And yet, in states run by Democratic governors that are just as hard hit by the economy, they are somehow finding ways to do this without taking away collective bargaining rights (which, no matter how hard you try to spin it, will not save a penny).

Depends on how you want to define "priority". There was only one way for Walker to push this through - and that was with both houses under Republican control. How often will that be the situation in Wisconsin?

Are you sure of that Mike? How many states (regardless of whether they are run by Republicans or Democrats) have successfully solved their budget crises?

Huh. Maybe I wasn't deluded.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/09/w ... ing-obama/

Correlation does not mean causation (that's not to say that Republicans don't want to stay in power).

With that sort of logic one could even suggest that the reason Democrats are supporting the unions is not because they care about teachers' well-being, but because *gasp* they want to keep funding the political machine that keeps electing them with taxpayers' dollars.

Of course one would have to be pretty outrageous to suggest that and surely we can laugh him or her right out of this thread!

Wisconsin Republican Senators bypass the Dems and strip public union employees of collective bargaining rights: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... l?mod=e2tw

Heh, Walker might be some genius that I just don't understand, afterall Krem does staunchly support his decision and he seems pretty smart, but this is a horrible political move even if one of its motivations is to lessen the funds of the Democrat party. I say that because of the backlash that has ensued, is ensuing, and will ensue. This was not a widely supported move. Much like Brownback ending the funds for the arts here in Kansas (even though Kansans outside of Lawrence blindly vote Republican even when it goes against their own interests).

Oh well, I'm sure it won't last, and I'm going to New England anyhow who has great benefits for educators, even if the rest of the country thinks managers in businesses deserve more money than teachers.

But you know, maybe privatizing education, while having the realistic capacity to teach false information like creationism and holding ideas like religion as qualified base platforms, might lead to higher wages for the academic world. One can only hope, certainly if this ends up surviving the democratic outcries against it.

I'm open minded either way.

Yep, after removing everything from the bill having to do with the budget.

Proving, once and for all, that they had been lying the entire time when they claimed it was about money.

Yes, I would believe that. But the Democrats are less nefarious, if totally inept. They're just not as committed as the Republicans are. They waffle and suck the right teats while seeming to regret it. I simply don't find public unions to be nearly as sinister as who's greasing the hands of the Republicans on this. The Republicans are bastards, but I admire their balls:

"The action today will help ensure Wisconsin has a business climate that allows the private sector to create 250,000 new jobs."

I gotta hand it to them for that. Starving the beast to "prove" that ideology right.

However, for the vast majority of Americans that has not been the case for the past decade. Their earnings and wealth have stagnated, while a miniscule % has soaked up almost all the economic growth.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02 ... hart-graph

The problem is Texas is known for massaging these tests because it was used to butress Bush's claim as a "compasionate" conservative with results when he ran for President in 2000. They still exclude students to jack up the scores.



http://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP202/index2.html

The same thing has been happening in Virginia from the articles I have read. These tests can and are being manipulated by certain states and jurisdictions. In my opinion, it seems to be more of a problem in Southern states, although it has shown up in LA,NYC, (Bloomberg's "miracle" is a mirage) and DC (Michelle Rhee was a joke hoisted by the national media as as an educational messiah) as well. I think it is yet another tool being used to destroy teachers unions through wedge issues to promote charter schools (don't work significantly better than public ones), and voucher systems (trojan horse to defund public education).



http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class- ... .html#more




http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/ ... ting_N.htm

I do agree there are too many variables to make a valid comparison in vastly different states between the union and non-union performances of teachers through their student test scores .

This is totally true. I went to high school in Texas, and they design their entire arithmetic around standardized tests. They also force those who get low grades to have entire semesters devoted solely to raising their scores on said tests.

In Kansas, we did none of that.

This thread sort of devolved into many tangential points, and I posted on a few of Krem's responses. This is my take on the original topic of the thread. I apologize for the mess I originally posted, this is close what I intended to post.

