Democrats love democracy until they are not in control. Then democracy is unfair.
Legislators in Wisconsin have left the state in order to stymie the process of a democratically elected government. The hate that has spewed from Democrats is breathtaking. Union members have even called for the death of Governor Scott Walker and signs showing Walker in a cross hairs are displayed. Difficult financial times have pierced the veneer of civility that unions and left wingers would have you think was normal.
It’s not normal. Under that veneer lurks the most vile of character. The hate, the threats, the bullying thuggery- this is the true personality of unions. Shared sacrifice means nothing to them. They shriek and revolt at the possibility of doing with a little less but not for one second are they hesitant to force the taxpayer to do with less. They cling to the necks of the taxpayers with vampiric tenacity, ever ready to drain the victims entirely.
No one should ever mistake unions as being civil, whether they drops bags of cement on buses or stomp on private property and terrorize teenagers.
Obama and Nancy Pelosi have made clear their support to this insurrection.
Teachers in Wisconsin are hardly impoverished. The average salary and benefit package for teachers in Wisconsin is worth more than $100,000 per year.
Teachers abandoned their jobs to participate in the protests and probably will want to be paid for their time.
The appearance of a race baiting demagogue will almost certainly see the overwhelmingly white protest crowd portrayed as racial victims.
Desertion seems to the main course at La Casa Wisconsin. Democrat legislators, facing certain defeat from Republicans hell bent on being financially responsible fled the state, preventing a vote in the Wisconsin State Senate. One of the escapees who ripped apart the democratic process, tore the state apart and shut down the government, Sen. Joe Erpenbach (D-Stupid) said this:
“That really, truly is up to the governor,” he told The Associated Press in an interview Friday at a downtown Chicago hotel. “It’s his responsibility to bring the state together. The state is not unified. It is totally torn apart.”
Governor Scott Walker would like nothing better than to bring the state together, but it was the idiot Democrats who left the state. Walker has dispatched the State Police to retrieve the truants.
Erpenbach compounded his disingenuousness.
“We all didn’t want to do this. I didn’t want to do this,” he added. “The only other option we had to slow things down, was to leave.”
They have also indicated that they are prepared to stay away for weeks. As of 2009 Wisconsin legislators were paid $49,000 per year. Presumably, they are not paid to play hooky in Chicago hotels.
Why was it necessary to “slow things down”? Voters gave Republicans a 19-14 edge in the Wisconsin Senate and republican democracy was working according to the state Constitution.
The truth is that Wisconsin teachers are derelict and Wisconsin democrats have violated their oaths of office. Wisconsin teachers have thrown students over for their own avarice. Wisconsin democrats are subverting democracy. They are trampling the rights of the voters.
It is sedition.
There was a vote and democrats ignore it. The people spoke but democrats are deaf to them. They have no right to “slow things down” for weeks. It’s not part of the job description.
Governor Walker ought to channel Ronald Reagan and declare their seats vacant and hold immediate elections to replace them and if teachers abandon their students again they too should be shown the door. This sad episode proves that democrats have no use for democracy when it doesn’t serve their aspirations and further proves that unions could not give a tinker’s damn about the general good.
Enough.
Update: Teacher strikes are illegal in Wisconsin but a judge won’t enforce the law.
See author page
@blackiris: That’s why we have a republic and not a democracy. Moreover, the real threat comes from the current administration, if anywhere. Ever see how FDR felt about collective bargaining?
@blackiris: This is a particularly stupid argument.
My dear Mr. Steward:
As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.
Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades “has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships.” Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.
The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.
Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that “under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government.” successful.
I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.
Very Sincerely Yours,
(FDR)
——————————————————————————–
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2675825/posts
FDR opposed collective bargaining but liberals spoke to him and are convinced he changed his mind.
Hilarious
B-Iris, you say you aren’t a socialist yet spout socialist talking points. We call it as we see it. I think your first post here was your most honest. You know, the one where you said “we willcrush you.”
I have to agree that IF you aren’t a union thug then you are a heavy supporter of their cause.
1933 Germany? Yeah, there are sooooo many similarities to America’s situation in 2011. (oy vey).
Oh and no, you will not crush us. You will self destruct spectacularly while trying. Your rabid hatred of your opponenets will be your undoing.
