Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 8:41 AM ET, 03/ 1/2011

The Morning Plum

By Greg Sargent

* Three national polls show scapegoating of public employees is a bust: We now have three big national polls showing that Americans back public employees in their standoffs with governors who would roll back bargaining rights -- clear evidence that the public has not been as quick to scapegoat them for our economic doldrums as many expected.

The new Pew poll asks people about the Wisconsin standoff in particular, finding that more (42 percent) side with the unions than stand with Governor Scott Walker (31 percent). Last night's New York Times/CBS poll asks the question more generally, finding strong support for the right of unions to collectively bargain, 60-33.

These come after last week's Gallup poll finding that 61 percent favor the public unions against Walker. Tellingly, all three polls show support for the unions among independents, and all three show that only higher income folks lean towards opposing them. Whatever hostility exists towards public employees, it seems fair to speculate that proposals to roll back long-accepted fundamental rights represent an over-reading of public sentiment -- and may even be stirring some public sympathy for these workers and their right to organize.

Conservatives may retain the upper hand in the broader war over the fate of organized labor -- polls show the public continues to have mixed feelings about unions in general. But for all the distortions and faux populism the right has thrown at public employee unions, Americans just don't seem willing to be manipulated into questioning their basic right to exist.

* After Wisconsin, wither labor? Ezra Klein reaches a similar conclusion, arguing that even if the public doesn't like unions, Americans don't want to see them destroyed. Which means it's time for unions to figure out how to flourish again by creating an "identity beyond being a protection service for people who aren't very good at their jobs."

* Neither side has upper hand in government shutdown fight: Pew also finds that the public is evenly divided, 36-35, over who would be to blame for a government shutdown, Republicans or the Obama administration. The new Washington Post poll's findings, interestingly, are identical.

The lack of clear advantage in this showdown may help explain why both sides appear willing or even eager to reach a deal to avert a shutdown.

* Obama's health care olive branch not good enough for GOP governors: You'll be startled to learn that Obama's willingness to allow states to opt out of the health law by 2014 is not good enough for Republican Governors Association chief Rick Perry.

Key takeaway: It will be interesting to see if Republican Governors are willing to accept any improvements to the law that address their concerns but don't achieve the goal of destroying it entirely.

* GOP suffers from lack of high-profile foreign policy voices: Ben Pershing notes a development that really deserves more attention: The absence of experienced, high-profile foreign policy experts among Repubican elected officials.

One corrollary development worth noting: The marginalization of older-line establishment GOP foreign policy voices by the Cheneyite wing of the party.

* Charles Koch will continue bankrolling Governor Walker: The chairman of Koch industries goes public with his unabashed intention to continue contributing to Walker, which may not do much to help the Governor in the Wisconsin P.R. war.

* Connecting the dots: What do the right's attacks on ACORN, Planned Parenthood and unions have in common? Ilyse Hogue tries to make sense of the larger pattern.

* No one touching Social Security thus far: Is the Obama/Dem strategy of drawing a line against allowing Social Security to get drawn into the debate over the deficit actually paying off?

* Skewering myths in Wisconsin: Hendrik Hertzberg knocks down two big ones: The bogus comparison of the flight of Wisconsin Dems to GOP filibuster abuse; and the nonsense that Governor Walker campaigned on his extreme anti-union proposal.

* Why unions matter: Chicago Dems are distributing a set of talking points for workers to argue that unions improve everyone's lot, including that of non-union members. The events in Wisconsin have provided an opening for labor to restate its case at a time when polls had been showing high public skepticism about its role in American life.

* Is Walker damaging the GOP's chances in 2012? Kevin Drum suggests that Walker's brand of hardball could bring more union households back into the Democratic fold in time for Obama's reelection.

* And T-Paw has a Michele Bachmann problem: Stuart Rothenberg on why Tim Pawlenty's primary obstacle to becoming president may be fellow Minnesotan Michele Bachmann. Wait, is she really running? Really?

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | March 1, 2011; 8:41 AM ET
Categories:  House GOPers, Labor, Morning Plum, budget  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Poll: Scott Walker losing P.R. battle

Comments

Public polling was against Reagan firing air traffic controllers too. So?