Flim Flam Fandango-Walker/Wisconsin Watusi


-Rachel Maddow like many MSNBC "talent" she plays a liberal on TV

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41993010/ns ... addow_show




http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110311/us_ ... sconsin_17

This is my estimation of the Walker/Wisconsin situation. It is a freeroll (a gamble or risk that you cannot lose capital only win if fortunate) for the Republicans. If Walker wins and this legislation stands, it may be the final death knell for the middle class in this country. The unions will have been broken in their keep of the latent citadel (Wisconsin) of union/progressive history and activity.

If Walker loses and Obama ever gives more than a vaguely worded tepid declaration of support for any union’s cause, the Republican operatives might be able to manipulate the situation into Obama being labor’s lackey for the 2012 election which will just amplify their current bellow of him being an un-American socialist. Even if Obama does not fall for the Beltway media “trap” of actually following through on one of his campaign promises, the Republican’s framing might work. At worst, they will have footage of dirty hippies and be able to use the scare tactic of "mob" rule to stoke voter enthusiasm for their supporters in 2012. No matter the ultimate outcome, Walker and the Wisconsin Republicans secured all the concessions. The public unions capitulated on all the monetary negotiations. The only sticking point seemed to be the collective bargaining issue, and other issues meant to defund and destabilize the union.

This is very disturbing, because everyone in the media seems to not be able to understand (or it is in their economic or long term career interest to ignore) that whatever "victory" the unions get will be a Pyrrhic one at best, unless there is a sea change in national attitudes and organization of labor and progressive interests in the U.S. from this point forward. I have not heard one pundit on TV or one columnist write one article addressing this point. It has been constant pleading to show how compliant the union has been to Walker's draconian demands with no analysis of how weak and feeble these supposedly all powerful public unions really are at this juncture in our country’s history.

I find the whole situation to be profoundly depressing. For the past three decades the middle class and working poor of this country have been under constant attack from a wealth and power grab by the nation’s monied elite with minimal checks on this incremental putsch. The unbalanced accumulation of that wealth in so few individuals for a supposed constitutional republic is unhealthy for the nation, and it is much of the reason the country is as dysfunctional as it is in addressing its current actual as opposed to wedge manufactured problems.

In my lifetime these are some of the major setbacks for U.S. labor unions:

1. The failure of the Labor Reform Act of 1978 to pass which would have strengthened the regulatory power of the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) with Democratic control of the Senate (61 seats) and White House.
2. Reagan’s 1981 firing of PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization) employees following a strike (technically illegal under Taft-Hartley but rarely enforced) which resulted in their eventual decertification.
3. The rise of the Sun Belt from the late 1960s onward where unions were non-existent or weak compared to the industrial North and Mid-west.
4. The passage of NAFTA (which I supported at the time) and the rise of outsourcing of domestic jobs.
5. The growth of the service industry as a poor substitute for the loss of manufacturing jobs.

The Democrats and Republicans over the past 3 decades have played this shell game with variants of the good cop/bad cop technique to wring more and more out of the vast majority of Americans. On the Federal and State level, there is a real or perceived problem or crisis (often manufactured to some extent). The Far Right/Republicans suggest some radical solution to the Democrats initially counter with a basically centrist counterproposal. Almost on cue, the partners switch places from time to time in initiating this flim flam fandango. There is a “compromise” or sometimes total capitulation on one side, but usually the result is either at best a centrist or more often a right center solution. Occasionally, the “compromise” is far right legislation. Perhaps rarely, a left of center piece of legislation sneaks into law. At the moment, I can’t think of a single piece of legislation in the past two decades outside of possibly HIPAA (1996) which seemed like a boondoggle for contractors. I can’t think of a “far left” piece of legislation that has passed in the past three decades (at least on the Federal level).

As an example, in the negotiations that eventually became PPACA (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) the recent reform of healthcare coverage, the Democrats should have proposed tax payer funded transgender adoptions, abortions for all (even those women that wanted to keep their fetus), and sex surrogates. While the Republicans spin doctors freaked out and dealt with their supporters going apoplectic (no time to concoct death panel B.S. as the Democrats allow their inner socialist freak on), the Democrats could have counter offered to accept Universal healthcare that covered mental health and dental care. Even in my preposterous scenario, I envision the Democrats would eventually capitulate by accepting the public option. In reality, the public insurance option was their pie in the sky demand. It was jettisoned before Republicans took their first hostage, even though it had majority approval in public polling.

The gruel passed out for the Right is the gradual restriction of abortion rights for women and on the Left the gradual allowance of a few civil rights for homosexuals. While the left and right fight over cultural issues, both parties gut regulations, while doling out tax breaks and subsidies to corporations and the extremely wealthy. This bait and switch tactic has worked well for both parties the past three decades.

The insidiousness of this fraudulent Kabuki on the American people is that it has been almost a continual lurch to the current plutocratic oligarchy de facto government. For every two to four starboard tacks under Republican leadership or control of the government, there has been a feeble “correction” of a half or one full port tack back to the center when Democrats had the reigns of governmental power. The media portrays these unequal actions as falsely equivalent. A fraudulent narrative emerges that the metaphorical ship of state is a little off course in this new century or at worst lost listlessly. When a truer picture is the country (or at least a vast majority of its citizens) is listlessly being steered over Niagara Falls or the bridge to the 21st century leads to the end of the 19th century and the worst excesses of the Gilded Age.

To paraphrase Dean Wormer from Animal House, “Fat, distracted, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.” Unfortunately, too many of the American population fits that description and to be fair I include myself in that group. We are distracted by static like Charlie Sheen's antics or Lindsey Lohan's tribulations which do not actually impact our daily lives.

However, something like the following event never makes it into the national discussion:



http://blogs.forbes.com/sportsmoney/201 ... state-tax/

Good hard working government employees are demonized for making a decent median income or heaven forbid having a comfortable lifestyle. It is seen as perfectly acceptable, even encouraged to excoriate this group of workers for their "absurd" prosperity while others less fortunate are forced to pay for these vile public servants’ lavish lifestyle. While at the same time, it is considered blasphemous to suggest that millionaires and billionaires be asked to pay any tax on frankly obscene inherited windfalls of wealth.

It is the modern equivalent of Rome’s bread and circuses designed to superficially satiate the public while a tiny elite amass more and more. We are the proverbial frog being boiled alive, yet too many of us don’t seem to care or are actively cheering on the water’s attempt to reach a boil.



I thought I saw the preceding attributed to former Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, but I am unable to locate the source. I apologize if the attribution is incorrect. It succinctly symbolizes this country’s wealthy elites distract and divide tactics while they seemingly confuse us into giving them more of our cookies. The top 1% can have their multiple cookies, but the Tea Party member and the rest of us deserve a few too. Rachel Maddow should refrain from yelping obscenely premature victory congratulations before Wisconsin union members wrangle a single cookie crumb off the floor..

I am a dude and thanks for the comment. My situation was similar to yours, although I was not rich but probably more accurately I would describe our situation as upper middle class.

The rich people I had contact were much like you described. I went to a private high school. Most of my classmates came from families that inherited wealth and a small minority came from families that worked their way up from humbler beginnings. The less wealthy of us came from families where both parents worked and were scientists, doctors and lawyers mostly. There were only about 5 of us out of a class of 55. Our parent got scholarships or worked their way through college. Those of us that had more modest backgrounds realized that wealth was not preordained or a right of the chosen few, while those that inherited their wealth were less charitable in their worldview to put it kindly. The majority were racist too. Public school students were considered white trash. The females tended to be more openminded than the males. College opened many of their minds to the plight of others, some became relatively liberal. Most remained creeps that were pathologically unable to accept responsibility for their own selfish actions. For example, there were numerous incidents of trashed hotel rooms, destruction of people's property, and DUI accidents that resulted in paralizations and death. They often blamed their reckless behavior on innocent individuals. For the most part, my middle class friends were not like these people. These observations are generalizations. I knew some awful kids from middle or lower class families, and some of the kids from the wealthy families were outstanding young adults.





