June 5, 2012

"Shame on Obama for abandoning Wisconsin during the recall."

Writes Matthew Rothschild at The Progressive (which is a Madison-based publication):
Obama and his team don't want to risk anything for Tom Barrett. Well, they risked a lot by not risking anything.

They've alienated their base in Wisconsin. People here are furious at the White House, and that won't help Obama come November.
Oh, don't be so tough on poor Obama. Look, he's trying:



Hey, Wisconsinites. Hey! Hey! Makes me think of this Brian Regan routine.

43 comments:

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Hey Barack,

Hey, hey, hey, goodbye.

Love, Bushman

Curious George said...

"It matters because this is about a basic human right: the right to collectively bargain."

This is why there is no point in trying to have any rational discussion with a liberal.

Original Mike said...

"They've alienated their base in Wisconsin. People here are furious at the White House, and that won't help Obama come November."

I'm surprised he didn't show up for this reason alone.

Curious George said...

"But he acts like he doesn't know where Wisconsin even is..."

In fairness to Barry, it's probably not an act.

Widmerpool said...

Curious George,

Agree this is a mindless point of view. No one wears black hats or white hats when it comes to labor relations. The idea is to allocate rights so that the best public policy goal is achieved. Left to their own devices, organized labor would really like a simple rule that says "Mr. Employer you must pay me what I want and if not, you are powerless to stop me from destroying your business." Public employee unions have simply abused the rights (hardly God-given) that they have.

Michael Haz said...

I don't understand why progressives haven't embraced the Act 10 reforms signed into law by Governor Walker.

Progressives want more government. Wouldn't it seem reasonable that they'd want government to be as efficient as possible?

By government being highly efficient, there can be more of it at a lower cost than a bloated, expensive, benefit-rich government.

Voters would like a maximum-efficiency government and perhaps more voters would think it a good thing and consistantly vote for candidates who efficient government.

Beyond lower cost, an efficient government is more egalitarian. Isn't that what progressives seek?

Our current state government, especially the pre-Act 10 version, enriches mostly people who are already upper middle class. Those benefits, if lowered to at least private sector levels, could be spread among more employees, or perhaps the money freed up could be used to hire more people.

Progressives. You need to embrace Scott Walker and the Act 10 reforms. It's in your interest to do so.

Calypso Facto said...

"But he acts like he doesn't know where Wisconsin even is..."

He couldn't even find it while travelling from Illinois to Minnesota last week, and that's tough to do ...

PatCA said...

"It matters because this is about a basic human right: the right to collectively bargain."

I guess this absurd statement struck us all.

Now I am going out to vote, then get a coffee. I might even get a donut: it's my basic human right.

Jay said...

HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Is Barack Obama Too Weak to Win in November?'


Obama is trending the same as public sector unions in terms of popularity...

AprilApple said...

Collectively bargain off the tax payer dime. Thanks.

Andy Freeman said...

> Progressives want more government.

Yes.

> Wouldn't it seem reasonable that they'd want government to be as efficient as possible?

No. Why should they want govt size to be limited by the minimum amount of resources required to do what folks are willing to let govt do?

Patrick said...

Curious George said:
In fairness to Barry, it's probably not an act.


Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark.

Fen said...

Wouldn't it seem reasonable that they'd want government to be as efficient as possible?

No. Because Progressives want more government for the sake of Power.

Remember the Inner Party in Orwell's 1984? That's what they want to be.

Tim said...

"Back in 2007 on the campaign trail, Obama said: "If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I'm in the White House, I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I'll walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States of America. Because workers deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner."

Hahahaha. Another bullshit Obama lie the idiots bought. One would think Obama supporters would be embarrassed by how gullible and stupid they've proven to be, time after time after time - yet, there they are, begging for more.

To this day most federal employees DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN.

So this "right" has been deemed critical enough to warrant recalling the Governor of Wisconsin; those organizing the recall are lining up to support a President (oh, you know they'll be there, despite all the butt-hurt caterwauling now) who didn't even try, once, to extend collective bargaining rights to federal employees.

It's funny how absolutely pathetic the American Left is.

Patrick said...

Michael Haz, your post is reasonable, but shows a fundamental misunderstanding of why progressives want more government. They want it to maintain power. More government equals more power. More inefficient government leads to new problems, which they will tell us are solved only by more government.

They want to obtain and increase their power. To be fair, in the end they probably want to do something "good" with it, but woe unto those who get in the way.

DADvocate said...

Hey! Hey!

Reminds me of Fat Albert.

Tim said...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/mar/02/scott-walker/wisconsin-gov-scott-walker-says-most-federal-emplo/

"It's true, said Beth Moten, legislative and political director for AFGE, that most federal employees don't have collective bargaining rights over pay and benefits.

"So what's the point?" Moten asked. "Should employees in Wisconsin be treated as badly as federal employees are?"


Hahahahaha. Obama treats federal employees worse than Walker, says the political director of a federal employee union.

Yet they'll all line up again to vote for the Golfer-in-Chief.

PETER V. BELLA said...

Wisconsin is one of those 7 missing states Obama is still looking for.

Original Mike said...

"I might even get a donut: it's my basic human right."