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 1, 2011 8:49 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Kevin Drum. What we have noticed over the past election that many of the "Reagan Democrats" which are the mid-western blue collar workers voted for Republicans in 2010 and probably helped to swing the election for the GOP.

Walker's busting of unions ploy really energized not only the Democratic base but also awoke those "Reagan Democrats" or "blue collar workers" to the fact that the GOP is NOT your friend and in the end wants your demise.

As a result, I fully expect many of those swing blue collar worker voters to rethink voting GOP in 2012 and may swing towards the Democrats. That could make the difference in terms of states such as Ohio and Wisconsin and in the end re-elect Barack Obama.

To the GOP, be careful what you wish for...

Posted by: maritza1 | March 1, 2011 9:01 AM | Report abuse

An interesting post over at New Deal comparing Coolidge and the Boston Police, Reagan and the ATC's, Walker et al and the Public Employees Unions. There's an awful lot of revisionism going on re history.

Historian Murray N. Rothbard notes that

""the year 1924 indeed saw the House of Morgan at the pinnacle of political power in the United States. President Calvin Coolidge, friend and protégé of Morgan partner Dwight Morrow, was deeply admired by J.P. “Jack” Morgan, Jr. Jack Morgan saw the president, perhaps uniquely, as a rare blend of deep thinker and moralist. Morgan wrote a friend: ‘I have never seen any president who gives me just the feeling of confidence in the country and its institutions, and the working out of our problems, that Mr. Coolidge does.’”

Coolidge got to the White House for crushing unions, where he slept ten hours a day and hopped on and off a mechanical horse in his underpants and a cowboy hat.

Here’s what America got: the Great Depression.

Coolidge’s real legacy was a huge upward shift of income during the “roaring twenties” away from ordinary people to the rich and powerful, who got even richer and more powerful thanks to his regulatory and policy inactivity. The best Average Joe could hope for under Coolidge was for his income to hold steady. The profits from that wondrous innovation and growth that send Shlaes into rhapsodies went to fatcats who turned the country into a casino and smashed the economy.""

http://www.newdeal20.org/2011/02/23/amity-shlaes%E2%80%99s-forgotten-history-when-unions-go-bust-we-all-do-36727/

Posted by: lmsinca | March 1, 2011 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Republicans trying to destroy Obama trade agenda...

NYT (just a snippet):

Although the White House renegotiated a pivotal free-trade agreement with South Korea in December, scoring rare bipartisan praise, House Republican leaders have refused to allow the deal to move forward. They want the administration to make progress first on similar accords with Colombia and Panama that face stiff opposition from labor unions and liberal Democrats.

To add to the pressure on the administration, House Republicans in February blocked a big expansion of trade adjustment assistance - which provides cash, training, relocation, job search and other benefits to workers displaced by globalization - from being renewed. Many of the 220,000 workers who took part in the program last year could have their benefits reduced as a result.

...

"It's absolutely reprehensible," said Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, who said workers were suffering as a result of Republican obstruction. "They should not hold people who are dislocated hostage to a trade agreement, or anything else."

White House officials also said the Republican maneuvers were counterproductive: The Andean preferences, which began in 1991, have lapsed just as the United States was trying to get Colombia to strengthen labor protections as part of the negotiations to revise the 2006 agreement.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=751826&f=77

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 9:20 AM | Report abuse

I'm not up on my floor procedures the WI Senate. But it the goals is to "delay a vote in the hope of mobilizing public support for compromise" there are likely options available to them to do so. So it is a bogus comparison, as the GOP used the rule book to its advantage, while the senators in WI are ignoring it. But it's only obstruction if the other team is doing it.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | March 1, 2011 9:26 AM | Report abuse

About Liam's Labor Party idea ... as others have noted, identifying with labor is a tough sell. And there is such a deeply institutionalized revulsion against collectivism and the whole idea of being in it together that the basic premise would never catch on.

And if it did, the result would be disaster. Come on, Liam, look at the effect of third parties in the last few decades. Perot finished off GHWB, Nader gave us Bush. Third parties split the vote of one of the two others. A party devoted to the interests of labor wouldn't siphon off a solitary Republican vote, since Republicans despise working people even when that's what they are themselves.

And in the larger context, that is America's political problem right there.

And even here on the Plum Line. I'd wager that not a one of the Conservative People who posts here will materially benefit from Republican ascendancy, much though they may gloat at liberal discomfiture, any more than anyone else. Those who snarl their support for Conservative Positions are bequeathing a disintegrating nation to their future selves and their children, and it is that disconnect between political beliefs and self-interest that we should be talking about and trying to do something about.

And oh, if you don't like hearing from someone who's left the USA, that's just too damned bad.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 1, 2011 9:31 AM | Report abuse

republican purity, ideology and ferocity to oppose anything from obama means that if obama came out today and said you know, we're going to scrap this healthcare law and start over" - all republicans, including perry would scream bloody murder and suddenly be "FOR" our new healthcare law. they're not only hypocritical, they are absolutely schizophrenic.

Posted by: ebproducer | March 1, 2011 9:31 AM | Report abuse

""I'm not up on my floor procedures the WI Senate.""

Look to what the state assembly did to pass the bill to get a hint what "playing fair" gets you when Beelzebublicans are in charge.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | March 1, 2011 9:34 AM | Report abuse

As I pointed out in the last thread, liberals have a serious problem. I happen to not take attitudinal polling very seriously, as I've often said. But, to the extent that liberals take these polls seriously, while they are crowing about them they are failing to notice that the other side of the coin is that the public rejects the liberal view of government as beneficent and instrument of the "common good" etc. They don't even trust it to be fair to its own workers.

"GOP suffers from lack of high-profile foreign policy voices: Ben Pershing notes a development that really deserves more attention: The absence of experienced, high-profile foreign policy experts among Repubican elected officials."

Absolutely hilarious, from a party whose "experts" are Biden, Hillary, and Obama. Hahahaha. I don't think Republicans are going to be too worried on this score.

"One corrollary development worth noting: The marginalization of older-line establishment GOP foreign policy voices by the Cheneyite wing of the party."

Such voices as? Older? Cheney was in the Nixon admin, for crying out loud. Would Reaganites be "old" enough to satisfy this faux concern of liberals? Oh, wait, Reagan was the ultimate in unacceptable foreign policy -- no experience, dangerous lunatic, etc. Is McCain old enough?

Nice to see liberals again pining for old ideas, though. Whatever they are.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 1, 2011 9:35 AM | Report abuse

""The bogus comparison of the flight of Wisconsin Dems to GOP filibuster abuse""

Meaning that, anything the Republicans do is bogus, anything the Democrats do is awesome.

@NoVAHockey: ""as the GOP used the rule book to its advantage, while the senators in WI are ignoring it. But it's only obstruction if the other team is doing it. ""

Exactly. Such bizarre rationalizations confound me: why not just say, "Look, we had to do something, this is the best option available to us, so we took it". When it comes down to it, whether you call it abusing the rule book or ignoring it, it's politicians using available tactics to accomplish their goals.

I suppose the constant attempts to delegitimize the chicanery or one side while lauding and rationalizing the chicanery of the other is also an available tactic, it's just much more tiresome. IMHO.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | March 1, 2011 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous 1
HBGary 0

http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2011/02/28/hbgary-federals-aaron-barr-resigns-after-anonymous-hack-scandal/

Koch are next. I'll enjoy watching these selfish frauds exposed. Hopefully this libertarian la la land these bozos want to trick the US into buying into will finally get some exposure as being a greedy lie that would destroy society as we know it.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/27/anonymous-targets-the-brothers-koch-claiming-attempts-to-usurp-american-democracy/

Will be fun when Koch's systems are compromised and private correspondents are released to the press outlining the Koch's intent to crush workers so they can further game the system.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | March 1, 2011 9:38 AM | Report abuse

@jp -- House procedures are designed to enforce the will of the majority. very few, in any protections for the minority party. different animal entirely.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | March 1, 2011 9:39 AM | Report abuse

""When it comes down to it, whether you call it abusing the rule book or ignoring it, it's politicians using available tactics to accomplish their goals.""

