Is Wisconsin yet another indication why we don't want Democrats in charge of National Security?

It might be a stretch but I see a connection:

The Democrats’ new playbook says to run away and hide when they don’t get their way. Good.

The one fundamental political truism in America is that Democrats always find a way to self-destruct. Good again.

Democratic legislators in Wisconsin and Indiana have run away so they don’t have to vote, represent their constituents or act like Americans. Other lemming Democrats surely will take their lead and follow them off the political cliff.

Perfect.

It’s hard to imagine our Founding Fathers finding the running-away behavior laudable or respectable, but I haven’t found anything yet that liberals believe that is in line with the philosophy and agenda of our Founding Fathers.

It’s delightful how these Democrats have run away from their elective jobs and hid. This juvenile, pro-union stunt has only tightened the political noose for Democrats in 2012. Hang ’em high.

Democrats have yet to accept the glaring fact that there was a seismic shift in politics in November when voters tossed them and their bankrupt ideas out of office. They are ignoring the will of the people because, at their core, Democrats think people need to be not only governed, but controlled. Liberals believe ordinary Americans are too stupid to make important decisions on their own. Believe it.

Instead of respecting the voters’ desire for frugal fiscal policies that make abundant sense, Democrats in Wisconsin and Indiana have run away and tried to take their political ball with them. They are emboldened by teachers who call in sick and various other loudmouthed, pro-union hacks and stooges.

My plea to these Democrats is to remain on the run. The longer they stay away from their respective states and elective jobs, the better the opportunity for fiscally conservative Republicans in 2012 and the better the opportunity to fix America.

William Warren’s new cartoon seems most appropriate:

DemocratChickens.jpg

Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
Sheila Jackson Lee cares about the people
  • 914

    Well, uhmmmm.

    If I left State for weeks on end I’m pretty sure my job would be forfeit and given to someone else to do so…..

    YOU YELLOW COWARDS ARE FIRED!!

  • WildWillie

    Actually, if you leave your job for a week in the private sector with no communication on when you will return, it is called Job Abandonment and you will be terminated. ww

  • Roy

    Tone-deaf and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

  • Oyster

    “Democrats have yet to accept the glaring fact that there was a seismic shift in politics in November when voters tossed them and their bankrupt ideas out of office.”

    Not only do some run away, but others that stay behind double down on stupid. The CEO of our “Large International Corporation” is leaving us to go to work for a Democratic Governor in the north east. At our company she has overseen a substantial decrease in the number of employees, with wave upon wave of layoffs, and implemented a hiring freeze over the last two years.

    Guess what the Governor has hired her to do?

    Become his new Commissioner of Economic and Community Development – to improve the economy and help create more jobs.

    It doesn’t get much dumber.

  • Rance

    Another way of looking at it is that it is a strategic retreat, a tactic that is available to them that they are willing to use.

    If they return and vote, they lose. End of story. If they stay out, the situation may change over time. That possibility, however slim, exists as long as the vote hasn’t been taken.

    I don’t think your analysis of this in terms of national defense holds a whole lot of water.
    Your talking about people who are outnumbered, but refuse to surrender

    Over? Did you say “over”? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no! – Senator John Blutarsky

  • john

    Do any of you have a consistent position on parliamentary moves to block losing votes that applies to both the U.S. and Wisconsin Senates?

  • SER

    @John:

    “Do any of you have a consistent position on parliamentary moves to block losing votes that applies to both the U.S. and Wisconsin Senates?”

    80% of life is “showing up.” Have the US Senators shown up to work?

  • john

    OK, I’ll mark that as one in the “no” column.

  • Hcddbz

    Running and SI a vote cannot be cast is cowardly.
    Get on the floor filibuster argue debate then take a vote. Try to sway the other side by the strength of your augments.

    This is an attempt at mob rule not a respective republic.

  • SER

    Little Johnny,

    You can mark it anywhere you would like.

  • john

    Get on the floor filibuster argue debate then take a vote. Try to sway the other side by the strength of your augments.

    You mean like this?

    Democrats are especially upset because they think most Republicans are getting around a Senate rule adopted three years ago that requires senators to make public their holds once they’ve had them in place for six legislative days. Republicans don’t deny using the method but argue it’s allowed by Senate rules which could be changed if Democrats want. “If they think the rule needs to be tightened up they can offer to change the rule,” suggested a GOP leadership aide.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-07/politics/senate.democrats.gop_1_gop-senators-obama-nominees-frustrated-democrats?_s=PM:POLITICS

    Fortunately, the secret hold has been abolished. No thanks to you, though.

