NOW is the time to save Wisconsin!

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Kimi Ishikawa
Kimi Ishikawa's picture

We need Amerca's grass roots to donate to Democratic candidates in Wisconsin's recalls coming up on June 5.  We need donations to every candidate (governor, lieutenant governor, 4 state senators) to counter the tens of millions that Walker is raking in... donate early, donate often! 

If you need a one-stop spot, I have an informational & ActBlue fundraising website for all non-fake Democratic candidates in the recalls:  DemocracyDive.com -- I'm a Madison teacher and one of the hundred thousand new Wisconsin activists.  All money goes directly from you to candidates on the secure ActBlue page -- we donate our time and materials, and don't see a dime.

Please help to spread the word by sharing this information with your progressive friends nationwide!

Thank you, and solidarity!

Comments

whiskeyman
whiskeyman's picture
  Walker is the one who is

  Walker is the one who is saving wisconsin, why would I want to reall him.  Kimi the taxpayers who are paying the bills sent walker to madison to save our state from turning into another illinois. And as far as the money walker is spending, he wouldn't have to spend this amount if it wasn't for the recall. And as soon as it is over you will see a large amount of new businesses coming to our state. They are waiting see if walker stays in as governor, or if  wisconsin returns to a state that caters to the chosen few of the public service unions. public service unions had a good run of prosperity, now the taxpayers have a leader who works for them in madtown, and not the special interest groups. Walker has my vote.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Suppose your recall is

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
http://www.forbes.com/sites/r

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/02/25/the-wisconsin-lie-exposed-taxpayers-actually-contribute-nothing-to-public-employee-pensions/

Dominic C
rigel1 wrote: Suppose your

rigel1 wrote:

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Maybe it's time you address points made in a other thread you started instead of posting more conservative mantra...

whiskeyman
whiskeyman's picture
[quote=Bush_Wacker] http://ww

[quote=Bush_Wacker]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/02/25/the-wisconsin-lie-exposed-taxpayers-actually-contribute-nothing-to-public-employee-pensions

I read your link. It is flawed. The money that is going to the retirement is coming from the taxpayers just like their salaries. The money was not coming from their salaries otherwise it would have been listed as a deduction from their pay and would be before tax dollars.  All of wisconsin's taxpaying residents (including public service employee union members)   have benefitted from these reforms.

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
whiskeyman]</p> <p>[quote=Bus

whiskeyman]</p> <p>[quote=Bush_Wacker wrote:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/02/25/the-wisconsin-lie-exposed-taxpayers-actually-contribute-nothing-to-public-employee-pensions

I read your link. It is flawed. The money that is going to the retirement is coming from the taxpayers just like their salaries. The money was not coming from their salaries otherwise it would have been listed as a deduction from their pay and would be before tax dollars.  All of wisconsin's taxpaying residents (including public service employee union members)   have benefitted from these reforms.

ALL of their money comes from the taxpayers.  Did you read what you just wrote?  You said their retirement is coming from the taxpayers and NOT their salaries.  It's all combined being funded by the taxpayer.  The point is that if you add the benefits to the salary the total is their total compensation.  All taxpayer funded.  That is what they collectively bargained for.  That is their "contract".  Their contract was not for a salary only and then somehow they are "stealing" even more taxpayer money for their retirement.  Now the governor comes in and says we are breaking the contract.  We're not going to honor what we promised.  All it is is a paycut.  Now the governor can spend that tax revenue on something deemed more important than a good education for the populace. 

Art
Art's picture
This is from John Nichols at

This is from John Nichols at The Nation, so, of course, it could all be a pack of lies:

Quote:
Appearing before the National Rifle Association, Mitt Romney was accorded the reception that might be expected for a Republican candidate who used to brag about how his positions on gun issues "don't line up with the NRA" but who now says: "If we are going to safeguard our 2nd Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes. I will."

The response was relatively warm but more than a little bit skeptical. . . .

So who did they love?

Scott Walker.

The Republican governor of Wisconsin was accorded a hero's welcome when he appeared Friday before the NRA's "Celebration of American Values" forum to accept the group's "Defender of Freedom" award. . . .

And he handed them raw meat. "I am proud to have a rifle, a shotgun and even a bow," Walker told the crowd of 5,500 people in St. Louis.

But the real winning line was Walker's absolute embrace of the state-based "Kill at Will" laws—such as the "Castle Doctine" measure he signed in Wisconsin—that have become so controversial since it was revealed that Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law had so complicated the investigation and prosecution of the shooting of teenager Trayvon Martin. "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" create new levels of immunity for gunmen, complicating the work of police and prosecutors. . . . 

The governor of Wisconsin is in political trouble largely because of his attacks on labor rights, which had its roots in "model legislation" written by ALEC. But he did not stop there. A member of ALEC during his decade as a Wisconsin state Assembly member, Walker worked closely with ALEC leaders in Washington, their corporate and special-interest sponsors and ALEC members in the legislature to advance many variations on ALEC's "model legislation"— from a restructive "Voter ID" law to corporate tax cuts and tort deforms and the "Castle Doctrine" legislation that was inspired by Florida's law. . . .

The latter law was cited by a Wisconsin prosecutor when he declined to pursue charges against the killer of Bo Morrison, a 20-year-old African-American man who was shot while fleeing a party in Slinger, Wisconsin. The Morrison killing, which took place around the same time as the shooting of Trayvon Martin, was the subject of protests in West Bend, Madison, Milwaukee and other Wisconsin communities. State Representative Chris Taylor, a Madison Democrat and a lawyer who was outspoken in her opposition to the measure last year, now says:  “It is heartbreaking that the legislature allowed this reckless law to go forward and now a young man is dead. This law encourages people to resort to vigilantism and use deadly force instead of calling the police.” . . .

He and his lieutenant governor, Rebecca Kleefisch, who also faces a Wisconsin recall election, have dismissed criticisms of ALEC and allied interest groups, such as the NRA. . . .

Dominic C
whiskeyman]</p> <p>[quote=Bus

whiskeyman]</p> <p>[quote=Bush_Wacker wrote:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/02/25/the-wisconsin-lie-exposed-taxpayers-actually-contribute-nothing-to-public-employee-pensions

I read your link. It is flawed. The money that is going to the retirement is coming from the taxpayers just like their salaries. The money was not coming from their salaries otherwise it would have been listed as a deduction from their pay and would be before tax dollars.  All of wisconsin's taxpaying residents (including public service employee union members)   have benefitted from these reforms.

 

You have any PROOF to your statement?

I mean I can scream that the Earth is flat and the Sun revolves around it but it doesn't make it true.

If you have no proof to support your claim that the article is flawed you need to SHOW it and not just mouthbreathe it.

DRC
DRC's picture
Boozer is drinking some bad

Boozer is drinking some bad moonshine.  Ignore his ravings.

Dominic C
DRC wrote: Boozer is drinking

DRC wrote:

Boozer is drinking some bad moonshine.  Ignore his ravings.

Yep, another crazy right wing idealogue that presents opinion as FACT, then, calls us out for not presenting supporting arguments even when we are throwing them in their face.

whiskeyman
whiskeyman's picture
  Your not expecting me to

  Your not expecting me to show you her paystub are you? Yes, I have a first hand knowledge of how union members are paid. And just because i don't see the world as you do does not make me crazy just like it doesn't make you right.

Dominic C
whiskeyman wrote:   Your not

whiskeyman wrote:

  Your not expecting me to show you her paystub are you? Yes, I have a first hand knowledge of how union members are paid.

Sure, whatever you say...

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
OK I hire a teacher who

OK

I hire a teacher who according to the union is worth 50K a year.  That is a combination of 40K in salary and 10K in health and retirement accounts.  My teacher never even notices the 10K a year that I've taken out of her salary in order to pay for her retired self some 30 years down the road. All of this is initially paid for with taxpayer money.

Now some yahoo comes along and is offended that he's helping pay for retirement benefits for this teacher.  It's bad enough we have to pitch in to pay her salary but I'll be damned if I'll pay for her insurance and retirement pay to boot!

The teacher is deferring 10K of the money she has earned, regardless of who is paying it, every year in order to be responsible and take care of her retirement.  Now a newly elected King comes to town and decides that her getting benefits is unfair.  He's gonna make changes no matter how long and hard this person's pay and benefits were bargained for.  In my world that's called breaking a contract and if you try doing that in the private sector you don't have a prayer but since it's being done against a public employee it's ok with the conservatives.

Dominic C
whiskeyman wrote:   Your not

whiskeyman wrote:

  Your not expecting me to show you her paystub are you? Yes, I have a first hand knowledge of how union members are paid. And just because i don't see the world as you do does not make me crazy just like it doesn't make you right.

This is HOW a union works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM

This was originally posted by another user here (I believe it was Art, but if it was somebody else, my apologies).

I work for a public employee union and I KNOW how we are paid.  

Quit blowing hot air up our asses.

 

DRC
DRC's picture
Hey boozerman, it is true

Hey boozerman, it is true that I am not right just because I disagree with you, but it is a start.

Sprinklerfitter
Sprinklerfitter's picture
I learned long ago that

I learned long ago that anyone that drinks whiskey is just drinking themselves some liquid courage. Drink too much of that crap and you'll eventually pay the piper...

whiskeyman
whiskeyman's picture
  If you chose not to believe

  If you chose not to believe me that is your choice. I now that it is hard to understand something that is not spewed by your liberal oracle Thom, You guys are just as much sheep as the sheep that follow rush's marching orders. That's ok I was like you once until I learned to think on my own and do my own research. But here let me try to expain this a different way so even you sheep can understand. You are trying to convince yourselves that the employees were paying into their retirement before Walker's reforms.  So what you are trying to say is that the unions let the state force union  members to pay for their own retirement, A full 5% of their salary ,and that was OK with the unions. And now that walker wants them to pay 5% of that original 5% ,or 5.05% of their salary Now they are going to pitch a fit. Seems  a little far fetched , doesn't it. So just go ahead and  believe what you will and I'll be here in the real world. I live in the state and I have seen that the reforms are working so walker will be getting my vote.

Dominic C
whiskeyman wrote:   If you

whiskeyman wrote:

  If you chose not to believe me that is your choice. I now that it is hard to understand something that is not spewed by your liberal oracle Thom, You guys are just as much sheep as the sheep that follow rush's marching orders. That's ok I was like you once until I learned to think on my own and do my own research. But here let me try to expain this a different way so even you sheep can understand. You are trying to convince yourselves that the employees were paying into their retirement before Walker's reforms.  So what you are trying to say is that the unions let the state force union  members to pay for their own retirement, A full 5% of their salary ,and that was OK with the unions. And now that walker wants them to pay 5% of that original 5% ,or 5.05% of their salary Now they are going to pitch a fit. Seems  a little far fetched , doesn't it. So just go ahead and  believe what you will and I'll be here in the real world. I live in the state and I have seen that the reforms are working so walker will be getting my vote.

 

Blah blah blah.

I'm the King of England!

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Dominic C wrote: rigel1

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Maybe it's time you address points made in a other thread you started instead of posting more conservative mantra...

First of all, if I make a post, I am not commited to that forum for life. It is okay to move on to other topics. Especially if I have already expresed the same view several times. Secondly. Don't be afraid to be specific. If there is a topic that you want further comment on, please tell me what it is and I will oblige.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Sprinklerfitter wrote: I

Sprinklerfitter wrote:

I learned long ago that anyone that drinks whiskey is just drinking themselves some liquid courage. Drink too much of that crap and you'll eventually pay the piper...

I learned long ago that anyone who attacks people rather than adress the subject is dodging the question. Maybe you need a little liquid courage.

Dominic C
rigel1 wrote: Dominic C

rigel1 wrote:

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Maybe it's time you address points made in a other thread you started instead of posting more conservative mantra...

First of all, if I make a post, I am not commited to that forum for life. It is okay to move on to other topics. Especially if I have already expresed the same view several times. Secondly. Don't be afraid to be specific. If there is a topic that you want further comment on, please tell me what it is and I will oblige.

Rigel I hate to tell you but you just left the post when it became difficult to defend your assertions so you just conviniently left a discussion you started.  You left when it became diffcult for you to finish the fight you started with the topic.

We all pointed out to you clearly what was wrong with the nature of your question and why it bore no validity yet you would gloss over that, not address it and so forth.

I, like some other posters here thought you were unlike so many other conservative posters here who rely on misinformation, disingenuous debating tactics, trolling, and of course, disengaging in a discussion when the logical discourse of the debate has left their position compromised.  It really makes no sense to debate a person who is going to debate on their own terms because there is a different term for that I believe.

You cannot equally compare two situations that are not the same as you did in the post you dropped when it became convinient for you to do so.  Seriously at least finish what you start.  That thread was to pick a fight becuase you knew we would be riled which is all and good for me but it just seems like you ran into the house...It's never fun playing with the kid who takes the ball home when he doesn't like what's happening.

Like I said, I seriously expect much more from you.  That is the kind of debating that I expect from different people here but not you.

Edit: For typos it's late.

P.S. The post rambles and it could be shorter but it's late.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Dominic C wrote: rigel1

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Maybe it's time you address points made in a other thread you started instead of posting more conservative mantra...

First of all, if I make a post, I am not commited to that forum for life. It is okay to move on to other topics. Especially if I have already expresed the same view several times. Secondly. Don't be afraid to be specific. If there is a topic that you want further comment on, please tell me what it is and I will oblige.

Rigel I hate to tell you but you just left the post when it became difficult to defend your assertions so you just conviniently left a discussion you started.  You left when it became diffcult for you to finish the fight you started with the topic.

 I have NEVER done that. My reply was 100% truthful. If you have something that you would like me to address then tell me what the hell it is.

Quit babbling about all of my personal flaws that you seem to have uncovered. You really, really need to get over your unhealthy obsession with my personality and "flaws"and start dealing with the posted subjects. Your drone is getting old. I did not ask for, nor do I need your "help." Please stop trying to fix me.

Hey I have a great idea! How about you treating me with the same respect the I treat you? Fair enough?

Now, I ask again. Exacty what post would you like me to return to and address. 

Dominic C
rigel1 wrote: Dominic C

rigel1 wrote:

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Maybe it's time you address points made in a other thread you started instead of posting more conservative mantra...

First of all, if I make a post, I am not commited to that forum for life. It is okay to move on to other topics. Especially if I have already expresed the same view several times. Secondly. Don't be afraid to be specific. If there is a topic that you want further comment on, please tell me what it is and I will oblige.

Rigel I hate to tell you but you just left the post when it became difficult to defend your assertions so you just conviniently left a discussion you started.  You left when it became diffcult for you to finish the fight you started with the topic.

 I have NEVER done that. My reply was 100% truthful. If you have something that you would like me to address then tell me what the hell it is.

Quit babbling about all of my personal flaws that you seem to have uncovered. You really, really need to get over your unhealthy obsession with my personality and "flaws"and start dealing with the posted subjects. Your drone is getting old. I did not ask for, nor do I need your "help." Please stop trying to fix me.

Hey I have a great idea! How about you treating me with the same respect the I treat you? Fair enough?

Now, I ask again. Exacty what post would you like me to return to and address. 

Rigel the post is already old but it was the video regarding violence you posted before.

No need to dig it up at this point since we will all have to go back, read it, think about it, etc..., you get the point.

You basically ended the conversation on your own terms and declared voctory while in the middle of the debate.

I just want to add that we were basically trying to tell you that your question itself was not valid because it was constructed with a fallacy of ommission.  You present the question as to comapring two events that are allegedly equivalent when this was not the case.  They shared SOME similarities but other key facts were left out or ommitted.  In this case that the legal actions taken were much different between the two cases you mention which are central to answer your question.  If you were comparing to equivalent situations then we could have a robust debate at that point where numbers can be brought out and we can support our arguments empirically when necessary.  When the actual question has a fallacy as part of the premise, there is no reason to further the debate until that matter is addressed first.

Like I said, I just expected from you and maybe there was no malice intended and you just got lost in other threads but like I said, it's no fun denbating a shadow or talking to a wall.  I, like you are probably taking time away from a busy day to engage others here and ex[ect certain things regardless of political or other beliefs.  I have said before that you actually can be debated in a logical manner and you understand empiricism with others.  I don't mind a debate ending with "we'll agree to disagree", but there are some things that have nothing to do with actual opinion but the actual construction of the argument itself.

Trust me, I'm no stranger to making logically incorrect statements and may not see them until somebody points it out and explains it to me.  We may agree or disagree on a matter but that has no bearing on the logical validity of a statement.  Many times we don't see things that seem so obvious to others until it's pointed out to us.

 

P.S. I will dredge the post up from page 2 or wherever it is so you can properly address the question.

It's there...feel free to address.

 

Art
Art's picture
Scott Walker really likes Ted

Scott Walker really likes Ted Nugent.

Of course, this is from the Huffington Post, so it could all be a pack of lies. (I especially like the picture of Walker with what sort of looks like a clown nose).

whiskeyman
whiskeyman's picture
  I would like to meet the

  I would like to meet the nug also. I enjoyed his music when i was younger. I also would add I do not base my politics on the people who's music, movies and books  i enjoy. If you are mindless and vote how your musicians , actors, writers or work affliations tell you to vote than you are a Just another sheep of the system and there is no hope for ewe.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Dominic C wrote: rigel1

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Dominic C wrote:

rigel1 wrote:

Suppose your recall is sucessful and the state continues to provide it's state workers with salary and benefits that are far above that of the people who are paying the bills? How long before the state can no longer fund these superb benefits? What do you do when you run out of money? Go to the tax payer and cry poor? Demand more sacrifice from the tax payer when you are unwilling to sacrifice a penny yourself? It is easy to complain that others are not doing enough for you. You are not poor. Wisconsin teachers are not living in poverty. Your average worker would love to have the health care, retirement, vacation, and salary of a tenured teacher. Maybe its time to stop complaining.

Maybe it's time you address points made in a other thread you started instead of posting more conservative mantra...

First of all, if I make a post, I am not commited to that forum for life. It is okay to move on to other topics. Especially if I have already expresed the same view several times. Secondly. Don't be afraid to be specific. If there is a topic that you want further comment on, please tell me what it is and I will oblige.

Rigel I hate to tell you but you just left the post when it became difficult to defend your assertions so you just conviniently left a discussion you started.  You left when it became diffcult for you to finish the fight you started with the topic.

 I have NEVER done that. My reply was 100% truthful. If you have something that you would like me to address then tell me what the hell it is.

Quit babbling about all of my personal flaws that you seem to have uncovered. You really, really need to get over your unhealthy obsession with my personality and "flaws"and start dealing with the posted subjects. Your drone is getting old. I did not ask for, nor do I need your "help." Please stop trying to fix me.

Hey I have a great idea! How about you treating me with the same respect the I treat you? Fair enough?

Now, I ask again. Exacty what post would you like me to return to and address. 

 

You basically ended the conversation on your own terms and declared voctory while in the middle of the debate. 

I apologize if I have left this impression. This was not my intent. I make a lot of posts. Probably more than I should. I either lose interest or lose track of some topics. I'll try not to leave abruptly. I don't comment on every reply, but I'll try to reply to more.