• 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 Governor to Missing Democrats: Do Your Job

diablo45 said:
a "majority" voted to the invasion of iraq.....as lasy j dalton sang; "god bless the boys on 16th avenue"....often the majority be stupid
Click to expand...

And the majority also voted for Barack Obama. Does your argument apply here as well? Regardless of it you think the majority is stupid, that's not how democracy works. You have every right to disagree with the majority, but you don't have the right to deny their rights of having their beliefs represented democratically.
 
digsbe said:
How spineless, unprofessional, and undemocratic. These fools are essentially throwing an immature tantrum by cowardly fleeing their state in order to postpone a vote on a bill that needs to be passed. They can simply vote "no" and do their jobs as elected officials. These senators should be ashamed of themselves. They are abusing the political system and acting like spoiled children throwing a fit over the fact that they won't get their way. They need to return to their jobs, do their jobs, and grow up.
Click to expand...

this involves the welfare of the middle class as opposed to the privlidged...those hiding are simply making a moral decision
 
whysoserious said:
I am not into this whole "Survivorish" government system. Show up and do your job. If every republican votes the same way and every democrat votes the opposite, then we have the most idiotic democrats and republicans in office.
Click to expand...

So let's say for example that the republican (or democrat, just to not be partisan) majority vote to legalize slavery, and it was the same case. Would you then support them boycotting to keep the bill from being passed, or would you support the passage of slavery in the silly name of "doing your job"?

In other words, this is the democrats doing their job. Finally.

apdst said:
The people spoke. The governer and the legislature are carrying out the will of the people. That's how it works under our form of government.
Click to expand...

Then put it to a referendum. I guarantee it will fail miserably. But Walker already knows that, which is why he isn't discussing this with anyone.

digsbe said:
How spineless, unprofessional, and undemocratic. These fools are essentially throwing an immature tantrum by cowardly fleeing their state in order to postpone a vote on a bill that needs to be passed.
Click to expand...

Oh? Why does it need to be passed?
 
diablo45 said:
this involves the welfare of the middle class as opposed to the privlidged...those hiding are simply making a moral decision
Click to expand...

More like an immoral decison.

You don't get to ditch the system, just because you're pissed about the outcome.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
So let's say for example that the republican (or democrat, just to not be partisan) majority vote to legalize slavery, and it was the same case. Would you then support them boycotting to keep the bill from being passed, or would you support the passage of slavery in the silly name of "doing your job"?

In other words, this is the democrats doing their job. Finally.



Then put it to a referendum. I guarantee it will fail miserably. But Walker already knows that, which is why he isn't discussing this with anyone.



Oh? Why does it need to be passed?
Click to expand...

It was already put to a referendum; in November, with the midterm elections.
 
diablo45 said:
this involves the welfare of the middle class as opposed to the privlidged...those hiding are simply making a moral decision
Click to expand...

Those "in hiding" are running from the inevitable as cowards. They may try to convince themselves that what they are doing is "moral." However, it's also despicable as they are abusing the political system and running from a democratic vote that they know they can't win. They are trying to have their way in an inappropriate manner by abusing rules and attempting to halt democracy. Personally, I think it's morally wrong for these unions to have such special deals at the taxpayer expense. It's also morally wrong to abuse loopholes in laws in an attempt to repress the democratic rights of an opposing opinion on an issue.


Khayembii Communique said:
Oh? Why does it need to be passed?
Click to expand...

It's an unfair law and the government needs to cut their budgets. This is one way to do it, and it's one of the right ways to do it.
 
Last edited:
digsbe said:
And the majority also voted for Barack Obama. Does your argument apply here as well? Regardless of it you think the majority is stupid, that's not how democracy works. You have every right to disagree with the majority, but you don't have the right to deny their rights of having their beliefs represented democratically.
Click to expand...

yeah i do, a "majority".. voted for hitler in 34....morality rules
 
digsbe said:
It's an unfair law and the government needs to cut their budgets. This is one way to do it, and it's one of the right ways to do it.
Click to expand...

Okay, then please explain what destroying collective bargaining does for balancing the budget? Or Walker's tax cuts? Can you explain that one please?
 
diablo45 said:
yeah i do, a "majority".. voted for hitler in 34....morality rules
Click to expand...
Godwin's law... A majority also voted to defeat him through force (war).
Khayembii Communique said:
Okay, then please explain what destroying collective bargaining does for balancing the budget? Or Walker's tax cuts? Can you explain that one please?
Click to expand...
Unions unfairly suck money from government coffers through unfair and unwarranted employee benefits at the taxpayers' expense.
 
diablo45 said:
yeah i do, a "majority".. voted for hitler in 34....morality rules
Click to expand...

It's immoral to circumvent the democratic process and fail to perform the task that they are paid to perform simply because they think their morality is superior to other people's.
 
Unions unfairly suck money from government coffers through unfair and unwarranted employee benefits at the taxpayers' expense.
Click to expand...

Ah, okay, so you can't answer the question.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Okay, then please explain what destroying collective bargaining does for balancing the budget? Or Walker's tax cuts? Can you explain that one please?
Click to expand...

Not to mention that in past contracts that they gave up wages in lieu of a pension plan? Now the repugs come along and want to steal their pension. :2mad:
 
digsbe said:
Those "in hiding" are running from the inevitable as cowards. They may try to convince themselves that what they are doing is "moral." However, it's also despicable as they are abusing the political system and running from a democratic vote that they know they can't win. They are trying to have their way in an inappropriate manner by abusing rules and attempting to halt democracy. Personally, I think it's morally wrong for these unions to have such special deals at the taxpayer expense. It's also morally wrong to abuse loopholes in laws in an attempt to repress the democratic rights of an opposing opinion on an issue.



It's an unfair law and the government needs to cut their budgets. This is one way to do it, and it's one of the right ways to do it.
Click to expand...

these "unions"? talk about contempt for working people as opposed for those who sit on their asses and according to fake news and the club for greed create "wealth"
 
diablo45 said:
yeah i do, a "majority".. voted for hitler in 34....morality rules
Click to expand...

You're totally wrong, too. :lamo

1) Hitler lost the presidential election of 1932 and 2) there was no election in 1934.

Be that as it may, you still don't get to ditch the system, just because you don't like the outcome.

Who wants to bet that when the Dems get kicked out of the government, even more in '12, that there is a violent uprising by the Leftists?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Ah, okay, so you can't answer the question.
Click to expand...

I did answer the question, you just won't accept it.

diablo45 said:
these "unions"? talk about contempt for working people as opposed for those who sit on their asses and according to fake news and the club for greed create "wealth"
Click to expand...

Contempt for working people? I have a contempt for the entitlement mindset and the abuse of employee unions to choke the throat of federal and private employers.
 
Last edited:
I did answer the question, you just won't accept it.
Click to expand...

No you didn't, you answered with a partisan talking point. Let's hear some figures. How much will destroying collective bargaining save for the state? Will it account for the hundreds of millions being added to the deficit in tax cuts? It would need to account for those hundreds of millions before it had any effect on the deficit.
 
Tucker Case said:
It's immoral to circumvent the democratic process and fail to perform the task that they are paid to perform simply because they think their morality is superior to other people's.
Click to expand...

morality isn't subjective
 
donc said:
Not to mention that in past contracts that they gave up wages in lieu of a pension plan? Now the repugs come along and want to steal their pension. :2mad:
Click to expand...

That's not true. The bill would only make them pay 12% into their own pension. That's fair, compared to raising taxes on an already over-taxed private sector.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
No you didn't, you answered with a partisan talking point. Let's hear some figures. How much will destroying collective bargaining save for the state? Will it account for the hundreds of millions being added to the deficit in tax cuts? It would need to account for those hundreds of millions before it had any effect on the deficit.
Click to expand...

$3.6 billion
 
Khayembii Communique said:
No you didn't, you answered with a partisan talking point. Let's hear some figures. How much will destroying collective bargaining save for the state? Will it account for the hundreds of millions being added to the deficit in tax cuts? It would need to account for those hundreds of millions before it had any effect on the deficit.
Click to expand...

Explain how keeping the law the way it is as being financially beneficial. I answered you with my argument that giving less government union employee benefits will reduce government costs... Explain how keeping them will reduce government costs or be beneficial financially, especially in a time of financially foolish spending by the government that desperately needs to make cuts.
 
apdst said:
You're totally wrong, too. :lamo

1) Hitler lost the presidential election of 1932 and 2) there was no election in 1934.

Be that as it may, you still don't get to ditch the system, just because you don't like the outcome.

Who wants to bet that when the Dems get kicked out of the government, even more in '12, that there is a violent uprising by the Leftists?
Click to expand...

yeah, you do......civil rights in the 60's. appartied in s.africa
 
digsbe said:
I answered you with my argument that giving less government union employee benefits will reduce government costs...
Click to expand...

I asked you about destroying collective bargaining, not giving less benefits, which the unions have already volunteered. You openly admit you didn't answer my question.

You also of course didn't even bother to address the hundreds of millions, if not billions, added to the deficit through tax cuts, where the hypocrisy particularly shines through.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
That's why the Democrats need to get their asses back to town and vote on the bill.
Click to expand...

nope, morality says keep the greddy from greater control
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom