Why Aren't We Talking About Union Busting?

[quote name='Knoell'] .....So the private schools that take in students that need work are "not smart" and comparable to "mcdonalds". okie dokie. What does that make public schools? [/QUOTE]

That's not at all what I said.

Your reference to mcdonalds is completely moronic.

Too bad my skidmark comment was deleted.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Should good students be held back because of the bad students?[/QUOTE]

No. I think they should separate the good and the bad.
 
We should separate the children by how well they do in school, which in no way is related to the advantages and disadvantages they have because of their race and social class. It's just because some kids want to learn and others just don't.
 
It works in europe. If you want to go to college then high school in europe teaches you that. If you want to be a mechanic you can study that instead. They have less then a 1% drop out rate.
 
[quote name='SpazX']We should separate the children by how well they do in school, which in no way is related to the advantages and disadvantages they have because of their race and social class. It's just because some kids want to learn and others just don't.[/QUOTE]

Because your generalization is any better than the one you're criticizing?

Once again everyone: way to play into the endgame of the right by devolving this discussion into something far away from the original topic.
 
[quote name='X BRO 420']It works in europe. If you want to go to college then high school in europe teaches you that. If you want to be a mechanic you can study that instead. They have less then a 1% drop out rate.[/QUOTE]

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Hoooooooly shit. As if there was any debate, now I know for sure you are just trolling us.
 
[quote name='Strell']Because your generalization is any better than the one you're criticizing?[/QUOTE]

Which generalization?
 
[quote name='SpazX'] Which generalization?[/QUOTE]

I think he's criticizing this one:

[quote name='SpazX']We should separate the children by how well they do in school, which in no way is related to the advantages and disadvantages they have because of their race and social class.[/QUOTE]
 
Isn't it really odd how anyone can reply to a topic with anything they want? For example if the topic is shifting into a different direction, you can still post a reply with something relevant or newsworthy to the original topic at hand? Neat concept, eh? It's pretty common for conversations to change and evolve topics - and I know it can be pretty hard for some people to stay up to speed when it happens, but always feel free to post updates about the WI Union situation - they make for a good read.

Speaking of Unions - did you know that before all this came up, Collective Bargaining by public sector workers was already banned by law in two states? Virginia and Texas. Wonder where all the "Civil Rights" protesters were when the Democratic Governor signed that legislation.

To tie this into the school talk - Virginia schools ranks in the top five......even after banning collective bargaining.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Isn't it really odd how anyone can reply to a topic with anything they want? For example if the topic is shifting into a different direction, you can still post a reply with something relevant or newsworthy to the original topic at hand? Neat concept, eh? It's pretty common for conversations to change and evolve topics - and I know it can be pretty hard for some people to stay up to speed when it happens, but always feel free to post updates about the WI Union situation - they make for a good read.

Speaking of Unions - did you know that before all this came up, Collective Bargaining by public sector workers was already banned by law in two states? Virginia and Texas. Wonder where all the "Civil Rights" protesters were when the Democratic Governor signed that legislation.

To tie this into the school talk - Virginia schools ranks in the top five......even after banning collective bargaining.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but Maryland was third, and they didn't ban collective bargaining, so you could argue that it's better not to ban it.:) I think it's due to other factors.
 
[quote name='docvinh']I think it's due to other factors.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. So all the stuff being spewed that ending Collective Bargaining in WI schools is going to destroy their educational system is clearly not based in reality.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Should good students be held back because of the bad students?[/QUOTE]
Should bad students not get the same expeirence that the better students get? See we can go back and forth like this all night.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So all the stuff being spewed that ending Collective Bargaining in WI schools is going to destroy their educational system is clearly not based in reality.[/QUOTE]

linksplzkthxbai
 
[quote name='UncleBob']To tie this into the school talk - Virginia schools ranks in the top five......even after banning collective bargaining.[/QUOTE]

