J.Twendrist Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 It's always good to have a combination of incentives to encourage productivity rather than just one, most def. We need more blue collar jobs that pay a decent wage in this country to keep the middle class alive or we're gonna have problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Protests continued for the 9th straight day. Democrats in the state Assembly are filibustering the bill (not threatening to, but actually doing it), while Democrats in the state Senate remain out of state. Gov. Walker, of course, remains unwilling to budge an inch, and has been stating that if the bill doesn't get passed then he may have to lay off thousands of state workers, while the Wisconsin State Journal reported today that a federation of Wisconsin unions are starting to prepare for a general strike if it does pass. While the crowds the last few days haven't been at their Friday numbers, I heard a rumor (that I will be shortly looking to confirm online) at the end of my shift tonight that we should be expecting a ton of Teamsters from around the country to show up for a massive rally on Saturday... in numbers around 250,000 (this is just a little under the population of Madison). So, I'm fairly excited by that possibility... it'll be one crazy weekend if that's actually going to happen. Also... a man named Ian Murphy from the online newspaper The Beast decided to call Walker while pretending to be billionaire David Koch and recorded the call, posting it online. In it, faux Koch and Walker discuss strategy for the current situation in WI... such as how some of Walker's people were considering sending people into the protest crowds for the purpose of causing trouble and making these crowds look bad. Before you start thinking this call faked... Walker's spokesman Cullen Werwie (edit: and Walker himself) already confirmed that it was indeed Walker on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jibber Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 ROFL. He actually recorded the call and then.. released it? He does realize that it's illegal to record someone without them knowing, and then releasing it to the public without prior authorization of the person recorded, right? Or should I say, does he know that? I wouldn't doubt a civil suit is on it's way to this Ian fellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Wisconsin state law allows phone calls to be recorded with the consent of at least one person involved (as does federal law and the laws of most states), although here they are not allowed to be used as evidence in court outside of murder or drug cases (they are, with certain restrictions, under most federal and state laws). http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/wisconsin.html Sorry Jibber, but you've been misinformed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jibber Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Actually, I'm not misinformed. If you read carefully from the link you just posted, the person who consents must be one of the two parties. Ian was neither of the parties, and so was impersonating someone else. If the person who records the wire, electronic, or oral communication is a party to the conversation or has obtained prior consent from one party, he may lawfully record and divulge the contents of the communication, unless he does so for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act. Ian isn't Koch. Therefore the two parties of the conversation doesn't include him. So even if he himself gives consent, he still isn't necessarily part of the conversation. AND.. tort /tɔrt/ Show Spelled[tawrt] Show IPA –noun Law . a wrongful act, not including a breach of contract or trust, that results in injury to another's person, property, reputation, or the like, and for which the injured party is entitled to compensation. So what is this recording doing? Yes, that's right, it's damaging the reputation of Scott Walker. And for that, that in itself is illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 As I understand it (and Wikipedia seems to agree), the only way it would qualify as defamation under tort law would be if it were making a factual assertion without evidence. It is not doing so. And as far as I can tell, the law doesn't require that all parties be identifying themselves to each other correctly (or even to have identified themselves at all), only that one of the parties involved (meaning one of the people holding a phone, not the characters in the narrative of the conversation) must have consented to the recording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imoutgoodbye Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Scott Walker is just another politician looking ahead 5 to 9 years and saying, "Yes, I am your man." to his party. He wants to punch his ticket to the presidential primaries. As to the recorded phone conversation, it cannot be used in a court of law because it involves public property, mainly The Guvnuh. It is also allowed certain protections as it is seen as a second amendment right. These two combined will override any personal protections the Guvnuh may have as he is not a regular citizen, but a civil servant. He's essentially admitting to committing societal crimes (organized gang activity), but he cannot be blamed for these things outright because of this "torte" or, in a more simplistic term, entrapment. However, people can take this into consideration with future dealings. Proving that this affected him at this point is impossible and as with most political "things" (things referring to a blue dress and a small stain) of this nature, it will be swept under the rug and laughed about. This is nothing new. To even believe any charges would be brought forth by this is simply silliness. *adds Law classes as something interesting to do at college* I'm going to start taking elective classes for the sole purpose of getting better at arguing just for the forums...lol....it's a pity there's no one around except the professors to challenge me in class. Damn big fish little pond syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Scott Walker is just another politician looking ahead 5 to 9 years and saying' date=' "Yes, I am your man." to his party. He wants to punch his ticket to the presidential primaries.[/quote'] Agreed. My mother is a Milwaukee County Supervisor and served on the Milwaukee County Board with Walker for years... and I don't think I can recall her ever saying a good thing about the guy. As to the recorded phone conversation, it cannot be used in a court of law because it involves public property, mainly The Guvnuh. I'm not sure this is a correct interpretation, at least not of Wisconsin law... Wisconsin does not allow any one-party consent recordings to be used in civil law with some exceptions through court orders (state statute 885.365). It is also allowed certain protections as it is seen as a second amendment right. You mean first amendment, right? He's essentially admitting to committing societal crimes (organized gang activity) Considering, not committing. There's a difference. EDIT: I HIGHLY recommend, if you're at all interested, taking the 20 minutes to listen to the conversation. There's some messed up stuff in it. I can't imagine better evidence being found that Republicans (or at least Walker) are bought and paid for by the super-rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekky Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Simply damaging someone's reputation does not amount to defamation. As long as you are telling the truth, or have reasonable grounds for believing you are telling the truth, you are free to trash someone's reputation to anyone you like. For entrapment to have occurred, a law enforcement agent (an agent can be a person working at the behest of law enforcement, or an actual law enforcement person) would have to induce Scott Walker to commit a crime. In Australia, anyway, there has to be a certain degree of actual coercion. It is not entrapment to impersonate someone and hold a conversation, in which Scott Walker makes voluntary statements about sabotaging protests. It's not even really entrapment if the guy impersonating Koch made suggestions of that nature and Walker seized on them. Simply providing an opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. Also, unless this radio personality was working at the behest of law enforcement, by definition no entrapment can occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imoutgoodbye Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 You mean first amendment, right? Yes. I was super tired posting last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyzarius Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 I wonder how you would go about hiring people to "rough up" a protest enough to cause trouble. Hell his reasoning for not doing it never ventured into the realm of "required personal" just that it would cause more work for him in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Not that it would case more work for him - that it might hurt him politically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mali Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Walker is an idiot tool of the tea-party movement. I hope the people of WI can change his agenda through civil disobedience. What we need is more funding and benefits for educators, not less... otherwise, we lack the incentives to inspire competitive and brilliant individuals to devote their lives to public service in state school systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaruil Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Walker is an idiot tool of the tea-party movement. I hope the people of WI can change his agenda through civil disobedience. What we need is more funding and benefits for educators' date=' not less... otherwise, we lack the incentives to inspire competitive and brilliant individuals to devote their lives to public service in state school systems.[/quote'] While I agree with this statement, I think the scope is limited. Teacher's Unions, to a certain extent, also limit the growth potential for new, competent teachers by supporting a certain lack of proper teacher evaluation and response. I'm all for rewarding good teachers, and hiring better ones. I'm not for offering teachers who fit the bill of "those who can't do teach" a more competitive salary or benefits package. Where the argument always seems to stalemate is that we want higher salaries and better benefits for our teachers, but unions often stand in the way of the Quality Assurance methods that have proven effective in the private and/or charter school markets. It's a cart and horse argument. Do higher salaries and better benefits bring in better teachers? Maybe, but not if less talented teachers remain employed with great job security. A great example of these strategies working is High Tech High in San Diego. Take a look at what they've done and be amazed that education CAN work! ....I got political! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I fully agree that unions have their drawbacks, and that there exist a lot of issues regarding them that need to be addressed (the highest paid city employee of Madison last year was a bus driver who, due to union rules regarding who gets first crack at overtime, made an extra $100,000 in overtime pay). But destroying unions is not the ideal way to go about fixing this kind of problem, I think. And again... in the end, this isn't about union effectiveness as much as it is about a Republican attempt to destroy Democratic Party funding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jibber Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 That's pure speculation, Pali. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Which part? That the attack on unions going on in Wisconsin has far more to do with destroying unions than it has to do with balancing a budget? That's not pure speculation at all (speculation, certainly, but with a fair bit of supporting evidence). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jibber Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 No.. no. The fact that you believe it's one of the Republican's ways to destroy funding to the Democratic party. It's speculation. Posting links to other websites that also speculate it doesn't mean it's evidence that it's true, either.. So, hence my post. That's pure speculation, Pali. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Unions are, hands down, the biggest contributors of money to the Democratic Party and Democratic campaigns. They are the only thing that competes, especially after the Citizen United decision, with corporate money (which pretty much all goes to Republicans). Destroying unions will have the effect of destroying the Democratic Party as a serious political force in the United States. You're correct that it is speculation that this is the intended motive. However, to assume that Republicans don't understand the above is, I think, insulting their intelligence. They tend to be far better political strategists than the Democrats. Edit: There are numerous anti-union bills being proposed in various states right now (many of which are failing, I'm happy to say). This was a coordinated, nation-wide attack on unions. Walker himself admits this in the phone call where he thought he was talking to David Koch. Listen to it if you don't believe me. EDIT: Also, the only website I posted that had this speculation was Maddow's piece, which I posted primarily because I thought it outlined well how this is not about the budget and that unions and the Democratic Party have a symbiotic, mutually-sustaining relationship... an attack on one's existence is going to have the effect of an attack on both. That was the point of her piece. Why the dig? EDIT 2: And by the way... take a look at www.gop.com. Right there, big bold letters on the front page: "Help stop Obama and his union bosses". At worst, I'd say I'm speculating with a fair bit of circumstantial evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.Twendrist Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 On a side note, unions do have a limit to their uses. They kind of f'd our auto industry. Though, state workers and teachers and what not don't have the a chance of their jobs being sent overseas and as such are open to abuse because the jobs are essentially stuck, making them very unprotected and needing of unions. Good teachers will save our country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Oh, I fully agree that unions overreach at times. I don't know enough about the specifics of the auto industry to agree with or dispute faulting them there... but ironically, I've seen your point regarding state jobs being fairly certain to remain in existence being used as an argument against them needing unions. A lot of things are needed to save the country. Good teachers are among them. EDIT: As for news... I have no sources at the moment, but if I've been informed correctly, protests in Madison were a bit smaller, though still in the thousands... but protests spread to 18 other cities in Wisconsin rather than being concentrated here. I've been told by one of the protest organizers that she is expecting 100,000 people or more here on Saturday. Public opinion is souring fast on Walker after the release of the phone call recording... I think the man annihilated his career with that call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imoutgoodbye Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I have my fair share of ties to people who work for GM. The UAW is a HUGE part of what brought the Big Three to their knees. They're already trying to take back what they gave up to help get those government loans paid back. It's absolutely sick, especially since they gave up very little. Imagine someone getting paid $50/hr to sit and read a newspaper and occasionally get up to go push a button for another guy who needs a bathroom break. On top of that they have full coverage insurance with no premium. By full coverage insurance I mean medical, dental, and vision. They get more time off than teachers (teachers don't really get summers off FYI, if you didn't already know this), plus it's PAID time off. They get sick days and vacation days. I'm incredibly jealous. Unfortunately, this scenario is only realistic if people continue to buy newer vehicles. This is where Cash for Clunkers came in and screwed over the lower class. I can't find a decent used car for under $2000 right now. They're all around $1500 with at least 200k miles on them and some kind of engine or body defect. I'd pay $500 for a vehicle like that and not a cent more. Unions in general can be good. Unions have lately been showing an ugly side. Mostly in a pissy mood about this because I ran into a friend last night who argues in absolutes and that's what riles me up more than anything about politics. Both sides argue in absolutes. It has to be this way or it has to be that way or it can't be a compromise because that's even more screwed up....BAH! Amaruil for President, 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaruil Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Thanks for your vote of confidence! Is Istendil my running mate? Oi Vey. Pali, I think you assumed that I was saying that Unions are the only problem and I may have come off that way, but it wasn't my intent. The problem is actually a little more centered around Valek's point: With a two-party political system people are forced to argue in absolutes. The current political structure has made America believe that there has to be a "good guy" and a "bad guy" in every argument, and that is what really causes the problems. The real truth is that most Americans fall somewhere in the middle and we see in shades of gray. The problem: you can't win an election with shades of gray. It forces elected officials to be polarized and stubborn because it's what they believe their constituents want when in reality it's what the system has created. With Unions it comes to light because Unions are doing some very negative things (as a generalization), but so are corporate bosses. So you've got Unions giving money to the Democrats, Corporations to the Republicans, sounds great! Actually, it's not, because it reinforces that there must be a right vs. wrong when in reality BOTH parties probably need to change. A politician can't really say that, though, because they'd lose support of both parties/sides. We're forcing gridlock down our own throats. Now, what I'm about to say sounds very scary (especially to the moderate citizen I claim to be), but hear me out: I hope the Tea Party continues to grow and become independently stable. Why? It will force a third major party as a reality, but for it to happen TP candidates have to run under a different ticket rather than winning Republican primaries. A tough nut to crack. This would, though, force a new dynamic if all parties involved want to survive and SOMEONE (likely Republicans) ends up becoming a more moderate presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted February 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm in full agreement, and also hope that the Tea Party or something else grows to be a true 3rd party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mali Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I hope the tea party gets squashed under the boots of the working class! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.