March 10, 2011

Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?

Is it that his people are pulling strings behind the scenes?
State GOP Senate Leader Scott Fitzgerald told Fox News on Thursday that some of the people filing petitions against members of his caucus have "direct links" to President Obama's political team in Chicago. He suggested the president is keen on aiding labor groups in the state so they can deliver for Democrats in 2012.

Republican state Sen. Randy Hopper [said] "People from Organizing for America have been running the protests in Madison for quite some time now... I think that there's no question that the president has some involvement in this. I don't know what."
Hmmm. I'd like to know the details. Meanwhile, Obama is interested enough that his people are working to get and keep votes for 2012, but not interested enough to say anything. But who in the Democratic Party outside of the Wisconsin legislature is? I count Tammy Baldwin, Michael Moore, and Jesse Jackson. That makes the whole protest movement look left-wing. I wonder why national-level Democratic politicos are content to let things look that way.

156 comments:

Joaquin said...

PRESENT!!!

kent said...

Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?

His cake hole is locked in the "YAWP!" position too damned often as it is.

Lucius Septimius said...

This is really getting ugly.

As James Taranto noted today, there is a chance that there is at least some collusion between police and protesters; if there is collusion between the President of the United States and protesters intending to prevent the operation of a democratically elected government, we have real problems.

tim maguire said...

Have tou thought about making a general "sense of the scene" post? From reading your updates (and very few others--if it weren't for you and Meade I wonder who outside of Wisconsin would know anything about this), Wisconsin seems out of control, with the government unable to control its own personnel, Democratic representatives committing treason against the state (if there were such a state level charge) and I am increasingly wondering if a top to bottom purge of the Civil Service System isn't in order.

Browndog said...

"We are the one's we've been waiting for".

With the oceans receding, Obama scurries to find his comfortable protest shoes......

Tom Spaulding said...

Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?

Because he is a clueless pretender with no experience who has been told his entire life how special he is?

You know, the exact same guy he was in 2007.

Don't Tread 2012 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bill S. said...

Could it be possible that our esteemed President is a political hack?

TosaGuy said...

The two times Obama opened his yap on the issue, Governor Walker cut him off at the knees.

Walker to Obama Part 1. I have budget issue and yours are bigger. Go deal with yours.

Walker to Obama Part 2. My state employees will be able to bargain for wages, your federal employees cannot.

MadisonMan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Don't Tread 2012 said...

@Ann

"That makes the whole protest movement look left-wing. I wonder why national-level Democratic politicos are content to let things look that way."

Precisely because it IS, and they don't know any other way.

Ex-Dissident said...

We as Americans must ask ourselves:
Are these teachers providing us with the service that is worth this expenditure? Are they preparing our children well for the future?

If the answer is no, fire them.

MadisonMan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
edutcher said...

He was partying again last night.

We should start calling The Zero ad Michelle Louis Seize and Marie, or, at least, Nero and Agrippina.

As to the claim of Obama involvement, one might also throw in the SEIU wants to involve itself in the recall efforts, so it's a do the math issue. Expect previously unknown WI voters named Mickey Mouse and Alphonse Capone.

WV "whine" (no kidding) What the trolls accuse the Althouse Hillbillies of doing, but seem to have engaged in nothing but themselves since the Tea Party movement began.

DADvocate said...

It's evident Obama cares no more about our democratic republic form of government than do the protesters in Madison. He comes from the corrupt, thuggish Chicago school of politics. I'm sure he is at least strongly rooting for the protesters, democratic process be damned. Our republic may be in the greatest danger it's ever been in.

Windbag said...

Obama's interference in state matters doesn't sound constitutional. Are there any constitutional legal minds around who could address that?

I'm not trying to sound like a smart alec, who cries "unconstitutional" at the drop of a hat. If he is meddling in state affairs, what is his legal authority? He is hardly ensuring domestic tranquility if he is actively engaged in subverting the democratic process.

MadisonMan said...

Oops -- never mind. After reading that sentence a couple times, its meaning suddenly popped.

JD Allen said...

Barcky Obumblef@ck could put a stop to this, immediately, were he to have any spine, or decency.

Velocon said...

Technical difficulties with his teleprompter?

Joaquin said...

No he shouldn't meddle is a states affairs. Oh yeah, Arizona.... NEVER MIND!

SGT Ted said...

Since the protest is leftwing it follows that it should look so.

Christopher said...

"Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?"

Well, it takes a long time to fire up the teleprompter, you know.

In the meantime, just consider the crack-brained whining from Garbage, Jeremy, Shiloh and the usual gang of idiots as a pretty good substitute for anything Little Black Jesus might vomit - minus only his usual sneering, down-the-nose look and ponderous faux-gravitas elocution.

JD said...

Longtime lurked. Excellent work.

Lucius Septimius said...

I wonder if Barry O has read this part of the US Constitution:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
Moreover, if he's read it, I wonder if he'd be willing to act on it if it meant stepping on the toes of the revolutionary vanguard.

JD said...

I swear I know how to spell. Damn spellcheck on the iPads.

TosaGuy said...

I do guarantee that his people in the various departments of the federal government are right now scouring the regs to pull any fed $$ it can from WI.

michaele said...

Rush was playing some excerpts of a Megan Kelly interview with Jesse Jackson. Good Lord, Jackson is a babbling idiot who doesn't even seem to understand what the issues are that he is there protesting in support of.
You are in for a treat tonight when you listen to the podcast.

Scrutineer said...

Obama's interference in state matters doesn't sound constitutional.

When Bush/Obama urged voters to elect GOP/Democratic candidates to state office, that was constitutional. I don't see any constitutional problem with a president urging citizens to protest against their state government or to vote to recall state officials.

