Scott Walker Declared Winner by Fox News/CNN/MSNBC.

Far from over?
How can that be since the people have spoken?

Considering that this was a recall election, I would say your entire post is completely hypocritical.

Well...what about the 2013 recall election?

I started getting things in order first thing this morning to start getting petitions signed.

Not to mention the fact that I imagine Walker's orange jump suit won't be doing much for his public image. People are stupid...but I don't think they are quite THAT stupid.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Sorry...you sound delusional. Hope you don't completely fall apart, when your plans don't materialize.

If Walker winning the recall election, by even a bigger margin than he won the first time, upsets you this much...I hope you have an ambulance on standby when Obama doesn't win a second term.....

Des

Originally posted by nenothtu

Whats your view on the socialist desires known as Tort Reform? Are you anarchy for all, or just the little people?

I think if the government is going to extend itself into other folks business so far as to allow tort cases to begin with, it ought to be at least responsible enough to keep them under control, and reject frivolous ones out of hand.

If that's a form of "reform", then so be it.

Allow...tort.

Allow people to take private organizations to a civil court due to injury..
allow..

like...the government allows you to breath air.

and therefore, because they -allow- tort to continue..you feel its their right to control it

So, by the same, EXACT logic..the government allows you personally to breath, therefore they should also be able to control how many breaths per day you take.


how pathetic.
The government allows you to continue thinking...do you support drugging the waters to control max thoughts?

what truely sad is you got several stars for that post..by people whom deem your civil rights something the government allows.

reply to post by neo96


Anything BUT common sense prevailed, but whatever...

Getting tired of educating zombies.

Time to take another 6 months off ATS perhaps, hehe.


Khar

I'm sure that every vote Walker got was legitimate and there was no voter fraud occuring...

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
"Mandate" is pretty debatable. His opponent was, by all accounts, a terrible candidate. Also, he had a an 8/1 advantage in campaign funding, which is pretty much an impossible thing to overcome.

Considering this was a recall and supposedly reflected a state-wide dis-sastisfaction with Walker him winning by the margin he did is most certainly a mandate. One to continue to keep the state in the black and prevent big-spending on bloated and inept public unions.

Originally posted by Beowulf52
reply to post by pavil

 

Do you think Wisconsin's roads will get any better now?

To be frank, most road construction is done by bid, I seriously doubt they are union at all.

Those State and County employees that do the plowing ect.... .with less monies being paid out in benefits and pensions, I would say that yes, there will be more money for salt ect and more money for more workers out on the roads. I'd rather be paying someone to plow then paying all of their health care, sick days and pension, that's for sure.

I think all of us in the private sector or even worse, self employed people like me, would love to have the benefit packages public employees have. In the real world of businesses and Entrepreneurs, we can't afford such loaded packages without going out of business. If the public sector had to compete like the private sector does, they would all be out of business. The days of the carte blanche free ride are over.

To be really honest, I really think that most government employees have it far too easy, when compared to private business employees. The typical government clerk I see behind a desk that doesn't seem to really want to be there to serve the public makes me really mad.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
[
I am not anti-Union. I am anti-public union as they are greatly responsible for the fiscal mess that the country and many states find themselves in.

Absolute nonsense -

A few lessons can be drawn from the numbers. First, the Bush tax cuts have had a huge damaging effect. If all of them expired as scheduled at the end of 2012, future deficits would be cut by about half, to sustainable levels. Second, a healthy budget requires a healthy economy; recessions wreak havoc by reducing tax revenue. Government has to spur demand and create jobs in a deep downturn, even though doing so worsens the deficit in the short run. Third, spending cuts alone will not close the gap. The chronic revenue shortfalls from serial tax cuts are simply too deep to fill with spending cuts alone. Taxes have to go up.

And while it is true that public servants shuold be held to the same standards for employment as anyone else, the flip side is also true - they should have the same rights as everyone else.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
And while it is true that public servants shuold be held to the same standards for employment as anyone else, the flip side is also true - they should have the same rights as everyone else.

And what rights are those? To be able to hold the taxpayer hostage when public unions decide to strike for even higher wages and benefits then the average United States worker will ever hope to get (all while the public union employee can be as average in performance as they want).

The right to bully and intimidate by demanding non-secret ballots for unionization purposes?

The right to reward mediocrity with lifetime employment through tenure?

All public unions are criminal rackets and need to be abolished so that the taxpayer no longer has to support the giant Ponzi Schemes that they have become. Even union organizers of the past knew that public unions were bad as evidenced by their own comments.

Does anyone think that public unions like SEIU are causing some of the
extreme medical cost increases ?

Many hospitals and clinics are organized.

Especially in major city areas.

Originally posted by xuenchen
Does anyone think that public unions like SEIU are causing some of the
extreme medical cost increases ?

No, it is all greedy corporations and if you and I or anyone else think otherwise we are mentally unbalanced.

I know it's popular to criticize labor unions, and any institution that grows too large can become corrupt, just like large corporation.

Large corporations, however, didn't bring you this:

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
And while it is true that public servants shuold be held to the same standards for employment as anyone else, the flip side is also true - they should have the same rights as everyone else.

And what rights are those? To be able to hold the taxpayer hostage when public unions decide to strike for even higher wages and benefits then the average United States worker will ever hope to get (all while the public union employee can be as average in performance as they want).

Aer private employees allowed to strike?

If so why not public ones?

The right to bully and intimidate by demanding non-secret ballots for unionization purposes?

anyone can alwas ask for a non-secret ballot

The right to reward mediocrity with lifetime employment through tenure?

Igf you can negotiate it with yuor employer then go for it.

All public unions are criminal rackets

What a lod of carp!

and need to be abolished so that the taxpayer no longer has to support the giant Ponzi Schemes that they have become. Even union organizers of the past knew that public unions were bad as evidenced by their own comments.

Sure there aer plenty of cases of dodgy unionism - jsut like there are plenty of cases of dodgy corporatism - but what you propose is the revocation of freedom of association and speech jsut because of your political agenda.

Dare I mention Godwin's law??

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Aer private employees allowed to strike?

If so why not public ones?

Because public union strikes can and do endanger the public welfare. By their ability to hold the taxpayer hostage they can dictate outcomes by withholding that which the public requires all while asking for more than what the average member of the public earns.

anyone can alwas ask for a non-secret ballot

Thus leaving themselves exposed as the person(s) who asked for said secret ballot and any type of bullying actions that may follow such request.

Igf you can negotiate it with yuor employer then go for it.

The 'employer' is the taxpayer and by the results of BOTH Wisconsin elections, and other elections throughout the country, the 'employer' is fed up with paying bloated salaries and benefits for medicore service and talent.

What a lod of carp!

When you can and do hold the taxpayer hostage for higher wages and benefits then they earn you are a criminal and need to be treated as such. Public sector unions are a criminal enterprise.

Sure there aer plenty of cases of dodgy unionism - jsut like there are plenty of cases of dodgy corporatism - but what you propose is the revocation of freedom of association and speech jsut because of your political agenda.

Do you even understand how freedom of speech works and its relation to other United States citizens?

Dare I mention Godwin's law??

Mention anything you want, I stand by my statements that public unions are criminal and are not in the best interest of the public. Maybe you can explain to everyone how a tenured teacher who is medicore benefits society or the children they are responsible to educate.

Originally posted by Beowulf52


Do you think Wisconsin's roads will get any better now?

I think Wisconsin,will have the money,to fix its roads........

Under 8 YEARS of Jim Doyle? Not so much.

Im from wisconsin,ive talked to people from milwaukee, and they told me that barrett isnt that great as a mayor,and where were all these people that wanted the recall?if they were so outraged with walker why didnt they vote?I for one am glad walker won,be for he was elected he said what he was going to do and did it .considering the last governor we had jim doyle he really messed up wi.and walker has to fix it. and if your going to vote,vote dont talk about it

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Far from over?
How can that be since the people have spoken?

Considering that this was a recall election, I would say your entire post is completely hypocritical.

Well...what about the 2013 recall election?

I started getting things in order first thing this morning to start getting petitions signed.

Not to mention the fact that I imagine Walker's orange jump suit won't be doing much for his public image. People are stupid...but I don't think they are quite THAT stupid.

You obviously have no knowledge of Wisconsin law:

WIs. Statutes 9.10(6)

(6) Limitation on recall elections. After one recall petition and recall election, no further recall petition may be filed against the same official during the term for which he or she was elected.

So sorry, thank you for playing. You may try again a year after Walker starts his 2nd term in 2015.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by nenothtu

Whats your view on the socialist desires known as Tort Reform? Are you anarchy for all, or just the little people?

I think if the government is going to extend itself into other folks business so far as to allow tort cases to begin with, it ought to be at least responsible enough to keep them under control, and reject frivolous ones out of hand.

If that's a form of "reform", then so be it.

Allow...tort.

Allow people to take private organizations to a civil court due to injury..
allow..

like...the government allows you to breath air.

and therefore, because they -allow- tort to continue..you feel its their right to control it

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that English isn't your first language, rather than assume your purposely trying to twist up what I said. What I said was (and read it again for confirmation) "allow tort cases". Torts happen, regardless of the government, but who tries tort CASES? That would be the government. Since the government involves itself, it ought to do so responsibly, and eliminate frivolous cases out of hand.

That's right - reading for comprehension will show that I said "allow tort CASES". They allow those cases to be heard in... a government court! It's not just their right to control it, it's their DUTY.

So, by the same, EXACT logic..the government allows you personally to breath, therefore they should also be able to control how many breaths per day you take.

No, the government doesn't allow me to breath. I breathe just fine without the government, nor do I ever enter a courtroom and beg their permission to breathe. What kind of "logic" is that? Some of that left-coast logic?

how pathetic.

Yes, "pathetic" does seem to cover it pretty well, but probably not the way your mind is working... if it IS working, that is...

The government allows you to continue thinking...do you support drugging the waters to control max thoughts?

No, the government doesn't allow me to think. I have never, in my entire life, asked the court's permission to think.

what truely sad is you got several stars for that post..by people whom deem your civil rights something the government allows.

Yeah. Those people who starred that post probably never asked the court's permission to think, either, and just do it on their own. Go figure.

"Civil rights" ARE government-issued. the word "civil" in that phrase should have been your first clue there... I don't exercise any civil rights, because I've never begged for them to be given me.

None of the rights I have are government-issued. "Civil rights" are not rights at all, because what the government giveth, the government taketh away, and anything that can be taken away is not a "right", it's a privilege.

That's your civics lesson for today.

Double post...

reply to post by xuenchen
The only thing the SEIU did where I work is keep incompetent nurses from getting fired the first, second, third, fourth --- well, you get the picture.