Charles Woodson and Wis. Protesters

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
I dunno what it is or why but Walker has something against Wisconsin and her citizens.
He's nothing but a mad power hungry dictator.
1) He is trying to bust unions with this bill and take away worker's rights.
2) Giving a free pass to his rich contributors by letting them build no bid power plants.
3) His latest budget address is proposed to make massive cuts to education. Not just for school age children but for the technical colleges as well. (Guess he wants to get back at them since he didn't finish college. Passive aggressive much?)
Facing cuts in state aid, MATC officials wonder how they'll pay to operate new buildings
4)Making cuts to community recycling programs which could lead to increase levels in landfills. And that could mean more destructive methane gas.
Wisconsin communities assess impact of state recycling cuts
5) Witholding pay from state senators who are doing their jobs. Sure they left the state to block a bill, but that is doing their jobs. They are working for those who voted for them and to take away their pay is just wrong.
(I'm proud to mention that one of those heros is my senator.)
5) Closing down the capitol building which is illegal and unconstitutional. Not just on the state level, but now he is trying to take away the right to freedom of speech and assembly.
It even got to the point where state assembly members actually moved their desks outside because their constituents were being denied access to meet them inside.
Constitutionally questionable: DOA bars protesters from Capitol
Walker Shuts Down Capital to Protesters
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd32hgd_GxA]YouTube - Dems asked to move desks back inside[/ame]
And all the extra cops at the Capitol aren't needed. Instead they are just there as Walker's thugs and are costing more than 5 million. Now THAT is a real waste of tax payer money.
Ex-DNR head: Show of force at Capitol is to 'intimidate people'
And this is just the beginning.
I'm afraid things are going to get much much worse for Wisconsin under our new ****** wanna be.
Walker doesn't care. Why would anyone support or agree with this loony? Do they not care as well?
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
@Forget Favre-

I'm sorry, but your argument loses credibility when you start calling people "******." You're no longer debating the merits of the situation. Instead you're resorting to personal attacks and name calling, which just undermine any argument you might try and make. You might consider editing your post and revising your post.

Anyway, busting unions is a good thing. This fact has been proven to you time and time again. I strongly suggest you examine the mounds of evidence provided and re-think your position. This isn't an "Attack on working people," it's a salvation for tax payers.

No, those Senators don't deserve to be paid. They abandoned their posts by fleeing the state. They shouldn't be paid to go on vacation.

I'll agree with you on no-bid contracts. I hate when unions are automatically awarded them, so the same rule should apply for private businesses as well.

If your state has as much waste as mine, massive cuts on education are necessary. There's just too much waste, and this should force them to figure out and pay for what's important first. Really, the education system needs an overhaul. They need to figure out what the minimum budget is to run successfully and work from there.

I don't really care or know enough about the rest to make a comment, but the topics I just laid out to you make logical, rational sense.
 

LombardiChick

Win or lose, I love this team.
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
654
Location
PLANET EARTH
So Gov. Walker will go ahead and waste tax payers money and resources by sending state troopers to empty houses of democrats who have left the state, but he won't provide escorts of troopers to those who show up to work through an angry mob? And he even keeps his own workers of the same party locked out? WTF!?
Our gov. clearly has his priorities Fd up BIG TIME.

He's a college drop out. That explains why he's such a moron.

I think this will clear up your perception on this, Forget Favre - I just stumbled on it. This is part of an email sent to William Jacobson, an attorney who publishes the blog Legal Insurrection (you can see it yourself here), by Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney:

"I write only after having been directed to your website by John **** [name deleted by me] from Virginia. I write only to correct an inaccuracy in the article, specifically that I pulled deputy sheriff's from guarding the WI Capitol. I did state that deputies would not guard locked doors as palace guards and we will disagree whether that was proper, but the deputies were assigned to continue walking the terrace and sidewalk surrounding the capitol, the same duty they have been assigned to for the past 19 days, 24 hours each day, and the duty they will continue until relieved or the request for assistance from WI Capitol Police ends. I would also like to point out that the incident involving Senator Glenn Grothman only occurred because not one law enforcement agency working at the capitol was made aware of his impromptu press conference during which a crowd gathered. I might point out as well, the senator was assisted at the conclusion of his press conference by non-other than Dane County Deputy Sheriff's.
What I get from this is that Sheriff Mahoney blames Grothman for the reaction of the protesters, which I would personally take issue with - but it would appear that none of this has anything at all to do with Governor Walker.
 

LombardiChick

Win or lose, I love this team.
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
654
Location
PLANET EARTH
A little more information on what's going on today:

State wants court order to remove unauthorized people from Capitol

The stated purpose of the proposed order is to conduct a security check of the building and grounds.

The proposed order says the state would report back to Albert by noon Friday with a status report and with a plan regarding access to the Capitol.

The request came after University of Wisconsin-Madison Police Chief Sue Riseling said in a Dane County courtroom on Thursday that police this morning found 41 rounds of .22-caliber ammunition outside of the State Capitol.

Riseling said 11 rounds were found outside the State St. entrance, 29 rounds near the King St. entrance and one round near the Hamilton St. area.

She testified that, "I don't like to see live ammunition when I see significant crowds," she said before Dane County Circuit Judge John Albert. "The presence of that doesn't thrill me."

The disclosure came as organized labor continued its legal effort to force the state to provide more access to the Capitol.

Later, Michael Huebsch, secretary of the state Department of Administration, said that officials had approached protesters inside the Capitol on Wednesday night, asking them to leave.

He said that Riseling told him that she had approached all of the protesters and asked them to leave. He said she told him that they declined the offer, though some offered varying timelines for when they might leave.

Huebsch also said that Riseling told him that some of the protesters still in the rotunda had mental-health problems.

"One person said he would stay the next 15 years," Huebsch testified. He added that he believed there were some individuals who had no intention of leaving the Capitol.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
well someone clearly planted the ammo if its at 3 of the 4 main streets to the capital. Just makes you wonder who would do something like that and what motives they would have.
 

LombardiChick

Win or lose, I love this team.
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
654
Location
PLANET EARTH
well someone clearly planted the ammo if its at 3 of the 4 main streets to the capital. Just makes you wonder who would do something like that and what motives they would have.

Well, I don't know about that, but it's alarming to the police chief. Organized labor is calling for more access, but it sounds like security is a real concern.

It's not like people aren't being heard or anything. Why do they need more access? Why are they trying to legally force that? What do they want, or want to happen?

In any case, mentally ill people in and around the building is probably not a good thing.

There is also a report out there that the damage to the marble in the capitol could hit $7.5 million.
 

LombardiChick

Win or lose, I love this team.
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
654
Location
PLANET EARTH

Heh. I thought that was going to be about the Milwaukee teachers demanding coverage for ******. (Note to self: read more carefully.)

Anti-abortion groups welcome Gov. Scott Walker's budget plan to cut state funding for family planning services and repeal a state law requiring insurance companies to cover prescription birth control.

This means insurance companies could choose to cover it or not, right? They're currently required to cover it? I would guess that most of them would continue, at least on some plans.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
Well, I don't know about that, but it's alarming to the police chief. Organized labor is calling for more access, but it sounds like security is a real concern.

It's not like people aren't being heard or anything. Why do they need more access? Why are they trying to legally force that? What do they want, or want to happen?

In any case, mentally ill people in and around the building is probably not a good thing.

There is also a report out there that the damage to the marble in the capitol could hit $7.5 million.

well I dont think someone just happened to drop it out of the pocket at those random spots. I think its safe to say they wanted it to be found. People can make their own assumptions as to who did it with what purpose. I wouldnt be surprised if it was a teacher trying to threaten senators or someone trying to discredit the protests.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
This means insurance companies could choose to cover it or not, right? They're currently required to cover it? I would guess that most of them would continue, at least on some plans.

Thats the way I read it. I know at some point many did not and it was very expensive for families to pay out of pocket.

I would rather they be required to cover it as I dont want anymore unplanned children running around wisconsin. That costs everyone way too much $.
 

LombardiChick

Win or lose, I love this team.
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
654
Location
PLANET EARTH
Thats the way I read it. I know at some point many did not and it was very expensive for families to pay out of pocket.

I would rather they be required to cover it as I dont want anymore unplanned children running around wisconsin. That costs everyone way too much $.

It seems like a reasonable thing to cover to me, too, but I suppose I'd have to see the reasoning behind the various moves.

Out here, the government required that mental health counseling (which can be very expensive) be covered by all insurance providers - so the providers came up with parameters that made it practically impossible to take advantage of the coverage. They raised the deductible on that portion of the coverage dramatically, then covered something like a fraction of six visits once the deductible was met. It was just ridiculous...so I don't know how effective the government mandates really are, in practice.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
Family planning seems like a reasonable thing for insurance companies to cover too, but I dunno about FORCING them to do it. Seems to me businesses ought to be able to run in a manner of their choosing, so long as it's not illegal. Who knows, maybe someone can create a company that specifically handles family planning?
 

LombardiChick

Win or lose, I love this team.
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
654
Location
PLANET EARTH
Family planning seems like a reasonable thing for insurance companies to cover too, but I dunno about FORCING them to do it. Seems to me businesses ought to be able to run in a manner of their choosing, so long as it's not illegal. Who knows, maybe someone can create a company that specifically handles family planning?

Well, yes...if it's expensive for families to pay for, you'd have to imagine it's expensive for the companies to cover.

I buy my own insurance, and naturally, the more you're willing to pay every month, the more you will get. Expensive plans (like the ones covering teachers) will cover a whole lot of things that I don't get.

The money has to come from somewhere, after all.

I agree with you regarding business - and in my prior post, you can see one problem with government trying to impose such things.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
some stuff is insane. Like pre approving ambulance rides? But I think one of the keys to bringing costs down is limiting malpractice lawsuits.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
This is a huge cost. Many unnecessary procedures are done every doctors visit to cover the providers liability.

That's a great point. As it stands now, doctors have no choice but to order a bunch of unneeded and unnecessary tests, just so they can cover their ***** and prevent themselves from being sued. Tort reform alone would lower the costs of health insurance significantly, to the point where it would be more affordable for those who want it.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Tort reform is a significant cost, no question about it. Another way to lower health insurance premiums IMO is to allow people to purchase health insurance over state lines. I can purchase my auto and homeowners insurance from nearly any insurer in the country, why not health insurance? The creation of large pools of potential insureds also lowers costs: The essence of insurance is shared risk and the larger the group, the better able insurance companies are to spread that risk. IMO another key to lowering the cost of health insurance is to allow the vast majority of people insured to have “skin in the game”. If the cost of health care doesn’t matter to most people receiving it we should not be surprised to see costs spiral out of control. If most people would be able to benefit by shopping for the most reasonably priced MRI, blood test, exam, surgery, etc., and have access to information about the comparative success rate of the medical professionals providing those services, I think that would put downward pressure on premiums. This is where health savings accounts come into play. BTW, HSAs are the only “cost” to taxpayers (in terms of reduced tax revenue because they are tax-advantaged) contained in any of these ideas. If those fortunate enough to experience good health and/or savvy enough to shop wisely for the health care they receive can benefit directly from those savings (by directing savings to future premiums, retirement accounts or even to pay the income taxes due and spend the savings), that too would put downward pressure on costs and premiums.

But controlling health care costs and premiums is a difficult issue. For example, we spend a huge amount on end of life care but the moral and ethical issues in controlling those costs are significant. And every new costly medical advance posses the same issue of who should be its beneficiary.
 

lambeaulambo

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
2,550
Reaction score
700
Location
Rest Home
That said, while I'll fully admit I don't know what they're arguing about, and nor do I care, I have no issue with people protesting. However, I do take exception to the congress people who skipped town in attempt to avoid a vote. I think that's a bush league move, and if I were a tax payer in the state of Wisconsin, I would demand they be investigated to see if any of my money was used to fund their little vacation.

I also think every single teacher who walked off the job and encouraged their students to skip school and join them should be immediately terminated. You should not be allowed to just walk off the job and expect to keep it. It's disruptive, counter productive and is detrimental to their students.
 

greenandgold

I'm Dirty Hairy Callahan
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
1,826
Reaction score
424
Location
Mobile, AL.
I'm more interested in what Woodson will say to Obama during a certain White House visit that's sure to be due.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
Tort reform is a significant cost, no question about it. Another way to lower health insurance premiums IMO is to allow people to purchase health insurance over state lines. I can purchase my auto and homeowners insurance from nearly any insurer in the country, why not health insurance? The creation of large pools of potential insureds also lowers costs: The essence of insurance is shared risk and the larger the group, the better able insurance companies are to spread that risk. IMO another key to lowering the cost of health insurance is to allow the vast majority of people insured to have “skin in the game”. If the cost of health care doesn’t matter to most people receiving it we should not be surprised to see costs spiral out of control. If most people would be able to benefit by shopping for the most reasonably priced MRI, blood test, exam, surgery, etc., and have access to information about the comparative success rate of the medical professionals providing those services, I think that would put downward pressure on premiums. This is where health savings accounts come into play. BTW, HSAs are the only “cost” to taxpayers (in terms of reduced tax revenue because they are tax-advantaged) contained in any of these ideas. If those fortunate enough to experience good health and/or savvy enough to shop wisely for the health care they receive can benefit directly from those savings (by directing savings to future premiums, retirement accounts or even to pay the income taxes due and spend the savings), that too would put downward pressure on costs and premiums.

But controlling health care costs and premiums is a difficult issue. For example, we spend a huge amount on end of life care but the moral and ethical issues in controlling those costs are significant. And every new costly medical advance posses the same issue of who should be its beneficiary.

I wasn't looking to jump into the healthcare debate in this thread, but the points you just laid out are exactly why I opposed Obamacare. I feel there's a market waiting to be created for health care insurance akin to what we have with car insurance, and think we should try that first before raising taxes on people to pay for a health care system that really doesn't work that well.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top