages, starting with his first, followed by all the other reps who think its a good idea to strip collective bargaining from state employees. Fortunately for them all they have to do is vote for themselves a raise...no bargaining needed

i belonged to a union once. i know what they are about and it sure wasn't about me or my family. i do believe unions "once" served a purpose in our society but now it is about those people who are supposed to serve the people in a union who are all about serving themselves. as for collective barganing, if the wisconsin governor leaves the collective barganing on the table, they will be back to where they were in the first place.

all you have to do is look at one of the most liberal states in the union, california(where is lived for 4 years) and their debt is incredible and partially because of unions and their barganing rights. they are bankrupt and will be for quite a while, while the dems run the state.

hmmm...how are you going to make the members of the union crime syndicates "pay more for their benefits" if they have collecting bargaining on it that says they can say "up yours we aren't paying it"...

interesting how this Governor has said repeatedly that salary and other "collective bargaining" isn't on the list , the very thing that thing that the morons writing this article are talking about is what is targeted...the libbie Jethro union mobius strip way of thinking is pretty ignorant

Jessica, you are living proof of why so many co pains outsource or offshore jobs.

So, you see yourself as merely a cog in the wheel, huh? Think you add no value to your business, anybody could do your job?

I certainly hope your employer recognizes you on this site- as you do not deserve your employment.

Let me tell you something- there is a man in my husband's company, been there many years. Has a relatively low skill job- and, when asked, will tell you he has the most important job in the company. Why? He fills sample requests- so, he considers that, when the customer gets the sample immediately after they request it, it adds value.

He brings that attitude with him to work, every single day.

Which explains why, when he retired last month, there was a large party, a huge retirement gift check in addition to his pension, and a gift of a cruise(first class) presented to him.

Strive for that attitude. It gets noticed- and rewarded.

Most of us are grunt workers, who work jobs that anyone could (and should) be able to do so long as you simply show up to work and put in effort. There is no way to measure what those workers bring to the company,

Now this funny. You have an even poorer business sense. Every employee has a value to their employee from "grunt workers" to CEOs. If any employee costs more than what a company is making off of them they are no use to the company and sure to be let go. I work in construction management so I deal with "grunt workers" all the time and not all "grunt workers" are the same. Some worker harder than others and some work smarter than others, hence some are more productive than others If there is no way to measure what these "grunt" workers bring to the company then how does a company make money? How does a construction company put an estimate together without knowing how fast these "grunt workers" can demo a building or clear a site? They have to know how long it'll take their "grunt workers" to knock down the building and haul off the rubble, this is their value. Obviously if you're just a "grunt worker" with limited skills your value to any company will be limited but you still have value. If you didn't you and you cost a company more than you're worth you'd be out the door. Companies don't employ people out of the kindness of their heart, the employ people because they need those employees to make money. Therefore they know the value of every employee.

62% against stripping public employees' bargaining rights + me = 63%

Nancy

"If you didn't you and you cost a company more than you're worth you'd be out the door"

is that also true for the union teachers that have shown that they are "grunt" teachers that are ineffective?...you know, the ones that can't be fired...check out the "rubber rooms" and how much that costs

A Union guy, a tea-partier, and a CEO are at a table with 12 cookies. The CEO takes 11 and tells the tea-partier, "that Union guy wants part of your cookie."

The CEO would have taken ALL the cookies but leaving the TPer and the union guy to squabble over the crumbs of the one cookie created a great diversion while the CEO hid his cookies away in an offshore account.

Ronny

your example is a "private union" and a CEO...the subject matter here is "public unions"...your attempt fails miserably ..the citizens of Wisconsin are the "CEO" in this matter and they have no seat at the table, unless you count the bought and paid for libbie Jethros that they were stupid enough to elect...

No problem!

I believe 30% of Americans view themselves as Republicans, same for Democrats. Leaving 40% that aren't sheep ;-) The problem with America is that we have the tail wagging the dog, it's either the 30% of Republicans or Democrats trying to shove their ideology on the rest of us.

Anyway, my point is that the 33% is probably made up of Republicans. Tail wagging the dog.

all of you people realize that most of the Tea/Party equals republican and some stupid dems who voted for this crap are getting what you deserve LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you actually think that attempting to reduce budget deficits is going to hurt Republicans? That is why they were voted into office and Dems were thrown out. No matter what happens in WI, in 2012 and 2014 the budget deficit will still exist and Dems will still be trying to Spend! Spend! Spend! and they will be held accountable again.

I think Walker has bit off more then he can chew with this situation....he's bought and paid for the the Koch brother's he can't back down now...

Anybody notice, when you see him on TV, he sure looks tired and worn down, doesn't he?. This mess he's created is bothering him, he's not getting any sleep..he thought the American people would roll over and take this, he's finding out otherwise....

All the state employees and unions say they're willing to "negotiate", yet they are the same people flushing self serving outrageous agreements through school boards as quickly as possible before the new State budget takes effect. I'm willing to bet that the 68% of people who don't agree with stripping SOME bargaining rights are idiots who have no idea what they're "voting" for!

Here is a little known fact:

Fred Koch started his company in the USSR after, the United States would not allow him and his partner to use their ingenious cracking plants, to make gas out of crude, at a much faster and better rate. Soooo, Fred went to the USSR, but after living there, he did not like Stalin or communism. Fred came back to the USA. His sons, who inherited Fred's company, are now trying to make the United States, like the USSR. They want the ruling class to have all the benefits and none of the work or worry. After all, actual labor or dirtying your hands, is for the peons, like union workers.

If Fred were alive today, I think he would disown Charles and David, or at least send them to the salt mines! Might as well send Scott Walker with them.

Take that back,

If Fred were alive today, I think he would disown Charles and David, or at least send them to the salt mines! Might as well send Scott Walker with them.

I wonder what Fred would do with George Soros?

Toyota3, and the democrats are bought and paid for by the unions.

Pjam--

And Repugs don't spend??

$1.16 TRILLION on wars of CHOICE???

Yeah, real tight fisted, they are.

Never mind the biggest expansion of the federal workforce in history under DHS...

Grow a brain.

Sometimes wars of 'choice' are less expensive. Look up Neville Chamberlin and the Munich Agreement.

Yeah, no kidding sk-nitroWV,

The presidents who have added to the national debt the most in U.S. history are Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Although, to be fair, that's not to say the Obama Administration's debt isn't getting up there...

The solution is to raise taxes and interest rates when economic times are good, and lower them when times are bad. That's the Keynsian model which kept us out of another Great Depression until Bush Jr.'s deregulation of Wall Street made this recession possible. Unfortunately, nobody wants to be the politician who raised taxes. They'd rather just cut working people's wages. The poor don't have high voter turnouts anyway (and they usually vote for Democrats).

Grand Moff Joseph

Keep it up GOP/TP! At the rate you are alienating the moderates and energizing the left, by the time 2012 comes around, you'll see what a real grassroots movement can do to your political future.

Speaking of roots, get a load of this...

March 2, 2011

Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions

Bill O’Reilly shows video of ‘violent union protests’ in Wisconsin on Fox News Propaganda Factor. Video shows PALM TREES. In Wisconsin.

Answer: Lies go in. Lies go out. Never a miscommunication.

http://foknewschannel.com/

=============================================

I keep telling ya'll FOX LIES. Also, MSNBC GIVES LIBERAL IN THE EVENING AND CONSERVATIVE VIEWS MORNING AND AFTERNOON. FOX DOESN'T MSNBC IS FAIR AND BALANCED. UNLIKE FOX NOISE MSNBC GIVES BOTH POINTS OF VIEW.

NOW THAT'S WHAT I CALL , WHAT'S THAT? RIGHT FAIR AND BALANCED!!!

OKAY RIGHTIES SHOT YOUR BEST SHOTS T-MIMUS 321...

I think you might be interested in this too...

FOKNewsChannel

repost:

[snip]

Scott Walker: That Man Is An Idiot

Posted on March 1, 2011

Good grief, how many stupid people do we have in this country? And how come we keep electing them as Republican governors?

In a had-to-be-seen-to-be-believed budget speech this afternoon, Wisconsin’s pet rock of a chief executive, Scott Walker, barely touched on the firestorm that has put his slightly cross-eyed, startled-looking mug on the national map. Absent were references to violating court orders to keep the Capitol open to protesters. No mention was made of unilateral decisions to bolt the Capitol windows shut. There wasn’t a word in there about the no-holds-barred campaign to demonize the Unions as if they were al-Qaeda. Only in passing – by referencing those Democrats who interrupted the knee-capping of collective bargaining rights – did Walker even come close to mentioning the issue that his lit up the night sky of America’s Dairyland.