    “Both Senator Begich and Lisa Murkowski voted with 90 other Senators to end the secret holds. Four senators voted to keep the practice, all Republicans and most of them members of the brand-new Senate Tea Party Caucus:”

    So now we’re back to: parliamentary moves to block losing votes, it’s OKIYAR.

  • john

    What… calling me names is supposed to make your argument have merit? Is that you, 914?

  • Jlawson

    john:

    “Do any of you have a consistent position on parliamentary moves to block losing votes that applies to both the U.S. and Wisconsin Senates?”

    Why block it? You’re going to lose, lose gracefully and work on getting what you want passed the next time. They need to act like adults, not little kids who think they can escape something they don’t want by running away from it. How many times in the last few years have the Republicans lost votes on important stuff? Did they just go “Well, Fuck y’all, we’re not even going to hang around for the vote!”

    Sheesh. “We’re not getting our way so we’ll just take the ball and go home!” Yeah, that’s really adult behavior.

  • Jlawson

    “Republicans don’t deny using the method but argue it’s allowed by Senate rules which could be changed if Democrats want. “If they think the rule needs to be tightened up they can offer to change the rule,” suggested a GOP leadership aide.”

    Tell ya what, John, show where in the rules it says you can just run away when it looks like the vote won’t be in your favor.

  • jim m

    By running away the dems not only prevented a vote on the bill that they objected to but they also foreclosed on any discussion of alternatives to reducing state expenses. The responsible act would have been to engage in the debate and offer meaningful alternatives.

    What running away showed the nation was that the dems are not interested in working on solutions to the nations problems and they are not interested in meaningful debate. They want their way or nothing and are willing to destroy the nation in order to get it.

  • John

    Good lord people,(Rance, john) you realize that the republicans were out of power in Wi for decades right? At any point did they ever just up and leave, no they stood their ground the took their case to citizens and WON and election. Now the Dems have lost an election and their answer to citizens is…. to GD bad you won we don’t care. There is no good reason for this, it is not a tactical retreat it’s simply election nullification.

  • Wussing Out For the Cause.

    d(^_^)b
    http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
    “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

  • hcddbz

    Well they took a lesson from Nancy. Remember when she turned off power in Congress and bared the doors to prevent Republicans voicing there options. So when they win they stick their fingers in their ears and say no no cann’t hear you. When they loose they run away. It shows that no matter what the vote is their way is the only way.

  • john

    Why block it? You’re going to lose, lose gracefully and work on getting what you want passed the next time.

    I’ll refer you to my previous post on secret holds. Since I haven’t seen your rant against Republicans’ use of that tactic, then I’ll take that as yet another inconsistent position on the use of parliamentary moves to block losing votes.

    Tell ya what, John, show where in the rules it says you can just run away when it looks like the vote won’t be in your favor.

    The rules say there needs to be a quorum, so the rules clearly anticipated the situation where there isn’t one. The rules do not specify that there are valid reasons for not having a quorum and invalid reasons for not having a quorum.

  • jim m

    It also shows that they lack any confidence in their beliefs.

    If they really thought that their ideas could win the day in a straight forward debate they would stay engaged and agrue their position. That’s what the GOP did while the dems rammed their agenda through the House and Senate. In doing so they eventually turned the tide of public opinion and gained the victory we saw last November.

    If the dems actually thought that the people backed their ideas they would do the same thing, but this reveals that the dems know that the public will not follow them so they need to get their way by subterfuge and manipulation.

  • john

    John #16, everything you say is equally true for secret holds. But the Republicans saw no problem setting records using them.

    Also,

    they stood their ground the took their case to citizens

    That’s exactly what the Democrats are doing. And every poll (including conservative-leaning Rasmussen) shows the citizens of Wisconsin siding with the Democrats. Why should they not stand their ground?

  • john

    Well they took a lesson from Nancy. Remember when she turned off power in Congress and bared the doors to prevent Republicans voicing there options.

    And she took a lesson from Sensenbrenner. Remember when he turned off the microphones and walked out of the room to prevent Democrats from voicing their options.

  • john

    It also shows that they lack any confidence in their beliefs.

    Wrong. It shows that they have STRONG confidence in their beliefs.

    If the dems actually thought that the people backed their ideas they would do the same thing, but this reveals that the dems know that the public will not follow them so they need to get their way by subterfuge and manipulation.

    Stop watching Fox News. The people back the WI Democrats over Republicans in poll after poll. Recent polls show Walker would lose in a do-over of November, and in reelection. The reason the Democrats have held out so long is because the public DOES support them.

  • jim m

    John,

    WRONG.

    If they had the courage of their convictions they would stand and fight. By running out they have shown that they neither believe that the public will back their position and they are declaring that they do not believe in democracy. It was a fair and democratic vote that put the GOP in power and they need to shut up and work within the system. The GOP did it on the Federal level and the results were seen last Nov.

    And while the unions have been trotting out polls that show the public might support their right to collective bargaining, the public backs Walker’s budget plan as a whole and does not support the bloated salaries and benefits that the unions have.

    You cannot separate the two. The unions want to make the inference that approving the right to collective bargaining is the same as approving all their inflated salaries and benefits and lifetime job guarantees. People do not supoprt that.

    Also the polling questions do not delineate between collective bargaining for wages and for fringe benefits. The Wisconsin law would not effect bargaining for wages. People suport that. The law exempts police and firemen because they actually have workplace safety issues that the other union workers do not. The pols supporting collective bargaining are dishonest because they ignore that important fact.

  • LiberalNitemare

    Another way of looking at it is that it is a strategic retreat, a tactic that is available to them that they are willing to use.

    Posted by Rance | March 3, 2011 2:01 PM

    The problem with democrats – there is no tactic they aren’t willing use.

    I wonder whose side the Wisconsin protesters would have been on if the republicans had hidden out in Chicago rather than stand and vote on the health care fiasco?

  • jim m

    Oh,

    and I will note that the unions have already tipped their hand. They don’t give a damn about their members and their salaries because they already announced that they will concede on that point.

    The unions are far more worred about the provision that says that the government will no longer collect the union dues automatically from the employee paychecks and that the union will have to do that work themselves. In other states that has meant a serious pay cut for the union because members don’t want to pay.

  • Tsar Nicholas II

    You wouldn’t give a ADHD-ridden 10 year-old the keys to a sports car. For similar reasons, you shouldn’t give a Democrat the keys to actual political power.

  • Jlawson

    “The rules say there needs to be a quorum, so the rules clearly anticipated the situation where there isn’t one. The rules do not specify that there are valid reasons for not having a quorum and invalid reasons for not having a quorum.”

    I would imagine that when they wrote the rules they didn’t anticipate half the folks needed for a quorum would bug out when it looked like they’d lose a vote. “It doesn’t say in the rules that you can’t!” isn’t a very good defense, and I’m surprised you’d try that route.

    Rather… I guess I should be surprised. Somehow, I’m not.

  • jim m

    The rules state that they need a quorum for budget matters only. That means that they could separate every single union issue and pass it without any dems on the floor with a simple majority. They could strip them of their bargaining rights, they could cap their salaries, they could stop collecting their dues, they could force them to recertify annually.

    If it were my choice I would have done so already.

  • jim m

    JLawson,

    Yes, the rules were written in a day when you got elected to represent the public and you showed up and represented them regardless of whether or not your party would be successful. You had a duty to show up and represent your constituency and to make the democratic process work.

    Today’s dems see government not as democracy but as a system to be gamed for their own benefit. They don’t give a damn about democracy they only care about who gets the spoils.

  • Jim Addison

    Secret holds were allowed in the US Senate for generations.

    Does the Wisconsin Senate recognize abandonment as a legitimate tool? What’s the history? It is stupid to compare them without understanding the background of it.

    Personally, I don’t think they should be forced to attend. Neither should they be paid if they do not show up for work – like anyone else.

    The FACT is, without swift action, massive layoffs of public employees will be forced in Wisconsin. I hope they are ALL union jobs, so the people who created the situation bear at least a share of the cost.

  • john

    If they had the courage of their convictions they would stand and fight.

    In a forum where they’re guaranteed to lose? That would be a pretty dumb strategy.

    And while the unions have been trotting out polls that show the public might support their right to collective bargaining

    Rasmussen is a union?

    the public backs Walker’s budget plan as a whole and does not support the bloated salaries and benefits that the unions have.

    And that’s why the unions have conceded to all of his salary and benefit demands.

    and I will note that the unions have already tipped their hand. They don’t give a damn about their members and their salaries because they already announced that they will concede on that point.

    And I will note that Walker already tipped his hand. He doesn’t give a damn about the budget, because they unions already announced that they will concede on that point.