@blackiris:
No, Jonah says it best:
Indeed, “if only.”
WOW, you all take my breath away, and this time, it’s not from shoveling my snow,
all the arguments of the representant Blackiris we have are absolutly nullyfied
having no substance, there for no match to the GOVERNER”s agenda to change
one iota, the best things to do is for the STATES employee to return to work and work harder to bring to our children A solid judgement for their future own endeavor, instead of showing to them their owns
squables with the STATE GOVERNER, wich is not from their chosen party allegeance,
therefor they choose to listen to bad advices from the PRESIDENT himself, inciting the employee
to countest a GOVERNER rightfully elected by a good MAJORITY GAP from his opponant,
let’s be fair to know that THE REST OF AMERICA HAVE BEEN WITNESS OF ALL THE ASPECTS AND TOOK GOOD NOTE OF IT
First of all, you seem to be under the impression that I support this protest. As I’ve said above, I do not. I find them selfish and irresponsible.
They are not, however “the government”. They are civil service employees who work for the government, and are individuals who do not give up their 1st Amendment rights just because they became employed by any local, state or federal government agency. Nor are they elected officials.
There is nothing seditious in their actions… even tho I consider it irresponsible and NIMBY in intent. And they are not “wresting” any power from the elected officials and the legislative body. They are doing something no different than the tea party did in that they are waging a protest against fiscal policy they do not agree with.
It does not matter if their grievances are justified or not – except, perhaps to you. But then that’s why the 1st Amendment exists. To protect free speech we do *not* agree with.
The policy is still being controlled by the elected representatives and executive branch in WI. They are asking that a particular bill be killed. Those protestors are not in control of what the current representatives do with policy and law, therefore they are not “the government”. Nor do they have representative voting power as individuals. Again, they are not “the government”. Those 14 MIA Dem losers? *They* are “the government”.
I think we’ve all see how all levels of government elected ones do what they want, despite approval of all… or even a majority… of their constituents. This is why we have elections. To replace those officials who abuse their responsibilities. Right now, there’s 14 Dems who should be quite worried about their future political careers. There’s not many positions in the private sector when you can deliberately not show up at work for political opinions, and remain employed. They’re gonna have a tough time trying that as a Walmart greeter in the future.
However your continued insistence that civil service employees are “the government”, and therefore must yield 1st Amendment rights to protest against policy, is not only an absurd stretch, but a baffling exercise in logic.
Now, the swing from one extreme to the other…. back to Ms. blackiris
Let’s leave aside the fact that I find unions for most public sector employees offensive, and most certainly should be limited in what they can bargain on since they are lobbying for increased taxpayer burden and affecting a government entity’s budget. This is especially true in a time of a “gimme gimme” entitlement epoch that has proven to be unsustainable.
Forgetting personal opines, let’s go to that pesky 10th Amendment concept that apparently escapes you, blackiris. Reminder… States’ rights?
You seem to be under the impression that not only are public civil servants automatically entitled to union representation and bargaining rights, but that it should be a blanket national policy. That it’s stripping some of an imagined Constitutional right. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In a “shoot your own foot off” sort of way, Josh Marshall at TPM attempts to make his case of support by showing a national map with varying degrees of union collective bargaining rights for the public sector by state.
As you can plainly see, five states forbid this practice for public sector unions outright, 11 states have it as permissable, and the rest mandate it. Wisconsin is one of those at this time.
My point? It’s a state decision. 10th Amendment rights. We’re a republic, remember?
And if a state and their elected officials present legislation to change that status at any time, that is again a state’s decision. There’s a procedure, and that procedure includes the elected ones voting up or down on legislative changes.
But it seems your obstructionist pals don’t wish for the legislative process to run it’s course because of sour grapes. I repeat, had the GOP done this in our Congress, you would have been screaming to high heaven. Hypocritical much?
So sorry your Dem buds don’t control the state legislature or the executive office in WI anymore, but that’s the breaks. Get over it. The majority of WI voters – who’s salaries and pension plans are not paid for by their neighbors – simply do not agree with you, and voted for just this type of action. And under our 10th Amendment, that’s their right.
Right… so now that a state government, of which your party isn’t in control of anymore, wants to change a law on the books that isn’t dissimilar to other states, you compare them to the Third Reich? You got a lot of chutzpah, lady.
@Missy, Jonah is, as usual, right on the money and entertaining in making his points. As an OT aside, I don’t know if you are aware that he and Lucianne just buried his older brother, Josh.. an accident of sort where complications arose. Very sad. Josh was quite the personality in his own right, helped run BlogsLucianneLoves, as well as The Connection. He shall be missed by more than just the Goldberg family. So I’m guessing Jonah wrote this more than a week ago?
Apologies for the sidetrack, but Josh was on my mind for the past few days.
@MataHarley:
Saw that last week, the photo of Josh on the beach was so moving. My thoughts were, amazement that Jonah could put this together so soon after the loss of his brother, it didn’t cross my mind that he could have written the column earlier. You are on your toes Mata!
MataHarley said:
I have no idea how you thought that I was criticizing public employees voicing their opinion on matters of governance. If it was due to being unclear in the use of the language, I apologize. My issue is NOT with free speech. I don’t know any non liberal who wishes to control it, and I assumed you would recognize I make no argument against it.
My complaint, in terms of sedition, is the act of organizing, raising money, and the ability to extract dollars from the public, under the threat of failure to carry out the work they were hired to do. In other words, the very act of unionizing and thereby raising money to try to alter political outcomes, and the threat of strike or work stoppage, is what I call “sedition”. Not showing up at the capitol building and saying “hey, we disagree”.
I consider it extremely unseemly, unprofessional, and downright malodorous that they do, but not illegal, nor criminal. Any public employee who says “give me perks” in an imperious tone has forgotten that he is MY servant, and works for ME, owing respect and duty to the very people these people are demonstrating against – the voters and taxpayers.
Now you really have me confused, weholdthesetruths…. for what is the act of sedition but illegal and criminal? Otherwise, why was Laura Berg, a VA nurse, investigated for sedition charges in 2005? In March of last year, nine members of the Hutaree were charged with seditious conspiracy, among other crimes. In the late 60s, sedition laws were used by US Marshals to arrest and charge some Vietnam protestors at an Army Induction Center in California.
This is why I repeatedly say, to accuse the protestors of sedition (in the legal sense, and not any liberal language interpretation based on emotion) is over the top hyperbole. Sedition is a prosecutable crime in this nation. So if your previous comments – stating your belief that the protestors were “the government”, and thereby were engaging in seditious acts – are *not* what you meant, then we are on the same page.
Have We as a Nation selected a different style of Community Organizer for Leadership that aligns Himself with a those that have chosen Lawfully Elected Officials as a different Scapegoat?
THE SEPARATION OF POWERS
“There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person.”
–Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu1
“The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
–James Madison, Federalist 46
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
–U.S. Constitution, Art. I, § 1
“The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”
–U.S. Constitution, Art. II, § 1, cl. 1
So Our Community Organizer in Chief needs to get the DNC, OfA and the rest off the case in Wisconsin.
Yep, the shoe is on the other foot now and Elections do have Consequences.
weholdthesetruths, hi, what you affirming surely make a lot of sense,
and I think you and MATA are very knowledgeble on this issue,
I think there must be just one iota that is being debated on both comments,
that not collide but misunderstood, by both experts,
thank you
MataHarley… Now, seriously, I was clear.
The act of unionizing and threatening to strike, or withhold services for more money or benefits… Sedition.
Protesting and complaining… Unseemly, unprofessional, malodorous, but not criminal or illegal.
What are you confused about?
Bound and determined to flog that ailing nag, eh, weholdthesetruths? LOL Okay…
Original dissent INRE the use of “sedition”… @I point out your and drj’s use of sedition is legally incorrect. Your generous and liberal interpretation of what constitutes sedition is a net that ensnares most that exercise their 1st Amendment.
You came back with comment #80
Here you equate “the government” with any government employee. In my #84 response, I said that because an individual becomes an employee of the government, they do not give up their 1st Amendment rights. Additionally, I provided the legal description of the crime of sedition.
In your #99 reply, you again equate the employees as “the government”, thereby noting that the government cannot petition the people.
Again, in my reply #112, I point out that employees of the government have no representative vote in the legislature (meaning they aren’t elected, voting members of that body). They are individuals, just as you and I. They are not “the government”. They are redressing their grievance against a bill before the legislators with fiscal policy they oppose… whether morally right or wrong.