If the president is encouraging illegal interference with the operation of state government (e.g., protesters physically blocking legislators from voting), then that's something else altogether.

The Crack Emcee said...

Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?

How many times do I have to tell you he doesn't exist? Look - I'm waving my hands where he's supposed to be - nothing there. Not even a suit to be emptied. The 'O' in Obama stands for Oakland:

There's no "there" there.

Julius said...

Why don't the Republicans ever voice any complaints about the murderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia?

They've had decades! But instead of doing anything about it, they've been best buddies with these brutal thugs.

Julius said...

Oh, and maybe Obama says nothing about Wisconsin because it is a state issue and he implicitly approves...

Republicans are still morally responsible for the people dying in Saudi Arabia, tho'.

Obama and the Democrats are responsible too, but not as much as the Republicans are.

Michael K said...

Obama probably doesn't know what to say. He has trouble making decisions. What if those polls are wrong and Walker's bill is popular ? Obama doesn't know what to do. We are all better off if he does nothing.

chickelit said...

TosaGuy makes a good point about potus's meddling not being welcomed before regarding "siding" with the Public Sector Unions (PSU).

It's an entirely different matter when lawlessness threatens and lawmaking is disrupted.

Potus should at least suggest that Jackson and Moore butt out.

Dad29 said...

Don't forget: if the recalls actually 'flip the Senate', re-districting will also be affected.

EDH said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chickelit said...

Republicans are still morally responsible for the people dying in Saudi Arabia, tho'.

That's like saying Democrats are morally responsible for slavery. Just sayin'

Christopher said...

Shorter Julius - "Look! A squirrel!"

But two can play this game - if Republicans are responsible for the misery in Saudi Arabia, Julius, I look forward to you groveling in abject apology for all of the ass-licking the Democrat Party has indulged in with the "muderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime" in Cuba.

MadisonMan said...

I do guarantee that his people in the various departments of the federal government are right now scouring the regs to pull any fed $$ it can from WI.

I'm wondering about the Transit Dollars that flow to Madison, and Appleton, and Racine, for example.

I know that at one point Transportation workers were going to be exempt from the Budget Repair Bill (why is it still called that?). Have they been?

edutcher said...

Why?

He may still be too upset about the fact that last year over 1000 high schools wanted him at their commencement and this year it's only 68.

Who cares about WI or Libya after rejection like that.

I might add that's not a great harbinger for '12.

Julius said...

Why don't the Republicans ever voice any complaints about the murderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia?

They've had decades! But instead of doing anything about it, they've been best buddies with these brutal thugs.


The same can be asked about all the Lefties and the most murderous regime in the history of the human race - Red China.

Henry said...

The 'O' in Obama stands for Oakland

That's an awesome jab. You should have left it without explanation.

EDH said...

With so many tenuous comparisons to the Reagan administration recently, why not Obama's Domestic "Contra War"?

In many respects it's a proxy war for stakes greater than Wisconsin, as was Nicaragua.

Likewise, "following the money" might be the most interesting story.

Indigo Red said...

Googling organizing for america gives as the first result: Organizing for America | BarackObama.com

The link goes to an official Obama continuing campaign page. Can't get any clearer connection than that.

Bruce Hayden said...

Obama probably doesn't know what to say. He has trouble making decisions. What if those polls are wrong and Walker's bill is popular ? Obama doesn't know what to do. We are all better off if he does nothing.

I think that there is a lot going on here, and that is part of it. It doesn't look good for the President to get involved in local matters, and, esp. here where a lot of people view this as primarily a budgetary issue. What would he say - that Wisconsin will just have to follow Illinois and raise taxes to pay for the union benefits?

Also, there may be a possibility that his advisers are telling him to slow down, since the last couple of times that he has jumped into local issues, he has ended up with egg on his face for picking sides when the equities were likely running the other way.

David said...

Politically, this is probably the best move for Obama. As a matter of policy it's not terrible either, since he has no jurisdiction and only moderate influence on the issue. It's not his territory.

Libya, the federal deficit ($222 billion in February!), these are his territory. He's pretty much silent on these too.

DADvocate said...

Why don't the Republicans ever voice any complaints about the murderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia.

Yeah!!! Like Obama has been, especially when he bowed to that Saudi king. He really showed him!!!

David said...

The police may or may not be in sympathy with the protestors, but what could they do last night or this morning, other than not provoke? They were hugely outnumbered. Someone else (ultimately Gov. Walker) is in charge of police deployment. Walker clearly has decided to avoid confrontation as much as possible. A good choice, it seems to me. Don't let the protestors change the subject.

Pogo said...

I wonder how long this collusion has been going on?

FBI files recently revealed how Edward Kennedy repeatedly met with communists in this and other countries.

The "People from Organizing for America have been running the protests in Madison for quite some time now..."

NPR, the NYTimes, CNN, and the Washington Post all toe the Party line.

We are now seeing the 'vast conspiracy' Hillary spoke of.

I thought she was a nut for saying there was a VRWC, but maybe she came up with that because this was what the left was itself doing all along, and expecting the right merely behaved as they did.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

@Julius

"Republicans are still morally responsible for the people dying in Saudi Arabia, tho'."

(chuckle)

Proof that idiocy knows no boundaries.

Drew said...

Rush was playing some excerpts of a Megan Kelly interview with Jesse Jackson. Good Lord, Jackson is a babbling idiot who doesn't even seem to understand what the issues are that he is there protesting in support of.

Geez, I watched that interview. It was clear that Jackson was babbling nonsense, but what I like about Megyn Kelly is that she will cut right through that crap. By the end of the interview, Jackson was anxious to leave.

He repeated all the tired lefty-unionista slogans (and I swear if I hear one more person saying "working families" when they mean "union families" I'm gonna fill the room with uppercuts), and all I could think was "What is this damned fool doing here? Does he even know? Or like Sharpton, does he cease to exist once the cameras are turned off?

wv: eurnark. Say it out loud.

traditionalguy said...

My guess is that Obama believes the Progressives ruling in Madison will soon lie their way back into the rule of all of Wisconsin soon. So Obama will stick to crashing the dollar and impoverishing everyone in Wisconsin with his sneaky moratorium on the economic life blood called oil, or as Obama says, "Dirty Carbon Energy". Then suddenly the Party's offer of a subsistence level income in exchange for votes will sound very seductive. He only needs 51% deluded fools willing to keep spending 40% borrowed money like water. But Obama must be furious about the internet that again and again challenges the best lies he and Soros can comes up with.

Revenant said...

Why don't the Republicans ever voice any complaints about the murderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia.

That was kinda weak, dude.

Methadras said...

It's a fear of the power grasp these leftards have had on state governments for decades and they see Wisconsin as the battle ground that they need to make their stand on. If Wisconsin falls and kills off these public union sector parasites, then they know the host will start to heal again and they can't let that happen. Plus the gigantic sums of money used by these unions for DNC largess is to critical to give up. They think it's worth the fight. They will lose.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)


Why don't the Republicans ever voice any complaints about the murderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia?



Sad, sad deflection…let’s see, William Jefferson Clinton 20 January 1993, until 20 January 2001, Barak Hussein Obama 20 January 2009 until 20 January 2013….if you can’t follow my drift, you’re being obtuse as well as sad. Oh and Libya 2011 and Egypt 2011…what’s our stance? Again get back to me will you?

roesch-voltaire said...

As Robert Reich points out in the following quote, a People's Party is growing and does not need Obama at this point. "Like the leader(Walker) of any coup d'etat, he wants to show the public his strong-arm methods are made necessary by adversaries whose behavior can be characterized on the media as even more extreme.

Be measured. Stay cool. Know that we are a nation of laws, and those laws will prevail. The People's Party is growing across America." People in Wisconsin are cool.

kent said...

Why don't the Republicans ever voice any complaints about the murderous, corrupt, oppressive, totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia?

Hey! Remember all those insufferably self-righteous "THE WORLD CAN'T WAIT!" and "NOT IN MY NAME!" protests, throughout the entire length of Bush's two terms? Huh? Remember those? Do you? Huh?

Evidently the "world" can "wait" just fine, thank you, while those precise same military targets are being drone-blasted daily with, you know, a Democrat seated in the Oval Office.

Just sayin', is all.

Asswipe.

Maguro said...

Because there's nothing he can say to help the protesters. He already tried and it didn't work.

MayBee said...

Obama can't really draw attention to it today! This is the day of his big anti-bullying conference, at which the following solutions will be discussed:

The conference today will breakout into smaller discussions focused on In-school Policies, In-school Programs, Community-based Programs, Cyber bullying, and Campus-based Programs. After the day is over participants will report back on what they learned and attempt to form a strategy going forward to more formally address the problem.

How can you tell the teachers to stop acting like a lawless mob on the same day you are saying teachers are the nation's solution to bullying?

via Political Punch

Alex said...

Ann has made the WSJ:

Blogress Ann Althouse on protests...

Blogress Ann Althouse, herself a Wisconsin government employee, reports that the Capitol "protesters" entered through the window of a Democratic representative's office. She relays an on-scene report from her husband, Laurence Meade, on their efforts this morning to disrupt the legislature[...]

retire05 said...

Why isn't Obama vocal on this? Ann, are you serious? Really? Are you?

Obama, left wing, supports the protesters, left wing. And what I find really funny is how Meade manages to video all those shinanigans inside the Capitol but somehow managed to miss the VERY large sign put up by the protesters with SDS on it.


So here is your answer: Obama doesn't have to become involved. It is clear his buddy, William Ayers, and his SDS group, already are. And if you think this only makes it "appear" to be left wing driven, you are only fooling yourself. IT IS LEFT WING DRIVEN.

Trooper York said...

Roachy said....
People in Wisconsin are cool.

Not so much.

Henry said...

Ah, roesch-voltaire, thanks for the comic relief.

Paddy O said...

"any coup d'etat"

Really?! Really?!

An elected governor gained power by a coup d'etat?

Stop for a second and realize what you are doing. You are accusing other Wisconsin citizens of overthrowing the government by forcible means... by voting.

That's a dangerous step. I may not agree with Obama, but he was elected properly.

When you start accusing duly elected leaders of gaining power by a coup d'etat you are, in effect, declaring that all votes not in your favor are invalid. Do you really want to go down that road? Because you really are attacking the very roots of our government in doing this.

I appreciate the role that strong rhetoric can play in political debates, and I understand there are sharply different perspectives on the present issue, but I think attacking the very foundation of our government is a very dangerous road to walk down.

blake said...

Paddy O--

Once again, note the projection.

When the Left accuses, they're telling you what they're doing or what they're planning to do. Prepping the Tu Quoque Battlefield, as it were.

Trooper York said...

How is it cool to run away because you are going to lose a vote?

How is it cool to break into the Capitol through a window to defy a court order?

How is it cool to deface the marble of your very beautiful Capitol Building with signs that look like they were made by a kimdergarden class?

And most of all. How is it cool to walk around with a big plastic piece of cheese on your head?

Trooper York said...

Not cool dude. Not cool.

edutcher said...

roesch-voltaire said...

As Robert Reich points out in the following quote, a People's Party is growing and does not need Obama at this point. "Like the leader(Walker) of any coup d'etat, he wants to show the public his strong-arm methods are made necessary by adversaries whose behavior can be characterized on the media as even more extreme.

We all know Robbie Reich has his hands on the pulse of America.

The only people's party (a phrase right out of the Stalin-Mao handbook, dare I say) is the Tea Party, but they don't really represent the real people.

Be measured. Stay cool. Know that we are a nation of laws, and those laws will prevail. The People's Party is growing across America." People in Wisconsin are cool.

Yes, we saw how the Lefties believe we are a nation of laws with their antics last night.

Does this guy realize how stupid he sounds?

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)


Like the leader(Walker) of any coup d'etat, he wants to show the public his strong-arm methods are made necessary by adversaries whose behavior can be characterized on the media as even more extreme.



Yhwh Above, R-V you don’t BELIEVE this tripe do you…Walker and coup d’etat? Really the duly elected Governor of WI and the Duly Elected Legislature of WI are now members of a coup d’etat? For exercising their duly appointed duty and for exercising the legitimate authority? Is this what passes for “thought” now in the faculty lounges of America? That elected leaders doing their duty and exercising public policy options, WHICH YOU DISAGREE WITH, are now no better than usurpers of the Public Authority? You are really, at the core, no better than Arthur Scargill and NUM…you seek to nullify a legitimate election, by extra legal means. You used to be funny, pitiable, now you simply have moved onto being no better than the Stalinist Scargill, or for that matter, McVeigh and Nicholls…you no longer accept, as legitimate, the actions of a legitimate government.

The fundamental, practical, principle of democracy, is that, sometimes, you lose elections….there will be another, and you might win it…instead you substitute, YOU SHOULD PREVAIL NO MATTER WHAT. Is that REALLY the position you wish to advocate? So when Palin and the TEA Party lose elections can they just ignore the result and attempt to set aside the election? That IS what you are saying, here, practically. Walker WILL lose an election, sure mayhap not this year or even four years from now, but your side WILL win, some day. And you’d expect the “loser” of that election to grant your decisions some legitimacy, right? Currently, you don’t and as the Bible says, “as you sow, so shall you reap….” You need to be careful what you’re sowing.

Alex said...

So Obama is a figment of my imagination? He never really existed at all?

oforchristsakes said...

Dry off a couple of golf courses, he'll be right up.

Three! umm, Fore!

Alex said...

Robert 4th Reich usually issues out whoppers in his "articles" that allege increased government spending = prosperity. He never actually proves it.

Coketown said...

For all his shortcomings, faults, failures, blunders, mistakes, etc., Obama is still a master politician. He understands how political machinery works. There have been several news stories of him saying (or not saying) one thing in public and then doing something else in private.

His strategy can be summed up like this: Appear moderate to the public; Appear pro-active to your base; Appear positively militant to your money-givers. One of the most incredible spectacles of the 2008 campaign was Obama's one-man minstrel shows in front of his money-givers--saying and doing practically anything to keep them cheerful while putting on a fresh face for the public the following day.

Trooper York said...

Don't hold roachy to the actual words that he is championing. He doesn't really mean it. He just doesn't recognize an election that his side lost. When the other side has more votes it has to be overturned. Not by the next election. But by threats, protests, hints of violence and acting out like a three year old.

He is your basic left wing Democrat professor who is afraid of someone tampering with his rice bowl.

Cut him some slack.

Alex said...

Coketown - the only reason Obama got away with it is because the fawning MSM was always in his pocket and would never connect-the-dots of his chameleon-like campaigning.

If Bush had done that in 2000, the MSM would have crucified him. Oh wait, they crucified him regardless because he's a Republican and the MSM is 95% leftie maniacs.

Robert Cook said...

Obama isn't doing anything because he doesn't care to. He is an obedient servant of the plutocrats, as have been his immediate predecessors. Anyone, either left or right, who still perceives Obama as "left," or "liberal" or "progressive" or any way motivated to help the citizenry is deluded, willfully so.

Tom Spaulding said...

In 1959, fairly elected Democrat Governor Gaylord Nelson gave the unions collective bargaining privileges.

In 2011 fairly elected Republican Governor Scott Walker rescinded them.

What's the problem again?

Alex said...

If WI voters really cared about upholding Wisconsin's "proud tradition of public sector unions" they never would have elected the scoundrel Walker in the first place. Obviously the people have turned their back on the unions.

Robert Cook said...

"If Bush had done that in 2000, the MSM would have crucified him. Oh wait, they crucified him regardless...."

If you regard an almost eight year blowjob "crucifixion," or if you regard crucifixion to mean that after an eight year reign of war crimes, torture, terror and mass murder, Bush gets to enjoy his retirement free, white and rich, you're not entirely insane.

North Dallas Thirty said...

Obama is paying, organizing, and supporting the people who are making death threats against Republicans and are threatening to blow up public buildings.

Why? So that a law that mandates teachers and other public employees make annual contributions to the Obama Party and its politicians or lose their jobs.

That is all this rhetoric is about. Nothing else. The Republicans in Wisconsin have struck at the taproot of Obama Party funding and power, and Obama will do anything, including supporting murders and bombings like his mentor Bill Ayers, to protect it.

Lincolntf said...

War crimes like Gitmo, drone strikes, blah, blah, blah? Those former "crimes" are now Obama's only real accomplishments. He'll retire stupid, rich and half-white. Big deal.

Tom Spaulding said...

Thank God! Here comes Cook with some old-school, vintage Bush-bashing. Back in the day, baby, back.in.the.day.

roesch-voltaire said...

Trooper not to worry about my rice bowl as our efforts to import as many students from China has resulted in filling up my classes and ensuring my employment for some time. Today one Chinese student made the comment that Walker seems to be following the Chinese manner of governing-- one party, one rule.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

Shorter Robert Cook: "If you're not to the left of me, you're right wing."