  • john

    “It doesn’t say in the rules that you can’t!” isn’t a very good defense

    It’s a hell of a lot less ridiculous than asking to show where in the rules it says you CAN do something that the rules don’t say you CAN’T do. Try this… show where in the rules it says you can give a speech while standing on one foot.

  • jim m

    So John you are saying that your convictions are dependent upon whether or not you will win? Your commitment to democracy is dependent upon whether or not your side wins every important vote?

    SO what you are saying is that you don’t really give a damn about democracy and who the people elected, that you will use any means necessary to win and that “democracy” is really only about the people on your side being heard.

    After that, the rest of your arguments are nothing but window dressing for your fascist bullshit.

  • 914

    I didn’t call anyone a name johnboy, I was the first to comment.

    Unless you are a leftist senator who cut and run in which case johnboy, you are a pussy.

  • jim m

    Now I understand why the unions are in such a panic:

    http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2011/03/the_loan_arrang.html

    Their broke. They’ve been borrowing money to buy dem politicians. They are millions in debt and if they can’t get their dues extracted from the workers automatically they are finished.

  • hcddbz

    Jim M.

    This has been an open secret since UPS strike.
    UPS strike was about control of pension. UPS wanted to maintain control pension so that only UPS employees would get the money UPS put in to their pension. The UNION wanted to maintain control because they had several other pension funds that were bankrupt. During the entire strike their was grand jury indictment pending against the head of the union for fraud. The judge in the case did not bring it because because he felt it would influence the strike.

    The Unions cannot afford loosing automatic dues and they cannot afford losing rectification in WI because they will they may loose in other states and then books will be open.

    It is the same reason the Unions and the Dem salivate over Walmart. They want dues on all those workers, it is worth billions of dollars that will be put into their coffers.

    Those Democrat Senators are honest politicians they were bought and pay for by the Unions and they will remain that way no matter what they have to do. Notice that people losing jobs is OK as long as the power of the Unions are not diminished.

    We live in Representative Republic. That means you vote on issues. Sometimes you win sometimes you loose. However you vote. If you loose you can always bring up the issues later if you have enough support. The fact that the these cowards will not vote proves they know they have no real support in the state.

  • Gmac

    The AEA in AL has gone absolutely nuts over the fact that a law was specifically passed that excludes the *state* from deducting union dues and sending them to the AEA’s account.

    Screams have been heard to the effect that its going to reduce their membership in a right to work state.

    Little Johnny? Running away is *not* participating in democracy, it is denying it.

  • Ryan M.

    Much like the ‘lame duck session’ when the rules were written what the democrats are doing now would not have been practical. The communications structure didn’t exist, the transportation structure didn’t exist. They wouldn’t have been able to flee and maintain contact with their families – doing what they are doing now would have been impractical at best.

    Face it. The Democrats are behaving lie a two year old throwing a temper tantrum because they aren’t getting their way. If the tactic were legitimate there would not have been rules added authorizing them to ‘go fetch them’.

  • John

    So john, poll after poll show the public with the dems on this huh? OK poll after poll show Obama under 50% so he’s illegimate too right? There is only 1 poll that counts, it was last Nov there will be another one coming up in a couple of years if the dems are on the right side of this they will win. Until then they should come to work and do their jobs.

  • gnossoss papadopoulis

    How come you guys don’t discuss the actual proposals in the budget? Because once you see where this is going you might agree with the majority of WI residents who want Walker gone.

  • Ryan M.

    No. Because pretty much, there is absolutely nothing in the budget that should escape a good level of cuts.

  • Ryan M.

    And I’ll bet you would rather discuss anything than the democrats infantile temper tantrum.

  • I REALLY WISH THE DEMS WOULD ALL TAKE OFF AND LEAVE THE COUNTRY, I”M SICK OF THOSE COWARDS, OBAMA IS SUCH A LIER, NO WONDER HE LOOKS LIKE A SKELETON WITH BIG EARS, HE LETS THE UNIONS RUN OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE HE DOESN’T KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN, THE PEOPLE WANT THEIR MONEY BACK THAT OBAMA HAS PUSHED INTO THE HEALTHCARE CRAP,HE USES OUR MONEY TO CREATE NEW PROGRAMS, THAT”S STEALING, SSD,SSI, FOLKS NEED MORE MONEY WITH EVERYTHING GOING UP IN PRICES, WHEN IS HE GOING TO RECOGNIZE THE POOR FOLKS THAT ARE ON SSD,SSI, ETC?