NationStates

I believe they're doing wrong because they are still getting paid for technicaly not working and they are also working in Illinois and not paying taxes.

I'm all for them - God knows the Repubs did this on capitol hill for the last two years. Only difference was they just kept talking and talking and talking.

The Democrats were exercising their rights to protest (not sure on that). I'm in full support of them.

By the way, I live in Illinois, and we've given them quite a warm welcome

Of course they are, I mean sure the people of Wisconsin voted to reduce their size in the state legislature....but goddamn it, the legislators know better! Just like the Democrats did in the US congress and look how the people repaid them in 2010!

Did Republicans do the right thing when they enacted the Patriot Act?

That's what I thought.

Norstal wrote:Did Republicans do the right thing when they enacted the Patriot Act?

That's what I thought.

Did the Democrats do the right thing when they seceded from the Union to defend the institution of slavery?

Yeah, I just went there.

They're both being infantile, but the democratic party is retaliating for the absurdities the republican congress committed two years prior and for a far more deserving reason.

Rolamec wrote:Of course they are, I mean sure the people of Wisconsin voted to reduce their size in the state legislature....but goddamn it, the legislators know better! Just like the Democrats did in the US congress and look how the people repaid them in 2010!

Umm, the people didn't "repay" them - they got tired of the gridlock and gave the House to the Republicans.

I honestly cannot wait until Obama gets re-elected in 2012.

They are representing the pro-union voters by refusing to sit in a session and watch a bill they can't defeat get passed.

Rolamec wrote:

Norstal wrote:Did Republicans do the right thing when they enacted the Patriot Act?

That's what I thought.

Did the Democrats do the right thing when they seceded from the Union to defend the institution of slavery?

Yeah, I just went there.

Did the Democrats do the right thing when they passed the Civil Rights Act?

More power to them, anything that takes a worker's rights away is a bad thing.

Rolamec wrote:

Norstal wrote:Did Republicans do the right thing when they enacted the Patriot Act?

That's what I thought.

Did the Democrats do the right thing when they seceded from the Union to defend the institution of slavery?

Yeah, I just went there.

Damn.

Western Darenjo wrote:

Rolamec wrote:Of course they are, I mean sure the people of Wisconsin voted to reduce their size in the state legislature....but goddamn it, the legislators know better! Just like the Democrats did in the US congress and look how the people repaid them in 2010!

Umm, the people didn't "repay" them - they got tired of the gridlock and gave the House to the Republicans.

I honestly cannot wait until Obama gets re-elected in 2012.

Neither can I, considering I'll probably vote for him, again.

Western Darenjo wrote:

Rolamec wrote:
Did the Democrats do the right thing when they seceded from the Union to defend the institution of slavery?

Yeah, I just went there.

Did the Democrats do the right thing when they passed the Civil Rights Act?

You mean did the Republicans?

Western Darenjo wrote:

Rolamec wrote:
Did the Democrats do the right thing when they seceded from the Union to defend the institution of slavery?

Yeah, I just went there.

Did the Democrats do the right thing when they passed the Civil Rights Act?

You mean did the Republicans?[/quote]

Well, I read over the article, and instead of a democrat vs. republican trend, I saw the very predictable northerner vs. southerner trend.

Although, I saw a lot about how the Democratic leadership worked to get it passed, almost nothing at all about any Republican support, besides the voting records.

Western Darenjo wrote:
Well, I read over the article, and instead of a democrat vs. republican trend, I saw the very predictable northerner vs. southerner trend.

Although, I saw a lot about how the Democratic leadership worked to get it passed, almost nothing at all about any Republican support, besides the voting records.

Oh silly me, I forgot how insignificant votes were in congress.

Rolamec wrote:

Western Darenjo wrote:
Well, I read over the article, and instead of a democrat vs. republican trend, I saw the very predictable northerner vs. southerner trend.

Although, I saw a lot about how the Democratic leadership worked to get it passed, almost nothing at all about any Republican support, besides the voting records.

Oh silly me, I forgot how insignificant votes were in congress.

Sorry, didn't fully explain myself.

Even if the Republicans had mass revolted against this, it probably still would've passed due to pressure from Northern voters on their Republican representatives. What I meant to say was that I saw the Democrats actually working to get this passed, and the Repubs just sitting back and voting yes without saying a word in support (which isn't true, since the article mentioned one repub who attempted to work out a compromise - but still, that was the only republican mentioned in the entire article).

EagleScout24 wrote:I believe they're doing wrong because they are still getting paid for technicaly not working and they are also working in Illinois and not paying taxes.

They could have at least stayed at a hotel in Wisconsin.

Seriously, if someone doesn't show up to work, he is fired. Republicans were completely justified in filibustering bills on the federal level.
But refusing to make a quorum because a loss is inevitable sets precedent -- don't like a potential outcome, well, don't show up to vote.

Conservative-Values wrote:

EagleScout24 wrote:I believe they're doing wrong because they are still getting paid for technicaly not working and they are also working in Illinois and not paying taxes.

They could have at least stayed at a hotel in Wisconsin.

Seriously, if someone doesn't show up to work, he is fired. Republicans were completely justified in filibustering bills on the federal level.
But refusing to make a quorum because a loss is inevitable sets precedent -- don't like a potential outcome, well, don't show up to vote.

Thats the only choice they have in a state where you can't filibuster. If Wisconsin had a filibuster than this wouldn't be happening. But like I pointed out somewhere else; When the GOP uses tactics to obstruct passage of a bill its heroic but is cowardly when the DNC refuses to face the inevitable. Its a pathetic double standard.

Are their methods right? No. Does their end justify them? Absolutely.

EagleScout24 wrote:I believe they're doing wrong because they are still getting paid for technicaly not working and they are also working in Illinois and not paying taxes.

I do find it amusing that you use Abraham Lincoln as your avatar, implying your respect for hime, whilst chastizing someone for the exact same manuver he pulled in 1840 when he jumped out a 2nd story window to prevent a quorum on a budget bill.

Western Darenjo wrote:

Rolamec wrote:
Oh silly me, I forgot how insignificant votes were in congress.

Sorry, didn't fully explain myself.

Even if the Republicans had mass revolted against this, it probably still would've passed due to pressure from Northern voters on their Republican representatives. What I meant to say was that I saw the Democrats actually working to get this passed, and the Repubs just sitting back and voting yes without saying a word in support (which isn't true, since the article mentioned one repub who attempted to work out a compromise - but still, that was the only republican mentioned in the entire article).

*Sigh* The bill passed because Republicans voted for it, otherwise the 83 day filibuster by Southern Democrats (Robert Byrd ring a bell?), would have stalled it in the Senate....contrary to popular opinion, yelling loudly doesn't make a damn bit of difference -all legislators yell and bitch, loudly. Your earlier statement that the "Democrats did it" is the common misconception by the American people of American politics, also shows that a president in office usually gets all the credit for himself and his party (even when a large chunk of his party opposed it). When historically that is not the case. The GOP voted with larger margins than the Democrats did....it was under a Republican administration that the first civil rights act passed anyway (Eisenhower), where was FDR? The Great Democrat and his support for the common man, in regards to blacks? Hmm?

Daistallia 2104 wrote:

EagleScout24 wrote:I believe they're doing wrong because they are still getting paid for technicaly not working and they are also working in Illinois and not paying taxes.

I do find it amusing that you use Abraham Lincoln as your avatar, implying your respect for hime, whilst chastizing someone for the exact same manuver he pulled in 1840 when he jumped out a 2nd story window to prevent a quorum on a budget bill.

To be fair, that's pretty fucking awesome. I'd give him the win for that.

Conservative-Values wrote:But refusing to make a quorum because a loss is inevitable sets precedent -- don't like a potential outcome, well, don't show up to vote.

It's already a tactic with a long history, dating back to the very beginnings of the republic and used by Republicans, Democrats, Whigs, and others.

You just don't like it when it blocks something you want. If the GOP were doinmg it, you'd be defending them for it.

Vectrova wrote:

Daistallia 2104 wrote:
I do find it amusing that you use Abraham Lincoln as your avatar, implying your respect for hime, whilst chastizing someone for the exact same manuver he pulled in 1840 when he jumped out a 2nd story window to prevent a quorum on a budget bill.

To be fair, that's pretty fucking awesome. I'd give him the win for that.

How about Bob Packwood's barricading himself in his office to prevent a quorum in 1988? (He got hauled into chambers bodily.)

yes

And just to point out, they are doing their job. Part of their job is defending the people and constitution of Wisconsin against Walker's corruption. If that means halting the legislative process, then so be it.