bushwacked Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) Should Wisconsin’s state employees and public employee unions have collective bargaining powers? Yes - 56% No - 32% I'm curios to hear from a few select people who where direly concerned about the will of the people a few short months ago. Edited February 25, 2011 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 "The will of the people" is like "state's rights" - something to be unequivocally supported up to the point it interferes with one's agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm curios to hear from a few select people who where direly concerned about the will of the people a few short months ago. I'll state it again, people, in general, are morons. You need to look no further than the halls of congress in DC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm curios to hear from a few select people who where direly concerned about the will of the people a few short months ago. The will of the people has started a few recalls already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 If the people of WI are that stupid, then let them have it, and let them pay for it. Part of the problem here is most people are too uninformed to know what is really going on, and all they see is what the unions are saying, and what the media which is largely on the side of the unions is saying. The leaders in the GOP have done a poor job of explaining why they are doing what they are doing, and the media isn't about to do it for them. Well if they are too stupid to realize what is going on, maybe they deserve what they get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm curios to hear from a few select people who where direly concerned about the will of the people a few short months ago. Here's another Wisconsin pole: Who should pay for this: Not me: 100% Me: 0% The will of the people was at the ballot box and not some crooked pole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm curios to hear from a few select people who where direly concerned about the will of the people a few short months ago. That's a very well referenced poll you've go there. What about the will of the people that actually voted for these Republicans for the very reason that the State's budget was out of control? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Here's another Wisconsin pole: Who should pay for this: Not me: 100% Me: 0% The will of the people was at the ballot box and not some crooked pole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 i will let u girls in on a little secret , AGAIN . Its not about the money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 "The will of the people" is like "state's rights" - something to be unequivocally supported up to the point it interferes with one's agenda. I believe this is the best answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I believe this is the best answer. No, I think it's the one below. i will let u girls in on a little secret , AGAIN . Its not about the money Exactly. It's about damaging the Democrats funding sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 No, I think it's the one below. Exactly. It's about damaging the Democrats funding sources. You are right and wrong at the same time. In a way this is similar to the way that the Dems would like to try to silence businesses. On the other hand you are extremely naive if you don't recognize what collective bargaining costs city, county, and state governments. To say it isn't about he money is short sighted in the extreme. Personally I think it is first and foremost about the money, the funding of the Democrats is just a nice side affect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 No, I think it's the one below. Exactly. It's about damaging the Democrats funding sources. Isn't that about money???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 You are right and wrong at the same time. In a way this is similar to the way that the Dems would like to try to silence businesses. On the other hand you are extremely naive if you don't recognize what collective bargaining costs city, county, and state governments. To say it isn't about he money is short sighted in the extreme. Personally I think it is first and foremost about the money, the funding of the Democrats is just a nice side affect. Perch I honestly mean this in all sincerity. Are you completely insane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caddyman Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Perch I honestly mean this in all sincerity. Are you completely insane? MAH(MOST ARROGANT HUDDLER) Strikes again. You are the most arrogant person I have ever seen. Honestly. The strange thing is that you can't back up your arrogance. You don't reply to posts you just attack. It is really getting old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 MAH(MOST ARROGANT HUDDLER) Strikes again. You are the most arrogant person I have ever seen. Honestly. The strange thing is that you can't back up your arrogance. You don't reply to posts you just attack. It is really getting old. Thanks for chiming in Zeke! Always informative and appreciated!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caddyman Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Thanks for chiming in Zeke! Always informative and appreciated!! Thanks for proving my point. Don't really care what you appreciate. Do you understand how old your act is getting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Isn't that about money???? Not in the sense I meant. Walker and the rest are most interested in cementing their own power as a party. The attempt to crush the few remaining unions is part and parcel of that strategy. The whole photoID at the polls thing that has been introduced in several states is another naked attempt to reduce the Democrat vote. It has nothing to do with impersonation voting fraud, which is so rare as to be non-existent anyway. If that was what they were interested in preventing, they would take a long hard look at absentee ballots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Not in the sense I meant. Walker and the rest are most interested in cementing their own power as a party. The attempt to crush the few remaining unions is part and parcel of that strategy. The whole photoID at the polls thing that has been introduced in several states is another naked attempt to reduce the Democrat vote. It has nothing to do with impersonation voting fraud, which is so rare as to be non-existent anyway. If that was what they were interested in preventing, they would take a long hard look at absentee ballots. I think the voter photo ID requirements are great. I don't see how this could possibly discriminate against legitimate voters. I really can see no legitimate reason for anyone to be against it. With regard to absentee ballots, I wouldn't mind getting rid of absentee voting except for persons serving the country overseas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Thanks for proving my point. Don't really care what you appreciate. Do you understand how old your act is getting? Thanks Zeke! Your contributions are always well thought out and informative. Please keep up the good work! I would hate for you to get banned again and be on your . . . how many is it now? Third different alias? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 . how many is it now? Third different alias? 5th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh B Tool Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 5th Really?!? and which lovable care bears was he before? Unreal IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) Really?!? and which lovable care bears was he before? Unreal IMO zeke 1982 PITTPANTHERMAN whosyourdaddy Bocephus Edited February 26, 2011 by Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Exactly. It's about damaging the Democrats funding sources. I know the concept of "saving money" is foreign to most lefties - because when they hear that they think it means "let's raise taxes" - but that's really what it is about. And if a side effect of "saving money" means the unions go bye-bye then so be it. That's just icing on the cake. Besides, unions nowadays are more like the old beta-max or 8-track player you have sitting in your basement. Yeah, they were useful at one time, but now they are just obsolete. As far as being a funding source, what better scam to get money than to tell people they have to join a union or they can't get a job? Let's see how much funding they can get when people actually have a choice to join a union or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) Can someone remind me on that recorded phone call how much Walker talked about the budgetary aspects of the bill? Edited February 26, 2011 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.