In short, Walker’s speech sounded about as in-touch and pertinent as one of Hosni Mubarak’s. No; check that; Mubarak eventually got it. When it comes to tone-deaf speechifying (not, obviously, bloodshed), Walker is closer to Colonel Gadaffi. Read more »

http://foknewschannel.com/

that's my prediction too. The Teabag Party will implode.

Quite a ways to go grand poobah. Do like how obama and company is posturing to use military force against libya.

Then a national debt of 14.5 trillion will need to be explained to the voters.

And we all know how obama and company kept a lazer focus on jobs as well as promoting an ant-i business attitude in 2009 and 2010.

Good to see how obamas "hope and change thingy" is working out.

He better hope that his cozying up with business and wall street since Nov 2010 brings unemployment under 7.8% and showing a downward trend.

Hmmmm?....Republicans get ripped for wanting to support businesses, but when obama does it where is the liberal noise? Constant chanting of Koch, Koch, Koch won't cut it. Perhaps the liberal chant should become nationalize, nationalize, nationalize!

I'll take Fox anyday over msnbc.

I have been hearing the Tea Party will implode for almost 2 years. Still waiting.

Thanks Bev, I knew we all couldn't wait to see your libbie cut & paste reports......keep us all informed on the liberal view on the issues, for it is better reading than the comics.

Solidly demonstrates the "non-thinking" part of non-thinking, yellow-dog socialist/liberals.

safecracker

Thanks Bev, I knew we all couldn't wait to see your libbie cut & paste reports......keep us all informed on the liberal view on the issues, for it is better reading than the comics.

You're welcome. I'm glad you liked it.

How right you are. Real news is so much better than reading non-facts.

Time to Say NO MORE

I have been hearing the Tea Party will implode for almost 2 years. Still waiting.

You think there's no buyer's remorse now that uninformed voters realize that THEY are on the Teabag list of "undesirables"? Guess again.

First They came... - Pastor Martin Niemoller

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Good to see how obamas "hope and change thingy" is working out.

....spoken like a functionally illiterate governor from Alaska.....

Ah Bev, even your retorts are funny.......real news - HAHAHAHAHAHA....

@ leanderm

If you dislike MSNBC and love Fox news, then what are you doing here reading articles, AND commenting on them. We would all be happy of you left this thread and went back to Fox news.

Beverly in Chicago: Wisconsin’s pet rock of a chief executive, Scott Walker

HA! Thanks for posting (or cutting and pasting) that very apt and hilarious description of Scott Walker. I needed a good laugh today. :)

Good point! This is exactly why 2012 will be so different than 2010. We are watching the political pendulum swing back to the left just in time for Obama's re-election.

Charles,

I Obama is reelected I will be moving to the middle-east for freedom.

I look forward to that. I'll be glad to get rid of you.

Hey NO MORE Brains,

Freedom for what? To carry guns and to work 20 hours a day for crappy pay and no benefits? That's what guys like you want.

I Obama is reelected I will be moving to the middle-east for freedom.

Can you make sure to take the oxycontin addicted fat @ss with you?

He PROMISED to move to Costa Rica, last time I checked he's still here spewing his HATE!

Hey No More....Could you take your family and all your like minded friends with you???

Time to Say NO MORE,

Please take all the other Anti-American Bigots with you, this country will be a whole lot better off with Conservatives destroying the country from with in.

Time to Say NO MORE

Charles,

I Obama is reelected I will be moving to the middle-east for freedom.

Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you.

Obama is reelected I will be moving to the middle-east for freedom.

Let me know if you need a ride to the airport or help packing.

How about we take a poll on whether or not the American people agree with paying more taxes to support all of the illegals in the country??? If we tackled that ridiculous and draining economic problem, we wouldn't have to even CONSIDER whether or not the AMERICAN PEOPLE have to pay more for insurance and retirement!

"Obama is reelected I will be moving to the middle-east for freedom."

Sorry, they are chanting "Yes We Can!" there too.

Hey Juice for brains, ever thought of going in to talk for yourself to get a pay raise? Heaven forbid people stand on their own two feet without a paid mouth to do their talking for them, so that not only you get a raise, but also get one for Joe Worthless. You know him, the guy who only shows up to work whenever he feels like it, and when the company tries to get rid of him, the union bars they way. Yep, pretty sweet deal for Mr. Worthless.

Hey Juice for brains, ever thought of going in to talk for yourself to get a pay raise? Heaven forbid people stand on their own two feet without a paid mouth to do their talking for them,

I worked for a "for profit" hospital, non union. When the hospital merged with another chain we didn't get raises for well almost 2 years "because of the merger" but that didn't stop the people at the top from getting bonuses, company cars, etc. While it may sound simple OnlyinAmerica-2604171, it's not as easy as you make it seem. I've seen managers in non-union hospitals avoid giving out maximum pay raises to deserving employees in order to keep the dept budget down and fatten the manager's bonus. Where's the fairness in that? True, Joe Worthless gets the same raise as Danny Dynamite but it's at a negotiated rate, not based on popularity or dependent upon the manager saving money to enhance his/her bonus.

Ian, so, two wrongs do make a right then? The company not giving out pay raises, and Joe Worthless getting something he shouldn`t have from the start. That makes it all fair?

So Rick, by your comments we can take it a bit further. Public servants should make minimum wage as their top pay wage AND have absolutely no health care or any other benefits whatsover. I mean, after all. Its not "fair" for workers to pay and pay and have others live a more comfortable life than you.

Maybe what you SHOULD be outraged about is the fact that MANY MANY americans cannot afford healthcare and/or have any benefits in their everyday jobs and are forced to work for extremely poor wages.

This is the problem with our country. Instead of addressing the REAL problems (ie lack of benefits for workers, low wages, poor work conditions) we instead look at someone elses job and decide, damn, they make more than me so we should remove their benefits altogether. I would love to see what kind of teachers we get in the school system if we paid them a maximum of minimum wage as their salary.

Wow...Talk about sour grapes! Sounds like someone is regretting that career CHOICE...That's right, YOUR career CHOICE. I personally see trillions spent on things I think are unfair, so? The world doesn't revolve around you, me or anyone else. You do know public servants aren't literally servants like butlers, maids, or slaves right? They are people who go to work to make money. They go to a job every day just like you. I don't see you bitching at the companies that get tax breaks that pay better than the job you currently have do I? Those tax breaks you want corporate overlords to get is YOUR money too. Where is your outcry there Rick?

Could someone explain to me why US capitalism is so much better than the Chinese version of communism? It seems that China has the cheap labor, the money to invest, the hard work ethic. Our own businesses seem to prefer their labor, their money, their work sites. If the US IS better than China, is it on economic grounds or humanitarian grounds? If the latter, why are we so quick to dismantle any program that helps people out.

You got that right Rick! Pensions should be pegged for withdrawal at 59 1/2 just like for 401k's with no double dipping of public funds (read private sector tax $$$).

I'd be interested to know how many retirees from government at any level take another job within the government (this time a different level) and qualify for yet another government retirement. I personally know many people who retire from the military and then go work for the state, city, county or even federal government.

Why doesn't the Private sector keep up with the Public Sector. The good Jobs don't need to be Federal Jobs. That's the question.

Why isn't the private doing for their employees what the Public sector does? Oh wait that's right, In the Private sector you have to own the company to have retirement and benefits. My bad.

dburton:

I wish people would understand that concept about what's wrong with our country, that just because someone else has something more than you do (generally speaking), that doesn't give you the right to take from the other person until you have equal portion. The only person responsible for YOUR position in life is YOU. If you are poor, it's because you or your family made bad decisions. If you're wealthy, you or your family obviously made wise decisions. No one owes anyone anything, if you are unhappy with what you make, I suggest you get off your rear and change things until you find happiness. Expecting someone else to pay more because you can't hack it in life is absurd. If "John Doe" went to school, got a good education and makes millions, so can you. We all have the same opportunities, whether we choose the correct path is entirely on us...This isn't just about Unions. I'm sure you catch my drift.

TM-689440

If you're wealthy, you or your family obviously made wise decisions.