Yep. What the reasonable conservative guy said.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | March 1, 2011 9:40 AM | Report abuse

""House procedures are designed to enforce the will of the majority. very few, in any protections for the minority party. different animal entirely.""

Understood, but it shows what kind of folks they're dealing with. Holding a vote open for less than a minute, when they HAD the votes? That was just a giant GFY to the minority. It served no other purpose.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | March 1, 2011 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Oregon is proud to have Ron Wyden working with Scott Brown on the reform of health care reform. Reactionary Republicans hate (surprise!) anything that looks like progress, but they are a one trick pony.

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/02/on_health_care_wiggle_room_for.html

Posted by: shrink2 | March 1, 2011 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, our pill popping Rep David Wu says it was all about mixing Ambien and Valium, as if anyone could have guessed that combination might not work well for a person who has to appear engaged and intelligent once in awhile. Don't go to rehab, blame the psychiatrist, that's usually what works best.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 1, 2011 10:04 AM | Report abuse

"Understood, but it shows what kind of folks they're dealing with."

Agreed. Elected officials.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | March 1, 2011 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Cheney goes back. Neoconservatism doesn't. Are you really as dim as you pretend, QB?

Posted by: caothien9 | March 1, 2011 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Good for Wyden-Brown.

Organized labor achieved its major goals, except for its primary one of survival.

I negotiate against unions and I favor collective bargaining as an expression of freedom. I am only going to make this observation: the threat of unionization is an effective check on employer overreach. When my client[s] and I successfully fight against an organizing campaign, it always leads to a bit of soul searching about employee relations, and it generally leads to paying closer attention to working conditions, especially.

Further

I do not believe that unionizing IBM would alter IBM's policies to the overall advantage of the employees. I do believe that the possibility of organization greatly increases IBM's attention to its productive workers.

That sense, that the mere right to collectively bargain is a great leveler, is, I think, of real importance.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 1, 2011 10:14 AM | Report abuse

ooops, I forgot the Wu links

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/03/david_wu_and_a_functioning_rep.html

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/02/rep_david_wu_says_ambien_valiu.html

Posted by: shrink2 | March 1, 2011 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"If Republican Governors are willing to accept any improvements to the law that address their concerns but don't achieve the goal of destroying it entirely;" another example of the gop's ideology war as opposed to actually solving the problems they say exist. acorn, planned parenthood, unions, regulations, corporate taxes - this is about absolute power, nothing more.

Posted by: sbvpav | March 1, 2011 10:22 AM | Report abuse

HAAAA!

The investigation puts Issa, who as House oversight chairman has the power to investigate and subpoena administration officials, in the unusual position of turning his scrutiny on a member of his own office.

Bardella, 27, has served as an Issa spokesman since January 2009; he previously handled communications for Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). Known as a rising star on Capitol Hill, Bardella was described by his boss in a recent New Yorker profile of Issa as "my secret weapon;" in the same profile, Bardella said that his goal is "to make Darrell Issa an actual political figure."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/2chambers/2011/02/darrell_issa_investigating_his.html

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 10:26 AM | Report abuse

@mark- "When my client[s] and I successfully fight against an organizing campaign, it always leads to a bit of soul searching about employee relations, and it generally leads to paying closer attention to working conditions, especially."

Thanks for the insight. I have a friend in HR for a rather large organization and he is my only real insight into how labor operates and needless to say he isn't particularly complimentary. It will be interesting to hear about his experience in his new international position which will allow him insight into how things are handled elsewhere and how workers are treated.

I would be interested in a poll about whether people think union workers are overpaid or if private sector workers are underpaid. I wonder if this debate is going to open people's mind to the possibility that they are underpaid rather than unions being overpaid. Of course, that poll would be full of problems, but it would be interesting to see the sentiment of people.

Posted by: ashotinthedark | March 1, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Will be fun when Koch's systems are compromised and private correspondents are released to the press outlining the Koch's intent to crush workers so they can further game the system.

==

Sorry mike but you're just engaging in nostalgia for the time when people cared about scruples and fair play. Not enough of us still do.