SAT Scores 2010

3 - Wisconsin
34 - Virginia
45 - Texas
America's Best High Schools

14 - Texas
23 - Virginia
44 - Wisconsin

Correlation does not imply causation

"Correlation does not imply causation" (related to "ignoring a common cause" and questionable cause) is a phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other (though correlation is necessary for linear causation in the absence of any third and countervailing causative variable, and can indicate possible causes or areas for further investigation; in other words, correlation can be a hint)
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Agreed. So all the stuff being spewed that ending Collective Bargaining in WI schools is going to destroy their educational system is clearly not based in reality.[/QUOTE]

Well, I can't speak for others or what you've read, but I didn't really think that this was the crux of the argument, I just simply thought they shouldn't have their bargaining rights taken away. Did someone say this earlier or something?
 
Not only is it wrong and unfair for them to take collective bargaining away but even more so is how insulting it is the way they furthered their argument. Initially they said it was needed to be removed for fiscal responsibility. Later, when they found a loophole in turning it into a bill not based on budget they're essentially admitting that it wasn't fiscally related. It's insulting to see they were so flippant about this issue and that the public wouldn't be able to see the inherent discrepancy.
 
Once they rejected the union's concession to give WI the financial considerations of the bill as long as they retained CB rights, the GOP playbook was exposed.

the whole argument of the right is that unions are "thugs" and never make concessions (an argument that is blatantly false, even if this scenario never happened) is crucial to the need to take away collective bargaining.

irony? schadenfreude? shitty.
 
you know the saying that goes something like "The best place to hide is in plain sight"? It amazes me how republicans get away with that, and while the rest of us are shouting "Look it isn't about fiscal responsibility, they just fucking said it wasn't" nobody hears it.

Now I'm sure Knoell will say something like "That's how we feel when we're trying to warn you about the expansion of our socialistic government.".
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Once they rejected the union's concession to give WI the financial considerations of the bill as long as they retained CB rights, the GOP playbook was exposed.

the whole argument of the right is that unions are "thugs" and never make concessions (an argument that is blatantly false, even if this scenario never happened) is crucial to the need to take away collective bargaining.

irony? schadenfreude? shitty.[/QUOTE]

Ha, I had missed that they were willing to give financial considerations to keep collective bargaining. Yeah, dirty politics at its best.

While I still wouldn't agree with it, I might respect them a little bit more if they had at least been more honest about their goal of busting the unions.

The republicans need to understand that just because you don't agree with unions (or other organizations for that matter, hint: Planned Parenthood) that you don't just underhandedly do everything in your power to wipe them off the map.

I'm sitting here and trying to think of when the Democrats have gone all out in trying to destroy right-wing related groups and I can't think of anything. They may disagree with groups like the NRA but I don't see them going full-bore, scorched earth on them like the Republicans have with Planned Parenthood, Unions, Acorn, etc.
 
[quote name='IRHari']That's not at all what I said.

Your reference to mcdonalds is completely moronic.

Too bad my skidmark comment was deleted.[/QUOTE]

Oh sorry I assumed you were calling those private schools similiar to mcdonalds, totally useless, and popping up everywhere for a buck. Instead you meant that the private school will not take anyone with less than a "mcmansion". So not only do these private schools take the best and brightest, they only take people with mansions as well. :roll:

my private school cost 800 dollars a year, and had 16 students in my grade. I certainly was not rich, and there were no entrance exams, or interviews to be accepted.

There are schools like this all over the place.
 
[quote name='Clak']Should bad students not get the same expeirence that the better students get? See we can go back and forth like this all night.[/QUOTE]

Most bad students are disturbing to other students. Bad students have bad attitudes and don't want to learn. They should be removed from our school systems so resources can be spent on the kids that want to learn, our nations real future.
 
[quote name='X BRO 420']Most bad students are disturbing to other students. Bad students have bad attitudes and don't want to learn. They should be removed from our school systems so resources can be spent on the kids that want to learn, our nations real future.[/QUOTE]

The opposite can be true as well, the kids who don't want to learn can benefit from being around kids who want to learn. It is really a case by case thing of who is more impressionable, the good student, or the bad one.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Instead you meant that the private school will not take anyone with less than a "mcmansion". So not only do these private schools take the best and brightest, they only take people with mansions as well. :roll:[/QUOTE]I didn't say that either.

When you described a private school in a derogatory manner as being 'rich', you assume they value money and would look down upon people not living in mansions.

Similarly when you described a private school in a derogatory manner as being a 'smart' school you assume they value intelligence and would look down upon people who aren't smart.

Why not actually read what I wrote instead of casting aspersions?
 
[quote name='IRHari']I didn't say that either.

When you described a private school in a derogatory manner as being 'rich', you assume they value money and would look down upon people not living in mansions.

Similarly when you described a private school in a derogatory manner as being a 'smart' school you assume they value intelligence and would look

down upon people who aren't smart.

Why not actually read what I wrote instead of casting aspersions?[/QUOTE]

? You wrote two words. Maybe you should go back and read what I wrote.

I did not assume that a "smart" school would look down on lower intelligence. Simple put, I said that a smart school does not always cost an arm and a leg, and can still admit students who need more focus while teaching them well.

You are all too quick to determine the universal condition of anything. There isn't always a "it works" or "it doesn't work" for everything.

Originally Posted by Knoell (Bold words are IRHari)
Before you all jump on me, I am not saying there aren't private schools who do only take the best and the brightest, just that all private schools aren't the smart people schools, that stick their nose up at anyone with less than a 200 IQ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knoell
Before you all jump on me, I am not saying there aren't private schools who do only take the best and the brightest, just that all private schools aren't the rich people schools, that stick their nose up at anyone with less than a McMansion.
 
[quote name='X BRO 420']Most bad students are disturbing to other students. Bad students have bad attitudes and don't want to learn. They should be removed from our school systems so resources can be spent on the kids that want to learn, our nations real future.[/QUOTE]
Just out of curiosity, how old are you?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Oh sorry I assumed you were calling those private schools similiar to mcdonalds, totally useless, and popping up everywhere for a buck. Instead you meant that the private school will not take anyone with less than a "mcmansion". So not only do these private schools take the best and brightest, they only take people with mansions as well. :roll:

my private school cost 800 dollars a year, and had 16 students in my grade. I certainly was not rich, and there were no entrance exams, or interviews to be accepted.

There are schools like this all over the place.[/QUOTE]

Wow, that's really cheap. There was definitely no private school like that where I was around, they weren't cheap and always required an entrance exam and interview. Where do you live?
 
[quote name='docvinh']Wow, that's really cheap. There was definitely no private school like that where I was around, they weren't cheap and always required an entrance exam and interview. Where do you live?[/QUOTE]

western new york
 
[quote name='Knoell']western new york[/QUOTE]

Interesting. You wouldn't happen to have any information on your school would you? I'm just interested in how they get funded, and how they select students and what not. You can PM the info to me if you don't want to share with everyone.
 
http://www.dangerousminds.net/comme...fighters_shut_down_wisconsin_bank_that_suppo/

Oh great, lets attempt a run on the bank because of their previous political donations!

Oops, M&I is now owned by Bank of Montreal so the bank you're attacking isn't even the right one anymore.

Oops again, the source for "M&I Donated To Walker" is actually employees of the bank and not actual bank money. So, let's make a run on the bank because of the evil employees!

Astonishingly enough, Oops thrice! Well, maybe not oops so much as worthy to point out, how did two firefighters end up with $300k each in savings? Ahh fuck it, more fun to be angry and chase your own pointed finger than figure out what's really behind the headline isn't it?
 
[quote name='nasum']http://www.dangerousminds.net/comme...fighters_shut_down_wisconsin_bank_that_suppo/

Oh great, lets attempt a run on the bank because of their previous political donations!