I'll give you credit -- a lot -- for being consistent. You're one of the few on the left who judges President Obama by the same standards as you judged President Bush, and complains loudly because you see no difference. I sincerely respect your consistency, even though I disagree with you, because so many others on the left were suddenly struck with amnesia two years ago.

But just because you see President Obama to your right doesn't put him on the right. It just puts you farther left.

wv: aphoge. Have these protests reached their aphoge yet?

Alex said...

r-v

Today one Chinese student made the comment that Walker seems to be following the Chinese manner of governing-- one party, one rule.

you see Roachy - a teachable moment. You could have taken the time to explain what Constitutional republics are like and what a fleebagger is.

NotYourTypicalNewYorker said...

"Bush gets to enjoy his retirement free...."

Still hating Bush?....GOOD!

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)


Today one Chinese student made the comment that Walker seems to be following the Chinese manner of governing-- one party, one rule.



1) Really Wisconsin is a Unitary Party-State Regime? So the Democrats what are they? And in the PRC they do what to party members/officials who flee to adjacent provinces in order to thwart the edicts of Hu Jin-Tao?
2) And when Obama never met with the Republicans on the Porkulus or Health Care Bills, that makes him the same as Hu Jin-Tao?
Are you really this stupid? This bitter, this partisan, that you cannot accept that, today, at least, you did not prevail? Wow IF ONLY we’d learned that this was the proper response to losing an election, in 1992, or 1996 or 2008.
As an old foreman of mine used to say, “You need to tell lies small enough that you’ll believe them.” IF you believe this tripe you are sad or stupid R-V…don’t know what else to say. Governor Scott Walker = Communist Party Peoples Republic of China…*WOW*

Robert Cook said...

"The same can be asked about all the Lefties and the most murderous regime in the history of the human race - Red China."

Actually, dude, it was Richard Nixon who initiated our relationship with the Chinese. Good thing, too, in retrospect, as they're the only thing keeping us afloat at all.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)






One last question R-v, do the words Tiananmen Square mean anything to you?

DADvocate said...

Today one Chinese student made the comment that Walker seems to be following the Chinese manner of governing-- one party, one rule.

Pretty much the case until the next election when you have the executive branch, and a majority in both houses. We saw that at the federal level in Obama's first two years. But, somehow you think it means something when someone unfamiliar with our system of government comments on it. Elections have consequences, but fell free to keep whining.

Maguro said...

@r-v - Don't be an idiot, the Chinese government runs over protesters with tanks. Have you already forgotten that little episode?

kent said...

Today one Chinese student made the comment that Walker seems to be following the Chinese manner of governing-- one party, one rule.

The inevitable end result of the other party scuttling away and hiding underneath the nearest moist, flat rock, rather than opting to engage responsibly in the democratic process. C'est la vie!

Robert Cook said...

"Those former 'crimes' are now Obama's only real accomplishments."

There's nothing "former" at all about Bush's crimes, and Obama is continuing them, making him also a war criminal, mass murderer and terrorist.

Alex said...

Cook - I've got news for you. We can exist without China, but they can't without us. Sure our current level of prosperity would take a huge hit, but they would end up in the gutter. Not precluding the possibility of a huge war because of all those rare earths China possesses. Yeah, I think it's a mutually beneficial relationship. but keep spouting the lie that somehow China is propping us up. Only our bubbles.

Lem said...

I wonder why national-level Democratic politicos are content to let things look that way.

The results of the 2010 election spoke loud and clear.. If Obama wants to get re-elected he knows he cant appear to close to ultra-left causes.

Robert Cook said...

"I swear if I hear one more person saying "working families" when they mean "union families" I'm gonna fill the room with uppercuts."

Do you imagine that union families are NOT working families?

kent said...

[...] Obama is continuing them, making him also a war criminal, mass murderer and terrorist.

... and yet: no more mass "THE WORLD CAN'T WAIT!" demonstrations; no more giant papier-mache puppet heads; no more sanctimonious MSNBC/Daily Kos/Cindy Sheehan mewlings, daily, on behalf of the plight of the doe-eyed, whey-faced innocents suffering daily in the shadow of our drone bombers.

Funny, that.

Maguro said...

Do you imagine that union families are NOT working families?

Union families are a subset of working families. Using the terms intergangeably is inaccurate.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)


Do you imagine that union families are NOT working families?



The ones sitting in Teacher Rubber Rooms or those retraining centres in Detroit, certainly WEREN’T, were they? As working families would include those families WORKING, whether or no they are unionized, I’d say that Union-Families is a small subset of working families, wouldn’t you?

edutcher said...

Robert Cook said...

"If Bush had done that in 2000, the MSM would have crucified him. Oh wait, they crucified him regardless...."

If you regard an almost eight year blowjob "crucifixion," or if you regard crucifixion to mean that after an eight year reign of war crimes, torture, terror and mass murder, Bush gets to enjoy his retirement free, white and rich, you're not entirely insane.


The day will come when he realizes there are news sources besides the Daily Worker.

Tom Spaulding said...

Do you imagine union families are the only ones "working"? the Left keeps saying how much this bill hurts "working families" yet it saves 90% of the working families money, and asks the other 10% to contribute more of the 90%'s money that pays their PSU job salaries...to their own future!

Robert Cook said...

"Are these teachers providing us with the service that is worth this expenditure? Are they preparing our children well for the future?

If the answer is no, fire them."


You seem to think the public school teachers are autonomous and can set their own lesson plans and teach what they choose, rather than being subject to the decisions of their school boards, required to teach to lesson plans provided for them and use text books bought for them by those above them in pay grade.

Trooper York said...

Well that's good Roachy I hope you let all those chinese students get the wrong impression of America. With you as the example they will underestimate us.

Good job buddy.

Trooper York said...

Pretty cool that you can take some solace from a commie chinese student.

I guess you have to take comfort where you can.

PaulV said...

R-V, the Tea Party is the People's Party. Sucks for the left wing loons

Robert Cook said...

"Union families are a subset of working families. Using the terms intergangeably is inaccurate."

I don't know if you're referring to specific instances or general usage, but in the case of the protestors in Wisconsin, those of them who are teachers are of that subset of working families who are members of union families. It's not using the terms interchangeably at all, its using the term accurately to counter the lies promulgated by Fox News and other propagandists that teachers and other public union members are somehow overpaid, undeserving fatcats living lives of incomparable luxury as contrasted with their peers in the private sector.

TosaGuy said...

"Do you imagine that union families are NOT working families?"

My family growing up was not unionized. We the children were not permitted to collectively bargain with the parental units about what channel was to be on TV, what station in the car, or what chores to be done or what time they were to be done. We were, however, allowed to pick the supper menu when it was our birthday.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)






Not original, of course, R-V and Garage:
Bi-Partisan means, Republicans compromise with Democrats, when in the majority, but when Democrats are in the majority it means Republicans VOTE for the Democrat’s Bill….I see. Republicans SHOULD have voted for ObamaCare, but Republicans SHOULD have compromised on their bill in WI, got it….

Tom Spaulding said...

It's not using the terms interchangeably at all, its using the term accurately to counter the lies promulgated by Fox News and other propagandists that teachers and other public union members are somehow overpaid, undeserving fatcats living lives of incomparable luxury as contrasted with their peers in the private sector.

Wow. Your MSNBC talking points totally trump my Fox News talking points. I'm convinced. I'm never gonna vote again, just riot. Well, riot, and define terms like "working families" as I see fit. I'm going to "Lie in order to counter the lies".

What could go wrong?

PaulV said...

r-v

Today one Chinese student made the comment that Walker seems to be following the Chinese manner of governing-- one party, one rule.

That proves the Chinese student is smart enough to play his professor as the liberal tool he is.

former law student said...

"Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?"

I heard a rumor he's going to declare Dane County a no-fly zone.

Paddy O said...

Roesch, one party rule is also the way of things in California. I would think it would be the responsibility of a professor to talk about the differences in such a situation here in the US and in China.

I'm wondering if you're encouraging your students to think more deeply or if you are encouraging their biases, because they are your own. I'm actually curious if you applauded that student or if you corrected him.

Because what you did says alot about your character and your views about our system of government.

Again, I don't agree with most of what the state leadership does here in California, where every major elected office is run by Democrats. But, I would heartily argue against anyone saying California is just like China, simply because I disagree with how the elected officials are choosing to exercise their office.

former law student said...

[Obama] comes from the corrupt, thuggish Chicago school of politics.

If only Obama came from the Milwaukee Socialists school! Or the LaFollette Progressive school.

But no. He's just another conservative appeaser.

Paddy O said...

"the Chinese student is smart enough to play his professor as the liberal tool he is."

Well, maybe China is a lot like Wisconsin... communist people know how to play those in power.

former law student said...

If WI voters really cared about upholding Wisconsin's "proud tradition of public sector unions" they never would have elected the scoundrel Walker in the first place.

Walker sailed under a false flag, like the buccaneer Edward Low:

Low was a clever pirate who would use brute force only when necessary. His ships collected a variety of flags and he would often approach targets while flying the flag of Spain, England or whatever other nation they thought their prey might be from. Once close, they would run up the Jolly Roger and begin firing, which was usually enough to demoralize the other ship into surrendering. Low preferred to use a small fleet of two to four pirate ships to better outmaneuver his victims.

Here, Walker pretended to be a reasonable 'Sconsinite. Once elected, he ran up the Jolly Roger and proceeded to lay waste to the public workforce.

TosaGuy said...

Stock market dipped below 12K today. He has bigger problems.

former law student said...

What's the problem again?

Losing a right is just the same as gaining a right?

Let's strip women of the right to vote. Women's suffrage hasn't made a dime's worth of difference as far as I can tell, and eliminating having to count their votes would save a lot of money invested in voting machines, poll workers, etc.

Synova said...

Considering that the *last* time Obama said something about Wisconsin, Walker pointed out that his proposal isn't any worse than what Federal employees have. What could he possibly say that doesn't open himself up to more of the same?

You know Obama is only "aware" of this as a general thing and someone on his staff arranged the previous statements that turned out to bite him. I would be surprised if Organizing for America has to get his input or permission for anything.

Tom Spaulding said...

Let's strip women of the right to vote. Women's suffrage hasn't made a dime's worth of difference as far as I can tell, and eliminating having to count their votes would save a lot of money invested in voting machines, poll workers, etc.

Takedowns:

1)Women's Suffrage = Paying more for your own health plan and pension.

2)Let's strip Republicans the right to enact the agenda they were voted in to enact. Fair elections don't make a damn bit of difference to the Left, and eliminating the votes of the majority of Wisconsinites would make it a lot cheaper to funnel cash to Dems without that cumbersome union conduit.

I got more, but I'm at work.

Maguro said...

Hmmm...Scott Walker as a swashbuckling buccaneer, heroically freeing the downtrodden taxpayers of Wisconsin.

I like it. Have your people get with my people, we'll do lunch.

Tom Spaulding said...

Losing a right is just the same as gaining a right?

No, losing/gaining a privilege is.

Just as Nelson cannot bestow "rights" on anyone, Walker cannot take "rights" from anyone.

Which means, we aren't talking about rights.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

So what to do now? I know! Let's storm the Capitol!

AllenS said...

Fuck off, barry.

former law student said...

OK, let's revoke the privilege of women's voting, then.

The government giveth and the government taketh away. Kinda like reserving "Indian Territory," and then letting all the Sooners grab off their land.

former law student said...

