Skip to main content

Wisconsin did it ... click to see

Liberals, Unions, the Media and Democrats are going crazy over the fact that Wisconsin seems to be going ahead with their law even though a judge has ruled against it.

Strange isn't it? How the very same people who are so torn up over a STATE, that most don't live, doing this yet when our President and Country does it at the National level then it's okay.

Look what's happened with the Obamacare healthcare law. A Federal Judge rules that Obama and the Democrats Healthcare mandate and law is not legal according to the Constitution of the United States saying it's unconstitutional. Yet President Obama and our government continues to implement it as if the Federal Judge didn't rule it unconstitutional at all.

Can anyone else see Hypocrisy here?

Be as the Bereans ( Acts 17:11 )

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
Wisconsin did it ... click to see

Liberals, Unions, the Media and Democrats are going crazy over the fact that Wisconsin seems to be going ahead with their law even though a judge has ruled against it.

Strange isn't it? How the very same people who are so torn up over a STATE, that most don't live, doing this yet when our President and Country does it at the National level then it's okay.

Look what's happened with the Obamacare healthcare law. A Federal Judge rules that Obama and the Democrats Healthcare mandate and law is not legal according to the Constitution of the United States saying it's unconstitutional. Yet President Obama and our government continues to implement it as if the Federal Judge didn't rule it unconstitutional at all.

Can anyone else see Hypocrisy here?


The ACA has been examined in multiple courts. More federal judges have found the law and the mandate to be legal than have ruled any part of the law illegal. So, does that mean you are now going to abide by the law?
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
quote:
Sez juan: So, does that mean you are now going to abide by the law?


You mean the same way the Liberals, Unions, DemocRATS, and Media are doing in Wisconsin?

Or do we need a pair of YOUR glasses to look through?


Yes. The anti-union law in Wisconsin has been ruled likely to be illegal by one judge and an injunction to prevent the implementation of the law enjoined accordingly. See, Obamacare is legal, while Walkers anti-Union law that only applies to particular unions is illegal.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
quote:
Sez juan: So, does that mean you are now going to abide by the law?


You mean the same way the Liberals, Unions, DemocRATS, and Media are doing in Wisconsin?

Or do we need a pair of YOUR glasses to look through?


Yes. The anti-union law in Wisconsin has been ruled likely to be illegal by one judge and an injunction to prevent the implementation of the law enjoined accordingly. See, Obamacare is legal, while Walkers anti-Union law that only applies to particular unions is illegal.


Actually the passing of Walker's law was in violation of the open meetings rule. It's pretty clear cut that it will be overturned.
quote:
Sez Opie: Actually the passing of Walker's law was in violation of the open meetings rule. It's pretty clear cut that it will be overturned.


And if so, this is something that can be dealt with in a legal setting. What juan seems to be flip-flopping about is the criminal actions of the demonstrators.
Are these actions OK with you...juan?
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
quote:
Sez Opie: Actually the passing of Walker's law was in violation of the open meetings rule. It's pretty clear cut that it will be overturned.


And if so, this is something that can be dealt with in a legal setting. What juan seems to be flip-flopping about is the criminal actions of the demonstrators.
Are these actions OK with you...juan?


OH CAGE, WHAT criminal actions???????
I know in the FOXOPHILED mind it is considered a CRIME to disagree with a rethugliteacon or ANY rethugliteacon policy BUT fortunately the master plan of the Koch brothers for this to be a dictatorship has not been achieved yet.
The protesters in Indiana have broken the law. Been found out. And resigned.

Indiana Official Reportedly Advised Scott Walker With Email Suggesting He Stage A Phony Violent Attack By Union Supporters



quote:
The e-mail was signed by “Carlos F. Lam.” WCIJ did some digging and discovered that indeed, there is a Carlos F. Lam who is a GOP public official in Indiana. He is a deputy prosecutor in Johnson County, Indiana — which is the same area the e-mail was sent from, according to its IP information. Lam also has a history of anti-union comments online: he’s written that Indiana is “an unsustainable public worker gravy train bubble.” In another, he said “unions & companies that feed at the gov’t trough will fight tooth & nail against anything that un-feathers their nests.”
Lawless Wisconsin GOPers Defy Court Order Against Anti-Union Law

quote:
Last week, a Wisconsin judge issued an order “restrain[ing] and enjoin[ing] the further implementation” of Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) anti-worker law until she has time to fully consider a lawsuit claiming that the law was not validly enacted. Yet, despite this clear and unambiguous order, Walker and his allies have decided that they are not bound by the law:

In a stunning twist, Gov. Scott Walker’s legislation limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published Friday despite a judge’s hold on the measure, prompting a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday. [...]

“It’s published,” [Senate Majority Leader Scott] Fitzgerald said. “It’s law. That’s what I contend.” [...]

Walker’s top cabinet official, Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch, gave only a brief statement reacting to Friday’s news.

“Today the administration was notified that the LRB published the budget-repair bill as required by law,” he said. “The administration will carry out the law as required.”


The judge is considering holding Walker in contempt and jailing him with a no contact order. Luckily, the Police are are backers of the anti-Walker backlash.
I'm not qualified to answer regarding the Wisconsin laws whether open meeting or whatever you call it. I do know from all media reports that ample time and efforts were made to vote on the issue but certain politicians refused to occupy the chamber and even left the state because they understood that their presence was required for a vote as the original bill was worded.

What the judge said was it may be illegal so an injunction was issued against. Here you have Judges usurping legislative action through activism.

Regarding the Healthcare law that was not a tax, that was all you heard while it was being debated and pushed upon America yet once they passed it and saw that their actions were unconstitutional the only way they could justify it and attempt to get it through was by calling it a tax which the federal government does have the right to do. It doesn't take a judge to know that their actions was outside the authority that the constitution allowed of the Federal Government (either the Executive or Legislative branches).

Had Bush had done this there would have been impeachment moves from Congress and the Media would be calling for immediate removal of him from office.

As for the Judges that ruled in favor of the Healthcare law the last and higher judge ruled it unconstitutional and that is the one that should rule until a higher court hears it or ultimately the Supreme Court rules.

What really reveals what's going on isn't so much the redefinition of the bill rejecting it as being a tax then having to define it as a tax but what really reveals what's going on is the abundant number of waivers given to those who financially have helped the Democrats out, the Unions, large companies, etc. The Democrats have basically given them a waiver or exclusion from the pecuniary actions of the bill and reserved the punishment for the normal citizens. IF it was so great for all then why all the waivers and why are they necessary for those supporters of Obama?
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
I'm not qualified to answer regarding the Wisconsin laws whether open meeting or whatever you call it. I do know from all media reports that ample time and efforts were made to vote on the issue but certain politicians refused to occupy the chamber and even left the state because they understood that their presence was required for a vote as the original bill was worded.

What the judge said was it may be illegal so an injunction was issued against. Here you have Judges usurping legislative action through activism.

Regarding the Healthcare law that was not a tax, that was all you heard while it was being debated and pushed upon America yet once they passed it and saw that their actions were unconstitutional the only way they could justify it and attempt to get it through was by calling it a tax which the federal government does have the right to do. It doesn't take a judge to know that their actions was outside the authority that the constitution allowed of the Federal Government (either the Executive or Legislative branches).

Had Bush had done this there would have been impeachment moves from Congress and the Media would be calling for immediate removal of him from office.

As for the Judges that ruled in favor of the Healthcare law the last and higher judge ruled it unconstitutional and that is the one that should rule until a higher court hears it or ultimately the Supreme Court rules.

What really reveals what's going on isn't so much the redefinition of the bill rejecting it as being a tax then having to define it as a tax but what really reveals what's going on is the abundant number of waivers given to those who financially have helped the Democrats out, the Unions, large companies, etc. The Democrats have basically given them a waiver or exclusion from the pecuniary actions of the bill and reserved the punishment for the normal citizens. IF it was so great for all then why all the waivers and why are they necessary for those supporters of Obama?


You know, you are trying to compare apples with oranges.
The Healthcare Act was a FLAWED bill, the bill passed in Wisconsin was ILLEGAL.

The Healthcare Act hopefully is a beginning but the way it was handled, concessions made to Big Pharma, the AMA and republicans make it a very far cry from what SHOULD have been passed: Universal Healthcare.
THAT would have been TRUE healthcare reform.
Specific FEES for procedures, regulated and specific PAYMENT to healthcare professionals for the services provided and take the health of this country out of the hands of politicians, lobbyist and insurance companies.

Maybe in another 50 years, like Medicare.
I could care less what the folks do in Wisconsin as they are the ones that will either reap the benefits or suffer the consequences. I believe Governor Walker's intentions were not in the best interest of the people, but that has nothing to do with what they want. He was ratted out even if the ratting out wasn't exactly ethical. But the folks of Wisconsin can either live with it or change it.

As to the health care law, it seems to me that few people even realize what it is about. Most of the provisions in the law doesn't take effect for a few more years. Those items that have taken effect have not negatively affected most people. The longer it stays in effect the less likely it will be completely repealed. In fact, I believe it will be only modified at best, but that is true of most laws.

Let Wisconsin live with or without their public unions. I choose not to live there so it is their problem, not mine.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Lawless Wisconsin GOPers Defy Court Order Against Anti-Union Law

quote:
Last week, a Wisconsin judge issued an order “restrain[ing] and enjoin[ing] the further implementation” of Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) anti-worker law until she has time to fully consider a lawsuit claiming that the law was not validly enacted. Yet, despite this clear and unambiguous order, Walker and his allies have decided that they are not bound by the law:

In a stunning twist, Gov. Scott Walker’s legislation limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published Friday despite a judge’s hold on the measure, prompting a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday. [...]

“It’s published,” [Senate Majority Leader Scott] Fitzgerald said. “It’s law. That’s what I contend.” [...]

Walker’s top cabinet official, Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch, gave only a brief statement reacting to Friday’s news.

“Today the administration was notified that the LRB published the budget-repair bill as required by law,” he said. “The administration will carry out the law as required.”


The judge is considering holding Walker in contempt and jailing him with a no contact order. Luckily, the Police are are backers of the anti-Walker backlash.


No, the judge is not! Don't make things up. Besides, like state assembly members, governors may not be held in contempt by state judges. Also, as a the governor is the head of the executive branch, he could simply order the police to ignore the judge's order. Without the permission of the executive branch, the judiciary has no power outside of the court room..

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×