Oops, M&I is now owned by Bank of Montreal so the bank you're attacking isn't even the right one anymore.[/QUOTE]
Not exactly. The corporate structure is still the same and those who make the real money and making policies are still probably there. A buyout doesn't mean that all the employees are replaced.

Oops again, the source for "M&I Donated To Walker" is actually employees of the bank and not actual bank money. So, let's make a run on the bank because of the evil employees!
I bet the tellers and csr's aren't the ones that donated and even if they did, pales in comparison to the amounts of the executives.

Astonishingly enough, Oops thrice! Well, maybe not oops so much as worthy to point out, how did two firefighters end up with $300k each in savings? Ahh fuck it, more fun to be angry and chase your own pointed finger than figure out what's really behind the headline isn't it?
So what if 2 firemen have $600k between them. I'm sure they're not rookies and have been in the department for at least 10 years. And even if they weren't, who's to say that they're grunts or maybe they're just living within their means.

Or maybe you shouldn't fucking plagiarize someone else's comments without doing some thinking on your own before you "just ask questions." Prick.

edit: Do conservatards and republifucks NOT know what a McMansion is? WTF
 
Hard to plagarize yourself (really I'm shocked that "my voice" didn't carry...) and yes, I did do my checking. That's how I found the bank sale as well as the law prohibiting corporate donations.

And yes, maybe some of the same people are still there but they're not "in charge" or anything to that effect. Most likely anyone above Regional mgmt is gone and replaced by syrup loving people of the north.


http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/neighbors.php?oldest=1&emp_or_occ=M&I+Bank&type=emp&search=Search
well there goes my theory, apparently national elections identified with M&I Bank employees were predominantly Democrat Party up until 2010? Unpossible!

Again, more fun to just jump to the conclusion as opposed to, I don't know fucking thinking or something.

p.s.
Don't get the wrong idea, gov walker is still a dick, but while that may be the case there's no use in people being morons and not peeling the onion back a bit.

and I have no idea where McMansions entered the conversation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Knoell']I did not assume that a "smart" school would look down on lower intelligence. Simple put, I said that a smart school does not always cost an arm and a leg, and can still admit students who need more focus while teaching them well.[/QUOTE]

Well I'm not sure I buy that argument. I think if you're describing something as a smart school (which you did), it would make sense to assume that they would value intelligence as a litmus test, as opposed to wealth (which you did). That's why I changed your words around, because it makes more sense to assume that's what will be valued.
 
[quote name='Knoell']The opposite can be true as well, the kids who don't want to learn can benefit from being around kids who want to learn. It is really a case by case thing of who is more impressionable, the good student, or the bad one.[/QUOTE]

The bad students don't want to learn because their parents are unfit and should have never had children to begin with. Most of the troubled students in our schools are the products of teens and other unfit individuals reproducing. The smart are being outbred by the stupid. The only way to repair society is to separate the able and unable. Any of the unable that can be reformed will be while the rest will be destroyed for the benefit of humanity.
 
I don't judge people based on sex,race,age or sexual orientation. If you are a dumbass trying to be ganster then you offer no value to society and should be exiled to a gulag before you cause harm to another person or their property.
 
I'm not a fan of Obama, but look at Bush's specific promise of no preemptive war... presidents lie to get into office. Just like most people lie to get any job.

Honestly Barry screwed himself over by not supporting the union workers. He might not be able to count on their vote come 2012. I guess maybe he saw the movie and just doesn't care about reelection.
 
Wow, politician tells people whatever they want to hear to get elected, then doesn't keep promise !!!

In other news, Water is wet and you need a heart to live !
 
perhaps he believes in state's rights?
I have to admit it, I was giggling the whole time I typed that.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']snip[/QUOTE]

Oh sweet, an invitation to get into a pissing contest about whether a politician has ever used hyperbole to get elected. Oh, no, wait, it's actually just a cheap jab. Yawn.

Back on topic:

Dane county judge halts collective bargaining law
Madison -- Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a temporary restraining order Friday, barring the publication of a controversial new law that would sharply curtail collective bargaining for public employees.
Sumi’s order will prevent Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing the law until she can rule on the merits of the case. Dane County Ismael Ozanne is seeking to block the law because he says a legislative committee violated the state’s open meetings law.
Sumi said Ozanne was likely to succeed on the merits.
"It seems to me the public policy behind effective enforcement of the open meeting law is so strong that it does outweigh the interest, at least at this time, which may exist in favor of sustaining the validity of the (law)," she said.
The judge’s finding – at least for now – is a setback to Republican Gov. Scott Walker and a victory for opponents, who have spent weeks in the Capitol to protest the bill.
Asst. Atty. Gen Steven Means, who was part of the state's legal team, said after the ruling that "we disagree with it."
"And the reason they have appellate courts is because circuit court judges make errors and they have in this case."
Means said the state would "entertain an appeal."
"If the Legislature decides to go back and re-act on these provisions, they have the right to do that. And we will see what happens," he said.
Means said he had no idea what the Legislature might do.
Means said no final decision had been made on an appeal. "But that's where we are pointing at," he said.
Means said the state expected Sumi's decision. He said the state had a chance to substitute judges, but decided not to do so.
Rep. Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) said he was pleased with the judge's ruling.
"I am very pleased with her action," Barca said. "We felt from the beginning this was a violation of the open meetings law. And now we go on from here."

edit: BBC coverage. Basically the same thing but DO read and parse as much info as possible.

So it's pretty clear that the bill was passed without any regard for the open meeting law. I'm sure you all remember the infamous video by now. So for now it looks like this is either going to drag on for months in the court system without being passed OR there will be another vote. I cannot find any clear information about the progress of the recall campaign or any information that can confirm or deny that the Republican coalition is ready or willing to try and ram through the bill a second time.

We shall see.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='willardhaven']I'm not a fan of Obama, but look at Bush's specific promise of no preemptive war... presidents lie to get into office. Just like most people lie to get any job.[/QUOTE]

Yup... Posted that video clip the other day. No one really came out to defend Bush the way people are coming out to defend Obama for completely breaking campaign promises...

[quote name='cochesecochese']Oh sweet, an invitation to get into a pissing contest about whether a politician has ever used hyperbole to get elected.[/QUOTE]

I'd almost agree with that, except that Obama rarely went on record concerning Wisconsin (he did a couple of times and *did* use some pretty strong language though, I'll give him that). I'm sure any of the groups holding rallies and protests would have *loved* for him to, perhaps, actually show up in the state, shake a few hands, give a speech or two. Would have really thrown some support their way.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']No one really came out to defend Bush the way people are coming out to defend Obama for completely breaking campaign promises...[/QUOTE]

Yeah it's not like W campaigned against nation building and interventionism and then completely reversed himself, and all the Republican sheep defended him. That never happened right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='IRHari']Yeah it's not like W campaigned against nation building and interventionism and then completely reversed himself, and all the Republican sheep defended him. That never happened right?[/QUOTE]

Perhaps you misunderstood the chain of events...

First, I posted a video clip just the other day about Bush's campaign promises and how he completely reversed his position.

I then posted a video clip showing (yet another one of) Obama's broken campaign promise.

When I posted the clip of Obama, several posters came to his defense, with such wonderful statements as "he lied to get elected - big deal!"

All I did was point out that no one here bothered to come to Bush's defense when I posted his video clip mocking him for broken campaign promises...
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Perhaps you misunderstood the chain of events...

First, I posted a video clip just the other day about Bush's campaign promises and how he completely reversed his position.

I then posted a video clip showing (yet another one of) Obama's broken campaign promise.

When I posted the clip of Obama, several posters came to his defense, with such wonderful statements as "he lied to get elected - big deal!"

All I did was point out that no one here bothered to come to Bush's defense when I posted his video clip mocking him for broken campaign promises...[/QUOTE]I wouldn't really say that' defending someone, sounds more like apathy.
 
bread's done
Back
Top