2)Let's strip Republicans the right to enact the agenda they were voted in to enact.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I have concluded this is a barefaced lie. If anyone has a Walker campaign ad or literature promising stripping unions of their collective bargaining rights, please post a link.

Alex said...

fls - is there some constitutional requirement for Walker to have been rabid about union busting in his campaign to implement it now? Am I missing something? The GOP are within their legal rights to pass the bill!

Maguro said...

The government giveth and the government taketh away.

Yeah, laws get passed and rescinded all the time. Alcohol used to be legal, then it was illegal for a while and now it's legal again. So what?

Are you suggesting that legislation becomes unrepealable at a certain point that's known only to yourself, Michael Moore and Jesse Jackson?

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

If anyone has a Walker campaign ad or literature promising stripping unions of their collective bargaining rights, please post a link.

I think FLS is onto something. Just imagine how different the 2008 election might have been if Obama had told us about his death panels and unconstitutional mandates.

former law student said...

Alcohol used to be legal, then it was illegal for a while and now it's legal again. So what?

Note that it took a 2/3 majority to strip people of their rights there.

Wisconsin did it with a bare majority.

is there some constitutional requirement for Walker to have been rabid about union busting in his campaign to implement it now?

What's offensive is pretending that "that was what the voters elected us to do."

Why didn't Walker just say

"We won," or

"Elections have consequences."?

former law student said...

if Obama had told us about his death panels

You mean, Sarah Palin's "death panels."

Here's what Obama said, June 23, 2007:

Our conscience cannot rest so long as nearly 45 million Americans don't have health insurance and the millions more who do are going bankrupt trying to pay for it. I have made a solemn pledge that I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family's premiums by up to $2500 a year. That's not simply a matter of policy or ideology - it's a moral commitment.

Tom Spaulding said...

If anyone has a Walker campaign ad or literature promising stripping unions of their collective bargaining rights, please post a link.

Unions don't have collective bargaining rights. Just privileges, given by the elected officials in '59, removed by the elected officials in '11. I understand you bought the lie that those were "rights", but they were not.

If you insist upon your delusion, I suggest you take your lame comments over to blogs in the other 25 states.. and the federal government.. and protest the non-existence of CB "rights" for public sector employees there. I'm sure they are dying to hear the opinion of a former law student on these matters.

Tom Spaulding said...

, let's revoke the privilege of women's voting, then.

You keep making false analogies, which explains the "former", I guess.

However, if that is your platform and you think it's a winner, run for office, make the case, get the voters behind you. That's how Walker did it.

Or run around pouting and beating on drums in protest that women have the vote.

Guess which one I think you will do?

former law student said...

Unions don't have collective bargaining rights. Just privileges, given by the elected officials in '59, removed by the elected officials in '11. I understand you bought the lie that those were "rights", but they were not.

Unions don't have rights -- people have rights. I would ask you to explain what exactly you believe to be the difference between rights and privileges, citing examples of each, but I think it would be a losing effort. I do understand you are fine with governments taking things away from people, so you must be a totalitarian.

Tom Spaulding said...

And you are fine with Gaylord Nelson giving a gift to the Wisconsin PS workers that is magically immutable and un-repealable. Rights come down to us from folks like Gaylord Nelson, not "Our Creator"...hell of a misprint.

Now, get busy organizing for the other 25 states that have no CB for PS workers.
YOU CAN BE THEIR GAYLORD NELSON! And then get some marches on the Capitol in D.C. happening so the Fed workers can have some CB rights, too.

Then come back and lecture me some more. I could read you for hours.

chickelit said...

FSH quoted...

Our conscience cannot rest so long as nearly 45 million Americans don't have health insurance and the millions more who do are going bankrupt trying to pay for it. I have made a solemn pledge that I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family's premiums by up to $2500 a year. That's not simply a matter of policy or ideology - it's a moral commitment.

And you probably wonder why those words didn't move more people to tears and to a sweeping aufswung of social compassion. Why, oh why wouldn't everyone embrace a savings of $2500 a year?

There are many possible answers to questions, all of them oversimplified and we are all now so polarized (permanently?) that we can't even begin to see real answers.

Maguro said...

The terms and conditions of state employment are determined by each state legislature through the laws they pass. Can you comprehend that?

As for "totalitarianism", come on. These people are getting a 5% pay cut, not a one way ticket to the gulag. The leftist hyperventilating over these trivial austerity measures is absurd.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

collective bargaining rights

What are the details of these magical rights and why are they limited to a special group of people?

somefeller said...

But who in the Democratic Party outside of the Wisconsin legislature is? I count Tammy Baldwin, Michael Moore, and Jesse Jackson. That makes the whole protest movement look left-wing. I wonder why national-level Democratic politicos are content to let things look that way.

It's possible that national Democratic politicians, including the President, don't want to get in the middle of this because they know that public employee unions, particularly teacher's unions, are not hugely popular among an important portion of their base - white-collar professionals. This is particularly true among DC-area Democratic professionals, because of the defeat handed to Adrian Fenty (and by extension, Michelle Rhee) at least in part by teacher's unions. Incidentally, Fenty came out in favor of Walker. I wouldn't assume he did that just for fun.

somefeller said...

And much of this talk of rights vs. privileges is largely an exercise in semantics. For one thing, the right/privilege distinction has been weakened if not abandoned in matters of constitutional law. Plus, in practice (and in the vernacular), if the government provides some sort of substantive or procedural benefit in favor of someone, one can say that a right has been granted. It's also a right that in practice can be taken away by the government that provided it. As has been shown today in Wisconsin.

vbspurs said...

"Why doesn't President Obama say anything about the Wisconsin protests?"

BECAUSE HE WAS BULLIED ABOUT HIS BIG EARS! Jebus, can't you see what really counts in his list of priorities to comment about? The pain haunts him to this day. This minor brouhaha will be over by Spring Break.

E.M. Davis said...

FLS:

If collective bargaining is a 'right', why don't I have it?

former law student said...

These people are getting a 5% pay cut,

Nuh-unh. Not in the bill that just got passed, because it would have a fiscal effect in that case and thus require a 3/5 quorum to be taken up. This bill simply strips people of their collective bargaining rights.

Although apparently the heating plant giveaway popped back up in the bill that got passed.

former law student said...

If collective bargaining is a 'right', why don't I have it?

How do you know you don't have it? Have you tried asserting it?

(Man, these conservatives wait till things are just handed them on a plate.)

blake said...

How can an individual assert a collective bargaining right?

Wouldn't an individual asserting a collective bargaining right be usurping the individuals bargaining rights?

Maguro said...

@somefeller - I don't think DC white collar professionals have an issue with teachers unions in general, they just didn't care for the way DC schools were run in particular. And it's true that Fenty lost for some very DC-specific reasons that are not applicable to the Wisconsin situation.

In short, these people see no inconsistency between hating their teachers union and loving Wisconsin's.

North Dallas Thirty said...

Our conscience cannot rest so long as nearly 45 million Americans don't have health insurance and the millions more who do are going bankrupt trying to pay for it.

Of course it can, Barack Obama; you, despite being a multimillionaire, don't seem to have any trouble sleeping without donating the money you make to buy people health insurance.

Think how many people Ninny Pelosi could help if she could make do with one house and no vineyard, instead of the multiple estates she has, and use the money to buy "the poor" health insurance. Or how about Dead Kennedy selling off a few estates and giving the proceeds to those his fatass jowls quivered over constantly, instead of blowing the money on drugs and defense lawyers for himself and his drunken spawn?

Obama Party members do not care one bit about the poor. That's why they insist on compelling other people to pay the bills for them. Indeed, it is most telling that Obama Party members project onto other people their utter unwillingness to give away a penny of their own money.

somefeller said...

Maguro - that may be true, but I wouldn't be so sure of that. (Though I'm sure there were a lot of DC-specific reasons for Fenty's defeat other than the teachers unions.) I'm not seeing a big groundswell of deep political support for the teachers unions in Wisconsin from sources outside of organized labor and its professional allies. I think Althouse is on to something here regarding the silence of national Democrats on this, aside from a few perfunctory comments to make organized labor supporters feel better. It's the dog that didn't bark.

former law student said...

And then get some marches on the Capitol in D.C. happening so the Fed workers can have some CB rights, too.

Federal employees have had collective bargaining rights since 1962

former law student said...

Wouldn't an individual asserting a collective bargaining right be usurping the individuals bargaining rights?

Does an individual asserting the right to peacefully assemble usurp the right of individuals to be alone?

E.M. Davis said...

While labor unions that represent federal workers do have some collective bargaining rights, provisions in the Civil Service Reform Act passed under President Carter in 1978 restrict federal employees from using it for pay or pensions and federal workers cannot be forced into a union or required to pay dues.

Sounds like Wisconsin, no?

blake said...

Federal employees have had collective bargaining rights since 1962

What's the point of saying crap like that, FLS? It's so blatantly incomplete, it's as though you don't wish to engage people honestly on this topic.

Does an individual asserting the right to peacefully assemble usurp the right of individuals to be alone?

If they're required to by law, or to contribute by law, it would.

You know, like being forced to join (or support) a union to work in a particular field.

Maguro said...

Nuh-unh. Not in the bill that just got passed, because it would have a fiscal effect in that case and thus require a 3/5 quorum to be taken up. This bill simply strips people of their collective bargaining rights.

Nope. It's still the budget repair bill, the only thing that's been stripped out is $30M debt refinancing.

Apparently the only thing they need a 20 member quorum for is new appropriations, all the existing stuff they can pass with a simple majority.

Read the bill here and see for yourself.

former law student said...

What's the point of saying crap like that, FLS?

Shows that I understand what "some" means.

former law student said...

Wis. Const. VIII 8 Vote on fiscal bills; quorum. Section 8. On the passage in either house of the legislature of any law which imposes, continues or renews a tax, or creates a debt or charge, or makes, continues or renews an appropriation of public or trust money, or releases, discharges or commutes a claim or demand of the state, the question shall be taken by yeas and nays, which shall be duly entered on the journal; and three-fifths of all the members elected to such house shall in all such cases be required to constitute a quorum therein.


Apparently the only thing they need a 20 member quorum for is new appropriations, all the existing stuff they can pass with a simple majority.

I think there's an argument that the bill "continues or renews" an appropriation of public money, so the unions can make a case that it was passed unconstitutionally. The annotations appear to relate to cases where the recorded vote lacks evidence of a quorum, and here we know there was no quorum.

Maguro said...

I never claimed to be an expert in Wisconsin parliamentary procedures, though I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night. Just pointing out that the bill does in fact set the budget in addition to the union stuff.

enicar333 said...

President Obama hasn't said anything because the GOP is doing his dirty work. America is beyond bankrupt and austerity is to be implemented. It is politically more profitable to let the GOP Governors do it. Timothy Geithner, President Obamas Secretary of the Treasury, stated as much in an interview with Charlie Rose. You got the memo, right? Pay particular attention to part 8 of the interview: "American realization of fiscal unsustainability" Not for the weak of heart! http://fora.tv/2011/01/28/Timothy_Geithner_in_Conversation_with_Charlie_Rose

blake said...

So, not using the word "some" demonstrates that you know what it means?

Daniel said...

Because the royal gentry must be supported on the backs of the weary peasantry.God forbid they be fired and thrown into the private sector where they would starve if unable to suckle from the government teat.