Walker's Budget repair bill passes

C

Canceled2

Banned
Budget repair bill passes in state assembly WFRV News
Story Created: Feb 25, 2011 at 12:14 PM CST
(Story Updated: Feb 25, 2011 at 12:55 PM CST )
An outburst on the floor of the state assembly as they pass Governor Walker's Budget Repair Bill. The bill passed just after 1 this morning.

Manuel Gallegus has the latest from Madison.

Die-hard demonstrators dug in for another day of protests after defeat in the state assembly.

Sue Judd, teacher:"Luckily there is still one more house to go through"

Early this morning the assembly Republicans abruptly called a vote on the governor's budget proposal.

After more than 60 hours of debate - the longest in the chamber's history - the ayes had it.

"There are 51 ayes 17 nays - the bill is passed."

Democrats never had the votes to defeat the legislation, but expressed outrage at the process.

more
 
Bfgrn said:
I wonder if our right wing patriots are aware they are supporting the g.... the go....the gove...the fucking GOVERNMENT...over the people?
Click to expand...

it seems to me that they 'government' is representing the majority of their constituents. being that less government spending is what they want. why would that be a bad thing to do now?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I seem to remember a bunch of liberals, you included, saying that elections have consequences. why wouldn't this apply now?
Click to expand...


It does apply now, as does everything the followed thereafter.

I don't recall, in the wake of Obama's statement, Republicans Congressmembers and their supporters rolling over and doing whatever the Democrats wished, do you? I vaguely recall that there was this Tea Party thing and these angry town halls and a record number of filibusters in the Senate and rallies on the Capital and cetera.


Edit: I would also note, for the record, that the "elections have consequences" line was adopted by Obama from George "Macaca" Allen of Virginia, following the 2004 election. When Obama used it, he was using it in much the same way you are here.
 
Last edited:
are you saying the bill passed in an unconstitutional manner nigel?

what a petulant whiner....you were all happy about the h/c and the stimulus when your dems had the majority, but when repubs have the majority you have to insinuate wrong doing....

your partisan slip is showing
 
Yurt said:
sweet....you and your butt buddy onceler are going to obsess over your idiocy in every thread!

thank you. i enjoy watching you two make complete asses out of yourself with your dishonesty. :good4u:
Click to expand...

I think you're confused about what "dishonesty" means.

See, on earth, dishonesty might go something like this: you saying that I support union funds, then denying it, then ridiculing me for saying that you said that, then offering $500 and saying you'd leave the board if you did in fact say it. Then, seeing the post where you said it, and not paying $500, and not leaving the board, and continuing to insist you never said it.

That seems more like dishonesty to me.
 
tinfoil said:
Government employee!= the people

they are a subset. A greedy and stupid subset
Click to expand...

Does Tinfoil have the guts to say that in person to the faces of the people that keep his roads paved, his water running, his lights on, his gas on, his hospitals operating, that pick up his garbage, that put out fires, that keep the criminals at bay, etc., etc.

Dopes like Tinfoil live under the delusion that there is no aspect of their lives that is affected by public servants.....which makes Tinfoil the perfect stooge for Walker and his Koch Bros. puppet masters.

To date, NO ONE has explained just how banning people from collectively bargaining on their benefits and pensions translates into lowering a deficit.
 
Taichiliberal said:
To date, NO ONE has explained just how banning people from collectively bargaining on their benefits and pensions translates into lowering a deficit.
Click to expand...

it's a two part process.....you lower the benefits and then bar them from negotiating it back up.....once you realize that it's not difficult to see how it reduces spending....(you're welcome, happy to be of help).......
 
Onceler said:
I think you're confused about what "dishonesty" means.

See, on earth, dishonesty might go something like this: you saying that I support union funds, then denying it, then ridiculing me for saying that you said that, then offering $500 and saying you'd leave the board if you did in fact say it. Then, seeing the post where you said it, and not paying $500, and not leaving the board, and continuing to insist you never said it.

That seems more like dishonesty to me.
Click to expand...

:good4u:
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal

To date, NO ONE has explained just how banning people from collectively bargaining on their benefits and pensions translates into lowering a deficit.
Click to expand...


PostmodernProphet said:
it's a two part process.....you lower the benefits and then bar them from negotiating it back up.....once you realize that it's not difficult to see how it reduces spending....(you're welcome, happy to be of help).......
Click to expand...

:palm: And since the unions have been advocating and willing to give up some of their benefit and pension costs, AND HAVE DONE SO IN THE PAST....why is it necessary to ban them from the process? Here, for your education:

http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2011/...-offer-by-unions-to-compromise-on-concessions

http://onevoicetulsa.com/index.php?ht=display/ContentDetails/i/4337109

Your assertion of "negotiating it back up" is typical of your Post Modern Foolishness of trying to pass off your PMP supposition and conjecture as fact....it also reveals the union busting mind set that has been denied by folk like YOU. Once again, YOU contradict the Tea Party mindset of letting "gub'ment" dictate to it's citizens WITHOUT citizen input....something that's totally against the spirit and purpose of our constitution. :palm:
 
Taichiliberal said:
Does Tinfoil have the guts to say that in person to the faces of the people that keep his roads paved, his water running, his lights on, his gas on, his hospitals operating, that pick up his garbage, that put out fires, that keep the criminals at bay, etc., etc.

Dopes like Tinfoil live under the delusion that there is no aspect of their lives that is affected by public servants.....which makes Tinfoil the perfect stooge for Walker and his Koch Bros. puppet masters.

To date, NO ONE has explained just how banning people from collectively bargaining on their benefits and pensions translates into lowering a deficit.
Click to expand...

I do indeed have the guts to say it. I pay my taxes to fund their jobs. Their job exists to service the people, NOT to ensure their livelyhood. Their job should not be a life long employment. Government jobs should be limited to 5 years. There are countless people who can do the job of a government worker. In most cases, they are inept and need to be walked through their own rules.

How do I know this? Becauise I've been self employed for 25 years and I've dealt with hundreds if not thousands of governemnt employees.

STFU dumbass!
 
Taichiliberal said:
:palm: And since the unions have been advocating and willing to give up some of their benefit and pension costs, AND HAVE DONE SO IN THE PAST....why is it necessary to ban them from the process?
Click to expand...

because, as you so successfully pointed out before, simply lowering benefits has no effect on the budget IF they can simply renegotiate them back up.....
 
tinfoil said:
I do indeed have the guts to say it. I pay my taxes to fund their jobs. Their job exists to service the people, NOT to ensure their livelyhood. Their job should not be a life long employment. Government jobs should be limited to 5 years. There are countless people who can do the job of a government worker. In most cases, they are inept and need to be walked through their own rules.

How do I know this? Becauise I've been self employed for 25 years and I've dealt with hundreds if not thousands of governemnt employees.

STFU dumbass!
Click to expand...

perhaps a visual aide will help him understand what we want to say to the government employees who pave our streets...

061709_0127_4guysholdin21.jpg
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Does Tinfoil have the guts to say that in person to the faces of the people that keep his roads paved, his water running, his lights on, his gas on, his hospitals operating, that pick up his garbage, that put out fires, that keep the criminals at bay, etc., etc.

Dopes like Tinfoil live under the delusion that there is no aspect of their lives that is affected by public servants.....which makes Tinfoil the perfect stooge for Walker and his Koch Bros. puppet masters.

To date, NO ONE has explained just how banning people from collectively bargaining on their benefits and pensions translates into lowering a deficit.
Click to expand...
tinfoil said:
I do indeed have the guts to say it. I pay my taxes to fund their jobs. Their job exists to service the people, NOT to ensure their livelyhood. Their job should not be a life long employment. Government jobs should be limited to 5 years. There are countless people who can do the job of a government worker. In most cases, they are inept and need to be walked through their own rules.

How do I know this? Becauise I've been self employed for 25 years and I've dealt with hundreds if not thousands of governemnt employees.

STFU dumbass!
Click to expand...


"Their job exists to service the people, NOT to ensure their livelyhood." - Tinfoil


So Tinfoil envisions a world akin to Roman slavery....were people do their "jobs" to service the ruling class and have NO say in how they're paid, or how their working accomodations are set.
Tinfoil thinks being self employed means that he's outside the societal need for gas, electricity, etc. So Tinfoil doesn't give a damn about anyone but himself, but yet he sure as hell doesn't mind benefitting from other people's labor. Yeah, fives years to service a POS like Tinfoil, and to hell with a decent pension or benefits...after that Tinfoil doesn't give a damn about you.
And


Assholes like Tinfoil are just bitter about their lives, and begrudge everyone else a betterlife. I seriously doubt Tinfoils "self employment" includes running to a lawyer in case he gets stiffed by a client, and Tinfoil sure as hell relies on the LAW to protect his rights.

Well toodles, so do the public servants. And I would love to know that Tinfoil does for a living that gives him such an absurd outlook on how the world works. Judging by his intellectual prowess on these boards, I feel sorry for anyone who hires Tinfoil for anything.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And since the unions have been advocating and willing to give up some of their benefit and pension costs, AND HAVE DONE SO IN THE PAST....why is it necessary to ban them from the process?
Click to expand...


PostmodernProphet said:
because, as you so successfully pointed out before, simply lowering benefits has no effect on the budget IF they can simply renegotiate them back up.....
Click to expand...

All you did was just bullhorn your supposition and conjecture...which I logically pointed out does not jibe with reality, and asked YOU for proof. To date, you just blow more Post Modern Foolish smoke as usual
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top