It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Continuing their resistance to the damaging changes being planned by Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, union supporters and teachers are organizing a large protest for Monday, Feb 21, 2011. The rally will take place at 9am at the Indiana Statehouse where the State Senate will be considering new limits on union rights. House Bill 1468, the so-called Right To Work bill is, of course, trying to ensure the Right To Work For Less.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by prexparte
You're right. They both have their right to protest. This may turn out to be far more important than any of us realize.
edit on 2/19/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by inforeal
Who doesn't want decent wages for honest work?
This whole issue is about raises. The teachers union wants set raises, the gov wants teachers raises set against the inflation rate and cost of living.
No-one is taking money away from anyone. The teachers just want HIGHER RAISES.
And this is why we are in this pickle today.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by Jeremiah Johnson
I think it's the mixing apples with oranges that's getting to me so much. Different issues. My issue is deeper in that I tend to appear like I side with unions when in fact it's a different "thing" that bothers me. Without some kind of solidarity to unify us we're just going to continue to be enslaved. Unions just happen to be the easy target in this case to shoot down, but I think any unifying "thing" would pretty much gets the same treatment.
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Montana
Then what is this about? These people who have their salaries from tax payer money are demanding more.
How simple can I make this?
Think this is just a narrow budget fight in one state? Think again.
"Some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin, where you are just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain generally, seems more like an assault on unions," said Obama.
He knows Wisconsin is just round one in the national battle for control of the budget message, so he's sent his outside political team, Organizing for America, to help build even larger crowds. Union officials are vowing to take the protests to Ohio, Indiana and other big 2012 political battlegrounds.
"Everybody's got to make some adjustments to new fiscal realities," said Obama. "We had to impose, for example, a freeze on pay increases for federal workers."
But Republicans say the president started the week at a White House news conference saying that he wanted a quote, "adult conversation" with Republicans to figure out how to pay for all these government programs. Now he's ending the week by trying to expand the protests that may make it harder for both sides to come together.
The first one: STATE.
You know, that thing that has all of the powers of government not explicitly delegated in The Constitution to The Federal government? Yes, that thing. There are 50 of them in The United States.
Notice that we don't call the nation "The United Federal Government." We call it "The United STATES." That's because States have supremacy. Always have. They originally joined together under a promise of a limited Federal government, which was mostly about the common defense - and little more.
Now as for the second word..... Sedition.
1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2. any action, especially in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
3. Archaic . rebellious disorder.
I'm going to draw the line between the word sedition and the act of seditious conspiracy; the latter is a federal offense. At least today, that line may still apply. It may be true, however, that as facts develop we will discover that this line has been crossed.
In America we have these things called elections. After the 2008 election Barack Obama was having a discussion with Republican lawmakers where they were objecting to some of his plans. They asked him why they should negotiate with a wall, effectively, and his answer was simple:
Ok. Fair enough. Elections have consequences, right, and one of the key points that Barack Obama himself has put forward time and time again as justification for his alleged "mandate" was that he won the 2008 election.
Never mind that he lied about virtually everything he said he was going to do. Among other things he said he did not come to Washington to favor the banksters, but in point of fact he has provided more Lewinskis to them than Monica ever did to Bill Clinton. His so-called Attorney General, Eric "Place" Holder, can't even find a felony to indict and prosecute when they're apparently admitted to under oath before the FCIC.
It is clear at this point that the game is to run the Statute of Limitations so that prosecution becomes impossible. That is, for those who elected Barack Obama, you by doing so - yes, this includes me - provided every bankster a "never go to jail" card for what they did.
In fact, Angelo Mozilo had the criminal probe against him dropped yesterday, if reports are correct.
Of course McStain was going to do the same thing. So it's not like we really had a choice between "D" and "R" in this regard, right? Well, no.
We were also told our health insurance payments would go down. Mine went up - more than 20%. This, despite being told it wouldn't. That we would get "relief." Well, no, we didn't get relief. We got cornholed.
After two years of this blatant abuse Americans had enough. They went to the polls again. And this time they threw a lot of Demoncrats out of office. One of the newly-elected politicians was Republican Governor Walker in Wisconsin.
He ran on a platform that, among other things, promised to do away with collective bargaining for teachers for all items other than pay. That is, pensions, health insurance, work rules, everything else. All those things, if they were going to be larded up on the public, would have to survive a public vote by the people.
What's wrong with this, may I ask? Teachers are employed by the people. Did you notice your property tax bill? You're the boss. You pay the check. You make the rules. And in a representative government, you hire people through the ballots to do as you demand.
Wisconsin did exactly that.
Governor Walker did exactly what he promised. Faced with a monstrous budget problem that was gimmicked and gamed by his predecessor to appear smaller than it really was (just as occurred in New Jersey with Governor Christie) he put forward a bill.
Remember now, the standard is "I won" when it comes to justification - by our own President.
Mr. Walker won.
So what did our President's campaign organization - "Organizing For America" - do?
OfA Wisconsin's field efforts include filling buses and building turnout for the rallies this week in Madison, organizing 15 rapid response phone banks urging supporters to call their state legislators, and working on planning and producing rallies, a Democratic Party official in Washington said.
Our own President's campaign apparatus is attempting to prevent a vote from taking place? To overturn an election? To incite discontent against a duly-elected government, perhaps by importing people who aren't actually Wisconsin residents? And to spread that discontent to other states?
Really? Our own President is doing this?
That's textbook stuff folks. As in Mubarak's textbook.
Didn't we just see a government go down with our support in Egypt over this exact same thing? A government where the people said "do X", government did "Y", and the people rose? And let us not forget that in Egypt it was not the people who were shooting, it was government goons - rifles are prohibited from private ownership in Egypt.
These acts have a word folks: Sedition.