Neither do I!
He could be in Naples, FL or New York with the stimulus king of AIG, or attacking unions in Arizona, OR Colorado secretly getting his orders from the Kochs. The one thing we know is Governor Walker is NOT in Wisconsin and and he will not tell anyone where he is.
You have Scott Walker doing this financial tour across the nation, raising money wherever he possibly can, flying over Wisconsin, sort of waving, and getting back on the plane and leaving the state again.
– Sen. Jon Erpenbach
Before we have to put out an APB and use some Wisconsin Milk cartons please help us out. He was last seen wearing a red and white shirt and stocking cap and blue pants! If anyone has seen him please let us know!
By the way for those of you scoring at home:
My first question was a softball: “Will you pledge right now to run the most open, transparent gubernatorial administration in the history of the universe?”
Gov.-elect Scott Walker’s one-word reply: “Absolutely.”
Maybe he’s “hiking the Appalachian Trail.”
LOL…so funny!!
Gov. Scott Walker will be in Chippewa Falls at 1:20 p.m. Friday for a ribbon-cutting at Chippewa Falls Intermodal Terminal, 1160 W. River St. The event is open only to credentialed members of the media. from the Leader Telegram….
If you are inferring that he is being less than honest with tonette, I resent that. This man is pure family values that is why he had Newt Gingrich come up and raise money for him. He is trying to live the pure snow white existence that Newt has…….o wait ….nevermind.
Maybe he is hiking the trail…at this resort
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2012/02/11272/alec-education-academy-launches-island-resort
I think it’s funny that you guys are criticizing the Governor for fundraising efforts he wouldn’t have to do if your side didn’t start the recall process. No recall, no fundraising.
Aaron, what’s wrong with fundraising in Wisconsin? Why must Scott Walker leave Wisconsin to fundraise?
The fact is, while Walker and his allies criticize the recall efforts as being spearheaded by out of state interests, Walker himself is relying on out of state money to fund his campaign.
Now the Governor is limited on how to defend himself against a recall process started by big labor? You guys have some strange rules.
I think most people realize that this election will have an impact nationwide. To pretend this recall is just about Wisconsin is either naive or convenient.
The recall effort was started by Scott Walker and his attack on collective bargaining for public employees. You and I both know that if he takes concessions on health insurance premiums and pension payments without attacking collective bargaining, we’re not having a discussion about a recall.
Listen, healthcare and pension contributions is an entirely different argument. The point is this: just as unions have a legal right to recall Walker for tying his shoes the wrong way, Walker has every right to raise as much money as possible tapping whatever legit funding sources he can.
You can criticize him for out-of-state funding, but like I said before, this election has national implications – especially for unions. And since we are being honest with each other, we both know that funding for Walker’s opponent will come largely from out-of-state labor unions – money they have because they usurp dues from union members who don’t have a choice to opt out of unions.
A winger recognizes rights. How quaint.
One of those rights is enshrined in the state constitution. The other is an obscure exception in campaign finance law created in the 80s by incumbent politicians to protect their butts from that constitutional right.
As they say, which side are you on?
Last fall uberGOper Stephan Thompson told us small donations from Wisconsinites were going to be the “lifeblood” of the save Scott Walker campaign.
To which right in the state constitution do you refer?
I believe the Democratic candidate will be limited to current campaign fund rules rather than the unlimited fundraising allowed an incumbent from filing to scheduling of the recall election.
Aaron I thought we were being honest here. So lets try and really be honest. As Zach says not only did Walker start the recall when he “dropped the bomb” technically the republicans started it when that loon from Milwaukee started the “recall”.
* yes out of state union money will be sent to WI for sure, but it will pale in comparison to the out of state money that scott walker is raising. Then look at who is donating. Find me anyone who has donated a nickel to the democrats anywear near the lack of character or ethics of Bob Perry.
Finally anyone in a union has every opportunity to “opt out” all they need to do is go around and get 50% +1 signatures in their workplace and the unions goes away. Its that simple. If the union is so bad for the workers wont be a problem at all. Unions are pure democracy in the workplace, no one is forced to do anything.
Finally, I am not sure whether to complement or ridicule the fact that every single right wing person in the country has the same exact lines.
Jeff,
Why should they need more than 50% to decide not to finance a union? I thought you libs were all about the individual’s right. Well, what about an individual’s right to represent themselves or a right not to finance the opposing political party.
You want democracy? Try having unions recertify themselves every year. Try having employees decide in a month by month basis whether they want to finance their unions. That’s democracy.
Its a democracy in the workplace, not individual rights. Its funny you come in here complain about recalls and then want the unions to recertify on a monthly basis. SHould we as a society take a vote on every bill that passes through congress? why dont we have an election and recertify Scott walker on a month by month basis?
As a community should we vote on every finished bill or do we get a say on every amendment also?
Jeff,
You need to get your facts straight. I didn’t say they should recertify on a monthly basis.
Aaron then who said this:
Try having employees decide in a month by month basis whether they want to finance their unions.
And yet Walker’s recertification is “disenfranchisement” of 2010 voters. Funny how that works.
Jeff,
Go back and read my response. I said recertify on a yearly basis and finance on a monthly basis.
Ok thats fine….ill bite can we do the same with Government? Imagine how much money we would have saved if we took a month by month vote on financing the Iraq war.
Why should a union recertify more often than we elect an official to state government?
And why do you assume a union will always donate campaign funds? or to people the members don’t support?
Ed,
Why assume what we do regarding elected officials should be the standard for how we treat unions?
Jeff,
So the arena of the workplace is equivalent to defending a country?
A little less democracy for thee.
Aaron,
A union decertification election has always been available to workers who don’t like the union, and workers organizing to decertify don’t face hostility from their employers like pro-union workers do. Mandating an annual recert vote of 51% of members, rather than those who vote, is an obvious ploy to crush the union. Just say it out loud. You’ll feel better.
Aaron ,
Leaving aside the ridiculousness that you are inferring that what we did in Iraq was “defending our country”.
The point is its democracy so the majority run the show. The thing about a union besides the incredible easy way to decertify it, if you do not agree with the way it is being run you get more involved in the leadership of the union and change the way it runs.
Aaron, in case you’re not familiar with the changes enacted by Act 10, union recertification required 50% +1 of ALL union members, not just a majority of those who voted. That’s a higher standard than we expect when we elect a governor, and why?
Because Scott Walker wanted to make it virtually impossible for public employee unions to recertify.
I think that Scott walker thought this would make it impossible for public unions to recertify but by the fact that most unions who took a vote passed in the 90% range it shows he was wrong about that also.
And so much for Scott Walker’s “transparency.”
I’m guessing he’s at home on a conference call with his legal team.
Yeah, but remember, there’s nothing to see there….Walker would never do anything wrong, because he was an Eagle Scout!
Remember…the Scout Motto is Be Prepared!
I thought the Scout Motto was hire two lawyers at a time!
Two lawyers at a time.
Walkers version of the Discount Doublecheck
Jeff,
I wasn’t trying to defend Iraq. I figured – and wrongly apparently – that you were using Iraq as an example of any war that the U.S. initiates with a foreign power.
And the point of a Republic isn’t that a majority gets a hand in every decision made by government officials. That didn’t work so well for ancient Greece, as I recall.
I was using the example of something that was amazingly costly and most people were against. Yet we were powerless to do anything about it really. That is how it works here.
As for how it works in a republic, not sure because i dont live in a republic. We however live in a constitutionally limited democratic republic so the majority does matter, just as our Founders wanted it to matter.
Unions are uniquely American and truly what this country was founded on. I will put aside the fact that the truly real and only reason that Walker tried to hard to break the public employee unions was simply because they donate and work for dem candidates and it was a political power play. The fact that the republicans tried to break the unions was an amaing act of big government.
Not to be pedantic, but if you live in a constitutionally limited democratic republic, then you live in a republic. And you knew what I meant by it.
And of course, the majority matters, just not in a mob-rule sort of way. A republic does a fairly good job protecting our country from many of the pitfalls of a pure democracy.
I still haven’t heard a very good reason why individuals shouldn’t have the liberty to opt out of a union. When applicants apply for a job, they don’t do it because they want to be part of a union. So why should an individual have to organize 50% of the workforce in order to opt out of a union?
You do understand that there is a difference between a republic and a constitutionally limited democratic republic right…. You also understand that in the Founding of our Country, our forefathers interchanged the words republic and democracy. So Ole Ben could have easily said “a democracy if you can keep it” – Tomato – Tamato.
That being said we go back to the fact that unions are a democracy in the wrokplace. The same reason i never had the option to “opt out “of Iraq unless i helped enact change and elect new people. That’s why people can not “opt out” of a union without decertifying it. Otherwise there would be chaos. Why would a worker want to opt out anyway when the union is the one negotiating ther contracts, etc….
Jeff,
This will be my last response of the evening.
Chaos is the reasoning – says you – why individuals cannot opt out of a union. Chaos for who? It wouldn’t be chaos for the employer since many employers do just fine without unions. And it wouldn’t be chaos for the worker since most workers in the U.S. are not unionized and do just fine as well. So who would be in chaos?
You are now not even reading my posts so not sure the point but it is hard to have a democracy when not everyone follows it(just ask Scott Walker), So for the same reason we can not pick and choose what laws affect us in our democracy is the same reason you cant have one individual opt out of the union. As has been stated over and over there are ways to get out of the union if its that important to you/
yes we are at an all time low in terms of unionized workers(which really makes the unions are bankrupting us and running the country talking point so ridiculous dont you think). yes there are some workers that are doing just fine. How was the lowest unionized total of employees done fo rour economy so far? Ask the massey Minors how that worked out for them…or maybe look at the real wages of workers in the US and you would see a steayd decreas since 1980……
Jeff,
The law analogy has problems for the rather clear and indisputable reason that chaos or harm doesn’t result from right to work laws.
“Chaos” being defined as the WisGOP unable to author, introduce and vote on a pet bill in five business days.
Steve,
A ploy to crush unions? When it comes down to it, who would be doing the crushing?
Scott Walker and Scott Fitzgerald.
Heck, Fitzgerald admitted what Republicans in Wisconsin were really doing with Act 10 was weakening unions in advance of President Obama’s reelect.
My point, Zach, is that the actual crushing comes either by members not voting to recertify or by members not financing their union. Don’t put off on Republicans what the membership is doing with their own volition.