Wisconsin GOP orders Arrest of Dems

[SuperHornet]

Except for liking Jimmy Carter

Were you even alive when he was President?

I was starting grade school when he was President.

[HI54UNI]

Except for liking Jimmy Carter

I hope this is a Navy thing because Carter is a

[Ivytalk]

Cue the Wicked Witch of the West:

"SEIZE THEM! SEIZE THEM!"

[SuperHornet]

Jon, c'mon - you're smarter than this.

..............not............gonna..................respond..............................................too easy................

I didn't know Alpha was easy.

[Rob Iola]

internal polling in WI suggests Walker is way overplaying his hand...

I don't have all the details, but a colleague just back from consulting down there was saying that while the public thinks the unions need to give ground, they should retain their rights... and their proposed compromise is the course of action the vast majority want taken...

Walker keeps this up, he'll be one and done - like so many tea-baggers.

Elsewhere you wanted Dems who had no business being in their seats to "nut up" and do the right thing vis-a-vis healthcare and the rest of the Democratic agenda - and not worry about reelection. Sounds like Walker's doing the Conk version of this, no?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

internal polling in WI suggests Walker is way overplaying his hand...

I don't have all the details, but a colleague just back from consulting down there was saying that while the public thinks the unions need to give ground, they should retain their rights... and their proposed compromise is the course of action the vast majority want taken...

Walker keeps this up, he'll be one and done - like so many tea-baggers.

Elsewhere you wanted Dems who had no business being in their seats to "nut up" and do the right thing vis-a-vis healthcare and the rest of the Democratic agenda - and not worry about reelection. Sounds like Walker's doing the Conk version of this, no?

look - if you see holding the WI governorship and the state house and senate there as temporary gigs... by all means take a big swing. from a purely strategic point of view - that's not a bad idea... but in reality it's one of those strategies that only works when you have little or nothing to lose - if the gop were moderate and conciliatory, and passed reasonable measures... they could consolidate their win in 10 and build on it... but it appears they can't help themselves. whereas the democrats in 2009 and 2010 were already at the peak in terms of numbers, and we should have disabused ourselves of the notion that there was any possibility of building on historic majorities - and govern hard with an eye toward growing our base for the future and doing the big things right that we might not get another shot at for a generation.

very different circumstances.

[Rob Iola]

Elsewhere you wanted Dems who had no business being in their seats to "nut up" and do the right thing vis-a-vis healthcare and the rest of the Democratic agenda - and not worry about reelection. Sounds like Walker's doing the Conk version of this, no?

look - if you see holding the WI governorship and the state house and senate there as temporary gigs... by all means take a big swing. from a purely strategic point of view - that's not a bad idea... but in reality it's one of those strategies that only works when you have little or nothing to lose - if the gop were moderate and conciliatory, and passed reasonable measures... they could consolidate their win in 10 and build on it... but it appears they can't help themselves. whereas the democrats in 2009 and 2010 were already at the peak in terms of numbers, and we should have disabused ourselves of the notion that there was any possibility of building on historic majorities - and govern hard with an eye toward growing our base for the future and doing the big things right that we might not get another shot at for a generation.

very different circumstances.

So in other words the Democrats are the voice of reason and should therefore work hard to enlighten those of us who don't yet buy in to their agenda.

What exactly is Gov. Walker doing now that he didn't clearly communicate during his campaign? He's not concerned with the politics, he's concerned with getting the budget back under control. The unions campaigned hard against him then and are doing it again now. And frankly from a negotiation perspective he's holding a very strong hand - likewise from a negotiation perspective the unions have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize government spending to their members. In this environment he's doing exactly the right thing.

BTW, here in VA the governorship IS a one term gig - amazing what you can accomplish if you're not concerned with reelection...

P.S. It is pure political folly for the Dems to believe the statement in your signature. Just sayin'...

[TwinTownBisonFan]

look - if you see holding the WI governorship and the state house and senate there as temporary gigs... by all means take a big swing. from a purely strategic point of view - that's not a bad idea... but in reality it's one of those strategies that only works when you have little or nothing to lose - if the gop were moderate and conciliatory, and passed reasonable measures... they could consolidate their win in 10 and build on it... but it appears they can't help themselves. whereas the democrats in 2009 and 2010 were already at the peak in terms of numbers, and we should have disabused ourselves of the notion that there was any possibility of building on historic majorities - and govern hard with an eye toward growing our base for the future and doing the big things right that we might not get another shot at for a generation.

very different circumstances.

So in other words the Democrats are the voice of reason and should therefore work hard to enlighten those of us who don't yet buy in to their agenda.

What exactly is Gov. Walker doing now that he didn't clearly communicate during his campaign? He's not concerned with the politics, he's concerned with getting the budget back under control. The unions campaigned hard against him then and are doing it again now. And frankly from a negotiation perspective he's holding a very strong hand - likewise from a negotiation perspective the unions have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize government spending to their members. In this environment he's doing exactly the right thing.

BTW, here in VA the governorship IS a one term gig - amazing what you can accomplish if you're not concerned with reelection...

not what i'm saying at all - i'm looking at this from a purely tactical standpoint - not a policy one...

setting that aside to address your other contention...

no - all he's concerned about is politics. he actually cut corporate taxes 105 mln to CREATE a 198 mln deficit to whip this whole mess up. (a 93mln deficit could be fixed pretty quickly)

his purpose and intent with this isn't "fiscal discipline" and that's why I'm saying he's overreaching his very obvious and very cynical politics are not being well received. while the unions have agreed to compromise (which would be a HUGE political win for him) he's not satisfied until he's broken their ability to bargain collectively (a very unpopular position among voters in WI) and a tactical mistake if your long term goal is to hold those seats

[Rob Iola]

So in other words the Democrats are the voice of reason and should therefore work hard to enlighten those of us who don't yet buy in to their agenda.

What exactly is Gov. Walker doing now that he didn't clearly communicate during his campaign? He's not concerned with the politics, he's concerned with getting the budget back under control. The unions campaigned hard against him then and are doing it again now. And frankly from a negotiation perspective he's holding a very strong hand - likewise from a negotiation perspective the unions have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize government spending to their members. In this environment he's doing exactly the right thing.

BTW, here in VA the governorship IS a one term gig - amazing what you can accomplish if you're not concerned with reelection...

not what i'm saying at all - i'm looking at this from a purely tactical standpoint - not a policy one...

setting that aside to address your other contention...

no - all he's concerned about is politics. he actually cut corporate taxes 105 mln to CREATE a 198 mln deficit to whip this whole mess up. (a 93mln deficit could be fixed pretty quickly)

his purpose and intent with this isn't "fiscal discipline" and that's why I'm saying he's overreaching his very obvious and very cynical politics are not being well received. while the unions have agreed to compromise (which would be a HUGE political win for him) he's not satisfied until he's broken their ability to bargain collectively (a very unpopular position among voters in WI) and a tactical mistake if your long term goal is to hold those seats

So then why is he doing what he's doing? And why does he have unanimous GOP support in the state house and senate?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

not what i'm saying at all - i'm looking at this from a purely tactical standpoint - not a policy one...

setting that aside to address your other contention...

no - all he's concerned about is politics. he actually cut corporate taxes 105 mln to CREATE a 198 mln deficit to whip this whole mess up. (a 93mln deficit could be fixed pretty quickly)

his purpose and intent with this isn't "fiscal discipline" and that's why I'm saying he's overreaching his very obvious and very cynical politics are not being well received. while the unions have agreed to compromise (which would be a HUGE political win for him) he's not satisfied until he's broken their ability to bargain collectively (a very unpopular position among voters in WI) and a tactical mistake if your long term goal is to hold those seats

So then why is he doing what he's doing? And why does he have unanimous GOP support in the state house and senate?

my snarky side says: because GOPers can't help themselves...
my realistic side says: because 1) he's not what I would call a brilliant tactician 2) he's getting pushed HARD by both the Koch Bros. (but even more by) the RGA to keep going 3) he doesn't realize just how far he's overreaching

why does he have support from his own party for attempting to gut public employee unions? do i really have lay that one out? here again, when it comes to the GOP post 2010 it would appear the inmates are running the asylum, and any voice of moderation, any voice suggesting compromising might benefit them long term (or even just in 2012) has been shoved to the side (shit, look what has happened to Mitch Daniels stock as a Pres. hopeful after he opted to be more reasonable...)

[Rob Iola]

So then why is he doing what he's doing? And why does he have unanimous GOP support in the state house and senate?

my snarky side says: because GOPers can't help themselves...
my realistic side says: because 1) he's not what I would call a brilliant tactician 2) he's getting pushed HARD by both the Koch Bros. (but even more by) the RGA to keep going 3) he doesn't realize just how far he's overreaching

why does he have support from his own party for attempting to gut public employee unions? do i really have lay that one out? here again, when it comes to the GOP post 2010 it would appear the inmates are running the asylum, and any voice of moderation, any voice suggesting compromising might benefit them long term (or even just in 2012) has been shoved to the side (shit, look what has happened to Mitch Daniels stock as a Pres. hopeful after he opted to be more reasonable...)

Similar to my comment on the tea party quote in your signature, it is pure political folly if your fellow Dems truly believe all that. Koch Brothers? Really? Walker didn't even recognize one of their supposed voices on the phone...

[kalm]

my snarky side says: because GOPers can't help themselves...
my realistic side says: because 1) he's not what I would call a brilliant tactician 2) he's getting pushed HARD by both the Koch Bros. (but even more by) the RGA to keep going 3) he doesn't realize just how far he's overreaching

why does he have support from his own party for attempting to gut public employee unions? do i really have lay that one out? here again, when it comes to the GOP post 2010 it would appear the inmates are running the asylum, and any voice of moderation, any voice suggesting compromising might benefit them long term (or even just in 2012) has been shoved to the side (shit, look what has happened to Mitch Daniels stock as a Pres. hopeful after he opted to be more reasonable...)

Similar to my comment on the tea party quote in your signature, it is pure political folly if your fellow Dems truly believe all that. Koch Brothers? Really? Walker didn't even recognize one of their supposed voices on the phone...

Taibbi, a la Thompson and the Hells Angels, lived amongst them for several months. He's qualified to make that statement. And it doesn't mean they're not a force to be reckoned with, in fact, I'm guessing many Dems are rooting for them.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

my snarky side says: because GOPers can't help themselves...
my realistic side says: because 1) he's not what I would call a brilliant tactician 2) he's getting pushed HARD by both the Koch Bros. (but even more by) the RGA to keep going 3) he doesn't realize just how far he's overreaching

why does he have support from his own party for attempting to gut public employee unions? do i really have lay that one out? here again, when it comes to the GOP post 2010 it would appear the inmates are running the asylum, and any voice of moderation, any voice suggesting compromising might benefit them long term (or even just in 2012) has been shoved to the side (shit, look what has happened to Mitch Daniels stock as a Pres. hopeful after he opted to be more reasonable...)

Similar to my comment on the tea party quote in your signature, it is pure political folly if your fellow Dems truly believe all that. Koch Brothers? Really? Walker didn't even recognize one of their supposed voices on the phone...

no no... i don't underestimate them so much as disdain them... a large, unruly mob of angry white people who are pissed about... well they don't know just what they're pissed about - but it appears to be a nebulous mix of things that all amount to a very menacing version of "who moved my cheese?"

[Rob Iola]

Similar to my comment on the tea party quote in your signature, it is pure political folly if your fellow Dems truly believe all that. Koch Brothers? Really? Walker didn't even recognize one of their supposed voices on the phone...

no no... i don't underestimate them so much as disdain them... a large, unruly mob of angry white people who are pissed about... well they don't know just what they're pissed about - but it appears to be a nebulous mix of things that all amount to a very menacing version of "who moved my cheese?"

They're pissed about the deficit and out-of-control government spending. Personally, they perceive that their tax dollars are being misspent, and they're voicing their opinion, loudly, that spending should be cut, not increased.

And you want disdain? I disdain teachers who walk off their jobs, often with their students in tow, to protest. I'd be fired if I ever pulled a stunt like that. As they should be, like the air traffic controllers were under Reagan. I also disdain elected lawmakers who walk off their jobs and abandon their constituents (and families) because they don't like being in the minority and watching the majority establish policy.

Now if you'd truly like to see an unruly mob of (mainly) angry white people who are pissed about, well they don't know just what they're pissed about, I invite you to come to DC for the next World Bank/IMF conference - apparently "globalization" is bad, whatever that is...

[TwinTownBisonFan]

no no... i don't underestimate them so much as disdain them... a large, unruly mob of angry white people who are pissed about... well they don't know just what they're pissed about - but it appears to be a nebulous mix of things that all amount to a very menacing version of "who moved my cheese?"

They're pissed about the deficit and out-of-control government spending. Personally, they perceive that their tax dollars are being misspent, and they're voicing their opinion, loudly, that spending should be cut, not increased.

And you want disdain? I disdain teachers who walk off their jobs, often with their students in tow, to protest. I'd be fired if I ever pulled a stunt like that. As they should be, like the air traffic controllers were under Reagan. I also disdain elected lawmakers who walk off their jobs and abandon their constituents (and families) because they don't like being in the minority and watching the majority establish policy.

Now if you'd truly like to see an unruly mob of (mainly) angry white people who are pissed about, well they don't know just what they're pissed about, I invite you to come to DC for the next World Bank/IMF conference - apparently "globalization" is bad, whatever that is...

BULL. SHIT. If that were the case, we'd have seen them in the Bush years. This "movement" is nothing more a bunch of angry GOPer base members bitching through a new outlet that they lost in 08. Even THEY don't know what they're abour.

[Rob Iola]

They're pissed about the deficit and out-of-control government spending. Personally, they perceive that their tax dollars are being misspent, and they're voicing their opinion, loudly, that spending should be cut, not increased.

And you want disdain? I disdain teachers who walk off their jobs, often with their students in tow, to protest. I'd be fired if I ever pulled a stunt like that. As they should be, like the air traffic controllers were under Reagan. I also disdain elected lawmakers who walk off their jobs and abandon their constituents (and families) because they don't like being in the minority and watching the majority establish policy.

Now if you'd truly like to see an unruly mob of (mainly) angry white people who are pissed about, well they don't know just what they're pissed about, I invite you to come to DC for the next World Bank/IMF conference - apparently "globalization" is bad, whatever that is...

BULL. SHIT. If that were the case, we'd have seen them in the Bush years. This "movement" is nothing more a bunch of angry GOPer base members bitching through a new outlet that they lost in 08. Even THEY don't know what they're abour.

Then why O'Donnell? Paul? Angle? Why did so many traditional Bush-era (and before) GOP candidates, candidates that would've won in walk-overs in 2010, lose in the primaries? We're not talking traditional GOP here, we're not talking about an extreme wing of the GOP, nor are we talking about a true 3rd party.

You seem quite animated by all this - why? Look at it this way, if Palin's the nominee Obama wins in a walk-over, heck even I'll vote for him (I don't sit out elections - I voted for Clinton in '96 because Dole had nothing to offer) because she's a crazy idiot who has no business being anywhere near our nucular weapons.

You're quite comfortable with angry teachers protesting in Wisconsin, but not angry taxpayers protesting elsewhere. In this environment the quiet majority disagrees with you. You can't effectively run a political campaign if that's your worldview. In a down economy a well-spoken, hard-campaigning, experienced candidate (like Christie) will trounce your candidate.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Why those candidates? because out parties nominate flame-throwers... it makes the base feel good viscerally the same way base Dems rallied around Dean in the summer of '03. Out-parties blame their parties establishment for losses and they toss them for higher-energy, red meat feeders...

as for your other question... "angry taxpayers" is exactly my point. the tea party is filled to brimming with ignorant assholes going on and on about Obama on taxes... yet he's CUT taxes - and taxes are now lower than they've been in 50 years... it's that level of divorced-from-reality, hysterical and completely irrational rage that causes me to quote Taibbi that they are "full of shit, all of them."

my point is this - far too many observers have convinced themselves that 2010 was the year of the tea party and that these people were somehow ascendant... truth be told, 2010 was the year the democrats stayed home and the GOP base turned out... not surprising in an off year when the GOP had just lost their shirt two years before.

as for running campaigns... i'm out. 2010 was my last cycle, I'm casting my career net in other waters. (not for political reasons frankly, but because you can't do this shit forever - and the lack of job security sucks eggs)

[CID1990]

Point of order-

The teacher's union has offered to have members make partial payments for their benefits but NOT to give up collective bargaining as it pertains to those benefits. Not really a compromise, since they will still maintain the ability to manipulate those benefits by supporting their friendly politicians.

That is not a compromise and it is either intellectually or literally dishonest to call it so.

[SuperHornet]

Point of order-

The teacher's union has offered to have members make partial payments for their benefits but NOT to give up collective bargaining as it pertains to those benefits. Not really a compromise, since they will still maintain the ability to manipulate those benefits by supporting their friendly politicians.

That is not a compromise and it is either intellectually or literally dishonest to call it so.

Which teacher's union? The national one? Or the one in YOUR district?

The big problem with teacher unions, IMO, is the people in charge. The average teacher just wants a decent salary, good benefits, and protection from crazies in management. It's the leaders that go overboard driving salary through the roof to the detriment of teachers as a whole (beyond a certain point, higher salaries lead to layoff and overwork for those who are left).

[YoUDeeMan]

Point of order-

The teacher's union has offered to have members make partial payments for their benefits but NOT to give up collective bargaining as it pertains to those benefits. Not really a compromise, since they will still maintain the ability to manipulate those benefits by supporting their friendly politicians.

That is not a compromise and it is either intellectually or literally dishonest to call it so.

THIS.

Public employees should not be unionized.

[YoUDeeMan]

no no... i don't underestimate them so much as disdain them... a large, unruly mob of angry white people who are pissed about... well they don't know just what they're pissed about - but it appears to be a nebulous mix of things that all amount to a very menacing version of "who moved my cheese?"

TTBF, it isn't always about lowering taxes...a little bit...for a little time. It is about government spending being out of control. Non-whites don't understand that...especially since they've organized themselves into a large, unruly mob that screams, "oppression" and, "I'm owed something"...but they don't even know what they want...they just want more money poured at them.

Oh, except those Asians...God damned them...they might as well be white...somehow they've figured out how to be disciplined and successful under white racism...Asians are probably some white racist experiment designed to interfere with the white black/brown dualism anyway. It probably helps that white men like asian women enough that they give the whole race a pass. And the Jews. They're white, but they aren't always the angry whites.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

no no... i don't underestimate them so much as disdain them... a large, unruly mob of angry white people who are pissed about... well they don't know just what they're pissed about - but it appears to be a nebulous mix of things that all amount to a very menacing version of "who moved my cheese?"

TTBF, it isn't always about lowering taxes...a little bit...for a little time. It is about government spending being out of control. Non-whites don't understand that...especially since they've organized themselves into a large, unruly mob that screams, "oppression" and, "I'm owed something"...but they don't even know what they want...they just want more money poured at them.

Oh, except those Asians...God damned them...they might as well be white...somehow they've figured out how to be disciplined and successful under white racism...Asians are probably some white racist experiment designed to interfere with the white black/brown dualism anyway. It probably helps that white men like asian women enough that they give the whole race a pass. And the Jews. They're white, but they aren't always the angry whites.

then where the fuck were they when Bush was running up deficits? they sat on their damn hands - of course they did, this isn't about the spending, it's about WHO is doing the spending.

[YoUDeeMan]

then where the **** were they when Bush was running up deficits? they sat on their damn hands - of course they did, this isn't about the spending, it's about WHO is doing the spending.

Give it up.

If you don't think there were plenty of people who didn't want Bush running up the deficit, then you aren't a very good political hack. PLENTY of people, and a lot of them Republican, were sick and tired of government spending...and many people didn't vote for Bush. But, it wasn't working...the alternative was to have a Democrat elected...white, black, purple...that would increase spending even more. WTF, it was lose, lose with either party...except the deficit keeps getting bigger and bigger. So yeah, why not start a new party?

As Rob pointed out, the Tea Party took out many WHITE candidates, WHITE Republican candidates, in their own primaries. In Delaware, they lost the Republicans a seat. But in your whacky world, the angry white folks purposely lost a Republican white man's seat because Obush is black?

So stop the crap about Tea Party people being "angry white people"...it just makes you look like a lazy bigot who doesn't understand the VERY simple concept of people wanting the government to stop spending their money like drunken sailors.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

then where the **** were they when Bush was running up deficits? they sat on their damn hands - of course they did, this isn't about the spending, it's about WHO is doing the spending.

Give it up.

If you don't think there were plenty of people who didn't want Bush running up the deficit, then you aren't a very good political hack. PLENTY of people, and a lot of them Republican, were sick and tired of government spending...and many people didn't vote for Bush. But, it wasn't working...the alternative was to have a Democrat elected...white, black, purple...that would increase spending even more. WTF, it was lose, lose with either party...except the deficit keeps getting bigger and bigger. So yeah, why not start a new party?

As Rob pointed out, the Tea Party took out many WHITE candidates, WHITE Republican candidates, in their own primaries. In Delaware, they lost the Republicans a seat. But in your whacky world, the angry white folks purposely lost a Republican white man's seat because Obush is black?

So stop the crap about Tea Party people being "angry white people"...it just makes you look like a lazy bigot who doesn't understand the VERY simple concept of people wanting the government to stop spending their money like drunken sailors.

you're the one making this about race. you're the one reading too much in to my statements. my comment about their objection as to WHO was spending was about the letter that followed their name. my point was that their "passionate commitment to lower spending" cropped up right about the time the occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania changed hands - and not a minute sooner.

I'd believe a word of what you say about "plenty of people objecting" if even a few of them did... but they didn't.

the tea party absolutely, without a doubt IS angry white people... you don't see a whole lot of diversity there. that's a fact. what they are angry about is entirely debatable, and reasonable people can disagree... i'm simply pointing out that if the deficit was really what had them all fired up... they sure had a funny way of not showing it during the last four years of the Bush administration - and during the GOP primary in 2008.

[kalm]

Now if you'd truly like to see an unruly mob of (mainly) angry white people who are pissed about, well they don't know just what they're pissed about, I invite you to come to DC for the next World Bank/IMF conference - apparently "globalization" is bad, whatever that is...

If the Tea Parties were consistent they should be right along side the hippie anarchists protesting things like globalization and Citizens United.