People will admire the Koch's ruthlessness more than deplore their dishonesty or the immorality of their goals.

If people cared about honesty we would have Republicans swinging from lampposts and twisting in the light of torches, from Portland to Portland.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 1, 2011 10:30 AM | Report abuse

""I would be interested in a poll about whether people think union workers are overpaid or if private sector workers are underpaid.""

The Village Wisdom says anyone making under $250,000.00/year is overpaid; anyone making over that amount is a "hard worker."
.

Posted by: jprestonian | March 1, 2011 10:32 AM | Report abuse

"As I pointed out in the last thread, liberals have a serious problem"

I GET IT!!!

QB = Skip!

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 10:34 AM | Report abuse

"I wonder if this debate is going to open people's mind to the possibility that they are underpaid"

If someone asks if you're underpaid, you say yes.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | March 1, 2011 10:36 AM | Report abuse

watching the E&C hearing. someone yesterday was talking about Gov. Barbour's accent. it is like Foghorn leghorn.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | March 1, 2011 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Well played NoVa and jpreston!

Posted by: ashotinthedark | March 1, 2011 10:46 AM | Report abuse

All the while, state after state is sinking into a sea of red ink.

As the legions of state bureaucrats multiply.

Taxpayers shrink.

Who's going to pay the bill??

Heat up the mint presses.

Roll out a few more trillion$$$$

We got to pay for dat Obamanation somehow.

Less than two years to go.

We got to hold on.

Two hundred fifty-three thousand, eight hundred and forty-three bureaucrats retired this year.

Start printing their pension checks and put out the help wanted ads.

MORE BUREAUCRATS WANTED!

Easy job. Big salary.

Benefits a senator would be jealous of.

Cushy, "guaranteed" pension.

The lines form to the LEFT.

Posted by: battleground51 | March 1, 2011 10:51 AM | Report abuse

A good summary of GAO report on government overlap...

"This report will make us look like jackasses," Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who read the report, told reporters Monday. He sponsored the amendment requiring the report's publication.

...

A 2006 Defense Department study recommended a unified medical command, but nothing came of it. The idea could have saved taxpayers between $281 million and $460 million, the GAO said.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2011/03/government_overlap_costs_taxpa.html

Gotta cut down on overlap and redundancy.

Why they never did this under Bush is anybody's gu...... oh wait, right, profiteering (see Rumsfeld, Donald and Scott, Rick).

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 10:51 AM | Report abuse

@ ronnie - i think the reasoning is probably less nefarious than that. You're taking on flag officers who aren't going to give that up easily. Is the Air Force really going to stand down and let the Navy handle medical care for airman? policy aside, that's a tough politically. it's more of turf war problem.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | March 1, 2011 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Republicans won the 2010 midterms by campaigning on jobs, jobs in a bad economy. Counterintuitively, and now that they control the purse strings, they have proposed a budget that eliminates 700,000 jobs and may affect the recovery of that bad economy? Coupled with their Republicans buddies on the Supreme Court that unleashed unlimited corporate funds for Republicans and the current assault on public unions in Republican controlled statehouses, etc.--this whole Machiavellian scenario must be solely about winning the 2012 Presidential race and seizing the ultimate power. So, will the majority of Americans continue to be snookered and vote against their own interest? History shows that they--like sheep to the slaughter--will. Who, what will "wake" the People up from their political sleepwalking?

Posted by: dozas | March 1, 2011 11:04 AM | Report abuse

"As the legions of state bureaucrats multiply.

Taxpayers shrink."

Posted by: battleground51 | March 1, 2011 10:51 AM

Sir, are you aware that those employed by the state are taxpayers also? By your reasoning, as "bureaucrats multiply" so should taxpayers (unless bureaucrats are somehow exempt from paying taxes, which I doubt).

Posted by: wiccan | March 1, 2011 11:13 AM | Report abuse

All, new poll in WISCONSIN finds strong support for public employee bargaining rights, and closely divided on Walker recall:

http://wapo.st/e3fGC6

Posted by: Greg Sargent | March 1, 2011 11:14 AM | Report abuse

@NoVa:

"i think the reasoning is probably less nefarious than that. You're taking on flag officers who aren't going to give that up easily. Is the Air Force really going to stand down and let the Navy handle medical care for airman? policy aside, that's a tough politically. it's more of turf war problem."

