Two things I just dont understand....
 

and there are many things I dont understand HOWEVER....

1. The Wisconsin Democrats have left town instead of needing to debate and vote on a bill that is anti union, knowing the Republicans would win a vote or so it appears.

2. Now the Indiana Democrats have left town for the same reason !

3. The President of the United States has entered the fray, albeit at this point only with rhetoric.

IF the Republicans or any other party left town in any state over an issue they could not win, AND a Republican President (lets say Bush) got involved in the fray, from my point of view there would be h... to pay !!!

Can anyone explain how this is becoming to be accepted as normal and acceptable behavior ???? I dont understand !

Running away
 

Wasn't the same thing done by Texas Dems about two years ago?

The liberal media, collectively and in one voice, would humiliate and belittle the Republican's in a similar situation. In this situation, with cowardice and dereliction of duty being shown by Democrats, the liberal media is supportive of the "dedication to principle" being shown by these disgraceful public servants fleeing their own state to avoid doing their elected duties.

I have to admit that I think the governor of Wisconsin has gone too far in trying to take away from the unions their hard fought for collective bargaining rights. I agree that the unions need to make major concessions, but I don't think they should be made to vote to destroy their own union.

I saw an interview with the governor where he was asked if a possible compromise would be the union giving in on the wage/benefit demands and Walker giving up on revoking the right to collectively bargain. Walker literally said 'no way'.

I'm no fan of unions, but.. It's one thing to ask for concessions. It's another to ask for concessions and refuse to allow the workers to ever ask for anything again.

Does this mean that you endorse the Democrats in two states simply hiding out to avoid a lost vote ?

Would you endorse that action if they were Republicans on another issue ?

Do you think the President should become involved, even if only orally, with state budget process ?

Reason for these questions and the reason for the thread is that a number of threads are discussing the issue itself...a lot of networks also, but I am struck by the silence on the Dems simply hiding out and recall the other party being called a lot of names for simply trying to filibuster...amazing to me the different outlook...is this the new political game....we will lose so we just wont come to work !!!

Franklin Roosevelt, the darling of the democrat party said,

"The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."

"I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place" in the public sector. "A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2675825/posts

The teachers should be fired. The democrats who fled town should be removed from office and the doctors writing the fraudulent medical excuses should loose their licenses. But that's just me.

Remember, FDR said that when "union bargaining" usually involved a strike.

I can EASILY see making strikes illegal for government workers for a variety of reasons. But to take away the right to bargain as a unit? THAT, I have a problem with.

Without striking, unionized workers can have perfectly legal "job actions" - like refusing overtime, etc.

I was completely in agreement with Reagan firing the air traffic controllers.

We're talking about public employees here. Their paychecks come from our pay checks.

We're paying the bills for people who on average make sometimes double what private sector employees make. All at a time when the private sector were loosing jobs, people loosing their homes, etc, etc, etc. During that time Obama added yet another 200,000 more public jobs... again paid for by our tax dollars.

They shouldn't have the right to bargain at ALL when they live off other peoples money. They should be grateful.

Unions
 

Initially unions raised the standard of living for the average guy and created better working conditions. However somewhere along the way they begain competing against thremselves to justify their existence. Along this same path via lawsuits, employment laws, legislature ,etc employees gained emplolyment rights and protection. So the questions now are what should the unions role be? Do unions benefit their industries ( auto, service, teacher, etc) ? Can American corporations compete globally?
Are unions obsolete?

The Texas Dems left back in 2003 over redistricting.

The Rights of Individuals to be Free
 

If people wish to join a union, the shriners, a local charity, a church and support it with their time, effort and money, that should be their right. If a person chooses not to join any of these organizations, no-one should be able to compel them to do so, and no-one nor any organization should be able to claim a right to their time, person or property.

Doctors do not have to join the AMA in order to practice medicine; lawyers do not have to join the ABA in order to practice law - then why should a teacher be required to pay dues to a union in order to teach?

thankful
 

"They shouldn't have the right to bargain at all when they live off other peoples money. They should be thankful." So you are saying that teachers,firefighters and police should not have the right to negotiate a fair contract? I think you should be thankful that we have people who are willing to do these jobs. Maybe we all should be thankful and none of us should be able to negotiate. Lets let all these high paid execs determine our salaries.

I assume from reading this thread that everyone thinks it is just fine for a minority party to leave their job and the state and hide out because they dont want to lose a vote !!!

Does not matter the issue or the party to me....that upsets me but obviously not others

dk: Where does YOUR paycheck come from?

And, for the record, I could be making more money in the private sector. Never once have I been a member of a union, nor will I ever join one. Why am I where I am? I'm basically giving up some in the paycheck department in exchange for more security and a couple of other personal reasons.

I have a particular loathing for the Postal unions - again, personal reasons. I wouldn't mind seeing them decertified and to be shown for the criminals that they (in the leadership) are. Doesn't mean that I think it's wrong to organize.

I have a problem going further than clauses that prevent public employees from going on strike. I agreed with firing the air-traffic controllers.

The country is .................BROKE! Doesnt anyone get it!!!!

DK I agree with you:agree: