• 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!

Should Wisconsin Democrats be paid while they hide out in Illinois?

Should Wiscnson Democrats be paid while they hide in Illinois?

  • Total voters
    47
I see that the conservative spammers did their usual mindless "voting" here.
I vote yes, they are still doing their jobs, rather effectively, I might add.
 
cpwill said:
by any means necessary?
Click to expand...

As long as it is legal.


well let's see:



seems like they're not exactly performing their duties of said office by refusing to show up to the office :).
Click to expand...

Is there a rule in their job description that says they can't stop a quorum by refusing to show up to vote? Their primary duty is to support and enact laws that their voters want and to oppose and prevent laws their voters do not want. Until Wisconsin changes this,then this is just another tool that politicians who are in a significant minority can use.
 
haymarket said:
Yeah. And castration is not ending your sex life - its only modifying it. Even though you will not be able to cut the mustard, you can still lick the jar.

I honestly have seen not one iota of evidence in your posts that you even understand what collective bargaining is and I had my doubts that you knew how arbitration and mediation work in a labor dispute. And since you equate reform of both with ending collective bargaining its now crystal clear beyond any doubt that you don't.

Reading the posts of right wingers here who want to discuss the details of labor unions is like reading the accounts of a eunuch in a brothel.
Click to expand...

Interesting
This boils down to a union / no unions debate..
Also, who rules ?
A vocal minority or a voting majority ?
Before any of this can have a value, we need campaign reform (no more buying of elections)
We also need to have the truth told.
Right now, its a "he said, she said" thing.
I believe and trust no-one now !
But one thing I do believe.
The GOP has sold what ever little soul it had to the wealthy and their "trickle down economics". (meaning that the wealthy get 99% and all the others get 1%)....
I think the protesters of Wisconsin know this much better than the voting sheeple.
 
jamesrage said:
As long as it is legal.




Is there a rule in their job description that says they can't stop a quorum by refusing to show up to vote? Their primary duty is to support and enact laws that their voters want and to oppose and prevent laws their voters do not want. Until Wisconsin changes this,then this is just another tool that politicians who are in a significant minority can use.
Click to expand...

The question is, do the politicians do the right thing or do they obey their constituents ? Traditionally the politicians have done a balancing thing between doing the right thing and doing as told by the ones who voted them in.
 
megaprogman said:
Thinking about this. I guess I now agree with those who say that sometimes the right thing is more important than democracy. At least for some things.
Click to expand...
An improper perspective I'd observe. The decision should not be viewed against the definition of democracy (a poor standard to choose) it MUST be viewed in respect for the Rule of Law in a memberstate of a constitutional republic. Doing so, you then accept ALL responsibility for the consequences of your actions and/or lack thereof. If your standard were to be accepted we would have anarchy. Democracy doesn't mean what you appear to think it does as it's a 'general' reference term. Every body doing whatever they want, because they believe it's their right as a free person. In a free society that demands order for it's survival and success, no one individual can set themseves above the The Rule of Law.

When and if you fight for principle you take the first step by taking a stand. You stand your ground and do what you feel is right regardless of and accepting full well the consequences.

You do NOT run away across state lines and take refuge in some outlying motel like some cockroach scurrying away from the light of day. These clowns define politicians as a comparative to statesmen. Every single one of them has the mark of a Violator of The Public Trust as if it were branded on their foreheads. It would prove interesting to check out what their fate was in the next elections to be held.
 
earthworm said:
The question is, do the politicians do the right thing or do they obey their constituents ? Traditionally the politicians have done a balancing thing between doing the right thing and doing as told by the ones who voted them in.
Click to expand...
By using using any legally available tool they have to support and enact legislation their voters support and opposing and preventing legislation their voters do not want, they are doing the right thing. The democrats are doing the right by protecting the interests of their voters by preventing anti-union legislation though what ever legal means they can and the republicans are doing the right thing by protecting the interests of their voters by trying to enact anti-union legislation by using what ever legal means they can use. It would be immoral for them not to use any legally available means to protect their voter's interests.
 