Or screwed over everyone in your path to get there. Not all wealth is earned. Ask Bernie Madoff.

Rick, if you clean that brown, smelly stuff out of your ears and stop swallowing it and do some independent research, you will find that the 'average' public employee doesn't exist and sure as hell isn't paid what the "average" salary is being touted as.

I WAS a state employeed in Indiana through most of the 1990s and can tell you that most of the clerks, secretaries, administrative assistants, etc., were severely UNDERPAID, and they still are. The starting salaries of most of the clerical jobs are minimum wage or just above. In our department we had ladies with families of children who qualified for food stamps because their pay was so low. Even the higher level secretaries and administrative assistants are lucky to see $30,000 a year.

What is skewing the average and giving a false view to ignorant folk like you is those averages include executive positions like governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, treasuer, attorney general and government agency heads, all of whom make at or near $100,000 per year. It also includes the sports coaches at state universities like IU's basketball coach who makes $600,000 per year. And it includes the state supreme court justices who receive $150,000 per year.

If you average out 15 employees making $25K with one basketball coach making $600K, you arrive at an "average" state salary of nearly $61K. Does that truly give a realistic view of public worker salaries? No, but you boobs probably don't want to have to think and research and do the math for yourselves. You just want to be spoonfed information that fits your prejudices and inflames false envy.

You're disgusting and pathetic.

wow,

BlackHillsLaura

Would you consider contributing to a national news network because I just learned more facts in your one post than I did from a half hour of watching the evening news last night.

And let's look at who Madoff helped elect, shall we...

http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?last=Madoff&first=Bernard

Yet another squeaky clean democrat looking out for the little guy. Oh wait...

BlackHillsLaura

clerks, secretaries, administrative assistants, etc.,

These are minimum wage jobs, if they chose to get pregnant and push out puppies instead of furthering their education why is that my fault and why should they be Over-paid for a menial job like you so well pointed out.

Thank you, Amy B.

I work hard to be informed, to not take someone else's assertions of 'facts' as my own thought or opinion without confirming them. Also, I have lived in and worked in both "right to work" states and states where there are unions, so I know first-hand a lot of what's being hollered about.

My dad worked as an accountant for Chrysler in Detroit in the 60s and though he wasn't ever a union member (nor have I ever been) he was very vocal about appreciating what unions accomplished, because whatever unions won for their members was also given to the white collar employees. My dad actually felt guilty about taking benefits he hadn't contributed to providing.

40-hour work week, overtime, sick and vacation pay, family leave, health care benefits, pensions... we have all of those things because of unions. Only fools think that we will keep them if unions go away. That's why this attempt is happening. Why the big hullaballoo about a 'mere' 12% of the national workforce, otherwise? Because most people are rightfully untrusting of unrestrained business.

The people who believe business to be benign, moral, unselfish, scrupulous are not only delusional, but they don't recognize that our country's system of government is based on exactly the same mutual mistrust of any entity with a single focus, or giving too much unrestrained strength and power to any one party in a relationship. Checks and balances divide power and protect the executive branch from the legislative from the judicial.

Should we have given up our nuclear arsenal prior to the USSR agreeing to the same thing? Would most of these Repubs give up their guns on faith that the government and law enforcement won't hurt them? Hell, no. But they want workers to give up their defense against big business, that has shown there is no corner they won't cut, no pollution they won't try to get away with, etc.

TM-689440,

Unfortunately, Envy is alive and well in this country. My grandfather left Norway because he was tired of being surrounded by those who thought they were entitled to something, even when they hadn't earned it, then got frustrated when he saw more and more in American society adopting a similar attitude. When you create a welfare society, you enable the entitlement attitude, because you create backstops that allow people to be less responsible. Accordingly, they grow up in a society that basically says that, because you exist, you're automatically owed something. And, because they grow up under this presumption, they're not motivated to understand what ultimately creates jobs, generates commerce - in fact they attack those who do. They go on tirades about how overpaid corporate CEOs are, when they themselves wouldn't know the first thing about how to run a corporation and don't understand that there are few who do, and because there are so few that do, they command a pretty penny for their services. No, they think the money just sort of comes automatically - it couldn't require much real effort to generate it. And why would they think otherwise? They've been brought up thinking they should receive health care without having to pay for it. They should receive education without having to pay for it. They should receive <name the benefit> without having to pay for it...

It is, and will be, this attitude that ultimately destroys this society, because the takers will ultimately overwhelm the providers. One has to look no further than Greece and Portugal for precedent...

'TM-689440

If you're wealthy, you or your family obviously made wise decisions.

Or screwed over everyone in your path to get there. Not all wealth is earned. Ask Bernie Madoff."

And if your poor, you need to learn to stand up and talk for yourself and get a pay raise, and let Joe Worthless do his own talking. Not all poor people are mutes. Ask Joe Worthless, he`ll tell you how good he is.

The main problem with public worker unions is that the worker pays dues to the union so the union can collectively bargain with the state. The union also uses this money to support the politicians that are pro-union. So we essentially have an organization that is bargaining with a group that they have been paying off. It's a legal bribery system. It needs to end now. The unions did this country a great service, but I do not know a single person that feels that unions are needed any longer. We now have federal laws that protect wages and working conditions. We can thank the unions for this, but wave goodbye at the same time...

Rorschach-558483
Or screwed over everyone in your path to get there. Not all wealth is earned. Ask Bernie Madoff.

I can guarantee you if he hadn't screwed over his clients, he'd still be wealthy. Why? Because he went to school, got an education, and chose a very well paying career.

I don't condone Bernie Madoff in any shape, way, or form, but if you're throwing stones, I think you should throw them in all directions. The poor are trying to screw the wealthy over by demanding they pay more in taxes to cover all the things that the poor WON'T earn for themselves. You can look at it from both sides of the isle, but the best place to look at it is from the middle. I said it before, everyone has the same opportunities to succeed in life. If you choose to sit on your butt, not go to school, and not be a productive member of society, then don't complain when you see others pass you by...

Madoff got rich because people were chasing the American dream-something for nothing.

Your right Ian, reminds you of Wall Street, doesn`t it?

"where is granny pole dancer?..."

hahaha...good one ...I guess the answer is "we don't know" where your grandma is, we would asume she is in the "VIP" taking care of business........

ian - something for nothing, don't you mean nothing for something? Last I checked that wasn't the American dream.

agree...most of the people on the street have no clue what these entitlements will end up costing them 20,30 or 40 years down the road...throw in some health care, a little set aside for your retirement and what is left....not a pot to @@@@ in.

as my man above me said, if you want to contribute to their retirement by all means ante up, but me, I want NO part of it.

Lies! You tell lies... nobody is buying your brand of crazy and it shows - in this poll!

Go home Teabaggers!

So you obviously missed what the poll stated about the majority feels that they agree that state workers should pay more (not argued by the Union in Wis because they already agreed to the changes that Walker wanted the only one they said no to is dissolving the union all together giving up the right to collective bargain). The SAME people agree that the public workers SHOULD NOT HAVE TO GIVE UP THEIR RIGHTS TO BARGAIN AS A COLLECTIVE.

Learn to read. if you don't know how to get help, let me know, I know of places.

Union dues cover the cost of representation. If people want to contribute to a political party, that is separate. If people aren't represented by a union, they have to hire their own lawyer if any job-related problem comes up.

Time to Say NO MORE

Now call the same people back and ask them to cut a check for 10K to help cover the exploding entitlements of the public sector and see what the poll numbers look like.

Fact:

Most Americans are clueless to the real issues. Public sector Union members pay dues. Dues go to elected officials for reelection. Same Union members bargain with the reelected for better pay and bennies. It's not even unethical. It's corruption."

What entitlements? You mean the health care and benefits they get as part of their pay? Those same benefits that the members have AGREED to help pay some of the premium costs on? You mean THOSE benefits?

Sounds like your buying into that whole bull@!$%# argument that since they are public workers who pay union dues OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS that there is some issue with what happens to those union dues and who the unions may or may not support in elections? How exactly is this any different than, oh. The Koch Brothers paying a LOT of money to support Governer Walker to get elected and then Governer Walker decides...hey, I think we're gonna pass a law that allows the state to sell PUBLIC UTILITES to whoever I want to sell them to and not to go through the bidding process. Heres a hint for you. IF that law passes, you can bet your ass that Koch will end up owning those public utilites that are being sold in Wisconsin. Of course the former, where an employee takes their OWN HARD EARNED MONEY and pays their Union dues out of it and supports a candidate is again, a taxpayer in their own right. They live, work and spend in their own state of Wisconsin (or whichever state they live in). The former are the mass of "we the people". The latter is a single Billionaire or two who really want to bend the will of a politician not to help "we the people" but to help their own self serving interest.

overload - apparently you don't know the meaning of "following the money". Even obama and company can't ignore the budget gaps in many state budgets. Think obama and company will come out with a "tarp" plan for state deficits?

Rather looks like you are the type of person Frank and time to say... are referring to.

Why don't you learn to read the poll 2051576? Apparently you are drinking the Cool Aid.

Unions are dinosaurs anyway. less than 12% of Americans are union employees (notice I did use the word WORKERS) and the number continues to fall.

In case the union parasites didn't get the memo... unions have FAR outlived their purpose.

Americans work normal full and part-time weeks; get paid for over-time, double-time, vacations, holidays, sick days, insurance, college classes, emergency time off, no more child labor and IF YOU EXCEL AT YOUR JOB you just may get a raise and a promotion! how about that? And all of that happens WITHOUT ANY UNION REPRESENTATION or UNION DUES at most any type of NON-UNION business in America.

Plus, NON UNION employees are intelligent... they have the freedom to donate and support "any political candidate they choose" without BEING TOLD WHO their Union Due WILL SUPPORT. That certainly seems very "American", you know "allowing people the Freedom of Choice?" What a concept?

The show is over for unions... public and private! They know it; the country knows it and that is what it is.

What it is IS... 2011... NOT 1911.

Bye Bye unions! Don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out!

dburton-2686409 -- I think you are confused.

Everyone's tax dollars go to pay the wages/benefits/pension of public workers. Those public workers can then take a portion of that money and give it to the Unions as dues. Those same Unions then take some of that money(dues) and give it to their "special" candidates to have favorable collective bargaining. Does every union worker support or are in favor of that "special" candidate? Does every union worker even know that part of their dues goes to "special" candidates?

I have no problem with the public worker giving his money to whichever candidate he wants but to give it to "special" candidates thru union dues does seems like some sort of violation. Let the choice be on the public employee.

The difference is that I don't pay the Koch Brothers. If they want to take their money and support a candidate more power to them. If I don't like what they are doing, don't buy their product/service. However with a public worker and a union employee I don't have a choice of not supporting it with my tax dollars.

So using your argument....defense, drug, telecommunications and on down the line that "donate" large sums of money to elected officials to get laws enacted to benefit them should also be made illegal, right? I have no problem barring public unions if you also bar everyone else.

Nobody, read that nobody, gives to a political campaign without wanting something in return. From the top contributor to the bottom we all want something from our contribution. Just those that give a few hundred aren't likely to be able to ask for much.

This isn't an argument about balancing the budget, he already got the monetary contribution he was after, this is about reducing the money that the union has to donate to the democratic party. In a few years when Democrats are back in charge (as normal ebb and flow will dictate they will be) look to them to attempt to cut off the Republicans access to donations...so on and so forth.

Only he didn't really get the money he's asking for. You hear a lot of people claiming the public unions in Wisconsin have agreed to the benefits concessions but you aren't hearing about the same unions trying to fore through new contracts without those concessions in place before the Flee Party returns to the legislature and Walker's bill passes. So the goal is to get the contracts through now so the concessions won't apply while also getting the collective bargaining restrictions stripped from the bill so they will never actually have to make those "promised" concessions.

Speedy, Palm Harbor, Florida

Americans work normal full and part-time weeks; get paid for over-time, double-time, vacations, holidays, sick days, insurance, college classes, emergency time off, no more child labor and IF YOU EXCEL AT YOUR JOB you just may get a raise and a promotion! how about that? And all of that happens WITHOUT ANY UNION REPRESENTATION or UNION DUES at most any type of NON-UNION business in America.

Here's some reality for you.

Every one of the benefits that you mention was bargained for and won FIRST by union-represented employees.

Companies expanded those offerings to their non-represented employees to head off organizing among the non-union staff.... AFTER those benefits were won by organized employees. I witnessed that firsthand - more than once.

Once the Kochs et al kill the unions, what do you think's going to happen to those bennies?

If you think the goodies will stick around after that, you're delusional. This is about the bottom line for two groups: management and shareholders. Everyone else can suck an egg as far as they're concerned, and that is their goal.

Rorschach-558483

Speedy, Palm Harbor, Florida

Here's some reality for you.

Every one of the benefits that you mention was bargained for and won FIRST by union-represented employees.

Once the Kochs et al kill the unions, what do you think's going to happen to those bennies?

Rorschach

I don't think Speedy knows the Koch Brothers are already in Florida. If they are not in his neigborhood yet, they'll soon be. Whoever hear of palm trees in Wisconsin? I saw that cowboy hat too.

Bill O’Reilly shows video of ‘violent union protests’ in Wisconsin on Fox News Propaganda Factor. Video shows PALM TREES. In Wisconsin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4

Fox News Banned in Canada!!

They [FOX LIES] are NOT allowed in Canada because there are laws about news channels misleading the public, Canada is awesome even more because of this.

http://m.current.com/news/93039146_canada-rejects-fox-style-news.htm

Like I said before we need Big Government" to protect the nation as a whole from corporate interests of Koch brothers and lies.

Gee overlord, you call yourself a scientist???? lmao!

My response was to your responce on YOUR (post 7.2) lack of understanding on what was being said in post 7 & 7.1. As a scientist can't you follow a train of thought? Or understand the consequences of actions taken? Perhaps you rely on your assistants too much for answers you should be able to arrive at for yourself.

ThOverlord is a scientist?...hahahahaha...that's some rich shyte...best thing I have heard in days , that should make the libbie news show The Daily Show ....hahaha

A poll by the WSJ is as laughable as Fox news polls on this issue would be.

Think Progress:

If the bill passes, its supporters will essentially be telling Ohio that they thought middle class Ohioans like those belonging to public employee unions should have to sacrifice while asking nothing more of the richest Ohioans.

Is this the same Gov. Kasich who gave huge pay raises to all his staff members, and even invented new, highly paid positions for a few of his buddies? Yeah, he's ALL about cutting spending and fiscal responsibility.

@Pat, you're right, but remember, Ohio is Boehner's state....

Pat, what rart of the current tax system do you not understand?

What percent of the total taxes paid in Ohio come from those "rich" Ohioians.

Come on Pat, we expect such unsupported conclusions from Feisty and Bev., but you too?

But I do love the cite to MoveOn. Great job there. Say does Ohio have any sites you can think of?

It would also have been nice if the prez didn't give GM millions of dollars in tax cuts when it was extremely profitable. Why would he do that? I thought repubs were vilified for doing things like that. Oh, the auto workers union.

What a bias way to phrase a poll question. These are not rights they are privileges or entitlements.

If you ACTUALLY live in Wisconsin you would understand the problem. Scott Walker won this debate a long time ago and is doing what he has to to save us from these tax sucking overpaid leaches. Now that the democrats just run away from the mess they created, he will have to cut the budget and local communities will have to lay off workers.

Run dems run

Pat, change the tax laws, or do you think that the IRS ignores the wealthiest tax returns in favor of those earning 50k or less.

You once mentioned that you work in a law firm, why not ask your boss about options and report back.

No doubt that greed played a part in our latest recession. Greed on the parrt of individual homeowners, speculators, mortgage originators, banks, fanny and freddy and to those who blindly bought the dirivatives offerred. Right off hand I would say that those most likely to benefit from this recession will be the bankers, lawyers and the politicians who get re-elected.

Pat, Boston, MA

Think Progress:

If the bill passes, its supporters will essentially be telling Ohio that they thought middle class Ohioans like those belonging to public employee unions should have to sacrifice while asking nothing more of the richest Ohioans

That's pure greed and betrayal and of course the usual right wing lies portraying the poor little rich people as victims.

Usually, I try and ignore Spanky's out bursts. He just a rude boy who thinks he's a wise guy.

Stevie, I think you're mistaken. Walker created this mess with his massive tax cuts and wasting a surplus he inherited; he created this "emergency" to get an excuse to bust the unions.

One more time. WALKER DID NOT INHERIT A SURPLUS. Doyle used some incredibly creative accounting tactics to hide the reality of his deficit, I'll grant you that, but don't for a second believe that Diamond Jim skipped out on a reelection bid because he felt it was important to self-limit his terms in office. That's a lot of shenanigans is what that is. He knew we were in trouble- otherwise he wouldn't have implemented furlough days for his biggest supporters. If there weren't deficits, he wouldn't have raided segregated funds like transportation or the patients & victims compensation fund to inflate his general fund balance (and therefore hide the deficits he was running). And because of those raids, there are funds that require paying back which falls to Walker. And any projected surplus Doyle tried to sell was based on federal funds that were previously available that he (along with all the rest of us) knew were not going to continue beyond his term in office, let alone long enough to actually create his projected surplus.

"These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland...They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

--Ronald Reagan, 1980 Labor Day Address

Even your hero voted anti-Bill!

Treating the unions and there pensions/healthcare as the cause for fiscal difficulties is like trying to blame the baby boomers and social security/medicare for the federal fiscal problems. Did everyone forget that for 8 years Bush told us if he gave tax cuts to the corporations and the wealthy that it would produce jobs? NOT!!!!!! For the first time in recorded history he cut taxes while fighting 2 wars, good idea? NOT!!!!!!!! We bailed out the banks and auto industry to save the economy, and all we did was save Wall Street. The thanks we received from the banks was 30% interest on credit cards, no matter how good your credit was and a rush to forclose on the very people who saved then. When you hear the govenors saying they can't afford to pay the commitments they have made to employees for pensions, and this includes the federal govt with social security it is because they never properly funded and maintained these commitments

So food for thought why is a commitment and contract by a state or federal goverment or bank able to be changed on a whim for the average citizen, yet we had to pay the bonus during the height of the crisis, because the executives had contracts?

what do you figure ending the tax dodging by all the liberal Jethros like Rangle and Geithner and the rest would do?...just wondering

Karen ...you make a good point about the "contract"...best plan would probably let the current agreement (contract) run out (it runs out in June) and then tell the union crime syndicate to piss off and go non-union , let them go get some those jobs that they claim "illegal aliens" are taking from Americans

passiveobserver

"These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland...They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

--Ronald Reagan, 1980 Labor Day Address

Even your hero voted anti-Bill!

That's priceless. And proof that the sainted Gipper would be too "lib'ral" for these maroons.

Wish I could vote it up 100x.

rxhill: Stupid people aren't awarded Edward R. Murrow Awards.

Keith has three of them.

Say Pat, why did Obama get that Nobel Peace Prize? Was it for merit?

Sometimes awards are given for things other than merit, no?

Spanky - don't be tossing out facts to the left. It's like water on the wicked witch....

And look at the nominations and awards received by:

Charles Sheen!

1989
Won
Bronze Wrangler
Theatrical Motion Picture
Young Guns (1988)

1994
Awarded
Star on the Walk of Fame
Motion Picture Star, At 7021 Hollywood Boulevard.

1999
Nominated
Screen Actors Guild Award
Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Theatrical Motion Picture
Being John Malkovich (1999)

Online Film Critics Society
Online Film Critics Society Award for Best Cast

2001
ALMA Award
Outstanding Actor in a Television Series
Spin City (1996)

2002
ALMA Award
Outstanding Actor in a Television Series

Won
Golden Globe Award
Best Performance by an Actor in a Television Series - Musical or Comedy

Nominated
Kids' Choice Awards
Favorite Television Actor
Two and a Half Men (2003)

2005
Screen Actors Guild Award
Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Comedy Series

Golden Globe Award
Best Performance by an Actor in a Television Series - Musical or Comedy

2006
Won
Golden Icon Award
Best Actor - Comedy Series^[1]

Nominated
Primetime Emmy Award
Outstanding Lead Actor - Comedy Series

Golden Globe Award
Best Performance by an Actor in a Television Series - Musical or Comedy

2007
People's Choice Award
Favorite Male TV Star

Teen Choice Award
Choice TV Actor: Comedy
Two and a Half Men (2003)

Primetime Emmy Award
Outstanding Lead Actor - Comedy Series

2008
People's Choice Award
Favorite Male TV Star

Teen Choice Awards
Choice TV Actor: Comedy
Two and a Half Men (2003)

Primetime Emmy Award
Outstanding Lead Actor - Comedy Series

Won
ALMA Award
Outstanding Actor in a Comedy Television Series

2010
Nominated
SAG Award
Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Comedy Series

*denotes nominated works with awards pending presentation and announcement.

Sources: ^[2][3][4]

Spanky-

Say Pat, why did Obama get that Nobel Peace Prize? Was it for merit?

Sometimes awards are given for things other than merit, no? P

Being the first Black President elected in this country is a MAJOR accomplishment whether you want to acknowledge this country's racist past or not. Where President Obama symbolizes the liberation of AMERICA from its roots of hatred and mind you some of it still lingers today. You may argue that he doesn't deserve the Noble but he is symbolic of the end of racism in America ( but you know that's not true. racism will never end). The First Black President of the US is Noble worthy in itself.

I had no idea luck-of-the-draw on what skin tone you're born with was a qualifier for a Nobel. All this time I thought it required an actual accomplishment! Thanks for clearing that up, ucg, you racist oaf.

"These are the values facing those brave workers in Poland...They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

--Ronald Reagan, 1980 Labor Day Address

Pat

Edward R. Murrow was a flaming liberal ...who do you think they would give that award to?...

oh...albeit off topic it seems relevent after your post.... Boston is the home of the heros that stole someone elses property and threw it in a river, while dressed like Native Americans in order to make it look like they did it...sounds like racists and cowards ...not real proud of that point in American history

Did you READ the article?

That's a rhetorical question. It's obvious you didn't.

No, they are in favor of their neighbors not being robbed blind by Walker, the Koch Boys and the rest of you crooked Republicans. Just like the poll says...

bob5ford

we know one thing........union members pay taxes just like you do!

Not too much hatred, huh overlord?

Riverrat - don't like bobs observations and conclusions do you? Think you might want to reread his post and think about it.

Gov't workers work for us- the taxpayer and as such should not have the ability to collectively bargain UNLESS each contract is voted on and approved by the taxpayers. If someone chooses to work for a government instead of the private sector, that is their choice.

Stop repeating the lies that Beck and O'Reilly told you.

Where are unions in general mentioned in the Constitution? There are a potload of things not mentioned in the Constitutions that are laws today, Cheryl.

Do you think because it's not mentioned in the Constitution something should be illegal?

Cheryl why is it fine and dandy to hand out tax breaks for businesses that are not paid for? Seriously your hatred for union members will give you ugly wrinkles if not already. The teachers pay taxes as well and had already conceded to pay cuts and to payroll deductions towards their pension.

Cheryl

all of those words....and still nothing!

Cheryl,

Would you do us a favor and please state some facts on their pay? I'd like to see concrete examples from you on how public sectors employees are getting paid "more" for the same job that a private sector job pays.

Also Cheryl, the numbers are the numbers. Doesnt matter IF 20% of the people polled were union members. They're still voters. You cannot discount someone in a poll whether they are a union member or not. Polls are random. They dont just say...hey, we have to call this percentage of republicans and this percentage of democrats etc. Its a random poll. What you are HOPING for is that if you take out that 20% that the rest of the Americans are split down the middle on it. But EVEN IF THIS WERE THE CASE, 40% for 40% against, that still leaves...yes, you guessed it, the other 20% of American against stripping the unions. So no matter which way you add it up, 62% is 62%.

For the record. Im a 9 buck an hour no union no benefits, NADA employee. Been working for that wage for several years. Struggling to pay my rent, struggling to pay my utilities. Struggling to buy food and pay for necessities. Scraping every dime I can get when I have a medical problem to pay the doctor for medicine or whatever. Have absolutely NO retirement to speak of. But I STILL support the workers and their collective bargaining rights. And I would have absolutely NO PROBLEM paying a little more taxes to make damn sure that the people, the PEOPLE of this country are taken care of and that the necessary workers, like teachers (who I know for a fact are damn well highly underpaid for the job they do) are taken care of because these public servants are the future of this country and they are educating the future leaders of our country.

What pisses me off more than anything is to see ANY politician give huge ass tax breaks to business like the Oil industry and continue to give them big tax breaks in favor of making sure essential employees are paid. What do we get for our money? Continued jobs? Maybe. Higher prices? Definitely. Massive, extremely obscene profits even when they cry how bad things are. MOST ASSUREDLY. I stood by and supported the bailout of the banks because I, for one, did NOT want to see banks fail and for this country to be plunged into a 1929 style full blown depression. I witnessed the emotional scars that the depression left on my Mom and Dad and they carried that with them till the day they died. I was NOT happy to see the banks turn around and screw the consumer after getting bailed out by charging fee after fee after fee for the use of your own money all in the name of record profits. I supported the automobile bailouts. The damage that a failure of that industry in this country would have done would have been castrophic. Not just Union jobs, but hundreds of thousands of workers in peripheral industries being laid off and put out of work had that industry failed. So far I've been fairly happy with their turn around. I hope they don't squander what this country did for them and that they continue to be a source of decently paying jobs for this country.

In the end, we all know some cuts need to be made, from both sides. Balancing budgets need to be done. But this isnt about balancing budgets. Its about Union busting. Its a political move on the rights side to scare the public into believing something that is entirely untrue.

Regardless though. Pleaes post some numbers on your comments. SHow us actual facts on how a public sector employee is paid more than a private sector employee for the same job.

Memory, why do you consider taxing less (what you call tax breaks) as something that needs to be "paid for". By your phrasing, you are inferring that income is first governments and that anyone amount a person is able to retain is a cost to the government.

Cheryl - go for it, FR liberals don't like opinions that differ from their dwell in the past misconceptions.

Dburton - two things...

Change corporate tax laws

Next time your state or local government tries to lure in businesses or to encourageexpand their business you go right out there on site waving a placard telling them to take their jobs and go away. You will surely be the hit of the town! As the town dries up around you you can stand in front of the empty buildings proclaiming to all those left what a good job you did in protecting the citizens from evil business.

BTW - you do realize that there is quite a difference between private sector unions and public sector unions, don't you?

Having been a union member in the late 70's I can say that I would not belong to another one.As for this article union or not the tax payers should not be paying for union members insurance or retirements that's what the union dues are suppose to be for.The collective bargaining issue since they work for the taxpayers should be put to a vote by the tax payers every time they want a new deal. We pay the bills we should make the decisions

Unions are antiquated and had a time and place both in the private and public sectors. Only those that belong to a union or come from a long line of Union devotees would still think they are good for this country. Unions promote sloppy and unefficient workers, require the collection of dues and mandatory membership to keep certain jobs, A good example of a poor excuse for a union is the United Teacher's union. It is a good reason why the good ole U.S. is behind most nations in educating our children. This country would be better off if we abolished most unions. Why do professional sports need player's unions, these guys and gals would be paid astronomical salaries whether there are unions or not and before someone posts a "I don't know what I am talking about" reply to this comment, I have been affiliated with two different unions, my Brother has been affiliated in three different unions and both my parents and grandparents were in unions (Teamsters, SAG, Musicians, Teacher's,to name a few) and every one of us hates and if it had been possible to stay out of the unions we would have, but it was always a requirement to employment.

I agree with you completely. I worked For Consolidated Freight under the Teamsters Union. The union became so rigid and inflexible that they wouldn't let employees who had guaranteed 40 hour weeks, go work in the yard moving trailers, when work slowed down on the dock. They told the company they had to hire more workers, which the company could not afford. So, they started CCX, a non-union company with higher pay and similar benefits, just to get rid of an overdemanding union, and put 22,000 employees out of work. My union did that for me, and I will not support them again! I lost a $21/hr job with full paid health because of the arrogance of the Teamsters union.

I live in Wisconsin, and the Democrats have always been for taxing the rich to help out the poor. Now they support taxing the poor to pay for teachers and other public employees who average $70,000 per year compared to our $30,000. We in the private sector in our town work at $8-$10 per hour jobs and are expected to pay for teacher salaries and benefits that average $70,000 to $125,000 per year! We have to work two full time jobs just to equal their one, and they work only 9 months of the year! Forget it! We don't have the money to do that. I have 4 children to support and I refuse to take food out of their stomachs so teachers can live in nicer homes and get "Viagra" in their health care collective bargaining, costing us $800,000 per year! For Viagra! My kids go hungry to pay for Viagra for teachers? I don't think so.

You want public employees to have collective bargaining, then you pay for their higher salaries and benefits! I want no part of it. We have over 350 foreclosed homes in our town, 9% unemployment, wage freezes the last 10 years, pay cuts and vacation time being cut, and now we are supposed to support collective bargaining? Two years from now the unions will get the pay cuts restored thru collective bargaining on new contracts and more of my money will go to the teachers and public employees who we cannot afford now. Grow up! Franklin D. Roosevelt, a DEmocrat, said that he strongly opposed public employee unions because they would destroy our society and everyones standard of living. Federal employees have NO collective bargaining rights because the unions always get raises for their workers, Why? Because when a city and the union disagree, then an arbitration judge rules and has historically raised the income for public employees, even tho our city cannot afford it. That is why many of my friends have lost their homes. They lost their jobs and now their homes. Not only is our state broke, but We Are Broke!

Do you think raising taxes and putting more people out of their homes and into the street, just to pay for higher wages and benefits for public employees is the way to go? If you do, then I will expect you to pay for higher taxes to help support us when we lose our home to pay for $70,000 elementary and Kindergarten teacher salaries. We have over 615 teachers in our city alone, and there are 424 school districts in Wisconsin. You do the math and then you pay the higher taxes if you support collective bargaining. I refuse to take food out of my childrens mouth to pay for the demands of arrogant unions and their employees who care nothing for those of us who pay their salaries, and are struggling just to make it. They are selfish and have lied so many times, I will not believe them anymore. Keep on attacking Glenn Beck and just see what kind of country this ends up to be. $ per gallon gas and empty food store shelves are really not that far off.

But you wouldn't believe the truth even if it hit you in the face. You would just get mad and attack the person who told you without even listening. All you want to do is overthrow the people who create the jobs so you have an income. Well, good luck!

Bookem' Danno

Memory, why do you consider taxing less (what you call tax breaks) as something that needs to be "paid for". By your phrasing, you are inferring that income is first governments and that anyone amount a person is able to retain is a cost to the government.

Cool. Since you think that paying for the services and infrastructure that you use and take for granted every day is an infringement on your rights, don't use them and you won't be asked to pay your fair share. I pay for these highways -- keep off. Dig your own landfill. Hire your own army. Do your own medical research.

It's funny: when I was growing up in the 50s, 60s, 70s, the tax rates were higher (and much higher on the wealthy). Industry was not choked by excessive taxation as the right likes to claim. American industry was thriving, growing and so was the middle class. All of this is undeniable. It was during this period that the US became the most powerful country on the planet.

Average CEO pay then was about 40x that of average workers. Now, it's more than 200x higher.

Once the Reaganites began taking hold in the 80s, the middle class has lost ground and the wealthy has gained. Jobs are gone, we're gouged on energy and commodities.

You figure it out, but I don't think the story you're hearing from Beck and Rush matches reality.

This is simple folks...how about all the states WITHOUT public unions (mostly Red states)? They are all bankrupt too, so who are they gonna blame? Hint: whoever they can to trick most people into voting against their best interests!

REsearch your comments better.Missouri voted for McCain(RED STATE) and we balanced our budget without denying public employees anything.We cut back on medicaid,left open vacant jobs and raised college tuition some.Now,your lefty states like California,Illinois,Wisconsin and New York,now there you see bankrupt from decades of social welfare

Until someone representing the taxpayers is allowed to sit at the unions so-called bargaing table, they will not get my vote for "collective bargaining"

Did I say, Rorschack, that we should not pay taxes? NO. What I said is that the money is not first the governments and then othe earner of that money.

But, since you seem to think the other way, please send your entire paycheck to the government each pay period and let them decide what you are worth.

you must be union.

NO, actually I'm a scientist and my wife is a physician. We are quite well-off financially.

Why do you Teabag types always assume that people that make lots of money are greedy, short-sighted and uncaring toward your neighbors like you?

overlord - Hmmmm...I don't, but apparently you do, otherwise you wouldn't be running off at the mouth about the right being the only evil ones. Powere to the people indeed, just don't take my $$$!

You almost typed that word for word from Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto;Das Kapital,Comrade

overlord - bet you are just one peacefull sob. As a self-professed scientist I bet you understand that "words have consequences" or did you miss that day at college?

Since FR refused to give us a link to the poll, quess we will have to wait until after 6:30 PM to see how the demographics break down

I'm not self professed, I have a degree. Just what I would expect from a Republican, first you call me names and then lecture me that "words have consequences." What a hypocrite!

"Of course you can't believe the results since you're probably being paid by the Koch's to spew this nonsense"

TheOverlord, did it take science. or just plain ego to come up with that statement? And you can provide facts that Cindy is being paid by the Koch`s to back up your statement as any good scientist can do?

OK overlord, you claimed you were a scientist in post 15.2, that is called self-professed. Let us see, your posts today include multiple occurances of saying "lies", then "

you're probably being paid by the Koch's to spew this nonsense

I especially like this one of yours...

Why do you Teabag types always assume that people that make lots of money are greedy, short-sighted and uncaring toward your neighbors like you?

But yet you say my sarcastic remark of you as a "peaceful sob" is name calling and I am being a hypocrit. I can live with that, after all look who is calling me that!

Seems that you have drunk deeply from the well of kool-aid and fiesties hate-r-aide! Care to expound on your post abouit neandertall republithugs in thread 19? Apparently you wish to capture the siasd crown for 2011 all by yourself.

Let's do away with unions. They served their purpose, good job guys.

Lies! Stop with the lies! The fact is that public Wisconsin employees pay 100% of their own pensions - they are benefits that they recieve as part of their compensation package! Yes, it's part of their PAY - it's THEIR money.

Stop the hating on teachers you neanderthal Republithugs!

Did you miss the whole part where the union agreed to all the changes he wanted other than the getting rid of the union all together? Did ya? *pats Ray on the head* there there little one. it will be ok, would you like your Newt doll now?

There is hardly any point in restating the obvious, but I'll give it one last try. Your salary goes for services the government provides for you and your family: education, water, sewer, landfill, roads and road maintenance, public parks, police, fire, national guard, department of health etc. Once you pay for those services, it is no longer YOUR money. If you get a car repair done, do you complain that YOUR money has paid for the mechanic's health care? (*Maybe you do, but the money is for the car repair, at the price agreed upon). Does your employer complain that HER or HIS money has gone for your home? (No, once they paid it to you, you use it as you wish). If you don't feel you like or use all the services you pay for, THAT is what you take up with your local, county and state. If your government contracted out all teaching to a private company, would you complain that YOUR money went to the teacher's salary and health care? If your government hired a private contractor (like Xe) to run the prisons, would you attack the private employees for taking your money?

Yeah but if the mechanic is charging too much money I will just find another one that is less expensive.

You have every right to enroll your kids in private schools Justinian75.

Justinian75

why not home school? you seem to have all the answers!

OverLord

The problem with that is he can't opt out of his taxes which still goes to teachers. But then he can just say all of his taxes went to roads huh? He just paid a larger share then its all a matter of perception.

TheOverlord && Bdune -- Yes I can send my kids to private school, but how do I make sure my taxes don't go to paying the union teachers that I no longer need? I could hire my own private detectives but how do I make sure my taxes aren't going to paying the police that I no longer need?

TheOverlord -- The pension fund is NOT 100% funded by public employees! If a pension is guaranteeing 5% return but the investment portfolio is only getting a 3% return who pays for the shortfall, that's right the tax payer! What about health benefits this is not 100% funded by the public employees either. If the union employee is getting health benefits that is above and beyond the average employee in a America who is paying for that excess? If I want better health benefits I have to pay for it out of my own pocket.

You don't pay taxes only on roads that you decide to drive on... so you don't get to decide that funding doesn't go to publican education because it's considered a PUBLIC SERVICE and is necessary for the collective good. But those without any education wouldn't understand that...

overlord you sure like to spread out your own lies and BS, don't you?

The fact is that public Wisconsin employees pay 100% of their own pensions - they are benefits that they recieve as part of their compensation package! Yes, it's part of their PAY - it's THEIR money.

Right overlord, all government salaries, benefits and program funding come from private sector revenues based on taxes and fees collected The public union members don't contribute a dime of their own money it is OPM (other peoples money). Change the pension plan to a 401k or IRA then they will be contributing their own money to a plan.

The point is, that when budget shortfalls occur (private or public) either revenue has to increase or expenses cut to make up the difference. Since states can't print their own money then they have the following choices...sell bonds, layoff workers, cut project funding or change the rules by how pay and benefits are determined, meaning that rather than the state pay 100% into a pension or healthcare plan the employee is now required to pay into the plan from payroll deduction from their own take home pay.

Union collective bargaining needs to change to include someone that represents the taxpayers at their "bargaining table". The unions tenacles run very deep, the WI unions want to continue to buy their health ins. from the union provided WEA, costing the taxpayers an additional $68 MILLION (see Wall Street Journal, 2/25/ll). If they purchased from the state, they would save $68 million that could go to the schools instead of into the union pockets.

Good ideas mighty heidi!

You do understand that unions set a wage precedence? they help keep every persons wage higher. If the union lets their collective bargaining agreement go then we are all screwed. You see first its the unions next it will be minimum wages, because what the phrasing I heard the other day "you will get paid what your worth". The same thinking that caused the government to pass minimum wage laws. Because Corporations do not think your worth anything.

Why do you think the Salaried worker works an average of a 12 hour day? Because they have to and are they compensated for the extra hours? nope. But why do they have to work so hard because if you don't your going to loose your job.

Whats next the repeal of child labor laws? I its up to the republicans and big corps that the road were heading down. And best of all I am hearing about getting rid of the public school boards. That means no more public schools. Are citizens are dumb enough as it is.

If we continue down the path that Republicans and Corporations are trying to take us down the us will be a third world very shortly.

Why? - you do realize that the american consumer wants lots of toys, with lots of bells and whistles don't you? Not only that, they want them to be low cost as well. You promote that...

You do understand that unions set a wage precedence? they help keep every persons wage higher.

And some people wonder why so much business is outsourced overseas.

Ever hear of competition? A business is only going to pay someone the minimum required to keep them on the job and not go elsewhere. Unions can't guarentee work either. Just ask all the carpenters laid off from local 207 in Des Moines, Iowa. Wonder how many of them quit the union because they couldn't afford to pay dues and living expenses with their unemployment checks.

Never had to work a 12 hour day day in and day out while salaried, without earning time and a half over 40. Sure their was the infrequent times spent working 10 - 12 hours, but when hired it was understood that the salary was based on a 45 hour week.

American 2051576, I am a public unio0n employee and am here to tell you, you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to the pension contributions being OPM! Part of my pay goes to my health care and I also, pay into my retirement. I just don't pay a mandated percentage but I chose an option to contribute an additional amount. I am married and my spouse and I also pay taxes, so part of our taxes payes for my employment and an additonal amount for my benefits as TAXPAYERS. And I will guarantee you, you would NOT want my tax bill every year! I can not believe the amount of people that think public employees are not taxpayers. I don't know where they think we come from before going to work and where we go after work. We are average citizens just trying to make a living and looking toward a decent retirement. One that we can support ourselves on and not expect John Q. Public to take care of us. But, in lieu of the thoughts about our mode of employment and it's benefits maybe we should rethink that. I guess you'd like to support us when that time comes and I know it would be with a big smile.

Unions are not the cause of the deficits. The employee pay and benefits are just a SMALL portion of that equation. The heads of our states have really blinded their constituants, they now do not have to take any responsibility for their part (i.e. overspending by elected officials, their over inflated pay and benefits, bad judgements and what ever else they want to hide). And you can bet there's something in it for them to get rid of the unions. Think about what they will be telling you you have to do next and you won't be able to do anything about it. Because you've just given them more power and the people less say.

And who decides where your tax dollar goes when it comes to State spending. Guess what, it's not you, it's your elected officials and they just keep spending. But, people don't want to put blame where it lies, they'd rather be led like a bunch of sheep and pick some other entity like the unions I feel sorry for all of you when you get your rude awakening.

Califblu - thank you for proving my point...

Part of my pay goes to my health care and I also, pay into my retirement. I just don't pay a mandated percentage but I chose an option to contribute an additional amount

Basically what you are saying is that the government is giving you a fixed pension amount funded by revenues collected by the government (OPM) that you can also invest your own $$$ into it as well. Not sure on your wording on health care but the results are still the same. OPM is still funding your wage and benefit package. Private sector benefits are derived in much the same way. Sales revenue (OPM) goes toward providing the wages and benefits of the employee.

Private sector. No sales>>> no income, no bennies and no job.

Public sector- No private sector tax and fee revenue>>> no public sector income, bennies or job.

Never said public union workers don't pay taxes.

As for wanting a decent retirement, don't you think that those of us in the private sector should have more of a say in that? After all it is John Q public that is supporting your benefits thru taxation. I don't disagree that the politicians share much of the blame for foolish spending or that the union reps sold you a bill of goods on what you "deserve" to have.

Keep in mind that just as in the private sector labor is a big % of costs for business so is labor (union or non) a big % of cost in the public sector. My support would be that SS and 401k's replace government pensions and that public sector health care will require larger copays and deductables. Do please wear a big smile as government lays you off because they no longer can collect the revenue necessary to keep you employed and pay for your bennies

LOL,your Affirmative Action education is showing

Wrong, we can recall Walker... and we will.

Excellent post speedy!

Speedy Palm

If a stopped clock is right twice a day......don't you think you could be right at least once a day?

By your very own statement then those Democrats having been duly elected are just as entitled to every legal manuver possible to represent those that elected them and your entire arguement becomes moot. As for Walker he will pay a heavy price for his ignorance of how his party will leave him behind as soon as they realize that he failed to sneak a damn thing through.

Speedy - You're right in principle and in most cases of public disapproval, your way is the right way.

But it takes only a short glance at what is going on across the entire Mideast to comprehend that there may be some instances where strong public sentiment outweighs rigid compliance with established procedural norms.

I certainly am not urging armed insurrection and I do agree with the obvious - that the long term cost of public sector employment has become unbearable and will get worse - but the governor's blunderbuss approach is no solution.

We are a nation of laws, that is the reason our nation has been admired by all since its creation (although so clearly far too many people have forgotten that little detail) and laws must be used to correct the unfortunate position we are in.

No one seems to be talking about it, at least not publicly, but it really was the courts that put us in this position of being unable to foot the bill for what we have promised to our retired public sector workers. Courts did not enact the laws but they did interpret them in such a way that the effect we now live with was enhanced.

Those interpretations were fitting and appropriate for the times in which they were announced, but the needs of government and the feelings of the people have changed since those times.

Courts probably cannot alone undo the problems but well-crafted legislation along with courts let understand the need for change can do the job.

America is today a greater risk than it has been since 1860. There will not be battles between organized armies but if the various administrations and legislatures throughout the country do not settle down to performing their duties of representing all of the people, not just the ones who they think voted for them, this proud nation will deteriorate to being a footnote in history with little more relevance than the Ottoman Empire has.

Let's attempt to educate about collective bargaining. Let's get the executives of the unions to publish their salaries. Let's make all union employees write checks for the unions. Let's graduate more than 50% of the students in this country. Let's make more than 10% get passports so they can get a taste of reality by visiting other countries. I have had it with the unrealistic demands of the unions.

Frank, you can not blame the majority of the recession on wall street. It was started and caused by the Federal government and the position that every should own a house, even if you can not afford it. Do you remember all the advertisements for no money down and/or get a loan for 125% of the value of your house? Clinton told Fannie and Freddie to back the toxic loans, and this is what the result was. Let's see, the past democrats held contract negotiations with the unions who spend millions upon millions of dollars for their campaigns. Does this sound right? Most of the contracts, pay, benefits, and pensions negotiated were for way more than what the private sector received. Again, the same politicians that gave this to them are the ones that received millions in campaign donations. Also, why should a person have to pay union dues and be part of a union that they do not believe in or their views. If the do not join, they do not get the job or they get fired if they want out. The bottom line is that states can not afford these sweetheart deals now and in the future. Are you willing to pay more in taxes so these government workers can earn more off of retirement than what they received while working and only have to work for 20 or 25 years?

Even the Union Bosses agreed once it was voted apon by the union members. The only thing that they said no to was the removal of collective bargaining.

Guess what? It is OVER and DONE.

Unions are dinosaurs anyway.

Whatever "political clout" they may have once had "years ago"continues to rapidly evaporate.

Congratulations to Governor Walker for enacting what a Democrat president and his Democrat Congress took away from Federal employees 30 years ago.

Whats over and done Speedy? You mean the law that cant be signed into a law because the democrats wont allow it to? Is that what you are speaking of? Unless I missed something, nothing has changed in Wisconsin. The Senate will NOT pass that into law unless they compromise on the bill. You guys seriously need to quit watching Fox news. I turned it on the other night and I honestly laughed at the comments and how "fair and balanced" it was. I loved when Greta asked the , I

believe it was the SC governer a question on the issues going on in Wisconsin and she completely 100 percent sidestepped the issue and went off on a complete different tangent pretty much stating the obviousl The question was even though the Unions and the public workers have agreed to all concessions to help balance the budget, is it still necessary to eliminate the Collective bargaining rights of the workers AND if so, how exactly would eliminating that right help with the budget. So the governer sidestepped it with a "we need to balance the budge and its going to be rough for both sides and went on this 3 minute spiel about balancing the budget and did not once answer the question. The basic simple question. HOW IS REMOVING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING GOING TO HELP BALANCE THE BUDGET IF CONCESSIONS ARE ALREADY BEING MADE. Pretty simple question. Should be a fairly straightforward answer.

But thats kind of beside the point on this reply. What did Walker enact?

dburton - mean the runaway wisconsin senators have returned to make a quorum? That would be a good thing.

What i absolutely dislike, on top of those bad moves that Gov Walker and the republicans want to make is the Walker's complete refusal to negotiate and compromise. He is acting like a big baby that will only settle for exactly what he wants and nothing else.

Walker will ruin the entire State of Wisconsin.

I am one of those "public employees'...I work for the state of NC at a major University...News flash....our salary has been frozen for two years going on three...and the cost of everything has gone up double and triple...I make low medium income for a woman...my pension is not plush...my bens...I already pay monthly from my check...so I do not know who is spreading the baloney that public workers have terrific salaries...massive pensions...and bens...we do not...This governor and the Rep. and Tea Party people who support him need a reality check...can they not see that masses of people...overwhelming majority know that denying workers the right to speak as a group is an invasion of their rights...their freedom of speech...their need to have a group to speak up for them in corporations (remember only huge companies have Unions)...where those in charge have all the power and money...You take this right away from them and you take away their voice...And the CEO's and other big wigs can pay them low salaries and give them bad bens...no pension if they choose ...and the workers would not be able to stop them...Now they are saying (Walker) they want to deny the workers the right to protest...Helloooo...does first amendment ring a bell....

"Walker will ruin the entire State of WI"

The democrates beat him to it already

Actually, I believe the unions beat the Democrats (really no difference between the two) to it. What do you think ruined Detroit? Look at Nagasaki and Hiroshima since 1945 with no unions. Unions are too concerned with power against owners anymore. In the beginning, they were definitely needed.

The NBC pool is completely flawed. Do they really believe that we are buying this? The majority of Americans are agaisnt collective bargaining and it should not even be legal. My guess is that the majority of NBC listeners and readers are all too dumb to think for themselves.

The union gravy train is coming to an end. When there are no more funds you can't just congure them out of thin air and the tax payers are tired of footing the bill.

To Kat23:

It's not the republicans or tea partiers that are saying you're overpaid, it's the federal government. The latest statistics from the Dept of Labor show that a public employee's pay/benefit package is approximately 60% greater than that of the equivalent private employee.

That's just a little bit out of whack for most of us and why the vast majority of people polled think you should be paying a whole lot more for your benefits/retirement.

Atlas Shrugging- The book Atlas Shrugged was written by one of the biggest hypocrites in human history.

Ayan Rand spoke often about doing away with social security, guess what she drew social security.

The one thing she did not mention in her writings is the very human condition of Greed! Deregulate and what you get is the situation we are in with wall street and the banks.

Atlas Shrugged was written by an immoral freak of nature. I read all of her books, when a read the Passion of Ayn Rand I through all of her books in the trash. She was a very morally corrupt individual.

Save the Wisconsin Budget and you pay twice as much in taxes. How about that ? Are you willing? Thats what was happening under governor Doyle.

We are the second highest taxed state in the Nation. 2nd! Recall is not the answer as all 14 Democrat Senators who have left the state are facing recall under Wisconsin Statute 783. If you leave your job to protest without sick days or personal time off, you would be fired. And if you called in sick, you would be fired if your boss saw you protesting...but maybe that doesn't matter to you. Maybe lying is acceptable these days.