Scott Walker: Worst Governor Ever

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

So Wisconsin asshole Scott Walker, who is best known for attempting to bust his state's public unions and sucking up to what he thought was a Koch brother, recently added another feather to his cap of right-wing twatitude by signing the repeal of the state's Equal Pay Act.

A Wisconsin law that made it easier for victims of wage discrimination to have their day in court was repealed on Thursday, after Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) quietly signed the bill.

The 2009 Equal Pay Enforcement Act was meant to deter employers from discriminating against certain groups by giving workers more avenues via which to press charges. Among other provisions, it allows individuals to plead their cases in the less costly, more accessible state circuit court system, rather than just in federal court.

In November, the state Senate approved SB 202, which rolled back this provision. On February, the Assembly did the same. Both were party-line votes in Republican-controlled chambers.

Just another day in the life of the modern Republican party. How anyone can vote for these worthless pieces of shit is beyond me.

Scott Walker, can you be more obvious if you wore a top hat and twirled a thin black mustache?

Part of me hates him, and another part of me thinks that when Wisconsin implodes into itself even more everybody got what they fucking deserved and voted for.

I hope they keep voting Republican because I'm tired of the cycle of vote Republican, have him repeal 40 years of worker's rights, vote Democrat, have him fix shit, but not fast enough so let's vote the same assholes in we voted right out last time on a lark because they look like good drinkin' buddies and hate all the same wrong colored people I hate.. rinse and repeat etc.

Why would someone wants to sign a bill that strips poor employees of the ability to go to court over being cheated in their pay? That's directly encouraging exploitation.

This isn't even 'disagree with', which I obviously do, but I can't grasp why someone would want to do that under any circumstances.

I love that this happened at roughly the same time that the chairman of the Republican National Committee Reince Priebus was saying that the "War on Women" the Republican party has going is just a Democrat invention.

But really, why doesn't Walker just legally change his name to Governor Snidely Whiplash? It's not like it'd make him any more fucking obvious. Besides, isn't this guy facing a Recall Election soon? Seems to me the appropriate strategy when facing that would be "try and make more people like you", not "If I'm going down I'm taking your rights with me!"

Blablahb:
Why would someone wants to sign a bill that strips poor employees of the ability to go to court over being cheated in their pay? That's directly encouraging exploitation.

This isn't even 'disagree with', which I obviously do, but I can't grasp why someone would want to do that under any circumstances.

Because they want to be able to exploit you.

ReservoirAngel:
I love that this happened at roughly the same time that the chairman of the Republican National Committee Reince Priebus was saying that the "War on Women" the Republican party has going is just a Democrat invention.

But really, why doesn't Walker just legally change his name to Governor Snidely Whiplash? It's not like it'd make him any more fucking obvious. Besides, isn't this guy facing a Recall Election soon? Seems to me the appropriate strategy when facing that would be "try and make more people like you", not "If I'm going down I'm taking your rights with me!"

He's rich. He doesn't need people to like him. He doesn't care if he's recalled. All he has to do is make enough of his friends rich on his way out the door as he can.

Then the dumb fucks will vote in another Republican who's claimed to have 'changed', like they did in 2010, and it doesn't matter. Which is precisely why I hope the guy that they recall Scott for is just as bad.

Because if they recall Scott and get somebody competent in, 2 years later they're going to be like "Lol, things are cool now, let's take a gamble on Scott Walker again!" and bam, same shit.

Damien Granz:
Because they want to be able to exploit you.

I get that that's the obvious and logical explanation, but it's hard to grasp someone would sit in his office and literally think "Yes, let's fuck over some people who can't afford it really badly, to add maybe a few cents more profit for a company that can afford much worse".

It's hard to believe someone could be that much without a concious or ignorant enough to not realise the consequences somewhere along the legalislating process.

Blablahb:

Damien Granz:
Because they want to be able to exploit you.

I get that that's the obvious and logical explanation, but it's hard to grasp someone would sit in his office and literally think "Yes, let's fuck over some people who can't afford it really badly, to add maybe a few cents more profit for a company that can afford much worse".

It's hard to believe someone could be that much without a concious or ignorant enough to not realise the consequences somewhere along the legalislating process.

Because he doesn't give a shit! He's firmly in the employ of those who would seek to further impoverish people to line their own pockets.

From everything I can tell about Scott Walker, he's a fucking sociopath. Or, as Mitt Romney called him, a hero.

Blablahb:

Damien Granz:
Because they want to be able to exploit you.

I get that that's the obvious and logical explanation, but it's hard to grasp someone would sit in his office and literally think "Yes, let's fuck over some people who can't afford it really badly, to add maybe a few cents more profit for a company that can afford much worse".

It's hard to believe someone could be that much without a conscious or ignorant enough to not realize the consequences somewhere along the legislating process.

It's only hard to grasp because you're trying to portray him as a decent person, then work from there.

These are the guys who say the best motivation in the world's greed so nothing else ever has to be done but let greedy people be greedy. Then they do some greedy shit, and the rest of us collectively go "Nobody can be that goddamn greedy", and try to rationalize him as something else.

I'm not surprised a bit. When they come out and claim their only motivation is greed, then claim that they are an unthinking profit generating machine, I'm never surprised when they do something stupid or wrong.

But it's not incredibly hard, if people aren't given a name or face, if they're a statistic on a spreadsheet, to cannibalize them for 'few cents more profit'.

You say that their company can afford much worse, but these are the people that are pushing to not allow the Bush Tax cuts expire because the rich can't afford it.. but also pushing for a flat tax and increases in payroll taxes that puts the burden on the poor and middle class on the idea that those who own nothing and are in control of nothing aren't pulling their own weight and can afford more.

If you try to see Scott Walker's actions from the point of view of a decent person who's not motivated entirely by greed, it won't make sense, but that's the problem, is that a Scott Walker that is motivated by something other than greed is an imaginary person.

When their platform REVOLVES around motivating themselves on greed, I can't really expect anything to come out of them but greed, except by accident.

Well. At least it'll make a nice daily show episode.

What else can I say? Wisconsin is fucked 6 ways from sunday. Good luck guys, you'll need it.

Just so you know, the recall Scott Walker campaign DOES accept out-of-state contributions.

One of the downsides of the Republican party's fixation on conservative purity in its own ranks is this brand of politician, that being someone that votes, signs, and proposes everything for the specific purpose of grading out as a "true" conservative. That sort of sub-human political android is able to exist, of course, because of the number of voters that vote along party lines and cannot perceive a world in which critical thinking doesn't result in voting Republican.

arbane:
Just so you know, the recall Scott Walker campaign DOES accept out-of-state contributions.

Fair's fair, I say. If that's the way he's determined the game can be played, then he has to deal with that. Don't write the rules if you can't deal with everyone else playing by them.

I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

Yeah, man. Fuck principles! He makes people who aren't on my team angry! WOO!!! USA! USA! USA! USA!

I can't wait until I'm out of this country.

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

I'll point out the same "logic" could be applied to AIDS, Global Warming, Robert Mugabe, and <godwin>Hitler</godwin>. Unless you can point to something GOOD he's actually done, I'd recommend not sounding like a reflexively contrarian Republibot who would cheer for the sun going nova if you thought it would upset a hippie.

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker.

What, exactly, is to like? What has he accomplished that you like? Perhaps you feel that taking away collective bargaining, nixing equal pay for genders and mandating abstinence-only sex education are good things. I think they're utterly fucking reprehensible.

Seekster:
Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right.

Well that's just stupid. By that rationale, since sentiment is overwhelmingly against Joseph Kony, he must be onto something with that child army of his. Sometimes people are "attacked" because they're terrible.

Seekster:
I hope he stays in office, I really do.

You know how you claim not to be a Republican? Yeah, I ain't buying that for a second. You carry water for the GOP at every conceivable turn, without fail, 100 percent of the time.

arbane:

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

I'll point out the same "logic" could be applied to AIDS, Global Warming, Robert Mugabe, and <godwin>Hitler</godwin>. Unless you can point to something GOOD he's actually done, I'd recommend not sounding like a reflexively contrarian Republibot who would cheer for the sun going nova if you thought it would upset a hippie.

Oh No I mean I approve of the job Walker has done as Governor, the fact that he pisses off people who drink blue koolaid is just a bonus. Sorry I should have been clear on that.

Seekster:

arbane:

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

I'll point out the same "logic" could be applied to AIDS, Global Warming, Robert Mugabe, and <godwin>Hitler</godwin>. Unless you can point to something GOOD he's actually done, I'd recommend not sounding like a reflexively contrarian Republibot who would cheer for the sun going nova if you thought it would upset a hippie.

Oh No I mean I approve of the job Walker has done as Governor, the fact that he pisses off people who drink blue koolaid is just a bonus. Sorry I should have been clear on that.

What's he done that you think is a good idea? Be specific, as "making Libruls suffer" isn't exactly an objective good.

arbane:

Seekster:

arbane:

I'll point out the same "logic" could be applied to AIDS, Global Warming, Robert Mugabe, and <godwin>Hitler</godwin>. Unless you can point to something GOOD he's actually done, I'd recommend not sounding like a reflexively contrarian Republibot who would cheer for the sun going nova if you thought it would upset a hippie.

Oh No I mean I approve of the job Walker has done as Governor, the fact that he pisses off people who drink blue koolaid is just a bonus. Sorry I should have been clear on that.

What's he done that you think is a good idea? Be specific, as "making Libruls suffer" isn't exactly an objective good.

Well specifically I like how he was willing to reform union laws to help balance the budget. The guy is bold and is not easily intimidated. Most politicians wont go that far to do what they believe is the right thing and I happen to agree with Walker on what the right thing is in that situation so yeah if I lived in Wisconsin I would vote for him.

Seekster:

arbane:

Seekster:

Oh No I mean I approve of the job Walker has done as Governor, the fact that he pisses off people who drink blue koolaid is just a bonus. Sorry I should have been clear on that.

What's he done that you think is a good idea? Be specific, as "making Libruls suffer" isn't exactly an objective good.

Well specifically I like how he was willing to reform union laws to help balance the budget. The guy is bold and is not easily intimidated. Most politicians wont go that far to do what they believe is the right thing and I happen to agree with Walker on what the right thing is in that situation so yeah if I lived in Wisconsin I would vote for him.

That's a load of shit. Walker's attempt to break the unions would have had virtually NO effect on balancing the budget; it was a blatant attempt to weaken a traditionally Democratic voting bloc. It was ridiculously transparent.

http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=589:scott-walker-admits-unionbusting-provision-doesnt-save-any-money-for-the-state-of-wisconsin

KUCINICH: Let me ask you about some of the specific provisions in your proposals to strip collective bargaining rights. First, your proposal would require unions to hold annual votes to continue representing their own members. Can you please explain to me and members of this committee how much money this provision saves for your state budget?

WALKER: That and a number of other provisions we put in because if you're going to ask, if you're going to put in place a change like that, we wanted to make sure we protected the workers of our state, so they got value out of that. [...]

KUCINICH: Would you answer the question? How much money does it save, Governor?

WALKER: It doesn't save any. [...]

Of course you agree with him, and of course you'd vote for him. You're a Republican.

arbane:
Just so you know, the recall Scott Walker campaign DOES accept out-of-state contributions.

Just so you know, the Obama campaign accepts unsecured credit card donations and doesn't even match up names with the card number.

ravenshrike:

arbane:
Just so you know, the recall Scott Walker campaign DOES accept out-of-state contributions.

Just so you know, the Obama campaign accepts unsecured credit card donations and doesn't even match up names with the card number.

Well, there's a thoroughly irrelevant "contribution" to the thread.

Tyler Perry:
http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=589:scott-walker-admits-unionbusting-provision-doesnt-save-any-money-for-the-state-of-wisconsin

KUCINICH: Let me ask you about some of the specific provisions in your proposals to strip collective bargaining rights. First, your proposal would require unions to hold annual votes to continue representing their own members. Can you please explain to me and members of this committee how much money this provision saves for your state budget?

WALKER: That and a number of other provisions we put in because if you're going to ask, if you're going to put in place a change like that, we wanted to make sure we protected the workers of our state, so they got value out of that. [...]

KUCINICH: Would you answer the question? How much money does it save, Governor?

WALKER: It doesn't save any. [...]

I remember seeing that on TV. Walker looked like an utter buffoon. And then they brought out Virginia's governor who balanced an even more unstable budget than Walker had to deal with and he actually worked with the unions to do it without taking away their collective bargaining rights. Rubbing salt in the wound, basically.

DrVornoff:

Tyler Perry:
http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=589:scott-walker-admits-unionbusting-provision-doesnt-save-any-money-for-the-state-of-wisconsin

KUCINICH: Let me ask you about some of the specific provisions in your proposals to strip collective bargaining rights. First, your proposal would require unions to hold annual votes to continue representing their own members. Can you please explain to me and members of this committee how much money this provision saves for your state budget?

WALKER: That and a number of other provisions we put in because if you're going to ask, if you're going to put in place a change like that, we wanted to make sure we protected the workers of our state, so they got value out of that. [...]

KUCINICH: Would you answer the question? How much money does it save, Governor?

WALKER: It doesn't save any. [...]

I remember seeing that on TV. Walker looked like an utter buffoon. And then they brought out Virginia's governor who balanced an even more unstable budget than Walker had to deal with and he actually worked with the unions to do it without taking away their collective bargaining rights. Rubbing salt in the wound, basically.

Of course, because what Walker was attempting to accomplish had approximately zero to do with anything other than paving the way for the GOP to have an easier time winning elections. It was blatantly transparent partisan engineering, and for anyone to insist that it was being done to fix a (btw, nonexistent) budget problem for the state is ludicrous.

I honestly dont see how taking down unions is a bad thing. They are a relic of a by gone age that need to be disposed of, least of all because they use unethical if not illegal tactics in order to get their way. To whit, the proliferation of "closed" shops, intimidation of workers before votes to unionize, intimidation of union members before hearings and investigations, as well as unsavory business practices from many union leaders. On top of that, unions oppose any kind of reform to the system that doesnt directly benefit them, even if said reforms would help those they supposedly represent (specifically children in regards to education reform and teachers unions.) Lastly, union workers are overpaid for what little work they do, have ridiculous and inefficient regulations (that also lead to some nebulous "penalty" if broken), and while not really cogent to the discussion, are smarmy and self righteous bastards who really need a good kick in the teeth sometimes.

Brett Dumain:
I honestly dont see how taking down unions is a bad thing. They are a relic of a by gone age that need to be disposed of, least of all because they use unethical if not illegal tactics in order to get their way. To whit, the proliferation of "closed" shops, intimidation of workers before votes to unionize, intimidation of union members before hearings and investigations, as well as unsavory business practices from many union leaders. On top of that, unions oppose any kind of reform to the system that doesnt directly benefit them, even if said reforms would help those they supposedly represent (specifically children in regards to education reform and teachers unions.) Lastly, union workers are overpaid for what little work they do, have ridiculous and inefficient regulations (that also lead to some nebulous "penalty" if broken), and while not really cogent to the discussion, are smarmy and self righteous bastards who really need a good kick in the teeth sometimes.

If Unions are so bad then how come Australia is doing so well, we are Union town. I agree that some of them do have a bit too much power but you can regulate it. Working conditions in nations with strong workers unions are significantly better than those without them. The average Australian worker for instance earns $25,000 more than the average American worker. The median wealth of an Australian adult is quadruple that of an American adult. It all comes down to one thing, strong unions for workers. Workers in Australia actually have rights, they don't in America.

pyrate:

Brett Dumain:
I honestly dont see how taking down unions is a bad thing. They are a relic of a by gone age that need to be disposed of, least of all because they use unethical if not illegal tactics in order to get their way. To whit, the proliferation of "closed" shops, intimidation of workers before votes to unionize, intimidation of union members before hearings and investigations, as well as unsavory business practices from many union leaders. On top of that, unions oppose any kind of reform to the system that doesnt directly benefit them, even if said reforms would help those they supposedly represent (specifically children in regards to education reform and teachers unions.) Lastly, union workers are overpaid for what little work they do, have ridiculous and inefficient regulations (that also lead to some nebulous "penalty" if broken), and while not really cogent to the discussion, are smarmy and self righteous bastards who really need a good kick in the teeth sometimes.

If Unions are so bad then how come Australia is doing so well, we are Union town. I agree that some of them do have a bit too much power but you can regulate it. Working conditions in nations with strong workers unions are significantly better than those without them. The average Australian worker for instance earns $25,000 more than the average American worker. The median wealth of an Australian adult is quadruple that of an American adult. It all comes down to one thing, strong unions for workers. Workers in Australia actually have rights, they don't in America.

We have something called "labor laws" nowadays that basically corrected all the problems unions were formed to fix in the first place-low wages, long abusive working hours/conditions, and little to no pension services (though the last one is still more or less restricted to union jobs). Unions drive up the cost of goods by driving up the cost to make those goods, since no union shop I know of offers less than 9 dollars US an hour to basically push a button for 8 hours. That and they are chock full of thugs and assholes who use their status as "Local 101" to put undue pressure on local governance/industry. Why do you think Northeastern United States is known as "The Rustbelt" while the Southern US still has manufacturing in it? You think maybe its because the South is still heavily de unionized (while still having those same labor laws)?

Brett Dumain:
We have something called "labor laws" nowadays

"We have these things, labor laws. You've probably never heard of them." Also, I like that you assume that the US is the only nation that has labor laws. I needed a good laugh.

that basically corrected all the problems unions were formed to fix in the first place-low wages, long abusive working hours/conditions, and little to no pension services (though the last one is still more or less restricted to union jobs).

Interestingly, Scott Walker has repealed a few of those, too. Hmm... It's almost as if he has ulterior motive.

Unions drive up the cost of goods by driving up the cost to make those goods, since no union shop I know of offers less than 9 dollars US an hour to basically push a button for 8 hours.

In my last job at grocery store, I was in a union. I busted my balls for minimum fucking wage and got my workload increased with no increased pay as the bosses stacked more arbitrary bullshit regulations on us and forced fewer people to do jobs in a shorter time, which required more workers. Any department manager who stood up to them was transferred to another location and the changes were made anyway. I was eventually fired for a transgression that should have warranted a warning: I finished the last bite of a muffin I bought as I was clocking in. This constituted "theft of company time." Because it was listed as theft, it provided a loophole meaning the union couldn't get me my job back. I should note that at that location I was their star of customer service. Regulars came in asking for me specifically. I was only late twice in 6 months, both times by only a minute thanks to traffic, and I only called in sick once when I caught a stomach virus that also hit a quarter of the other employees.

So, how exactly was the union the bad guys in this equation? Because it looks to me like the bad guy was actually my dipshit boss. In fact, my father is a business consultant and he can trace 90% of all of a business's problems not to unions, but incompetent management.

That and they are chock full of thugs and assholes who use their status as "Local 101" to put undue pressure on local governance/industry. Why do you think Northeastern United States is known as "The Rustbelt" while the Southern US still has manufacturing in it? You think maybe its because the South is still heavily de unionized (while still having those same labor laws)?

Guilty by correlation then? Also, how is the South deunionized? They have a fuckton of unions down there. And they still have public sector unions just like every other state. I would also point out that the Southern states consume more in federal funding than they give back in GDP and tax revenue.

Brett Dumain:

pyrate:

Brett Dumain:
I honestly dont see how taking down unions is a bad thing. They are a relic of a by gone age that need to be disposed of, least of all because they use unethical if not illegal tactics in order to get their way. To whit, the proliferation of "closed" shops, intimidation of workers before votes to unionize, intimidation of union members before hearings and investigations, as well as unsavory business practices from many union leaders. On top of that, unions oppose any kind of reform to the system that doesnt directly benefit them, even if said reforms would help those they supposedly represent (specifically children in regards to education reform and teachers unions.) Lastly, union workers are overpaid for what little work they do, have ridiculous and inefficient regulations (that also lead to some nebulous "penalty" if broken), and while not really cogent to the discussion, are smarmy and self righteous bastards who really need a good kick in the teeth sometimes.

If Unions are so bad then how come Australia is doing so well, we are Union town. I agree that some of them do have a bit too much power but you can regulate it. Working conditions in nations with strong workers unions are significantly better than those without them. The average Australian worker for instance earns $25,000 more than the average American worker. The median wealth of an Australian adult is quadruple that of an American adult. It all comes down to one thing, strong unions for workers. Workers in Australia actually have rights, they don't in America.

We have something called "labor laws" nowadays that basically corrected all the problems unions were formed to fix in the first place-low wages, long abusive working hours/conditions, and little to no pension services (though the last one is still more or less restricted to union jobs). Unions drive up the cost of goods by driving up the cost to make those goods, since no union shop I know of offers less than 9 dollars US an hour to basically push a button for 8 hours. That and they are chock full of thugs and assholes who use their status as "Local 101" to put undue pressure on local governance/industry. Why do you think Northeastern United States is known as "The Rustbelt" while the Southern US still has manufacturing in it? You think maybe its because the South is still heavily de unionized (while still having those same labor laws)?

Labor laws in the US are terrible. Workers are not even guaranteed paid sick leave.

As for driving up costs, they are more than offset by the fact people make more. In Australia the minimum wage is $15.51. It means the cost of living is higher, but as I said before, it also means we make a lot more money. A min wage worker doing 40 hours a week in Australia takes home ~$28k after income tax, in the US its $13.5k after Federal tax, it can be even less once the State gets to it. The benefits of higher wages far outweigh the negatives.

As for you comment on the NE compared to the South, I would hardly think it is a good thing to point out. Have you looked at a wealth chart of the US. The NE is the richest part of the US, the South the poorest. If Unions are so evil this would not be the case.

DrVornoff:

Guilty by correlation then? Also, how is the South deunionized? They have a fuckton of unions down there. And they still have public sector unions just like every other state.

The South is by no means "deunionized," but I imagine he's referring to the fact that pretty much every Southern state is a "right to work" state. I know Alabama's laws limit who can protest/strike and such. There's also a very anti-union sentiment that seems bred into the bone down here. I've heard people talk shit about unions that literally have no idea what a union even is, they just know Republicans aren't supposed to like them.

Edit: Southern states should NEVER be used as a model for anything. Ever. We fucking suck. We're at the top of every bad list and the bottom of every good list.

Najos:
Edit: Southern states should NEVER be used as a model for anything. Ever. We fucking suck. We're at the top of every bad list and the bottom of every good list.

If it makes you feel any better, you guys at least know how to crank out some decent metal bands.

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

Seconded. I, personally like how he stood up to the unions, which are why wages were getting too high in the first place.

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

"The usual suspects"? Oh come on...

Were those mean ol' libruls being all mean again? Tsk tsk, they're such big ol' meanies, bullying people like that...

BOOM headshot65:

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

Seconded. I, personally like how he stood up to the unions, which are why wages were getting too high in the first place.

No, he did not "stand up to the unions." He attempted to thoroughly delegitamize them for partisan purposes.

BOOM headshot65:

Seekster:
I don't care what anybody says about the man I like Scott Walker. Seeing how viciously he is being attacked by the usual suspects he must be doing something right. I hope he stays in office, I really do.

Seconded. I, personally like how he stood up to the unions, which are why wages were getting too high in the first place.

Yes, people in the poorest state in the country were making too much money.

Here's the thing. The conversation went thus:

"Ok, we're in a lot of debt. I'm going to make some cuts."

"Ok, what do you need, Walker?"

"I need this." *lays out a dollar amount*

And on every, single, measure, the teacher's union agreed with Walker and took the pay cut.

Then he was like "Cool, but that's not going to be enough. I need you to never ever be able to bargain again. Even if it costs me money to build ridiculous hurdles make sure you can't."

And from there, only THEN did the Unions say "No, screw you" and the shit storm happen.

Imagine if, it was a federal debate.

And the president and congress and the judges, imagine whichever brand you wanted, came out hand and hand and was like "If we don't make X amount of money by tomorrow.. we're fucked. It's over."

Then when you opened your wallet, they were like "And to make sure this doesn't happen again.. we're taking away your right to organize to vote."

You'd be like "Fuck you.".

Then being told by the media, that YOU are the one who refused to pay and shit.

Oh, but it gets better, because now they're actually being asked by Walker to give up their right to vote too, because Walker's a pile of shit disguised as a human being.

So you have a state that cannot afford to give people state IDs passing a law that if they don't magic up a thing you can't easily get in that state, you can't vote.

Might as well pass a law saying if you don't have Mermaid Tears you can't vote.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked