The 'New Age' of Civility

Call me a skeptic, but somehow I saw this coming.

A litany of death threats and other calls for violence and harm have started to make its way into the environs of Wisconsin amidst the aftershocks of the budget repair bill that passed Wednesday night in the Wisconsin state legislature.

The State Department of Justice is investigating this specific threat (read entire e-mail in the above link). Here's an excerpt from the e-mailed threat:

Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your familes (sic) 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.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that unions nationwide are calling for all union members and supporters to cast this 'anti-union' trend and episode as a national civil rights matter.

I strongly believe that the citizens of Wisconsin, and U.S. citizens alike, are too intelligent and pragmatic and will see through the forthcoming union-civil rights battle cry.

American citizens want jobs, a growing economy and for our national budget and debt crisis to be reckoned with in a serious manner. People do not want to see wholesale demagoguery by union leaders and bosses; people do not want to see people like AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka pandering to the crowd; people do not want to have to endure such sycophants and have to hear their sanctimonious rancor; and finally, people do not want to see our country hijacked by out-of-touch leaders that claim to fight for the middle class, but inexorably end up hurting that very same middle class.

I'm not anti-union, I'm pro-taxpayer.

Posted by Kevin L. Lagola at March 11, 2011 11:31 AM
Comments
Comment #319971

Kevin L, this shows us which group is guilty of violence and potential violence. It is not the TP as the left have tried to claim.

This shows us that the left has no use for the rule of law. If they don’t get their way, they are more than willing to become violent. Remember how the left acted when Gore and Kerry lost? There is a pattern to their actions when they don’t get their way. They try to make it look like all of America is behind them; when in reality there is only a small group.

I might add another thing Kevin L: have you noticed the lack of intelligent thought coming from the left on WB. I have never read such crazy ideas and thoughts. Some of them border on the call for violence.

I just spent a few minutes listening to Obama give his speech on TV. I couldn’t stand any more so I turned him off. All he had to do was say we are opening up drilling for oil and the market crude prices would have calmed right down, but no, he has to continue to push this green crap, which will never come to pass. The left has a hatred for fossil fuel, and if it means bankrupting the country and destroying our economy, so be it.

Posted by: 1776 at March 11, 2011 1:06 PM
Comment #319972

There was a man, wearing a suit, in the WI protest. He was knocked to the ground by the union thugs. As they were beating and kicking him, he cried out, “I’m not a Republican”. They beat him simply because he was wearing a suit and tie.

Is this the same justice department who failed to prosecute black panthers who threatened voters? Don’t count on it.

Posted by: 1776 at March 11, 2011 1:11 PM
Comment #319975

Sorta sounds like that ” water the tree of liberty” phrase that has been the cry of the teapublicans. The people on the far right have finally pushed to far and now you are seeing the long overdo push back. Union members that have supported the right over wedge issues now have been awakened to the truth of your agenda.

Posted by: Jeff at March 11, 2011 1:17 PM
Comment #319982

Kevin,
I normally find your arguments of the persuasive variety, notwithstanding my being very liberal. But your credibility in this post is flagging; why would you call what transpired a “budget repair bill”????????? The union had already given every single financial concession asked for to the Gov.

Really…………!

Posted by: steve miller at March 11, 2011 2:27 PM
Comment #319988


As governor, I will bust these state unions and do my best to get rid of them.

Kevin, do you think Walker would have been elected if he had the guts to tell the voters before hand of his intentions?

Posted by: jlw at March 11, 2011 3:26 PM
Comment #319989

Kevin, since when is several considered a “litany”?Your link stated “The State Department of Justice confirms that it is investigating several death threats against a number of lawmakers”. Do you feel the need to exaggerate this claim to contrast the tea baggers and other extremist as some how less violent in their thoughts and deeds.

Why would other unions not refer to this as a civil rights issue, Kevin? The bill that passed had nothing to do with the budget it was designed to force one party rule on the country. To destroy the democrats funding, nothing more.

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/revolt-states-lead-the-way/

This class war being conducted by the tea baggers and the puppet masters behind the tea party has one intent to destroy the middle class. It is that simple. The conservative movement followers that fall for the authoritarianism of the movement leaders deserves the name koch suckers as they are being suckered into eating their young.

Posted by: j2t2 at March 11, 2011 3:30 PM
Comment #319991

Steve Miller is right. It’s such BS to call what they did a “budget repair bill.” This was a union busting bill, period.

Your party completely refused to talk to these people. Your party decided to strip these people of their collective bargaining rights, undoing 50 years of state labor law. And, your party broke state law in that process by giving no notice, and holding a surprise vote, and you’re expecting civility?

How absurd.

No, Republicans should no longer expect any civility whatsoever from any of the people your party has trampled upon and stripped of rights — because you deserve none. Whatever your party gets now, they more have coming to them.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 11, 2011 3:35 PM
Comment #319994

“budget repair bill” To the best of my knowledge, that is the ‘name’ of the bill…ergo…

RE Steve Miller: Actually, I never saw a legitimate concession of the 5% and 12% giveback. It was bantered about in the media by some union leaders in WI, but it was never ‘officially’ conceded.

At any rate, and all things being equal, I fully understand the ramifications of this whole WI budget-union maelstrom. Further, I’m not sure that Gov. Walker tried to do too much too fast. However, he had the courage and he did it.

In the end, not a lot really happened. Once the dust clears and things go back to normal, most will see the wisdom of Walker’s move. Moreover, Mitch Daniels did the same thing in 2003 when he became governor there, albeit he did it via an executive order. Btw, Indiana is one of only 2 states in the U.S. that has a budget surplus.

Finally, if Walker’s plan to grow 250k jobs for WI in 4 years doesn’t pan out, he should be voted out. He put his money where his mouth is. I admire his courage in the face of extreme political pressure.

Posted by: Kevin L. Lagola at March 11, 2011 4:20 PM
Comment #319996

j2t2 writes: “Kevin, since when is several considered a “litany”?Your link stated “The State Department of Justice confirms that it is investigating several death threats against a number of lawmakers”. Do you feel the need to exaggerate this claim to contrast the tea baggers and other extremist as some how less violent in their thoughts and deeds.”

I’m not going to create a luandry list. If you don’t think that there’s not a litany of threats being made toward numerous R legislators, their families and the Governor, then you’re clearly divorced from reality.

Posted by: Kevin L. Lagola at March 11, 2011 4:24 PM
Comment #320000

Wrong! Try again. It was Montana and North Dakota. Teapublicans try and create there own reality.

Posted by: Jeff at March 11, 2011 5:25 PM
Comment #320002

Adrienne:

Gets what’s coming to them? What are you talking about…

Those union workers now have to pay union dues themselves rather than them coming out of their paycheck…is that so hard?

The unions have to re certify every year… If they are as valuable and necessary as you pretend, that shouldn’t be an issue.

Now for the rub, they can collectively bargain for salary, but not for pension and benefits… Good. I don’t have a pension, AND I pay 50% of my own health care. They STILL get a sweetheart deal compared to most of us…

If it is such a huge setback to those union members affected, they can always go get a job where their performance actually determines their pay and benefits, as opposed to the unions jobs which evaluate everything based simply on their tenure…

I’m glad I live in a Right to Work State!

Posted by: sick&tired at March 11, 2011 5:44 PM
Comment #320003

The title of the post is “The New Age of Civility”, and I thought we had discussed this in the past, to not use terms like Tea Bagger or curse words. I guess j2t2 and Adrienne did not get the memo.

Posted by: Conservativethinker at March 11, 2011 5:55 PM
Comment #320004

Kevin L. said:

“RE Steve Miller: Actually, I never saw a legitimate concession of the 5% and 12% giveback. It was bantered about in the media by some union leaders in WI, but it was never ‘officially’ conceded.”

From what I understand, the concessions were made by the city employee unions, but not the State workers.

I believe it should be up to the voters to vote whether or not city, state, and Federal workers (including all politicians) should get a pay raise and how much (%) and benefit package. Since they work for us…

Posted by: 1776 at March 11, 2011 6:09 PM
Comment #320007

sick&tired wrote; “The unions have to re certify every year… If they are as valuable and necessary as you pretend, that shouldn’t be an issue.”

Correct. If a union has been around for length of time, new employees don’t have any voice in approval of the union or anything else that may have occurred many years prior to their becoming employed. Recertification allows all members of the union to express their current opinions, not just abide by that of the original members.

Posted by: Royal Flush at March 11, 2011 6:23 PM
Comment #320017

“I’m not going to create a luandry list. If you don’t think that there’s not a litany of threats being made toward numerous R legislators, their families and the Governor, then you’re clearly divorced from reality.”

Kevin I don’t think there is any more threats against R legislators than against D legislators, their families and Governors. A litany is probably an exaggeration unless you wants to go through the annals of time to do your laundry list. The hyperbole being sling around by those on the right insults the intelligence of many of us that know it to be exaggeration.

Royal and sick I also think the same criteria should apply to corporations. After all there really isn’t much difference is there?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 11, 2011 7:46 PM
Comment #320033

Is this an example of union extortion?

http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/117764004.html?blog=y

UNIONS THREATEN BUSINESS
By Charlie Sykes
Story Created: Mar 10, 2011
Story Updated: Mar 10, 2011
That’s a nice business you got there. Pity if anything were to happen to it if, say, you didn’t toe the line and denounce Governor Walker like we’re asking nice-like.
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
executive 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

Posted by: 1776 at March 12, 2011 12:13 AM
Comment #320037

1776:

Wow, is that for real? Don’t get me wrong, it wouldn’t shock me (hell, I’d hardly be surprised), but have you been able to verify that this letter is authentic?

Posted by: Kevin Nye at March 12, 2011 12:51 AM
Comment #320038

I will have to check tomorrow.

Posted by: 1776 at March 12, 2011 1:30 AM
Comment #320045

“Now for the rub, they can collectively bargain for salary, but not for pension and benefits… Good. I don’t have a pension, AND I pay 50% of my own health care. They STILL get a sweetheart deal compared to most of us…”

This is a great argument for getting rid of unions. They get a better deal than the rest of us. Misery loves company, I guess.

Eventually, this sentiment will boomerang against the anti-union forces when people realize that shared austerity will not resolve or reverse the stagnation of wages and loss of benefits that labor (union and non-union) has experienced over the past 30 years. Perhaps, if there were no unions, the true causes of the decline in the middle class will become clearer.

Posted by: Rich at March 12, 2011 6:31 AM
Comment #320050

Royal and sick I also think the same criteria should apply to corporations. After all there really isn’t much difference is there?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 11, 2011

All corporations have a board of directors who are voted upon by its shareholders on a regular basis.

Posted by: Royal Flush at March 12, 2011 11:50 AM
Comment #320055

Royal I was thinking more along these lines. (with a tip of the hat to Weary)

**corporations were required to have a clear purpose, to be fulfilled but not exceeded.

**corporations’ licenses to do business were revocable by the state legislature if they exceeded or did not fulfill their chartered purpose(s).

**the act of incorporation did not relieve corporate management or stockholders/owners of responsibility or liability for corporate acts.

**as a matter of course, corporation officers, directors, or agents could be held criminally liable for violating the law.

**corporation charters were granted for a specific period of time, like 20 or 30 years (instead of being granted “in perpetuity” as is now the practice.)

**corporations were prohibited from owning stock in other corporations in order to prevent them from extending their power inappropriately.

**corporations’ real estate holdings were limited to what was necessary to carry out their specific purpose(s).

**corporations were prohibited from making any political contributions, direct or indirect.” (Rachel’s Environment and Health Weekly, #488, April 4, 1996)

http://dieoff.org/page62.htm

Posted by: j2t2 at March 12, 2011 1:05 PM
Comment #320064

I do not support death threats. It is cheap, and in the eyes of the law, it is not protected speech, and rightly so.

That being said, several e-mails does not constitute sufficient cause to badmouth tens of thousands of people who did not run riot, did not beat other people, did not trash the Capitol.

This constitutes not any kind of real argument about policies on the merits, about the consequences and realities that follow from them, but instead an extended ad hominem argument.

You’re essentially taking several paragraphs to elaborate on the theme of “union thugs.”

I think that this is the way people run politics when they don’t want the issues to be considered in a calm, considered, sober manner.

Of course, if you wanted such a rule to be considered in a calm manner, you wouldn’t be using deficits (which the anti-union measur hardly helps) as a pretext for opposing union rights.

Meanwhile, I never heard much of anything out of your people about civility when you were raging about government takeovers in the middle of our town hall meetings, or when you were brandishing guns near a presidental reality. You talk about civility when the words “death panels,”, “Kill Grandma”, and all that other stuff was flying around.

Me, I think a certain level of civility is good in politics. It helps you appeal beyond your own group. Republicans, though, as of late, believe that the urgency of their message lets them have a pass on real civility. Thus, people who never beat up or threatened a person in their lives get called union thugs.

As for the Police and Fire unions, do you realize that those were the same people who supported Walker in the election before hand? Did they realize that their candidate was going to threaten union rights? I don’t think they did. I think Walker, in part, operated as stealth candidate. He was not open about his true intentions. Then, when he went about seeking those intentions, he didn’t spare an ounce of concern as to whether what he was doing was civil, or whether his tactics were fair or proper.

I know, I know, bleeding heart liberal. But tell me, aren’t you the folks portraying yourselves as victims? It’d be much more convincing if we didn’t see you pick an unnecessary, unadvertised fight.

You don’t want to admit that your people exceeded their mandates, or have done anything that could be seen as unpopular. Fine. But don’t blame me when the people you were counting upon to re-elect you or support you this time around hightailed it elsewhere. I certainly believe that the police and firefighters unions will drop their support for Walker. Worse than that, he probably made bitter enemies of them.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 12, 2011 3:49 PM
Comment #320072

SD writes: “I know, I know, bleeding heart liberal. But tell me, aren’t you the folks portraying yourselves as victims? It’d be much more convincing if we didn’t see you pick an unnecessary, unadvertised fight.”

Sadly Stephen, rarely does the main stream media, among other voices, admit that there’s equal threats and rhetoric on both sides of the political spectrum.

In other words, conservatives and Republicans have to sometimes crouch into a defensive posture. It’s truly sad and pathetic.

To Stephen and other liberal voices on WB: do any of you ever notice when a group of dems or liberals are on a cable news show - say MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ for example, and they are talking about a conservative person or POV and they all giggle and laugh at serious issues posited by said conservatives?

It happens so much that I honestly don’t think the general public even notices this ‘elitist’ conceit, arrogance and hubris.

I’m not talking about debating or debunking odd rhetoric that the left may not like or deem ‘crazy,’; I’m talking about straightforward holier-than-thou and sanctimonious arrogance.

Ironically, one never sees such antics when conservatives or Republicans get together on a cable news show. Indeed, conservative right-wing voices will be propogated; however, you will not see giggles and high school-type attitudes revealed when progressive or liberal-minded ideas are considered. You’ll definitely hear some sarcasm, on occassion, but you won’t hear or see that high-school behavior.

Take a look at Brett Baiers’ roundtable and/or Sean Hannity’s ‘Great American Panel’ and compare it with Morning Joe’s and/or Chris Matthews.’ It’s outrageous!

I do sometimes see some sophomoronic behavior on the panel of Fox and Friends in the morning when they invite someone like Michelle Malkin, Anne Coulter or Laura Ingraham on, but generally, this behavior occurs daily on the other, so-called liberal-leaning shows.

Btw, Beck doesn’t count. First off, he’s an idiot, secondly, he doesn’t have ‘panels’ and unapologetically pushes his own form of rhetoric.

I’m referring to the programming shows that are seen during prime time (morning or night).

Posted by: Kevin L. Lagola at March 12, 2011 4:44 PM
Comment #320073


The new Age of Civility has arrived. War has been outlawed. Our troops are on their way home from around the world. Unemployment is going to be a bitch.

Let’s be reasonable about this, it is necessary to lower your standard of living so we and the wealthy can get a tax break.

I think the tea party should man up, get out there in the street and whip some union butt before they steal your revolution.

We tend to forget that the greatest contributors of the Progressive Era were the Bosses and their hired thugs.

Thugs bashing workers heads contributed, but teenage girls jumping to their deaths to keep from burning to death was a back breaker. No longer was the public willing to ignore the vicious callousness of capitalism.

That general public is dead and gone. Today, there is a new general public, one that has forgotten that lives were sacrificed to provide the protections that are taken for granted today.

Posted by: jlw at March 12, 2011 4:48 PM
Comment #320077


Kevin, It is nice that you have the time to watch so many morning shows so much. Are you offering the Beck reference as evidence of your lack of bias.

“Btw, Beck doesn’t count.” Is that right? You don’t count the idiot and his idiotic hoard as allies? There are a few million on the right that consider Beck’s words gospel, the whole truth and nothing but.

Posted by: jlw at March 12, 2011 5:33 PM
Comment #320078


What is the most trusted news source in America?

Posted by: jlw at March 12, 2011 5:48 PM
Comment #320087

Kevin N; it appears th letter is for real:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/wisconsin-unions-threaten-businesses-boycott-unless-they-denounce

Posted by: 1776 at March 12, 2011 9:49 PM
Comment #320089

“To Stephen and other liberal voices on WB: do any of you ever notice when a group of dems or liberals are on a cable news show - say MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ for example, and they are talking about a conservative person or POV and they all giggle and laugh at serious issues posited by said conservatives?”

Kevin I don ‘t know what you watch but you have definitely been drinking the koolaid if you believe this nonsense. Morning Joe is a conservative and he is the one … he may not be a JBS conservative but he is a conservative none the less, ask him. Anyway, he is the one ….. I guess it depends on what you mean when you say “serious issues posited by said conservatives” because it seems to me the extremist on the right,such as Hannity, are to busy spewing hate to giggle and laugh but how does that make them some how less elitist in your mind?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 12, 2011 11:02 PM
Comment #320093

1776,

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I’m curious to see if any of the major news outlets pick it up.

Posted by: Kevin Nye at March 13, 2011 5:18 AM
Comment #320097

Elitism is the belief or attitude that some individuals, who form an elite — a select group of people with intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other distinctive attributes — are those whose views on a matter are to be taken the most seriously or carry the most weight or those who view their own views as so; whose views and/or actions are most likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary skills, abilities or wisdom render them especially fit to govern.[1]

Teapublicans use the word and have no idea what it means.

Posted by: Jeff at March 13, 2011 11:17 AM
Comment #320100

Jeff

“Teapublicans use the word and have no idea what it means.”

Is this a fact or your opinion.

How many “teapublicans” do you know out of the millions that might claim that title?

Such a blanket statement carries absolutely no weight or influence.

Try something else.

Posted by: tom humes at March 13, 2011 3:47 PM
Comment #320104


The one thing that I have learned from teapublicans is that much of the U.S. history I learned in school is wrong. Example, I was taught that the battles of Lexington and Concord were fought in Massachusetts, but they were actually fought in New Hampshire.

Posted by: jlw at March 13, 2011 6:03 PM
Comment #320105

Kevin L. Lagola-
My sensibility is that I want the best to lead and respresent us, not simply the most vicious competitors or canny manipulators, not simply those who get propped up as figureheads by the party elite.

I’m not picky about background I am picky about skills and qualifications. I’m leaving my country in these people’s hands.

As for your claims about liberal figures in the media?

Convenient that you can exclude the most inflammatory figures in your politics, that you can make-believe that having panels on is the determining matter in whether your people qualify as opinion leaders.

Republicans don’t sometimes crouch down into a defensive posture nowadays. They’re always being defensive, always trying to fight the fact that so much of what they advocate is beyond the mainstream. They seem to have an answer for every objection, and a reason never to believe that their leaders made a mistake or misjudged popular opinion, and even the slightest win is treated as complete justification for using power however they want to.

You complain about our civility. I’ve just been through two years where a freely elected majority that I support could not do its job because your side relentlessly filibustered it, breaking all records and precedents for such behavior. I’ve just been through two years in which your side accused me of wanting to kill granny, and Palin’s baby boy. I’ve just been two years when anything my party proposed, no matter how popular, how desired by the public, was labelled as socialism, and portrayed as the gateway to America’s ruin.

Even now, your side makes political hay out of the debt ceilling your people repeatedly raised while in power, with some even proposing that we refuse to raise it, or use it to hold some liberal programs hostage.

Yeah, it’s only the full faith and credit of America, our reputation for being able to pay back what we owe. Nothing big. Nothing that might cause the country to drop into a great depression if we don’t pass it.

The Republicans have become so obsessed with defending themselves and their policies against liberals that they no longer even try to figure out whether their ideas are actually working. Why? Because then they might have to concede political points to the Democrats, and with so much that went wrong in the last decade, where would it end?

That doesn’t change the fact that we need to be on the right policies, not trying to resuscitate old failures.

It’s not merely a matter of civility. There are some things it doesn’t pay to overlook or hide your astonishment about, just to make sure some folks feel good about their politics.

I don’t feel like making you feel warm and fuzzy about policies that endanger the economic, environmental, and social future of this country. You act like we’re going to do bad things. At the same time, you don’t acknowledge what terrible screw-ups you’ve done. Worse yet, you seem intent on making the system that led to these screw-ups permanent, even stronger in its misrule over this country.

To do that, you seem to think it’s justified to accuse us of every moral deficiency under the sun.

And now, you complain that you don’t have enough civility. Do you sow the wind, but not expect to reap the whirlwind? You’re getting off light. We haven’t even decided to be as radical or as angry as your side seems to always be about us. But if you keep all this up, well, civility’s going to be a distant memory. It’s not just about superficial manners. It’s also about how your laws and your actions affect other people’s lives. The people who Wall Street put on the unemployment line aren’t exactly in a good mood to be lectured about civility.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 13, 2011 9:12 PM
Comment #320110

SD

Rhetorically you are good, not in principle, but in structure. So was Richard Nixon. So was Lyndon Johnson.

Posted by: tom humes at March 13, 2011 11:50 PM
Comment #320118

tom humes-
What, are you issuing orders to the rest of your fellow debaters as to how to judge the results?

What is it you’re afraid of, that people might find my arguments convincing, so you trash my opinions as being rhetorically well constructed, but untruthful, dishonest?

Sorry. This is what I believe. I think the Republican Party has become less about new ideas these days, and more about insisting nothing change, all the more strongly for the fact that there’s so much pressure to change policy.

But the pressure’s there for a reason. The failures of policy have been substantial, and people want an alternative. Sooner or later they’re going to get it, and you can other work with them to help get what they want, or pay the cost of being on the wrong side of popular consensus.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 14, 2011 10:11 AM
Comment #320129


“The failures of policy have been substantial, and the people want an alternative.”

Stephen, are the people saying they want less substantial failures of policy?

The reason I ask is because that is what Obama and the Democrats have been trying to sell them on.

What is the ‘policy’ Stephen, and who has been pushing that policy?

The people say we are on the wrong path. Is that the same thing as saying we want an alternative to the substantial failures of the policy?

When the people say we are on the wrong path, could that possibly mean the ‘POLICY’ itself, the policy that both parties have been promulgating for at least two decades?

Is mandatory for profit health care a correction of substantial failure, a highly significant change in policy, or a continuation of the policy?

Is an Archer Daniels Midland ethanol & Southern Co. nuclear energy policy a substantial change in policy or a continuation of the policy?

The Republicans love the policy and want to get on with the policy by promoting the completion of the policy’s domestic agenda.

The Democrats want to make slight adjustments to the policy in an attempt to prevent a continued decline in support for the policy.

Posted by: jlw at March 14, 2011 4:36 PM
Comment #320281


“Is this an example of union extortion?

No, that is an example of fighting back.

Glen Beck preaching doom and gloom while selling $1500 an ounce gold to morons is an example of extortion but I guess it isn’t any worse than taking candy from a baby.

I know what we can do. We can fire all the police and replace them with illegal immigrants. We have plenty of them and they work cheap. Or perhaps we can replace them with those worthless bums the liberal socialists are keeping on the government dole.

Not extortion, but a call to arms. As I said earlier, conservatives need to rent storage space in preparation. It is going to be a costly war.

Besides, it is you conservatives that said you wanted a war. I guess you all thought the opposition would just roll over and die.

I think I know what happened. I think conservatives let that 7% union workforce number swell their heads.

Another thing that conservatives did, especially the tea party people, They made the mistake of equating the peoples growing concern and dislike of what the government has been doing as acceptance of their radical ideas.

The conservatives won the last election cycle because the Democrats failed to present them with change that was acceptable to them, not because the conservatives were offering a better alternative.

Posted by: jlw at March 16, 2011 11:53 PM
Comment #378357


The summer of 2014 is more and more close, and the weather is getting hot, so the people like to go to the beach for holiday. If you have a 2014 Yamaha Jet Ski, you will enjoy yourself in the sea, and people will cheer for you, then you will feel very good.

If you do not have Yamaha Jet Ski now, then you need to consider buy one, after you have a jet ski, you can become the focus of the beach, and many beautiful young girls will strike up a conversation with you. With Sea Doo Jet Ski you can run free on the sea, and you will have a good summer time in the beach.

2014 Yamaha Jet Ski Sale now can supply you 2013~2014 brand new genuine jet skis, we now have Yamaha, Sea Doo and Kawasaki in stock for you to choose from. In order to recover the cost, we now have promotion price for you, customers who order from us can enjoy the preferential, such as factory price and big discount.

You are welcome to order Yamaha, Sea Doo and Kawasaki Jet Ski in our online store, we will do our best to service you.

Posted by: 2014 Yamaha Jet Ski at May 14, 2014 9:01 AM
Post a comment