National Guard May Deploy as Socialists, Unions Wreak Havoc in Wisconsin

[tangent4ronpaul]

Exactly.

It has the exact same effect, but the dumb GOP legislators had to do it in an anti-liberty way. If I were a GOP legislator, I would've proposed an amendment banning the government from negotiating with the unions collectively, which has the same effect.

That would depend on if the current agreement got grandfathered in and made permanent. The root problem is that they make about 20% more than the average worker and pay a tiny, tiny fraction of their pension and health care. Much less than if you worked anywhere else. Even if this goes through, they would be paying a lot less than anyone else for pension and health care, just a bit more. They also get a 3 month vacation so in reality they make about double what other ppl do. That's public service unions for you.

 

[Mini-Me]

I salute you on making a compelling argument on that one. However, it brings up a moral question - should workers consider WHERE the money is coming from? Or should they take the best job they can get, wherever they can get it, to take care of their families, themselves, etc. and not worry about where the money comes from?

Are public employees slaves? Do they have a moral obligation to be paid ROCK bottom prices since it's stolen money? Should they not negotiate to improve their own lives? Should it all be volunteer work or else they are immoral?

These aren't government handouts like welfare mind you, these people show up to work each morning and do a job. Do they not have rights?

I think the core question of this post here may be more an issue of personal morals than politics. Would you buy merchandise you know was stolen?

Personally, I think we all have a moral responsibility to care about where our money is coming from. Would you be okay working for the mafia, even if you didn't perform any violent acts yourself? Would you be okay with negotiating with the mafia for greater pay, if you knew it meant they'd compensate by extorting more protection money from people? If you knew that joining the armed forces would send you to some third world countries to blow up innocent people remotely from a helicopter, would you consider it "just a job?"

Obviously I'm getting into grayer and grayer waters here, since we've gone from criminal employers to criminal employees, so let's end with some black water: I'm not sure if you know this or not, but the man who devised the Holocaust was not even an anti-Semite; he didn't have a strong personal belief against Jews (actually, there's some debate on that, but anyway...). He just thought that working for the Nazis and the German government was a good career path, and he was talented at logistics. His name was Adolf Eichmann, and he's a textbook example of the "banality of evil." In the end, I do believe it's very important to care not only about how you make your money, but where the money comes from.

 

[RonPaulCult]

I think the core question of this post here may be more an issue of personal morals than politics. Would you buy merchandise you know was stolen?

Personally, I think we all have a moral responsibility to care about where our money is coming from. Would you be okay working for the mafia, even if you didn't perform any violent acts yourself? Would you be okay with negotiating with the mafia for greater pay, if you knew it meant they'd compensate by extorting more protection money from people? If you knew that joining the armed forces would send you to some third world countries to blow up innocent people remotely from a helicopter, would you consider it "just a job?"

Obviously I'm getting into grayer and grayer waters here, since we've gone from criminal employers to criminal employees, so let's end with some black water: I'm not sure if you know this or not, but the man who devised the Holocaust was not even an anti-Semite; he didn't have a strong personal belief against Jews (actually, there's some debate on that, but anyway...). He just thought that working for the Nazis and the German government was a good career path, and he was talented at logistics. His name was Adolf Eichmann, and he's a textbook example of the "banality of evil." In the end, I do believe it's very important to care not only about how you make your money, but where the money comes from.

Interesting points for sure. And you're right, it's much less political and far more a matter of morality. And I think most of us here agree that you can't/shouldn't legislate morality if at all possible. People need to make their own choices in life. Most jobs have a little dirt attached to them. But if you make a choice to work for a government, or even for the mafia, or anybody else, I think your natural rights should remain intact.

Public employees may be draining our system, but they have rights too. Let's take them down without violating their rights - that's my humble request.

 

[Ninja Homer]

There's a lot of BS going around about what this bill says and does.

Be honest - have you read the bill? I just posted a piece of it above, where it says in clear language they are taking away RIGHTS.

