"With all due respect to the attorney general, the Titanic was a big ship, too.... What Act 10 has run into is the Wisconsin Constitution, and it has violated the Wisconsin Constitution."
१२ नोव्हेंबर, २०१३
"I don't believe the two ships pass in the night. I believe they collide. And the state has a bigger ship, so we will win."
Said Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen to Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley who used the cliché "two ships passing in the night" to refer to the opponents' arguments about the constitutionality of the collective bargaining reforms made back in 2010 and previously considered by the court in 2011. The lawyer on the other side came up with:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१२ टिप्पण्या:
That would have been more effective if he had completed the analogy: "Act 10 ran into the Wisconsin Constitution, which is a pretty big iceberg."
[I'm not taking a position on merits, but merely critiquing the propaganda.]
Bad metaphors.
I wouldn't have used "bigger", and I wonder if that's accurately reported. The "bigger" side in a law suit isn't supposed to win; the "better" side is.
Try to work "chokehold" into it somehow.
I kinda hate when there's a serious discussion and people switch to talking about some metaphor, and then the argument is about elements of the metaphor, but no one wants to be the first to say it's a bad metaphor!
In a courtroom, the judge gets to set the terms, and you can see why the lawyers not only refrain from chiding the judge for bringing in an unhelpful metaphor but attempt to work within the metaphor.
It's actually quite insane.
If the Court already ruled on it, what is the point of this hearing? It was legally proposed and passed by the legislature legally.
I am not sure I really get the issue at this point.
Didn't the public workers already express their voice by getting out of unions quickly?
Why are we talking about this?
It's settled LAW!!!
We're going to need a bigger boat!
When I heard Pines' Titanic metaphor on the news, last night, I chuckeled to myself as I tried to follow it... then Van Hollen's boasting about the overwhelming power of the state was a laugher, too.
(Obligatory Barry Manilow Link)
Hey, wait.
It was passed the Wisconsin Legislature, was signed by the Governor, and already upheld by the State Supreme Court.
Following the logic of the Left on Obamacare, doesn't that mean they should stop trying to overturn it in part or in whole and simply accept it as the settled law of Wisconsin?
Pro tip for the union lawyer "icebergs aren't ships."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा