• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker survives recall effort, NBC News projects

Karl;1060577245]Ad hominem.


Stripping collective bargaining rights from a union is not "crushing" it? In what zip code -- the Twilight Zone?
Click to expand...

And what collective bargaining rights have been stripped from UNIONS? Do you know the difference between a public union and a private union? As a taxpayer of Wisconsin did you have the right to negotiate wages and benefits for public union employees? Didn't think so? Now is union membership prevented in Wisconsin?

Ostrich argument. Also used by many in the U.S. during the Holocaust.
Click to expand...

Comparing union bargaining rights to the Holocaust? When are you going to get some activist judge to overthrow the will of the people?


Delusion/paranoia.
Click to expand...

How many times does Walker have to win an election?
 
Karl said:
Since you've repeatedly refused to answer my question, I'll answer none of yours. I will, however, continue to point out your erroneous claims, which at the rate they're arriving may require secretarial assistance.
Click to expand...

your question was answered, you are just dodging because you are getting crushed in this debate. (as your weak use of ad hominem was crushed)

we will admit that public unions have been weakened. their numbers will go down significantly, and now the money they use in public elections will have to go towards referendums rather then the old way of buying the guy that sits across from them at the bargaining table.

You need to explain how this breaks public unions though. Predict when public unions will become no more and give the reason why it happens. you provide nothing in debates and it gets very tiring.
 
The Man said:
Ahh, you will answer none of my questions because you have no answers, or at least no answers that make any sense. Gotcha!

Good day sir! :wave:
Click to expand...
LOL... I figured you realize that you'd overstepped the facts eventually :mrgreen: . . . I'll post both your falsehoods, which you were unable to substantiate, here for posterity.

The Man said:
The thing I don't understand is, a governor, Scott Walker in this case, gets elected by a good majority, and does exactly what he said he intended to do when running for election [...]
Click to expand...

The Man said:
[...] stripping the requirement that one MUST join the union in order to work at a specific job [...]
Click to expand...

Have a nice day, and better luck next time
smileybye.gif
 
Karl said:
Ad hominem.
Click to expand...

oops, you got it wrong again. mere verbal abuse in the absence of an argument is not ad hominem nor any kind of logical fallacy. It's simply a personal attack.
 
ARealConservative said:
your question was answered, you are just dodging because you are getting crushed in this debate. (as your weak use of ad hominem was crushed) [...]
Click to expand...
Well then it would be easy to quote it for all to see, now wouldn't it?

So . . . why didn't you? Was it a magic answer? Invisible? Do we need magic beans in order to see the answer?
 
Karl said:
Well then it would be easy to quote it for all to see, now wouldn't it?

So . . . why didn't you? Was it a magic answer? Invisible? Do we need magic beans in order to see the answer?
Click to expand...

I summarized it for you
 
ARealConservative said:
oops, you got it wrong again. mere verbal abuse in the absence of an argument is not ad hominem nor any kind of logical fallacy. It's simply a personal attack.
Click to expand...

Aw, yes, another "Progressive" temper tantrum and distortion of reality
Click to expand...

Since it was used to discredit the validity of my post, it was indeed an ad hominem. Futhermore, it associated my reasoning with a political ideology, giving it a guilt-by-association fallacy as well. You guys really should read up on this stuff.
 
The Man said:
We don't, but apparently you do.
Click to expand...

LOL... the personal insults keep on rolling. What happened to your argument? I gotta go to work guys, but I'll check in later this afternoon to see if you've managed to come up with a good story explaining all that stuff you're now dodging. TTFN.
 
Karl said:
Since it was used to discredit the validity of my post, it was indeed an ad hominem. Futhermore, it associated my reasoning with a political ideology, giving it a guilt-by-association fallacy as well. You guys really should read up on this stuff.
Click to expand...

conservative is unable to actually debate. it was simply a personal attack.
 
Karl said:
LOL... the personal insults keep on rolling. What happened to your argument? I gotta go to work guys, but I'll check in later this afternoon to see if you've managed to come up with a good story explaining all that stuff you're now dodging. TTFN.
Click to expand...

Personal insults??? By whom?

Maybe while you're at work you can formulate answers to the questions you haven't answered?
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
Personal insult??? By whom?

Maybe while you're at work you can formulate answers to the questions you haven't answered?
Click to expand...
Well, just informed that my schedule has shifted an hour or so, therefore you get a short reprieve.

Your posts have turned into nothing but a series of insults with no redeeming argument. More of the same above. Again I'll summarize your failings.

1. You claimed, effectively, that Walker campaigned on eliminating/severely restricting union bargaining rights. You failed to evidence that when asked (of course, it is likely untrue, making evidence difficult in the least).

2. You made a bogus claim about mandatory union membership. You failed to evidence this when asked. While some states require payment of a dues equivalent, mandatory requirement to join a union was made illegal nearly a century ago by the Taft-Hartley Act

Instead of admitting those failings, you now want to go on the personal attack. Repeatedly. What would be the point in my participating in that schoolyard game, when your argument has quite clearly failed?
 
Conservative said:
And what collective bargaining rights have been stripped from UNIONS? Do you know the difference between a public union and a private union? [...]
Click to expand...
An argument based on semantics. Priceless :roll:

Conservative said:
Comparing union bargaining rights to the Holocaust? When are you going to get some activist judge to overthrow the will of the people?
Click to expand...
Fanaticism as an argument. Priceless :roll:
 
Last edited:
Karl said:
Well, just informed that my schedule has shifted an hour or so, therefore you get a short reprieve.

Your posts have turned into nothing but a series of insults with no redeeming argument. More of the same above. Again I'll summarize your failings.

1. You claimed, effectively, that Walker campaigned on eliminating/severely restricting union bargaining rights. You failed to evidence that when asked (of course, it is likely untrue, making evidence difficult in the least).

2. You made a bogus claim about mandatory union membership. You failed to evidence this when asked. While some states require payment of a dues equivalent, mandatory requirement to join a union was made illegal nearly a century ago by the Taft-Hartley Act

Instead of admitting those failings, you now want to go on the personal attack. Repeatedly. What would be the point in my participating in that schoolyard game, when your argument has quite clearly failed?
Click to expand...

So, how is Walker breaking unions?

And what "personal insults" have I thrown at you?
 
The Man said:
So, how is Walker breaking unions? [...]
Click to expand...
Your argument is that stripping essentially all collective bargaining rights from a union, and legislating that the members do not have to pay dues, is not breaking it? Really?
 
Karl said:
Your argument is that stripping essentially all collective bargaining rights from a union, and legislating that the members do not have to pay dues, is not breaking it? Really?
Click to expand...

You confuse not accepting an offer with not allowing the offer. The key difference in the demorats and the republicants is that the demorats, that get massive campaign cash and political support from the gov't employee unions simply said YES to the offers, while Walker finally said NO. Allowing union membership to be an OPTION is not taking away any gov't employee's right to join (or remain in) the union. It is, however taking away the right of the UNION to demand those dues regardless of whether the gov't employee feels that they are being used productively. Imagine how a WI, GOP supporting, gov't union member felt, with their MANDATORY union dues being given to "recall" the very governor that they voted for?

Too allow a minority (gov't workers) to dictate labor policy to the majority (the taxpayer/voters) is insane. Why should we, the people, be forced to cede labor negotiating power to the few among us that CHOOSE to work in the gov't jobs that we offer? If 2% of the public works for the gov't, then barely over 1% get to be the sole deciders of whether a gov't union can come to exist. In non right-to-work states that means that ALL gov't employees must pay union dues, and ALL taxpayers must honor any contract made with them.

If the gov't has the "right" to alter SS retirement ages AFTER that citizen has been required to pay SS taxation (but has not yet attained the benefit age), we should certainly be able to alter a "labor contract" that assigns retirement benfits for ANY gov't worker that has not yet retired. It is time to stop the madness of treating ONLY gov't employees, not the citizens that must support them trough taxation, as "super citizens" with special union contract rights that are not applicable to ALL citizens.

After all of the screaming in WI about how "unfair" the union teachers were treated one would expect a mass exodus of these highly qualified and educated folks, yet NONE (as far as I know) quit and the applictaions for these positions are still backed up with hundreds waiting for an opening. Many simply stopped supporting the union wth THEIR money voluntarily once given the option.
 
Last edited:
Karl said:
1. You claimed, effectively, that Walker campaigned on eliminating/severely restricting union bargaining rights. You failed to evidence that when asked (of course, it is likely untrue, making evidence difficult in the least).
Click to expand...

It would appear that your position is based on the bolded word above. Your argument could be alternatively be interpreted as ‘you didn’t say it specifically so I will imply what you meant…now prove my interpretation’…typically your tactic…Nice
 
Karl said:
I'll answer your question when you answer mine, which I've asked twice now.

Third time: However, can you at least provide evidence that during the campaign he said he was going to eliminate collective bargaining for state employees?
Click to expand...

You act like Walker did something wrong.

Walker should be given a medal for busting the unions.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You confuse not accepting an offer with not allowing the offer. The key difference in the demorats and the republicants is that the demorats, that get massive campaign cash and political support from the gov't employee unions simply said YES to the offers, while Walker finally said NO.
Click to expand...
Did Walker say no to the out-of-state Koch money? Thank you for pointing out that Walker's efforts were nothing more than a partisan ploy to cripple the Democrats.

ttwtt78640 said:
Allowing union membership to be an OPTION is not taking away any gov't employee's right to join (or remain in) the union. It is, however taking away the right of the UNION to demand those dues regardless of whether the gov't employee feels that they are being used productively.
Click to expand...
Hmmm... the union DEMANDS something that the worker agreed to pay as a condition of membership, which nets him/her better pay and benefits than non-union jobs. Odd how that happens. If the worker doesn't like paying those dues, all they have to do is quit and get a non-union job. Odd how that rarely happens.

Using your logic, should not we, as citizens, be allowed to withhold paying our taxes if we feel that they are not being used productively?

ttwtt78640 said:
Too allow a minority (gov't workers) to dictate labor policy to the majority (the taxpayer/voters) is insane.
Click to expand...
Actually your premise is insane.

ttwtt78640 said:
If the gov't has the "right" to alter SS retirement ages AFTER that citizen has been required to pay SS taxation (but has not yet attained the benefit age), we should certainly be able to alter a "labor contract" that assigns retirement benfits for ANY gov't worker that has not yet retired.
Click to expand...
SS is not a contract. You should read up on it sometime.

ttwtt78640 said:
It is time to stop the madness of treating ONLY gov't employees, not the citizens that must support them trough taxation, as "super citizens" with special union contract rights that are not applicable to ALL citizens.
Click to expand...
What have you been reading / listening to?

ttwtt78640 said:
After all of the screaming in WI about how "unfair" the union teachers were treated one would expect a mass exodus of these highly qualified and educated folks [...]
Click to expand...
You would? Why? Leave family/friends, sell a house in this market, possibly lose vested pension benefits, definitely lose health insurance benefits... why would you expect that?
 
Last edited:
Karl said:
Did Walker say no to the out-of-state Koch money? Thank you for pointing out that Walker's efforts were nothing more than a partisan ploy to cripple the Democrats.
Click to expand...

Did Walker's opponent not receive any out-of-state money?

Using your logic, should not we, as citizens, be allowed to withhold paying our taxes if we feel that they are not being used productively?
Click to expand...

You can bet that many (most?) people would do just that, if there weren't a prison sentence and a criminal record involved. The citizens of Wisconsin merely did the next best thing, which is within the law, and the whole point of our representative democratic process in the USA: They elected a governor who will put less of their tax dollars toward wasteful spending. Apparently the majority of democrats in Wisconsin have no respect or regard for the democratic process.
 
Last edited:
Dickieboy said:
Karl said:
[...] 1. You claimed, effectively, that Walker campaigned on eliminating/severely restricting union bargaining rights. You failed to evidence that when asked (of course, it is likely untrue, making evidence difficult in the least). [...]
Click to expand...
It would appear that your position is based on the bolded word above. Your argument could be alternatively be interpreted as ‘you didn’t say it specifically so I will imply what you meant…now prove my interpretation’…typically your tactic…Nice
Click to expand...
I shortened the charge to keep from boring everyone by repeating the same thing over and over again. Since you choose to find fault with that, I'll humor you and simply bore everyone again:

Karl said:
The Man said:
The thing I don't understand is, a governor, Scott Walker in this case, gets elected by a good majority, and does exactly what he said he intended to do when running for election [...]
Click to expand...
You have evidence that while running for election he said that he was going to break unions? May we see that please?
Click to expand...
A few posts later, upon complaint by the poster, I modified my request as follows:

Karl said:
Of course he's breaking unions. Stripping them of collective bargaining rights is what -- a Christmas bonus? However, can you at least provide evidence that during the campaign he said he was going to eliminate collective bargaining for state employees? [...]
Click to expand...
Evidence was never provided. IIRC a vague claim about cleaning up the budget mess was offered, but that is hardly "exact".
 
Last edited:
johnny_rebson said:
You act like Walker did something wrong.

Walker should be given a medal for busting the unions.
Click to expand...
There ya go, folks... makes one wonder why the others expended so much effort denying it :mrgreen:
 
The Man said:
Did Walker's opponent not receive any out-of-state money? [...]
Click to expand...
Probably, but Walker's successful union-busting plan will reduce or eliminate that in the future, will it not? [/QUOTE]
 
Karl said:
Probably, but Walker's successful union-busting plan will reduce or eliminate that in the future, will it not?
Click to expand...

Again, Walker did not bust any union. Being fiscally responsible and balancing the state budget is NOT union busting. Are public labor unions no longer allowed to exist in Wisconsin? I'm pretty sure that even if the whole point of the labor union is only to get together to go bowling every Friday, or have a barbecue twice a week, labor unions are allowed to exist.

But, even if candidates can't receive out of state money in the future, does it really matter? If no candidate can receive out of state funding, then it's still an even playing field, no?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom