The Power 50?

We started getting Newsweek & Time at work.  I was offered them and declined.  I think  they are biased to such a degree that I simply cannot trust anything they “report”.  However, I stumbled upon a cover (Nov 8, 2010) got my attention. “The Power 50” with big Rush as # 1. I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh, so don’t have much of an opinion on whether he is good or bad.  But I do wonder why do they think he’s # 1, with talk radio only?  Is TV not a bigger medium with a larger audience? Looking at their list with some of the comments from the article I decided that I had a few thoughts and questions…

  1. Rush Limbaugh        Male     Talk show host     $58.7 million
  2. Glenn Beck                 Male     Talk show host     $33 million
  3. Sean Hannity            Male     Talk show host     $22 million
  4. Bill O’Reilly                Male     Talk show host     $20 million
  5. Jon Stewart                Male     Talk show host     $15 million
  6. Sarah Palin                Female   Former government official     $14 million
  7. Don Imus                   Male     Talk show host     $11 million
  8. Bill Clinton                Male      Former government official     $7.7 million
  9. Keith Olbermann     Male     Talk show host     $7.5 million
  10. Rudy Giuliani           Male     Former government official     $7 million
  11. Laura Ingraham      Female     Talk show host     $7 million

“The Rush Limbaugh Show” is on the air three hours a day, five days a week, carried by some 650 radio stations. Industry estimates put his weekly audience somewhere between 15 million and 20 million.”

Limbaugh

Would that put his daily audience at 3-4 million?  About the same as Beck or O’Reilly, but less than any network?

“News anchors such as Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, and Jim Lehrer earn more than enough money to appear in the top 50, but they serve mostly as conduits for information, not merchants of ideas.  So we left them off.”

Wow!  Does anyone at SUFA buy that?  From the TeaParty being continually linked with racism to Palin being tied to the Tucson shooting, they inject their spin on all political coverage! At this point they are really just as much merchants of ideas as anyone on talk radio. How about we add them to the list, just to see the numbers?

Katie Couric, CBS Evening News $15 million (Puts her ahead of  Sara Palin)

(CONDOLEEZZA RICE interview, presses the Bush lied theme)
officials knew there was a small chance of actually finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Matt Lauer, NBC Today coanchor $12 million (He and Sawyer would tie at #8)

(GB interview, was against extending tax cuts)
But we’ve been living under that system for seven years now and we’ve seen incredibly slow growth in jobs. So why should we continue down that path?

Diane Sawyer                                            $12 million

(only reports AGW side, had 10 climate scientist, one viewpoint)
Another winter storm roared through today. More records were toppled, and it heightened that question: Do the leading scientists now agree that this is global warming?

Meredith Vieira, NBC Today coanchor $10 million  (Made the top ten!)

(On Sara Palin shooting a gun. )
VIEIRA: Plus you’re with a woman with a gun. The whole thing makes me nervous, you know?

Brian Williams, $8 million (pass, will dig up something if requested)

I think I have shown news anchors do interject themselves into many of their stories.

At #5 we have Jon Stewart who weighs in at $15 million. I have no issue with Jon Stewart or talk show hosts, but aren’t there some other people missing?  I don’t get to watch much TV during the day, but I know there are shows other than “Days of Our Lives” and “Scooby Doo.” I remember “The View” weighing in on politics on a regular basis, so why were they left out?  Not paid enough? Let’s Take a look:

  • Barbara Walters – $12 million (including 20/20 and Specials)
  • Joy Behar- $1.5 million & $1.8 million for her HLN show
  • Whoopi Goldberg- $ 2 million
  • Elisabeth Hasselbeck–$1.25 million
  • Sherri Shephard- $ 1 million

Joy Behar should have made the list twice, for “The View” and her own show on HLN. Newsweek stated, “conservatives dominate the list”.   Could they have missed anyone?  I understand Rush is big, and $60 million a year is a lot of money.  What liberal could possibly compete with that?  Oprah Winfrey, per year $260 million.  She has gone from having her own show, to having her own channel!  Does she have any opinion on politics? Any influence on the American public? Did she openly back anyone in a political race?

“Included in the rankings are politicians, ex-politicians, media personalities, and political consultants who hawk their personal brands in the public marketplace—and influence American political discourse in the process.”

Oprah Winfrey & Barack Obama Hit the Campaign Trail | Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey

No, I guess Oprah just doesn’t fit their description.  Could they have missed anyone else that influences American political discourse?

Individual donations to “527” organizations (2001 to 2010)
George Soros: $32.5 million
Koch Brothers: $1.5 million

So-called 527 groups are non-profit, tax-exempt organizations that are allowed to raise money for political activities including voter mobilization efforts, issue advocacy and other actions. They are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations and unions.

Soros spends millions each year pushing his liberal agenda, but Newsweek doesn’t think  that has any effect on our politics?

George Soros

I kinda wonder how Newsweek is doing, as a business.  Is there money to be made claiming to be an un-biased news magazine and attacking conservatives?

“NEW YORK — Newsweek, a 77-year-old magazine that once helped set the national news agenda, is linking its future with a startup website just two years in the making.

Three months after agreeing to buy the money-losing weekly for just $1, audio equipment magnate Sidney Harman has completed on-again, off-again negotiations to merge it with The Daily Beast.” This photo illustration shows news and blog site The Daily Beast and a copy of Newsweek magazine in Washington,DC on November 12, 2010. Newsweek, the venerable but struggling US magazine, and two-year-old The Daily Beast joined forces in a marriage of...

Another major media failure.  Is it caused by putting a liberal agenda before  professional ethics.  How long until the NY Times and the networks also fall to their bias and the power of the new media?

I found information from the following sources:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/wapo_mounts_boycott_sarah_move.html

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/11/01/power-list.html

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Good morning, LOI. I do not know of anybody that subscribes to Newsweek or Time or even the US News and World Report. I used to be a subscriber to the USNWR and have found it to be very biased as well. It is no secret that msm will villify the conservative (although I am not a supporter of BEck at all, can tolerate Hannity, and I am not a ditto head)…but I do not watch the Sunday morning propaganda either. So I am not surprised. Each of these have millions of listeners and watchers. I have watched the VIew exactly once to say that I watched it and it was horrible.

    Just back from a few meetings at the border. It is amazing how stupid the college kids are by going to the border towns but we are gearing up for srping break and will be out in force. We will warn them about going into Mexico. I do not even like the fact that my parents are still in Mexico but……..that is their choice. Our Ranch in San Miguel Allende looks like an armed camp with the number of guards we have….sigh.

    Hope you and yours are doing well, sir.

    • Morning D,

      I think they sent them free, that we did not subscribe. I get a golf magazine free. I think they give them away to keep their circulation up and make their money from the ad’s.

      College kids, can’t fix stupid. I wonder if the gov. should close the border for a couple weeks?

      Your parents, they are making an informed choice. Have to respect values that are not put aside when things turn dark.

      So far, all is well here, business and family both. I have a cousin intending to honeymoon in Mexico this spring, hope he makes a wise choice….

      • If you want to know the safe areas….just ask. I know what is going on better than the US Government knows.

        Golf magazine….yes…..that is where I would subscribe. Nothing like a little cow pasture pool to settle the nerves..unless it is sitting down at a serious Hold ‘Em table

  2. gmanfortruth says:

    Good Morning 🙂

    LOI, It’s intereting to see how much money theses people make (Charlie’s blood pressure is now dangerously high). A media bias is good for ratings, not good for the people. It’s hard to find a news source that does not inject political bias in some form or another. The people are getting torn apart at the seams. To their own detriment I fear.

    • Gman…..Charie is ok….just a little misguided. He reminds me a lot of Glenn Beck….without the money. He is passionate about his stance but, I would be willing to bet the farm, if he was offered 22 million to be a voice opposite of Beck or Limbaugh…I bet he would no only do it but he would not give any of his salary back. But I like Charlie….he is great entertainment and he really gets the goats of a lot of people because they let him….

      Charlie, have a plate of eye talian…it will lower your blood pressure.

      • Oy vey, I’m trying to diet (again) Colonel … yes, the blood pressure was high seeing those figures. I find that totally IRRATIONAL (without all the assumptions).

        Crazy stuff … but I do agree there’s not much (if any media at all) without a bias.

        Once again, nobody needs THAT much … but here’s something I’m willing to bet … that if any of those megolomanicas on those lists were given $75,000 a year (with public worker benefits), they’d STILL do what they do (either because they are genuinely passionate or because they can’t help themselves (the spotlight stuff that feeds egos). Charlie would, in fact, take the same amount ($75,000 not all those millions) so long as I knew the balance of those absurd salaries were going towards the … uh,oh (Gman), here it comes … GREATER GOOD.

        Truth be told, I can’t watch the vast majority of the clowns on those lists because the spinning raises the blood pressure as much as the salaries.

        • Charlie,

          If they did not get those millions, they would not do the show because no one would listen to them.

          You have your cause and effect backwards.

          There are millions of people who love to get up in front of a camera and speak their mind – and they’d do it for free! (You merely have to watch TV to see everyone fighting to be on it for 2 minutes)

          These people are paid millions because these are the ones the People (who watch TV) want to watch on TV.

          The People who watch TV provide advertisers with “eye balls” to sell goods and services.

          Advertisers pay these talking heads to be on TV to attract those eye balls.

          If you have the power to attract eyeballs (or ears, as in the case of Rush) you would make millions too.

          But, …. you don’t, so you don’t….

          • You have your cause and effect backwards.

            Here we go again … assumptions rule supreme. Assuming (since you depend on it), there weren’t any million dollar jobs and everybody in that role was paid $75,000, I’m betting they’d do it still. Since they are paid (completely unfairly) those absurd wages, they are promoted (publicity/supported) by the bigger machines (networks, etc.) to become the stars they have become. Take away that support/promotion and they’re just another group of newscasters.

            They are unfairly promoted (vs. those doing it for much less) … if those doing it for much less were supported the same way, Beck, Olbermann, etc. would be doing it for $75,000. How they were promoted, I guarantee you, had a lot less to do with their “talent” (as you’d argue) than it did with internal politics, personal connections, etc.

            That’s the way of the capitalist world, BF.

    • I’ve been looking at FOX closely, and some of their bias really jumps put at me now. They flash breaking news in bold red/yellow all the time, like it’s 9/11, and then just hype up minor stories. And yes, they do have a conservative bias and interject themselves into the story.

      I still prefer FOX because they will report thing the others will skip, such as ACORN.

      I think the MSM will continue to decline while the new media grows.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I agree. It’s become so blatant it’s hard not to notice. Are we a nation of laws, or are we now a nation of politics? The latter would lead to disaster.

      • Good point….Fox, even though conservatively biased, in my opinion does better reporting and I watch CNN and MSNBC as well…. but they all have the “breaking news” but their choice of what is breaking is still their own mantra.

      • LOI, something MSNBC (although it was first aired on Lawrence O’Donnel’s show and I only found out the next morning on Morning Joe) was the 2007 Obama campaign promise to walk the lines of workers threatened with losing their collective bargaining rights. It set me on fire when I carefully watched the next several days and it was barely aired again … also how Rachel Maddow seemed to lose all that passion she has when making fun or attacking the right when she FINALLY aired the clip of Obama. I put it on my FB page about 20 x’s over the next few days … and went after so-called liberal democrats for not wanting Obama and Trumka’s head. Now I watch (and review) foreign movies to keep my blood pressure at 2000 over 6 …

        • Charlie,

          What stands out to me, all the outrage and protests about the war aimed at Bush. Obama has continued Bush’s policies.
          Where is all the media attention?

          Price of gas, same thing. They hammered Bush for it, but make excuses for Obama.

          Not sure if Obama walking that line would be legal. Federal gov. intruding on a state. Lesson, don’t make promises you can’t keep.

          Long walks are good for the blood pressure.

          • Obama has continued Bush’s policies. Where is all the media attention?

            In total agreement here (the gas and everything else). Obama is no friend of mine — way too close to your side of the aisle for me.

            Long walks are good for the blood pressure.

            Yes, they are, even in the cold. The gym works almost as well … then a nice foreign movie to relax with … and dream of better days to come.

  3. If I’m were cool like Flag, I’d post the shades smiley face to say good morning. But this is more my style….

    http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80428106/

  4. ABC and NBC Resort to Using ‘Bert and Ernie’ and ‘Big Bird’ to Undermine Effort to De-Fund NPR

    Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2011/03/10/abc-and-nbc-resort-using-bert-and-ernie-and-big-bird-undermine-effort-d#ixzz1GCvZ7jJf

  5. gmanfortruth says:

    Small hijack, Sorry 😦

    Republican leadership was considering calling in SWAT teams or the National Guard. Plans have been set. We have almost completely lost control of the capitol building. Protesters now control the first and second floors and are amassing outside the governor’s office. The third and fourth floors are under control but we’re not sure what side our security is on. Law enforcement is leaking evacuation plans to the protesters. An official tried to evacuate through a secret underground tunnel and was turned back by protesters. No one is safe. Protesters have broken down doors, broken windows, Democrats are helping them into the building and they’re building momentum. They’re robo-calling like crazy, trying to pack as many people into the capitol so the Assembly can’t vote today. Right now there’s no way the Assembly can vote…we can’t secure the Assembly and we can’t protect our legislators. If the protesters fill up the capitol all the way, the governor would have to declare a state of emergency and hold a vote off site.”

    Stay tuned for more developments…

    UPDATE: Sources say: “Police control the lobby to the Assembly Chambers and they think they are in a position to take back control of the Assembly Chambers. However, right now all they control is the lobby.”

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @G-Man – do you think what the Republicans did was illegal?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Ray, I’m not familiar with their laws, so I really can’t say for sure. The same question could apply to the Dems running to Illinois. Ugly situation there, hope it stays peaceful. 🙂

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          Sorry G – was referring specifically to the end around pulled last night that may have violated their public meeting laws – GOP used a “move” to pass anti-union bill in WI.

          • Let’s cut to the chase so we know where YOU stand first.

            Was it legal or not Ray?

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              @Anita – I haven’t been able to find a reliable link to what their law actually is. I am inclined to say they at least did something unethical and possibly illegal.

              I’d just like to know how they all of a sudden decided the Union was NOT budget/financial related?

              What a bunch of scumbag liars.

              • In conjunction with the cuts in the budget, collective bargaining is a very real part of the process. In order for each level of government to deal with the cuts, they will have to make significant changes and that includes personnel who are part of public employee unions. If local governments cannot make any changes to benefits and pension of these employees, their hands are tied. The legislature removing CB negotiations just from these areas, gives local governments some leverage. I trust you get this part, right Ray?

                However, CB doesn’t have to be part of the budget itself. Walker initially included it as it is all tied in to our state’s poor financial condition. He could have separated them right from the get go. Dems opted to flee, 3 weeks of negotiations, left the Senate with no other alternative.

                The other thing that, at least as I understand it, you all are aware of the governor asking for concessions to contributions to health care coverage and pension coverage. Very modest. For the first few days, the unions fought these as well, but quickly conceded these. However, these are in the areas of CB with benefits and pensions, so if this CB change isn’t made, the unions would not have to honor those concessions as well. In other words, concessions to paying modest portions cannot happen without overall change to rules of CB. Again, this is my interpretation only, but I’ve read it on several sites that seem to be more factual than emotional.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @Kathy

                http://legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/wisconst.pdf

                In Article VIII, Section 8 on page 59….

                What I believe the GOP is arguing is that since they stripped all appropriations then the revised bill did not require a quorom.

                What may be at issue is the “release” or “discharge” clause and how that has been and could be interpreted.

                I may tend to lean with the GOP on this one.

                The meeting process beforehand I am less certain about.

              • Ray Hawkins says:
        • I think they only gave two hours notice, which may have been a violation of their rules, like Pelosi did multiple times. Not someone I would want to be compared to….

          Their action would be OK if they had given 24 hours notice.
          I suspect they are reacting to the mob’s actions.

      • Don’t know about illegal butI think that it was not an ethical move. But what the hell….the dems did it all the time. The midnight meetings, locking of doors, security keeping republicans out….etc.etc. NOw it has been done to them and they do not like it.

        That said….it is politics as usual and not pretty. But I kinda like it….I like it because it shows the infantile childish leadership that we have. The true leaders are running industry and mom and pop outfits….

        Politicians…..well….sub human beasts. ALL POLITICIANS.

        • You know, at what point do you let the mob rule? It’s hard to think ethical when 14 senators sit in Illinois. My hope is they did in fact follow every rule (meeting notice etc.). They were in caucus all day yesterday – I really don’t even know what that means – and called for a conference committee meeting at 6:00pm. That is when all hell started to break loose. Committee passed original (no modifications that Walker had been offering to fugitives), came back to Senate floor and was immediately passed.

          I would think that when you are in session, moving to this siutation with minimal notice happens all the time. If you are 2-1/2 hours aways and not attending and can’t respond, it’s a little hard to hear any talk of unethical.

          • Yes Kathy, however, the so called “new” republicans also ran for office on the issues that they hated from the Obama administration….there was no openess. Obama had a plank in his platform of openess of meetings…..you know the transparency issue. Do not get me wrong on this but I feel that a lot, if not all, of the republicans that were elected ran on the transparency issue that was not forthcoming from the Obama administration and it seems to me that they did exactly what they were elected NOT to do. Hurried up back room deals….etc.

            I do not know nor think that anything done was illegal. But 24 hours would not have hurt…in my opinion. If anything, it would have made the dems in Illinois look even more asinine…..and I do not think for a minute that any democratic Senator from Wisconsin was driving 80 MPS to get back to vote. This quick deal gives these idots in Illinois more fodder.

    • Re-Post:
      Awhile ago I posted, both here and on my blog, that any attempt to reduce government expenditures would lead to civil unrest.

      Since such reductions would necessarily be placed upon a specific group of citizens, that group would react very poorly to such reductions.

      This is important: this was not necessarily a reduction -but merely a threat of reduction- and the outcry has been massive.

      When reductions are mandated by economic reality, cities will burn

      • So what you’re saying is that the absolute last group of people to suffer cuts should be fire fighters?

        • I find myself angry today about everything but you managed to make me laugh. 🙂 🙂

        • Mathius,

          What I am saying is that there is not enough police, army or fireman to save you when the cuts really start coming.

          • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

            Sure there are. There are plenty of army/police/etc. Don’t forget that they are better armed/trained/equipped than the populace and generally better organized. If they want to put down a riot, and are willing to use any means necessary, they will put the riot down.

            But……

            “but we’re not sure what side our security is on.”

            That pretty much says it all, doesn’t it?

            The million dollar question is whether a full scale riot would be handled like the end of V for Vendetta or like Kent State.

            • DPM….in my opinion, there will be no riot. I do not believe that cities will burn…not over this. It is plain to see that these demonstrations are orchestrated and paid for. They are not the average person on the street.

              • Agreed. There will be no burning cities.

                Disagree. These demonstrations are truly indicative of the anger/fear/frustration of the people affected by this bill.

              • yeah right, and that is why Jesse Jackson is in Madison today. No outsiders here – just frustrated teachers!

              • Re Jackson: “I must find out where my people are going so that I can lead them.”

              • Matt, I would normally agree with you but it is obvious that most of the demonstrators are being bused in…..This is a state issue…no one else’s business.

  6. Just a quick note and then to work. Several years ago about the time the Iraq war started, I read the local major paper. After reading articles, I would edit out all the adjectives and adverbs and then reread. What a difference. They were universally slanted to the left. These were front page “news” stories. Try it.
    Also note that body counts are not front and center on the MSM anymore. The lead in to body counts was always “And X MORE Americans were killed today in the war.”

  7. Ray Hawkins says:

    @LOI – generally speaking – these “Top whatever” lists should fall into the “who gives a shit” category.

    But having said that…..

    I am a Newsweek subscriber – have been for 20 years now. But I subscribe to a lot of stuff…from National Geographic to the Nation to Playboy to 2600 to High Times and even recently, to the National Review. If I only read the things/people I agree with then I’d worry I’d become too narrow-minded.

    I’d probably classify the article criticism as silly. Its like groveling that the annual “Shocking!!! – Celebrity bikini shots” issue of the National Enquirer didn’t show enough cottage cheese hanging off Britney Spears’ ass. Oh the horror!

    Worried about Oprah not being on the list? Let’s see who her guests are this week:

    Monday – “Oprah and Gayle’s Big Yosemite Camping Adventure, Part 2”

    Tuesday – “Former President George Bush on his Most Difficult Decisions”

    Wednesday – “The Hottest Tickets on Earth, Plus Superstar Garth Brooks”

    Thursday – “A Two Day Oprah Show Event – 200 Men Who Were Molested Come Froward”

    Friday – “Money Powerhouse Suze Orman’s Intervention with Octomom Nadya Suleman”

    Now I’m sure someone here at SUFA may start channeling Alex Jones and chide me for not waking the hell up to the fact that there is a political conspiracy involved here (hell – with Bush, Brooks, Gayle, and Octomom – how the heck cannot there not be a conspiracy in the works?!?!?) – but I’m going to sit on the side of snarky skeptical and say……no thanks LOI, not seeing this one…….

    The net net is that the top 10 you listed tell me that aside from a comedian and a womanizer, a lot of people seem to flock to flock to misery and fear

    1. Hateful lying drug addict
    2. Hateful lying drug addict alcoholic conspiracy theorist
    3. Hateful muppet-headed Palin cheerleader
    4. Hateful lying fearmongerer
    5. Comedian
    6. Hateful empty-headed fearmongerer
    7. Hateful spiteful has-been
    8. Womanizing fence-jumper
    9. Fat headed narcissistic fearmongerer
    10. Gumby-esque cartoonish weasel

    • Ray,

      You seem a little irritable this AM. Little man keep you up last night? I agree, I’d rather look at Britney’s anything than Rush’s mug, anyday. But that was not where I was trying to go.

      Newsweek was sold for $1. I think their bias was a major factor.

      PS, you top ten has a lot of hate in there. Could we dial that down like Obama asked? The new respectful tone?LOL

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @LOI – toned down a little……

        Newsweek publishes some very interesting and informative stories as well as viewpoints that do run the gamut but do tend be more left weighted.

        There is nothing wrong with that so long as you recognize it.

        There is little “merit” in a top 50 anything story.

        That is usually fluff designed to move retail stock.

        It’d be like judging SI based on the quality of the swimsuit issue.

        I do think we’re not far off from the death of periodicals like this – news and information moves way too fast – so unless they change model or focus – they will find it hard to remain profitable.

        And that has little to do with bias.

  8. *Black Flag warning* based on post from “Zero Hedge”

    “…Based on still to be publicly reported data by Pimco’s flagship Total Return Fund, the world’s largest bond fund, in the month of January, has taken its bond holdings to zero ….
    …. The offset, not surprisingly, is cash. After sporting $28.6 billion in “government related” securities, TRF dropped to $0.0, while its cash holdings surged from $11.9 billion to a whopping $54.5 billion (based on total TRF holdings of $236.9 billion as of February 28). ……This is the most cash the flagship fund has ever held, and the lowest amount in Treasury holdings since January 2009

    Now the rest of the Zero Hedge post says this (in brief)

    (1) Gross has more insiders in the FED than anyone on Earth, therefore, “he knows what the FED will do”
    (2) Zero Hedge believes if Gross stops buying T-bill, this means the FED will stop buying T-Bills
    (3) Zero Hedge therefore says “depression and deflation is coming”, and thus sell your commodities and ..
    (4) “…Time to Panic!..”

    I do not agree with points (2) and (3).

    Bill Gross’s and his staff economists are Keynesian.

    Keynesian are very confused over themselves to what causes inflation. Ask two Keynesian what causes inflation and you will get four, contradictory, answers.

    But Keynesians are quite clear to themselves about what causes deflation.

    A Keynesian thinks that government bonds will do well in a deflationary depression. But, so do all economists, including Austrians.

    So, anyone who thinks that recession or depression is ahead would buy T-bonds. Lock in a high yield. Yields will fall. Bond prices will rise.

    So when Keynesian Gross is selling T-Bills, he is not thinking depression – he is thinking something else.

    I think he thinks that QE3 is scary.
    I think he thinks the FED will not stop inflating.
    I think he is getting out while the getting now, while bonds have some value, because I think he thinks the rates in T-bonds will go up, and therefore collapse bond prices.

    So do I.

    So I conclude the opposite of Zero Hedge.

    I also know Zero Hedge has always been violently scared of deflation, and sees deflation around every economic corner.

    I think that Gross thinks that more inflation is coming.
    I think he does not know what will survive best in inflation – he is Keynesian and therefore gold is not an option. Not much else out there for him to put $25 billion into other than stocks – and in an unproductive economy, who is he going to bet on?

    So he is on the defensive. I think he is thinking that no profit is better than big losses.

    If Gross is right, so is Zero Hedge on item (4). It’s almost time to panic .

    (posted in wrong thread previously)

  9. @ Ray….how is the little feller today?

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      He is good D13. He’s been looking for his “mow mow” everyday which is tough (we put our last cat down Monday night – she was around 20 years old). Little guy loved her “meow meow” greeting he got everyday when he got home.

      • Whoa….sorry to hear that. 20 years old….sounds like a Siamese….hope the little guy gets over it quick.

  10. Mathius

    they will put the riot down

    You forget LA.

    You forget this ….

    • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      I don’t forget LA. I lived through the riots. I remember.

      But the police didn’t do everything in their power. The army didn’t bomb the protesters.

      The government knew that they would win eventually and that the protests would simmer down, so why take the gloves off?

      Given a serious and large scale conflict which the authorities feared they could not control, or which threatened their positions of power, there are many other things they could have done.

      But as I said.. that’s assuming that military would side with the government against the people.. and that’s not necessarily a given.

  11. Charlie,

    Here we go again … assumptions rule supreme.

    I agree.

    You assume labor is not an economic good but “something else you have yet to define”

    I assume labor is an economic good no different than any other economic good, and obeys exactly the same laws of economics.

    Assuming (since you depend on it), there weren’t any million dollar jobs and everybody in that role was paid $75,000, I’m betting they’d do it still.

    First question, why do irrationally assign only $75,000 to the role? Why not $100,000 – why not $15,000 – why not $1??

    How do you think you can pick a number out of the air, subjectively say “This is what this is worth!” and assume that everyone thinks the same as you

    Today, the people in the job think they are worth what they are paid – if they did not think this, they would be working at a lower numberwhich is why -as posted- there are large differences between the salary of these talking heads.

    Thus, they would not necessarily accept something less no matter how much you would!!.

    And that’s the thing: you continue to evaluate the lives of others and their choices to be wrong, and yours to be right – the ego-centric world view – that you know what is the “amount” of what everyone else should get

    Re: Paid because “they know people and are connected”

    Exactly! As I said before, I do not deal with you because you are untrusted – and therefore, you believe you can steal money from those I trust because you don’t think it is “fair”

  12. You assume labor is not an economic good but “something else you have yet to define”

    I assume labor is an economic good no different than any other economic good, and obeys exactly the same laws of economics.

    If we both assume … what’s the difference since it cannot be proven? Why should labor be a subpar commodity? It is subpar in your view because it is convenient for your capitalist mentality. In my view it is nothing more or less than what it is and thus should be treated equally across the board. No one laborer treated more unfairly than the next.

    First question, why do irrationally assign only $75,000 to the role? Why not $100,000 – why not $15,000 – why not $1??

    It was a hypothetical … surely you remember Mr. Stella’s Widget Company? $1 works just as well so long as there aren’t those who are earning $1,000 and the cost of living can be handled for, say, $.50 cents.

    How do you think you can pick a number out of the air, subjectively say “This is what this is worth!” and assume that everyone thinks the same as you

    How do you subjectively say $2.4 million an hour is okay and assume that everyone else thinks the same as you?

    Today, the people in the job think they are worth what they are paid – if they did not think this, they would be working at a lower number – which is why -as posted- there are large differences between the salary of these talking heads.

    No, they probably think they’re worth more … but that has to do with the disparity in a very unfair marketplace that allows few to become rich at the expense of many.

    And that’s the thing: you continue to evaluate the lives of others and their choices to be wrong, and yours to be right – the ego-centric world view – that you know what is the “amount” of what everyone else should get

    And that’s the thing you continue to evaluate … their choices to be wrong and yours to be right — the ego-centric world view- that you know what is fair and just vs. what is completely unjust and immoral.

    As I said before, I do not deal with you because you are untrusted – and therefore, you believe you can steal money from those I trust because you don’t think it is “fair”

    They have already stolen from those I trust (the vast majority, by the way) … which is why sooner or later (probably not in our lifetime but sooner or later), you’ll be giving up some coin for the greater good. It is immoral and unjust and unfair and evil for the few to prosper (unfairly) at the expense of the many. There’s just no way to justify it, BF. Impossible (with a French accent for Gman).

  13. Charlie,

    If we both assume … what’s the difference since it cannot be proven?

    Mine is proven from first principles of economics whereas you have yet to even define yours whatsoever.

    Further, I can explain the economics of labor within the world of reality – that is, I can say “If you do this with labor, this will happen”, and when you do that with labor, and what I say will happen actually happens, it is an indication my theory is correct.

    You cannot.

    Why should labor be a subpar commodity?

    It is not “subpar”!

    I said “no different

    In my view it is nothing more or less than what it is and thus should be treated equally across the board. No one laborer treated more unfairly than the next.

    So please explain why you believe a person digging a hole in the ocean is doing the same value of labor as a person building your house?

  14. Charlie,

    It was a hypothetical … surely you remember Mr. Stella’s Widget Company? $1 works just as well so long as there aren’t those who are earning $1,000 and the cost of living can be handled for, say, $.50 cents.

    That is not what I asked.

    I asked how do YOU -CHARLIE- know what is the right amount?

    What is your measure?
    You do you know your measure is correct?
    Why is your measure better than my measure?

    • BF: Mine is proven from first principles of economics whereas you have yet to even define yours whatsoever.

      The principles of Economics is nothing more than a man made hypothesis. Marx (red through and through, remember) had his too.

      BF: Further, I can explain the economics of labor within the world of reality – that is, I can say “If you do this with labor, this will happen”, and when you do that with labor, and what I say will happen actually happens, it is an indication my theory is correct.

      BF: You cannot.

      Except here are societies abroad that work quite contrary to your theory. You can’t admit that because it then puts your economic theory in the same vulnerable place as others (and can be assaulted from any angle).

      BF: I said “no different”

      Except you want to treat it very differently (see next)

      BF: So please explain why you believe a person digging a hole in the ocean is doing the same value of labor as a person building your house?

      Because if the hole in the ocean will yield something (I’m assuming here you’re not being facetious), oil, say, and the person building my house is yielding something … as is the poor SOB sweeping the floors of some school midnights, they are all contributing to the greater good and should be rewarded equally. Why shouldn’t they? Why should a CEO whose most likely made his place in the world with immense unfair advantages and on the backs of others be rewarded any different than those he used to get there?

    • This is another big area of disagreement between us, I guess. I’d prefer a more democratic approach to perform the actualy measuring (of value, etc.); let democracy handle it. You are terrified of the mob. So it goes.

  15. Charlie,

    How do you subjectively say $2.4 million an hour is okay and assume that everyone else thinks the same as you?

    I have never said it was “ok”, just like I never said it was “not ok”

    IT IS NOT MY MONEY OR MY BUSINESS TO EVEN CARE ABOUT THE QUESTION

    And that’s the point.

    You want to get into everyone else’s wallet – you want to involve yourself where you have no right to be.

    You want to invade other people’s lives – and infect them with what you think is right for them.

    That is why you promote evil.

    • BF: I have never said it was “ok”, just like I never said it was “not ok”

      Actually, you said it yesterday or the day before I think (that you were fine with it) and even had some fun with Gman about it. (it being a beautiful planet, etc.)

      But once again, your memory is remarkably convenient …

      You want to get into everyone else’s wallet – you want to involve yourself where you have no right to be.

      What I want is equitable distribution for the greater good. If that requires the unfairly enriched dynamite open their wallets, then so it goes. You can call it evil all you want. I call it righteous.

      Gotta get some other writing done for now … more later (i’m sure)

  16. Mathius, D13:

    There will be no burning cities

    I hope you are right.

    But I know you will be wrong.

    You ignore the evidence already occurring – from Greece, France, Germany, North Africa …. and you believe, for reasons that are irrational, that the American people will act “differently” then the rest of the People of the world.

    • and you believe, for reasons that are irrational

      Oh, lordie … you’re in for it now …

    • I believe that the economy will turn around today, tomorrow, next week, next year, or next decade. But it will turn around.

      We made it through the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, we’ll make it through this.

      Will there be minor riots? Could be.

      Will there be civil unrest, strife, and minor violent outbreaks? Could be.

      Will we see wholesale chaos and a civilian uprising a la Egypt, Libya, Yemen? Unlikely.

      Things are bad, but they’ve been worse. My great aunt survived a whole year on bread and ketchup during the great depression. She wasn’t happy about it and she lost teeth due to malnutrition, but she never had the urge to throw a Molotov at a government building.

      We will make it through this because we have before. We may have to trim the fat, tighten our belts, and learn how to make due without a new plasma TV. Not every 16 year old will get a car on his birthday. People will take on boarders in order to pay the mortgage. We have become soft and weak in our prosperity – we have become entitled – we think that these luxuries are necessities – and that is the source of our pain. It is the difficulty in readjusting downward to a lower standard of living.

      It sucks, but America, even in recession and decline is a wealthy and powerful nation. We have a long, long way to fall before we burn our cities in a fit of unfocused rage.

      • Mathius,

        I believe that the economy will turn around today, tomorrow, next week, next year, or next decade. But it will turn around.

        I agree, but that is not the question.

        I believe you will get food in 60 days. But if you do not get food in the next 30 days, you will die – and it does not matter if the food comes the day after that….

        Human race progresses. It appears this is the defining theory you hold – but allow me to tell you this: that is self-evident and “nothing new here”

        What is important to understand is Cause/Effect; Action/Consequences.

        To say that “Well, after the crap hits, we’ll smarten up and do better things” is rather base, not?

        What is important is to learn from the past, and project into the future – why? To prepare

        • I’m looking at the past. Things were worse there than they are now. Things did not fall (completely) apart then, therefore they are not likely to fall (completely) apart now.

          • True. Things will not fall completely apart. People will, however, have to do some of the things that people back then did. Also, people had more legal right to their own stuff than they do now, and more freedom of action. Even so, many who went through worse times, like the Great Depression of the 30s, went hungry a LOT. And people helped each other rather than looking to government.

            If things go bad like they were, we will not fall apart, but we will change.

            • Very true. And, not that I would want to go through that, but I’m not convinced such a change would be a bad thing.

          • Mathius,

            Things were worse there than they are now

            You jest!!

            No time in all history has such an economic problem existed.

            The last time is was nearly this bad caused the collapse of the Roman Empire and the subsequent Dark Ages that stagnanted mankind for 1,000 years.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Mathius,

        Don’t compare The Great Depression era to what we are now. In the GD era, 90% of the people were living in rural areas and could be somewhat self sufficient. Today, 95% of the people live in urban areas, they are not self sufficient. When the food in unaffordable to the 95%, what do you think will happen?

        • An excellent point.

          Food today is a fraction of the cost it was prior to the great depression. Advancements in agriculture and distribution have seen to that. To rise to prices which would actually cause hunger to be a serious problem in America would take a lot of movement – far, far more than what’s going on right now.

          I don’t really have time to the dig up statistics, but I’m sure you can if you want.

          Still, a great point, and something worth watching.

          I’ll worry about it when when I can’t buy a 1,000 calorie cheeseburger for a buck at McDonald’s and when less than “63.1% of adults in the U.S. [are] either overweight or obese.” <a href="http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20100210/percentage-of-overweight-obese-americans-swells"Link.

          And, for reference, “6 percent are underweight (BMI less than 18.5).”

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Matt, As of aroud Feb 14th:

            So far in 2010, the following farm commodities have already skyrocketed at an unprecedented pace.

            – Wheat is up 84 per cent.
            – Corn is up 63 per cent.
            – Sugar is up 55 per cent.
            – Soybeans are up 24 per cent.

            http://gmanfortruth.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/food-prices-when-are-they-too-high/

            • Yes, they are way up.. but they were way, way down before.

              In 1935, a doz eggs were 0.18 (2.97 inflation adj). In 2010, they were 1.19.

              Sugar, 25lb sack: 20.61 (1.25) vs 15.60

              Bacon, 1lb: 6.26 (0.38) vs 3.44

              Some prices are higher now (white bread: 1.32 (.08) vs 2.99), many others are lower.

              From what I can see, most prices are substantially lower now than they were (adjusted, of course, for inflation) during the G.D.

              But again, I’m going to start worrying about food prices when less than 2/3rds of Americans are overweight.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Matt, medically speaking, overweight people will starve and die in the same time that non-obese people will. Fat does not provide energy, it cause one to expend it faster.

              • “Furthermore, fat helps store calories for when the body needs them later. This is part of the body’s natural survival mechanism that would help anyone through a time when food is scarce or when for medical reasons a fast may be necessary.”Link

                But the fatties are screwed if foot prices rise too much. Think Soylent Green.

              • I responded to you, but I guess SUFA just decided not to post it.. oh well.

                Fat is a store of calories. If you are not starving, but rather just going hungry (as is more likely the case), your body will use fat reserves to make up the difference. It is, of course more complicated than that, however.

                That said, if push comes to shove, I say we eat the fatties first, then there will be plenty of food for the rest of us.

          • You used to be able to get the all American meal..burger, fries, and a coke for under a dollar. Now you get the burger for a dollar.

      • Common Man says:

        Matt;

        I’m not sure I can buy your logic. I’m not saying there will be rioting, but there is a much greater chance of rioting in today’s day and age than there was during the depression years. That is because a greater majority are better informed, and far less likely to believe what comes out of the mouths of government officials.

        I think people will take more action if things continue to get worse. Rioting is not unlikely, especially since it is and has been a historic event.

        • Could be. I can’t really say.

          All I can do is look at the precedent and see that there was no real rioting (that I know of, anyway) during the G.D., and that things were far worse back then.

          I tend to think that Americans are generally a pretty tough breed and that, once we shed this attitude that we’re entitled to lives of luxury, we’ll get back in the game and be just fine.

          Who knows, this could wind up being just what the doctor ordered for our national personality.

          • Overall, I do agree with your less panicky stance on this stuff Matt. Things might get really bad. So what? Survival is not as hard as people make it out to be. It is not the danger to life that most fear, but the danger to lifestyle, the need to actually change from your comfort zone.

            I heed the warnings of people like BF because they are accurate. I do not, however, react with fear and panic, as those are always a bad idea. I do not agree with overstating the extrmety of danger. If the danger really comes, it will awaken people just fine without the doomsday speeches. If it does not come, then the people who prepared and educated those around them will be thought no less of if they did not exagerate. If they did, then their credibility is damaged, and people will sleep even deeper, making them ever harder to awaken. It think a lot of the lethargy of America is not from just being comfortable, but from being lied to about haw bad things are or could be. Never cry wolf.

            • Well, one group is crying wolf (“Cities are going to burn! There will be riots in the street!”), and another is crying sunshine and puppy dogs (“The recession is over! Hurray!”).

              You and I sit in the middle with our pragmatic stances, but who hears us over the din?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                You are at least aware that problems may occur. Most people have no clue. As you like to say, it’s better to err on the side of caution.

              • We hear each other. That is enough for now. Others will see the quiet and come listen more closely. Most do not care for the noise anyway.

                The calmness will resonate more than all the noise in the world

            • LOI,

              There is typically in any culturally advanced population that what happens “elsewhere” cannot happen “here”.

              Germany was the most culturally advanced society in Europe in 1910. 30 years later, they had death camps.

              Much of failure of perceiving the risk is caught up in this “nah, can’t happen here” mentality.

              But the test is simple:
              Is the problem (in this case economic) viewed with objective reality? Or is the problem ignored or whitewashed with the view “nah, SOMEHOW it will be ok”.

              If the response DOES NOT PROVIDE a rational, reasoned attempt at a SOLUTION, and in its place, you have merely platitudes, you have a serious problem of perception.

              Problems of perception typically lead to falling off a cliff.

              • Flagster,

                “There is typically in any culturally advanced population that what happens “elsewhere” cannot happen “here”.”

                Entirely correct. People and the media deny reality. It’s not perception, they don’t like the answer, so will come up with a reason to not believe. Look at historic examples and compare. Do they indicate how serious our situation is? The fall of Rome & Great Depression should teach us lessons on what to avoid.

                “Problems of perception typically lead to falling off a cliff.”
                Yep, so many think we are/were on an enlightened path…

    • I don’t think that I am being naive but time will tell. I hope that I am correct also.

    • Having seen what I’ve seen, heard and written from WI these past 3-1/2 weeks I would believe anything now. Mob mentality rules and what this governor is doing is minor, both monetarily and policy wise, so if more if taken away and food prices continue to rise? I do believe cities will burn.

      • Mob mentality…. I would believe anything now….cities will burn:

        Agree

      • No Kathy…cities will not burn. I am convinced of this….and let me explain by burning cities…..I do not consider the Watts Riots or the Rodney King issue as an example of burning cities…

        I do not consider bused in demonstrators defacing the Capitol and smashing windows as rioting and burning cities. I define burning cities as being totally devasted….not selective neighborhoods or blighted areas.

        • I’ll agree with this too…but I do think the mob mentality will be evident in the streets. For example…our city just turned down a millage for the second time in one year…Today in front of our local grocery store (small spartan store) there are ~15 people outside picketing about city services being cut.. Small scale I know but as more people get cut the crowds will grow.

  17. Canine Weapon says:
    • Ahhh….Canine Weapon is spry today….take a steak out of petty cash..tell USW to make it a T Bone.

  18. Charlie,

    The principles of Economics is nothing more than a man made hypothesis. Marx (red through and through, remember) had his too.

    This is true, but that can be said of any science.

    Marx hypothesis have been shown to be wrong. He predicted economic outcomes that did not occur, even in his own time.

    As happens often, unfortunately, it doesn’t stop crackpots from trying his hypothesis anyway.

    Except here are societies abroad that work quite contrary to your theory.

    No, they do not.

    What you are confused about – and it is a common confusion – is the difference between understanding cause/effect and a wish that all effects are good.

    You measure economic theory under the belief that it should effect good outcomes only – that is, under your theory, no matter what you do, the outcome must be a good thing.

    But that is a simplistic, superficial concept.

    Economic theory simply says :”If you do this, this will happen” and it does not judge whether that outcome is a good or bad, since good and bad are wholly subject to an individual and cannot be judged objectively.

    But that confounds your ego-centric world view: that is, if it is not “good for you”, the theory that made it a “bad for you” must be wrong!

    So you trip and fall and continue to make poor decisions, because you cannot ascertain cause/effect properly.

    You can’t admit that because it then puts your economic theory in the same vulnerable place as others (and can be assaulted from any angle).

    I have nothing to admit. Economic cause and effect follows economic law. Whether that outcome is “good” or “bad” is your subjective value.

    How I judge your economic cause/effect is simple:
    If you say “I want this”, and then act in a manner that actually causes the opposite of what you want, I will say your action is “in error” – not because I am judging what you wanted is right or wrong – but because your actions put you opposite of your stated aim.

    If you want A, work to get A, and end up with opposite of A, something is wrong, Charlie.

    That is why your economic ‘theories’ are wrong.

    Because if the hole in the ocean will yield something (I’m assuming here you’re not being facetious), oil, say, and the person building my house is yielding something … as is the poor SOB sweeping the floors of some school midnights, they are all contributing to the greater good and should be rewarded equally.

    When I say “digging in the ocean” I mean digging a whole in the water.

    But as you proclaim, you are judging value – you would not pay anyone to dig a hole in water, yet you would pay someone for their oil.

    You are making value judgments based on your wants – and that is human.

    What you error is you believe YOUR value judgments are Universal to all humans.

    Why shouldn’t they?

    Because I value some things more than I value other things.

    So I will make My own choices based on those values and get what I want – which might not be the same as yours.

    So you may value a clean floor than gas in your car – maybe because you don’t own a car! So a gallon of fuel to you is worthless, but a clean floor is godly!

    To me, it may be the other way around.

    So you buy your clean floor with your money and I buy my gas for my care with my money and both of us get what we want.

  19. gmanfortruth says:
  20. Charlie,

    PS: Thank you for responding “intellectually honestly”.

    prefer a more democratic approach to perform the actualy measuring

    I would ask:
    “How can a group of people evaluate the subjective value any better than a single person?

    Are you saying that if 1,000 people believe water from the Hudson is worth $1 million a gallon, they are right?

    • BF: I would ask:
      “How can a group of people evaluate the subjective value any better than a single person?

      Are you saying that if 1,000 people believe water from the Hudson is worth $1 million a gallon, they are right?

      CS: You would have to accept the formula to achieve the measurement is not as nebulous as you postulate. Or maybe it’s inflation 🙂 [that was a joke]

      But that would still leave you unfree (or voiceless) against the majority (I agree). Those are the breaks. I am assuming that man can think in terms of mutual benefit as opposed to the chaos that would reign supreme in a world without governmental(s)/rules/laws/regulations.

      And mind you, I never said it would be perfect or that all that would come from it is good. That is not what I said at all. What I said was it would be more fair than it is today (which is immoral and evil).

  21. An interesting side article somewhat related…

    Huffpo and AOL…..which are heartily supported on SUFA and elsewhere………seems that they just did the “right” thing. They just laid off 20% of their workforce….upon the merger. One hundred of them from India (gee, another “right” thing)…so it seems as if Huffpo can join the 50….say one thing, do another.

  22. gmanfortruth says:

    @Black Flag,

    BF, Most commodities have been going down since noon Monday. I have heard that it was because of short selling to drive prices down. The anticipation is that on Friday, when Saudi has their day of rage, their betting that commodities will shoot up drastically. Sell early, drive prices down, buy at lower cost, watch the expolosion of prices due to Suadi. Any thoughts?

    • Gman,

      Commodities are traded daily between speculators – some betting high, others betting low.

      Unless you love to gamble, this is a game only for those that have no heart beat.

      Stick with the fundamentals – they dominate over the long term.

      An increase in the money supply will cause inflation.
      An increase in the money supply of the world’s currency will cause global inflation.

      Day to day ups and downs, including regional disturbances, do not impact these fundamentals. For example, the price of oil going up has little to do with inflation, but lots to do with supply uncertainty.

      Do not place long term bets on short term uncertainty. Make long term bets on fundamentals.

  23. Why is everything in italics today?

    Also, does anyone have any objections to my hiring individuals that may not be in the country legally?

    • Buck the Wala says:

      Not if you pay them a subjectively fair wage.

      • Great.

        Followup question: do you have any objection to my paying in cash with a strong suspicion that they will never report the money to the IRS?

      • Buck? My counselor friend? Is it really you?

        • Buck the Wala says:

          Yes, it is me!

          Haven’t been able to join the fray the past few days – coming back from a vacation often means piles and piles of work to catch up on. Been reading along here and there though.

          How are things your way?

          • Warming up significantly…we are in that time of weather…you know 70 during the day 35-45 at night….back to 70….

            Losing government money because we won’t use bean bags and rubber bullets…you know…the usual.

            Getting ready for Spring break on the border which will be violent…lots of security, meetings, etc planning for the onslaught of kids that need to stay away from Mexico…but you cannot beat stupid….in college kids that are not afraid of anything.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Gotta love spring break! Lots of drunken stupid fun. I can think of a few places I’d rather head than the border though…

              • Oh yeah….I remember some of the spring break and being stupid…..I failed to realize in my college years that I could drink all the beer there was….I was wrong of course but I did put a dent in it….but still did stupid things.

    • Yes…hire a legal immigrant…they will work just as cheaply…

    • Mathius,

      Buck’s answers – though violently less articulate then my typical 42 page post – are fundamentally correct!

      What happened to Buck? He drank too much salt water floating in the ocean waiting for rescue???

      • Buck the Wala says:

        Wow, BF says my answers, and I quote, “are fundamentally correct!”

        I’m quitting SUFA while ahead! Wasn’t the salt water, I can float for hours on end. Must have been the grog.

    • Mathius

      YES, I have a problem with that.

      But do you really care?

  24. Geez…….all day long and I just realized that I did not sign in….hoo boy….need another Dr Pepper.

  25. Charlie,

    Actually, you said it yesterday or the day before I think (that you were fine with it) and even had some fun with Gman about it. (it being a beautiful planet, etc.)

    Here is the thread:
    Charlie: You don’t see the inequity in $2.4 million per hours vs. 32K a year so that makes it an “agreement” to work.

    BF: Nope.

    In your system, though I am a far better poker player than you, and win all your money – you demand that I have to give it back “so that we are equal”.

    To you this is fair.

    I DO NOT CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLE’S WALLETS

    But once again, your memory is remarkably convenient …

    My memory is “pristine” – (actual quote from my “brain” doctor)

    What I want is equitable distribution for the greater good.

    based on YOUR view what is equal.

    You acknowledge equal work – but cannot value all the work, for you know some “work” is more valuable then other work.

    So YOU – that is Charlie – has decided that Charlie and his cohorts will decide what is valuable and what is not … FOR EVERYONE ELSE.

  26. Mathius,

    All I can do is look at the precedent and see that there was no real rioting (that I know of, anyway) during the G.D., and that things were far worse back then.

    Again, you error here.

    We are not in the 1930’s.

    90% of the population was rural – could live off the land.

    Today, 90% is urban, and living off the land via barter is not an option.

    In 1930, the Federal government was a distant, rarely, involved entity.

    Today, it has direct influence over more than half your life.

    In 1930, less than 15% of the people had any dependency on government money

    Today, 1/3 of the people depend on government money.

    To assume that because the Great Depression “did this”, therefore, “this is what we will experience” is superficial.

    There are fundamental, systemic, differences</b.

    • Yes, for example, we have better farming techniques and superior infrastructure now. We also have ways to preserve food so that it doesn’t spoil as quickly.

      Or should we only consider the things that support your theories?

      • Mathius,

        So, let’s see what you are arguing here.

        Superior infrastructure – completely dependent on a high division of labor economy will survive the collapse of the high division of labor economy.

        The modern economy exists on a “Just in Time” inventory.

        The gasoline stocks in America are about as large as the inventory at the gas stations themselves

        You know this because when Katrina hit, and shutdown the refineries in Texas and the Gulf Coast States, gas prices went way up, and shortages extended across all of North America.

        But, so untypical my young adversary, your reviews have been brutally short-sighted and poor researched lately…what’s up??

        • Mathius

          The entire nations toilet paper supply is less than 30 days.

          It used to be 2.5 weeks but not sure exact number today.

          🙂 🙂

          • WHAT????? Now I better get out and get another 24 pack! Glad I don’t have a bunch of daughters in the house! 🙂

          • I buy in bulk at costco.. I could go a year.

            But then again, Birdman might be in trouble. He has over 100 toilets in his house..

  27. Mathius,

    most prices are substantially lower now than they were (adjusted, of course, for inflation) during the G.D.

    Of course they were. A depression/deflation causes prices to go down.

    But that is not the warning.

    The warning is:
    Massive Inflation

  28. There was the thread … and you’ve rationally changed the idea that “Nope” doesn’t equate to being “okay” with it (someone earning 2.4 million an hour).

    Pristine, huh?

    BF: So YOU – that is Charlie – has decided that Charlie and his cohorts will decide what is valuable and what is not … FOR EVERYONE ELSE.

    So long as the cohorts are the majority, sure. I likeee that idea.

    You keep forgetting the Cohorts when you bold this: based on YOUR view what is equal.

    No, my cohorts too … weeeeeeeee

  29. Charlie,

    You would have to accept the formula to achieve the measurement is not as nebulous as you postulate.

    In 10,000 years of civilization, the smartest men in history have yet to be able to determine how to measure the subjective value of other men.

    I would posit such an ability is impossible.

    You do not know my wants.
    I do not know your wants.

    You therefore have no idea what I value, nor I of you. We can guess, but it will always be a guess, and never objective

    However, this has never stopped TYRANTS from believing they can value things for other people.

    Those are the breaks.

    Yes, victims are victims because they cannot resist evil of others.

    But accepting victim-hood makes one a slave.

    I am assuming that man can think in terms of mutual benefit as opposed to the chaos that would reign supreme in a world without governmental(s)/rules/laws/regulations.

    Why do you believe that a man does not understand “mutual benefit” unless it is FORCED upon him?

    You do not know that trading your goods you have in excess for goods you do not have is a benefit????? You need someone else to FORCE you to do this?????

    And mind you, I never said it would be perfect or that all that would come from it is good.

    Never said it had to be – I simply said that was your measure – you have always measured economics on the theory all decisions must have NO NEGATIVE consequences.

    If a person does not work, you want to pay them.
    If a person is evil, you force me to deal with them.
    If a person is lazy, you force me to feed them.

    You do not want any consequences that are negative be delivered upon people.

    You want to transfer their suffering to other innocent people

    That is not what I said at all. What I said was it would be more fair than it is today (which is immoral and evil).

    But you cannot define “fair” beyond yourself. What you think is fair is not necessarily fair to anyone else.

    But you do not care. What you think is fair is the Universal “fair” for everyone.

  30. Mathius,

    Salaries frequently lag inflation. They’ll catch up. Just try to make ends meet until they do.

    Again you suggest to others that they merely have to survive not eating for 60 days, then food will be available.

    You err, again!

    Salaries do not necessarily catch up. Price and wage controls will prevent this, as happened in the Great Depression/WW2.

    They had 90% taxation, wage controls, price controls, rationing and massive shortages – along with massive death and destruction.

    To suggest that a strategy is “well, just hang on” is rather perverse suggestion, sorta, childish.

  31. Mathius,

    Food today is a fraction of the cost it was prior to the great depression.

    Gawd! What happened? You hit your head?

    This has little to do with price and monetary inflation and lots to do with the high division of labor of a modern economy.

    But roughly, let’s test your analysis.

    Dozen Eggs 18 Cents Ohio 1932 = $2.29 in 2009$
    Country Hen eggs, $4.99 – Safeway, LA, California.

    Opps, you’re wrong.

    Bananas 19 cents for 4 Pounds Ohio 1932 = $1.52 in 2009$
    5.98 per kilogram or 2.92 per pound or $9.58 for 4 lbs

    Wrong again.

    Bacon, 38 cents per pound New Jersey $= 4.72 in 2009$
    Farmland Bacon $3.70

    OOoo…. bacon is cheaper!! Yippee! (roll eyes)

    Your contention is wholly in error, sir.

    I’ll worry about it when when I can’t buy a 1,000 calorie cheeseburger for a buck at McDonald’s and when less than “63.1% of adults in the U.S. [are] either overweight or obese.” <a href="http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20100210/percentage-of-overweight-obese-americans-swells"Link.

    And, for reference, “6 percent are underweight (BMI less than 18.5).”

    So, let me get this straight.

    You are advocating massive starvation because you believe some statistical average has many people over weight….. blink…blink…

  32. The bill just passed the Assembly! (Since it was split, it had to go back and be passed again by them).

    Now everyone can get the hell out of WI!

    • Buck the Wala says:

      Do you really think everyone is just going to shrug their shoulders and leave now?

      Gonna be interesting to see what happens over the next few days/weeks/months. I’ve read numerous reports about possible recalls.

      • BUCK

        Yep, the national unions and progressive groups are funding and sending people to Wisconsin to help run the recall petitions.

        Strange form of “democracy” you lefties support. Majority rule unless I don’t like the result.

        • Buck the Wala says:

          So you don’t support a democratically provided for process to remove a serving politician?

          If the majority decide they no longer like an elected official, just because that individual had been previously been elected by a majority, then too bad?

          • Buck

            I might consider supporting the effort IF it were entirely run by people within the state involved.

            This thing is being driven by forces outside the state. Without the money and “volunteers”, without the media purchases, just how far would this go if it were only a Wisconsin effort?

            This is typical hypocrisy of the left. I know it, you know it and I only hope most Americans will eventually understand it.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Sorry but I don’t see this as hypocrisy of any sort. Regardless of any funding from outside of the state it can only happen if a majority of people within the state agree and vote for it.

              In what way is this hypocrisy?

              • I agree…not hypocrisy…..but unethical to meddle in State affairs that is not your state..unethical for White HOuse busing….

              • Buck

                Who have the demonstrators, union rabble, organizers, bussed in demonstrators and the entire left wing media animal been blaming for “interfering in Wisconsin’s business”.

                Who has bee accused of trying to “buy off the Wisconsin Gov and legislature?”

                Who has been told in thousands of blogs, commentaries and on signs to get the hell out of Wisconsin?

                Does the name Koch ring a bell?

                They are freaking hypocrites.

              • D13thecolonel,
                Can you explain how “it is plain to see that these demonstrations are orchestrated and paid for. They are not the average person on the street?”

                And “it is obvious that most of the demonstrators are being bused in?”

                And “unethical for White HOuse busing?”

              • JAC,
                Do you feel the same way about money and influence from the right flowing into Wisconsin?

    • Kathy

      Whats the matter? Gettin a little crowded.

      🙂

    • Kathy,
      Feel free to lead the way! 😉

      • Todd

        Was just wondering how you still feel about how words can motivate people to violence?

        Still think it should be condemned?

        Do you think we should do something to get all the left wing talking heads, like M. Moore to shut the hell up?

        Or should we just celebrate the exercising of our “Democracy”?

        • Hi JAC, this may get uglier …

          http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=182012

          The following is reproduced as an alleged copy that was sent to Republican Senators in Wisconsin:

          Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your familes will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks. Please explain to them that this is because if we get rid of you and your families then it will save the rights of 300,000 people and also be able to close the deficit that you have created. I hope you have a good time in hell. Read below for more information on possible scenarios in which you will die.

          WE want to make this perfectly clear. Because of your actions today and in the past couple of weeks I and the group of people that are working with me have decided that we’ve had enough. We feel that you and the people that support the dictator have to die. We have tried many other ways of dealing with your corruption but you have taken things too far and we will not stand for it any longer. So, this is how it’s going to happen: I as well as many others know where you and your family live, it’s a matter of public records. We have all planned to assult you by arriving at your house and putting a nice little bullet in your head. However, we decided that we wouldn’t leave it there. We also have decided that this may not be enough to send the message to you since you are so “high” on Koch and have decided that you are now going to single handedly make this a dictatorship instead of a demorcratic process. So we have also built several bombs that we have placed in various locations around the areas in which we know that you frequent. This includes, your house, your car, the state capitol, and well I won’t tell you all of them because that’s just no fun. Since we know that you are not smart enough to figure out why this is happening to you we have decided to make it perfectly clear to you. If you and your goonies feel that it’s necessary to strip the rights of 300,000 people and ruin their lives, making them unable to feed, clothe, and provide the necessities to their families and themselves then We Will “get rid of” (in which I mean kill) you. Please understand that this does not include the heroic Rep. Senator that risked everything to go aganist what you and your goonies wanted him to do. We feel that it’s worth our lives to do this, because we would be saving the lives of 300,000 people. Please make your peace with God as soon as possible and say goodbye to your loved ones we will not wait any longer. YOU WILL DIE!!!!

          Please note that this is a alleged DIRECT COPY of the email allegedly received by the Republican Senators and which was reported as news. Since it is not the original work of the reporting entity, and is a matter of STRONG PUBLIC INTEREST, I am reproducing it here in its entirety.

          Again: Where are the arrests of these terrorists? This is a direct and specific threat to commit murder through the unlawful use of firearms and explosives.

          Ps: It would appear, from the general structure and content of the above prose, that the writer was “educated” in a unionized-teacher public “school.”

          all the best — c

          • When will the president come out with a civility talk? waiting….waiting….waiting….waiting……waiting…..

          • What the HELL!!!! ???? People are losing their minds..Those prima donnas won’t be able to feed and clothe their families? They have no clue how to live in a non-entitled environment. Somebody better hurry up and get to the source of this letter or all hell really will break out.

        • JAC,
          I have always stated I’m against violence or threats of violence from anyone on either side.

          I find it interesting that most of those on the “right” here make up excuses that comments and/or actions of those on the right are not threats of violence, and do not condemn the potential for violence. But you demand that I condemn the same type of comments from the left.

          • Todd

            You have it twisted once again.

            I ask nothing of you but consistency.

            It was you that took on the right over “inflammatory” speech but I haven’t heard peep from you with all the “inflammatory” speech put out by the left on this Wisconsin issue.

            So that along with your few barbs thrown at Kathy caused me to wonder.

            If you condemn both that is fine.

            Now I am curious as to where you draw the line on “violence”. From your comment I assume death threats are violence.

            How about blocking the path of someone so they may not move about of their own free will? Or surrounding them and screaming as loud as possible?

            Is there a point other than actual physical harm that you consider inappropriate?

            Where does speech cross the line to coercion or a threat?

            • JAC,
              What part of “I have always stated I’m against violence or threats of violence from anyone on either side” is twisted or not consistent?

              You demand that I be consistent. When are you going to be consistent?

              • Todd

                Please read my comment again.

                You have reacted to something I did not attack.

                By twisted I am referring to your assumption that I was trying to demand you to speak out against the rhetoric in Wisconsin.

                I explained why I asked the question, which you clarified and which I accepted.

                I think I am pretty darn consistent. Feel free to point out the case when you think I failed.

                I demand nothing of you Todd. In fact it was wrong to even say all I ask is for you to be consistent. It would be better to say is “All I hope for is that you be consistent.”

                Of course what I really hope for is that you are consistent with the rules of the Universe including the moral truth of freedom and liberty. I hope for you to reject the philosophy of Altruism and all its political manifestations.

                But I know that what we hope for and what we get are not always the same thing.

                Now I am wondering if you would care to answer the questions I asked. I am curious as to how you draw these lines.

              • JAC,
                Drawing the line is tough. It depends a lot on the individual circumstances:

                Death threats – pretty obviously not acceptable.

                How about blocking the path of someone so they may not move about of their own free will? Or surrounding them and screaming as loud as possible?

                If both sides are involved in the demonstration/issue, then some of this is acceptable. But if you turn to walk away, me and my thugs should not surround you to stop your movement.

                Screaming as loud as possible in someone’s face is just stupid and reveals a lot about the screamer… 😉

                Is there a point other than actual physical harm that you consider inappropriate? Where does speech cross the line to coercion or a threat?

                Again, it’s a fine line, but threats and intimidation are out. It also depends on your “status”. Someone using a megaphone or microphone in front of a crowd needs to exercise more caution than the individuals in the crowd.

  33. Charlie

    and you’ve rationally changed the idea that “Nope” doesn’t equate to being “okay” with it (someone earning 2.4 million an hour).

    (BF watching a Charlie-spin-tornado)

    So, in Charlie’s mind … the word “Nope” and “Ok” are the same thing….

    Pristine, huh?

    Yeah: long story for another time, but I got an MRI on my brain and she said it looked “perfect” which she was shocked at since I’m an old guy. “Pristine”, “better than 25 year old”,”Perfect”….

    🙂 I guess because I exercise it every day!

    So long as the cohorts are the majority, sure. I likeee that idea.

    So, as I asked before:
    If your cohorts vote that water from the Hudson is $1 million a gallon, you’d agree?

    If your cohorts voted that men over the weight of 200lbs need to get a lobotomy, you’d show up?

    If your cohorts voted that your kids are sub-standard and need to be “excised” from society, you’d “shrug”?

    PS: These questions are not rhetorical.

  34. Red Alert: Saudi Police Fire On Protesters In Oil Hub

    March 10, 2011

    Saudi police have reportedly opened gunfire on and launched stun grenades at several hundred protesters March 10 rallying in the heavily Shiite-populated city of Qatif in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province.

    ….”can’t happen here”….

  35. gmanfortruth says:

  36. 😉

  37. This probably made Charlie’s day

    A cautionary tale: How to go from billionaire to broke
    http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/A-cautionary-tale-How-go-goldengirlwp-2728667591.html?&mod=pf-sp14d

    See, Charlie, they are not invincible. They do just fine blowing up their money without your help.

  38. Todd

    Todd Says:
    March 10, 2011 at 11:59 pm

    JAC,
    Do you feel the same way about money and influence from the right flowing into Wisconsin?

    With respect to the RECALL, yes I would.

    While I support the concept of RECALL in general I have always looked at it like a leaking piece of dynamite.

    It has the potential to destroy our republican form of govt. And to those who think they want Democracy I say it would create an ungovernable situation in short order.

    That is if it becomes the first reaction everytime one group does not get everything they want.

    The left is great at pointing out how “compromise” is needed for our “democratic republic” to function. But the minute they have to compromise in a serious way they go for the nuclear button.

    And despite the R’s pushing this through it was a compromise. They could have simply outlawed public unions all together or stripped them of ALL collective bargaining but they did not.

    It appears to me that you don’t have many statesmen on either side of the isle in Wisconsion. But don’t feel bad. If you want to see a real “citizens legislature” in action come watch Montana’s at work.

    My opposition to outsiders involvement in the RECALL is the same as for INITIATIVES pushed by outsiders. You should know by now I view STATES RIGHTS an extremely important aspect of our way forward. Those who live in a state should be the ones to carry the water on their own issues.

    The other day I got into a long battle with many at HuffPo over some state trying to prevent college kids from voting in the town they go to school. I supported that effort for the same basic reason. If we want “voting” to matter we need to make sure we don’t disenfranchise those who are most affected by the results of voting.

    Most students do not stay in the same town. Their votes can establish policies and programs that disenfranchise the locals who have to actually fund or deal with those programs.

    I see the out of state involvement in initiatives and recall petitions as much the same.

    Now that I have gone far beyond your question, I wanted to point out that I was primarily trying to point out the hypocrisy of those who are taking this support but screaming about Koch or any other “outside” supporter of their opponents.

    But I thought the longer explanation was needed since I did voice my personal opposition to the outsiders, or their money, pouring into Wisconsin.

    • JAC,

      With respect to the RECALL, yes I would.

      So you’re against a Utah Group starting recalls of WI Dem Senators?

      And a major DC Lobby Firm hosting a fundraiser for Wisconsin GOP Leaders?

      The left is great at pointing out how “compromise” is needed for our “democratic republic” to function. But the minute they have to compromise in a serious way they go for the nuclear button.

      But in this case it was the right that won’t compromise and used the nuclear button.

      And despite the R’s pushing this through it was a compromise. They could have simply outlawed public unions all together or stripped them of ALL collective bargaining but they did not.

      No, there was no compromise. The WI legislature passed what Walker proposed.

      If you think that’s compromise, then Obama Care was a compromise too, because they could have passed Nationalized Health Care, but they did not…

      Since the Koch Brothers don’t live in Wisconsin, I guess that makes them outsiders, right? So do you approve of them spending huge amounts of money on Wisconsin politics?

      • Todd

        “So you’re against a Utah Group starting recalls of WI Dem Senators?”

        YES!

        “And a major DC Lobby Firm hosting a fundraiser for Wisconsin GOP Leaders?”

        I LIMITED MY OBJECTIONS TO INITIATIVES AND RECALLS. BUT SINCE YOU BRING IT UP PERHAPS OUT OF STATE CONTRIBUTIONS TO STATE ELECTIONS IS EQUALLY BAD. AFTER ALL, EVEN CONGRESSMEN ARE SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT THEIR STATE.

        BUT THEN WE GET INTO THE FUZZY BECAUSE ONCE ELECTED, CONGRESSMEN VOTE ON THINGS THAT AFFECT PEOPLE OUTSIDE THEIR STATE. SO WHY SHOULDN’T THESE PEOPLE BE ABLE TO LOBBY OR FUND THOSE WHO THEY WISH TO INFLUENCE?

        “But in this case it was the right that won’t compromise and used the nuclear button. …………. No, there was no compromise. The WI legislature passed what Walker proposed.”

        TODD, YOU FAIL TO SEE THE ERROR IN NEGOTIATING BY EITHER SIDE. OF COURSE THE PROPOSAL WAS A COMPROMISE. AS I SAID, THEY COULD HAVE JUST PROPOSED ELIMINATING ALL BARGAINING. GOVT OFFICIALS ARE NOTORIOUS FOR TRYING TO DEVELOP WHAT THEY CONSIDER AS SOME COMPROMISE TO REDUCE THE BLOW BACK AGAINST THEIR FIRST PROPOSAL.

        IT USUALLY RESULTS IN GETTING A LESS ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION THAN IF THEY HAD STARTED WITH THEIR TRUE OPTION. THIS IS WHY THE R’S ARE ALWAYS MOVING LEFT AND WHY THE “CONSERVATIVES” HAVE BEEN TAKING THEM TO TASK.

        THE LEGISLATURE PASSED THE COMPROMISE PRESENTED BY WALKER. PERHAPS IF THE DEMS HADN’T RUN FOR THE HILLS THEY MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN EVEN MORE. WE WILL NEVER KNOW NOW.

        TO CALL THE LEGISLATURES ACTION A NUCLEAR OPTION IS SILLY IN MY VIEW. THEY COULD HAVE PULLED THE BILL AND REINTRODUCE A MORE ONEROUS ONE. BUT THEY DIDN’T. THE OUTCOME WAS EXPECTED AND I SUSPECT THE ONE THE DEMS HOPED FOR WHEN THEY LEFT TOWN.

        WISCONSIN BEING WISCONSIN, AND GIVEN WHAT LOOKS LIKE INEXPERIENCED POLITICAL MANAGEMENT BY THE R’S, I EXPECT THIS WILL GO VERY BADLY FOR THE R’S IN THE NEXT ELECTION.

        NEITHER SIDE SEEMED VERY ADEPT AT HOW TO HANDLE A TRUE NEGOTIATION, EVEN AFTER RUNNING.

        “If you think that’s compromise, then Obama Care was a compromise too, because they could have passed Nationalized Health Care, but they did not…”

        YES, IT WAS A COMPROMISE. AND NO, THEY COULD NOT HAVE PASSED EITHER SINGLE PAYER OR GOVT OPTION. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE VOTES WITHIN THE DEM PARTY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

        BUT BEING THE DEM’S THEY CONSTRUCTED AN ABERRATION THAT WILL SUPPORT THEIR MOVE TO NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE IN THE FUTURE. BY THE TIME THE FULL IMPACT OF THIS MONSTROSITY HITS PEOPLE WILL THINK FEDERALIZED MEDICINE WOULD BE CHEAPER AND MORE EFFECTIVE. AND SO YOU KNOW, I THINK SOME OF THAT WAS DELIBERATE. REMEMBER, I USED TO SIT IN THE ROOM WITH THESE SNAKES AND WATCH THEM DO JUST THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

        “Since the Koch Brothers don’t live in Wisconsin, I guess that makes them outsiders, right? So do you approve of them spending huge amounts of money on Wisconsin politics?”

        NO AND YES. BASED ON WHAT I KNOW TODAY. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE KOCH’S OWN COMPANIES THAT DO BUSINESS IN WISCONSIN. IF THAT IS TRUE THEN THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN STATE POLITICS.

        IF THEY DID NOT OWN COMPANIES OR ASSETS WITHIN THE STATE THEN I WOULD OBJECT TO THEIR DONATIONS.

        YOU SEE TODD, THERE IS ONE VERY SIMPLE SOLUTION TO ALL THIS MESS. ELIMINATE THE GOVT’S POWER TO HAND OUT COOKIES AND PROTECTION.

        IT IS ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT POWER THAT WE GET ALL THESE CONVOLUTED ISSUES SURROUNDING ELECTIONS.

        BUT ONCE AGAIN I POINT OUT THAT MY PRIMARY OBJECTION IS THE HYPOCRISY, ON BOTH SIDES. IF OUT OF STATE INFLUENCE IS ACCEPTABLE TO ONE SIDE THEN DON’T CRY ABOUT IT WHEN THE OTHER SIDE DOES THE SAME THING.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @JAC – care to elaborate a bit more on this position regarding college students and voting? Not quite sure what you are getting at?

      Please do differentiate between a college student who lives in the same college town for 4-6 years, nearly year-round, spends their money on goods and services nearly year-round in the town and may or may not exit the town after graduation…

      And

      A family who moves into the town, lives there for 4-5 years and moves on.

      Are you saying the college kid should not be allowed to vote yet the later should?

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        In other words – by what criteria do you determine who is most affected by the voting?

      • RAY

        Lets start with the “criteria”. THOSE WHO ACTUALLY HAVE TO FULLY LIVE WITH THE RESULTS.

        That could be paying taxes or living with some new regulation. But generally, it means higher costs to govt.

        I admit there is good argument on both sides of this issue, although I think mine are a little stronger, based on my real life experiences.

        The conflict occurs, in my opinion, primarily in small to mid sized towns, where college populations can have huge influence in elections. In my town, for example, this has resulted in the “Progressive” take over of the Dem party, and control of city and county govt. Because of the town’s size and normal low voter turnout in local elections, the college Progressives combined with the resident left wingers to have this major influence.

        I expect the same could happen in a small town with a “Right wing Conservative” college as well. My issue is with the impact, not which side wins.

        A family who moves to a town may or may not expect to stay. In the mean time they will pay ALL taxes and will be subject to all rules, regulations, laws, etc. They are impacted in total by all political decisions made.

        The college students, on the other hand, usually have no intentions of staying. Especially in these smaller towns. There is no work here and they know it. But in the mean time they vote to create a town in the image they think one should be, and then leave the rest of us with the result when they graduate.

        But we can not ever fix the problem because each year 1/4 of the group is replaced with more kids with the same views and malleability.

        I also have heartburn over the fact that most Universities require students to have lived within the state for at least one year before qualifying as a state resident. Yet these same students can VOTE in state and local elections as a resident.

        I find the arguments that college student pay taxes and fully participate in local situation unsupported by reality. Most of us here went to college and unless you happened to be from the town where you go to school you generally do not fully participate in the local living experience.

        Most college students live in dorms. NO PROPERTY TAXES.

        Those that live off campus rarely pay PROPERTY TAXES on those things they may vote for. The tax impact usually follows a year or two later. The extent to which property taxes can be passed on to the renter are also subject to overall supply/demand in the rental market.

        Some argue that they pay sales tax. No sales tax in our state so they do not pay.

        Only those that work pay any tax into the system, in my state. And those that work increase the surplus of labor for low skilled jobs that could be taken by our local teenagers or college aged kids, or unemployed adults who can’t or don’t go to school.

        A few years back the college block teamed up with the lefties to get massive state money to build more campus housing. They couldn’t get RENT CONTROLS passed so this was option 2. The net effect? Rents in the private market dropped while taxes were being raised. Landlords were not able to pass the new taxes on to renters. And even if they could, those renters were NOT students as they were now living in new State built apartments.

        Even worse, they over built the new housing. After a couple years of high vacancy the Univ started renting out the apts to NON STUDENTS. Further depressing the local rental market, right when all other costs were increasing.

        And did I mention that EVERYONES property taxes went up? But the students were now living in TAX FREE housing?

        So, if a student does not leave after graduation then they are a resident for voting purposes. That was easy.

        While they are enrolled in college they should be able to vote absentee in the town where they graduated high school.

        If a student skipped a year to establish residency in the State and for tuition purposes then they are a resident of the State and thus any town where they live.

        The other point I made with the HuffPo audience the other day is that the issue of student voting differ among states and perhaps within towns of each state. While general liberties must be protected, these States should be able to address the issues unique to them.

        In our local case, there are other voting issues that could be solved first that might reduce the “organized get out the college vote” that has distorted local elections. For example, same day registration and no requirement of permanent address that is verifiable.

        There is also the issue of gerrymandered election boundaries. If boundaries were drawn without control of the majority party perhaps the influences would be diminished.

        Probably gone way beyond the necessary here but I think you get the idea. And as I said, I understand and can sympathize to some degree with the counter arguments. But I have experienced first hand, and suffered financially, the results of college student voting in a small town. In this case it was left wing.

        And before we forget, these issues all go back to the issue of govt handing out cookies and protection.

        I also want to point out Ray that I have not advocated for any real changes using govt. The other day I was primarily trying to point out that there are real issues and this was not some national Republican attempt to take away voting rights of college students. The pot got stirred because the R’s were proposing this in New Hampshire or Vermont and openly discussed the fact that the college student were predominantly left wing liberals and were thus distorting the politics of the small towns where the universities were located. I could relate and tried to explain as I did here. Lets just say my examples were ignored and my comments taken as support of a Nazi takeover of our govt.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          @JAC – first off I don’t entirely disagree with you – I think the differences in how some “local” governments may preclude complete consensus here.

          A few thoughts:

          (1) If a 1/4 of the student population is replaced yearly with the same liberal/progressive types then are they not effectively the same person? Just a thought 😉

          (2) I’d be shocked if a rental property owner is not passing down 100% of the property tax – what’d be the point of renting it out then? If I’m that student renter I’m fairly certain I am paying the property tax, even if indirectly.

          (3) How would you differentiate between a non-student renter and a renter? Are they not allowed to vote either because they do not pay property taxes directly?

          (4) What does “participate in the local situation” even really mean? Sounds too slippery to me.

          (5) Are college students somehow not subject to the same rules, laws and regulations that other non-student residents are? You have me confused as to why that is even a point here.

          • Ray

            They are not the same “person” but they are the same personality.

            And like to admit it or not, some of the personality is formed by the same “professors” who are there year after year.

            I am sure we all witnessed some of that in our time.

            Ray, I am a rental property owner. I DID NOT and COULD not pass on 100% of the property tax increases. In fact, they passed an ordinance prohibiting me from raising rents and then telling the renters that I was doing so to recoup property tax increases.

            If you are a student renting from a private landlord you are paying at least some portion of the property tax. I did not claim otherwise. But you have the ability to defer the full impact in both amount and time, depending on the local situation.

            I think I explained “participate” in other context. Those who have to pay the bills and live with the consequences in the longer term.

            Not sure where you got question #5. What are you thinking here?

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              I dunno JAC – I’m not sure you have all the right criteria nailed down – and I’m not sure you don’t.

              How do you separate a student renter from a non-student renter w/o disenfranchising?

              • Ray

                You don’t. I said from the start that this is not clean cut. I am sure I don’t have it right as there is no right in this one. There is only bad and worse.

                The reason is because I am trying to solve a problem that is real but solve it within the existing system, which includes all the flaws that lead to corruption of the system itself.

                So within that system, which I prefer to eliminate but can’t at the moment, some people do in fact get disenfranchised. My goal is to have the least impact on those who would be impacted the most over time.

                In this case I put my support to the folks who will have to live with the decisions in the long term, not the guys who have no intention of living in the area after they graduate.

                I guess I look at college much like a military or State Dept assignment. Or even election to Congress. Or any govt or private sector detail to another state or country for a not permanent assignment. Those on temp assignments, even years, usually vote at home by absentee ballot.

                I know what the issues are here. I know they exist in other places. But the cause of the issues may differ. Like I said, there are other things that could be done here to prevent jamming the polls with bodies who vote for pizza and beer. But if that fails, then I would look to some residency requirement that would deal with voting and the college residency issue.

                Frankly Ray I go back and forth on this one. That is because neither answer is supported by sound principles. Take away the power to provide protection and cookies and the issue resolves itself.

                I am not settled on a final solution and could give up on any restrictions. I intend to keep working it out so any further thoughts you have on this would be welcomed.

                It may be that because of the existing system there simply isn’t a good answer.

                Well, that is short of returning to allowing only landed citizens to vote. That certainly might fix the problem.

        • JAC,
          Are you YELLING AT ME NOW? 😉

          So actions are not allowed (starting a recall) but money is Ok? I agree it’s a fuzzy issue…

          YES, IT WAS A COMPROMISE. AND NO, THEY COULD NOT HAVE PASSED EITHER SINGLE PAYER OR GOVT OPTION. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE VOTES WITHIN THE DEM PARTY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

          Ok, but are you sure Walker had the votes to outlaw public unions all together or stripped them of ALL collective bargaining?

          NO AND YES. BASED ON WHAT I KNOW TODAY. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE KOCH’S OWN COMPANIES THAT DO BUSINESS IN WISCONSIN. IF THAT IS TRUE THEN THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN STATE POLITICS. IF THEY DID NOT OWN COMPANIES OR ASSETS WITHIN THE STATE THEN I WOULD OBJECT TO THEIR DONATIONS.

          I see a pattern here JAC. You seem to find reasons to allow those you agree with to have political influence (Koch brothers), but look for reasons to exclude those you disagree with (liberal college students).

          Once you start looking for reasons to exclude certain groups from democracy, it gets easier and easier to exclude the next group, and then the next group…

          • Todd

            I am not yelling. Just separating your comments and mine in the most efficient manner I can think of.

            I doubt Walker had the votes, thus the compromised proposal from the beginning. Or they had the votes but didn’t want to create blow back, thus a compromise position.

            My view on the college kids went both ways if you noticed. Not liberal vs. conservative.

            You are accusing me of deliberately finding and excuse for those I support. That is a blatant distortion of my position, which I thought I pretty much explained. So that you could not make such an accusation.

  39. LOI,
    Back to your original article.

    I found the same numbers for “527” contributions of Soros and the Koch Brothers, but that is a small part of their political activity. You left out the Koch Brothers Political Action Committee and Lobbying spending – $57 million. Then there are donations to individual candidates, Think Tanks, Political Organizations, and state & local candidates. It gets pretty hard to determine who has spent more and the results they’ve achieved.

    You think “The View” and Oprah are on the same level as Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and O’Reilly?

    Your evidence that Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, and Jim Lehrer (or is this supposed to be Lauer & Vieira – I got confused?) are all “left-wing” is one quote or interview each that basically didn’t use your point-of-view as the starting point?

    I think the problem here is your “starting point” or “perspective”. When you start at “right-wing”, anything in “the middle” looks like it’s “left-leaning” or “left-wing”.

    It’s kind of like the “Middle East” and “Far East”. These are American and European designations.

    If you’re from Japan, it would be the “Middle West” and “Near West”.
    If you’re from Australia, it would be the “Middle Northwest” and “Near Northwest”.

    It all depends on your perspective…

    • Todd,

      I think Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, etc interject themselves into the stories, which is not what Newsweek said.
      “They serve mostly as conduits for information, not merchants of ideas. ”
      When Sawyer has ten AGW “experts” with one view, I can no longer call that “reporting”. The founder of the Weather Channel might know a little about weather, why not report his opinion?

      I did not question Bill O’Reilly being on their list and would never say he did not cover things from a conservative viewpoint.

      “You think “The View” and Oprah are on the same level as Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and O’Reilly?”

      Well yes, I do think that. I showed their salary and audience are comparable. I did not question the conservatives being on the list. I questioned the liberals not being counted and showed why I think they should.

      “I found the same numbers for “527″ contributions of Soros and the Koch Brothers, but that is a small part of their political activity. You left out the Koch Brothers Political Action Committee and Lobbying spending – $57 million. It gets pretty hard to determine who has spent more and the results they’ve achieved.”

      Yes I did leave that out, but included my source. As you said, there are a lot of numbers there and I don’t think Koch & Soros alone really would do justice to how massive and scary the contributions game is, maybe you could do an article and expose the evil right machine? BTW, how much did Obama raise and where did it come from? Seems a lot was over the internet where reporting rules are hard to enforce….

      My perspective…, I think the networks are loosing viewers, the NY Times, Newsweek are losing readers. You can blame the readers on the shift to electronics vs print, but why then is FOX gaining viewers? I think the liberal bias is a large part of the reason. Too many people have found themselves lied to, and vote with their remote. After ClimateGate, people want to hear the other side, even if they still think AGW might be true. The networks have denied them full information on too many issues, ACORN, Planned Parenthood…..makes people look for someone who will report the news.

    • PANIC TIME!!!
      DRIVE HOME, PARK YOU CAR, THROW THE KEYS AWAY. IT’S BIKES OR WALK FROM NOW ON. NE ELECTRIC VEHICLES, COAL POWER PLANTS WILL BE SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY!
      GLOBAL WARMING IS NOW NOT JUST ENDANGERING OUR LIVES, WE ARE ABOUT TO LOOSE coffee.

      New York Times reporter Elisabeth Rosenthal found a familiar villain for her Thursday Business story on the woeful state of Colombia’s coffee crop – “climate change” (“Coffee Source In Colombia Suffers Setbacks – Climate Change Poses a Threat To the Popular Arabica Crop”).

      Like most of the small landowners in Colombia’s lush mountainous Cauca region, Luis Garzón, 80, and his family have thrived for decades by supplying shade-grown, rainforest-friendly Arabica coffee for top foreign brands like Nespresso and Green Mountain. A sign in the center of a nearby town proclaims, “The coffee of Cauca is No. 1!”

      But in the last few years, coffee yields have plummeted here and in many of Latin America’s other premier coffee regions as a result of rising temperatures and more intense and unpredictable rains, phenomena that many scientists link partly to global warming.

      Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2011/03/11/nyt-reporter-elisabeth-rosenthal-everything-global-warmings-fault#ixzz1GIrGSN00

    • Can you spot the bias? From the New York Times, a March 8 report by John M. Broder, “At House E.P.A. Hearing, Both Sides Claim Science”:

      In an effort to support the E.P.A.’s regulatory power, committee Democrats rounded up five eminent academic climatologists who defended the scientific consensus that the planet is warming and that human activities like the burning of fossil fuels are largely responsible.

      In the italics, yes, of course — the New York Times states the so-called global warming “consensus” (a spin of the left) as fact and makes certain to inject it in the copy. A more objective line would have been:

      In an effort to support the E.P.A.’s regulatory power, committee Democrats rounded up five eminent academic climatologists who testified that the planet is warming and that human activities like the burning of fossil fuels are largely responsible.

      EXCEPT that’s not the only bias to be found.

      Note the way the GOP rebuttal is described in the next paragraph:

      The Republicans countered with two scientific witnesses who said…

      The Democrats’ witnesses are “eminent academic climatologists” while the GOP’s witnesses are merely “scientific witnesses.” No academic eminence for them, no sir – yet, strangely, the official witness list for the hearing shows that every single witness is a university-affiliated Ph.D. scientist with appropriate credentials.

  40. Live BLog Updates On Japan and the Tsunami

    * Posted on March 11, 2011 at 6:54am by Mike Opelka Mike Opelka

    8:00

    National Weather Service says Midway Island was hit with 5-8ft high waves two hours ago.

    Kauai, Hawaii is starting to see the initial waves from the Tsunami, it could take 20-30 minutes for the waves to reach Honolulu where nerves are on edge. Honolulu is at sea level and could be seriously affected by the waves.

    7:55

    Hawaii on edge as the waves are due shortly – it is just about 3am and much of the population is awake and monitoring this situation as well.. US Naval ships to remain in port in Pearl Harbor.

    7:45

    USGS reports a 4.5 earthquake hitting Hawaii, but is unrelated to the Japanese quake.

    Tsunami waves that hit Japan were reported to be as large as 33 feet high. Before 8am EST Hawaii could see waves between 3-6 feet above sea level. The USCG says they are preparing for “the worst case scenarios” by moving ships out to sea and putting planes in the air as the waves approach.

    7:40

    IAEA reports that four nuclear plants near the quake were safely shut down. Narita Airport in Tokyo remains closed, as does the local subway system.

    7:35

    Various reports out of Japan say that military personnel in chemical suits are entering the nuclear plant as a precaution.

    7:30

    The largest earthquake to hit Japan in over 100 years rumbled the country yesterday afternoon. The 8.9 quake has cut power to four million buildings, put two nuclear plants on alert and shut down most commuter transportation. 2000 residents living near one of those plants have been told to evacuate.

    Current reports say 63 people have died, but that number could rise dramatically after the flood waters recede.

    7:25

    Hawaii has closed airports on the big island and many smaller facilities. The waves are expected within the hour.

    7:20

    President Obama offers condolences to Japan while ordering FEMA to step up and be ready for the tsunami in Hawaii and other U.S. states and territories in the path of the waves. There was a Presidential Press Conference already slated for later this morning, that event will no doubt also address this developing story.

    7:15

    Seal Beach in Orange County, CA has closed it’s beaches and the pier in the area in advance of the tsunami, which is expected to arrive in just over five hours. Homes have not been evacuated.

    7:10

    Tsunami waves travel approximately 500 mph, that means contact with the continental U.S. would happen around 7:15 PST / 10:15 EST and Oregon would receive the first wave.

    No radiation leaks reported but two nuclear plants in Japan have been placed on a state of emergency.

    7:00

    Pentagon reports all U.S. Service personnel in Japan are safe and ready to assist the local authorities.

    Entire Pacific region on a Tsunami warning – Hawaii is now expecting waves as high as six feet above sea level. Those waves could hit Hawaii just before 8am EASTERN time, less than an hour from now.

    4 million homes in Japan without power.

    FOX NEWS reports Orange County has issued a coastal flood warning, expecting waves of 2-3 feet.

    CNN video of an office meeting as the quake hit.

    6:45am

    Japan reports no radiation leak at nuclear plant where cooling problems were reported.

    Tokyo subways expected to resume service later today.

    President Obama orders FEMA on alert to help Hawaii and U.S. territories in the path of the tsunami.

    http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2011/03/11/updates-on-japan-and-the-tsunami/

    • Been talking with my daughter all night. Just spoke with her again. The news is not totally correct according to her and the local news. She should be seeing some action in the next half hour.. Her house is in a ‘safe zone’ and has not been evacuated at this point but much of the Island’s shore including Waikiki has been evacuated. Cell and internet service is spotty at best. Grrrrr!

      • From what I’ve been hearing they aren’t reporting alot of trouble in Hawaii-although they are waiting for daylight. Glad to hear-none the less- that your baby is in a safe zone 🙂 It looks really, really bad in Japan.

        • Luckily she’s in Kailua the east side of Oahu and she’s in the middle of the base high up on a hill. Would be nice to hear from CYNDI right now too!

          • Hopefully she will drop in and let us know she is okay-Just praying for everyone in the path of this thing. But it sounds like your daughter, thank God, is pretty safe where she is.

          • Good to hear Anita! Some good friends left for Hawaii just yesterday and haven’t heard from them yet. So far, the pics coming in from Hawaii look “OK”.

            Japan – horrible.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            I heard from CYNDI, she is fine, no problems there.

  41. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/2chambers/2011/03/the_peter_king_hearings_on_rad.html#jasser

    Thoughts? Comments?

    I especially liked these chestnuts:
    “Probing U.S. Muslims is just like probing Nazi war criminals, KKK”
    “Neo-Nazis don’t commit terrorist acts”
    “America couldn’t possibly ally with Muslim countries”

    And then there was this one: “‘Most’ Muslims just don’t understand the Koran!”.. but that happens to be true.

    Alright, it’s a new day.. have at it, people!

    • Why?

    • Truthseeker says:

      I think the media and the reporting about this has blown it way out of porportion and has exacerbated the issue.

      • Which issue is that? The return of HUAC, or the mind-numbing islamophobia that leads Americans to act as if all Muslims are an inch away from strapping bombs to their chests?

        I heard that Muslims conduct secret ceremonies where they drink the blood of Christian infants.

        • REPRESENTATIVE PETER KING, CHAIRMAN HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE (R-NEW YORK): I’m now going to ask the witnesses to come forward. Let me just say also, I would hope, now that this hearing is over, that the media in particular would look back and reflect upon the mindless hysteria that occurred over the last two or three weeks, and not in the future rely so much on what opponents, such as CAIR and others, who do not want these type hearings, say. Again I think the hysteria and the madness leading up to this hearing did nobody much good and certainly didn’t reflect well on those who were reporting it.

          Indeed it didn’t. Here’s a small sampling of that hysteria:

          Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/03/10/rep-king-bashes-medias-mindless-hysteria-over-islamic-radicalization-#ixzz1GIw51Nkm

          • Personally, I think this needs to be discussed-but I think any good that might have come from it-was destroyed by the constant attacks and identifying it as an attack on Islam believing people-instead of a discussion of an identifiable problem which we as Americans wanted to work together to fix. I read some of the testimonies and was actually happy to hear fellow Americans who were followers of Islam condemn what was happening to their children and wanting help-which they were not getting from the organizations that should be there to help them. It helped to convince me of what I wanted to believe all along. So this could have helped but has it??-me personally yea.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              So it is the ‘fault’ of critics of the hearing for speaking out against the hearing as opposed to the very idea of having this hearing to begin with?

              • I don’t believe what I wrote is a matter of blame-it is a matter of the way I saw the event unfolding and the consequences of what went on.

              • Buck the Wala says:

                No, I see what you are saying, but it also seems to me that you are pointing a large finger at critics of the hearing for making it seem like an attack on Islam, while neglecting the fact that it was an attack on Islam.

              • Well, I would say that is because we disagree-I do not think it was an attack on Islam-you do-I think it was an attack on radical Islam and the affects it has on this country and it’s people. I think it could have brought us closer together. It could have shown very clearly Americans standing together against the radical.

              • YES, it is the fault of the fear mongers and agitators who stirred up paranoia where it wasn’t appropriate.

                If you had listened closely to Kin and the others involved with this instead of those trying to foment fear you might have understood they are trying to open a national discussion of why this is happening.

                And there was testimony yesterday about how the “Islamophobia” can impede govt working with the Muslim community to resolve the “conversion” or “radicalization” issue.

            • VH,

              I agree. In this supposed “land of the free”, we should be able to have discussions, even on things that cause discomfort. Can we discuss abortion & gay rights? Racism?
              The problem is when any group tries to shut down reasonable discussion. Are there Islam radicals? Are they a threat to the US? Seems like it is a topic that should be discussed. If they want to include Christian radicals and all radicals, I think that’s OK as well. But if they find radical Islam to be a thousand times greater threat,(or not) that should come out also. Along with the threat level of moderate Islam(hopefully very low).

  42. @Todd

    Good morning, sir. I will try to answer your questions the best that I can.

    As to the orchestrated demonstrations, there was an interview on MSNBC from a professional “organizer” (cannot recall his name, not even sure they mentioned it) that said that he was organizing teachers groups and union groups from across the country to be bused into Madison to support the teachers there. That is what I call orchestration…the msm picked it up and reported as Wisonsin teachers, when in reality it was outside of Wisconsin for a lot of it.

    The second question you asked was about White House meddling. It was reported on Monday by Chris Matthews how the political arm of Obama’s PAC is funding the busing and behind the scenes is helping organize the response in seeing that it is an attack on BIG labor and that he is “calling in a chit”…..

    The unethical part of it all……It is no ones business what goes on in Wisconsin except those that live and work in Wisconsin. I am a firm believer in State’s rights. The President of the United States has NO business WHATSOEVER meddling in State issues. That is NOT his place. His place is providing for the defense of the United States and not trying to issue recalls and replace State Senators and Legislature. It is unethical and immoral for anyone outside of Wisconsin to even be involved in the State issues. It is not YOUR business nor MINE.

    This rhetoric that Wisconsin is attacking ALL of labor is bull hockey. Wisconsin has a problem and they have it correct, in my opinion. What I find amazing, is that the public sector unions in Wisconsin EXPECT taxes to be raised in order for their pensions to be funded. Wisconsin, like some state’s is dying. Business’ are moving out and rightly so. I would move to a more profitable climate and so would you. There are other state’s that have the same if not worse problems than Wisconsin. Texas had a 27 billion shortfall and has solved it without all this storming the Capitol crap. It was hard and some do not like it but we are not defacing public property….but then Texas is a right to work state.

    Last, but not least, was the interview on Fox News and run again on CNN about the protest group that was bused in form Illinois that actually got into the Capitol building and trashed it. Even the Wisconsin teachers that were legitimately protesting did not like that but it was OUT OF STATE ORCHESTRATED protests…..as I said…this is bull hockey.

    When this started, I was on the side of the Wisconsin public sector employees. My mind has now changed. I believe in collective bargaining and the right to sit down and discuss working conditions, etc. even in Texas we have collective bargaining….but we also have the right to work. No forced dues…no forced union membership…..there are many companies that have both union and non union employees in the same company. Each have a right to bargain. The point being, my mind has changed on Wisconsin and my support is not behind the public sector employees any longer.

    • I might add that my support is moral. I will not go up there and I will not send money. It is Wisconsin’s problem. It is a State issue.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @D13 – an unfortunate thing that may be evading you is that we still have national elections. And we still have an electoral system. And we have had WI GOPers on Fox in plain English describing with delight how this move will castrate Unions and increase the difficulty in raising funds to support candidates.

      You’re goddamn right there is interest in what happens in WI by people not living in WI. As well there should be.

      • And I will say with the same amount of disgust….the GOP outside of Wisconsin needs to butt out as well.

        But you and I, sir, will just have to disagree. Perhaps other state’s can see what is happening in Wisconsin and change their methodology to avoid the same issues….

        Explain why what goes on in Wisconsin affects you? (Unless you live there)..I really would like to know. What National implications does Wisconsin have? The labor movement? How so?

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          A blueprint has been established and for now, is successful, at how State level politics can be better leveraged to most clearly influence the National level – more than ever before.

          The issue was not merely on what specific organizing rights a group of people in WI could/would have.

          It was also about whether the ancillary benefit of being organized and how that collective result can be used to support candidates philosophically similar to the membership of the group.

          Not being organized does not preclude one from donating to and supporting candidates – it just makes it a helluva lot harder.

          I do not support everything that Unions do – I never have and likely never will. But I do applaud their ability to rally people around a common cause(s) and help support candidates that see eye to eye with them.

          • Ahhhh…I see where you are coming from…..hmmmm..have to think about that for a minute.

          • Ray

            “A blueprint has been established and for now, is successful, at how State level politics can be better leveraged to most clearly influence the National level – more than ever before.”

            So would this be some national conspiracy in play to destroy Unions? I thought such large scale unified movements were just “fear mongering”.

            If those who are members of a union support a particular view they can certainly contribute money to the same people they do now.

            This argument that it is “harder” is pure bull. The problem is that the political operatives are afraid they “might not”. Or simply want the lazy way out.

            And remember, we are talking about Public Employee Unions here. The use of unions to lobby and sway the election of politicians who then control the money paid to the same people.

            • JAC…I think a lot of it is worry if it extends past the public sector…I see this as no different than Obama using the NLRB to further his agenda but we will get argument about that.

              It is still a State right issue and not a Federal issue, in my mind.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              @JAC – so you’re suggesting that the property of being “organized” is not impacting on the amount of money donated or political power achieved?

              I’d go cut my grass but its under 6 inches of rain.

              Surely you jest.

              • Ray

                I am suggesting that these people can “organize” outside the purview of UNION if they choose.

                And that it would be no more difficult, if all the folks in the unions actually believe everything we are told they believe.

                I am suggesting that those who argue that reducing Union power is a direct attack on the power of the Dem party, are admitting that the purpose of the Union is to support the Dem party. Not to simply represent their employees in bargaining with their employer.

                I am suggesting Ray that the true power of the Union regarding Political Organizing is FEAR. The unions are very adept at creating fear among its members. Many members trust their leadership and simply accept anything they are told as truth. Much like the Fox robots you have mentioned in the past.

                I am suggesting Ray that Unions, especially Public Unions have gone far beyond their intended purpose when it comes to their political involvement. The national groups are dominated by hard left ideologues and they use the money and perception of voting blocks to wield influence in all our policies.

                So if those they supposedly represent truly believe in all these policies it should be very easy to organize them outside the Govt protected and subsidized structure of a Labor Union.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @JAC – thanks for the suggestions. Now (and I’ll be nice for once here) – why should I go with your suggestions? Prove your hypothesis sir.

              • Ray

                The first step to proving the hypothesis is to TEST it.

                So first we eliminate the ability of Public Unions to forcibly collect dues from members and prohibit any political involvement what so ever.

      • Truthseeker says:

        Ray, keep in mind that Walker and the Republicans were elected to do what they are doing. They are only following what they promised to do, If they are wrong, then they should pay for it in the next election.

        • Buck the Wala says:

          I don’t recall reading anywhere that Walker and the GOP made this proposal, union-busting, a part of their campaign.

          Rather they are using a ‘budgetary crisis’ to advance an ideological agenda. They were not elected to do this.

          • Truthseeker says:

            Wikipedia, our favorite source:

            “Walker became an early favorite for the 2010 Republican Party endorsement for Wisconsin governor, winning straw polls of Wisconsin GOP convention attendees in 2007 and 2008.[27][28] He announced his candidacy in late April 2009 after several months of previewing his campaign themes of reduced taxes and reduced spending,/b> to Republican audiences around the state.[21] He also criticized the 2009–11 Wisconsin state budget as too large for the slow economy.[21] He won the Wisconsin GOP convention endorsement on May 22, 2010, receiving 91 percent of the votes cast by the delegates. Walker won the Republican nomination in the primary election of September 14, 2010, receiving 59 percent of the popular vote, while former U.S. Representative Mark Neumann garnered 39 percent”

            Just because he did not specify Unions does not mean he did not have a mandate to cut spending. Since Unions cost the State so much money, it is on the table.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              You proved my point, thank you. Walker never mentioned this proposal until already in office. Whether or not this is related to balancing the budget (which I would argue this action is not related to) is a different issue than whether or not he had a mandate to take this action.

              Also, while I agree that public unions and private unions are different, that distinction does not render this action ‘union-busting’. It is still union-busting (albeit, limited, for now, to public unions).

              Coincidentally, if Walker didn’t push through all of these tax reductions, there wouldnt’ have been a ‘crisis’ necessitating reduced spending to begin with. But again, its not like this action is truly related to reduced spending anyway.

              • Buck

                So according to YOU our elected officials may not act on anything other than what they mentioned during the campaign?

                You had better check your sources on this theory that Walker’s tax cuts created a financial crisis. Wisconsin has the same problem as Montana. The agency that puts forth “projections” of future revenue has a lousy track record so the legislators stopped using their numbers and started using “actual” revenue.

                The projected out year deficit in Wisconsin is far larger than this tax cut.

                The action taken is NOT Union busting. But if it truly were Public Union busting then more power to them.

                Public Employee Unions are immoral.

              • Buck the Wala says:

                That’s not what I’m saying in the least. I’m merely arguing that a recall would be perfectly acceptable as a democratic means of holding the politicans accountable for their actions in this regard. If there is a legitimate process to use, WI citizens should not need to wait until reelection.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                Walkers Tax Cuts are an ATTEMPT to bring business back to Wisconsin, which will bring back jobs, which will RAISE tax revenues. His tax cuts have exactly ZERO to do with their current problems.

                Wisconsin was BROKE long before Walker took office. (LONG LONG BEFORE). As I pointed out in a post on an earlier topic, Wisconsin has nearly a 10% State Tax Rate. Indiana, with a similar econimic structure and a smaller population, has a 3.5% State Tax Rate. Wisconsin has a big deficit, Indiana has a surplus (although a much smaller surplus than it had before the “great recession” but still a surplus nonetheless).

                Most State Employee Unions were outlawed in Indiana 6 years ago. In spite of this, State Government Workers still have comparable (usually better) pay than their private counterparts, and State Government Workers still have FAR BETTER BENEFITS than their private counterparts. They don’t seem to have “suffered” nearly as much as the private workers have.

                If State and Local Government Workers can Unionize and have collective bargaining “rights” (a clear mis-use of the word “rights” by the way), then they are effectively bargaining AGAINST (bargaining is an adversarial process) the PEOPLE of their own locality or State. This is precisely why both FDR and JFK argued AGAINST public employee unions. There is no way to ensure that the Taxpayers are adequately represented at the bargaining table, and, as JAC says, public unions are immoral.

          • Truthseeker says:

            Also, you are using retoric like union-busting which is not true. You are liking public unions with private unions and they are quite different. You cannot negotiate with yourself.

          • Buck….legit question….not argumentative…..

            I read the bill…where do you apply union busting? From what I read, it stripped certain fiscal rights, but not collective bargaining per se over working conditions, etc.

            Do you apply the same test to what Regan did? Was that union busting by your definition?

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Ok fair enough – it is not union busting in the sense that the unions still exist and there is still collective bargaining and other rights over certain areas. But it most certainly is union-busting in the sense that its purpose is to limit the scope and power of unions.

          • Really Buck? Really?

            I laughed when this slant was brought up, as somehow, it would aid in Walker’s recall since he did not “say he was going to do this” so his election isn’t real. Or something to that nonsense.

            I won’t even go down the path of what politicians in general say during a campaign vs. do once in office. Let’s talk about Walker specifically. Those of us that follow, do our own vetting, get involved, and in this case understood the significance of our state’s financial shape and how the benefits and unsustainable pensions of our public emloyees play a part in that, knew exactly what had to happen to work our way back to fiscal solid ground. The local governments (school boards, muncipalities, counties, state) HAD to have a say in how and what was paid. CB limitations in these areas had to be put in place.

            Walker often, now and in campaigning, talked about his time as County Exec of Milwaukee County. There was one time, in order to avoid lay-offs, he asked for a reduction in work week hours to 35 from 40 across the board. The union said, “NO”. He said then he’d have to lay off a fairly large number of people to balance his budget. Union said, “do it”. So he had to. The union could care less. Walker said that at that point, he committed to himself, that if he was ever in a position, to give local governments more control of their situations, he would. I’ve heard him tell that story countless times.

            If people were not listening or just weren’t smart enough to understand, that is their own problem. Perhaps people have gotten so used to their union telling them how to think, they’ve forgotten how to?

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Who said his election isn’t real? Who said he’s an illegitimate governor, or anything to that effect?

              But the fact remains that the people of WI should be entitled – are entitled – to recall him and other GOP officials if they disagree with their actions in office.

              Are there any requirements for a recall? I know the official has to have served for X number of months, but asides from that? Why shouldn’t the people of WI be able to call for a recall if they do not agree with Walker’s agenda?

              • That’s the talk around here, when using the “he never campaigned on that” jusification. I was just surprised you fell for it.

                Absolutely there is a recall process. If people are so inclined, have at it!

              • Buck the Wala says:

                What exactly did I fall for?

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              HA! I thought of bringing this up earlier but figured I’d wait for Kathy to “step in it”.

              Word to Kathy – thanks!

              See – what Kathy isn’t bothering to tell here is that the Walker decision to layoff the workers under a ginned up budget crisis led to the hiring of security guards from the firm Wackenhunt

              ……Wackenhunt……

              Yep – the same classy firm of guys who like to drink vodka out of each other’s asses (cite – Wackenhunt in Afghan.). Now these fine men get to protect Milwaukee on the taxpayer dime.

              But wait…..

              Then Walker’s move was invalidated and the security workers who were let go were brought back…..while the County is still paying the Wackenhunt contract.

              Atta-boy Scott – ya dumbfuck. Make the taxpayers pay twice for the same service so you could bust the Union and outsource their jobs. Would be fun to see how much Wackenhunt donated to his Governor campaign – shit – wait – we’ll never know!!!

              http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/wisconsin-gov-scott-walker-hires-deviant-sex-hazing-company-wackenhut-for-security-at-chidrens-co/question-1531051/

              • You know what Ray, I truly, truly like to give you lefty’s the benefit of the doubt.

                And then you stoop to this level.

                Have a nice day~

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Then tell the whole truth Kathy. Us lefties have to live with the burden of being right all the time – so when we see someone slap a bunch of lipstick on a pig we’re inclined to wipe it off. 😉

                I’ll have a great day!

              • Ray

                And none of that has a damn thing to do with the point Kathy was making now does it.

                You lifted your shirt and have revealed your spots once again.

                Perhaps this entire local experience is exactly why he said if he ever had the chance he would expand LOCAL power in these matters.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @JAC – the hell it doesn’t have anything to do with what she said. She tried and failed to offer a narrative about Walker w/o offering side B of what happened at the local level where he essentially did the same goddamn thing. That sting you felt was the hard snap of the reality towel on your rear end JAC – in this Walker case we KNOW what happened after he had the chance to implement his agenda. Kathy just cherry-picked what facts to share here.

    • Second post script…

      I will say, Todd, that I do not understand not collective bargaining. It is so simple. Sit down and bargain. Where it gets one sided is state laws that require closed shop and compulsory union membership. THAT is not collective bargaining..that is dictatorship (MY analogy).

      I would much rather talk to one person than 1,000…however, from an equitable position and not like Wisconsin, where the union holds the hammer and the nails and the rules.

    • D13,

      It is not YOUR business nor MINE.

      Actually, it is MY business… 😉

  43. @ Ray…..I got to thinking about the electoral process you mentioned. I think you were coming from the National side of that, correct? The electoral issues have no bearing on State politics, to the best of my knowledge…so how does the electoral issue apply to the State budget, etc. I am not sure I am following.

    • Never mind…you answered it..thanks.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @D13 – let’s just cut to the chase shall we?

      If I am a GOPer – I know I have a SCOTUS decision in my pocket that will enable my buddies in big business to cram my pockets full of cash and overwhelm the airwaves with anti-Democratic messaging and ads.

      ****winning!!!****

      Next – to help defund Democratic movements I need to hit them where I legally can – one way is to castrate the Unions and demonize them. If I can legally limit their ability to operate and function – not only does that achieve perhaps a tactical objective of limiting/eliminating collective bargaining, but I also have achieved a strategic objective in collapsing fund raising infrastructure for Democrats. This is exactly what has happened in WI and is teed up in other states.

      ****winning!!!****

      From here – I have an advantage in the 2012 election cycle because I have improved my strength and addressed a glaring weakness.

      Now all I have to do is blame the crisis du jour on Obama (gas prices?) and I should be golden.

      Each WI that happens is one more State where the playing field has shifted and the rules changed.

  44. More ugliness today in the schools. Got a call early this morning from a “non-conforming teacher” that when she arrived, teachers were already gathering and were standing “arm to arm in solidarity” to greet the kids coming in. She literally stayed on the phone with me and used it as a distraction to walk past them all and not have to engage in conversation. Bullying much? High school kids are walking out at 2 (NOT MINE!)

    Hard to respect them and consider anyone professional who uses kids as props and shields for their bully pulpit.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Word I heard is that Michael Moore is calling for a big protest on Saturday, have you heard anything?

  45. gmanfortruth says:

    Some Morning humor 🙂

    Grandma’s boyfriend

    A 5-year-old boy went to visit his grandmother one day.

    Playing with his toys in her bedroom while grandma was dusting, he looked up and said,

    ‘Grandma, how come you don’t have a boyfriend now that Grandpa went to heaven?’

    Grandma replied, ‘Honey, my TV is my boyfriend.

    I can sit in my bedroom and watch it all day long.

    The religious programs make me feel good and the comedies make me laugh

    … I’m happy with my TV as my boyfriend.’

    Grandma turned on the TV, and the reception was terrible.

    She started
    adjusting the knobs, trying to get the picture in focus.

    Frustrated, she started hitting the backside of the TV hoping to fix the problem.

    The little boy heard the doorbell ring, so he hurried to open the door and there stood Grandma’s minister.

    The minister said, ‘Hello son, is your Grandma home?’

    The little boy replied, ‘Yeah, she’s in the bedroom bangin’ her boyfriend’

    The minister fainted.

  46. @ Ray

    You said: “A blueprint has been established and for now, is successful, at how State level politics can be better leveraged to most clearly influence the National level – more than ever before.”

    D13, The unknowing, thinks: The blueprint has always been there. It just sat in a drawer for a long time. And, yes, I think you can go further in that local level politics affects State level, and State level affects National level. But a local level political issue in Fort Worth, Texas is not an issue for Houston, Texas to send organizers up here to involve themselves. Consequently, even if what happens in a State, by a governor, could have an effect on future National policy, it is still a State level issue and the Feds and out of state individuals need to butt out. The governor has an obligation to his state…nothing else.

    Ray continues: “The issue was not merely on what specific organizing rights a group of people in WI could/would have.

    It was also about whether the ancillary benefit of being organized and how that collective result can be used to support candidates philosophically similar to the membership of the group.”

    D13, thinks about this some more: “Ok….I can agree with your statement here. But even ancillary effect still does not ethically or morally make it ok to try to influence State politics from the outside. I thought that the progressive movement was supposed to be new and innovative. If it is time to change the collective bargaining in Wisconsin then why would this not be a progressive move? I lost it when the democratic side took flight out of the state. What a coward move that was. Stand and fight. Texas did that ten years ago when a bunch fled to Oklahoma to avoid redistricting. I lost respect for them and most of them lost the next election anyway. But, what we do in Texas is no business of New York or Oklahoma. If the people of Wisconsin made a choice, then it is a Wisconsin issue.

    What I think is happening, is that the labor movement of the 30’s and 40’s is scared at least from the public sector side. I am real torn on this issue. I support the right to bargaining but I am NOT in support of a one sided bargaining issue,,,,and public sector employees have had a monopoly on it and it is coming home to roost on financial issues.

    But I like your retort and it is thoughtful.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @D13 – so should I have no interest in what happens on the Texas/Mexico border?

      Should I have no interest in what happens with the Texas school policy that drives content in public school textbooks that the rest of us use?

      Should I have no interest in Texas economic policy that affects oil refineries/companies that populate the Houston area?

      Should I have no interest in the economic policies of the DFW area that impact companies that reside there / have Headquarters there than then impact branch operations for those same companies in other cities/States?

      Should I have no interest in the criminal justice policies in Texas that are blueprinted by other States?

      This idea that States are somehow islands and everyone else should butt out feels very 1840s -ish.

      • Ray,

        Isn’t the law an issue? The Repug’s were duly elected and are acting to fulfill the promises made that got them elected.
        All legal process. When thug’s come in from out of state, cannot legally vote, and try to stop the LEGAL actions of those elected officials, that is not democracy, that is mob rule.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          @LOI – I’m not sure how any legal actions were “stopped”. There is clearly a case to be made for WI citizens and people with interest in what the outcomes are (and do not live in WI) to organize and galvanize support and momentum to ensure Walker and gang know that what he is doing is not unilaterally okay with everyone. There is a line between legal, productive protesting and halting the wheels of government. I think we can all find some cases where a line was crossed or something inappropriate happened – but you can find that anywhere – doesn’t make it right nor does it mean that if you’re not a WI citizen then you should not be there.

          It is perfectly acceptable and ok to stand by and support those you care about and care for and/or have common interest & goals. Happens all the time and is part of our make-up (well – for some of us it is).

          • Ray,

            Before the TeaParty, outraged citizens demanded their elected officials “hear” what they wanted on healthcare. The outrage was such that many returned from D.C. and had town hall meetings. The meetings were loud, emotions high, but for the most part, both sides were heard. Point, their offices were not invaded and obstructed. No one hindered them in doing their legally held job.

            Contrast that with what the union protesters have done.
            They have “forced” their way into the capitol, doing some damage in the process. (point, out-of-staters doing said damage don’t pay for it) They have continually done everything they could to harass the Republican lawmakers, shouting and obstructing them at every chance. If I lived in Wisconsin, I would feel I had a right to be heard by my representative. And I would see no reason not to express myself to any other government official. But that does mean going thru the channels, make an appointment, send an email, etc.

            Out of state has no right to demand. They can request being heard. They can demonstrate. But when they obstruct, that’s crossing a line.

      • @ Ray…behind the 8 ball..but will answer.,,,you do have a couple of good points,

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          No worries D13 – not trying to be ass about the points – I feel there is “interest” in the matters that occur in other States. How that interest is manifest is perhaps more of what is at issue.

      • Ray….got to thinking about it but as to an interest…yes. I can probably see that….as to trying to influece State politics…no. You do not live here.

        Ex….you mentioned the Texas/Mexico border. As an American, youshould have an interest in how the Feds patrol or not patrol the border as it is Federal. As to how Texas patrols the border and its own state immigration or hiring policies…no sir…not your business.

        As to Texas school policy re: textbooks. No one has asked, much less Texas, for anyone to follow Texas policy. Why does your state or any other state for that matter care what defines Texas textbook policy. I know that other states follow it…but why? There is no Federal edict stating that Texas is the leader in text book policy. If your state decides to follow Texas text book policy…I feel your interest stops there. You do not have the moral or ethical obligatrion to infringe upon Texas politics to influence the election or appointment to the committee. It is a state issue not a Federal one.

        Texas economic policy belongs to Texas. Not to you or anyone else outside the State. IF there is an economic issue that influences corporations located outside Texas, so be it. YOu should not try to influence state policy from outside the State.

        Criminal justice of TExas belongs to Texas…..Criminal justice in your state…belongs to your state. If someone mimics or blueprints justice Texas style….that does not give you the moral obligation or moral authority to come to TExas to try to change it. LEave us alone…it is a State issue…

        It may sound 1840ish but as a State rights advocate and I am a staunch one….it is not a Presidential obligation, nor another state governors obligation nor a unions obligation from outside the State to create anarchy, like Wisconsin, by bringing in hired guns. IT is a Wisconsin issue and if the people do not like it…fire them the same way you hired them.

        Wisconsin is a poor example because the msm has hijacked what is actually going on. But Wisconsin is a good example of outside agitition and lawlessness interfering in a State problem.

        What really bothers me is this statement : YOu stated the following:Should I have no interest in the criminal justice policies in Texas that are blueprinted by other States?

        My answer is no….if your state chooses to follow Texas deal with it in your state not here.

        Now I am sure that you will say it is apples to oranges….but what is the difference on a World level? I have seen you lambast the UNited States for interfering in the rights of a soverign country….ie Iraq, Afghanistan……Why would you not use the same analogy? Should I not be concerned about the oil prices on what is happening in Libya and, therefore, it is ok for the US to try to influence politics in that country? Iraq? Yemen? Egypt?

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          @D13 – with all due respect sir – we’ll just disagree. And me and my cronies will still have a compelling interest in the affairs of Texas and any other state – and we’ll feel no less ethical or moral or legal because of it.

          Even one example……

          I should every interest in how Texas manages its border and crime and laws……to be blunt……you don’t live in a vacuum down there sir – nor do I live in a vacuum up here. The illegals and drugs that make their way into PA are airlifted here. Nor does Marcellus Shale Gas miracle its ass to recipient in Texas.

          Its isn’t about trying to just hijack something because a bunch of rabble rousing liberals wanna stir shit up. Its about taking personal responsibility/interest for/in the economic value chain that exists within our own borders.

          • OK…. 🙂 We will disagree with each other, respectfully, of course.

            • Oh..one other thing, kind sir…..you and I can always talk and disagree…I think we understand each other pretty well and not be mad at each other……

              Ahem……….is everybody reading this?

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                I’ve not been real polite though today. Went home, talked to my friend Tanqueray and all is better now.

          • Oh….I actually have to say, we feel we are in a vacuum….we are handling our border problems without the Feds (other than Immigration and DEA) just fine and it is not costing you or anyone except Texas…one thin dime. We do not want nor expect help from the government on our border issue and you are quite right about the drugs getting up there…..however, I will report what is not reported in the msm and likely will not be reported…Texas has stopped border crossings by 72% in one year. AND we did it without Federal help. Most of the nasty stuffis in New Mexico and Arizona and California. We have even plugged the Juarez issue to some extent….the traffic has routed primarily West and is going through New Mexico to LAs Cruces……Why? We do not use bean bags and rubber bullets. BUt we are in a political vacuum here primarily because we tell the Feds to go to hell.

  47. Well, just because…..

    Robert Kiyosaki:
    People are stupid when they think they are smart. This is why the highly educated can be the stupidest people on earth.

  48. Great Day for WI Taxpayers and the (formerly) forced union public employees. The former recognizes this now; the latter will soon, when the sky doesn’t fall, maternity leaves are still covered, they will get paid more than $1/hour, and Upton Sinclair’s Chicago slaughterhouses do not reappear!

    WoooooHoooooo!

    Walker signs budget-repair bill, rescinds layoffs

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/117798133.html

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      And there is still a budget shortfall as Rep Shilling points out. Just proves my point that he ginned up a budget controversy for a more different strategic political objective.

      See its okay when a Republican manufactures a crisis or doesn’t let one go to waste eh?

      Hypocrisy!!

      • ?????

        Yeah, a big budget shortfall. Never denied. As much as PEU claimed he was putting it all on their back, their minimal contributions to their own benefits and pensions were but just a smidget. Now the real budget (with major cuts) goes out and now each level of government has at least some tools at their disposal to deal with them.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          It was never really about the budget Kathy. Especially when we consider contracts that are already in place.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            @Ray,

            Are you only looking at the State budget? I think that municiple budgets who are struggling should be considered, and this law will help them as well.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              @G-Man – how will it help them? Are there examples we can cite?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                @Ray, My understanding is that the law effects all government entities in the state. Unions negotiating with municiplaities would have the same limitations when it comes the benefits in the law.

          • Ray

            I think that is a FALSE accusation.

            While there may be other things beneficial from a purely political play, this is absolutely tied to budgets.

            All Public Labor Unions are about the money, and the money is tax money and it is the budget.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              @JAC – once again you are intentionally offering falsehoods to bolster a lack of credibility in your argument.

              “All Public Labor Unions are about the money, and the money is tax money and it is the budget.”

              No sir – you know this is a lie yet you continue to push it to further your viewpoint. ANY labor contract can and usually does include clauses unrelated to compensation. They typically fall under the category of work rules.

              I also find it comical that you all are insisting this was purely fiscal/budgetary but your get alligator-armed when it comes to the legality of passing the law w/o quorom.

              Very disappointing sir.

              • Ray

                Your supposed logic is confusing me here.

                Money = compensation in many forms when it comes to labor. That includes hours worked, days off, etc etc. All about the money.

                Money = POWER in politics.

                We are talking about political clout of unions and how that relates to STATE and LOCAL budgets.

                Can labor unions negotiate other things? Sure.

                But take away the power to affect money and tell me how many of these public employee unions would have the same membership, let alone any clout.

                Ray, before you accuse me of deliberately putting out False information I suggest you do a better job of considering my comments in the context they are given.

                You claim this was not about budget. Yet the issue was WAGES and BENEFITS and the ability of local govt to have power in that negotiation. That my friend is about MONEY and govt money is tax money and tax money is part of the budget.

                I simply can’t remember the last time the TEACHERS threatened a strike because they didn’t like how the chairs were arranged in the lunch room.

                And I don’t recall saying this was just budgetary. I think it is primarily BUDGET driven. There are obviously other political advantages for the R’s but then those usually go back to MONEY and the impact Public Unions have on the ability to control the Budget.

                They are integrally tied together. To make the claim it has nothing to do with BUDGETS is FALSE.

              • Ray….quorum smorum……they had three weeks to get back..they refused…..get on with the States business….Why are you not totally upset at the dereliction of duty of the Senators that are not there? If you are not there…..you get NO vote. Show up do your job..If you lose…too bad you lost.

                When this caught TExas off guard 10 years ago…..the running of legislators to Oklahoma to avoid quorum and voting…(on redistricitng) , we changed the way thigs are done in Texas..you leave the state….the quorum is reduced….and the fine is tremendous. But that is how we handled it….

                In Wisconsin, you have a duty that has not been peformed and to me that is impeachable.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @D13 – that’s a helluva statement coming from a guy in the military. So when the rules/laws seem to get in the way we just ignore them? IT IS IN THEIR CONSTITUTION!!!!

              • ok,I will digress if it is in their Constitution….that is something that I did not know. But………what about the abandonment of their job….it seems to me…not being a law scholar….that they have also violated their Constitution by not doing their job…running away….

                Seems I remember you lambasted Sarah Palin for quitting…which I agree……but I see this as far worse than her resigning….these Senators are worse than resigning…they are quitters…I do not see it as a protest at all. They ran from their position just as a soldier would run from his….that is cowardice.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                D13 – I do not consider them quitters. Best I can give them is maybe an alternate way of doing a filibuster – that is a stretch. But that is besides the point and where I will step aside because I don’t know what their parliamentary procedures are what emergency provisions exist – meaning – lets assume that instead of them running out of town they were all in a bus that crashed and they were all critically injured. They should have some alternate procedures (business continuity) that kicks in so the State business gets done (or maybe their potential arrest was what that was? I dunno).

                Sad fact is this – the election is over and you ended waaaay on the wrong side of things which means there is gonna be some stuff get passed that you really do not like. Tough shit. That’s how it works. I’m just confused there was no plan B to keep the State’s business moving!

        • Ray, it’s not just a stop gap measure. This has been a long time coming and been building up for years. Unfunded and unsustainable pensions that up to this point, were almost entirely funded by taxpayers have to be changed. You even said in posts earlier this week that employee (ie taxpayer) funded pension are a thing of the past. I AGREE! Because they are unsustainable.

          You also said you were late to the party on the WI issue – perhaps you need to go back and read through the posts. We’ve covered this ad nauseum (sorry everyone!) for 3 weeks now.

          I do not understand how you can begin to say this is not a fiscal issue?????

          • CORRECTION: employer only funded pensions

          • gmanfortruth says:

            In Indiana!

            Meanwhile, a female state worker was assaulted by the union thugs outside a state building.
            The Indy Channel reported, via Free Republic:

            A state worker told police she was assaulted by three men during Thursday’s union rally that brought thousands of people to the steps of the Statehouse.

            The 33-year-old Department of Child Services employee said she was taking a smoke break at the west end of the Indiana Government Center South building just after 12:15 p.m. when she was approached by three men who asked her to use her electronic pass to let them in the building.

            When she refused, directing them toward the public entrance, she said the men pushed her, causing her to fall backward, off the sidewalk, and hit her head.

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

              Unfortunately the 3 thugs were able to “blend back into the crowd” before the State Police arrived. How convenient!

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              Wondering how we knew they were “union thugs”.

              At any rate – hope they have cameras – arrest all three of them press charges.

              • Reasonable assumption. Walks like a thug, beats people like a thug, at a location where union protesters are actively protesting. Could be simple thugs with no union association.
                But that’s not likely, be better to claim they are a fringe minority of union protester, and do not represent the whole organization.

                Innocent until proven guilty, but it’s fair to say suspected union thugs.

  49. Tropical “almost” 40 here – the pavement is calling! Then onto one of my favorite times of year – March Madness! (started just a tad early in WI this year!!!)

    Big Ten tourney – Go Badgers!

    (I’m drinking)30Beers!

  50. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    Here I go again, side-tracking the conversation 🙂

    Unfortunately, this is nothing to smile about. The “money velocity” talk smacks of Keynes, but other than that this analysis is pretty damning.

    http://www.kitco.com/ind/willie/mar092011.html

  51. March 09, 2011
    Union thugs try to silence recall effort in Wisconsin
    Phil Boehmke

    With the Wisconsin Senate and the democratic process being held hostage by 14 Democrat union puppets on the run in the People’s Republic of Illinois, the hard working-tax payers of the Dairy State have begun the recall process. Local patriots have risen to the challenge posed by the irrational and unethical conduct of the Senate Democrats and have volunteered their time and effort in a truly grassroots expression of their abiding faith in representative government.

    This past weekend, peaceful recall petition events came under assault from union agitators eager to flex their muscle and derail the free and democratic process. My friend and fellow Tea Party Patriot Lori White made me aware of the union intimidation that had occurred in the Burlington and Kenosha areas and she put me in touch with Dan Hunt, the leader of the “Recall Wirch” effort.

    State Senator Robert Wirch (D-Pleasant Prairie) has served public sector union interests in the 22nd district since 1997 and is currently subverting the democratic process from an undisclosed location in Illinois.

    Yesterday I spoke with Dan Hunt and he confirmed the stories that have been circulating about union efforts to suppress the “Recall Wirch” petition drive. According to Mr. Hunt, union agitators were already present at Veteran’s Terrace in Burlington more than an hour before the event. Union members representing teachers, firefighters and teamsters had assembled and taken up strategic positions in order to achieve maximum visibility and restrict access by blocking entrances and filling available parking areas.

    The highly organized union mob waved their mass produced signs and periodically deployed at entrances to create a human barrier when vehicles dared to breech their lines, quickly melting back into the crowd after convincing the vehicle’s occupants to leave. Lacking any sense of shame and parenting skills, many of the union agitators brought their young children to help fortify their human barricades. The well trained mercenaries were careful to avoid the sort of physical violence that once accompanied the Obamacare town hall meetings.

    In an e-mail forwarded to me by Lori White, a volunteer named Gerry who was manning a drive-through event in Burlington reported that he was overwhelmed by the union mob. Although they were generally well behaved, “the protesters sucked all the oxygen by strategically blocking our signs from the view of the passerby. Their very real and visible presence effectively hid the fact that we were collecting recall signatures on private property.” Gerry observed that “they were well organized and knew exactly what to do to obstruct our efforts and stay legal.” Sadly, the drive-through site was shut down before noon due to the “unionistas.”

    The extent to which the enemies of free and representative government are willing to go in this battle should be a wake-up call to us all. This is no longer just a local matter, this fight has taken on national significance, or Gerry explains it “The battle has been engaged, we CANNOT lose it, or I fear we lose our State and our Country for good.” The unions and their Democrat puppets (including Mr. Obama) seem to have no compunction about denying the citizens of Wisconsin their First Amendment right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” so we as people of good conscious must rise to meet this challenge.

    President Ronald Reagan warned us not to take our responsibility at citizens lightly when he said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” This is the time when our faith and resolve will be tested. Will future generations be consigned to the tyranny of the state having never known the blessings of freedom and liberty that our forefathers entrusted to our care and keeping?

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/union_thugs_try_to_silence_rec.html

    This is the main problem -People interfering with the process

    • I wonder if the Union dupes realize that nobody CARES BUT the the Unions. I don’t feel the least bit sorry for them.

      Unions may have STARTED a good thing, but now they are nothing but Socialist/Communist Woker groups. Not the people in them. The Mob bosses who run them.

  52. SUFA

    AT LEAST THIS IS SOMEWHAT RELATED TO THE GENERAL TOPIC OF MEDIA.

    For those who don’t think the political operative are on top of their game, just check out the headline and story at Huff Po, which is in turn emanating from Wash. D.C. already.

    “Tsunami Relief And Preparedness Cut In GOP Budget Proposal: National Weather Service”

    NOW LETS GET TO THE STORY THAT CREATED THIS HEADLINE, AND OBVIOUS JAB AT THE REPUBLICANS.

    “WASHINGTON — Thursday night’s massive earthquake in Japan and the resulting tsunami warnings that have alarmed U.S. coasts, seem likely to ignite a debate over a previously little-discussed subsection of the spending bills currently being debated in Congress.

    Tucked into the House Republican continuing resolution are provisions cutting the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including the National Weather Service, as well as humanitarian and foreign aid.

    Presented as part of a larger deficit reduction package, each cut could be pitched as tough-choice, belt-tightening on behalf of the GOP. But advocates for protecting those funds pointed to the crisis in Japan as evidence that without the money, disaster preparedness and relief would suffer.

    “These are very closely related,” National Weather Service Employees Organization President Dan Sobien told The Huffington Post with respect to the budget cuts and the tsunami. “The National Weather Service has the responsibility of warning about tsunami’s also. It is true that there is no plan to not fund the tsunami buoys. Everyone knows you just can’t do that. Still if those [House] cuts go through there will be furloughs at both of the tsunami warning centers that protect the whole country and, in fact, the whole world.””

    OK, LETS STOP A MINUTE. DID EVERYONE CATCH THAT? DISASTER WILL PREVAIL IF THESE CUTS GO THROUGH. RIGHT????

    WELL DID YOU HAPPEN TO CATCH THIS ONE LITTLE SENTENCE BURIED IN THE MIDDLE? “It is true that there is no plan to not fund the tsunami buoys. Everyone knows you just can’t do that.”

    LETS CONTINUE

    “The House full-year continuing resolution, which has not passed the Senate, would indeed make steep cuts to several programs and functions that would serve in a response to natural disasters (not just tsunamis) home and abroad. According to Sobien, the bill cuts $126 million from the budget of the NWS. Since, however, the cuts are being enacted over a six-month period (the length of the continuing resolution) as opposed to over the course of a full year, the effect would be roughly double.”

    NO IT WON’T. THE EFFECT WILL BE EXACTLY THE SAME BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALL BEEN TOLD SINCE THE START OF THE FISCAL YEAR TO PREPARE FOR THIS EVENTUALITY. AGENCIES WERE ADVISED TO LOOK FOR A 10 TO 15% REDUCTION IN GENERAL FUNDING. THEN THE NOV. ELECTIONS HAPPENED AND THEY WERE ALL WARNED IT COULD GET WORSE.

    “As for NOAA, the House GOP cuts are even deeper. The House spending bill is roughly $450 million below the president’s 2011 budget requests. The Senate Democratic bill would be $110 million below that request.”

    OK, BUT WHAT WAS THE FY 2010 SPENDING LEVEL? WHAT THE PRES. 2011 BUDGET REQUEST WAS IS IRRELEVANT. A CONTINUING RESOLUTION REQUIRES SPENDING AT THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR LEVEL. WELL IT USED TO ANYWAY.

    “The White House-allied Center for American Progress, argued that the House spending bill would actually cut $1.2 billion from the president’s budget requests, likely by taking into account that the bill does not provide NOAA the funding increase requested for the Joint Polar Satellite System.”

    DID YOU CATCH THAT????? CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS IS A “WHITE HOUSE-ALLIED” ORGANIZATION. LOVE IT WHEN THEY KEEP TALKING AND SPILL THE BEANS.

    BIAS ANYONE? BIAS? BIAS? HAS ANYONE SEEN BIAS?

    • Wow, if this is such a vital need( 🙄 ) than the president needs to cut NPR instead-I believe he wants to actually raise what we are giving them to approximately 450,000 Million.

  53. Well Hell. Of course they are biased.

    My opinion? Shut the freakin’ government down!! The Repubs should grow a pair and slam the whole thing to a stop just to show Obama they are serious.

    I am sick of hearing Obama and Reid and the others TALK about cutting but not actually DOING anything. Talk out one side and spend out the other.

    At this point I am ready to secceed from the union again and tell the rest of the US to go to hell. Heck, I’m ready to secceed from the State of Georgia!

    • Okey Dokey! I hereby declare myself the President for Life of the Esom Hill Nation! 😀

    • Sen. Rand Paul is the only member of Congress who has entertained not just one, but every single one of the following ideas: Requiring a $2,000 deductible for Medicare plans, raising the age at which Americans can receive Social Security, drastically cutting military spending, eliminating foreign aid to Israel and the rest of the Middle East, and weaning poor Americans off “intergenerational welfare,” more commonly known as Medicaid.

      Nevertheless, he is unhappy with House Republicans’ attempt to cut first $100 billion, now only slightly more than $60 billion, from the budget. Quite simply, these cuts are not enough.

      “Here’s the thing that’s most troubling,” Paul told me in a phone interview. “Even if these House freshmen get $100 billion in cuts, we’re talking about changing the annual deficit from $1.65 trillion, to $1.55 trillion.”

      “So really, you’re talking about still adding trillions in debt every year.”

      The math behind that is that government spending is currently $3.8 trillion and revenues are only $2.2 trillion.

      This kind of thinking makes Paul the most radical man in a party that is trying and failing, for reasons both within and beyond its control, to make good on the essential promise it has made to its base. Paul’s only mission is to help the GOP learn to do something it hasn’t ever really been good at: Reduce the size and scope of government.

      “My purpose is to drive Republicans to be more bold,” Paul said. “Most of them want to wait and see what the president has to offer and make it a bipartisan solution so that you get more political cover.”

      Paul would rather have Pres. Obama come to the GOP, “so that way, if the president does come around to our thinking, he has to meet us somewhere in the middle, and our solution becomes the talked-about solution.”

      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/10/rand-pauls-party-of-one/#ixzz1GKdrlW8t

  54. I’m curious how those of you that are “anti-union” would feel about eliminating Corporations?

    • Todd,

      Eliminate them – all of them!

      They are the spawn of evil – they exist solely by writ of government and as its spawn, lives to feed that evil.

    • Eliminating Corporations? Like this?

      MADDOW: Can we have a wide shot of what Mr. Moore has brought with him? (handcuffs shown)

      MOORE: I brought these with me. I’d like anybody who works on Wall Street, anybody who works for one of the banks, just take a look at this, OK? (holds up cuffs) ‘Cause this is what, this is what’s coming, this is what’s coming for you. Because the people aren’t going to take it anymore. The people are going to demand justice. They’re going to ‘mand, they’re going to demand that your ass is in jail. You’ve taken our money. We want the money back.

      Just out of curiosity, Mr. Moore, do the monsters in your wheelhouse include President Obama — who voted for the Wall Street bailout while still in the Senate? Hard to get around the complicity there.

      How about Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner? You remember, he was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York when the bottom fell out in 2008. Right in the thick of it, you might say. Shortly thereafter, Geithner was assigned to distribute TARP funds. Or “loot the treasury,” as you put it.

      What about House Financial Services Committee chairman Barney Frank, who ignored years of warnings and flashing red lights that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were dangerously overextended? Apparently Frank was distracted by his decade-long personal relationship with a Fannie Mae executive.

      None of these scofflaws have to worry, though. Moore’s fantasies about handcuffs are strictly limited to Republicans.

      Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/2011/03/10/michael-moore-rendered-unhinged-over-wisconsin-declares-war#ixzz1GKybFh2x

      • LOI,
        No, I’m not referring to Michael Moore.

        Unions allow the workers to band together to get better wages, benefits, and working conditions. Corporations allow the owners/investors to band together to pool resources and limit liability. Each has it’s good points and bad points. If one gets substantially more power than the other, it will be able to control the other and large portions of our society.

        Unions were one of the driving forces that created a strong middle class in America. They have been declining for 30+ years, as has the middle class. During this time, wages for the middle class have been flat, while wages/income for the upper class have skyrocketed.

        The Citizens United case gave unions and corporations more political power, but the unions are in decline, while corporations are getting stronger. Public Sector Unions are the last strong hold of unions. As they lose power, the middle class will to, just as corporations and the upper class gain more power.

        If you eliminate corporations, it would take away some of this power, but it would also have a huge impact on our society as a whole. I don’t think the middle class would benefit from that…

        But my point is if unions continue to lose power, corporations will control everything. A few years ago Warren Buffet said “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

        We are quickly becoming a two class society. Eliminating unions will only exasperate this problem. Unless you think a “free-market” will suddenly cause corporations to get a heart and pay workers better.

  55. VH,

    I agree. In this supposed “land of the free”, we should be able to have discussions, even on things that cause discomfort. Can we discuss abortion & gay rights? Racism?
    The problem is when any group tries to shut down reasonable discussion. Are there Islam radicals? Are they a threat to the US? Seems like it is a topic that should be discussed. If they want to include Christian radicals and all radicals, I think that’s OK as well. But if they find radical Islam to be a thousand times greater threat,(or not) that should come out also. Along with the threat level of moderate Islam(hopefully very low).
    Reply

    *
    Todd Says:
    March 11, 2011 at 3:22 pm edit

    LOI,
    If I remember correctly, there were many people upset about a study done a few years ago about right-wing radicals…

    Hmm, you’re not VH, but OK.

    You will have to link whateverthehell study for us to do this right. If it’s one by Southern Poverty whatsit, they don’t upset me except when the media treat them like a credible source, instead of an agenda driven fringe group.

    Or did you mean when our own homeland security issued a memo warning about the possible threat posed by returning US servicemen?

    You may have to overlook some things with me Todd, namely my simple minded ways. I seem to remember a couple buildings falling down that were not caused by earthquakes and such. You can’t fight mother nature, but you can take precautions. But when a group of people proclaim holy war against your country, and then attack it multiple times, I think it’s a very proper response to ask about radical Muslims. And to attack me for that is disingenuous. I am not attacking Muslims. If they have an issue, they and you need to state where you stand on their attacking the US and others. Denounce the violence and we can stand together. Attack me for asking who is seeking to attack us again.

    Have at it, because I can’t see us being on the same side.
    I’m not advocating anything except asking reasonable questions. Freedom of speech, I can ask. You don’t even have to answer. That may mean I question what’s in your basement. I will pay close attention to any odd behavior.
    If I see some odd wires connected to things in you trunk, I will call the police, hope it’s not a bomb, hope it’s not an old stereo that makes me look like an idiot. But I will make that call to 911. If you are not up front against violence, you are what I consider part of the problem. And I won’t give a rat’s ash what you think about me.

    So, been hugging many tree’s lately?LOL

    • LOI,
      I was referring to the Homeland Security memo. The possible threat posed by returning US servicemen was just one part of it.

      I remember part of a building falling down without earth quakes as well.

      And to attack me for that is disingenuous.

      Attack me for asking who is seeking to attack us again.

      Exactly how/where did I attack you?

      You say you’d be fine if they want to include Christian radicals. But your actions in the past show otherwise. And when caught in your own hypocrisy, you accuse me of attacking you…

      Have at it, because I can’t see us being on the same side.
      I’m not advocating anything except asking reasonable questions. Freedom of speech, I can ask. You don’t even have to answer. That may mean I question what’s in your basement. I will pay close attention to any odd behavior.
      If I see some odd wires connected to things in you trunk, I will call the police, hope it’s not a bomb, hope it’s not an old stereo that makes me look like an idiot. But I will make that call to 911. If you are not up front against violence, you are what I consider part of the problem. And I won’t give a rat’s ash what you think about me.

      Fine with me. But if your neighbor – especially your MUSLIM neighbor – were to do this to you, you’d be screaming holy-war-here-comes-sharia-law at the top of your lungs.

      • Todd,

        My bad! I meant to direct it at those who have attacked the Rep. calling for hearings. Do you know anything about that CAIR organization? I think the media reaction has been comparable to branding everyone a racist who questions Obama’s economic policies. And that ends intelligent discussion.

        “But if your neighbor – especially your MUSLIM neighbor – were to do this to you, you’d be screaming holy-war-here-comes-sharia-law at the top of your lungs.”

        You do not know me very well, good sir. It takes a lot to make me yell, no screaming. Holy war? Not a chance in “ell.
        Muslim extremists want a religious war. We want them to stop attacking everyone. Our war/my war is against terrorism. If you are not a terrorist, welcome to the neighborhood, would ya, could ya, be my neighbor???
        Start demanding sharia law, I will firmly say no, and explain
        why to the neighborhood. And if you abuse your wife or children in a way that I know it occurs, we will have a chat, and I won’t give a rats ash what your holy book allows you to do to them.

  56. gmanfortruth says:

    Listening to coverage of the Japan disaster. The talk is about the nuke plant that they can’t seem to cool down. The latest is that radioactivity is 8000 times what it should be. I wonder if this could effect us if it melts down.

    • Us, the US? No. Japan, it could be bad, but I would bet on Three-Mile Island bad as a worst case, not a Chernobyl. Now a scary thought, a true China Syndrome in their “Ring of Fire” unstable region. I don’t think a modern core could reach such depths. An evil scientist might build one for a James Bond flick, but not real world. So that’s a simple rednecks opinion.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

  57. What does everyone think about this? I find the ideas that those who are supposed to protect you and put out fires-writing this letter and making treats is totally unexceptable.

    Support us or Else: Wis. Unions Bully Local Businesses With Ultimatum

    * Posted on March 11, 2011 at 4:00pm by Emily Esfahani Smith Emily Esfahani Smith

    *

    Having lost the battle over collective bargaining rights in the capital, the Wisconsin unionistas are now taking their fight to local businesses.

    Seven union heads have sent the below letter to Marshall & Ilsley Corporation, a financial services firm. In the letter, the union members give the president of the company an ultimatum: publicly denounce Gov. Scott Walker’s anti-collective bargaining law, or face union boycott.

    March 10, 2011
    Mr. Tom Ellis, President
    Marshall & Ilsley Corporation
    770 N. Water Street
    Milwaukee, WI 53202
    SENT VIA FASCIMILE AND REGULAR MAIL
    Dear Mr. Ellis:

    As you undoubtedly know, Governor Walker recently proposed a “budget adjustment bill” to eviscerate public employees’ right to collectively bargain in Wisconsin…

    As you also know, Scott Walker did not campaign on this issue when he ran for office. If he had, we are confident that you would not be listed among his largest contributors. As such, we are contacting you now to request your support.

    The undersigned groups would like your company to publicly oppose Governor Walker’s efforts to virtually eliminate collective bargaining for public employees in Wisconsin. While we appreciate that you may need some time to consider this request, we ask for your response by March 17. In the event that you do not respond to this request by that date, we will assume that you stand with Governor Walker and against the teachers, nurses, police officers, fire fighters and other dedicated public employees who serve our communities.

    In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining, please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the goods and services provided by your company. However, if you join us, we will do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership in the fight to preserve the right of public employees to be heard at the bargaining table.

    Wisconsin’s public employee unions serve to protect and promote equality and fairness in the workplace. We hope you will stand with us and publicly share that ideal.

    In the event you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact the
    Director of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, Jim Palmer, at 608.273.3840.

    Thank you in advance for your consideration. We look forward to hearing from you soon.

    James L. Palmer, Executive Director
    Wisconsin Professional Police Association
    Mahlon Mitchell,President
    Professional Professional Fire Fighters
    Jim Conway, President
    International Association of Fire Fighters Local 311
    John Matthews, Execuctive Director
    Madison Teachers, Inc.
    Keith Patt, Executive Director
    Green Bay Education Association
    Bob Richardson, President
    Dane County Deputy Sheriffs Association
    Dan Frei, Prersident
    Madison Professional Police Officers Association

    The primary signatory of the letter is James L. Palmer, the executive director of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association:

    The unions have also taken aim at a chief financial backer of Gov. Walker, M&I bank.

    From The Nation:

    M&I Bank is the largest bank in Wisconsin, and was the recipient of $1.7 billion in TARP bailout money from the federal government. The bundled contributions from M&I executives were Walker’s second largest source of campaign funds. According to records provided by the Sunlight Foundation, executives at M&I Bank gave $46,308 to Walker’s campaign. And now, a group of local unions in Wisconsin have threatened to pull their money from M&I Bank unless it denounces Scott Walker’s attack on workers’ rights.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/support-us-or-else-wisc-unions-bully-local-businesses-with-ultimatum/

    • Buck the Wala says:

      So it is unacceptable for a group to boycott a business due to that business’ financial support of a candidate or cause that the group disagrees with?

      So much for ‘free market’ principles..

      • That’s the point you seem to be missing Buck, this isn’t just a Group-this is a group who has the power to not respond when you have a fire-or a burglary-they are not just a group because they have a responsibility to these people they are threatening and these tactics are about the same as a protection racket. I

        • Buck the Wala says:

          Did you read what you posted? “…we will publically and formally boycott the goods and services…”

          There was absolutely no mention or indication of any threat of refusal to respond to an emergency. Now you’re just injecting your own biases and reading into things.

          • Are you kidding me-you cannot see how inappropriate this is-and do you really think they have to write it out for it to be perceived as a threat beyond that which was written-why don’t you try to put yourself in the position of receiving one of these from your police department. See if you don’t feel threatened.

        • WOW. Imagine if a Tea Party organization acted in the same manner as these Unions have.

          I WONDER what kinds of steps would have been taken by the Government while the Unions and Progressives cheered them on.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        “Do what we want or else” What the hell is free about that! That is liberal bullshit, nothing more.

        • Buck the Wala says:

          So individual members of the unions should not be free to withdraw their money from this bank in protest of the bank’s financial backing of Walker?

          If a conservative group were to boycott a bank or company due to its financial support of Obama (or any liberal official), would you similarly criticize that group, or would you applaud their efforts?

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Individual decisions are just fine with me. When a organization, simply boycotts because of providing monies to a candidate that the other group disagrees with is OK too!

            When an organized group says “do what we say or we will cause you economic hardship”. That is extorsion. It’s no damn different than the mob going in demanding money every week for “protection” from the very people providing the protection.

            If I were the company owner (CEO), I’d tell the Union bosses to go fuck themselves.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              So what’s good for the goose isn’t good for the gander?

              You know as well as I do that a letter written by a group of individuals is much stronger than one written by a single individual. You try to make a distinction between an ‘organization’ (which you say would be fine) from an ‘organized group’ (which you say is extortion). Where does this distinction come from?

              The unions from my understanding, have many of their pension plans held by this bank. Are you suggesting that they should not be allowed to work towards moving those plans elsewhere? The CEO is free to tell the unions to go screw themselves, but by doing so, the CEO must be willing to say good bye to their business. What’s wrong with that?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                The CEO should tell them to get their money the hell out, IMHO. It’s great publicity, which would probably get them a better customer base.

                I think you missed my point. They are not threatening aboycott because of political support, they are demanding a specific action “denouncing Walker”. This is extorsion. If they had said we’re pulling our business because you supported Walker in the election, that would be fine. But they demand an action. That sir is liberal bullshit at it’s smelliest.

            • And use their little red signs to do it with.

        • Damn. I’m with Buck on this one. They have made no threats to not do their jobs. Anyone can call for a boycott, they are just better organized and able than most groups. The VA or NRA could do the same.

          Best answer is if all Walkers supporters counter them with giving them their business if they stand firm.

          • I’m sorry-police officers especially have to much power to mistreat people through the power of their jobs. To make any kind of threat. Period

            • VH,

              You are absolutely correct in how much power they have. But they are innocent until they commit a crime. A boycott is not a crime. If they refuse to put out a fire or arrest a criminal, etc, to do their job, then they are in the legal wrong.

              And this may come back to haunt them, some mayors and police chiefs could find their services no longer needed come next election.

              • Illusion-this is inappropriate, unethical, and just all the way around wrong. One who has been given power over me, as a trusted public servant-must be held to a higher standard. Just the idea of threatening those whom they have given an oath to serve is just Wrong-I don’t care what they have done or haven’t done. Just the threat is inappropriate when it cannot be separated from their power.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            LOI, It’s not the boycott part that pisses me off. It’s the demand to “denounce” or else.

            • G!

              I don’t like it, but I respect their right. And to be fair, the NRA has called for boycotts before. I think any fair look at what the unions have demanded in the past shows they have too much power and have abused it. As long as they are only boycotting, it’s an ethical/moral question. I do not think armed public servants should be leading such efforts, but I understand their legal right to do so.

              I think it’s a fight fire with fire thing. If 90% of Wisconsin is non-union, they can support boycotted companies to greater effect than the unions can, the bank could come out even better off.

              • As individuals they have a right to boycott, whomever they please but as public servants they do not send out threatening letters-demanding anything. And they sure as hell shouldn’t use there officials titles to do so.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                LOI, Forget boycotts. They demanded that these companies take an action that may be against their principles and denounce Walker. That is typical Liberal/Progressive control tactics. That’s where my argument lies.

              • Buck the Wala says:

                Whenever there is a boycott there is some attached demand. You don’t boycott for the sake of boycotting; you boycott to achieve some end.

                I must say that I am very bothered with the fact that you are so against this course of action, when in past posts you have been so clear as to the ability of individuals to take personal responsibility, to step up and take action absent government to take a stand and accomplish something.

                The unions feel strongly against Walker; this bank is a major backer of Walker. The unions have every right to stand up and ‘demand’ the bank disavow Walker or risk losing their business. Likewise, the bank has every right to tell the unions to go to hell.

                There is absolutely nothing wrong, nor inappropriate, unethical, whatever word you want to use here, for the unions to take this immensely appropriate action (in particular I am talking about the police union). Frankly I am surprised to find you think otherwise.

              • Let me see if I can explain it to you in away you might get it-You are an attorney-you represent this bank-but the organization you work for-send him a letter threatening to withdraw their money from his account if he doesn’t stop-do you think he would be able to continue trusting you to represent him. Would this not be unethical for you to continue representing him.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Buckster,

                I understand your surprise at my stance on this, so I will offer an explaination.

                I grew up in Youngstown, Ohio. In my youth, Y-town was known as little Chicago because of heavy mob presence. I learned and seen first hand how they operate. We also had a heavy union presence, whom were associated with the mob, which empowered them even more. The current tactics being used are identicle to the tactics used in those days. Intimidation, threats, be it economical or physical, were common. I had relatives involved, one was gunned down with machine guns at his residence in Boardman Ohio a long time ago. His name was Jack Tobin.

                I fully understand the mentallity of the union mindset. As an ex-Teamster, I know that even local elections can lead to violence, I’ve seen it.

                I have no problems with boycatts, it happened all the time, including picketing, and still goes on today. I can see a strike where they demand better wages or benefits, that’s life with unions. What I don’t like about this is that they demand someone say something against their apparent beliefs. It’s no different than the mob actions back in the day, and will ultimately lead to some violence. Racketeering comes in many forms.

                G!

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Scroll down to July 25, 1979. The report is a misrepresentation of the events, but dead is dead.

                http://www.americanmafia.com/Mob_Report/7-22-02_Mob_Report.html

  58. Thinking out loud here…

    I get into a disagreement with Ray and I get told to ‘find another blog’, and get called ‘ignorant’, am called a bitch by way of a backdoor slam, and get told to STFU.

    D13 gets into a disagreement with Ray and Ray ‘respectfully disagrees’.

    AHAA HAHAHAHA AAAAHHHHAAAAAAAAAAA, OOOOOOO, HEEHEHHEHEEHEEEEEEEEEEEE, BAAAHAAHAAAHAAAHHAA!

    i LOVE IT! Now by my own choice I will stfu! 🙂

    • You’re kidding me. When did you get told that?

      And when did Ray start running this blog?

      And when did the Progressive Liberals start telling the rest of us what we could and could not say?

      Now you know Anita why I have almost stopped coming here.

      Damn places is getting too filled up with assholes for my taste! :-b

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Damn am I that bad?

        gmanfortruth.wordpress.com

        • Hey G! I haven’t been here in so long I didn’t even know you HAD a blog.

          I will try and keep up more.

          Whoever did that to Anita can kiss my ass though. I have had it happen to me here and it ain’t fun. Ain’t polite to be called ignurnt neither. 🙂

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Esom, LOL, So far I’ve managed to be called crazy in the last two weeks, but, it’s probably true, so I let it go. Anita can stick up for herself, she’s a tough one, she just needs to bite back a little harder sometimes (never quit girl!).

            I started my blog about a month ago. I’m also contributing here on a regular basis. I like both, more chances to be heard.

            I don’t take some of the nasty stuff personnal. kinda like a big family, sometimes brothers and sisters just don’t see eye to eye, but I care for all of them and hope they feel the same.

            Good to hear from Ya!

            • You’re right. If you’re gonna blog, you have to grow some thick skin. Especially here.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              G-man – I hope I’ve never called you crazy. After learning a bit more about you I can do nothing but take my hat off to you. IMHO you live life maybe a little the hard way, but certainly the right way.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Ray, No, you have never called me crazy. We have always had mutual respect for one another. My hat is off to you as well, you speak your mind, and don’t seem to care about political correctness in doing so. That we have in common.

                As far as living life a little the hard way? I love it! I love being more and more self sufficient each day. It gives me a sense of peace. I don’t have to answer to anybody! If that’s the hard way, well I’m there! 🙂

                Peace!

            • I love Gman …. I love Anita … and I’d marry Kathy if she’d lose the shoes already.

              Hell, I even “like” BF … (although sometimes I get headaches when I see he’s posted something that I have to scroll through for 20 minutes). I’ve still caught more hell from left wing blogs (so-called liberal democrats really don’t like my take on The One–in fact a year ago one started an “I hate Charlie Stella blog” and called me “the new voice of right wing America” … a genuinely decent guy who got caught up in the passion (and didn’t like being contradicted) … and I know the “asshole” reference up above at least as me included … so it goes. Adults will handle it fine …

              For the record, though … that Gman … oy vey.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                😆

                Back to Ya!

              • Hey Charlie –

                From my personal experience with BF. Used to get so PO’d at his responses, I mean PO’d. Then there would be times his responses made my brain hurt, and they still sometimes do. But I’ve figured out what that hurt is – my brain is being forced to work in areas I either didn’t want to think about, or were just not used in some time.

                I don’t agree with everything he offers by any stretch – but he does make me think and evaluate my beliefs.

                And sorry, I keep the shoes so you better keep things good with Mrs. Stella.

              • Also, today’s BF is totally calm and patient compared with the BF of the early SUFA days. Go back and read some of his “debates” with USW. Whew!

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Esom – I no more run this blog than Buck Belue was the best Georgia Bulldog QB

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      I respectfully disagree with you Anita.

  59. Sir Michael Tyson and George W. Bush …

  60. gmanfortruth says:

    There are now five nuclear reactors in danger of meltdown in Japan. I sure hope the Japanese have their act together, this could be a big, big problem. Some prayers wouldn’t hurt at all! Sad day for Japan, and the world.

  61. Todd

    Do you see major problems for society if this were to occur

    Sure. A lot of our ‘society’ has built a number of constructs to manage and work around their existence to a point that these constructs -though perversions- have become the “normal”.

    Example: limited liability. A corporation can suffer a large loss, but the real persons who made the decisions resulting in this consequence are immune or have most of the damage mitigated.

    But harm is a zero-sum game. If I steal from you, but only have to return half to “solve” my problem, you still lost half!

    So Corporations simply transfer the suffering onto the innocent.

    But society has built a number of “workarounds” to this – from “acceptance”; that is, “you know what you were getting into when dealing with a Corporation” to making ‘side deals’ that re-invoke responsibility.

    As I said, distortions.

    So, eliminating Corporations would leave these distortions still in place for a time, which would confuse society for awhile and confusion causes problems.

    But the problems that may result in eliminating Corporations would be a lot less then the problems caused by the existence of Corporations

    • BF

      As I recall our prior discussion on this with Mr. Budge of Electric City, it was also concluded that a sudden elimination could cause severe problems for companies seeking capital investment. Which of course goes back to the distortions created by deflecting liability.

      This is within the group of problems you describe but more specific, so I thought worthy of mention.

      I see it like many of the maladies, without addressing the underlying moral principles within our culture/society, simply pulling out the knives could kill the patient.

      Hope your weekend is going well.
      JAC

      • JAC

        Agreed.

        When society has learned to live like cannibals, and they cannot conceive of other sources of food, society will starve if cannibalism it is suddenly halted.

        At the same time, it is important to always point out how perverse cannibalism is and not advocate for more of it or partake in it for one’s self.

    • Black Flag & JAC,
      I agree, the removal of limited liability creates problems for raising capital. In order to invest in a company (not a corporation), you become a part owner and are exposed to any liabilities the company incurs. That means all owners would probably want to be more involved to manage their risk. It would sure mess up the entire investment atmosphere.

      • Todd,

        Yes it would – temporarily.

        But making money is still the goal of investments, so investments would not stop, but merely change.

        As you pointed out, instead of random, hands-off, investments – it probably would change to specific, focused, hands-on. And that would be a very good thing, in the long run.

        The current investments are from old, successful guys who have worked to get, and now leave their industry with cash in hand – and by remote control, try to make it grow (or at least, not shrink as fast).

        The “revolutionary” change would essentially give motive to these highly skilled, highly experienced, highly successful guys to stay involved directly – we would have a whole lot less of business failures, a whole lot more of fantastic business successes – and a job for “old people” instead of sending them off to the grassy fields to die.

%d bloggers like this: