Dear Gov. D-bag of WI: (Page 35)

You are both correct. Now that Unions and Democratic Politicians (who have now overtly expressed their support of this approach) are directly threatening private businesses unless they publicly support their cause, it is very clear what their real agenda is: they are willing to the throw the private sector and taxpayers under the bus in any way to protect their rigged negotiating table.

http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/117764004.html

Please explain to me how attempting to harm private Wisconsin businesses or drive them out of the state is in any way good for the middle-class and the State, and is in any way a defensible position.

This is a Mafia tactic straight out of Prohibition-era Chicago. "Nice business ya got there. Shame if something was to happen to it if you didn't fall into line and voice a little support for the cause."



Edited by scoobysdad 2011-03-13 11:48 AM

Kind of exposes so many union leaders for the thugs they are.... no, make that complete thugs.

Who were are all the people on this forum alone that said it's ok to defy/break the rules, whatever it takes to defeat Walker, short of murder?

This is what happens when the rule of law is not observed, especially when the rule of law is broken by those who have taken an oath to uphold it.

Why should anyone else care about the rules when the Wisconsin 14 openly defy the rules and a very vocal minority shout & praise their cowardly act.

This user's post has been ignored.

Edited by Fred Doucette 2011-03-13 2:55 PM

Again, I'll ask, what rule of law was broken.  Not the senate rules, but what LAW was broken, since you insist upon using that word.

It's as much above board as the Republican decision to strip the budgetary portions of the Bill in a comittee ( which may or may not have violated Wisconsin's Open Meetings Law ) and passed the anti-union measures with the lesser required quorum.

It's also the same tactic used in the US Senate by Republicans who wanted to block a Climate Change Bill:

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-11-03/politics/climate.change_1_climate-change-senate-environment-republicans?_s=PM:POLITICS

If all you are going to do is rant about "cowardly actions", then you're not likely to have anyone listen.  If you can drop the heated rhetoric ( and this goes equally for UWMadTri ), you may find better luck in getting people to listen to your ideas.

As soon as you start flinging character attacks around, I tune you out ( both of you ), and you do little to help bolster your "side".  

Also regarding boycotts, Tea Party members are organizing boycotts of GE and Johnson & Johnson because they supported Obama and his policies.  How is that different?

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2010/11/22/next-tea-party-target-corporate-america

If you want to argue the substance of the issue, argue that.  The actions ( senators blocking quorum, boycotts, manipulations of parliamentary procedures, etc. ) that you so vehemently decry are not the sole domain of either party, and have all been employed by both political parties in the past.  Or if you do disagree with the actions that much, please be honest enough to call out your own party when they do it as well.

Finally, regarding the death threats made against the Republicans, *those people* are the real cowards.  They should be investigated, tracked down, and dealt with as severely as the law allows.

Regarding the Rule of Law they broke I've provide the portion of the WI constitution the 14 are breaking.

As far as me calling their act of fleeing the state cowardly, I see your point on that. One person's corardly act is anothers partriotic act. Please note, i did not call them cowards, the act of fleeing the state to avoid their oath of office is what i said, that  may be splitting hairs but there is a difference.

As far as the Tea Party calling for boycots, I think a group of indivudials doing that is a lot different than those that control the police and fire departments. They have a monopoly on public servies they have a sworn duty to protect everyone, how I read that letter and the problem I see that is implied in it is if you don't go along with us don't expect the same level of service as those who support us. If you don't see a difference in those two threats of "boycott" I don't what to say.

So how do you feel about public servants sworn to protect EVERYONE sending out this letter requesting support tht Scobbs posted?

I'd be interested what evidence you can provide that this violated any rule or law. 

The law ( and this is a state law, not just a senate rule ) requires 24 hours notice for all public meetings, unless there is an emergency.  2 hours notice was all that was given for the committee meeting where the Bill was modified to the form that was passed by the Senate with the lesser quorum.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/117780348.html

Here's the law:

http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&d=stats&jd=19.81

Of course, there is another take on the events as noted by the Republicans, which is why I said "may or may not".

 

My understanding of what you posted is that it is true unless (and I don't know the exact term) they are in a special or emergency session then it can be held immediately after notice has been given to all of the Senators office. My understanding is that they gave more notice than is/was required by their rules.

I think the point of order that they are contesting is that since they weren't in their offices even though there was a special/emergency session that they had to use the two day rule since they were not in their office.  While any argument can be made from what I've heard (and I haven't and won't read all of their rules and parlamentary procedures) on fox, cnn & msnbc that's my take on it.

I think the question is had they been in their office during this session would that meeting notice have been adequate for the open meeting process?

The two day meeting notice is necessary when they are not in the (whatever the correct term is) session, which they were as far as I undersand.

A follow-up to my earlier post about Unions, with the endorsement of at least one of the AWOL 14 Democratic Senators, threatening private businesses unless they support the union cause-- apparently, someone is already acting on that threat, even before their own stated deadline.

http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20110313-greendale-graffiti,0,4403...

The unions and Democrats must take full responsibility for this. Remember how concerned they were with "the consequences of words" after the attack in Arizona? They have threatened war on private businesses and obviously some are acting on their threats.

Unfortunately, M&I Bank is not the only one being threatened. Sendik's grocery store on the East Side of Milwaukee has also been threatened by a group based at MATC for supporting Jeff Stone for County Executive (he's not even related to Walker or State government-- his crime is merely being a Republican.) In addition, local restaurants and print shops have also been threatened with boycotts for the mere act of printing Republican materials or serving as the venue for Republican events.

There's no other way to say this-- unions have declared war on free speech and the private sector in our State. After all, as they are so quick to call out, "an attack against one is an attack against all".

This user's post has been ignored.

Fred I'd be interested to know your thoughts on the difference of the Tea Party calling for boycots on some big corporations who who supported President Obamas legislation and the Firemens Union, Police Union and the Teachers Unions sending out letters to business's demanding they pick a side and not responding will be deemed as being against them?

This user's post has been ignored.

Edited by Fred Doucette 2011-03-15 6:47 AM

So, State public employees unions have now issued a "hit" list of companies to be targeted for boycotts. In many cases, such as with M&I Bank, these companies haven't even made contributions to the campaign of Gov. Walker or expressly supported him, but their EMPLOYEES have. IOW, they are trying to kill the freedom of speech of individuals by threatening their employers.

Of course, this boycott strategy brings up several interesting questions. If unions are trying to protect the "middle-class", how will killing employers that provide jobs for thousands of middle-class workers benefit that cause (especially when just 15% of the middle-class belongs to a public union)? (Or, one must ask, is protecting the middle-class REALLY their cause?) Also, if you kill off the private sector companies and individuals who make up the Wisconsin tax base, how will you be able to raise any money to support public sector jobs?

My hope is that they really push these boycotts and that more Democrats come out and explicitly endorse these tactics. If nothing else, it will finally expose the real enemy of their alliance: Wisconsin taxpayers.

Here is a partial list of the Wisconsin companies targeted:

ABC Supply Co
Agrecol Corp
Allen Edmonds Shoes
AMK Concepts & Services
Anew Health Care Services Inc
AO Smith Corp
Apache Stainless Steel
Artisan Partners
Atlantic DQ
Audio Implements/GKC
Badger Meter
Baraboo Growth
Bevco Ergonomic Seating
Blomquist Benefits Consulting
Boerke Co Inc
Bradley Foundation
Brian Retzlaff Trucking
Briggs & Stratton
Burke Properties
Burlington Northern Santa Fe…
Call Solutions
Campbell Wrapper Corp
Carpenter
CD Smith Construction
Chambers & Owen
Charro Restaurante
Charter Manufacturing
Church Mutual Insurance
Cobalt Partners LLC
Commonwealth Development Corp…
Continental Properties Co Inc
County Concrete
Couri Insurance Agency
Custom Pak Products
EBY-Brown Co
Einhorn Associates
Emergency Medicine Specialists
Endeavors Group
Fabco Equipment Inc
Fashion Angels Enterprises
Feather Larson & Synhorst…
Fiduciary Management
First American Funding
Fisher Barton Inc
Glenora Co
GMR Marketing
Gogebic Taconite LLC
Gold Leaf Development
Hal Leonard Publishing
Hammes Co
Harris Associates
Hay Creek Pallett
Heartland Advisors
Hexagon Investments
High Crossing Development Corp
Holton Brothers Construction
Horton Group
Hovde Financial
Hy Cite Corp
I-Robot
Iconica
Inpro Corp
Insight Industries
Irgens Development Partners
Johnson Controls
Johnsonville Foods
JSD Professional Services Inc
Kapur & Associates
KBS Construction
Koss Corp
Krier Foods
Kwik Trip
Lorman Education Services
Lubar & Co
M&I Bank
Meissner, Tierney, et al
Michels Corp
Midwest Neurosurgical
Milksource
MillerCoors
Minnesota Wild
MJ Construction Inc
Morrison Creek Cranberry
Nicholas Company Inc
Nova Surgical LLC
Orthopaedic Associates of…
PACUR
Panduit Corp
Paper Machinery Corp
Payne & Dolan
Pinstripe Inc
Plastic Surgery Group
Prent Corp
Promotions Unlimited
RCI FirstPathway Partners
Reiman Publications
Richardson Industries
Rite Hite Corp
Roehl Transport
Salomon Smith Barney
Sargento Inc
SC Johnson & Sons
Schneider National
School Choice
Sendik’s Food Market
Shannon Sales Inc
SIG Financial Holdings
Specialty Underwriters
St John Properties Inc
Standard Process Laboratories
Stark Investments
Super Steel Products
Tamarack Petroleum Co
Tankcraft Corp
ThedaCare
Tries & Rice
Uihlein Wilson Architects
US Counseling Service
US Oil Co
V Duane Rath Foundation
Wausau Homes
Wausau Paper
West Allis Salvage
West Bend Clinic
Zenith Tech

My concern isn't for the lack of business or the increase in business that may result but the lack of service that those who don't fall in line with the union bosses may experience.

Uhh, the group is named, and a quick google comes up with quite a bit of additional sources:

http://www.freedomworks.org/press-releases/freedomworks-joins-coalition-to-boycott-dawn-soap

http://www.freedomworks.org/news/tea-party-affiliated-groups-call-for-immelt-to-res

Who is Freedomworks you ask?  Good question:

http://www.freedomworks.org/about/board-of-directors

 Okay, want more sources:

http://www.libertycentral.org/disagree-with-chris-matthews-join-the-dawn-boycott-2010-06

http://www.gopjournal.com/?p=851