Last edited:
earthworm said:
But one thing I do believe.
The GOP has sold what ever little soul it had to the wealthy and their "trickle down economics". (meaning that the wealthy get 99% and all the others get 1%)....
I think the protesters of Wisconsin know this much better than the voting sheeple.
Click to expand...
What a foolish assertion to make. I challenge you to justify it and back it up with FACTS.

And another...
earthworm said:
I see that the conservative spammers did their usual mindless "voting" here.
I vote yes, they are still doing their jobs, rather effectively, I might add.
Click to expand...
So..., those who are of different opinion than you wormy are defined as "spammers" and sluffed off as not entitled to have a vote. How very altruistic of you. When is your next Bund meeting scheduled?
 
Last edited:
jamesrage said:
By using using any legally available tool they have to support and enact legislation their voters support and opposing and preventing legislation their voters do not want, they are doing the right thing. The democrats are doing the right by protecting the interests of their voters by preventing anti-union legislation though what ever legal means they can and the republicans are doing the right thing by protecting the interests of their voters by trying to enact anti-union legislation by using what ever legal means they can use. It would be immoral for them not to use any legally available means to protect their voter's interests.
Click to expand...

Thus, we end up with a stand-off.
I can see the two sides of this argument, I think...
Apparently, the GOP conservatives wish to scratch or reform the unions, not eliminate them (according to their statements).
The protesters do not trust the conservatives...
If both sides were to try honesty and fairness........that would be innovative....that I'll never live long enough to witness...
 
doctorhugo said:
What a foolish assertion to make. I challenge you to justify it and back it up with FACTS.

And another...So..., those who are of different opinion than you wormy are defined as "spammers" and sluffed off as not entitled to have a vote. How very altruistic of you. When is your next Bund meeting scheduled?
Click to expand...

The current score is 16 votes for 'Yes', 27 votes for 'No'. Given the very regular spamming of the polls here, I think we can discount the anonymous voters.
 
jamesrage said:
Is there a rule in their job description that says they can't stop a quorum by refusing to show up to vote? Their primary duty is to support and enact laws that their voters want and to oppose and prevent laws their voters do not want. Until Wisconsin changes this,then this is just another tool that politicians who are in a significant minority can use.
Click to expand...

according to that oath you cited, their job is to discharge the duties of their office. that means showing up and voting.
 
megaprogman said:
Thinking about this. I guess I now agree with those who say that sometimes the right thing is more important than democracy. At least for some things.
Click to expand...

and making sure that Wisconsin doesn't become the 27th state to limit collective bargaining for its public employees (who are serving the people .... supposedly) is more important than democracy?
 
I voted no.

I know some of you will freak out.

While I support what they're doing, they shouldn't be paid for being off the job.

That said, I think if state legislatures want to fix their budgets the first thing they should ****ing do is cut their own salaries before they ask others to sacrifice.

But of course Walker and his puppet masters aren't asking for that at all.
 
doctorhugo said:
So..., those who are of different opinion than you wormy are defined as "spammers" and sluffed off as not entitled to have a vote. How very altruistic of you. When is your next Bund meeting scheduled?[/FONT][/SIZE]
Click to expand...

Actiually he is correct about this. In certain polls, we have conservatives that "stack" the poll towards their side. Check the poll results. What you will see is 29 names, but 77 votes. That's 48 spam votes. Happens every once in a while, pretty much always done by conservatives. I have a suspicion of who it is.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Actiually he is correct about this. In certain polls, we have conservatives that "stack" the poll towards their side. Check the poll results. What you will see is 29 names, but 77 votes. That's 48 spam votes. Happens every once in a while, pretty much always done by conservatives. I have a suspicion of who it is.
Click to expand...

What stacking? Even looking at registered members alone the no votes have it by a landslide.
 
phattonez said:
What stacking? Even looking at registered members alone the no votes have it by a landslide.
Click to expand...

30-17 by registered voters. 48 spam votes for "no", 8 spam votes for "yes". That's called stacking. What the real vote is, is irrelevant.
 
cpwill said:
according to that oath you cited, their job is to discharge the duties of their office. that means showing up and voting.
Click to expand...

No, unless it is very explicit in that (is it?), it means representing your constituents to the best of your ability. I'm guessing there is no element of that oath which specifies that the only way you may do that is by showing up and voting, not even that that is the method of representing your constituents that must take precedence over all others.
 
Andalublue said:
No, unless it is very explicit in that (is it?), it means representing your constituents to the best of your ability. I'm guessing there is no element of that oath which specifies that the only way you may do that is by showing up and voting, not even that that is the method of representing your constituents that must take precedence over all others.
Click to expand...

So every time one party disagrees with a Bill they should just leave and shutdown the Legislative branch of government?
 
cpgrad08 said:
So every time one party disagrees with a Bill they should just leave and shutdown the Legislative branch of government?
Click to expand...

Your powers of extrapolation are great, Grasshopper, but misguided. Did I say that? I merely said that turning up and voting at a congressional session are not the only ways (or even the most effective ways) of representing your constituents. Were a rep to negotiate the investment of a major corporation into their district, bring hundreds of jobs, s/he would also have engaged in non-congressional activity, but would have benefitted their constituents to a far greater extent than merely turning up and voting to cut refuse collection services.

Voting's necessary, but hardly to the exclusion of all else.
 
Andalublue said:
Your powers of extrapolation are great, Grasshopper, but misguided. Did I say that? I merely said that turning up and voting at a congressional session are not the only ways (or even the most effective ways) of representing your constituents. Were a rep to negotiate the investment of a major corporation into their district, bring hundreds of jobs, s/he would also have engaged in non-congressional activity, but would have benefitted their constituents to a far greater extent than merely turning up and voting to cut refuse collection services.

Voting's necessary, but hardly to the exclusion of all else.
Click to expand...

It's no different than using the filibuster - a procedural technique for the minority party to fight the majority.

But it's only patriotic when Republicans use procedural techniques. It's terrorism when Democrats do it.
 
haymarket said:
Now you have a medical degree in psychiatry?

If you look at any of the 528 threads here on Wisconsin, you will quickly see that there are lots of supporters of the Senators who have left to protect the rights of working people in their state. That is a heroic act and deserves to be praised.

from dochugo



That is exactly what they are doing. The Senators have employed the rules - to the letter - to defend the working people of Wisconsin.
Click to expand...

Then let them vote 'No' on the legislation. What's the big deal?
 
cpgrad08 said:
So every time one party disagrees with a Bill they should just leave and shutdown the Legislative branch of government?
Click to expand...


Never said that you did. I was asking a question by on what you said.
 
FilmFestGuy said:
It's no different than using the filibuster - a procedural technique for the minority party to fight the majority.

But it's only patriotic when Republicans use procedural techniques. It's terrorism when Democrats do it.
Click to expand...

With a filibuster they are in the Senate representing there constituents on the floor. A filibuster can be ended with a vote. What this is an effective shutdown of Government. Can you imagine what would happen on the State and Federal level if elected officials ran away from their duties just because they disagree with a bill?
 
cpgrad08 said:
So every time one party disagrees with a Bill they should just leave and shutdown the Legislative branch of government?
Click to expand...

hmmmm i wonder what those who stand in support of these legislators now will say when and if the national government get's shutdown over the budget?
 
cpwill said:
hmmmm i wonder what those who stand in support of these legislators now will say when and if the national government get's shutdown over the budget?
Click to expand...

Probably complain about the GOP's failure to compromise with the Dems.
 
cpgrad08 said:
Probably complain about the GOP's failure to compromise with the Dems.
Click to expand...

and wail and gnash their teeth at how awful a government shut down is, and how it can never be countenanced, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom