Don't Agree? Flee!

[Ness]

Disclaimer: This issue pertains more to the US but the overall principle can be applied to the government of other nations as well.

Over the past few weeks I've been watching drama unfold in the state of Wisconsin over proposed legislation by its governor. For those who aren't aware, the governor is trying to get a significant piece of anti-union legislation approved in the Wisconsin State Senate. Rather than accept defeat during a vote, all of the Wisconsin Democrats fled the state so that a quorum could not be reached. They have been gone for at least a week now and the crisis has reached a point where they will now be brought back by force if at all possible, as can be read here. A similar situation is taking place in Indiana as well, but Wisconsin really set the example.

What do you think of this style of politics?

Personally, I find it abhorrent. This incident speaks volumes about how far the political system of the United States has fallen. Partisanship rules the day, with little regard for actual sorting out the important issues that plague each state and the nation.

 

[Oliver Queen]

I think it's stupid. "I don't like the outcome that's gonna happen, so I'm gonna run and hide."? Seriously, grow a pair and take the decision like a man. You can't win them all, everyone knows that, so to think that you can is just utterly retarded, and if you DO think that, you really shouldn't be in the position you are in IMO.

And Ness, I think it's closer to 2 weeks now.

 

[Valvalis]

I actually like this idea, tbh. I think it's obvious at this point in history that the U.S. is a raging plutarchy rather than a democracy, since the government does nothing but serve the interests of big corporations and the wealthy 99% of the time; and so if these democrats are willing to do something extreme to protest how godawful and raping this decision is, then more power to them. It's a load of bullshit to punish workers for the deficit by taking away some union privileges when they're not directly responsible for the deficit.

Sorry, but the workers are not the ones who set and control the ungodly high costs of health care, which is probably one of the biggest vital expenses for most working class citizens in this country and the reason why they need substantial wages in the first place. If they want to fix the deficit, they should take it out of the pockets of whoever owns these money-vacuum health care and health insurance companies, for fuck's sake. I mean seriously, NO ONE should earn $5,200 for turning on one CT scan machine for a five minute session. And yet that's the number I saw them charge on my bill, and that's what I would've had to pay if I didn't have insurance. Or, $330 for a mere discussion with a specialist I met with once, where all we did was just talk for ten minutes and there weren't even any tests done or equipment used! (And I did have to pay that one ) So yes, if the workers want to be healthy and not die, then they do piss away a lot of money from their wages, but it all goes into PRIVATE HEALTH CARE OWNERS' POCKETS and nobody in the government has the balls to do anything about it! It's outrageous

Also, I noticed in some of the articles that the governor is threatening to lay off over a thousand workers if none of the democrats return, and I think that's absolutely disgusting as well. It's a ploy to make the democrats look like villains, even though these workers are the very people they're trying to defend. It's like a comic book climax, where the villain forces the hero to choose between rescuing his love interest and a group of citizens, and whichever party he doesn't choose will die. I mean seriously Wisconsin governordude, are you the fucking Green Goblin?

Not to mention, I also read that he's planning to cut $1 billion from schools and local governments over the next two years. Okay, so...what are they NOT cutting? Because it sounds to me like they're cutting all the most vital ones, I.E. the ones that benefit the working class the most, which are the majority of the U.S. population and the majority in each state as well.

 

[Linnaete]

I'm no fan of Scott Walker or his strict anti-union measures and harsh cuts on so much of the public sector and to the most important public services (because frankly, we're seeing this happen over on this side of the pond as well but on a national level with our Tory-Lib Dem coalition). However, the impression I gain a lot of the time from the Democrats is - they're probably more fussed about the fact that the offender is a Republican Governor rather than sincerely opposed to this austere measure to reduce the state deficit. Partisanship is always a big factor now and I too suspect that's what happened here. As for this fleeing tactic well, I certainly don't like this proposal by Walker, but to attempt to halt it like this is...not exactly something you've a mandate to do, especially as the Wisconsonites willingly voted Republican anyway. If they now decide to turn against Walker, they have the initiative to recall him. I don't agree or like what Walker wants to do, yet I wouldn't actively try and buffer it like this just because of that and paralyse the state government. It doesn't exactly paint yourself a very good light to the electorate and the rest of the country (and the world), does it? It does nothing but continue to consolidate the high levels of partisanship in the country and at this rate, nothing will ever be done. You will have all these legislators as sitting ducks while both parties continue to stare at each other with villification when a bit of bipartisanship at a time when the country still needs to economically get on its feet is needed more than anything.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

Republicans are the wealthy, which speaks volumes regarding U.S. politics. They are trying to conserve a social body which is becoming less and less compatible each day, all to benefit themselves.
They never seem to hold the interests of the nation as a whole, but rather themselves, which has a lingering menace about it.
I mean, Glenn Beck goes on television and declares that all people without jobs do not deserve to be an American.
Wha ??
So conservatives propel capitalism and then try to stomp on unions, all while saying the unemployed are not worthy.

I'm glad Democrats are fighting them tooth and nail.

 

[Donald Trump]

Sometimes you just have to admire politicians, they're shits but they're good at being shits. As far as I'm aware this isn't exactly new to politics in America. Politicians used to leave the house of representatives so that any vote passed would be invalid. Filibustering isn't much better either. However it is fairly damning that such an environment has been created where adults can't even reach a compromise and have to resort to walking out.

 

[Shu]

Way to give a good name for liberals I say. I'm not democrat but nor am I a republican, but I will say these are the very reasons certain bills in America take forever to pass. Even if you don't consider it running, a lot of legislation is escalated often times, due to the other party does not want to admit defeat.

I understand at times why appealing to a state court after a county court hearing, but even politicians like these are giving their fellow party members an embarrassing name. This has happened quite a few times before, but I find it embarrassing.

The best way I can describe it is like a separated wife and husband coming to divorce agreements, and one of them won't sign the papers..

 

[blakstang98]

Republicans are the wealthy, which speaks volumes regarding U.S. politics. They are trying to conserve a social body which is becoming less and less compatible each day, all to benefit themselves.
They never seem to hold the interests of the nation as a whole, but rather themselves, which has a lingering menace about it.
I mean, Glenn Beck goes on television and declares that all people without jobs do not deserve to be an American.
Wha ??
So conservatives propel capitalism and then try to stomp on unions, all while saying the unemployed are not worthy.

I'm glad Democrats are fighting them tooth and nail.

Actually, it was Reagan who implemented the trickle-down system to help small businesses, so its the Republicans that support small business. The NAFTA bill that was implemented by Clinton is what drove most small businesses out of the market, as larger corporations have more resources to simply move the business out of the country, while still profitting here. So you have it completely backwards.

Unfortunately, both sides are so polarized that its more of a pissing contest to see who can take total control and have their way with us. I honestly think if a third party could battle with the two, then maybe we can find a little stability. By the looks of it, we'll never have a third party step up and gain that much popularity. So unfortunately, we have to either wait for that to happen, or find politicians who are willing to play nice in the sandbox and at least find some even ground on some issues.

The whole "we're not showing up" deal is such a cowardly stance. Don't be a baby, just accept your inevitable loss. I won't say more on the actual topic of the unions because I didn't read anything about it, I just knew about the cop-out they were taking.

 

[CassinoChips]

Filibustering isn't much better either.

Thank you.

However it is fairly damning that such an environment has been created where adults can't even reach a compromise and have to resort to walking out.

The unions, specifically the teachers' union, acquiesced to every single demand Walker and his people put forth. Except one. The collective bargaining issue. But Walker wouldn't back down from it. He wanted every single measure passed, and refused to compromise. So the lack of compromise happened on the other end of the aisle well before the walk-out happened.

so its the Republicans that support small business.

Not really.

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2010/09/anti_small_business.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40411.html

Side note on that, the main reason the (R)s blocked it was out of spite.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/republicans-block-effort-to-repeal-1099-tax-reporting-rules/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100723/us-small-business-lending/


Agreed though, on the concept that partisanship is killing the governmental process in this country.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

Actually, it was Reagan who implemented the trickle-down system to help small businesses, so its the Republicans that support small business. The NAFTA bill that was implemented by Clinton is what drove most small businesses out of the market, as larger corporations have more resources to simply move the business out of the country, while still profitting here. So you have it completely backwards.

I have to argue irrelevance on this one. Republicans are capitalists, not democrats.
NAFTA was a way to broaden the market, nobody suffered, but rather big businesses benefited.

 

[blakstang98]

I have to argue irrelevance on this one. Republicans are capitalists, not democrats.
NAFTA was a way to broaden the market, nobody suffered, but rather big businesses benefited.

Lets be fair for a moment, all politicians are capitalists, not just Republicans. Politicians in general are all about padding their own pockets, not just Republicans. Democrats are taking the coward approach to this particular topic. I'm not going to sling mud about which party is better, or what I support or any of that bullshit. Most politicians, especially these days, are out to help themselves more so than the population. That goes for both sides. It's pretty ironic, because even though they're opposite parties in political theory, their goal should be to compromise enough to help the people, but the commonality is that they are both out to help themselves. This issue does nothing more than to fuck over the people of WI, because it doesn't help them.

 

[Ness]

I actually like this idea, tbh. I think it's obvious at this point in history that the U.S. is a raging plutarchy rather than a democracy, since the government does nothing but serve the interests of big corporations and the wealthy 99% of the time; and so if these democrats are willing to do something extreme to protest how godawful and raping this decision is, then more power to them. It's a load of bullshit to punish workers for the deficit by taking away some union privileges when they're not directly responsible for the deficit.

Sorry, but the workers are not the ones who set and control the ungodly high costs of health care, which is probably one of the biggest vital expenses for most working class citizens in this country and the reason why they need substantial wages in the first place. If they want to fix the deficit, they should take it out of the pockets of whoever owns these money-vacuum health care and health insurance companies, for fuck's sake. I mean seriously, NO ONE should earn $5,200 for turning on one CT scan machine for a five minute session. And yet that's the number I saw them charge on my bill, and that's what I would've had to pay if I didn't have insurance. Or, $330 for a mere discussion with a specialist I met with once, where all we did was just talk for ten minutes and there weren't even any tests done or equipment used! (And I did have to pay that one ) So yes, if the workers want to be healthy and not die, then they do piss away a lot of money from their wages, but it all goes into PRIVATE HEALTH CARE OWNERS' POCKETS and nobody in the government has the balls to do anything about it! It's outrageous

Also, I noticed in some of the articles that the governor is threatening to lay off over a thousand workers if none of the democrats return, and I think that's absolutely disgusting as well. It's a ploy to make the democrats look like villains, even though these workers are the very people they're trying to defend. It's like a comic book climax, where the villain forces the hero to choose between rescuing his love interest and a group of citizens, and whichever party he doesn't choose will die. I mean seriously Wisconsin governordude, are you the fucking Green Goblin?

Not to mention, I also read that he's planning to cut $1 billion from schools and local governments over the next two years. Okay, so...what are they NOT cutting? Because it sounds to me like they're cutting all the most vital ones, I.E. the ones that benefit the working class the most, which are the majority of the U.S. population and the majority in each state as well.

I suppose you could make an argument that the US is a plutarchy, if you compare the general size of the legislative body to the amount of people it governs. I personally don't think the size deficit is TOO large, though...since there's really always going to be one and not every government is a oligarchy. The plutocratic aspect simply stems from the electoral process, which is more about "who has more money to spend on negative advertisements" then "who has better ideas and who will better represent my interests in Congress". Unfortunate, but true.

I'm not sure what relevance the health care issue has to this discussion...perhaps the bill itself mentions health care spending in some way?

Regarding Gov. Walker's general tone of retaliation...it may well be just as bad. The purpose of politics is supposed to be one of measured debate and...well, adulthood. Neither side seems to be particularly interested in approaching this issue in a mature way. Nevermind the protesters...if people are protesting an issue in droves, perhaps it should be addressed in debate rather than rammed through along party lines.

Republicans are the wealthy, which speaks volumes regarding U.S. politics. They are trying to conserve a social body which is becoming less and less compatible each day, all to benefit themselves.
They never seem to hold the interests of the nation as a whole, but rather themselves, which has a lingering menace about it.
I mean, Glenn Beck goes on television and declares that all people without jobs do not deserve to be an American.
Wha ??
So conservatives propel capitalism and then try to stomp on unions, all while saying the unemployed are not worthy.

I'm glad Democrats are fighting them tooth and nail.

Ah yes, because there are certainly no wealthy Democrats. I won't address your post directly because it seems to have a decidedly Democratic leaning, but I think the old expression "the pot calling the kettle black" is appropriate to your allegations regarding the Republicans in general.

Note: I did not say that you were incorrect, but to claim that Democrats are not that way is a bit absurd.

The unions, specifically the teachers' union, acquiesced to every single demand Walker and his people put forth. Except one. The collective bargaining issue. But Walker wouldn't back down from it. He wanted every single measure passed, and refused to compromise. So the lack of compromise happened on the other end of the aisle well before the walk-out happened.
s blocked it was out of spite.

Agreed though, on the concept that partisanship is killing the governmental process in this country.

I'm perfectly willing to recognize that both parties are at fault here. Gov. Walker could certainly stand to be a little less dogmatic regarding this issue...and probably wouldn't have had a situation on his hands if he had been a little more open to compromise. Unfortunately, he knew that his party had control of the vote regardless, so there was no need to be diplomatic. He probably also knew this would rocket him to stardom with election season coming up...but I digress.

The statement I bolded in this quote really sums up what I think the main issue is. Both parties are doing it...and for government to truly run properly, it needs to stop.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sum1sgruj
Republicans are the wealthy, which speaks volumes regarding U.S. politics. They are trying to conserve a social body which is becoming less and less compatible each day, all to benefit themselves.
They never seem to hold the interests of the nation as a whole, but rather themselves, which has a lingering menace about it.
I mean, Glenn Beck goes on television and declares that all people without jobs do not deserve to be an American.
Wha

??
So conservatives propel capitalism and then try to stomp on unions, all while saying the unemployed are not worthy.

I'm glad Democrats are fighting them tooth and nail.

Ah yes, because there are certainly no wealthy Democrats. I won't address your post directly because it seems to have a decidedly Democratic leaning, but I think the old expression "the pot calling the kettle black" is appropriate to your allegations regarding the Republicans in general.

Note: I did not say that you were incorrect, but to claim that Democrats are not that way is a bit absurd.

Alright, not ALL Democrats are unwealthy. But most Republicans are wealthy. It's all in the statistics, really. Go to a lower class area and see how many Republicans there are. Now go to a middle or upper class area and see how many Republicans there are. The coinpurse somewhat matches the Party on the big scale.
"The pot that called the kettle black" doesn't seem to follow so well when you take the entire population in consideration.

 

[Ness]

Alright, not ALL Democrats are unwealthy. But most Republicans are wealthy. It's all in the statistics, really. Go to a lower class area and see how many Republicans there are. Now go to a middle or upper class area and see how many Republicans there are. The coinpurse somewhat matches the Party on the big scale.
"The pot that called the kettle black" doesn't seem to follow so well when you take the entire population in consideration.

The entire population doesn't matter, though, since we're discussing the behavior of politicians. The (some would say hastily generalized) demographics of each party's electorate has little bearing on the issue.

You could also go out to a rural area where the average income is very low and do this same poll and get surprising results.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

The entire population doesn't matter, though, since we're discussing the behavior of politicians.

Wha

Alright no 1: are you a U.S. citizen?

no 2: since when did an entire population not matter? I refuse to support a matter according to one state when it ultimately affects the whole country.

and no 3: I speak for the entire country when I say you are pushing a ridiculous claim. so much so that I could get a million people spamming this site. what are you thinkin bro?

Yeah.. it's personal because I live this life. I suggest you be more accurate. It's this wishful thinking that makes war between politics.

_Because honestly you are speaking for trailer parks./ which for the most part consist of racist, wishful thinking individuals.

 

[CassinoChips]

and no 3: I speak for the entire country when I say you are pushing a ridiculous claim. so much so that I could get a million people spamming this site. what are you thinkin bro?

Yeah.. it's personal because I live this life. I suggest you be more accurate. It's this wishful thinking that makes war between politics.

Because honestly you are speaking for the trailer parks.

Er, first of all, you don't speak for anyone but yourself.

Secondly, you live in Virginia, so let's break it down. There are essentially three major population centers in Virginia, and everything else is fairly rural/small-ish towns, or college towns.

1) Hampton Roads. Of course it varies by which city you're in, but there's a significant military population in the area, which tends to lean towards a more conservative agenda. And VB is, of course, the home of Pat Robertson, the 700 Club, Regent University, so on and so forth.

2) Nova/DC. Probably split fairly evenly. That comes with the territory, being so close to DC. It just gets a bit of everything.

3) Richmond. Very much a college city, what with VCU, UR, VUU in the city or in the general area. So that brings with it a natural tendency towards liberalism.

So there you have three large areas, with three different political leanings. Of course none are polar opposites. It's probably a matter of 60/40 either way.

Then the smaller, outlying areas.

1) College towns like Blacksburg, Staunton, Harrisonburg are going to be more liberal by their nature. But on the flipside, Lynchburg, despite being a college town, is probably more conservative considering the college there is Liberty.

2) Everything else is essentially farmland. You'd be hard-pressed to find too many avowed liberals in farm country. Trust me, I basically live in the equivalent version in the state in which I live. But at the same time, places like Swope, where Poliface (spellcheck there) Farms is located, may have your more liberal-leaning farmers.

So the point here is that the demographics don't really mean much. Just because an area of the country is type X, does not absolutely mean they're aligned with political party Y. Regardless of class, SES, race, whatever. After all, one of the most conservative areas of the country I've been to is Texas. Hispanic-Americans tend to be very conservative, due to the Catholic influence. But they also deal with a severe poverty issue.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

Er, first of all, you don't speak for anyone but yourself.

Secondly, you live in Virginia, so let's break it down. There are essentially three major population centers in Virginia, and everything else is fairly rural/small-ish towns, or college towns.

1) Hampton Roads. Of course it varies by which city you're in, but there's a significant military population in the area, which tends to lean towards a more conservative agenda. And VB is, of course, the home of Pat Robertson, the 700 Club, Regent University, so on and so forth.

2) Nova/DC. Probably split fairly evenly. That comes with the territory, being so close to DC. It just gets a bit of everything.

3) Richmond. Very much a college city, what with VCU, UR, VUU in the city or in the general area. So that brings with it a natural tendency towards liberalism.

So there you have three large areas, with three different political leanings. Of course none are polar opposites. It's probably a matter of 60/40 either way.

Then the smaller, outlying areas.

1) College towns like Blacksburg, Staunton, Harrisonburg are going to be more liberal by their nature. But on the flipside, Lynchburg, despite being a college town, is probably more conservative considering the college there is Liberty.

2) Everything else is essentially farmland. You'd be hard-pressed to find too many avowed liberals in farm country. Trust me, I basically live in the equivalent version in the state in which I live. But at the same time, places like Swope, where Poliface (spellcheck there) Farms is located, may have your more liberal-leaning farmers.

So the point here is that the demographics don't really mean much. Just because an area of the country is type X, does not absolutely mean they're aligned with political party Y. Regardless of class, SES, race, whatever. After all, one of the most conservative areas of the country I've been to is Texas. Hispanic-Americans tend to be very conservative, due to the Catholic influence. But they also deal with a severe poverty issue.

Alright, so Bush being presideant f*cked only certain parts of the country, not the entirety of it altogether? Except for the 2 percenters, I'm pretty sure everyone else who votes Republican is an idiot.
Every notion in a given state affects the whole country.
It's called being a country

If you think I'm wrong, ask the other 100 million people who think the same.

Furthermore, no claim can deny what I see with my very eyes. White college students on the big scale come from Republucan families, and most likey vote for Republican leadership to support their high status despite their adolescent intrigue.
And I do speak for millions of people. Read a newspaper, watch the news, take a poll, type a source, ask your neighbors, enter a public junction.. welcome to America.

Note: And I wasn't the one who brought up demographs, I simply stated that the lower class is predominantly Democrat and the middle/upper is predominately Republican.
Feelin a little deja vu from that particular religious debate I was in.
Irony.
It's ridiculous that I must have literal perfection to get a point across to certain individuals. I don;t blame them however- it must hurt to be wrong. It's really stupid to follow me from thread to thread harrasing the shit out of me. If you honestly beieve the statements you front, I fell sorry for you all.

 

[blakstang98]

Except for the 2 percenters, I'm pretty sure everyone else who votes Republican is an idiot.

So...about half the country are idiots? I understand you support the liberal point of view, but isn't a bit much throwing down a diss to half the country because of the political views they support? I voted Republican, and I'm a college graduate and living as a successful mechanical engineer. Can you claim that?

Anyways, not to derail the topic any further, but I think the point Ness and TTT are getting at is that just because the poorer person tends to support Democrats, it doesn't mean its because the Democrat came from a poor background. The poorer person just supports the views of the Democrats. There are very few politicians that made it rich on their own, they pretty much all grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths. You'd be naive to think that Democrats grew up poor and Republicans grew up filthy rich. They ALL grew up filthy rich. Well, maybe not all, but most of them did. Democrats support welfare systems, so naturally that wins over the poorer population. They were not poor themselves, they just prefer to spend government money on poor people instead of other areas that Republicans do.

 

[Ness]

Alright no 1: are you a U.S. citizen?

no 2: since when did an entire population not matter? I refuse to support a matter according to one state when it ultimately affects the whole country.

and no 3: I speak for the entire country when I say you are pushing a ridiculous claim. so much so that I could get a million people spamming this site. what are you thinkin bro?

Yeah.. it's personal because I live this life. I suggest you be more accurate. It's this wishful thinking that makes war between politics.

_Because honestly you are speaking for trailer parks./ which for the most part consist of racist, wishful thinking individuals.

1) Yes.

2) I'm sorry, but collective bargaining rights for unions in Wisconsin most certainly does not affect the whole country.

3) The only "ridiculous claim" that I am "pushing" is that our politics has become so partisan it hardly functions properly. Never once have I blamed a particular party for this problem...in fact, I've gone out of my way to say that both parties are equally culpable.

I'm not entirely sure what the meaning was behind the last line of this quote...feel free to elaborate if you think it will contribute to the discussion.

Alright, so Bush being presideant f*cked only certain parts of the country, not the entirety of it altogether? Except for the 2 percenters, I'm pretty sure everyone else who votes Republican is an idiot.

I suppose this sentence explains your behavior up to this point. So far in this thread, it would seem the only overly dogmatic one is you. Besides, it's been 3 years now, the Bush Punching Bag is no longer appropriate to use...particularly in dealing with issues that have nothing whatsoever to do with what most people dislike him for.

I'm just glad to see that you have such a fine grasp of the mentality of the average Republican voter. Thank you for that insight.

Every notion in a given state affects the whole country.
It's called being a country

Is it? I believe that state issues eventually swell in significance to become national issues in some cases, but the core of our federal system of government is a demarcation between state and national government.

If you think I'm wrong, ask the other 100 million people who think the same.

Which puts you in the minority?

Furthermore, no claim can deny what I see with my very eyes. White college students on the big scale come from Republucan families, and most likey vote for Republican leadership to support their high status despite their adolescent intrigue.

Have you been to a standard university before? In general, most universities tend to have a more liberal makeup. Obviously, there are always some conservatives at any college, with a few colleges even being majorly conservative (I went to such a school). These colleges are certainly in the minority, though...you generally won't find a majority of "Republucan" students and/or faculty members.

I'm particularly curious about what you mean by "adolescent intrigue" also.

And I do speak for millions of people. Read a newspaper, watch the news, take a poll, type a source, ask your neighbors, enter a public junction.. welcome to America.

I'll be sure to type a source later on and look into these statistics. Perhaps you could provide a few of your own to justify your claims?

Note: And I wasn't the one who brought up demographs,

Except you were.

I simply stated that the lower class is predominantly Democrat and the middle/upper is predominately Republican.
Feelin a little deja vu from that particular religious debate I was in.
Irony.

There isn't any proof to justify your claims in this regard. Again, I think you're making a hasty generalization about the populations of metropolitan areas to get this statistic.

It's ridiculous that I must have literal perfection to get a point across to certain individuals. I don;t blame them however- it must hurt to be wrong. It's really stupid to follow me from thread to thread harrasing the shit out of me. If you honestly beieve the statements you front, I fell sorry for you all.

You don't need literal perfection, but your arguments need to follow some appropriate logical flow. I'd just like to point out that for all of your complaining about being "harrased", you are the only one who has used an ad hominem argument up to this point. Again, we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black...except this time the kettle is blue and the pot is looking in a mirror.

 

[Rapture]

Totally agree with you Ness.

I also did a thread on this in Midgar and I think the situation is absolutely ridiculous.

I'm not going to get into the whole Republicans are this and Democrats are that...its just needless finger pointing. Though I can't deny that I think what the Dem's did in the case of what is happening in Wisconsin is deplorable. They needed to stay and do their job, not stall this situation out to the max and prolong the inevitable.

The issue itself needs to be fixed....how is running from a problem ever going to solve it? We all have jobs/careers in real life and is it reasonable for us to leave our jobs and flee the state because we don't agree with a new policy or a change in benefits or etc...? No, you know why? Because we would get fired, thats why.

I personally feel that since they left their jobs in the first place and disrespected the whole state's process for as long as they did...that they should all get fired. I'm sure with the state 7.4% unemployment rate there would be many more willing and appreciative candidates who would be willing to replace them.