Right. Politics + Turf. You're talking PORK. Instead of taking on waste and contracting abuse in DoD, the Republicans scream and cry and carry on in support of military pork for their districts. See Kyl, John. It wasn't until the OBAMA admin when military contracting rules were reformed to disabuse political leaders of the idea that they can get billions for their districts (helping them politically) for redundant or wasteful projects.

-Obama signs law to reform Pentagon weapons buying-

President Barack Obama, seeking to end the schedule delays and cost overruns that plague U.S. defense spending, signed a law on Friday to reform the way the Pentagon purchases major weapons systems.

"As commander-in-chief, I will do whatever it takes to protect the American people," Obama said at a White House signing ceremony. "But I reject the notion that we have to waste billions of dollars to keep this nation secure."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/05/22/us-obama-pentagon-idUSTRE54L3FR20090522

In fact, it was one of his first major accomplishments as President.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 11:19 AM | Report abuse

PIvotal to an understanding of the liberal world view is a careful reading of the words they chose.

Today Mr Sargent carefully choses the word "scapegoating". Setting aside the syntax issues created by using a noun as a verb, let's discuss the definition of the term. My old webster's defines the word thusly: the action or process of casting blame for shortcomings or failure on an innocent or at most only partly responsible individual or group.

Oh, the poor babies in WI. Victims of nasty Republican politicians and the evil, ignorant voters who elected them!! How will they ever survive?

Are the unions innocent? Certainly not. They've spent their union dues buying the best legislature possible. In fact the Democrats who ran WI are so deeply in the pockets of the unions that they sought to pass new contracts in the lame duck session, even if that meant springing one of their own from jail.

Basically the unions, and politicians they bought own this mess. They worked hard to rob the tax payers and were successful at it for years. The only thing that has stopped the picking of the citizens' pockets is the immutability of Thatcher's law.

so for whose shortcomings or failures do the unions allegedly suffer? the unions would have us believe that there is no financial problem for Wisconsin that cannot be resolved by confiscating more money from the citizens.

As for the Democrats and their party, they see that the stakes are high. The golden seam that resulted in the taxpayers funding the Democrat party is threatened in a very public way. I've read reports that when Indiana stopped collecting union dues, 90% of the members simply stopped paying them.

But this is America and the easiest path to power is to become a liberal recognized victim group like the "palestinians" or the alaskan caribou. So the unions have to portray themselves as the "scapegoats" even though they are far, far from innocent. It is their only shot.

And Mr Sargent, being the hyperpartisan that he is dutifully carries the water for them. It must be nice to be paid for that kind of "work". Just write what the party bosses dictate, like a good aparatchik.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | March 1, 2011 11:21 AM | Report abuse

NoVa,

THIS (from the same article) is even MORE TELLING:

"The Government Accountability Office estimated nearly 70 percent of the Pentagon's 96 biggest weapons programs were over budget in 2008."

SOOOOOOOOOO much wasted money.

Where is the GOP's plan to reduce waste in military?

Where was the GOP in the 2000s? Oh right. Iraq, Afghanistan and BombBombBomb Iran.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 11:22 AM | Report abuse

@skip johnson: "Just write what the party bosses dictate, like a good aparatchik."

Hilarious comment considering the lengths you will go -- paraphrasing you, "I don't like violence but I'm more than willing to go there" -- to defend your Republican Establishment party bosses who are in bed with wealthy corporate elite.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Then there is this gem of absolute stupidity. Clearly neither Mr Sargent nor Ilyse Hogue know a darned thing about their political opponents. That's great news for us on the right and it provides endless amusement as well. Take this quote:
==============
Their attacks are all carefully aimed at the same critical juncture: institutions that work for people in their daily lives and in the political arena, those that connect people’s personal struggles across the country to the political struggle in Washington
======================

the simple fact of the matter is that both organizations were very high profile in their desire to tread on the law. Both got caught red handed.