Then in #115, you say:
Well, I have just copy/pasted exactly why I think you were criticizing the public employees, voicing their opinion. You have labeled them “the government” without having the power to pass or vote on the bill. And you have erroneously charged them with the crime of sedition.
And the second paragraph of that same comment shows that you hold an interpretation of sedition that in no way applies to the legal crime by saying:
This was not only addressing MIA legislators, who are, per WI law, at best committing a Class I felony, but the protestors themselves by not showing up a schools to teach classes. That they collect fake sick passes from corrupt doctors to pass muster is sleazy, but hardly seditious. Union organizations, strikes or work stoppages are also not sedition. Lobby activities and PACs are also not sedition.
Then you say you believe you were “clear” in what you were saying. I agree. You were, IMHO, accusing the protestors of being “the government” and of sedition in every instance. Changing it from their protest to organizing etal doesn’t correct your understanding of that crime.
It seems your main problem lies with what constitutes the crime of sedition, and apparently don’t care that it’s really a serious charge to bandy about so casually.
My suggestion is you let that nag die a quiet death without your further flogging. And perhaps suggest some reading on what constitutes “sedition” by researching some of the cases I mentioned above.
@Hard Right: You are out of touch with the realities on the ground in Wisconsin. You need to read some perspectives from those who are in the trenches. http://host.madison.com/
@MataHarley: Fortunately reason resumes. Thank you for your complete dissection.
@Old Trooper2: Actually there is no evidence that Walker promised to end collective bargaining at any time during his election campaign. This is a false claim and it tends to make your argument that “Wisconsin gets what it deserves” less than credible.
@MataHarley: Actually I’m okay with Walker proposing changes. He just needs to allow everyone an opportunity to comment. Instead he walked to the podium and without willingness to negotiate proclaimed it will be done.
That’s chutzpah
That was not something that I stated. The Nation is getting what 53% of American Voters were sold in 2008.
We never deserved any of this. But We will pay for the Current Regime’s malicious acts for generations. We will pay for the lack of leadership and judgment. Your Governor is being Proactive in limiting the damage.
@MataHarley:
My mind, too has been on the Goldbergs.
Our family is distantly related to them.
Our cousins name change at Ellis Island became Goldenbergs.
So sad.
My husband used to often ”play dead” if he hit his head sort of hard on anything.
Last year I warned him: do that again and I’ll call 911.
He’s too old to be faking his death. Even for fun.
And poor Joshua was only in his forties.
Nan G, I had the pleasure of many personal emails from Josh. I’ve love the Lucianne family, site and Jonah for years. He is like my political version of Tom Robbins for political writer, and never ceases to give me a smile. I was so heartbroken to hear of the fate dealt to Josh and family. Not close enough to be “family”, but close enough to recognize and realize the loss.
Ellis Island… both my grandparents went there too. So hard to say how far our respective family tenacles have spread, yes?
BTW, still eyeing that Cuban restaurant you sent on for my future visits. Trust me… you’ll be the first to know when I’m lucky enough to get some take out! And my profuse thanks for that heads up.
blackiris, this is a compilation of two comments here, and two different thoughts. And I wanted to address them separately.
To the first segment, I’m a bit confused at your demands? Granted it is state vs federal level, but we are addressing the same concept of a “comment period”. Obama promised transparency and a time factor for the public to not only view legislation, but feedback time. Did we get it?
Of course not.
Now you are pissed you don’t get the same from state legislation.
Tell me… when did you ever get that transparency from your state legislature? Or does it only matter now?
To the second segment INRE Walker campaign promises. Tell me, does he have to spell out the details of each proposed legislation to you, during the campaign, in order to hold true to his promises in general?
And thank you for noticing we are a mixture here. No, we are not all the extreme right, no more than you cohorts are the extreme left. It is left to we “sort of middle” types to try to find the sense of it all in these trying times.
@blackiris:
And where does Madison.com from? heh:
http://host.madison.com/capital_newspapers/article_c3c761e0-ca23-11de-afdf-001cc4c002e0.html
Ann Althouse has been at the Capitol for days,
http://althouse.blogspot.com/
so has MacIver Institute:
Who ya wanna go with? Decisions, decisions….