I grew up in Kansas too, until I went to high school.

As someone who grew up in a lower middle class family (my father was a sign painter) I too saw the same thing -- especially when I went to law school in Boston, surrounded by rich kids whose parents were all lawyers and who spent weekends in Bermuda while I worked at a record store to pay my rent.

And then when I worked for a liberal lobbying group in Boston, I saw it all the time. These rich people who would donate $1000 to candidates without blinking always treated me like an inferior. I could never be their equal, even while they hypocritically talked about helping the poor and underprivileged.

I did NOT see this in people who worked and got their money that way.

People who inherit money or are born into it have a sense of entitlement the rest of us don't understand. And they resent it when we, the people, want them to pay their fair share.

Sadly, these rich people have managed to convince many of us that it's the right thing to do, to support them at the expense of ourselves. I suppose there were deluded serfs who felt the same way about kings, too.

Fuck American liberals. Bunch of self-indulgent, hypocritical, trendy yuppies. The hippie movement killed American leftism.

So the Governor wins by an even bigger margin.

Epic flop by the democrats


Obama will take the state but it shows the GOP is quite energized.

It's really quite an impressive feat of propaganda!

I love hearing people quote talking points like they originated in their own minds - - just like movie hype.

Well the argument is Public sector workers are spoiled and govt (Obama) wants to increase taxes to pay for their benefits which many normal folk do not have.



Anyways I think the election shows a few small things.

Republicans are energized and democrats are not.

Even with all that outside help and unions going crazy they did not even get a better result then last time.


I was wondering when is the Health care case being decided...

I think that is going to cause a shit storm of biblical proportions.

The ACA decision should already have been decided (March 30 or so) it is just that the opinion has not been released yet--we do not know how the justices voted. Potentially it could be released next Monday but I am thinking that 25 June is more likely since I think that is the end of their term.

I agree in part, but you have to admit that money also makes a big difference. The GOP outspent the Democrats 20 to 1, thanks largely to the Citizen's United case allowing unlimited and anonymous donations.

If the expenditures for this election had been equal and the Democrats had still lost, your point would be stronger.

Actually thinking about it...


With unlimited money and the fact Romney is raising so much money and then add in Republicans being energized.


2012 will be a close election.

Obama will have to play defense in this election, no way he is picking up anything now it appears.


Also..

I find Obama making fun of Romney for being a Vulture (Venture Capitalist) in the 80's when that was common business practice during that...

Then goes around around the country getting money from the 1 %...

Hypricrit.

Even Clinton called him out for that. Clinton makes Obama seem like an amateur.

Welcome to politics. Clinton started triangulation, so he's done more than enough to lead to permanent GOP rule.

I find this comment interesting. Explain.

I think this explains what he means well ^^

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulat ... olitics%29

Clinton was a realist, he realized after the Republican victory in 1994 that the country had no appetite for left wing policies...

Obama lol..
Spends 2 years on Healthcare while the economy was in the tank...Likely will go down as one of the biggest Presidential blunders when we look back on it.

Anyways I think that the US is a centre right country so its naturally favours the GOP. This is among the people who actually vote. There are a ton of people who support left wing ideas but they never vote or only voted in 2008.

It happens.

For example...
Tony Blair accepted many of Thatchers ideas and now all the big politicians in the UK do.

In Canada, the liberals in the 90's were pretty much conservatives..Led to them dominating the scene for 13 years. Now they have moved to the left and people don't care about them anymore.