Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 6:43 PM ET, 03/ 9/2011

Happy Hour Roundup

By Greg Sargent

UPDATE, 7:59 p.m.: The Wisconsin Democratic Party sends over a copy of the forthcoming statement from Dem chair Mike Tate, and note the explicit threat to mount a recall drive targeting Governor Scott Walker:

"Using tactics that trample on the traditions of our Legislature, the Republican leadership has betrayed our state. Republicans have rubber-stamped the desire of the Koch Brothers and their godshead Scott Walker to cripple Wisconsin's middle class and lower benefits and wages for every single wage-earner in our state. The vote does nothing to create jobs, does nothing to strengthen our state, and shows finally and utterly that this never was about anything but raw political power. We now put our total focus on recalling the eligible Republican senators who voted for this heinous bill. And we also begin counting the days remaining before Scott Walker is himself eligible for recall."

More thoughts on this in a moment.

UPDATE, 6:52 p.m.: Wisconsin media outlets are reporting that Republican state senators are breaking up the budget repair bill to pass only the piece that rolls back collective bargaining. The idea is that by removing the fiscal portions of the bill, they can pass the collective bargaining piece without Dems present. More when I learn it...

* The leader of Wisconsin state senate Republicans appears to admit that the drive to break the unions is partly about diminishing Obama's chances of winning Wisconsin in 2012.

* Not even Fox News is buying the Wisconsin senate leader's claim that Obama is secretly manipulating efforts to recall GOP senators over the collective bargaining proposal.

* The fact that Walker floated a bogus compromise with labor and Dems in order to seem moderate and reasonable is more proof that he knows he's taking on water fast.

* What if yet another poll showed that Americans think cutting defense spending is a far better way to control the deficit than cutting "entitlements," and no leading figure in either party cared?

* Grover Norquist gives away the game:

"The goal is to reduce the size and scope of government spending, not to focus on the deficit."

* Now that the Senate has voted down both the GOP and Dem budget cut plans, no one knows the way forward.

* Surprising how many moderate Republican senators voted for $60 billion in cuts.

* It's official: House Republicans will defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

* Self-awareness watch: Pete King claims he won't back down in the face of "hysteria" from opponents of his Muslim show trial, blissfully unaware that he's the one stoking hysteria.

* Breaking: Newt Gingrich is going to keep us all in suspense about whether he's running for president for at least two more months.

* Newt gets pounded by conservatives for suggesting that patriotism and his taste for hard work somehow led to his adultery.

* Don't miss Dan Balz's moving reflections on the life and times of David Broder, who has passed away at 81.

* Chris Cillizza recalls the perfect Broder anecdote.

* And conservatives finally hit the jackpot (okay, not so much) in their endless and desperate hunt for union thuggery in Wisconsin.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | March 9, 2011; 6:43 PM ET
Categories:  Foreign policy and national security, Happy Hour Roundup, House GOPers, Labor, Senate Dems, budget  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Can Obama's political operation make difference in budget fight?
Next: GOP's shenanigans in Wisconsin ensure the fight will only escalate

Comments

"Newt gets pounded..."

Poor Lindsay, when he got pounded by conservatives, no one noticed.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 9, 2011 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Newt pursue his High School Teacher to Georgia, after she moved there, and the ended up getting married.

It does not take much imagination to figure out what they were doing, when he was her high school student.

The guy appears to have been a precocious super patriot.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 9, 2011 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Rumors are flying that the Wisconsin Republicans, starting tonight, are going to fashion a "non-fiscal" bill (no spending or taxes) which does not require 20 Senators to be present. It will strip the union of collective bargaining rights and be passed by both houses and signed into law within a day or so. Then the Democrats can return at their own leisure to talk about budgets, salaries, and benefits. The game may be drawing to a close.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

I was wondering when they would finally go ahead and split out the collective bargaining reforms and pass them on a majority vote.

Posted by: sold2u | March 9, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"Republican state senators are breaking up the budget repair bill to pass only the piece that rolls back collective bargaining."

Which means that they get to put their party squarely in favor of a piece of purely anti union legislation. When the recall petitions succeed and the Dems take the Wisconsin Senate a bill repealing that bill hits the floor immediately, just in time to make the Republicans in the Wisconsin House have to vote against unions TWICE before they have to run again next year.

They make a mighty big bet on the anti union sentiments of Wisconsin's center.

Posted by: ceflynline | March 9, 2011 7:03 PM | Report abuse

The idea was to bust the D part of the public employee unions, put that into a bill that had a lot of bs, a lot of cover, stuff that could be given away. Now, it is on. A fight worth fighting. The teachers' union is worth its salt, they'll bring a good fight. We have already seen the Republican hand (and a little more uglyly).

Posted by: shrink2 | March 9, 2011 7:11 PM | Report abuse

So, all of the caterwauling about how WI's fiscal crisis forces the repiglicans to bust the unions is exposed for the lie that it is if passing the union busting parts of the bill DON'T ACTUALLY CHANGE THE DEFICIT PICTURE and can be passed without the 3/5ths requirement for budget matters.

The real reason:

If we win this battle, and the money is not there under the auspices of the unions, certainly what you’re going to find is President Obama is going to have a much difficult, much more difficult time getting elected and winning the state of Wisconsin.

--Sen Fitzgerald.

Repiglicans: Lying to WI voters to push their partisan adgenda. nuff said.

Posted by: srw3 | March 9, 2011 7:20 PM | Report abuse

The FBI arrested a suspect in the attempted bombing of a MLK Day parade in Spokane, Washington. The suspect, Kevin Harpham, 36, is white and has been affiliated with at least one white supremacist group.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014443763_spokanebomb10m.html

In response, Rep. Peter King stated the obvious: Radical Islamo-Fascist Jihadist Muslims must have infiltrated the white supremacist movement. (snark)

Posted by: bearclaw1 | March 9, 2011 7:22 PM | Report abuse

" It will strip the union of collective bargaining rights and be passed by both houses and signed into law within a day or so."

Finally.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 7:24 PM | Report abuse

The Wisconsin Republicans have just admitted that stripping the collective bargaining right from the unions, had nothing to do with the state's budget.

That is going to be the albatross that hangs around all of their necks, and will get a lot of them recalled, including Walker, next year.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 9, 2011 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Finally. I was thinking they'd strip the fiscal provisions and pass collective bargaining changes in the first week.

Heck, now they should include Right-to- Work law and prohibit automatic payroll deduction of union dues also.

I'm for private sector unions in Right-to-Work states.
Not for public sector unions... the AFSCME, NEA and thier ilk should not exist.

Posted by: TominColorado | March 9, 2011 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Some interesting comments today:
----------------------------
Limited disenfranchisement throughout an individual's sentence is a reasonable restriction on voting rights since convicted individuals serving sentences haven't "paid their debts to society" but completion of a criminal sentence should result in restoration of the convicted person to full citizenship.

Posted by: mobrien83 | March 9, 2011
-------

Exactly right.
======================================
Crimes have consequences. If you are a convicted felon you can also never own a gun. Now, does that make sense if the felony you were convicted of was a nonviolent crime? Nope. But, then again, crimes have consequences. You give up certain rights when you engage in criminal activity and just like in voting, I doubt if someone who embezzled money was thinking about their future gun rights?

Posted by: Marin823 | March 9, 2011
-------
Disenfranchisement of people convicted of crimes is just a politician's safe and cowardly way of appearing to be "get tough" on crime. The Gun Control Act of
1968, which prohibits felons from possessing firearms, made it a crime for someone who had been convicted of a felony in 1946 to possess a firearm. "Consequences" should not continue to pile up as the years go by, after cases have already been settled and adjudicated. Not fair at all. People have been charged and sent to prison for no other reason than possessing a hunting rifle used for sport.

A law which prohibited people with domestic violence convictions from possessing a gun became law in my state and was retroactive. Policemen who had been on the job for years were suddenly out of work.
======================================

"I'm republican and I am against allowing felons the right to vote because they broke a social contract to not violate our nation's laws. I don't care who you are or what race you are, if you commit a felony you should not have the right to vote."

Posted by: bayma1 | March 9, 2011
-------

Until you've completed your sentence. You have an opinion, but someone else might opine that felons should not be allowed to own property or drive cars. Where does it stop? If they aren't going to be full participants in society, maybe they shouldn't have to pay taxes.
======================================


I don't think felons should be allowed to vote.

I don't care what color they are. Criminals aren't trustworthy and voting is an exercise of the public trust.

Posted by: ZZim | March 9, 2011
-------

Shouldn't they have an opportunity at rehabilitation and reestablishing their trustworthiness. I think that's in society's best interest. I wouldn't trust most politicians any farther than I can spit, but they are provided public trust. What does trustworthiness and voting have to do with the poster who was convicted of vehicular manslaughter?


Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

They make a mighty big bet on the anti union sentiments of Wisconsin's center.

Posted by: ceflynline | March 9, 2011 7:03 PM
-----------------------

To give one an idea of how that bet is trending, consider these factoids:
1) Exit polls on election day suggested Scott Walker got 56% of the independent vote.
2) In a recent poll 57% of indies now disapprove of Walker's performance.

http://www.eurimaco.com/us/2011/3/7/poll-gov-walkers-position-erodes-with-wi-independents

So far, the bet isn't bearing fruit.

Posted by: MsJS | March 9, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

The Fourteen Democrats must still stay out of state, because Walker can not pass his budget, or get the unions to surrender their current benefit agreements, without the Democrats being back in Wisconsin.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 9, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Rep Peter King holding committee hearings on Islamic terrorism the same day they arrest a white supremecist for terrorism...

Grover Norquist admitting that the right is more about cutting spending than reducing the deficit the same day that Dems are negotiating possible tax increases with three of the most conservative Senators in the country...

WI Senate Majority Leader admitting that their budget fix bill is all about politics and preventing an Obama win in 2012 the same day Dems are going great guns on a recall of the WI8...

As they used to say... DIVINE PROVIDENCE!

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 9, 2011 7:33 PM | Report abuse

King's hearings
A "three-ring circus" and we get to poke "mooselimbs" with sticks.
C'mon guys, it'll be fun!

Posted by: TominColorado | March 9, 2011 7:37 PM | Report abuse

The Fourteen Democrats must still stay out of state, because Walker can not pass his budget, or get the unions to surrender their current benefit agreements, without the Democrats being back in Wisconsin.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 9, 2011 7:31 PM
====================================

Hahahahahaha. The damage will already have been done. Then the public will turn on them. They might as well just resign and stay in Illinois.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Slate.com just posted that the Wisconsin State Senate has passed the bill, 18-1, with Sen. Schultz voting no.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Now the "Fleebaggers" are racing back.
The R's should reinsert the fiscal provision and pass the original version.
Should have done this on Day 2.

Posted by: TominColorado | March 9, 2011 7:44 PM | Report abuse

http://www.slate.com/id/2287539

This made me laugh. An analysis on how hating trains became a Conservative thing.

Includes the gem..."Why does George Will think "the real reason for progressives' passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans' individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism"?"

Posted by: DDAWD | March 9, 2011 7:49 PM | Report abuse

State Sen. Miller has issued a statement (from Illinois):

"In thirty minutes, 18 State Senators undid fifty years of civil rights in Wisconsin. Their disrespect for the people of Wisconsin and their rights is an outrage that will never be forgotten. Tonight, 18 Senate Republicans conspired to take government away from the people. Tomorrow we will join the people of Wisconsin in taking back their government."

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Liam: "The Fourteen Democrats must still stay out of state, because Walker can not pass his budget, or get the unions to surrender their current benefit agreements, without the Democrats being back in Wisconsin."

It's done. They split off the collective bargaining out and voted on it. They only needed a simple majority since it was a non-budget item.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | March 9, 2011 7:50 PM | Report abuse

"Grover Norquist gives away the game:

"The goal is to reduce the size and scope of government spending, not to focus on the deficit."

Wow, you really caught Grover red handed there, Greg. What a scoop. Grover wants to cut spending and not raise taxes at all!? Shocking.

You might have been more honest about the full argument he states, part of which goes on:

"GN: The goal is to reduce the size and scope of government spending, not to focus on the deficit. The deficit is the symptom of the disease. And there are several reasons to oppose tax increases. First, every dollar of tax increase is a dollar you didn’t get in spending restraint. Two, if you walk into the Democrats’ Andrews-Air-Force-Base, Lucy-with-the-Football trick for the third time in a row -- they don’t have have a saying for being fooled three times!"

See that? Deals to raise taxes are ALWAYS ALWAYS a set-up for a double cross by Democrats. It is always a sucker's deal. The government has more than enough revenue. It spends too much. Just that simple.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 9, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse

From ceflynline:
-------------------------------------

"And meanwhile the republican party has spent the last forty years using its unearned majority to more solidly establish its self as the Party of the Very Rich, and nothing else."
-------

Unearned majority. What in Hades is that supposed to mean?
========================================

"As the Jim Crow Republican electorate dies, they leave no heirs who have any reason to give their allegiance to the preposterously wealthy."
-------

Liberals easily trip over their own terminology. What ceflynline should have said was "Jim Crow Conservatives." There were no such things as Jim Crow Republicans, only Jim Crow Democrats.
***
"The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States enacted between 1876 and 1965. They mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities, with a supposedly "separate but equal" status for black Americans. In reality, this led to treatment and accommodations that were usually inferior to those provided for white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational and social disadvantages.

"During the Reconstruction period of 1865–1877 federal law provided civil rights protection in the South for "freedmen" — the African Americans who had formerly been slaves. In the 1870s, white Democrats gradually returned to power in southern states, sometimes as a result of elections in which paramilitary groups intimidated opponents.

"Jim Crow laws were a product of the solidly Democratic South. Conservative white Southern Democrats, exploiting racial fear and attacking the corruption (real or perceived) of Reconstruction Republican governments, took over state governments in the South in the 1870s and dominated them for nearly 100 years, chiefly as a result of disenfranchisement of most blacks through statute and constitutions. In 1956, southern resistance to the Supreme Court's ruling in Brown v. Board of Education resulted in a resolution called the Southern Manifesto. It was read into the Congressional Record and supported by 96 southern congressmen and senators, all but two of them southern Democrats."
***
=======================================


Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 7:54 PM | Report abuse

The Commonwealth of Virginia prohibits all public sector unions.

C'mon lefties - March, riot, and trash Richmond !

(Need more popcorn)

Posted by: TominColorado | March 9, 2011 7:55 PM | Report abuse

"See that? Deals to raise taxes are ALWAYS ALWAYS a set-up for a double cross by Democrats. It is always a sucker's deal. The government has more than enough revenue. It spends too much. Just that simple.

Posted by: quarterback1"

So if raising taxes necessarily leads to more spending, lowering taxes leads to reduction in spending.

And this has occurred...when?

Posted by: DDAWD | March 9, 2011 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Vote suppression is a strategy Republicans use predictably.

Posted by: bernielatham | March 9, 2011
========================================

I take it he's not talking about all the shenanigans typically used to suppress and challenge military ballots.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 7:58 PM | Report abuse

""the liberal baby or fertility gap -- namely that progressives have fewer (or any) kids than conservatives""

As if that makes a difference. Most of the lefties I know were raised in conservative (if not VERY conservative) households.

Posted by: jprestonian | March 9, 2011
======================================

Is that what we commonly call anecdotal evidence?

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 8:01 PM | Report abuse

@qb1: It spends too much. Just that simple.

Correction: It spends too much on the wrong things. Lets have a government where education, aid to poor people, environmental protection, etc. get funding they need and the defense dept has to put on a bake sale or peddle the army times on the street corner to buy the next generation of unneeded hardware.

The repubs give up the game when they always try to defund the IRS (which brings in $15 for every $1 spent in enforcement) whenever they have any control and then complain about the deficit.

Posted by: srw3 | March 9, 2011 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Anyone that reads the bible can see that violence is promoted and encouraged against any non-christian.

Posted by: gordmetcalfe | March 9, 2011
======================================

You probably should read it again, Gordo. You've evidently missed or misinterpreted something.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Kaddafi, the gangs MS-13 and La Cosa Nostra, who's membership are 100% Christian, are responsible for thousands of deaths, rapes and prostitution across the U.S.

Do you think we should investigate Christians and persecute ALL Christians for not coming out and condoning their fellow Christians hideous acts?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | March 9, 2011
========================================

Mikey, Mikey, Mikey. Did you mean condemn rather than condone? Where did this 100% figure come from? Can you provide some documentation?

Very quickly, just how to do you think one becomes a Christian and what that entails? I think you may be operating under a misconception.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Relax everyone, no one's rights have been taken away. The bill would still need to pass the assembly.

And Greg, here's a story for you tomorrow. The bill came out of a conference committee with less than 24 hours notice, likely violating state public meetings law. It's going to get tossed.

I think the bill mostly does the right thing. But I won't support the Republicans who are doing this the wrong way by violating open meeting laws.

Posted by: Bailers | March 9, 2011 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Please hold your breath as you "begin counting the days remaining before Scott Walker is himself eligible for recall."

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 8:09 PM | Report abuse

"So if raising taxes necessarily leads to more spending, lowering taxes leads to reduction in spending."

Not a logical corollary. Sorry. Would be nice.

"And this has occurred...when?"

Good question for you. When has spending ever been reduced?

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 9, 2011 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Virginia:

•Collective bargaining in state and local government banned by a 1993 statute signed into law by Democratic Governor Douglas Wilder
•State debt as a share of income: 2.1%
•State unfunded pension obligations as a share of GDP: 17%
•Score on quality of state government management: A-
•Score on Pew’s subcategory for “people” management: A

Wisconsin

•Collective bargaining (monopoly unionism) in place for government workers, with about 52 percent of state/local workers in unions
•State debt as a share of income: 4.6%
•State unfunded pension obligations as a share of GDP: 32%
•Score on quality of state government management: B-
•Score on Pew’s subcategory for “people” management: B-

Posted by: TominColorado | March 9, 2011 8:14 PM | Report abuse

I think the bill mostly does the right thing. But I won't support the Republicans who are doing this the wrong way by violating open meeting laws.

Posted by: Bailers | March 9, 2011 8:08 PM
==============================

Party pooper.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 8:16 PM | Report abuse

srw,

Nope, your priorities are not only reversed but loony. Put the armed forces on the street begging while we balloon the welfare state? That's downright suicidal. James Burnham was right.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 9, 2011 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Bailers, if the Dems actually cone back tomorrow, presto! There's your quorum and they can vote the original AB-11. Satisfied?

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 8:22 PM | Report abuse

"Good question for you. When has spending ever been reduced?

Posted by: quarterback1"

So we're in agreement that Norquist's "starve the beast" paradigm is complete nonsense and that lowering taxes prior to cutting spending does nothing but increase the deficit.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 9, 2011 8:23 PM | Report abuse

cone, or come back ; )

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 8:25 PM | Report abuse

"Kaddafi, the gangs MS-13 and La Cosa Nostra, who's membership are 100% Christian, are responsible for thousands of deaths, rapes and prostitution across the U.S."

Soon as you find proof that these gangs are uniformly motivated by Christianity and shout "Praise Jesus" before slaughtering people, let us know.

Next.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 9, 2011 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Bailers, if the Dems actually come back tomorrow, presto! There's your quorum and they can vote the original AB-11. Satisfied?
Posted by: clawrence12
___________

Yes, but I don't expect it to happen. They are raking in way too much campaign cash sitting in Illinois. Besides, then they couldn't be the martyrs could they?

Posted by: Bailers | March 9, 2011 8:28 PM | Report abuse

I'll believe they're serious about Rights when they are marching and rioting in Richmond, Virginia.

Until then it's all about power and union payroll deductions, which are donated Dem politicians, who are then across the table at contract negotiations.
Can't blame them for fighting to keep that... hellofa gig if you got it.

Posted by: TominColorado | March 9, 2011 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Did you read Miller's statement. At least Weigel thinks that means they ARE coming back tomorrow.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 8:33 PM | Report abuse


So collective bargaining rights for public employees in WI are no longer a budget issue. Wow, that sure changed quickly.
What brazen BS!
I always thought that Walker and the GOP would win this battle, but would lose the war. The GOP in WI are so screwed.
I hope that this will be a wake call for Barack. You can't negotite with these people. The GOP is diseased, suffering with a moral rot and must be stomped out like the vermin they are. They don't belong in a civil society.

Posted by: filmnoia | March 9, 2011 8:40 PM | Report abuse

filmnoia, you want to round us up and ship off to concentration camps to be gassed too?

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 8:43 PM | Report abuse

"Soon as you find proof that these gangs are uniformly motivated by Christianity and shout "Praise Jesus" before slaughtering people, let us know."

Hi everybody! Wow! What a day!

QB, it's no "Praise Jesus." Who else is worried about Satanists?

Thanks for reading! (if you choose to!) :-)

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2011/03/04/2011-03-04_he_had_just_given_a_soul_to_the_devil_witness_recalls_slay_susps_rant.html

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 9, 2011 8:44 PM | Report abuse

All, my thoughts on the events in Wisconsin:

http://wapo.st/hZDqVH

Posted by: Greg Sargent | March 9, 2011 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Elliot Spitzer (big surprise) is hoping the Assembly gets an outpouring of anger and newspaper editorials across the State saying this is not the way to get this done. Dave Weigel calls this the "nuclear option". LOL

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Howard Fineman made a very interesting assessment on Lawrence O'Donnell. He said that the people running national Republican strategy--and he listed Rick Perry, Karl Rove, the Koch brothers, and Haley Barbour--are orchestrating these Wisconsin moves to try to provoke an over-reaction from Dems and labor (and Madison students) that will fit the narrative they're trying to create that Obama and liberals are really 60's-style radicals. He said this is all about 2012.

That list of five is interesting. It has certainly seemed that there's a unified national Republican strategy to try to take advantage of the fact there are so many Republican governors and legislatures after the stealth attack that elected them in 2010.

Posted by: AllButCertain | March 9, 2011 8:52 PM | Report abuse

"The GOP is diseased, suffering with a moral rot and must be stomped out like the vermin they are. They don't belong in a civil society."

Hi filmnoia! What an observant comment!

Can't argue there, when I eat in public, people become sickened. Plus, I belch loudly, then giggle afterwords. No civil society for me, no way.

When you stomp us out, avoid the rat poison. I've been told that's an exclusive form of right wing violence, "... and covering the lead pellets with anticoagulant/rat poison provides a signature, the mind of the right wing terrorist." ;-)

Thanks for reading! (If you choose to!)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 9, 2011 8:54 PM | Report abuse

"filmnoia, you want to round us up and ship off to concentration camps to be gassed too?"

As Jack Benny said when he hesitated as a stick up man told him "your money or your life" - he said "I'm thinking, I'm thinking."

Posted by: filmnoia | March 9, 2011 8:55 PM | Report abuse

@Brigade : All of the dixiecrats that lived long enough became republicans. Thurmond, Helms, etc. The "conservative democrats" of the apartheid era have morphed into the conservative repubs of yesterday and today.

"Former conservative Democratic officials are helping to churn the Deep South into a red sea as they find friendlier waters in the Republican Party, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times."

It is now the repubs that oppose school integration, any kind of affirmative action, etc. The big change happened after the civil rights era, conservatives changed their party stripes.

"Jim Crow laws were a product of the solidly Democratic South."

Jim crow laws had little to do with party labels and everything to do with maintaining white hegemony.

Stop trying to rewrite history.

Posted by: srw3 | March 9, 2011 8:59 PM | Report abuse

So collective bargaining rights for public employees in WI are no longer a budget issue. Wow, that sure changed quickly.
What brazen BS!
I always thought that Walker and the GOP would win this battle, but would lose the war. The GOP in WI are so screwed.
I hope that this will be a wake call for Barack. You can't negotite with these people. The GOP is diseased, suffering with a moral rot and must be stomped out like the vermin they are. They don't belong in a civil society.

Posted by: filmnoia | March 9, 2011 8:40 PM
====================================

Republicans control both houses of Congress and the Governor's mansion in Wisconsin. Poor, poor filmnoia. Just hang on to your bile and bitterness; it will see you through. You've still got your dreams.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 9:00 PM | Report abuse

"@Brigade : All of the dixiecrats that lived long enough became republicans. Thurmond, Helms, etc. The "conservative democrats" of the apartheid era have morphed into the conservative repubs of yesterday and today."

Paging Kleagle Byrd, the "conscience of the Senate," please pick up the white hypocrisy phone.

;-)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 9, 2011 9:09 PM | Report abuse

filmnoia's hero, Rachel Maddow is having a cow.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 9, 2011 9:09 PM | Report abuse

"The GOP is diseased, suffering with a moral rot and must be stomped out like the vermin they are. They don't belong in a civil society."

Hahahahahahaha

You need a cranial enema.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 9, 2011 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Hey boyz, what goes around comes around. You'll have your day.

Posted by: filmnoia | March 9, 2011 9:20 PM | Report abuse

"Hey boyz, what goes around comes around. You'll have your day."

Hi filmnoia! I'm sure you'll be one of the guards that treat us "firmly but fairly" after we're sent to the camps for being "diseased, suffering with a moral rot and must be stomped out like the vermin they are. They don't belong in a civil society." I just hope the camps aren't as bad the last time a Democratic Administration imprisoned American citizens for being different. Guys, do you think they'll strip us of our property too?

Love the new tone! Hope you're having a great evening!

And thanks for reading! (or not!) ;-)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 9, 2011 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Not different, Troll, but vermin. Loathsome, elongated-incisor-bearing, flea- and plague-ridden vermin.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 9, 2011 9:35 PM | Report abuse

@Brigade : All of the dixiecrats that lived long enough became republicans. Thurmond, Helms, etc. The "conservative democrats" of the apartheid era have morphed into the conservative repubs of yesterday and today.

Stop trying to rewrite history.

Posted by: srw3 | March 9, 2011 8:59 PM
====================================

You're the one trying to rewrite history. We've hashed this out here before, and your theory was tossed into the sh*tter where it belongs. Quoting some article by a liberal hack is not documentation. Dixiecrats were a 1948 breakaway faction of the Democratic Party and had returned to the reservation by 1950.

The Jim Crow era ended in 1965. There were no Jim Crow Republicans. Thurmond and Helms were Jim Crow Democrats who later became Republicans, but they were two of very few.

"We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states."---Richard Russell (D-Georgia)

Did he become a Republican?

"On the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) completed a filibustering address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier opposing the legislation."

Did he become a Republican?

Did Fritz Hollings, one of 11 Senators to vote against confirmation of Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court (but for Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas), become a Republican?

Did William Fulbright become a Republican?

"Al Gore, Sr. did not stop at simply voting against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In addition, Congressional Quarterly reported that Gore attempted to send the Act to the Senate Judiciary Committee with an amendment to say "in defiance of a court desegregation order, federal funds could not be held from any school districts." Gore sought to take the teeth out of the Act in the event it passed."

Did ole Al Sr. become a Republican?

How about George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Orval Faubus, or Bull Connor? More Republicans?

The FACT is that Republicans voted for Johnson's CRA in overwhelming numbers as opposed to Democrats, as Johnson gratefully acknowledged. The Jim Crow Democrats would not have felt too welcome as Republicans at that time.

It's true that the Democratic Party evolved into a more liberal party and, as the Republican Party became more conservative, many southern conservatives began to vote Republican. But your wild theory that the Jim Crow Democratic politicians switched en masse to the Republican Party is sheer liberal revisionist poppycock. And don't bother to link to some leftwing hate site. Facts are facts. History is history. You can't change it. Your predecessors were racist scum.

Posted by: Brigade | March 9, 2011 9:40 PM | Report abuse

LMAO!

When I was a kid I used to like to take a stick to a hornet's nest. I had a chance of getting stung then, but you guys are pretty lame.

Posted by: filmnoia | March 9, 2011 9:51 PM | Report abuse

"Not different, Troll, but vermin. Loathsome, elongated-incisor-bearing, flea- and plague-ridden vermin."

Ya mean like this?

http://bss.sfsu.edu/internment/posterrattrap.html

Again, from the last time a Democratic Administration imprisoned American citizens for being different.


Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 9, 2011 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company