I suppose that the desire to portray these evil doers as victims is just a function of the perverse liberal world view. In that view killing babies in the womb and engaging in election fraud among other nefarious acts is simply working with people in their daily lives.

A case could be made that smuggling teenaged girls from latin america to enrich a pimp is just working with people in their daily lives.

Certainly Kermitt Gosnell worked with people in their daily lives to, n'est ce pas?

Basically Ms Hogue is just offering a rationale, a reason for the liberals to continue to dwell in denial. After all admitting that ACORN and Planned Parenthood did would be tantamount to admitting a mistake. That's an adult view of things and as we learn anew each day, liberalism is little more than extended adolescence.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | March 1, 2011 11:36 AM | Report abuse

"In that view killing babies in the womb"

AKA Abortion. Which is LEGAL under the Supreme Court's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

"engaging in election fraud among other nefarious acts"

Are you suggesting that a TINY number of people who abused the rules is representative of the whole organization? That would be like saying the entire GOP caucus solicits sex from transsexuals because of one Christopher Lee. Talk about "nefarious acts"!

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Skip, is being as stupid as that physically painful?

Posted by: caothien9 | March 1, 2011 11:44 AM | Report abuse

@ronnie

My child, you must learn the ways of the force. One does not do the slide of by issuing an insult and then demanding a response. If you truly wish to perform the slide off well you must learn from the masters: the spokesmen for CAIR.

In your approach you basically admit that the behavior of the legislature before Mr Walker was indefensible. If you could defend it you would. So the rhetorical tactic that most blowhard liberals use next is a direct attack.

Having read the rantings of liberals on the internet for years now, I am, as they said in the sixties, hip to the trip.

There is no reason for me to respond to your juvenile and unreasonable demand. And there is every reason for the unions and the politicians they've purchased to respond to the taxpayers and voters.

It comes down to this grasshopper: The taxpayers VS the taxeaters. It is long past time that we taxpayers flexed our muscles in the general direction of the government.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | March 1, 2011 11:54 AM | Report abuse

@caothien9

This is just a note to you. I don't bother to read what it is you write here. I have no interest in the words of a boor such as you. Given the fact that all of us have but a finite amount of time on this mortal coil, you are simply not worth much.

If I need nasty, there are a variety of other providers who on occasion say something of value. That group wouldn't include you.

so go have a steaming hot bowl of pho and quit wasting your finite supply of time trying to pick a fight with me. You got nothing of value that I can discern.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | March 1, 2011 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"There is no reason for me to respond to your juvenile and unreasonable demand."

I made no such demands.

I was just pointing out facts that show conclusively how blatantly wrong you are on the issues that you brought up.

Abortion is legal.

And knocking ACORN for "election fraud" is like knocking the entire GOP caucus for one of their members who solicited sex from transsexuals on Craig's List.

"The taxpayers VS the taxeaters"

Ah. That's "what it comes down to"... Class Warfare. Heckuva job. You're a pawn doing the bidding of the corporate elite. I hope you enjoy working against yours and your family's own self-interest. Seems like you do.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Heads we win, tails you lose. Isn't that what the manufactured "collective bargaining" for public employees crisis is all about? You rag and rag about big business and wall street. Then you back your political stooges, ignore that they promise over their head, unless of course, the real working people will pay their ever increasing taxes to support your benefits, retirement etc. People are just becoming aware of the scam thats really accelerated over the last 20 years. The reason you don't want to see this end is that you want to go back in 2 years and get everything you feel you gave up and then some. Meanwhile, the other 90% of us just work until we're 70 so you can retire after 30 years. Quote all the polls you want. You and this same media elected this union shill. Quit your goverment job and try and replace it with anything close, even without "collective bargaining" in the new obameconomy.

Posted by: carl19 | March 1, 2011 1:44 PM | Report abuse

"the real working people"

Do teachers work?

Do policemen work?

Do firemen work?

I suggest you go to the nearest police precinct and ask them if they "work".

Posted by: ronnieandrush | March 1, 2011 2:29 PM | Report abuse

"I GET IT!!!

QB = Skip!"

Still as dense as you used to be, Ethan.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 1, 2011 7:09 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