Except in Bloom-burg.

edutcher said...

Dictator Zero was the Kiss of Death in '10 and that hasn't changed.

He isn't doing anything for anybody but himself and that's gonna cost him in about 4 months when he needs the local machines' help.

Michael Haz said...

Patrick - I understand that completely. I was just pointing out that the proggs are letting their tantrums get in the way of seeing an easier route to their objective than the one they have chosen.

David said...

Ok, Barack, I found the polling place. What am I supposed to do next?

David said...

Even Barack's tweet dares not mention the mayor of Milwaukee by name.

edutcher said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
alan markus said...

Progressives want more government

Not really - what they want is well paying jobs for themselves. They want "more" government in the sense that they want to share their workloads with other well paid employes. 2 or 3 guys making at least $75,0000 doing the work that could be done by 1 person making $50,000 a year - that's the concept.

edutcher said...

Tim said...

"Back in 2007 on the campaign trail, Obama said: "If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I'm in the White House, I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I'll walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States of America. Because workers deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner."

Apropos of nothing else, that "a comfortable pair of shoes" line is an old racist joke and Choom is so white, he's never even heard it.

Shanna said...

Hey is for horses, Mr. President.

When this election is over, do you think we will stop hearing so much about Wisconsin elections?

cubanbob said...

"It matters because this is about a basic human right: the right to collectively bargain."

Not a problem as long as only taxpayers get to vote on the pay, benefits and retirement packages at a regularly scheduled election.

alan markus said...

Before Mother's Day, I think there was one of those $3 dollar raffle fundraisers. Donate to Obama & win a chance that your mother got a tweet from Obama on Mother's Day.

Maybe someone had to donate to Obama's campaign to get Obama to tweet on Barrett's behalf.

alan markus said...

Apropos of nothing else, that "a comfortable pair of shoes" line is an old racist joke and Choom is so white, he's never even heard it.

He did tell the Congressional Black Caucus to "take off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes". Not well received, as I recollect.

Shanna said...

To this day most federal employees DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN.

Indeed. Many have the right to bargain, but only on work rules/other random stuff...never pay or benefits. That all comes from congress. Why isn't it the same at the state level?

My grandmother was a democrat and a fed, and she always used to say she hated Reagan, except when he fired all the air traffic controllers.

dbp said...

Just Barack Obama voting "Present"... by being absent.

Fen said...

"It matters because this is about a basic human right: the right to collectively bargain."

What a load of crap. Its not a "basic human right".

traditionalguy said...

The Progressives who put their reputations at risk for the Public Employee Unions Lost Cause are surprised that Obama is too smart to do that for them.

Suddenly facing reality in a world made of myths is not a pleasant moment.

PatCA said...

Yes, Mike, good thing we are still somewhat free to indulge here!

purplepenquin said...

This is why there is no point in trying to have any rational discussion with a liberal.

Well, that explains why you chose to just call names, make threats, and laughing while you post videos of workers dying on the job....you don't any intentions of having a rational discussion with people you disagree with so instead you chose just be a troll who starts flame wars.

I've often suspected that never intended to have a convo in good faith, but it is nice to see you finally flat-out admit it.

Andy Freeman said...

> Not really - what [progressives] want is well paying jobs for themselves.

Nope.

They want power and expect to be rewarded while exercising said power, but they're not satisfied with the reward alone. In fact, they'll even sacrifice reward to get power.

Joe said...

I think it more likely than not, that had Obama paid attention to Wisconsin it would have done even more political damage to him AND to Barrett.

RonF said...

Shanna said:

When this election is over, do you think we will stop hearing so much about Wisconsin elections?

If you listen to CNN and NPR, yes. If you listen to Fox, no. The liberal media will want to bury this as fast as they can, except to hold it up as an example of the fallout from Citizens United. Fox News and other conservative outlets will hold is up as a referendum on Pres. Obama's policies.

Curious George said...

"purplepenquin said...

Well, that explains why you chose to just call names, make threats, and laughing while you post videos of workers dying on the job....you don't any intentions of having a rational discussion with people you disagree with so instead you chose just be a troll who starts flame wars."

Make threats? Laughing while posting videos of workers dying on the job? Never have done that. You are a habitual liar Penguin. A disgusting habitual liar.

Saint Croix said...

Kaus busts him! "Next he'll tweet his opposition to Assad." Ouch. Yeah, Obama isn't a President so much as a faculty professor in a big house.

Joseph said...

Hell, from what I'm reading, @Obama2012 ought to just head to Madison, register and vote.

purplepenquin said...

Make threats? Laughing while posting videos of workers dying on the job? Never have done that

Seeing how you've stated before that there is nothing violent about one man spitting on another, it doesn't surprise me at all that you don't consider your own comments to be "threatening". Much like you consider name-calling to be part of a normal discussion, you simply aren't aware that there is anything out-of-line with your violent language.

But we both know that you did indeed post a link to the video of the stage collapsing at the Indiana State Fair, and we know that you did so mockingly rather than respectfully. And we both know that you're a liar to claim you never posted such a link nor made such comments.

What's really funny is that this is the very first time you've denied doing such a thing. Guess you finally went back and deleted the posts so you feel confident about saying you didn't...