Wisconsin GOP passes union-stripping bill

[Snowboarder_Bo]

3 replies to me and 3 times you call me names. :rolleyes:

You’ve shown nothing. In fact, the first part of Gov. Walker’s screed you quoted is, I’m pretty sure, a lie, to wit:

@Gov. Scott Walker

Contrary to what the Obama administration would lead you to believe

I’ve never heard President Obama make that claim or make any statement that would lead anyone to believe he meant that.

As I said earlier, but which you ignored, this “fact” is misleading at best. It’s like saying that most baseball players can’t pitch.

I’m done with you; you have nothing but namecalling and reiteration of someone else’s opinions.

[Mr_Smashy]

Good Lord, trying to educate you is like trying to put one’s arms around smoke. Stay still!

As for the Administration’s criticism, they said that Wisconsin’s Governor’s treatment of union employees, via this bill, was bad because nobody should “denigrated or vilified or their rights are infringed upon.” You can make your own inferences.

You still won’t admit you’re wrong though. Let me give you some concrete examples, which I assume you will ignore then change the subject.

You said

That’s what happened/is happening in Wisconsin: members of a collective bargaining unit (hereafter referred to as a “union”) are now being denied the right to bargain collectively.

WRONG! They are not being denied collective bargaining rights. The bill curtails what issues can be collectively bargained, to avoid the structural conflict of interest that is bankrupting the state.

You said

I’ll assail the hell out of it and say that he’s wrong on every point

Every point. Really. Feel free to prove that, one of these days.

Look, there’s no shame in being a liberal. But don’t make silly statements with no proof or backup, you only embarrass yourself. The thing is, for Democrats, this is the ballgame. They are so dependent on the unholy alliance w/unions, where the mandatory member dues are siphoned off into their campaign contributions, resulting in re-election and overly generous negotiated contracts. Thank God Walker has the balls to end this, for the good of the Wisconsin taxpayer.

Anyone who can’t see this simply has their eyes closed.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Mr_Smashy

But don’t make silly statements with no proof or backup, you only embarrass yourself. The thing is, for Democrats, this is the ballgame. They are so dependent on the unholy alliance w/unions, where the mandatory member dues are siphoned off into their campaign contributions, resulting in re-election and overly generous negotiated contracts.

WRONG! It’s illegal to use member dues for political purposes. cite

You’d never know that, under both federal and state law, no union, public or private, can donate members’ dues money to political campaigns. Wisconsin is one of 15 states that outlaw union and corporate direct contributions to candidates.

[Rand_Rover]

So TTR, I guess you aren’t answering my second question?

[Frank]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

Further please explain why you feel your cotton candy question was relevant, or state you’re just being random.

@Rand_Rover

So TTR, I guess you aren’t answering my second question?

So, Rand Rover, I guess you aren’t answering his question? (Helpfully quoted above.)

[Rand_Rover]

So, Frank, I guess you are sad that no one is paying attention to you?

[Frank]

@Rand_Rover

So, Frank, I guess you are sad that no one is paying attention to you?

Oh, I’m getting plenty of attention paid to me, both in real life and on the board. Further deponent sayeth naught.

Is there some reason that you are unwilling to answer questions, while demanding that your questions must be answered?

[Rand_Rover]

you r boring

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Mr_Smashy

WRONG! They are not being denied collective bargaining rights. The bill curtails what issues can be collectively bargained

[

@dictionary.com

curtail: –verb (used with object)
to cut short; cut off a part of; abridge; reduce; diminish.

](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/curtail)

In other words, they are being denied collective bargaining rights. Which is what I said in the first place.

[magellan01]

@Snowboarder_Bo

[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/curtail]

In other words, they are being denied collective bargaining rights. Which is what I said in the first place.

Seems like you two might agree with one minor tweak:

…they are being denied SOME collective bargaining rights.

Of course that leaves aside the whole issue of collective bargaining being a right, but it should serve as a basis of agreement.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@magellan01

Seems like you two might agree with one minor tweak:

…they are being denied SOME collective bargaining rights.

Of course that leaves aside the whole issue of collective bargaining being a right, but it should serve as a basis of agreement.

Err…

IIRC they were allowed to collectively bargain but by law wages were capped (essentially) to the inflation rate.

So, the best they could do is collectively bargain to maintain their effective wages and not lose money.

Or I suppose they could bargain to lower their wages. :rolleyes:

[Rand_Rover]

Or they could bargain about issues other than wages. So :rolleyes: right back atcha.

[justrob]

@Rand_Rover

Or they could bargain about issues other than wages. So :rolleyes: right back atcha.

I hesitate to get between you and Snowboarder Bo but isn’t all the hoopla about the fact that this bill removes the collective bargaining rights for all the “issues other than wages.” Wages then being the only item they can bargain for, within the inflation rate that is.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Rand_Rover

So TTR, I guess you aren’t answering my second question?

I am a working college student getting the end of the semester. As a result my participation is contingent on not having metric pile of junk that isn’t urgent.

Also, I feel this relationship is one sided. When is it gong to be my time? Why don’t you just answer some of my earlier questions first?

[Rand_Rover]

I think that my answers to your questions will be revealed in your answer to my question. So what’s your answer?

[Lobohan]

@Rand_Rover

I think that my answers to your questions will be revealed in your answer to my question. So what’s your answer?

You really are a worthless pissant. I forget that sometimes.

[Rand_Rover]

@Lobohan

You really are a worthless pissant.

I’m glad you think so.

[Lobohan]

@Rand_Rover

I’m glad you think so.

I’m glad that you’re glad. I’ve been meaning to ask, is the stick up your ass made of Reardon Metal?

[elucidator]

No, a product of Buttafuco Industries, Ltd.

[Fear_Itself]

Wisconsin’s Anti-Union Law Struck Down by Judge

That controversial anti-union law passed by Wisconsin’s legislature in March over the objections of demonstrators and the fleeing Democratic caucus has been struck down by Dane County judge Maryann Sumi, who previously barred the law from taking effect while she deliberated.

Sumi found that while the legislation itself is legal, the way it was passed violated the state’s Open Meetings law, because Republicans gave only two hours of notice before considering the bill instead of the required 24.

“Our form of government depends on citizens’ trust and confidence in the process by which our elected officials make laws, at all levels of government,” Sumi wrote in her decision.