Under this bill, they will still be able to unionize. That is true. In fact, for these jobs in the state of WI, the workers have NO CHOICE but to join the union (which is WRONG and needs to be addressed - but it not dealt with in this bill).

But under this bill, they won't be able to ACT as a union while negotiating with the state. The state is tilting the negotiations in their favor, which violates the rights of the people on the other end of the negotiation.

I agree that unions should not be given special privileges by the government. I wish the bill was addressing THAT instead of taking rights away from workers.

Please read the bill: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/JR1SB-11.pdf

Thanks for the link, I'm scanning through it now. You're right, there's some shady stuff in this bill. I guess that's to be expected... Democrats and Republicans are BOTH doing the wrong thing. They should have just nullified any law pertaining to unions.

One thing I noticed right off the bat is they keep referring to union rights given by law... those aren't rights, those are privileges. That's half the problem right there; they don't understand the difference.

 

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

is anybody here really going to support the idea of armed state enforcers marching in and shooting people for exercising their right to peaceably assemble and protest government for redress of grievances?

Not me, and I think these protesters are a fucking pack of braying hyenas. I have not a goddamn shred of sympathy for them, but I sure as FUCK don't want force used on them. Question is, will they return the favour when the shoe lands upon the other foot and its us out there? Somehow, sadly, I doubt it though it hasn't come to that yet.

 

[RonPaulCult]

Not me, and I think these protesters are a fucking pack of braying hyenas. I have not a goddamn shred of sympathy for them, but I sure as FUCK don't want force used on them. Question is, will they return the favour when the shoe lands upon the other foot and its us out there? Somehow, sadly, I doubt it though it hasn't come to that yet.

Well at least people are respecting their right to assemble and protest. I was going to have to delete my account on here otherwise

 

[Lucille]

fire them all!

+qe∞

i'd actually like to see walker go one step further, decertify the teachers union and fire every public school teacher who belongs to it. That would border on epic and would instantly make him a national hero in the image of reagan. one of the defining lessons of the thatcher and reagan eras is that the people love a politician who crushes unions.

the governor is entitled to fire them all. And he should do so.

right now.

There are millions of unemployed americans. There is no shortage of people looking for work. Many of them are qualified to teach.
[...]
the unions want everyone to pay more taxes. But we have paid more taxes. What we haven't gotten for our taxes is better results. So we're paying for nothing - a pig in a poke.

The money doesn't exist. Private sector employees have had to suck it up, work harder and get paid less. There's no way around this - you can't spend what you don't have forever.

The public unions think they're exempt from the laws of mathematics. They're not. All they can do is what they're doing - try to hold people up.

It's time to say no and shut them down.

teachers should be fired

every teacher who called in sick is guilty of fraud.

They cheated school kids out of a day of school. They cheated taxpayers who have to pay for it. They also placed tremendous burdens on many parents who were not prepared for school closing.

Amazingly, teachers are constantly whining about how they do everything "for the kids".

This clearly was not for the kids. This action by teachers was 100% for greedy teachers who walked out on their kids for their own benefit, at taxpayer expense.

There is absolutely no other way of looking at it.

 

[FrankRep]

Jesse Jackson, Russ Feingold Attend Madison Protests
http://wtaq.com/news/articles/2011/feb/18/jesse-jackson-russ-feingold-attend-madison-protest/

Rev. Jesse Jackson in Madison supporting protestors
http://www.wxow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14058509

Of Course, Jesse Jackson Descends on Wisconsin
http://nation.foxnews.com/union-protests/2011/02/18/course-jesse-jackson-descends-wisconsin

Jackson: Capitol protest "a real Martin Luther King moment"
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/116487168.html

 

[Pericles]

Public sector worker waive the right to strike as a condition of employment.

That is in exchange for the civil service protections.

When you don't take the same risks as private sector employment, you don't get the same benefits.

 

[Stewart Rhodes]

The rabid activists swarming the capitol in Madison were caught vandalizing property, distributing subversive literature, putting fear into innocents, pounding on legislators’ doors and windows, shouting, and furiously banging drums, according to witnesses. Some of the protestors were videotaped carrying signs comparing Governor Walker to Hitler, Mussolini, and deposed Egyptian despot Hosni Mubarak. Other more violent placards featured him with gun crosshairs trained on his face. One sign likened budget cuts to rape. And the mob left behind mountains of trash in its wake.
[...]
Claiming that the “economic and political system has failed,” the groups exhorted demonstrators to reject both parties, create “independent” committees of students and workers, nationalize corporations, seize the wealth, and usher in socialism. “The capitalist system has failed and must be replaced with a new type of society based on social need,” the flyer stated, promoting the transformation of businesses into “publicly owned and democratically controlled entities.”
[...]
“That beautiful and recently restored building has been trashed. Bands of thugs are roaming the halls, blockading restrooms, stairwells, and elevators,” she said. “They scream and yell, bang drums, and run around with clenched fists, banging on the windows and doors of the locked legislators' offices.”

She also said students were being used for political purposes and that “thugs” had been bussed in from Illinois. “Keep in mind the majority of these thugs are teachers, who are teaching impressionable children,” she said, noting that Gov. Walker should have called in the National Guard already to prevent the “teachers’ union mobocracy” from overrunning the capitol. “I would also fire every teacher who abandoned their post over this across the state.”

==

Does anyone seriously want these people anywhere near their kids?
Call out the guard and fire their asses!
Fire the Dem senators while you're at it!

I really, really hope this ends badly for Obama. It would be a huge boost for 2012

-t

Do you have a link to the source of those quotes, or was that from an eye witness? I'd like to see photos of the signs or copies of the fliers. I am trying to get a good handle on exactly what is going on there. We have some Oath Keepers in WI who are gathering info, but anything you can provide would be greatly appreciated. As the economy crashes, we will see more social disruption, and it appears that radical socialists will try to use that chaos for their own ends, which would lead to a destruction of our Constitution and destruction of liberty as surely as anything any neocon could do. I'd especially like a source or pic for this:

"the groups exhorted demonstrators to reject both parties, create “independent” committees of students and workers, nationalize corporations, seize the wealth, and usher in socialism. “The capitalist system has failed and must be replaced with a new type of society based on social need,” the flyer stated, promoting the transformation of businesses into “publicly owned and democratically controlled entities.”
[...]

Thanks,

Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers

 

[FrankRep]

Do you have a link to the source of those quotes, or was that from an eye witness?

The quotes are from Ann Shibler, writer for The New American


SOURCE

 

[Stewart Rhodes]

Ronpaulcult said:

"Well at least people are respecting their right to assemble and protest. I was going to have to delete my account on here otherwise"

And that is an important point. However wrong-headed we may think their ideas (that the answer is more government, not less, and more government spending that we cannot afford, and that government workers somehow have a "right" to our money), their right to assemble and protest must be respected. I went on the Randi Rhodes (no relation!) radio show the other day and she was a bit surprised that I agreed with her that it would not be proper, at all, for the governor to use the National Guard to police the demonstrations - unless there is a major, violent riot that the police cannot handle, the National Guard should be kept out of it. I also agreed with her that the Guard should not be used to replace state workers across the board. Instead, the governor should hire replacement workers to replace those who walk off the job. The only exception would be if prison guards were to suddenly walk off. That would be a situation where it may be proper to use the state National Guard to keep prison riots from breaking out. But the National Guard, which is a military force, should not be used to break strikes or to replace workers. It would be dangerous to start using them outside of their limited role of military defense, and disaster relief in REAL emergencies. Even in a riot context, they should be a last resort.

But, that was our only points of agreement. She tried to get me to agree that the governor is somehow violating his oath by proposing this bill, and my response was that his oath was to the Constitution, and I did not see how it was a violation of that oath to try to balance the budget. Randi said that what is needed is higher wages, and from that I suppose she wants even MORE government spending. Socialism doesn't work, and increasing government spending on government worker salaries will only bleed out the golden goose (the tax payers) even faster.

I think we are all in for a rude awakening, and state government employees in particular will have to realize that the days of living off of the work of their fellow citizens with a guaranteed job with guaranteed benefits and cost of living increases is coming to an end. But while we go through this, it is vital that we not misuse the National Guard and that we respect the rights of assembly and speech even of people who would not respect our rights if the roles were reversed (and we have seen just that over the past couple of years).

Stewart Rhodes

 

[Stewart Rhodes]

The quotes are from Ann Shibler, writer for The New American

Thanks. I'd still like to see photos or video of the actual statements. Less deniable.

Stewart

 

[RonPaulCult]

Ronpaulcult said:



And that is an important point. However wrong-headed we may think their ideas (that the answer is more government, not less, and more government spending that we cannot afford, and that government workers somehow have a "right" to our money), their right to assemble and protest must be respected. I went on the Randi Rhodes (no relation!) radio show the other day and she was a bit surprised that I agreed with her that it would not be proper, at all, for the governor to use the National Guard to police the demonstrations - unless there is a major, violent riot that the police cannot handle, the National Guard should be kept out of it. I also agreed with her that the Guard should not be used to replace state workers across the board. Instead, the governor should hire replacement workers to replace those who walk off the job. The only exception would be if prison guards were to suddenly walk off. That would be a situation where it may be proper to use the state National Guard to keep prison riots from breaking out. But the National Guard, which is a military force, should not be used to break strikes or to replace workers. It would be dangerous to start using them outside of their limited role of military defense, and disaster relief in REAL emergencies. Even in a riot context, they should be a last resort.

But, that was our only points of agreement. She tried to get me to agree that the governor is somehow violating his oath by proposing this bill, and my response was that his oath was to the Constitution, and I did not see how it was a violation of that oath to try to balance the budget. Randi said that what is needed is higher wages, and from that I suppose she wants even MORE government spending. Socialism doesn't work, and increasing government spending on government worker salaries will only bleed out the golden goose (the tax payers) even faster.

I think we are all in for a rude awakening, and state government employees in particular will have to realize that the days of living off of the work of their fellow citizens with a guaranteed job with guaranteed benefits and cost of living increases is coming to an end. But while we go through this, it is vital that we not misuse the National Guard and that we respect the rights of assembly and speech even of people who would not respect our rights if the roles were reversed (and we have seen just that over the past couple of years).

Stewart Rhodes

Excellent post.

You need to first ask yourself if our constitution protects our right to associate freely. I think we can agree it does.

Next, you need to ask yourself if a union is a type of association between free men. Yes, that is probably quite clear also.

Then you need to tie the two together - are these rights natural and universal. Another clear yes.

If they are natural and universal - should they still apply to public workers. I say OF COURSE - others here say no.

If you agree that universal rights are universal - then you need to determine if those rights are violated in this bill.

I suggest you read the bill if you haven't and look carefully for the violation of the right to associate freely.

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/JR1SB-11.pdf

I also recommend this article which sums up what the bill says and does:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/what_is_actually_being_propose.html

 

[libertybrewcity]

 

[Lord Xar]

 

[Jack Bauer]

Randi said that what is needed is higher wages, and from that I suppose she wants even MORE government spending. Socialism doesn't work, and increasing government spending on government worker salaries will only bleed out the golden goose (the tax payers) even faster.

Stewart Rhodes

She is 101% correct. In the last two years - with Democratic super majorities in both houses and a Democratic president, I wonder why they did not mandate that the minimum wage be raised to $ 500,000 a year. That way, we would have have higher wages and all our problems would be fixed. #EconomicGenius

 

[demolama]

Anyone who works for the government does not have my sympathy

 

[FrankRep]

Wausau Republicans planning trip to pro-Walker rally - February 19

Wausau Daily Herald
February 18, 2011




I STAND WITH SCOTT WALKER RALLY (organized by American Majority)

Details:

Date: Saturday, February 19, 2011
Time: 12:00pm - 3:00pm

Location:
Wisconsin State Capitol, East Side of the Building

 

[ItsTime]

It is about to heat up! We could be looking at the start of a civil war. Of course started by the bottom feeding left.