The November 6th general election returned the State to single party control. The State Legislature is again firmly in Republican control with no outward signs of moderating its partisan agenda. This is not surprising since the Republican controlled legislature was able to redraw legislative districts, guaranteeing continued Republican legislative dominance for the next decade.
Governor Scott Walker unveiled a portion of his agenda at a conference in California last week. Some of the opposition is already concerned that he didn’t reveal it within the state but choose to do it out of state. What can be taken away from his brief statement is that his legislative and budget proposal will include reduction in income taxes, reduction in property taxes, broaden the school choice/voucher program, increase accountability of public schools (including public post secondary education), and eliminate same day voter registration.
Without having a detailed proposal; it is only logical to ask exactly what does he have in mind. This appears to be a replay of 2010 all over again. He “dropped the bomb” the following February and set the political landscape ablaze. This tactic, of less than full transparency, will always result in a heightened sense of dread by at least half of the state’s citizens. Just like before, the Republican legislature will simply “rubber stamp” anything the governor proposes. This appears to be more like a tyranny than that of a representative democracy.
Also on the Republican/extreme right’s wish list, just to name a few:
- Turn Wisconsin into a “Right to Work Law” state
- Change the state employees’ fixed benefit retirement system to a variable benefit retirement system
- Pass mining legislation that will further strip the DNR of regulatory power and authority
- Create a toll road system for transportation funding
- Force state workers into the Healthcare Exchange for Healthcare
- Begin an aggressive program of privatizing government services
- Modify the Constitutional Recall or eliminate it altogether
- Convert the Conceal Carry Gun Laws to Constitutional Carry
- Further limit pregnancy termination laws to make it more difficult to obtain an abortion on demand
As these issues and others are proposed and enacted it will energize the opposition, resulting in more political turmoil and partisan extremism. It appears that the Republican majority has lost all will for moderation and is consumed with the total suppression of the opposition. I think, this is a mistake on their part to alienate half of the state. As the national Republican Party just found out in the recent election; the belief that the electorate was right of center and would support their extreme right positions was just plain wrong. The state Republicans also need to understand that they also don’t have a mandate for unlimited extremist actions.
If we are to avoid the public outcry and civil disturbances of the past, I and other moderates implore the political right to approach this next legislative session with caution and resist the temptation of extremism.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html So the fact that this is not 100% positive proof, we should take "on faith" a document that is 0% positive proof? Insulting my name doesn't make your point less absurd.
"There are many metrics of success that have nothing to do with making money." True, I doubt any would disagree. "People like yourself discount anyone who doesn't follow the business model." False, I never suggested such nonsense. "Your assumption that liberals are not successful in business is faulty." I never said this either. People can debate the reason Bill Gates succeeded in business, none could say he isn't liberal. "The other faulty assumption is that to be successful economically that one must be amoral, with justifying all business practice based on achieving R.O.I." ... and you decided this because ... ??????? "Those who choose to serve the needs of others are to be discounted?" Those who choose to serve the needs of others should be thanked, complimented, revered, respected, and joined.
"Where is the value of pride in work?" It depends ... on the consumer. You can be proud of what you do, as can anyone, but it won't ensure value to others. "Why in your world is all metrics based on competition and win/lose scenarios?" Again I'm left to wonder what I wrote that caused you to ask such a question. ... and for what it's worth, it isn't. "If we have to give employment security to those who take on thankless jobs that the rest of us couldn't do or wouldn't take on, why is non-competition and security to high a price to pay?" If the rest of us couldn't or wouldn't (your example) take a position that is essential the value of that position would sky rocket. However, protecting the position from competition belies your example. You wouldn't have to protect the individual in your example. Perhaps you could respond to my post.
My statement of business amorality is from 35 years in business, from self ownership to multinationals that I have worked for. I began to see a shift in business practices beginning in the late 1970s from strategic planning models of 5 to 10 years to tactical planning of 1 year or less. In the publicly companies I worked for, I saw the executive management make decisions to meet the next quarter's R.O.I. at the expense of long term growth and security. Too much immediate gratification and not enough sound business practice. Corporate executives replace brand loyalty and innovation with quarterly bonuses and golden parachutes. Business created the mess we're in and wants to avoid, at all costs, the consequences of disrepute. Ethical business has become an oxymoron. Just follow these comments on the Patch for any length of time and my position is justified. The problem about employment security for government workers is that since the private sector doesn't understand the difference in agencies and the work mandated to be performed, there is a general discount of that work and not the full value is understood. For example, the social worker who is called out at 3:00 AM to retain some children and find a place for them to sleep after the household was a scene of a crime. (continued)
It happens over and over again. People view public servants as nothing more than lazy leaches, just eating at the public trough. The only two groups that get any kind of respect and recognition are law enforcement and fire fighters. Its funny that the only two groups that avoided the ACT-10 were law enforcement and fire fighters. That goes to show you how much the general public respects their public servants. If that is how we are going to treat "our employees", we are not very good employers.
God created the Earth in 7 days. How long was a day back in the 'beginning'- or at the time of creation? We consider our day to be one revolution of the Earth yet we know the speed at which the planet rotates has been changed. Might I suggest we interject sex into the discussion as well as religion? I will even post a picture to get the ball rolling.
There's more to be gained by following a thoughtful process for an initiative with this much potential environmental and economic impact.
Sorry Lyle, but Hoffa is going to disagree with you here. DC Republicans use the filibuster to prevent a vote from occurring in the federal Senate. Wisconsin Democrats use the tactic of fleeing the state and neglecting their job duties to prevent a vote from occurring in the Wisconsin Senate. In both instances, we're talking about blocking a vote from occurring. The difference is that the Republicans are following the rules in blocking the vote from occurring, while the Democrats in this state acted like they were above the law and didn't have to be in Madison to vote on legislation, a requirement of their express job duties. Thus, Mike in OC's point and question are not moot. Try again.
Concerning Scott Walker, due to acquaintance I voted for his 2002 challenger, the late Jim Ryan. My knowledge of Walker prior to his taking office as County Executive was peripheral. Although it wasn't long before the stories about trying to fire workers, Blue Shirt contract cancellation, privatisation schemes that were more expensive than the status quo, etc., started coming forth. Subsequent direct experience with Walker and his county budget follies began to formulate the dawning view that his ambitions exceeded his gifts, so to "speak." That's why I didn't vote for him in 2010. Without the County Board of Supervisors to play "Dad," who knew what sort of hijinks he could get into (well we found out). To me that's more of a WTH than a crush but don't let me spoil your fun! That would spoil mine. ; )
Federal Republican Senators using the filibuster is not illegal. While what Wisconsin Senate Democrats did may not have been 'illegal,' via enforcement of penalties through the judiciary, they did in fact violate express Constitutional provisions, as well as Senate rules, requiring their attendance in Madison. Wisconsin Constitution, Article IV, Section 7. Wisconsin Constitution, Article IV, Section 28. Wisconsin State Senate, Rule 23. Article IV Section 7 states that legislators can be legally and forcibly compelled to attend legislative functions. And the Senate rules expressly state that absence/leave from a function must be granted ahead of time. Thus, it's quite clear that part of the "duties" referenced in Article IV, Section 28, is to be present in Madison during official legislative functions. The Dems could not fulfill those duties in IL. No where does it expressly or implicitly state that such "duties" include fleeing the state for the sole purpose of avoiding the compulsory attendance that is expressly granted by the state Constitution. And the federal Republican Senators never coordinated wearing goofy t-shirts while shouting down their cross aisle counterparts, the way in which WI Senate Democrats did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7w1b6a6vmA Again Lyle, your argument is unsupported. Just admit that the Wisconsin Senate Democrats were wrong and that such caucus is an even more uncooperative body than federal GOP Senators.
Are you intentionally dodging my points, or are you acknowledging my accuracy?
Actually, it's never ok to hate. Happy Holidays to you, too.
So much for Holiday Cheers!
But hating is also protected as an American, so I am having trouble with your question. But I am pretty sure that expressing hatred, followed by wishing someone a Merry Christmas is probably not OK, so that is what I will go with.
Happy days are here again!